[Halfmanhalfamazing]

Gingrich is 2012's Ross Perot.

Because the conservative vote is split, the liberal William Cli...er... Romney is winning.

[ReneeLynn]

Oh, bull.

[Halfmanhalfamazing]

Gingrich and Santorum Pings

[lightman]

Gingrich is hoping that his hanging on like a leech will entitle him to the VP slot under Mittens.

[jennychase]

Just send some $$ to Newt. He is doing great, blocking Mitt and establishment.
Go Newt

[SatinDoll]

I will make this absolutely clear to you: Romney and Santorum are both fiscally liberal, big government spenders.

This nation is $16TRILLION DOLLARS IN DEBT. Neither Romney nor Santorum have any ideas for changing this situation.

Newt Gingrich does.

His leaving right now would be disastrous for this nation. Obama is responding defensively to Gingrich, not Romney, not Santorum.

When Newt goes to the convention in Tampa, he will have bargaining chips called ‘delegates’. It will matter.

[Kansas58]

Actually, in proportional delegate situations, Newt staying in really hurts Romney’s math, quite a bit.

[Tribune7]

I think if Newt drops out a significant number of his voters goes to Romney, and be an overall loss for conservatives.

[Utmost Certainty]

Closing down to a 2-man race at this point assures Romney’s victory. Even if it was just Santorum vs. Romney, there is no viable path for Santorum to reach 1,144 delegates. The only strategy left is to deny Romney from reaching 1,144.

[Utmost Certainty]

No, SatinDoll is right. From here:

On spending, Santorum has a mixed record and showed clear signs of varying his votes based on the election calendar. In the 1990s, when he was only a freshman Senator, he was a leading author on the bill that completely overhauled the country’s welfare system. He also voted for the Freedom to Farm Act in 1996 that started the process of ending direct farm subsidies. When Congress decided that it couldn’t live up to that promise, it voted to re-establish the subsidies in 2002 with the Farm Security Act, a bill that Santorum rightly opposed. He also voted for a balanced budget amendment and a line-item veto in 1995.

More recently, when he was out of Congress, Santorum opposed TARP , the stimulus , the auto bailout, and the Fannie-Freddie bailout.

However, there is a troubling part of Santorum’s record on spending, which is found in the years sandwiched between these periods of fiscal restraint. His record is plagued by the big-spending habits that Republicans adopted during the Bush years of 2001-2006. Some of those high profile votes include his support for No Child Left Behind in 2001, which greatly expanded the federal government’s role in education. He supported the massive new Medicare drug entitlement in 2003 that now costs taxpayers over $60 billion a year and has almost $16 trillion in unfunded liabilities. He voted for the 2005 highway bill that included thousands of wasteful earmarks, including the Bridge to Nowhere. In fact, in a separate vote, Santorum had the audacity to vote to continue funding the Bridge to Nowhere rather than send the money to rebuild New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina.

Indeed, Santorum was a prolific supporter of earmarks, having requested billions of dollars for pork projects in Pennsylvania while he was in Congress. Perhaps recognizing the sign of the times, Santorum finally reversed his position in 2010, saying that he was opposed to them , but one must remain skeptical about his sincerity. As recently as 2009, he said, “I’m not saying necessarily earmarks are bad. I have had a lot of earmarks. In fact, I’m very proud of all the earmarks I’ve put in bills. I’ll defend earmarks.”

And while Santorum voted against the Farm Bill in 2002, he sponsored a bill to extend milk subsidies in 2005, which he claimed he did to “save countless Pennsylvania dairy farmers.”

An examination of his scores in the NTU rating of Congress shows that Santorum compiled a very strong record on taxes and spending in the first four years of each of his two Senate terms, then a sharp swing to below the Senate Republican average in the Congress before his reelection campaign. In the 2003-2004 session of Congress, Santorum sponsored or cosponsored 51 bills to increase spending, and failed to sponsor or co-sponsor even one spending cut proposal. In his last Congress (2005-2006), he had one of the biggest spending agendas of any Republican -- sponsoring more spending increases than Republicans Lisa Murkowski, Lincoln Chafee and Thad Cochran or Democrats Herb Kohl, Evan Bayh and Ron Wyden.

Santorum also supported raising congressional pay at least three times, in 2001, 2002, and 2003.

[Utmost Certainty]

No, SatinDoll is right. From here:

On spending, Santorum has a mixed record and showed clear signs of varying his votes based on the election calendar. In the 1990s, when he was only a freshman Senator, he was a leading author on the bill that completely overhauled the country’s welfare system. He also voted for the Freedom to Farm Act in 1996 that started the process of ending direct farm subsidies. When Congress decided that it couldn’t live up to that promise, it voted to re-establish the subsidies in 2002 with the Farm Security Act, a bill that Santorum rightly opposed. He also voted for a balanced budget amendment and a line-item veto in 1995.

More recently, when he was out of Congress, Santorum opposed TARP , the stimulus , the auto bailout, and the Fannie-Freddie bailout.

However, there is a troubling part of Santorum’s record on spending, which is found in the years sandwiched between these periods of fiscal restraint. His record is plagued by the big-spending habits that Republicans adopted during the Bush years of 2001-2006. Some of those high profile votes include his support for No Child Left Behind in 2001, which greatly expanded the federal government’s role in education. He supported the massive new Medicare drug entitlement in 2003 that now costs taxpayers over $60 billion a year and has almost $16 trillion in unfunded liabilities. He voted for the 2005 highway bill that included thousands of wasteful earmarks, including the Bridge to Nowhere. In fact, in a separate vote, Santorum had the audacity to vote to continue funding the Bridge to Nowhere rather than send the money to rebuild New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina.

Indeed, Santorum was a prolific supporter of earmarks, having requested billions of dollars for pork projects in Pennsylvania while he was in Congress. Perhaps recognizing the sign of the times, Santorum finally reversed his position in 2010, saying that he was opposed to them , but one must remain skeptical about his sincerity. As recently as 2009, he said, “I’m not saying necessarily earmarks are bad. I have had a lot of earmarks. In fact, I’m very proud of all the earmarks I’ve put in bills. I’ll defend earmarks.”

And while Santorum voted against the Farm Bill in 2002, he sponsored a bill to extend milk subsidies in 2005, which he claimed he did to “save countless Pennsylvania dairy farmers.”

An examination of his scores in the NTU rating of Congress shows that Santorum compiled a very strong record on taxes and spending in the first four years of each of his two Senate terms, then a sharp swing to below the Senate Republican average in the Congress before his reelection campaign. In the 2003-2004 session of Congress, Santorum sponsored or cosponsored 51 bills to increase spending, and failed to sponsor or co-sponsor even one spending cut proposal. In his last Congress (2005-2006), he had one of the biggest spending agendas of any Republican -- sponsoring more spending increases than Republicans Lisa Murkowski, Lincoln Chafee and Thad Cochran or Democrats Herb Kohl, Evan Bayh and Ron Wyden.

Santorum also supported raising congressional pay at least three times, in 2001, 2002, and 2003.

[chris37]

All I see here is 4 guys who can’t even defeat or help each other much less Obama.

[SaraJohnson]

Santorum is out of his league. He should give one for the team. He could not argue his way out of a paper bag.

The obama media will hang him high. However, at least he is against killing people. So he’s better than Mittens and obama. Newt would know what he’s doing and we need that badly right now.

[BradyLS]

Oh, man! Escalation! Here we go! Out with "unelectable." In with...

SPLITTERS!!!

[raybbr]

No, it's Romney splitting the votes.

Oh, wait. It's Santorum splitting the votes.

Oh, wait. It's Paul splitting the votes.

Maybe you'll get it.

[pgkdan]

Conservatives all over the country are settling on their chosen standard bearer. Rick Santorum. Newt’s colossal ego won’t allow him to face facts and get out of the way.

[Dubya-M-DeesWent2SyriaStupid!]

You’re correct Gingrich is the Ross Perot.Pay no attention to the bully freeper ping list that are diehard Gingrich supporters.They are the minority in the real world outside of the sick cult
this website has become.This bully cult ping list that everyone is sick of said that Santorum was in the tank for Romney and called good candidates like Bachmann RINO’s.And now that it is so clear Gingrich should have dropped out a long time ago and get behind the one chance we had....they are hellbent on electing Romney so they can whine and moan some more? What happened to country first?

[Yashcheritsiy]

Why are you assuming that Newt’s supporters would default to Santorum if Gingrich wasn’t in the race?

A lot of us don’t really like either Romney or Santorum, because they’re both big government establishment schlubs.

[MiddleEarth]

If Gingrich is successful in preventing Florida from giving all their delegates to Romney then maybe it’s worth it that he’s staying in.

[xzins]

Newt’s math could be right in proportional states. It won’t be true in winner-take-all states.

Those 2 splitting the vote in WTA states = a higher likelihood of a Romney win.

I am glad to see he understands “stop Romney”, though.

[McGruff]

Santorum is another compassionate conservative.