Posted on 04/05/2012 6:49:16 AM PDT by Ocarterma
Two days after losing three more primaries, Rick Santorum appears to be in trouble in his home state:
Mitt Romney’s taken the lead in PPP’s newest poll of Rick Santorum’s home state of Pennsylvania. Romney has 42% to 37% for Santorum with Ron Paul at 9% and Newt Gingrich at 6%. The numbers represent a dramatic turnaround from when PPP polled the state a month ago. Romney’s gained 17 points, going from 25% to 42%. Meanwhile Santorum’s dropped 6 points from 43% to 37%, for an overall swing of 23 points in the last four weeks.
(Excerpt) Read more at outsidethebeltway.com ...
I don’t know who will win PA.
But here’s why it’s not a given that Rick wins it.
Rick lost his PA senate seat by 18 pts.
Libs weren’t for him...they tend to vote Dem...Conservatives were mad at him and many of the PA ones still are because of backing Specter over Toomey and several other things...moderates most likely didn’t care one way or the other.
In contrast, Newt and Romney retained popularity in their respective home states.
There are now several internal polls and indications, that if Santorum stays in until PA is over, he risks losing his political career permanently if he loses PA again. If he drops out before PA, he can salvage his future in politics.
The inside pressure mounting against Santorum to drop out, is becoming very intense. Santorum himself, scoffed at the magnitude of the pressure and vowed that it was nothing and would not stop him.
This is typical for Santorum, who has a long history and reputation for being obsessively stubborn, arrogant and unreasonable. So, it looks like Santorum has decided to self destruct once again. Only this time, it will be permanent.
“If Obama wins, Scalia and Kennedy aren’t going anywhere.”
And your sure knowledge of their future health is based on what ???
And what if its Ruth Bader ginsburg? She wants to retire. health issues. We could flip her to a conservative, but if Obama wins, she gets replaced by a hardcore leftist.
We will have a new supreme court justice by 2016 almost surely. Do you want another Scalia or another Ginsburg?
Maybe these points are raised again and again because they are valid.
I supported Newt for that reason alone, but since the Base is too brain dead to understand what is at stake and blindly kept enabling Santorum, I did what I has to do.
And destroying our obvious nominee, only to have to later support him, is not only stupid, it is rather irrational.
Your faux concern over Santorum’s political future is odd in light of your SDS (Santorum Derangement Syndrome). I think we get it...Obamney is the one! (Either 1.0 or 2.0).
“That’s not the same as saying Santorum was a fan of Romney’s, but it does suggest that claims he’s more liberal than McCain aren’t valid. At least, not in Santorum’s eyes. “
Santorum had first-hand knowledge of McCain.
It’s funny how Romney is getting the 3rd degree for being a RINO when in fact, McCain was an uberRINO far beyond what Romney is. Romney 2012 is a better candidate than McCain 2008; it’s a low bar, I know, but it says something, and that something is that all this bluster about how bad Romney is, well, its hyperbole. we really are forgetting about how RINO-ish and doltish Ford, Dole and McCain were.
Without them, the MI race would have not even been close. 4% of the same tried to upset Wisconsin for Santorum, but they are losing interest, now that Romney is obviously going to win, and that Obama now has a slight lead over Romney in the polls. (Which we can thank Santorum in part, for his ridiculous belief that he is winning.)
It helps Romney. His and Ron Paul's campaign were the only ones who recruited candidates to run for delegate. Romney got a lot current and former elected officials to run as delegates. These people have high name ID so they will do very well. So even if Santorum wins PA (which I believe that he will) Romeny will still win most of the delegates for the state.
I think you need to consider your RDS stigma first, don’t you?
A faithful Catholic taking a break from campaigning during the Easter Triduum, just means he is being a faithful Catholic; that’s all it means.
Rino Derangement Syndrome? As the former Alaskan governor would say “you betcha!”
The people who select the Republican nominee are the primary voters, nobody else.
The fact is, had Texas Gov Rick Perry not flubbed his debates, he would be mopping up right about now. Voters dictated that by deciding they wouldnt support a guy who didnt seem ‘ready’, nobody else.
These whines about GOP-e ‘picking’ people are pointless and wrong. Time and again we have seen the ‘annointed candidate’ losing - like Crist to Rubio, like ?? to Rand Paul, like when Senator Bennett lost to Mike Lee. In texas, Perry beat KBH by a move to out-conservative her. Elites were stunned, it worked.
So what if some people like Romney and were inside the beltway? They didnt have the votes.
Santorum and Newt were good candidates but had flaws, and Romney won because we didnt have a strong, clear, consensus conservative candidate, whose strengths outweighed the negatives. If we had such a candidate, it would be clear. I got flak for pointing out that Santorum was a good conservative, from others who insisted he wasnt. well ... did we get a more conservative result from all those complaining about how non-conservative Santorum was? Huh?!? so we are where we are now.
We are TOO MUCH focussed on the negatives of our guys than the positives, treating something they did or said a long time ago as “proof” they can never ever ever be of any good. Too much negatives against all of them, from Newt, Santorum, Cain, and Romney. Too many circular firing squads, while the real battle is between us and the leftists like Obama who hate us all. Obama side loves our intraparty fights, they feed it. For all the attacks on Romney being a RINO, looking at what he is saying and listening as he tries to channel Reagan, supports conservative budgets (Ryan), support prolife positions, calls to repeal obamacare, etc. Romney has a more conservative agenda than McCain did in 2008, than GWB did in 2000. Acting like it will be the end of the world if Romney gets in there and ends up being a smarter and a more fiscally conservative version of GWB is .. well, nuts.
So ALL of us know this “ I know in my heart that four more years of the Kenyan Kommie would be far worse than Mitt ever could be.”
.. and for every extremist picking 3rd party, there are thankfully many more level-headed folks who decide its better for the country not to let Obama get another 4 years.
I’ve had hard vote before, but a vote to fire Obama by voting for whoever the Republican is will be a joyful gleeful, ‘hope he gets his butt kicked’ vote.
So, instead of whining about the GOP-e folks, realize that they are not omnipotent, that primaries matter and to get your way we have to win them, so .... Find good conservatives for whatever office and support them in primaries.
Ted Cruz for US Senate. :-)
“I believe I’ve had confirmation that supporting Romney would be a sin for which God would hold me responsible.”
So your God wants Obama to win re-election?
Wow.
What will you say when Sarah gets behind our nominee? (Who will be Romney of course)
“You betcha!”?
You’re the loser because you are so hated here.
I saw you condemn the “haters” on this forum and took the moral high ground as usual. So if you think I am hated here, then I will take that as a compliment and wear it with pride. It’s a dirty job, but somebody has to take a stand and show the courage to do what is sometimes necessary.
“And your sure knowledge of their future health is based on what ???”
Supreme Court Justices get the best healthcare, so I’m not that concerned about health. Both will be 80, old but not exactly in their death beds. I hear that both have indicated a desire to say on should Obama win. And with Romney’s history of nominating liberals, does it really matter?
Romney would be a disaster for the Republican party, you basically have a Socialist running against a Marxist. I will vote for neither, either way it’s a recipe for disaster for this country, so at least I can say I didn’t take part in it. And a GOP Congress will just be a rubber stamp for Romney’s big government agenda. “See George W Bush”. Within 90 days of a Romney win you’ll be at your FAX machine fighting amnesty, count on it.
And a Romney win would just lead to another hard core leftist winning in 2016 when the economy tanks and is blamed on conservatism. Imagine how the court will look then? I would rather we take our lumps now and regroup for 2016.
Of course, Myth could do the right thing, acknowledge he’s the beneficiary of a fragmented conservative vote and drop out for the good of the party, but obviously that’s not going to happen.
Oh, I’ve said many time, Penn Mom, that the GOP-E is the prime perp here.
I am so angry with Paul Ryan and Ron Johnson, sell out Rinos both, endorsed Myth before our Tuesday primary.
All of the hard work of the volunteers(we even had Hillsdale college students come up to phone) cancelled out in one fell swoop of the arrogant party elites.
I feel demeaned like when an adult tried to squash my spirit when I was young by telling me that what I thought didn’t matter. Conservatives will “come around”? I don’t think so.
No more media for me. Faux News just someone that I used to know. Rip roaring Romney cheerleading to the point of nausea. Our local talk show hosts too: Slobbering Rombots. It’s amazing the vitriol and hatred they spew for a Conservative candidate who is principled. What are they afraid of?
If anyone has any ideas of how to let these turncoats, Ryan, Sensenbrenner and Johnson, know how we(I) feel about their betrayal, please let me know.
I’ve tried calling their offices to no avail.(”We don’t take political comments here”)..Writing to them through their websites? Sure. I want to be heard, da**it.
I don't follow that logic at all. You can certainly oppose socialistic policies without publicaly calling Obama a "socialist".
Here's what Romney actually said in a debate about it. I can't really fathom what in his rhetoric a conservative could find so objectionable. From National Review:
The question of whether President Obama is, or should be called, a socialist came up in last night’s debate. The consensus seems to be that Romney played it smart by side-stepping the use of the “s” word. That’s too simple a take, I think.
This is what Romney actually said: “What President Obama is, is a big-spending liberal. And he takes his political inspiration from Europe, and from the socialist-democrats in Europe. Guess what? Europe isn’t working in Europe. It’s not going to work here. I believe in America. I believe in the opportunity and in the freedom that is in America, opportunity and freedom. I believe in free enterprise and capitalism.”
Saying that Obama is a big-spending liberal who takes his political inspiration from European socialists strikes me as not at all far from calling Obama a socialist. And in the context of his answer, Romney’s emphasizing his own belief in free enterprise and capitalism clearly implies that Obama’s faith in those entities is somewhat less than complete. It’s a mark of where Obama has put us that the socialism question has not only been asked, but that claiming a president of the United States takes his inspiration from European socialists is now considered mild.
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/278158/romney-obama-and-socialism-stanley-kurtz
“Santorum may yet win in PA, but it must be noted that he and his staff found it advisable to announce just this morning that the candidate will be taking a four-day break in his campaign.”
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.