Q
qui_est_ce
Guest
I’m glad you said most, because I willingly and happily voted for Rick Santorum. :yup:
- Status
A
_Abyssinia
Guest
Santorum enjoys his new status as the main anti-Romney…
Triumphant Santorum takes fight into Romney’s backyard: Michigan - The Hill
…as Romney promises to get more aggressive with him
“We think we can beat Sen. Santorum where we compete head-to-head in an aggressive way, and we obviously didn’t do that in Colorado or Minnesota to the extent that (Santorum’s) campaign did,” Romney told reporters. … Republicans in Washington have “spent too much, borrowed too much, (and) earmarked too much,” he said. “Frankly, Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich were a big part.”" - CNN
How Romney could fail to get enough delegates - Washington Examiner
Gingrich in decline after losing anti-Romney status
“Election? What election? Some 12 hours after getting clocked in Minnesota and Colorado, Newt Gingrich came to a manufacturing plant here to talk about the economy, Social Security and most issues besides Tuesday’s voting. (Mr. Gingrich was not on the ballot in Missouri.)” - Wall Street Journal
Karl Rove: Newt’s Southern strategy won’t work - WSJ
The next GOP contest: Maine
“Maine’s caucuses are multiday affairs, held over the course of more than a week, with the results to be released on Saturday. The state is considered Mitt Romney territory, given that he has a house in adjacent New Hampshire and was governor of Massachusetts. But Representative Ron Paul has been making an aggressive push in the state and came to visit late last month… The contest is nonbinding, and the results are used to help select the state’s 24 delegates to the Republican National Convention in August.” - New York Times
“Gingrich and Santorum have had little to no presence and have virtually no campaign organizations in the state.” - AP
After Maine: “If there’s one silver lining for Mitt Romney after Tuesday’s losses, it might be that the people of Michigan are looking forward to seeing him.” - Wall Street Journal
Code:
"Now, with more victories under his belt than any other candidate, he is organizing a nationwide campaign with ambitious goals. He is preparing to go head-to-head against Mr. Romney in Mr. Romney’s home state, Michigan, which votes Feb. 28. And aides said he was likely to challenge Mr. Gingrich on Super Tuesday, March 6, on Mr. Gingrich’s home turf, Georgia." - [New York Times](http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/09/us/politics/after-3-victories-santorum-campaign-sets-new-goals.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=tha24)
"Buoyed by unexpected victories in three states on Tuesday night, Rick Santorum swept into North Texas on Wednesday, where he sought to build momentum by assuring Republican primary voters that he and not Newt Gingrich was the true and reliable conservative in the presidential race." - [Houston Chronicle](http://blog.chron.com/txpotomac/2012/02/santorum-stumps-in-north-texas/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter)
"Tuesday’s victories gave GOP presidential candidate Rick Santorum at least 55 additional delegates and pushed him into second place in the delegate hunt" - [Wall Street Journal](http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2012/02/08/santorum-now-no-2-in-delegate-chase/)
Code:
"Rick Santorum's campaign confirmed Wednesday they raised $1 million in the past 24 hours, with $800,000 coming from online donations." - [CNN](http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/02/08/santorum-website-sees-boost-after-wins/)“We think we can beat Sen. Santorum where we compete head-to-head in an aggressive way, and we obviously didn’t do that in Colorado or Minnesota to the extent that (Santorum’s) campaign did,” Romney told reporters. … Republicans in Washington have “spent too much, borrowed too much, (and) earmarked too much,” he said. “Frankly, Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich were a big part.”" - CNN
Code:
"If Romney turns his well-financed character assassination machine on Rick Santorum, or Santorum resorts to character assassination against either Romney or Gingrich, the Republicans may forfeit whatever chance they have of defeating Barack Obama in November." - Thomas Sowell for [Town Hall](http://townhall.com/columnists/thomassowell/2012/02/09/the_antiromney_vote)
Code:
Student tries to throw glitter at Romney in Denver - [AP](http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_ROMNEY_GLITTER_BOMB?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT)
Code:
"Coming off a drubbing by conservative rival Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich plans to head to home turf as part of his strategy to revitalize his struggling presidential campaign with a strong showing in next month's Super Tuesday primaries." - [CNN](http://www.cnn.com/2012/02/08/politics/gingrich-what-next/index.html)
But Gingrich may not be able to guard his home turf: "The Georgia presidential primary may not be a slam dunk for Republican hopeful Newt Gingrich, a congressman from the state for two decades. Rival Mitt Romney is signaling that the biggest prize on Super Tuesday could be up for grabs." - [AP ](http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_GEORGIA_GOP_CAMPAIGN?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT)Karl Rove: Newt’s Southern strategy won’t work - WSJ
The next GOP contest: Maine
“Maine’s caucuses are multiday affairs, held over the course of more than a week, with the results to be released on Saturday. The state is considered Mitt Romney territory, given that he has a house in adjacent New Hampshire and was governor of Massachusetts. But Representative Ron Paul has been making an aggressive push in the state and came to visit late last month… The contest is nonbinding, and the results are used to help select the state’s 24 delegates to the Republican National Convention in August.” - New York Times
“Gingrich and Santorum have had little to no presence and have virtually no campaign organizations in the state.” - AP
After Maine: “If there’s one silver lining for Mitt Romney after Tuesday’s losses, it might be that the people of Michigan are looking forward to seeing him.” - Wall Street Journal
S
Sailor_Kenshin
Guest
I don’t think it was the Evangelicals who elected this man.
Many things puzzle me. Why do Catholics continue to ignore their own mandates (ie: the CCC’s stand against communism)?
Why do they look down on Protestants who respect the USA’s Constitution, and who more vigorously defend traditional marriage and the unborn than so many Catholics?
S
Scott_Lafrance
Guest
Santorum’s foreign policy is far too aggressive for my liking.
R
Rich_Olszewski
Guest
Communism is an non-issue right now.
You are generalizing. Some non-Catholics are as you describe, but not all by a long shot, and it’s “some” Catholics, not “so many” who hold as you described.
A
_Abyssinia
Guest
**Roll Call looks ahead… to the 2014 Senate races **
“If Democrats are concerned about the lopsided Senate playing field this cycle, just wait until 2014. An early scan of next cycle’s Senate landscape paints a favorable picture for the GOP, which will defend 13 seats to Democrats’ 20. There is a noticeable dearth of competitive Republican seats, while several Democrats will be automatic targets based on geography.”- Roll Call
“If Democrats are concerned about the lopsided Senate playing field this cycle, just wait until 2014. An early scan of next cycle’s Senate landscape paints a favorable picture for the GOP, which will defend 13 seats to Democrats’ 20. There is a noticeable dearth of competitive Republican seats, while several Democrats will be automatic targets based on geography.”- Roll Call
P
ProVobis
Guest
There’s a lot of truth to that.
The sad part is that the winner never looks at himself as being the “lesser of two evils,” as many voters see him/her.
K
kubark
Guest
“Sour grapes much?”
-Translation: you are correct, kubark, and I do not dispute your facts.
Q
qui_est_ce
Guest
I think he is an man of character. He walks the talk and admits his mistakes rather than backtracking. I find him refreshing and unafraid. That’s why I voted for him.
He may change some of his ideas once he sees what’s on the President’s desk.
E
estesbob
Guest
And the fact that Ron pauls BEST finish has been third. There is no chance of getting the nomination. One wonders if Romeny is encouraging him to stay in.
K
kubark
Guest
A Rick Santorum nomination would all but guarantee an Obama second term. This is confirmed by the latest Reuters poll that shows Ron Paul surging and Rick Santorum at the bottom of the pack, nationally.
And speaking of electablilty, Rick Santorum (and Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney for that matter) represent everything wrong with the Republican Party and represent everything that the tea party rejected in the 2010 congressional elections.
Rick Santorum holds the record for the largest margin of defeat for an incumbent senator since 1980 and the largest losing margin for an incumbent Republican senator ever, for his performance in the 2006 election, where Santorum lost by over 700,000 votes, receiving 41% of the vote to Casey’s 59%. In 2006, Pennsylvania conservatives like myself overwhelmingly rejected Santorum after he betrayed us by actively campaigning for pro-death candidates like Arlen Specter and Christine Todd Whitman. We rejected Rick Santorum, noting that between 1995 and 2006, Rick Santorum voted 10 times to fund Title X and International family planning services, including Planned Parenthood. We rejected Santorum after he sponsored the Iran Freedom and Support Act in 2005, which appropriated $10 million of U.S. taxpayer dollars for the purpose of regime change in Iran. We rejected Santorum for voting, in 2002, for the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. We rejected Santorum for voting, in 2001, to allow states to impose health care mandates that are stricter than proposed new federal mandates. We rejected Santorum for voting, in 2003, for Medicare Part D, the largest expansion of entitlement spending since President Lyndon Johnson - creating $16 trillion in unfunded liabilities. We rejected Santorum for voting, in 1996, to give $25 million in foreign aid to North Korea in a failed effort to keep North Korea from pursuing nuclear technology. We rejected Santorum for voting, in 1996, against National Right to Work Act, which would have ended forced union dues nationwide. We rejected Santorum for voting, in 1998, to exempt IRS union representative from criminal ethics laws and for voting against creating independent Board of Governors to investigate IRS abuses, in that same year. We rejected Santorum for voting, in 1999, for a $1 billion bailout for the steel industry. We rejected him for voting twice, in 2001 and 2002, for a congressional pay raise. We also rejected him for his voting record on guns, education, energy, healthcare, spending and entitlements, among other issues. We looked at Santorums public record and decided that it did not match his rhetoric. It is now sad to see so many so-called catholics and conservatives fall for Slick Rick once again.
And speaking of electablilty, Rick Santorum (and Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney for that matter) represent everything wrong with the Republican Party and represent everything that the tea party rejected in the 2010 congressional elections.
Rick Santorum holds the record for the largest margin of defeat for an incumbent senator since 1980 and the largest losing margin for an incumbent Republican senator ever, for his performance in the 2006 election, where Santorum lost by over 700,000 votes, receiving 41% of the vote to Casey’s 59%. In 2006, Pennsylvania conservatives like myself overwhelmingly rejected Santorum after he betrayed us by actively campaigning for pro-death candidates like Arlen Specter and Christine Todd Whitman. We rejected Rick Santorum, noting that between 1995 and 2006, Rick Santorum voted 10 times to fund Title X and International family planning services, including Planned Parenthood. We rejected Santorum after he sponsored the Iran Freedom and Support Act in 2005, which appropriated $10 million of U.S. taxpayer dollars for the purpose of regime change in Iran. We rejected Santorum for voting, in 2002, for the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. We rejected Santorum for voting, in 2001, to allow states to impose health care mandates that are stricter than proposed new federal mandates. We rejected Santorum for voting, in 2003, for Medicare Part D, the largest expansion of entitlement spending since President Lyndon Johnson - creating $16 trillion in unfunded liabilities. We rejected Santorum for voting, in 1996, to give $25 million in foreign aid to North Korea in a failed effort to keep North Korea from pursuing nuclear technology. We rejected Santorum for voting, in 1996, against National Right to Work Act, which would have ended forced union dues nationwide. We rejected Santorum for voting, in 1998, to exempt IRS union representative from criminal ethics laws and for voting against creating independent Board of Governors to investigate IRS abuses, in that same year. We rejected Santorum for voting, in 1999, for a $1 billion bailout for the steel industry. We rejected him for voting twice, in 2001 and 2002, for a congressional pay raise. We also rejected him for his voting record on guns, education, energy, healthcare, spending and entitlements, among other issues. We looked at Santorums public record and decided that it did not match his rhetoric. It is now sad to see so many so-called catholics and conservatives fall for Slick Rick once again.
A
AlwaysCurious
Guest
He came in second in NH and MN, and had a strong third in IA. It’s expected that he will do well in Maine this weekend. By and large he has vastly increased his numbers from 4 years ago, while Romney’s have fallen.I don’t think anyone except maybe his strongest supporters really expect Dr. Paul to win the nomination. He is running to broadcast a message (a message that a number of us are willing to support at least through the nomination process). And in that sense he has been fairly successful.
K
kubark
Guest
You obviously missed the latest Reuters/Ipsos poll (reuters.com/article/2012/02/07/us-usa-campaign-poll-idUSTRE81514720120207) conducted on February 2-6, which has Ron Paul surging to second place NATIONALLY, only seven percentage points behind Mitt Romney, who has seen his lead drop by one percentage point point since early January. Paul gained five percentage points since the last poll.
Paul is gaining despite a concerted attempt by neoconservatives to derail his progress. Powerful neoconservative commentators like Limbaugh, Levin, Savage, Erick Erickson, Beck, Hannity, O’Reilly, Kristol, Krauthammer etc, have made it clear by their words and actions that their strategy is to ignore or ridicule Ron Paul in order to discredit him with the conservative voters who comprise their audiences. Despite their dirty tricks, Paul is surging.
As to your mention of Ron Paul’s recent performances in the recent straw polls, it is important that you remember, estesbob, that not one single delegate was awarded on Tuesday. Instead, the caucuses in Minnesota and Colorado were the very first step in the delegate selection process. There are still over 40 states left to go. The Missouri primary means nothing. It was a non-binding popularity contest; the contest for delegates won’t take place for another month. In Iowa, where not 1 of the 28 delegates has been awarded yet, and in Colorado and Nevada, Paul will do very well in the state delegate counts. The delegates awarded will far exceed the straw poll numbers. In Minnesota where Paul finished a solid second, he also has a strong majority of the state convention delegates, and the process to elect delegates has also just begun, so Paul is well-organized to win the bulk of delegates there.
By the way, estesbob, Gingrich and Santorum have major ballot access problems. Neither of them will be on the ballot in Virginia and neither of them have full slates of delegates in Tennessee. In Missouri, Gingrich was not even on the ballot. Santorum is not on the ballot in Washington DC and lacks full delegate slates in North Dakota, Ohio and Illinois.
This is a two-way race between Mitt Romney and Ron Paul.
K
kubark
Guest
One wonders if Obama is encouraging Santorum and Gingrich to stay in.
Of course Romney will “encourage” Ron Paul to “stay in.” Romney will not defeat Obama WITHOUT the crucial Ron Paul independent and swing voters. Romney and Paul are neck-and-neck at the national level. Romneyy knows that he needs those crucial Paul votes and that is why he is so polite to Paul in the debates. But Paul will not compromise with Romney on certain issues, especially foreign policy. Stay tuned!
E
estesbob
Guest
Paul will not win any primaries, he will not win the nonination and the only thing he accomplishes by staying in is to help Romney
K
kubark
Guest
Your unwavering support for Santorum/Gingrich is blinding you to the fact that neither of them will be the nominee. Santorum/Gingrich are not on all the ballots. They are not serious contenders.
The delegates will not be awarded for some time. So far all we have had are straw-poll popularity contests.
This remains a two way-race between Romney and Paul and the latest poll shows Romney slipping and Paul surging.
You will be saying Ron Paul is unelectable regardless of how well he does.
His America-First, Constitutional foreign policy is what really scares you.
V
Vincent_N
Guest
Santorum 06 voter here. I would like to thank my fellow Pennsylvanian Ron Paulists for putting in office Bob Casey Jr. who did everything in his power to get Obama elected. For all your self-righteous indignation at Santorum for support Arlen Specter, you don’t seem to have any remorse for getting Obama elected. Funny how that is exactly how the Ron Paul camp rolls.
I support Romney. But, I’m not disinclined to support Rick. You’re right though, tasting defeat once has left a bitter taste in my mouth with him. Although, the blame is square on your hands. I don’t think 2012 PA is the same as 2006 and 08 PA. We seen what havoc the couple of Ron Paulists can do. But, Pennsylvanians won’t make the same mistake again this election cycle.
PA Ron Paulists can live in the past and glorify in Obama. Many people I know have had a change of heart. I don’t count any of the true Ron Paul believers in this election. Their votes will divide and cancel.
S
Semper_Zelare
Guest
Really? Well I’m sure the good people of Iowa, Minnesota, Colorado, and Missouruh would love to learn that.
I mean, supporting your candidate is one thing. But, in the words of Bill O’Reilly I’d have to say that you, “might need a little fresh air… you need to stop drinking the kool aid”.
Ron Paul, in fairness might win in Maine (and I hope he does). But, if he does its because the Santorum and Gingrich people up there are going to vote for Paul because they want to vote against Romney.
That being said, Rick Santorum is NOT a compromise candidate. When we had 8 candidates in this race, he was the most Catholic, and the most conservative. *.
And, whatever, we cand debate if Ron Paul or Santorum are more conservative, but don’t put out a bunch of lies that Rick Santorum supports abortion or Planned Parenthood in any form.
What’s his life record? I’m sure they give him a 100%. Campaigning for Arlen Specter has nothing to do with abortion. It didn’t kill any babies. That’s just unfair, and the American voter is fully capable of trudging through that MUD.
If voters on CAF are voting solely because they’re Pro Life, tell me, WHO IN THIS RACE IS MORE PRO LIFE THAN RICK SANTORUM?
[And, if you say Ron Paul, how is that the case, if Ron Paul doesn’t ever vote for Bills? He probably failed to vote for a bunch of pro-life bills because of this, and I bet Santorum managed to vote for them]*
V
Vincent_N
Guest
Semper Zelare:
Ron Paul fails the pro-life test any time where being pro-life means taking an active measure. That is because he espouses the Libertarian principle of less government over protecting the dignity of life and he opposes pro-choice regulations on the same principle. Thus, while he is unquestionably personally pro-life(because I am not a mind-reader and can only go on his self-identification), he is neither publicly pro-life nor pro-choice. He is Libertarian.
G
gilliam
Guest
Fact-checking Ron Paul’s claim about troops and bases overseas
But wait, scanning the list, you also see nine troops in Mali, eight in Barbados, seven in Laos, six in Lithuania, five in Lebanon, four in Moldova, three in Mongolia, two in Suriname and one in Gabon. Most of the countries on the list, in fact, have puny military representation.
Not only that, but we count 153 countries with U.S. military personnel, actually higher than the 130 cited by Paul.
What’s going on here? The answer is that the list essentially tracks with places where the United States has a substantial diplomatic presence. (The United States has diplomatic relations with about 190 countries.)
In other words, Paul is counting Marine guards and military attaches as part of a vast expanse of U.S. military power around the globe. But this document indicates that only 11 countries actually house more than 1,000 U.S. military personnel.
Read the Article
But wait, scanning the list, you also see nine troops in Mali, eight in Barbados, seven in Laos, six in Lithuania, five in Lebanon, four in Moldova, three in Mongolia, two in Suriname and one in Gabon. Most of the countries on the list, in fact, have puny military representation.
Not only that, but we count 153 countries with U.S. military personnel, actually higher than the 130 cited by Paul.
What’s going on here? The answer is that the list essentially tracks with places where the United States has a substantial diplomatic presence. (The United States has diplomatic relations with about 190 countries.)
In other words, Paul is counting Marine guards and military attaches as part of a vast expanse of U.S. military power around the globe. But this document indicates that only 11 countries actually house more than 1,000 U.S. military personnel.
Read the Article
- Status