Santorum suggests that re-electing Obama would be better than a Romney presidency

Yahoo ^ | 3/22/12 | Chris Moody

[Nachum]

Rick Santorum suggested Thursday that re-electing President Barack Obama would be better than electing Republican rival Mitt Romney, a statement that is arguably his toughest criticism of Romney to date.

"You win by giving people a choice. You win by giving people the opportunity to see a different vision for our country, not someone who's just going to be a little different than the person in there," Santorum told supporters in San Antonio. "If you're going to be a little different, we might as well stay with what we have instead of taking a risk with what may be the Etch A Sketch candidate of the future."

Santorum was referring to Romney, whose campaign strategist said recently that they would be able to "reset" the campaign when they transition to the general election "like an Etch A Sketch."

[Related: Romney memo calls Santorum Obama's 'most valuable player']

The Santorum camp later clarified the candidate's remark, saying he didn't mean to insinuate that voters would be better off re-electing Obama than choosing Romney.

"What he was talking about was that they're just so similar. You've got to have differences to motivate people to vote," Santorum spokesman Hogan Gidley told Yahoo News. "If there's virtually no difference between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney, chances are they won't go out and vote."

Romney responded in a statement released by his campaign, saying that "any of the Republicans" would be better than Obama.

[musicman]

[D-fendr]

I dunno, Rick seems to have a tin ear often.

I don’t think he would be a very strong campaigner in the general.

Shesh, I so much prefer Newt.

[Hostage]

“everyone EXCEPT FOR DOGS, would be safer under Romney”

Complete Utter Fartrous Loaded Bovine Excrement.

[Toespi]

This is pathetic. Santorum is nothing but an opportunistic politician. Theoretically, Santorum just endorsed Obama and if Romney gets the nomination, I can tell you, the Obama campaign will use Santorum’s words. Reckless campaigning.

[jersey117]

I no longer have a dog in this race. My guy was Rick Perry. Sad the way he was trashed around here. My vote goes to Romney at this stage of the game. Obama is a racist commie. No way will I let him win by default. I love my kids and grandkids too much to let obama destroy their futures. Romney has a bunch of grandkids of his own. I doubt he wants them growing up in obama’s amerika.

[DannyTN]

If we are going down, I would rather a Democrat be at the helm than a RINO like Romney.

That's my thought too. I can't in good conscience vote for either one of them. Both represent values I abhor.

If Obama wins, the republicans will fight him, and there is a good chance voters will swing to republicans in the congressional races two years later in hopes of change.

If Romney wins, we get Obamacare, gay marriage, abortion, less gun rights, and a non-Christian role model with good hair. And no body will stand in his way. Two years later, voters will be voting for a democrat congress hoping for change.

I'm hoping Santorum somehow pulls out a win. If not I'm hoping the constitution party puts up a good candidate.

[Kansas58]

I do not want Romney to be the nominee.

However, if Obama wins it will be a demoralizing blow to Conservatism and a HUGE win for Socialism.

The Country and the World will see an Obama victory as a sign that Socialism is inevitable, and many will simply give up all hope and quit fighting it.

I think the solution to our dilemma is to make sure we have a CONSERVATIVE HOUSE (Doable) and a REPUBLICAN Senate (Doable) and then make sure that those we support do NOT go along with any “moderate” ideas that an President Romney might come up with.

[musicman]

I agree!!

[American Constitutionalist]

My Oh MY are the Newt supporters trying to make hey or make something out of nothing by taking Rick's comments out of context to mold and shape it into what they want you to think.

Here is Rick's actual comment : " "You win by giving people a choice. You win by giving people the opportunity to see a different vision for our country, not someone who's just going to be a little different than the person in there," Santorum told supporters in San Antonio. "If you're going to be a little different, we might as well stay with what we have instead of taking a risk with what may be the Etch A Sketch candidate of the future." ...

Rick is actually saying there is not much difference between Mitt Romney and Obama when you look at their records.
Rick goes on to say that if that's what you want in a candidate, then why vote for Mitt Romney when there is someone else in office as just about the same ?
Rick is saying, vote for someone who is NOT like Obama and Mitt Romney, Rick IS NOT saying to vote for Obama, he is saying look for someone who is not like Obama and Mitt Romney.

[Jeff Head]

Rick should not have gotten on the etch a sketch band-wagon...or if he had to, said it early in the week and then left it alone.

Now by trying to use it to the max, and thus use it up, he has done worse. He has made a gaffe so bad himself that it allows Romney to get out from under what his advisor said and point the attention now to Santorum.

It gave Newt ammo against Santorum as well and it has a lot of people scracthing their heads now focusing thier worry on Santorum.

Foolish mistake on the eve of Lousiana. You can bet this will be the talk of tomorrow.

[ngat]

Nobody is taking Rick out of context. If they were, the Santorum campaign would not be having to reverse themselves on it. Here is Rick’s actual comment:

“If you’re going to be a little different, we might as well stay with what we have (Obama) instead of taking a risk with what may be the Etch A Sketch candidate (Romney) of the future.”

What Rick actually said is why THE SANTORUM CAMP TOOK IT BACK as the article says:

“The Santorum camp later clarified the candidate’s remark, saying he didn’t mean to insinuate that voters would be better off re-electing Obama than choosing Romney.”

[cricket]

Santorum’s lost his mind. As flawed a candidate Romney is, the precious “gop brand” will be the least of our concerns after four more years of Obama.

So agree. Another term of Obama will almost guarantee that there will be no GOP brand in a few years; and probably no elections to worry about either. Romney has his flaws for certain; (personally do not see him winning 'with them') but he will not lose by 'my' vote; if he is candidate. NO way, can any sane citizen voter; think that Obama is better; without being considered 'certifiable'.

Santorum is bitter; angry; and with that; we are hearing a mindless rant on Obama; nothing more. Am sure Santorum is 'feeling' that if he loses; then we all deserve the hell of Obama. This is not intelligence speaking; it is the worst of an angry and tired; challenged and desperate candidate.

For as bad - and unfair - as Santorum is thinking this campaign has been to him; NO ONE had it as challenging as did Sarah Palin. And she NEVER resorted to this kind of divisive; cheap and childish rhetoric as what Santorum is now dropping - like a spoiled brat candidate.

Disgusting to behold!

[cricket]

"If you're going to be a little different, we might as well stay with what we have instead of taking a risk with what may be the Etch A Sketch candidate of the future." ...

Do we need to have it 'etched' for us; what he means? Don't think so. . .All of which he said; is the 'wrong' thing to say; period. and IMHO. . .

[cricket]

Conservatives will still be around in 2014 to get in the face of Obama or Republican-in-Name-Only RINO Romney.

Ya think? I think 'Conservatives' will be in 'gulags' by 2014. And probably RINOS too; for that matter.

What part of 'last chance' - and America being 'on the brink' - do you all 'not get'?

[musicman]

(The quote at the top of your post to me wasn't even close to being in my #21 post that you pinged me to....might want to repost it to it's "rightful owner"....Thanks)

[TexasSecede79366]

I doubt he wants them growing up in obama’s amerika.

There's that word again. Mitten's is a liberal elitist chosen for us by our betters. Anybody that goes against their own convictions and votes for this man (hold your nose) shame on each and every one.

Our grandchildren deserve better.

[cricket]

wasn't even close to being in my #21 post that you pinged me to....might want to repost it to it's "rightful owner".

[(post #20/hostage): Conservatives will still be around in 2014 to get in the face of Obama or Republican-in-Name-Only RINO Romney. ]

/(cricket): Ya think? I think 'Conservatives' will be in 'gulags' by 2014. And probably RINOS too; for that matter./ What part of 'last chance' - and America being 'on the brink' - do you all 'not get'?]

******

Oops and hope this corrects it. Not close in content; but #20 (hostage) close in proximity, to your #21.

[musicman]

(Thank you!)

[W. W. SMITH]

The two wings of the Government Party offer you the choice of a disorganized and self indulgent megalomaniac leftwing progressive, or the focused and self disciplined megalomaniac leftwing progressive. The organized one -will- accomplish more harm if elected.

Please! Please! please! A very big shout out to the conservative party and to the constitution party, Don’t even ask her just put Sarah Palin on the ballot for your party. That would greatly increase turnout, decrease Romney’s vote count and make the Democrat’s vote fraud more difficult. Considering the strength of those currently running, Palin should be a shoe in.

[Hostage]

****Ya think? I think ‘Conservatives’ will be in ‘gulags’ by 2014. And probably RINOS too; for that matter./ What part of ‘last chance’ - and America being ‘on the brink’ - do you all ‘not get’?****

Funny how each election always has your type predicting the end of the world, how it’s the “most crucial election in history” yada yada yada

Guess you weren’t around when in 1996 we HAD TO DEFEAT CLINTON ore else the country was doomed (and ‘we’ lost)

or in 2000 we HAD TO DEFEAT GORE or else the country was doomed (and ‘we’ won)

and yet whether we win or lose we are still here and we will be in the future.

But the real question is whether we are better off for having ‘won’ and the answer is no we are not. Because we won nothing by thinking we had nominated a conservative who in fact was GOP-E RINO (Dole ‘96, McCain ‘08 etc.) or a ‘weak’ conservative, a ‘boy’ conservative in GW Bush who let Wall St. walk all over him, who let scammers do whatever they want, who considered Harriet Myers for SCOTUS until he was corrected, who dissed the Swift Boat Vets for working to educate the public on the phoniness of John Kerry, who was cowered into listening to his liberal wife to formulate his policies, who in effect drifted from being a semi-conservative to being in the RINO camp, who along with his appointee Paulson left us at the mercy of the Fed Reserve member investment banks, who was listening to Paulson about ‘global warming’ and in general showed no leadership in his second term other than being fortunate to have General Petraeus to take the responsibility for the Iraq War and stave off disaster and so on. No it did not help us to have a watered down semi-conservative RINO in the White House.

And now we are supposed to support this piece of shiite called Romney? Support this phoney who will look at you, smile and lie with the ease of breathing?

Because the reality is these people are not conservatives. They are salesmen that look like whatever the viewer wants to see.

And the people behind them, the real beneficiaries of the political power? They don’t give two farts about us, about you. It’s all about them and what’s in it for them.

Don’t you think for 1 second that you got to have Romney because Ob*llsh*t will doom the country.

Rather get your mind around electing TP conservatives to the Senate and House. That’s far better.