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

Skip to comments.

UT/TT Poll: Santorum Crushing GOP Hopefuls in Texas (Santorum 45%, Romney 16%)
The Texas Tribune ^ | 2/20/12 | Ross Ramsey

Posted on 02/20/2012 5:27:44 AM PST by TexasFreeper2009

Former Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania has a commanding lead among Republican presidential candidates in Texas, according to a new University of Texas/Texas Tribune poll.

Santorum would get the votes of 45 percent of the respondents if the election were held today, according to the survey. The other three candidates in the GOP race — former U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and U.S. Rep. Ron Paul of Texas — are clustered well behind. Gingrich got 18 percent, Romney received 16 percent and Paul garnered 14 percent.

(Excerpt) Read more at texastribune.org ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Texas
KEYWORDS: freeperheadsexplode; getoutnewt; newtgetout; poll; ricksantorum; santorum; texas
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-195 next last
To: conservativejoy

I am aware of that. But he did support mandates. Obama will point that out to him, be assured of that. It will give Obama the upperhand.

I intend to vote for our nominee be it Santorum, Newt, uh Romney I would have to seriously think about, but at least he isn’t Obama.


101 posted on 02/20/2012 7:24:40 AM PST by dforest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: no dems

His goal is to get 15% of the vote in Michigan. He should have been living in Arizona, campaigning there non-stop. Romney can’t spend all of his time in both Michigan (fighting Santorum) and in Arizona (fighting off Gingrich). Romney would have to spend all of his time defending his home turf against Santorum, like he is now, leaving Newt competitive in Arizona by the fact that he would be the only person campaigning there.

But what do I know?


102 posted on 02/20/2012 7:26:09 AM PST by FerociousRabbit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: TexasFreeper2009; Arrowhead1952; wolfcreek

! what? I haven’t seen those! I am a Mormon ads?
____________________________________________________________
Nor have I.


103 posted on 02/20/2012 7:27:44 AM PST by no dems (I can't back Santorum anymore. He's so frickin' out of touch with the real world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: greyfox; All
95 posted on Monday, February 20, 2012 9:19:49 AM by greyfox: “I’m afraid Rick will go down with the “God” issue, the “Gay” issue and the “abortion issue”. Better he should stay neutral on these issues rather than blunder on. A live and let live attitude might serve him well.”

Huh?

Even Southern rural Democrats are pleading with their party to shut up on the issues of God, gays, and guns, saying the Democratic Party loses elections all over the South by being on the wrong side.

Most Americans are not atheists. Most Americans are not (yet) pro-gay. Even in major urban areas, while most residents don't own guns, they don't want to take guns away from those who do.

Seems to me like Santorum is kicking the Democrats exactly where they need to be kicked by making these issues front and center.

104 posted on 02/20/2012 7:28:31 AM PST by darrellmaurina
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: DestroyLiberalism

Thanks, that needed to be said.


105 posted on 02/20/2012 7:33:05 AM PST by dforest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: dforest

dforest wrote:
<<
I see any of the candidates on our side as changing a whole lot.

The negativism around here is ridiculous.

Obama sucks, people know it even though they may not be out there screaming it on the streets.

As Levin said, “an orange juice can is better than Obama”.
>>

************************************************************

THANK YOU! I don’t get all the idiotic negativity around here by FReepers who think Obama can’t be beaten in November. The truth is, his presidency has been a catastrophic FAILURE by any objective measure and his job approval numbers are WEAK going into an election year! There is absolutely NOTHING positive about his record that he can run on and I don’t care how many hundreds of millions of dollars he has in his “war chest”. Obama is as good as BURNT TOAST in November, though that COULD change if the hand-wringing Negative Nellies on our side don’t stop with all the damn self-defeatist talk!


106 posted on 02/20/2012 7:33:17 AM PST by DestroyLiberalism
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: DestroyLiberalism

Rick Santorum is leading for two reasons:

1. The public crusifixion of Newt Gingrich by Mitt Romney, the Media and establishment republicans. Much of which is inaccurate and some plain false. His own moral failings are public knowledge. (I am glad mine aren’t). But to think the others are innocent of moral failings is to discount much of the gospel. Newt is redeemed and forgiven by God, we would do well to do the same.

2. Ron Paul is unacceptable because of a naviee view of radical Islam and their purposes. Mitt Romney is the worse kind of politician, seeking office solely for the purpose of self interest...and does anything and everything to get elected.

Rick is what most people believe they have left. So they build him up in their own minds in order to get excited about his candidacy. He is an average Jr. Senator, that needs more seasoning, and in a sense a very average communicator. He will lose to Obama.

I AM NOT TRYING TO BE NEGATIVE JUST REALISTIC. THOSE WHO WISH TO MAKE RICK SANTORUM MORE THAN HE IS WILL NOT HELP HIM WIN. LOOKING AT HIM REALISTICALLY HELPS US IN MANY WAYS. VETTING IS THE NORMAL COURSE OF ALL GOOD POLITICAL ANYAYSIS.


107 posted on 02/20/2012 7:36:44 AM PST by dt57
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: no dems

We’ve seen them during the evening news here.


108 posted on 02/20/2012 7:37:32 AM PST by Arrowhead1952 (Dear God, thanks for the rain, but please let it rain more in Texas. Amen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: dforest
If someone beats Obama and they maintain the status quo and Americans don't see/experience positive changes, then the Dems will take over both houses and the WH in the next election and America will be done. Our economy cannot continue as it has. As far as negativism, yes it is alive and well. I am so sick of hearing people who are outraged because Newt sat on a couch with Pelosi. I am also sick of hearing the other things people are outraged about, yet they don't care about economic proposals, much less can evaluate the impact of the proposals or the likelihood of a candidate being able to implement them. Good grief!! “It's the economy stupid” is more applicable now than ever.
109 posted on 02/20/2012 7:38:47 AM PST by LuvFreeRepublic ( (#withNewt))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.

Many of my Italian American friends in western PA...yes, traditionally vote Rat....will vote for anyone but Obama...you can take that to the bank!


110 posted on 02/20/2012 7:38:58 AM PST by MadelineZapeezda (Conservatism: "It's either there or it isn't.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: no dems

If he wins Michigan, he WILL end up as the nominee”

Let’s play that out...do you think that Santorum can win in November?

I think that is a “maybe”...he has a shot. Not a shoo in, but he has a shot. And I think he has a better shot than Romney or Gingrich.

I would not be opposed to having a contested convention and having some combination of McDonnell/Jindal/Walker come out of that.

Or Santorum with any of those guys at the bottom, that’d be ok, too.

I’d also be ok with Santorum/McDonnell/Jindal/Walker with Christie as VP. (I know them’s fighting words here). But we have to keep our eyes on teh prize here.

What is the most important pro life objective? To beat obama. And to beat him, ideally, with a strong pro lifer. Obviously Santorum is the strongest possible alternative to him in that regard.

But we have an economic agenda as well, and as has been routinely noted, Santorum needs some muscle here from Walker, and he needs to turn his back on George W. Bush.....while still hanging onto the blue collar votes that he has gotten in the past.

In any event...just some random thoughts.

Back to the question: do you think Santorum can win in November? I think he’s got a shot, but he has some real weaknesses.


111 posted on 02/20/2012 7:38:58 AM PST by ConservativeDude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: no dems
Santorum’s Senate record shows lack of support for E-Verify. And he has failed in all debate opportunities to show a changed position. - NumbersUSA

I guess he's updated, this is from his site: "Enforcing immigration and labor laws including through employer verification including an E-Verify system that is simple, reliable, and protects businesses."

112 posted on 02/20/2012 7:42:21 AM PST by anglian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeDude

Everyone of our candidates have weaknesses.

Dirty little secret? Obama has far more than our candidates do and he proves that daily.

Once the primaries are over, maybe there will be some time spent pointing that out.


113 posted on 02/20/2012 7:44:01 AM PST by dforest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: duckman

Don’t quite understand your reasoning.

If Santorum continues to rise, he will get a majority of the delegates and there will be no brokered convention.

If he falters and the vote is more divided, it is a faint possibility.

I don’t think it would be that good for the country. If the promises, deals, and horse trading start, Mitt might hold the whip hand.

It would need to go through several votes before an outsider could be considered.

It would be fun television but it’s a ‘be careful what you wish for’ situation.


114 posted on 02/20/2012 7:44:09 AM PST by altura
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.

I strongly suggest all real conservatives get a copy of a new book called REGANS COMEBACK it is a carbon copy of whats happening right now. Basically it states that Regan the new comer was getting wracked by the man from Michigan an during the Texas Primary he became the winner. Remember the establishment was in bed with Ford as the next guy due to run. We do know what happened next don’t we? Pray the same happens for Newt...............


115 posted on 02/20/2012 7:45:17 AM PST by straps (Electric Jack)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: dt57

dt57 wrote:
<<
Rick is what most people believe they have left. So they build him up in their own minds in order to get excited about his candidacy.
>>

**************************************************************

Hmmm... You seem to be describing the very phenomenon that got OBAMA elected in 2008. HE was a blank slate and tens of millions of voters got excited building up in their minds whatever image of him they wanted.

Bottom line... The election is still 8-1/2 months away and I believe I’m being very REALISTIC in predicting that Obama will be defeated.


116 posted on 02/20/2012 7:45:42 AM PST by DestroyLiberalism
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: darrellmaurina

Seems to me like Santorum is kicking the Democrats exactly where they need to be kicked by making these issues front and center.”

That is precisely Santorum’s strength. Remember, there are two kinds of indy voters. The fiscally “conservative” socially liberal. These are the indys who the media identify, and they of course voted obama.

But there are also the indys that the media ignores. These are the bitter clingers that have often voted Democratic...basically Reagan Democrats.

Santorum is doing great here, and will do great here. But he does need the other indys to win in November. If the campaign becomes, “Santorum wants your birth control” that is going to be hard to overcome. And that is where obama and Axelrod want the campaign to go.

Santorum’s strength is also his one weakness...perhaps, dare I say it, a blue blood fiscally conservative/socially ambivalent running mate might help. Reagan/Bush.

Santorum/Romney?

Oh my goodness. I said it. Many freepers will say under no circumstances. But many of them in other posts will also talk about how meaningless the VP slot is if held by a conservative. If it is meaningless for a conservative, then it is meaningless for a liberal. And again, the overriding objective (no...imperative) is to beat obama.

We shall see how this plays out...but I do agree with you that Santorum has a strength here that the media by its very nature is unable to recognize, seeing as the media is dominated by a bunch of fags and libertines who don’t own guns.


117 posted on 02/20/2012 7:46:11 AM PST by ConservativeDude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: Jedidah

Perry is beloved enough to be the longest ever governor in the state and a man who could win again.

The leftists hate him with a passion because he is too conservative.

I don’t know who you are and what positions you have in Texas but Rick Perry has been great for the state.

That said, I don’t think endorsements help that much no matter who give them.


118 posted on 02/20/2012 7:46:27 AM PST by altura
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: anglian
And while other candidates provide pages on their website that give positions on immigration, Sen. Santorum doesn’t address immigration on his website.

It's actually pretty prominent on his website. Here it is:

As the son of an Italian immigrant, Rick Santorum values the important role immigrants have played and continue to play in shaping our nation. One thing that makes America exceptional is that anyone from any part of the world can become an American by embracing our ideals and following our laws. Moving forward, America needs fair and robust immigration policy that will continue to protect Americans, reward lawful citizens, and help grow our economy. Rick Santorum believes that the key to a strong immigration policy begins with securing the American border. For America to grow and prosper, developing a strong immigration policy must become a priority. Unfortunately, President Obama has not only failed to reform America’s broken immigration system, he has also failed to secure the border against serious threats that imperil all Americans. His first visit to the border was two and a half years into his term; not exactly border first.

A multifaceted approach to border security will not only make America safer, but also save taxpayers more money during these difficult economic times. Securing the border first will put America in a better position to address the immigration system and illegal immigrants that currently live in America. While securing the border is not the only solution to immigration, it will serve as a starting point to fix the broken immigration system and clear the path for responsible reform.

The policies of the Obama administration have left us today with a serious problem: an exposed border and a nation vulnerable to drug cartels, violent criminals, and terrorists. Rick Santorum shares the views of Americans by and large that once the border is secure more immigration reforms can begin. This is not only a fairness issue but a national security issue as well. With countless threats facing America, securing the border is the first line of defense for America. President Obama needs to stop the political games on immigration and get to real solutions. That’s not what they’re doing in Washington on immigration. The U.S. Constitution explicitly gives this responsibility to the federal government. Instead of providing leadership, President Obama is an antagonist and a panderer, suing states struggling with the burden of illegal immigration rather than supporting them, and promising things he has not and will not deliver.

Rick Santorum believes that after we get serious about securing the border and earn the confidence of the American people, we need to streamline the legal immigration system, seek to attract the best educated and most entrepreneurial people from around the world, and create a workable guest worker program for farmers.

Policies:

•Secure the border first, and then tackle other aspects of immigration reforms to solve an urgent national security challenge and gain credibility with the American people first.
•Streamline the legal immigration system to avoid unnecessary bureaucratic delays and burdens.
•The key to a safer America lies in an approach to border security that includes the following enforcement measures:
     •Expand the border fence fully where needed and enhance physical border security;
     •More law enforcement resources and border agents;
     •The increased use of and access to cutting-edge technology; and
     •Enforcing immigration and labor laws including through employer verification including an E-Verify system that is simple, reliable, and protects businesses.
•Oppose amnesty as unlawful, unfair to legal immigrants, and expensive to taxpayers.
•Oppose other rewards for illegal immigrants at taxpayer expense such as in state tuition rates.
•The efficacy and success of border security efforts should not be measured by outputs, but rather by outcomes.
•Support and partner with state and local authorities to address illegal immigration rather than suing them and support them with the resources necessary to do the job.
•Make English the official language of government, not to penalize but to promote opportunity and a common culture for new immigrants.
•Deport immediately all illegal immigrants involved with criminal and drug trafficking activity unless a specific individual would create a security concern because they may be released in country of origin.
•Coordinate all relevant policy areas and government agencies and functions relevant to securing the border and eliminate duplication.
•Prioritize admittance of legal immigrants by what is good for our country rather than lottery system.
•Redefine metrics for successful border security. Goals should be based on tangible results based directly upon actions, such as:
     •Decreased border violence;
     •More apprehensions of illegal immigrants and criminals at the border; and
     •Increased seizure of contraband and illicit drugs.
•Stop the federal government from requiring states to provide government services to illegal immigrants and oppose provision of government benefits not available to all citizens such as in-state tuition.
•Promote legal immigration for highly educated and entrepreneurs from around the world.
•Create a workable guestworker program for America’s farmers.
•Acknowledge the historic and ongoing contribution of legal immigrants to our country as President of the United States.
•Encourage States and local school systems to teach more American history.
•Partner with States to address and prevent discrimination against recent immigrant communities.

119 posted on 02/20/2012 7:46:40 AM PST by Engraved-on-His-hands
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: deport; TexasFreeper2009; All

Has the Texas GOP changed it back to a ‘winner take all’
____________________________________________________________

Sorry; my bad. As of right now, Texas is NOT a winner-take-all in the Primary.

“There are no plans or discussions for changing to a winner-take-all system,” Party Spokesman Chris Elam said Tuesday.


120 posted on 02/20/2012 7:47:07 AM PST by no dems (How did we end up with such an inferior GOP slate of candidates for President this year?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: abclily

“Santorum is the only one of the four who is not afraid of the MSM or of Obama. Rick feels free to say what he thinks. That is such an awful offense to RINOs!!!!!”

What an embarrassingly silly comment.


121 posted on 02/20/2012 7:49:29 AM PST by moonhawk (Rush, Mark, Sean: Conservative talkers. Sarah, Newt: Conservative DOers. Mitt: Conservative faker)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: dforest

As you know, the issue of Obamacare is far more complex than individual mandates and I hope whoever debates Obama knows that issue backwards and forwards and wraps it around Obama’s neck in a noose. Dang, did that sound Racist?

Wonder if we’ll have a Supreme Court decison on mandates before the election. The controversy with the Catholic Church and Obamacare is one that I would like to see Scalia and Alito sink their teeth into. I think this is a clear violation of religious freedom and is unconstitutional. Gives our side some Red Meat going into the election.


122 posted on 02/20/2012 7:49:31 AM PST by conservativejoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: dforest

Once the primaries are over, maybe there will be some time spent pointing that out.”

May it be just so.

I think Newt/Rick/Ron Paul would do just that.

I am not so sure that Romney would do so anymore than Dole or McCain pointed out the obvious flaws of their opponents.

(I suppose Romney to his credit has proven to be rather ungentlemanly in the primary...so would he take that fight to the general? Maybe. Then again, McCain was ALSO tough on other Republicans. Then he rolled over in the general. I see the same pattern with Romney happening....when Mike DeWine (!) of all people says that it is obvious that Romhhey would lose the general, then, well, it is obvious that he would lose the general).


123 posted on 02/20/2012 7:50:09 AM PST by ConservativeDude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: dforest

Once the primaries are over, maybe there will be some time spent pointing that out.”

May it be just so.

I think Newt/Rick/Ron Paul would do just that.

I am not so sure that Romney would do so anymore than Dole or McCain pointed out the obvious flaws of their opponents.

(I suppose Romney to his credit has proven to be rather ungentlemanly in the primary...so would he take that fight to the general? Maybe. Then again, McCain was ALSO tough on other Republicans. Then he rolled over in the general. I see the same pattern with Romney happening....when Mike DeWine (!) of all people says that it is obvious that Romhhey would lose the general, then, well, it is obvious that he would lose the general).


124 posted on 02/20/2012 7:50:14 AM PST by ConservativeDude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: darrellmaurina

Well, I don’t agree. As long as Santorum sticks with anti-abortion and anti-gay marriage, he is on solid ground with conservatives and most people in general.

When he veers into talking about sex being for procreation and seeming to be against birth control, he will alienate all the women voters, even conservative ones.

Even the majority of Catholics use birth control.

Now, I know Rick didn’t actually say that, but he is giving that impression and needs to put a lid on it and sit on that lid.


125 posted on 02/20/2012 7:50:26 AM PST by altura
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: dt57

The public crusifixion of Newt Gingrich by Mitt Romney, the Media and establishment republicans.

I agree with this HOWEVER, Newt has done nothing to try to change this. The only thing he has done is fund raise in Cali. Last Sunday, when all the candidates were on the talk shows, Newt was no where around. It is up to him to change people’s perceptions of him. Yes he was given some negativity in FLORIDA but why are people in the rest of the country turning on him? It is something he is doing wrong. He let Romney of all people to dictate Newt. That alone is kinda sad. Newt has ONE MORE CHANCE and that is Wednesday. If he does not, I think he is over.


126 posted on 02/20/2012 7:50:49 AM PST by napscoordinator (A moral principled Christian with character is the frontrunner! Congrats Santorum!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: ngat; All

Also, Texas has an interesting republican primary race going on for retiring Senator Kay Baily Hutchison’s seat.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Texas Solicitor General Ted Cruz is the BEST Conservative in the Race to replace Ted Kennedy’s girlfriend, Kay. I hope to goodness the Establishment, RINO, David Dewhurst does not get the GOP nomination.


127 posted on 02/20/2012 7:52:46 AM PST by no dems (How did we end up with such an inferior GOP slate of candidates for President this year?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: dforest

Here’s something else for all the negative doom-and-gloom hand-wringers here to chew on... Rick Santorum has moved back into a statistical tie in a hypothetical presidential matchup against Obama, according to the latest Rasmussen daily tracking poll released this morning.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/archive/2012_presidential_election_matchups2

The poll currently has Obama leading 47% to 44%, but bear in mind that any politician who polls below 50% during an election year is considered VULNERABLE, not to mention we haven’t even yet begun to campaign against the Marxist Leader!


128 posted on 02/20/2012 7:54:25 AM PST by DestroyLiberalism
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: LuvFreeRepublic

Actually, this election has to be about more than just the economy. You can already see how the State run media is cranking out a false picture of an improving economy. So far what they are doing kind of works because people listen to the media and even FOX plays along.

This election has to also be about liberty and what will happen not only to our money, but our basic freedoms if Obama isn’t booted out.

As you can see, the person who is President, and the people he surrounds himself with, can very much so affect the attitude and culture of a nation.

I remember back to how I felt when Carter was in the White House. I felt ashamed of our country and was tired of hating what we were becoming.

When Reagan was elected, it was wow. After a period of time it felt so good to have a positive attitude, patriotism, and respect again. God and Country didn’t embarrass him.


129 posted on 02/20/2012 7:55:00 AM PST by dforest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator

He was on Fox News Sunday.


130 posted on 02/20/2012 7:55:33 AM PST by altura
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: DestroyLiberalism

I hope you are right. I would really love to be able to say President Rick Santorum said......

I do think he is a long shot, and why I am publically supporting Newt Gingrinch for president.

Rick has yet to satisfy me to his loss in PA. Why did he move to Virgina? Why did he use PA. funds to educate his children and then when confronted refuse to pay the state back when he clearly lived somewhere else? Why did the voters sour on him and vote him out by 18 per cent. Those are important questions, and not about being a hater. They need to be answered better. It is not enough to say it was a bad year for republicans, it was NOT that bad. Having said all that Rick is one of the candidates I will get behind and support if he wins the nomination. Newt would be a more engaging and successful candidate against Obama, IN MY OPINION. I think I can still have an opinion. I would like to be wrong.


131 posted on 02/20/2012 7:56:14 AM PST by dt57
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: dt57

Unfortunately, you are not wrong.

I am trying hard to like Rick Santorum as it looks like he may get the nomination.


132 posted on 02/20/2012 7:57:55 AM PST by altura
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: DestroyLiberalism

-—Obama is as good as BURNT TOAST in November, though that COULD change if the hand-wringing Negative Nellies on our side don’t stop with all the damn self-defeatist talk!-—

Right on, right on!


133 posted on 02/20/2012 7:58:01 AM PST by St_Thomas_Aquinas (Viva Christo Rey!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: caww; abclily

he (Santorum) has no discerning ability to know when to keep certain matters to himself until the right time...or not speak them at all.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Exactly!!! Rick being a religious man needs to familiarize himself with James 1:19 and “be swift to hear, slow to speak....” Check out this:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2848296/posts


134 posted on 02/20/2012 7:58:42 AM PST by no dems (How did we end up with such an inferior GOP slate of candidates for President this year?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: greyfox

You are so right on!! If you’re interested:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2848296/posts


135 posted on 02/20/2012 8:03:34 AM PST by no dems (How did we end up with such an inferior GOP slate of candidates for President this year?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: altura

Altura, I hope we are both wrong. I hope Rick Santorum does not get the nomination and if he does I hope we are both wrong and he wins.

Having said that the worse thing that can happen if Rick does not win the nomination is that Mitt Romney does. I could not pull the lever for him.

My prayer is that Newt when turn the corner, run a better campaign and surge again.


136 posted on 02/20/2012 8:03:36 AM PST by dt57
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: St_Thomas_Aquinas

Obam will have a built in 47% and only needs to move the dial 3 to 4 points to win.

Our side will start at around 45%, and will need to move the dial about 5 to 6 points to win.

This is a very GOOD place to be win facing an incumbent President. The right candidate can beat Obama, but it will be VERY close. Been around a long time and I have seen this played out for over 60 years over and over again. We can win, but we need a strong candidate with solutions. Even if those solutions are found by allow the public to succeed, and knocking down the obstacles the government has placed in our way.


137 posted on 02/20/2012 8:08:27 AM PST by dt57
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: darrellmaurina
Santorum’s ethnic heritage and Catholicism gives him credibility with a demographic that is bigger than being Italian. The old “Reagan Democrats” are not a major force anymore in national politics, but they are important in certain key states which we absolutely must win to retake the presidency this fall, and Santorum has a better shot at winning those states in the general election when most other Republicans.

True. Rust-belt States like PA, OH, and MI. There are 3 key states in every Presidential Election. No one has been elected President without winning at least 2 of those 3. They are: PA, OH and FL. That's why Santorum, or whomever the nominee is, MUST pick Marco Rubio for the VP slot.
138 posted on 02/20/2012 8:09:27 AM PST by no dems (How did we end up with such an inferior GOP slate of candidates for President this year?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: dforest

Freepers who are dissing Santorum on this site look foolish, angry and spiteful....providing little in the way of real reasons to not support him.

Those who know him have said that to meet him is to like him..and everywhere he is going where he gets to talk to people one on one or address a crowd, his numbers are improving.

Romney needs to be defeated at all costs..and if Rick is the one to be able to do that, then we should all be supporting him.
I’m going to Michigan on Friday from Wisconsin. Other supporters are coming in from all over the country to work for the Santorum campaign. Polls indicate that this could come down to a very narrow victory for either Rick or the dishonorable liberal from Massachusetts.

If it was Newt that was ahead and needing grassroots volunteers, I would do same.
No Romney/No way.


139 posted on 02/20/2012 8:12:55 AM PST by Mountain Mary (Freedom is at stake in this election. Rick Santorum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: greyfox

since judges can’t over ride elections the way they do legislation, those are issues that will propel santorum to the nomination.

Social conservatives are not going to compromise this time around. If you personally are okay with the left getting its way on those issues, I personally am okay with the left getting its way with your wealth, your parents wealth, my wealth, and everyone else’s.

As Howlin said, the Christians have oir boot on the neck of the party. we get a social.conservative, or everyone gets the Democrat. There is no compromise here, and that is why Santorum is surging.


140 posted on 02/20/2012 8:13:32 AM PST by MrEdd (Heck? Geewhiz Cripes, thats the place where people who don't believe in Gosh think they aint going.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: no dems

Yes Marco Rubio is a must, but I worry about Santorum in PA., and quite frankly in Ohio. He already lost PA by 18, in yes a very rough year. Ohio is a strange state, and much of Santorum’s message will not play well in the large metropolitian areas. Ohio will be won by the one who can appeal to the indepedants in that state who swing back and forth depending on the candidate.


141 posted on 02/20/2012 8:13:32 AM PST by dt57
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

To: dt57

dt57 wrote:
<<
I hope you are right. I would really love to be able to say President Rick Santorum said......

I do think he is a long shot, and why I am publically supporting Newt Gingrinch for president.

Rick has yet to satisfy me to his loss in PA. Why did he move to Virgina? Why did he use PA. funds to educate his children and then when confronted refuse to pay the state back when he clearly lived somewhere else? Why did the voters sour on him and vote him out by 18 per cent. Those are important questions, and not about being a hater. They need to be answered better. It is not enough to say it was a bad year for republicans, it was NOT that bad. Having said all that Rick is one of the candidates I will get behind and support if he wins the nomination. Newt would be a more engaging and successful candidate against Obama, IN MY OPINION. I think I can still have an opinion. I would like to be wrong.
>>

************************************************************

I live in Pennsylvania. I don’t claim to know the exact reasons why he lost the state by such a large margin in 2006, but here are some plausible explanations:

1) PA is traditionally a heavily Democratic state and 2006 turned out to be an election that heavily benefited their party nationally. And, yes, it absolutely was a very BAD year for Republicans. After all, the Dems did recapture the House and Senate that election.

2) Many PA conservatives were still upset with Santorum for endorsing liberal establishment “Republican” Arlen Specter in his 2004 re-election bid (Bush endorsed Specter as well) and therefore many conservatives refused to help re-elect Santorum in 2006. Santorum was simply trying to be a loyal “party guy” and he’ll be the first to admit it was a big mistake.

3) Santorum’s 2006 senate opponent was Bob Casey Jr. His father Bob Casey Sr. had long been an immensely popular Democrat politician in PA and his son no doubt tremendously benefited from the association.

Comparing the 2006 elections to the current political climate is apples-to-oranges. These are different times, different worlds. What happened back then is completely irrelevant to the upcoming election.


142 posted on 02/20/2012 8:15:31 AM PST by DestroyLiberalism
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: TexasFreeper2009

Found it! Thanks!


143 posted on 02/20/2012 8:16:40 AM PST by ohioWfan (Proud Mom of a Bronze Star recipient!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: straps

“I strongly suggest all real conservatives get a copy of a new book called REGANS COMEBACK it is a carbon copy of whats happening right now. Basically it states that Regan the new comer was getting wracked by the man from Michigan an during the Texas Primary he became the winner. Remember the establishment was in bed with Ford as the next guy due to run. We do know what happened next don’t we? Pray the same happens for Newt....”

In the end Ford won the nomination and lost to Carter. So you want Newt to win the nomination but lose to Obama? LOL!

I understand what you what you mean but the analogy isn’t the best!


144 posted on 02/20/2012 8:17:26 AM PST by FerociousRabbit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: Mountain Mary

Ok, maybe I might look foolish, but I am neither angry nor spiteful. I have a lot of unanswered question for Rick Santorum, and getting little help answering them. Thanks for what you are doing, and I mean that. When I make statements about Rick and ask questions it is because I care, and he worries me a great deal.

Rick Santorum is leading for two reasons:

1. The public crusifixion of Newt Gingrich by Mitt Romney, the Media and establishment republicans. Much of which is inaccurate and some plain false. His own moral failings are public knowledge. (I am glad mine aren’t). But to think the others are innocent of moral failings is to discount much of the gospel. Newt is redeemed and forgiven by God, we would do well to do the same.

2. Ron Paul is unacceptable because of a naviee view of radical Islam and their purposes. Mitt Romney is the worse kind of politician, seeking office solely for the purpose of self interest...and does anything and everything to get elected.

Rick is what most people believe they have left. So they build him up in their own minds in order to get excited about his candidacy. He is an average Jr. Senator, that needs more seasoning, and in a sense a very average communicator.


145 posted on 02/20/2012 8:18:27 AM PST by dt57
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]

To: TexasFreeper2009
Interesting poll stats:

26% consider themselves in the middle re repub vs dem.

35% of respondants are dems

33% declare themselves repubs.

31% live in the Dallas fort worth area

38% finished high school only.

No doubt these poll results reflect the voting population in texas to a T. (WTF?)

146 posted on 02/20/2012 8:21:16 AM PST by going hot (Happiness is a momma deuce)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: going hot
So the majority of those polled in this poll are democrats who are in the middle politically and have only a high school education, and 45% of them vote for Mr. Santorum.

This is how we are going to win in November? Don't hang up the work gloves just yet.

147 posted on 02/20/2012 8:28:56 AM PST by going hot (Happiness is a momma deuce)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: going hot

The party affiliation stats sound about right - this is an open primary state.

Not sure about education breakdown though. I think Highschool grad or less might be under represented.


148 posted on 02/20/2012 8:35:00 AM PST by MrEdd (Heck? Geewhiz Cripes, thats the place where people who don't believe in Gosh think they aint going.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: magna carta

Its just the “feel good” polling right now in Texas. Once Santornem’s rocket ride fades, you’ll see Newt come back. When no one’s watching and no one knows who they really pull, even the Evangelicals will vote common sense. And common sense is Newt.


149 posted on 02/20/2012 8:36:18 AM PST by X-spurt (Its time for ON YOUR FEET or on your knees)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: MrEdd

So what happens in November when those same dems hear the call and bahhh their way to the booth to vote dem?


150 posted on 02/20/2012 8:38:03 AM PST by going hot (Happiness is a momma deuce)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-195 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