Skip to comments.Does Santorum have any of his former Senate or House collegues or present Congressmen endorsing him?
Posted on 02/11/2012 9:26:31 AM PST by mitchell001
Does Rick Santorum have any of his former Senate or House collegues or present Congressmen endorsing him? We saw a slew of conservatives endorse Newt Gingrich at CPAC, including Fred Thompson, Ollie North, Herman Cain, and Rick Perry. However, I have not heard of any endorsements for Santorum, beside Mark Levin and Michelle Malkin.
That’s because he wasn’t doing well until recently.
Tom Tancredo for one.
..and David Limbaugh, and the Evangelical Conference... et al...
Have any former Senate collegues endorsed him?
Most of his Senate colleagues like McCain are Romneybots.
I love Newt... but Santorum is more likable... and will make us competitive in the rust belt.
He is the most electable candidate... so you’re sounding like sour grapes here.
I hope not, all present need arrested
He apparently doesn’t need them.
If you’re gonna treat FR like a chatroom, please limit your every thought to the chat forum.
Congressional endorsements would be the death knell for Santorum. If I were running, I would actually brag about not having received any congressional endorsements. It’s a badge of honor. The last thing I would solicit is congressional endorsements.
I wouldn’t be bragging too much about Fred Thompson’s support. He’s joined team Soros in pimping the national popular vote.
Santorum rambles and borders on incoherent when he speaks. He almost put his wife and daughter to sleep when they stood behind him during his CPAC speech.
Wait a minute....its important that you get endorsements from people who serve in an institution that routinely has an approval rating of somewhere betwenn 10 and 20 %.
I’m not thrilled that my congressman has offered a weak endorsement or Romney but I think it came as a result of him being a freshman under pressure from the party.
How dare they. LOL
Do these count?
Cathie Adams, President, Texas Eagle Forum
Gary Bauer, President, American Values
Brian Burch, President, CatholicVote.org Candidate Fund
Tim Busch, Businessman, philanthropist, and attorney
Ken Campbell, California Conservative Leader
Peggy Dau, Special Liaison Representative, Voice of the Martyrs
Penna Dexter, Radio Host and Commentator
James Dobson, Family Talk
Elaine Donnelly, Center for Military Readiness
Tim Echols, Georgia Public Service Commission
Kirk Elliott, Philanthropia, founder and chairman
William J. Estrada, Director, Generation Joshua
Joseph Farah, Editor and Chief Executive Officer, WND.com and WND Books
Robert Fischer, President, Fischer Furniture, Inc
Richard Ford, President, Heritage Alliance
Foster Friess, Friess Associates
Maggie Gallagher, Institute for Marriage and Public Policy
Michael Geer, Family Policy Leader, Harrisburg, PA
Ellen Grigsby, Conservative Leader
Rebecca Hagelin, President, Rebecca Hagelin Communications and Marketing, LLC
Patrick and Toya Hall, Vice President, Guadalupe Radio Network
Jason Jones, Producer of the film “Bella”
Tim LeFever, Chairman of the Board, Capitol Resource Institute
Brad Mattes, Executive Director, Life Issues Institute
William J. Murray, Chairman, Religious Freedom Coalition
Richard Neill, Texas Conservative Leader
Preston Noell III, President, Tradition, Family, Property, Inc.
Pam Olsen, President, Florida Prayer Network
Paul and Nancy Pressler, Justice, TX Court of App (ret)
Penny Pullen, Illinois State Representative 1977-1993, State President, Eagle Forum of Illinois
Jill Stanek, Pro-life activist and blogger
John Stemberger, Florida Family Action
Stacy Taylor, Texas Conservative Leader
Richard A. Viguerie, Chairman, ConservativeHQ.com
Is this one an endorsement?
Glenn Beck, November 2011, “If there is one guy out there that is the next George Washington, the only guy that I could think of is Rick Santorum. I would ask that you would take a look at him.”
Not sure that he does. However, the pedigree of a former or current congressional RINO’s endorsement does not sway me the least. RINO GOPers are this country’s problem, particularly as the last legal defense against Obama and fascist liberalism. They’ve given up (the multiple-term ones) and they are not to be trusted one bit.
The arguement that Rick is more electable, is just your assumption. No one can say with any certainty who is electable until they are actually elected.
Part of “electability” is looking Presidential. Santorum needs to work on that a lot more.
Takes a boring rambler to know one, I guess.
Have you considered building up Newt’s merits instead? I mean he is a good guy and you must have some good reasons for supporting him. Think about trying to keep your enthusiasm up by posting those reasons.
He beat Romney like a drum in the debates... and will rally the Evangelicals and practicing Catholics like no other candidate.
I’m for a Santorum/Gingrich ticket all the way... and yes in that order.
Yeah, but Beck’s a RINO,doncha know?
I'll take those two any day over the others (besides Ollie North) you mentioned.
Levin and Malkin stuck their reputations out there when Santorum was given up for dead. You will now see the Bandwagon effect of many more.
No doubt that Reagan didn’t have much support from the Republican Establishment either. Movement Conservatives never do. They, of course, get that support (retroactively) only after they win (and the RINOs need jobs).
Phyllis Schafley has also endorsed Santorum. She originally endorsed Bachmann. She opposed George Romney too.
Googling the term ‘’Santorum stunning victories’’ brought up 1.86 million results. At the same time, googling the terms ‘’Romney stunning losses’’ and ‘’Ginchrich stunning losses’’ brought up 1.4 million and 10.9 million results, respectively.
This demonstrates the stunningly poor judgment of the establishment Republicans, including Congressmen and Senators, who endorsed the stunning losers Romney and Gingrich while for the past six months ignoring the eventual stunning victor Rick Santorum. Could anything more stunningly prove how out of touch the Republican establishment is with Republican voters?
The General Electorate is not looking for a culture warrior as much as most conservatives would like to think.
Not to mention Fred Thompson endorsing McCain for re-election over J.D. Hayworth in the 2010 Arizona primary. (all the Fredheads who swore in 2008 that Fred's association with McCain was long over and he'd never do that again were strangely silent about that one). It was even worse than Sarah Palin's endorsement for McCain since Palin had been McCain's veep choice and owed him... Fred owed McCain nothing but helped him beat a conservative anyway.
I see Santorum's heavy endorsement from grassroots conservative activists (Levin, Beck, Malkin, Limbaugh, etc.) and lack of support from his career-politician "Senate collegues" to be a positive thing. I wouldn't want him to have Trent Lott & Orrin Hatch's support. If you're looking for evidence of which GOP candidate is "anti-establishment", this is it. Santorum was never a favorite of Republicans leaders when he was in the Senate and frequently butted heads with them because he spoke out AGAINST agreed upon "bipartisan" solutions like TARP and the Fannie-Freddie bailouts.
All of those folks are culture warriors and none are small, less intrusive government folks.
There's no doubt the Social Conservatives are behind Santorum 100% and there's no doubt they are voting in numbers.
It's a united voting bloc of approximately 30%-40% of the GOP electorate.
However, I believe if Santorum gets the nomination he will lose in a LANDSLIDE in the General Election. Obama will get 58% of the vote and win 45 states.
Great. Just great.
Maybe Duncan Hunter and Christine O'Donnell can get on board, too.
Kiss of death.
I personally think that Santorum or (puke) Ron Paul are the only two who could beat Obama in a general election. Santorum is out polling Obama currently and he is the ONLY one doing so. Polls change overnight.
Santorum is a stark contrast from Obama, unlike Mitt Romney. He has has high favorable ratings across the nation. And thus far, and I believe all the way through, he has NO boogeymen in his closet.
But that's just me.
Nope. Breath of life.
Don’t know, don’t care. I don’t need to be led by the nose.
My reasoning, however faulty is as follows:
1. If Santorum gets the nomination, and he MIGHT, the left will attack on the cultural issues. They will use quotes from Rick's books, speeches and interviews(often out of context and mischaracterized, sometimes not) to paint him as an Assembly of God zealot who would impose his religious beliefs on others. Many of those beliefs are NOT mainstream (right or wrong, just fact).
Romney will be attacked on Bain/1% AND the tenets of Mormonism, magic underwear and all. They'll make him out to be a space alien from Wall Street.
Paul, if he could get the GOP nomination (very unlikely) would have a fair chance at winning as his only real weakness is Foreign Policy...and many folks are just plain tired of the wars. But he'll never win the nomination.
However, Gingrich would force the commies to engage on the size and scope of the Federal Government. He's not, historically, a culture warrior. The debate would be completely different.
Gingrich is the only one with the four required qualities: Right on Social Issues. Right on Size and Scope of the Federal Government. Right on Foreign Policy. Excellent Communicator.
And, he won't have to spend all of his time talking about whether women should stay in the home, whether there should be a Constitutional Amendment to Ban Homo Marriage, whether he wears Magic Underwear etc.
With Newt, the debate is a different debate, one that can be won.
Not sure about former colleagues endorsing Santorum. Maybe about the same amount as Newt’s former colleagues endorsing him. I think they all want to distance themselves until a strong front-runner appears.
As in the (democrat party) Senate?
Who do you support, for full disclosure please.
Newt is our strongest contender i believe, as the presidential debates have usually been a deciding factor in people’s perceptions of the best candidate to lead the nation.
While I like Santorum, how and why did he lose his last re-election bid by the highest % in history (19)? If his own state won’t vote for him, why would the rest of the country?
What am I missing here?
Traditionally that's been true, unfortunately. But it could be a bit different if the Catholic population is undeceived by Obama's "compromise" on insurance coverage of abortion. That could be interesting, and especially if the potential second Catholic president is on the ballot.
Rick lost PA because Bob Casey ran on his fathers name and he touted himself as a center of the road deomcrat. If you watched the debates, Rick cleaned casey,s clock. It was embrassing to watch how stupid Bob looked.
Also a lot of conservatives stayed home because Rick supported Arlen Spector.
And The Bush backlash. Mother Teresa woud have lost in PA that election if she had a R after her name
I really do not get the unlikable tag on Gingrich. I like him however I like smart, strong, opinionated and even stubborn men. They get things done.
Even beyond that, the US has had plenty of “likable” presidents that screwed things up, we need strong forceful people.
Tom Tancredo has endorsed him.
Valid question. I'm going to try to answer, but I'm speaking purely as an individual and am pinging people who may be able to give an official answer.
I remember the 2006 campaign. People in the conservative movement were saying that Santorum was simply irreplaceable and had to be kept in office. Now, six years later, “he was the go-to guy” comments are being made and I think that explains the attitude back then of why people wanted to keep him.
There may have been other views being voiced by conservatives back then, but they weren't loud — and that's what would be expected. When conservatives are unhappy with a candidate in the general election, they usually stay quiet and vote with their feet and their unopened wallets.
The fact is that 2006 was an “anno horribilis” for Republicans. Mitt Romney saw the handwriting on the wall and decided not to run for re-election. Some Republicans followed Romney's lead and left office, creating open seats with no incumbent advantage, others were well on the way to losing, and the national GOP and the big national donors had to prioritize. Santorum, running against a pro-life Democrat son of a pro-life Democrat governor who had been publicly “dissed” by the national Democratic Party, made a difficult target to defend. Many people who usually voted pro-life but were Democrats felt they could safely vote for his opponent.
The end result is what might have been a close loss or a narrow victory with adequate funding against a liberal Democrat opponent turned into a rout because the Republicans poured their money into races where they thought the Republican had a better chance, and voters felt they could safely vote for the Democrat because he wasn't all that different on the social issues that were Santorum’s strength.
In other words, Casey did the same thing that Mitt Romney did: try to become as much like your opponent as possible on social issues so your differences on other factors get front-and-center attention. It worked for Romney in Massachusetts, it worked for Casey in Pennsylvania, and it can work with any candidate who is willing to compromise core principles to accommodate himself to the polls.
That's not Santorum.
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.