Gingrich must endorse Santorum

http://www.freerepublic.com ^ | 6 March 2012 | impimp

[impimp]

I have advocated Gingrich staying in until sometime in March. I felt the vote splitting would help prevent Romney from locking up a sufficient number of bound delegates to take the nomination. The plan did a good job so far, but not a great job.

I think now the mathematics is shifting such that Gingrich needs to bow out. The reasons for the shift are:

1. winner-take-alls coming up soon - vote splitting begins to really hurt us in these primaries 2. we need money consolidating behind Santorum. 3. Santorum made the Indiana ballot after all

But now Gingrich needs to bow out.

[seekthetruth]

Thanks! Switching to CNN! :)

[MHGinTN]

Hear here! Well and truly stated!!

[b9]

Has anyone noticed that the MSM does not want to show the ACTUAL delegate count for all the candidates

Yep -- so obvious.

[Crucial]

Newt can’t carry Ohio. No Republican has ever won the presidency without Ohio. I love listening to Newt and I love his fire, but he can’t win. In the end, I think his ex-wife did him in.

[berdie]

Take it to the convention works for me. :)

[Kevmo]

This kinda makes me sick to my stomach.

Romney beats AnybodyButRomney

[berdie]

The whole thing makes my head spin! But it does help me understand why candidates choose to not campaign in every state.

[Redcloak]

It’s time for Gingrich to put the good of the Conservative movement first. A “GOP win” with a drop-in replacement for Obama is no win. By pitting two conservatives against the Establishment, Country-clubber, we guarantee that Obama’s policies will continue.

Newt, you can’t let that happen.

[Josh Painter]

No way. Santorum is a pro-union, big government, “compassionate conservative.” He’s even to the left of George W. Bush, and George W. Bush got us Barack Obama.

Dream on, Scooter.

[Dave W]

You know exactly what I mean. You are purposely confusing the issue. Newt isn't going to win the nomination and Santorum probably won't either. Both are seriously outspent and outorganized. Without money, it is very difficult to compete.

[Randy Larsen]

Try this one...

NY Times

[Dave W]

I could take you more seriously if you did not subject others to your hyperbole. Romney may not be the conservative one wants, but it is also a lie to call him a socialist. You black and white people, those who throw out wild labels can't be taken seriously. If a candidate does not toe the line on all of your issues, the hatred and vile you spew in their direction is bizarre. I know people similar to yourself. They are controlling individuals and bullies that make life difficult for those around them. Strive to be a better person. I know you can do it.

[Gene Eric]

>> What happened to you FRiends? Has FR gone insane?

I guess you’re oblivious to Rick’s big government, pro-union voting record.

[ansel12]

That is kind of the point, the man is unvetted, invisible except for his own perfect image that he himself created and has delivered. The media, the left, the establishment, none have set upon the man as they do with true effective conservatives like a Palin, or Reagan, or Gingrich, so no one knows about the incredibly bizarre history and record of Santorum.

If you read his early politics when he was pro-abortion and anti-Reagan (he described Reagan supporters as the "right-wing fringe"), and purely focused on the very moderate parts of the GOP, working only for pro-choice moderates, exactly the kind that he has always continued to support in elections, he mentions his theories on carving out a niche and hanging on to it.

Santorum used to label himself in his campaign literature, a "Progressive Conservative".

The early Santorum is always described as not being interested in issues themselves, but in how to use them.

Before switching to pro-life for his first campaign, this is how he described himself, like Romney he was.
"I was basically pro-choice all my life, until I ran for Congress"

This is his first campaign position paper he wrote to grab pro-life voters, it is less than inspiring.

[ansel12]

We know what to call Romney supporting liberals also, anti-conservative.

[Gene Eric]

>> Gingrich needs to bow out

Your boy first.

[RitaOK]

Bail out boys and individual mandaters, along with their sympathizers, want to call all that something other than socialism? LOL!! And YOU want to mess with me about hyperbole?

HaHaHaHa!

Take that hyperb’ crap and kick it upstairs to the Jimbo Big Guy Robinson.
He’s done a column on the socialist Romney on more than one occasion.

What do you call it? Fiscally responsible? Say so, give me your best shot.

[caww]

Thank you....But just a shame the voters don’t see it MHGinTN....it’s so clear to me and others but for reasons other than I can grasp people still think Santorum is their guy when we have the best opportunity to get this country on track with Newt. It just boggles my mind.

God can still part seas and Newt has the ear to hear...so I’m with Newt until he says otherwise...and I don’t see him throwing in the towel before convention. And so....

Go Newt Go!!!!!

[caww]

Well now that’s an intersting page from Santorum’s own hand.....does speak volumes doesn’t it. But I’m not surprised. Here in Pa we know how Santorum operates...and it still makes me mad he claims himself from Pittsburgh and then Virginia when from 7yrs. to graduation he lived in Butler pa. a town he’s too embarrassed to identify with.

[ansel12]

See post 234.