Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Santorum surges into the lead (National poll Santorum 38%, Romney 23%)
Public Policy Polling ^ | 02/11/2012 | Public Policy Polling

Posted on 02/11/2012 6:19:11 AM PST by Rational Thought

Riding a wave of momentum from his trio of victories on Tuesday Rick Santorum has opened up a wide lead in PPP's newest national poll. He's at 38% to 23% for Mitt Romney, 17% for Newt Gingrich, and 13% for Ron Paul.

Part of the reason for Santorum's surge is his own high level of popularity. 64% of voters see him favorably to only 22% with a negative one. But the other, and maybe more important, reason is that Republicans are significantly souring on both Romney and Gingrich. Romney's favorability is barely above water at 44/43, representing a 23 point net decline from our December national poll when he was +24 (55/31). Gingrich has fallen even further. A 44% plurality of GOP voters now hold a negative opinion of him to only 42% with a positive one. That's a 34 point drop from 2 months ago when he was at +32 (60/28).

(Excerpt) Read more at publicpolicypolling.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2012polls; election; happydance; mittromney; newt; polls; ricksantorum; santorum; santorum2012
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 451-463 next last
To: GulfBreeze
Can you do two things. One support your point. Two state who you are for and why you think they are best in terms of electability, currently stated positions and past track records?

First, regardless of who I support, pay attention to the merits of my points about Santorum. Second - I have been widely quoted here, on Fox News, in the Politico, The American Thinker, Winning Our Future and all over the place answering all of your questions hundreds of times over.

101 posted on 02/11/2012 7:39:53 AM PST by C. Edmund Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: alicewonders
When you let the media tell you that someone with the credentials of Rick Perry cannot be president because he gaffed some debates - you let THEM control the discussion

Bravo!

They are controlling the election. I think polls are the biggest reason for the Republican low turnout. When they keep pumping candidates up (Perry, Cain, Bachman, Gingrich) then show those same candidates with dismal numbers, it destroys us. There was plenty of enthusiasm in the beginning for every one of these candidates and the turnout would have been great. They're using our fear of of being stuck with Mitt/Obama to manipulate us. Can't be coincidence.

102 posted on 02/11/2012 7:41:01 AM PST by Kenny (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Yaelle
Style, schmyle. Obama was pretty stylin’. We need a constitutional conservative, not a prancing dandy.

What we need is somebody who can get more votes than Obama. As of this moment, we have no such a candidate.

103 posted on 02/11/2012 7:41:05 AM PST by Drew68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: C. Edmund Wright

Your hatred of Rick borders on strange !
Your memory of 2006 is wrong.
The entire GOP was wiped out due to the Mark Foley October surprise by Brian Ross and his left wing Crewe !
Secondly the brilliant Rove strategy of letting the DNC and their media pals trash Bush and the Iraqi War for years with no counter attack !


104 posted on 02/11/2012 7:42:54 AM PST by ncalburt (NO MORE WIMPS need to apply to fight the Soros Funded Puppet !H)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Drew68

Looking at it from the other direction. Obama has no single target....It keeps changing....Too bad.


105 posted on 02/11/2012 7:43:34 AM PST by hoosiermama (Stand with God and Sarah, the Gipper and Newt will be standing next to you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: TexasFreeper2009

Actually, I think that would be an excellent ticket.


106 posted on 02/11/2012 7:43:52 AM PST by Colonel_Flagg (Why, yes. I AM in a bad mood.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: TexasFreeper2009
Our first priority must be to stop Romney

It looks like I'm a three time loser: Cain, Perry, Gingrich. If Santorum is on top by the time of the Illinois Primary, he'll have my full support.

107 posted on 02/11/2012 7:44:01 AM PST by stars & stripes forever (Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: PapaNew
Santorum offers a “balanced budget” instead of less government.

Reagan was a proponent of both. By the end of his two terms he realized that cuts were nearly impossible, but he was still a proponent of a balanced budget amendment. About the only thing you can hop for in DC is maybe some simplification, and cutting back of regulations. Maybe spending can be slowed, but it can't be cut. The one top priority we need is economic growth.

108 posted on 02/11/2012 7:44:01 AM PST by Moonman62 (The US has become a government with a country, rather than a country with a government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: littleharbour
It was a perfect storm that brought Santorum down, some of which was his own doing, but I don’t think there was anyone who could have held that seat in those circumstances.

Totally correct, but keep in mind - I was not slamming Santorum because he lost. I slam Santorum for his outright lies about how he ran the 2006 campaign versus the reality of how he ran the 2006 campaign. He claims the mantle of conservative purity and claims he is the one who always stands up for principle regardless of the consequences. It's bullsh-t - because he ran a very wimpy moderate lefty campaign on 06. Its not the reality of 06 I hold against Santorum, it's the lying sanctimony of 2011-12.

109 posted on 02/11/2012 7:44:01 AM PST by C. Edmund Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: georgiagirl_pam

Well Willard will now turn the slime machine on Santorum so Newt will have a chance to recover. He should do well on Super Tues and he is campaigning hard in Ohio. That would be a big win for him.


110 posted on 02/11/2012 7:44:19 AM PST by Georgia Girl 2 (The only purpose of a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have dropped.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: Dysart

I am flattered when my stuff is stolen! :)


111 posted on 02/11/2012 7:44:37 AM PST by Lady Lucky (Public education -- government cheese for the brain.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: Georgia Girl 2

He already has. CNN discussing it now. Anne C was on FOX slamming Rick this morning.


112 posted on 02/11/2012 7:47:01 AM PST by hoosiermama (Stand with God and Sarah, the Gipper and Newt will be standing next to you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: LuvFreeRepublic

Why are you out to do destroy Santorum? That doesn’t make any sense.


113 posted on 02/11/2012 7:47:10 AM PST by bjcoop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: ncalburt

I will write slower so you can follow what I’m saying, because clearly you have no clue to this point.

I am not blaming Rick for losing 06. It was not winnable for a lot of reasons. I totally agree with that. Now, follow me close here —

I blame Rick NOT for the reality of 06, I blame Rick for the bullish-t he is telling in 2012 about how he ran 06. He did NOT run a conservative campaign. He panicked and jettisoned conservatism faster than Karl Rove in a swing state in a feckless attempt to try and convince folks that little Rickie “can be a good moderate too.”

Google his “50 Things You May Not Know About Rick Santorum” which was put out by HIS own campaign in 06.


114 posted on 02/11/2012 7:47:32 AM PST by C. Edmund Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: Kenny
Brokered convention = Sarah Palin.

Wonder what it would take, what the chances are.

115 posted on 02/11/2012 7:47:49 AM PST by PapaNew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: C. Edmund Wright

And so your answer is...


116 posted on 02/11/2012 7:47:49 AM PST by GulfBreeze
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: jpsb

Ok so it seems you’ll fall back on Romney if Newt ever dropped out.


117 posted on 02/11/2012 7:48:51 AM PST by bjcoop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: Rational Thought

My problem was early on the non-Romney candidates didn’t doggie pile on Willard and at least try to take him down a notch. Which would have left a more conservative field to choose from.
Shoulda coulda woulda I suppose.
I will totally support $$$ Gingrich or Santorum. Whichever has the momentum going into Super Tuesday.


118 posted on 02/11/2012 7:49:15 AM PST by Leep (Dueling tag lines=don't worry,you'll be a vegetable guy soon<>It's gonna be a Newt day!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RetSignman

This is a time for sticking to our own convictions about who has the best solutions for our country. Why are we being yanked around by Polls, most of which are rigged and meaningless? This is not the time to go “all wobbly”.

Things may look very different after the Arizona debate on Feb.22nd. Stop listening to the polls and listen to what the candidates are proposing to do. So far, I’ve only heard one candidate give specifics, and I’m sticking with him.


119 posted on 02/11/2012 7:49:40 AM PST by conservativejoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: GoCards

Thank you GoCards! Thank you!!

Please stop it ya’ll. Santorum is the starkest contrast to Obama that we can offer. He answers questions without flinching with great answers that are inherently very conservative. He is a friend of Israel, knowledgable of foreign affairs, a committed follower of Christ and a believer in the original intent of our Constitution. He is the only one who has said that FREEDOM is the point of this election. He could not be more correct. I have never sent money to a presidential candidate, but I sent him money the other day. Respectfully, if yall think this nation would put Obama back in, you don’t live in the reality I live in. Obama is a flagrant liar and coward and he has fully outed himself as such.


120 posted on 02/11/2012 7:50:13 AM PST by katieanna
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: C. Edmund Wright
Yelp it's not the action, it's the lying about the action that gets politicians in trouble every time...When will they learn?
121 posted on 02/11/2012 7:51:12 AM PST by hoosiermama (Stand with God and Sarah, the Gipper and Newt will be standing next to you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: Georgia Girl 2

I don’t like Santorum personally but could get behind him, and am interested in what Reagan Democrats he could peel off.

He can carry the ethanol industry wherever they’re moonshining it, that’s a plus, and maybe religious independents.


122 posted on 02/11/2012 7:51:42 AM PST by txhurl (Mormonism = Sharia by White people)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: BarnacleCenturion

Cool it with personal smears.
In 2006 the entire GOP was wiped out thanks to the ABC News Mark Foley October surprise and the Iraqi war trashing with no Bush counter attack to justify the war.
Second newt has never run or won a state wide race only gerrymandered congressional races so he is the inexperienced one here .


123 posted on 02/11/2012 7:52:11 AM PST by ncalburt (NO MORE WIMPS need to apply to fight the Soros Funded Puppet !H)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: GulfBreeze

Ask anyone. And then ask yourself this: is what I say about Santorum true or not because that is the only thing that should matter to you.

Because you’re going to totally go bass backwards in how you try and connect the dots. So let me help you out. I support who I support because of the truth about his opponents - but you will no doubt assume I say what I say because of who I support. Therefore I am loathe to play your little mind game.

BUT FTR, Newt. And the reasons are well documented in my archives at American Thinker and all over the web - and all over hundreds and hundreds of posts here.


124 posted on 02/11/2012 7:52:21 AM PST by C. Edmund Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: bjcoop
I am not out to destroy Santorum. Santorum has not been vetted and he needs to be. If he can't get past conservatives/Republicans he will not get past Obama. FACT.
125 posted on 02/11/2012 7:52:27 AM PST by LuvFreeRepublic ( (#withNewt))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: nathanbedford

As I see it, in a Romney-Obama matchup, Romney will lose much of the conservative vote, who will stay home or avoid that lever by his name.
In a Santorum-Obama matchup, Santorum will lose the moderates, the mushy, the independents. And there are more of those.
Romney would lose big. Santorum would lose bigger.
Neither one is strong on anything but platitudes that serve to fig-leaf their shortcomings of record.
But in a couple of weeks Santorum is going to be hamburger anyway. He’s just the anti-Romney du jour.


126 posted on 02/11/2012 7:55:10 AM PST by Lady Lucky (Public education -- government cheese for the brain.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: C. Edmund Wright

Your personal attacks on Rick are overrun the top and cool with the snide comments about me if you don’t want the admin involved real quick .
Your memory of 2006 is wrong it was The Mark Foley election surprise which Are
The facts


127 posted on 02/11/2012 7:56:48 AM PST by ncalburt (NO MORE WIMPS need to apply to fight the Soros Funded Puppet !H)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: BarnacleCenturion

And unlike Newt, he’s an establishment candidate


The notion that Gingrich is not “establishment” is laughable. He’s been a Washington insider forever.

Coming from an anti-Perry troll like you, however, I understand your political ignorance.


128 posted on 02/11/2012 7:56:54 AM PST by magritte (Nevermind)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: stars & stripes forever

If Santorum could win delegates from states that he could never win in a general election, such as MN, IL, or maybe WI, that would be really ironic.


129 posted on 02/11/2012 7:58:33 AM PST by Theodore R. (Forget the others: It's Santorum's turn, less baggage, articulate, passionate)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: Yaelle
We need a constitutional conservative, not a prancing dandy.

That's why Santorum won't win.

130 posted on 02/11/2012 7:58:37 AM PST by Rudder (The Main Stream Media is Our Enemy---get used to it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: LuvFreeRepublic

You make a very important and over looked point. Santorum has NOT been vetted. Consider that Chuck Norris understands Santorum better than Rush Limbaugh and Mark Levin do. Why? Santorum has been ignored with Newt and Mitt’s ridiculous obsession with each other.

I think I can say with some confidence that as the truth of Santorum’s liberal record comes out, you will see Rush and Levin start to back away from him a bit.

But a word of warning to Newt’s folks - you damned well better start getting some of this stuff out there now before Levin and Rush become too invested in their love of Santorum to admit they were wrong.


131 posted on 02/11/2012 7:58:57 AM PST by C. Edmund Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: Moonman62
Reagan was a proponent of both.

You must have both, but the right way is to do whatever it takes to CUT GOVERNMENT. Otherwise you kill our economy and it won't matter anyway. Reagan did his best - he SLOWED government growth. But a sustained effort long enough could actually do it. What if a President simply removed a bunch of cabinet departments (most of them are useless). He could do stuff like that.

Otherwise, as has been said so often, we're just rearranging the chairs on the Titanic.

132 posted on 02/11/2012 7:59:11 AM PST by PapaNew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: Lady Lucky

You may be right, but how do you think Newt can possibly prevail with his adverse gender gap? Maybe the American people are truly still stuck on Obama, and nothing will matter.


133 posted on 02/11/2012 8:01:18 AM PST by Theodore R. (Forget the others: It's Santorum's turn, less baggage, articulate, passionate)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: C. Edmund Wright
The reason we will lose this election is, mostly based on the fact that there is no stability among our side. Hell, they can't stay with a candidate any longer than a few days, or a week tops.

This not only reveals how weak this voting block is, it also shows how ignorant most of the voters in regards to the facts or details about the candidates, truly is.

You are absolutely correct about Santorum, but you get viciously attacked for rightfully pointing it out, complete with history and documentation to back up your information about him. I can say that I have fully investigated Santorum and find the same alarming things from his past, but I have also been attacked for pointing his many contradictions, out to the forum.

This blind, impulsive stampede and Lemming mentality will only prove to ruin us later. It always does.

134 posted on 02/11/2012 8:01:28 AM PST by PSYCHO-FREEP (If you come to a fork in the road, take it........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: Lady Lucky
Santorum is a loser. Sorry, but he simply is.

The good folks in Colorado, Minnesota, Missouri and Iowa don't seem to think so.

Of the four remaining, Santorum has won statewide in a big league state that is not known for being friendly to conservatives. He won twice, and lost big once. Romney didn't even attempt to run for re-election in his smallish state. Gingrich and Paul have never won a general election in anything larger than a congressional district.

Even if Santorum is not your cup of tea, he is stronger against an insurance mandate than Romney or Gingrich. We don't need George Washington, Theodore Roosevelt or Ronald Reagan to beat Barack Obama. We need a man who is not easily slimed by the Obama-meisters, who will stick to his game plan, take advantage of the breaks that come his way, can't easily be cast as a meanie, and knows how to spend campaign $$$ wisely. That man is Santorum.

Vote for whoever has a better chance of beating Romney in your state. In Georgia and Alabama, vote Gingrich. In Virginia, vote for Ron Paul (our convention needs a spectacle). In Michigan and Wisconsin, vote Santorum.

Gingrich and Santorum backers:
Promote your guy.
Attack Romney.
Attack Obama.


135 posted on 02/11/2012 8:01:51 AM PST by Dr. Sivana (May Mitt Romney be the Paul Tsongas of 2012.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: ncalburt

You have zero reading comprehension or you’re just being an obtuse ass on purpose.

So Burt, I will write R E A L SLOW for you now. YES, the Foley stuff and a lot of other crap is why Rick lost. I GET THAT. I HAVE ALWAYS SAID THAT.

What ticks me off about Santorum and many of his supporters is that they can’t stand the truth. The truth is that Santorum RAN AS A WEENIE MODERATE in 2006. That’s not why he lost, but it is how he ran.

Now he claims he’s the true conservative, and it’s not true.

So BURTboy, I’ll try one more time. My point is NOT THAT HE LOST 06 - my point is HOW HE RAN 06 compared with what he says today about HOW HE RAN 06.

If you can’t read, do not respond.


136 posted on 02/11/2012 8:02:23 AM PST by C. Edmund Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: All

I no longer care about numbers. Perry was my first choice and Gingrich second. I am now for Gingrich 100% and will support him until he wins or quits. If Gingrich drops out, I will no longer be supporting anyone for president, I will only be voting against candidates.


137 posted on 02/11/2012 8:03:20 AM PST by Irenic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: txhurl

In my opinion, the Reagan Democrats are all dead. Those were white middle class folks who were part of the WWII generation who worked in manufacturing and the like. Most of them married.

I don’t think that group exists anymore, and if it did, we would have a lot more conservative dems in congress now.

I think the white males in what would have been the Reagan democrat mold are now voting GOP anyways.

Thus the GOP has to figure out how to attract younger voters and the suburban soccer Moms. I think Santorum and Newt scare the hell out of both of those groups.

Romney isn’t a good candidate either because he’s obviously going backwards the more people see of him during the past three months.

I think we are in trouble.


138 posted on 02/11/2012 8:03:41 AM PST by SteveAustin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: C. Edmund Wright
You're just flat out wrong.

The 2006 election in PA was all about the war in Iraq. Democrats did an excellent job of making PA an anti war state while Santorum was a supporter of our Military action. Added to that was a candidate (similar to Obama) that the media promoted. Still to this day, there has been little vetting of the Senator. Almost nothing is known about Bob Casey Jr. except that he is the son of a very popular ex Governor (Bob Casey Sr.).

Now, you might be able to make an argument that if Santorum did so poorly against Casey, he could do poorly against Obama. But, times have changed and the war in Iraq is no longer a front-line issue.

What could become an issue, perhaps even the leading issue, is the threat from Iran. If this comes to fruition, Santorum would be Obama’s worst nightmare.

139 posted on 02/11/2012 8:04:14 AM PST by Rational Thought
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: C. Edmund Wright

I fear you’re right.

Per se, I don’t have anything “against” Santorum. He was important in getting welfare reform passed and was a part of Newt’s own ‘94 Revolution.

However, although his fiscal and economic record (save for the Medicare Prescription Drug fiasco) is probably above-average, he’s known primarily as a SoCon type which I fear won’t sell well this cycle. He also can’t play the assertive role (which is needed against a d-bag like Obama) without coming across like a whiny, sanctimonious prick.


140 posted on 02/11/2012 8:04:14 AM PST by RockinRight (If you're waiting to drink until you find pure water, you're going to die of dehydration.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Lady Lucky

I have a feeling this poll is Santorum’s high-water mark. He has already started saying things that his supporters have to “explain” and “clarify.” Without a solid record of conservative achievement, that is the kiss of death.


141 posted on 02/11/2012 8:06:37 AM PST by Mangia E Statti Zitto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: Rational Thought
Santorum surges into the lead

Aaaaaaahhhhhhhh......

Nice.
142 posted on 02/11/2012 8:06:44 AM PST by Engraved-on-His-hands
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PSYCHO-FREEP
You are absolutely correct about Santorum, but you get viciously attacked for rightfully pointing it out, complete with history and documentation to back up your information about him. I can say that I have fully investigated Santorum and find the same alarming things from his past, but I have also been attacked for pointing his many contradictions, out to the forum

What you point out is a startling difference between the average Newt supporter and the average Santorum supporter. The average Newt supporter readily admits the problems and simply says that the ability to attack liberals and the history of success in the 90's is more important than the mistakes - which we readily admit.

Contrast that with the average Santorum supporter, who instead of admitting that Santorum screwed the pooch with Specter - they attack Toomey. Instead of admitting Rick is a pro life big government big union guy - they go back to something tired like Pelosi on the couch (as if we don't know that).

What it tells me is that the Santorum campaign - positioned as wind driven snow pure - will crumble under the first few consecutive days of attack.

143 posted on 02/11/2012 8:07:09 AM PST by C. Edmund Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: LuvFreeRepublic

“Santorum has not been vetted and he needs to be.”

I am going to snark a bit...

IMHO, I have three things to say about this. Vet 0bama, then.

If he’s not going to be vetted, don’t vet Santorum anymore than he has been.

But, if someone’s going to vet Santorum without vetting 0bama, then every living soul who can needs to shout out, put forth and scream IN PUBLIC forums questions about 0bama’s lack of recorts of any kind....with a specific demand, like the COLB, transcript, CT SSN, New Party affiliation, Rezko/Khalidi/Iraqi guy now in the UK (starts with an ‘A’ IIRC), entrance to Columbis, etc. Pick one and push it.


144 posted on 02/11/2012 8:07:40 AM PST by combat_boots (The Lion of Judah cometh. Hallelujah. Gloria Patri, Filio et Spiritui Sancto.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: GoCards

The dork optics are overwhelming. I watched his speech with the daughter and wife behind him, and I cringed. They forced a few smiles and then defaulted to grim American Gothic. The daughter with her small head on enormous body, her face puckered up with the same dyspeptic look her father sports most of the time — “I just swallowed a live squid!” — and the I-smell-something sneer on the wife — these things unfortunately matter a great deal, usually on a subliminal level.
If you doubt it, remember who’s voting: the people who elected Barack Obama.
Style beats substance.
If he gets any further along, Santorum will be attacked on matters of substance, such as he possesses, and that will only make things worse.
I’d sure rather vote for Santorum than skip voting for president because Romney’s on the ballot; but Santorum is just not going to win the nomination. Of that I am certain.


145 posted on 02/11/2012 8:10:50 AM PST by Lady Lucky (Public education -- government cheese for the brain.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: SteveAustin

Yeah, we kind of ran out of candidates, didn’t we? But wait! says the GOP, no you haven’t! Heeeeee’res Jeb!

I think we’re in trouble, too.


146 posted on 02/11/2012 8:11:21 AM PST by txhurl (Mormonism = Sharia by White people)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

To: Rational Thought

What is it with you Santorum supporters that preclude even a third grade reading comprehension level. You keep going back to points over and over and over and over that are NOT EVEN IN CONTENTION.

Let me write this - ONE MORE TIME - S L O W L Y

I AM NOT, repeat NOT, slamming Santorum for losing 06. Almost everybody lost in 06. I am not saying a damned thing about WHAT the election was really about or any of that. Now, follow CLOSELY TO WHAT I SAY:

Rick Santorum claims today he is the pure conservative who has always run as a true conservative. It is BULLSH-t because in 06 he RAN AS A FLAMING MODERATE.

Again, not blaming him for losing. Thanks to Bush and Rove and Hastert and Frist and others, he was doomed regardless of how he ran. I have ALWAYS said that in defense of Rick even though I do not like him.

BUT - the reason I don’t like him is that he is a pious sanctimonious phony who ran as Democrat Lite in 06. Now, FTR, for all of Newt’s foibles, and they are many, he never RAN A CAMPAIGN on them. Rick has.


147 posted on 02/11/2012 8:11:54 AM PST by C. Edmund Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]

To: Rational Thought
[Santorum would be Obama’s worst nightmare.]

ROFLMAO!

Seriously! what ever it is you are smoking, you might try to find a 12 step program somewhere to help you get off of it. You are hallucinating uncontrollably again!

148 posted on 02/11/2012 8:14:14 AM PST by PSYCHO-FREEP (If you come to a fork in the road, take it........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.

Newt didn’t do too badly among women in SC.
We shall see. Right now, if I were betting, I’d say Obama gets another 4 years. :(


149 posted on 02/11/2012 8:14:43 AM PST by Lady Lucky (Public education -- government cheese for the brain.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: C. Edmund Wright
A lot of people on Twitter are trying to get info out about Santorum and as you would expect, we are bad people for trying to hurt Santorum. It doesn't bother me though. My country and what kind of future my kids have is more important than being called a meanie. Perhaps some tweets directly to Rush and Levin would be helpful. We have a long way to go before the Convention and for sure Santorum will be vetted before then. To be honest with you, I can't see Newt or Romney supporters going with Rick unless he is the last one standing. Should that be the case, Obama will win.
150 posted on 02/11/2012 8:15:27 AM PST by LuvFreeRepublic ( (#withNewt))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 451-463 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson