Skip to comments.An Obama-Santorum matchup would be good for the country
Posted on 02/14/2012 7:26:22 PM PST by writer33
Mitt Romney was the inevitable nominee until he wasn't.
In order to sustain a lead, a candidate's message must resonate with the heart and the mind. Mr. Romney's cakewalk to the nomination has been stymied by the inability to get anyone excited about his campaign. He has supporters but not believers.
Rick Santorum's message resonates with voters' hearts and minds (this week at least), because he is a true believer. He believes in his message, and his message is consistent with core Republican values. What gave Mr. Santorum the edge in Iowa, Minnesota, Colorado and Missouri can give him an edge in the general election against President Barack Obama.
(Excerpt) Read more at baltimoresun.com ...
Preach it, brother Scott!
It would be like a campaign between Che Guevera and William F. Buckley — there will be no doubt in the minds of the American public who stands for what.
It would be a disaster.
Yes, ma’am. For Obama.
>> Obama vs. Santorum is the only contest where real issues would be the focus
Disingenuous to imply Santorum has a better grasp of things than Newt.
first comes sheriff arpaio report march 1st.
Yes, sir. No doubt.
Resonates? That's not the word I would use to describe my reaction. Grates or screeches work better for me. Sort of like fingernails on a blackboard.
I distrust anything printed in the Baltimore Democratic Party Daily Newsletter.
He may be your “brother” but he sounds more like comrade Scott.
“To have a third party, a large, energized group needs to feel alienated and unrepresented. The Tea Party controls the House of Representatives and will decide the Republican presidential candidate. The Tea Party, to its credit, is getting its way as much as any single group can in our system.
Either because Democratic leaders are not ideologically aligned with the left or because they lack the political savvy to get their policies past the opposition, the interests of the left are not being represented. This means that if the left is to have its voice heard, those on the left must go somewhere other than the two dominant parties.”
Obama would chew up Rick in the first round. Sorry, Rick will not cut it in the general.
We need someone like Newt who can take the fight to Obama and cream him and the Dems.
Rick should be his head of Health and Human Services.He would rescue them from the culture of death that is there now with Sebellius.
This is going to be one of the dirtiest, hard fought campaigns we have ever witnessed. That is becasue the radical Left has their prize in sight—the chance to completely take over the levers of power and to loot this country in the name of the revolution.
No matter who wins, there are dark days coming for our beloved land. Like in 1980, this is a time for choosing, and an epic good v. evil battle is on the horizon in America.
We need the strongest horse, to win.
Ron Paul bots have arrived!
How the 9/11 truther scan working out for your crazed cult leader !
Obama is an awful debater .
He will never debate a soul and tje media will let him get away with it
Oh, there will be a debate,alright.
But no matter what, the media will prop up the Kenyan and blast Rick.
And that will only be on the debate front. On the campaign trail and the nightly news, the GOP guy will be portrayed as the enemy of America, when the real enemy is being protected.
Rick may be a nice guy, but he will wither under this kind of assault. He has faced nothing like it in his experience. Newt already has the Dem slime machine.
Newt is grasping too much baggage....damaged goods.
The left makes all of our candidates damaged goods.
Some have a lot of self-inflicted damage.
Why on Earth would you associate me with the nutjob Ron Paul? Just trying to make anyone who disagrees with you guilty by (wrong) association?
Shame on you.
I have VERY good reasons to oppose Santorum, and by extension you, and they have nothing whatsoever to do with Ron Paul.
They have to do with the fact that at best Santorum (or Romney for that matter) will just be placeholders for the socialists. NONE of the damage they have done will be undone by Santorum (or Romney). the best that will happen is that they will come back after a disastrous four years and start their project right back up again, just like they have done after EVERY cowardly Republican administration since Herbert Hoover.
Why not actually put an end to the Progressive/Socialist pogrom on the American people? I won’t settle for less.
What I get is: “I’m a nice guy and I won’t rock the Democrat’s boat. I’ll do what I can, as long as it does not involve making waves or upsetting the Arlen Specters, Mitt Romneys and Harry Reids of this world.”
That does NOT float my boat.
Why...! would Santorum be a disaster???
What law? we are the law, it just means what the meaning of IS,IS...Slick
“We need the strongest horse, to win.”
Some might conclude that would be not Rick, not Newt but rather Romney because he has the money, the organization and he has already shown that he could fight back Newt. He could do the same to Rick and eventually Obama.
We wouldn’t have this epic good vs evil battle if Romney is the nominee. It would be a technical “I’m the better manager than you” debate.
Is that the bots I smelled? I like RP accept for his ideas!
Every time we elect Republicans who are not committed to taking on the Socialists in a fight to the death they win. Every time. Because they are like zombies. They just form spores and wait until the rains come again, and up they sprout, right where they were before.
We need someone who will dig them out, root them out, smash their constructs, poison their fields, and not stop until the job is done.
Neither Rick Santorum nor Mitt Romney will do anything like that. They’d invite Harry Reid to lunch at the White House.
Like Newt chewed up Romney in the last debate. I keep hearing how Newt's the only one who can take it to Obama but let's be honest, one deer-in-the-headlights debate like that last one and Newt would be done.
Disclaimer, I also like Newt but not as sure as others that he'd be any better than Santorum in the general. They both have their strengths and weaknesses.
I agree with you on what our candidate must do...I think Santorum can do that...as well as Newt, and Romney...that is what I have read and heard from all three of these fine men...Rush is leaning towards Rick Santorum and I before him...we just need to see the big dog eat alittle more to win you over <:o))
This is about the tenth item from the liberal Republican hating media pimping Santorum that you have posted. Do you not know what their agenda is? Do you really think when these folks say it would be good for Santorum to win the nomination, that it would be good for us?
They are breathing easier; but still a bit of 'breath holding' as the candidate who actually knows, what of he speaks; is still out there.
Their silent mantra? Anyone; but Newt.
(We cannot forget that for 'these' people; 'winning' is a blood sport; and only the 'win' matters. No question; they would like to see Obama sink his fangs into Santorum.)
His unvetted candidacy is a ticking time bomb. He needs the light shown on him and his real record.
He helped give us Obama's first Supreme Court nominee, Sotomayor, by voting to confirm her Circuit Court appointment by Bill Clinton. That's the kind of judge Senator Rick Santorum truly believed was suited for our high courts!
He added $550 million in Amtrack funding to the $900 million Bush wanted. (Reference: Santorum amendment to Transportation funding bill; Bill S.Amdt.3015 to S.Con.Res.83 ; vote number 2006-052 on Mar 15, 2006)
Based on his voting record, until just recently Santorum rated an F from Numbers USA on immigration. Suddenly, late in this campaign, he's now an A-, the only candidate to flip-flop positions and raise his grade substantially except the king flip-flopper himself Mitt Romney. Even Mitt moved just one letter grade! Which is the more believable Rick? The cold hard voting record or the sudden rhetorical shift?
Obama and the press don't need a "smear machine" they simply need to pull back the curtain on Santorum and let his record do the talking. The PA press have started gathering things from their years of reporting.
Here are just a few highlights:
1. His charity Operation Good Neighbor (2001-07), illegally never registered with PA, doled out just 36% of income as grants, far less than the 75% of responsible causes. I'm sure it's coincidence the charity which spent most of its money on lobbyists, aides and fundraisers closed after he was defeated for reelection.
2. His "leadership PAC," "American's Foundation," was worse--just 18% went to candidates, well below similar PACs.
3. The $500,000 mortgage for his Leesburg mansion came from a private bank run by a big campaign donor. By all appearances, Santorum was not eligible for the closed program.
4. Santorum bilked a Pennsylvania school district out of $72,000 to pay for home "cyberschooling" of five of his kids ... in Virginia.
5. As the third-ranking Republican, he worked closely with House majority leader Tom DeLay, now felon, on the "K-Street Project" to grow ties between the GOP and major lobbyists. Twenty-three of his own staffers landed well-paying jobs at lobbying firms. When he was fired by the PA voters? Santorum turned to lobbyists.
6. This supporter of Medicare Part D was so important to this culture of crony capitalism, an internal memo at pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline said his loss "creates a big hole that we need to fill."
7. Before anyone heard of Solyndra, Santorum was securing $100 million federal loans for a coal-to-liquids plant that was never built. The project's lobbyist was PA's top GOP power broker, Bob Ashner, and paid nearly $1 million.
That's seven places just to start digging. Besides his unheard of 18-point loss for reelection, putting electability in question there's his hypocrisy of campaigning on requiring health insurance in 1994, on his public tort reform position vs. his testimony in his wife's own legal case, his "problem" with working women and genuine gender gap in his senatorial elections, his union pandering and more.
What has this failed lawyer and career politician really done; what specific reforms does he propose?
We all know what Romney is. Newt's vetted for more than a decade. Ron Paul's been running since 1988.
I want every supporter of Santorum to look themselves in the mirror before casting a vote and ask, "Can I honestly say I know all there is I need to know about Rick Santorum or are I being bamboozled by Hope he'll Change things?
That is a huge factor. Romney doesn't convince people that he believes what he's telling us. Rush brought up a good point... how does a candidate who isn't a true believer in the core messages possibly convince others to get on board? It's reminiscent of Bob Dole, who said in 1996, "I can be Reagan if you want."