Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Suggestion to Gingrich, Santorum, Perry and respective supporters
RealClearPolitics Republican presidential primary polls | Jan 17, 2012 | Jim Robinson

Posted on 01/17/2012 3:32:52 PM PST by Jim Robinson

RealClear Republican Presidential Polls as of January 17:

South Carolina, Monmouth University: Romney 33, Gingrich 22, Paul 12, Santorum 14, Perry 6

South Carolina, Rasmussen Reports: Romney 35, Gingrich 21, Paul 16, Santorum 16, Perry 5

Florida, PPP (D): Romney 41, Gingrich 26, Santorum 11, Paul 10, Perry 4

Florida, Sunshine State News/VSS: Romney 46, Gingrich 20, Santorum 12, Paul 9, Perry 3

Nationwide ABC News/Wash Post Romney 36, Gingrich 16, Santorum 13, Paul 16, Perry 9

Nationwide Gallup Tracking: Romney 34, Gingrich 15, Santorum 15, Paul 12, Perry 6

Like it or not, the trend has been clear for weeks. If we wish a conservative to be our nominee, Perry should drop out of the race and we should coalesce around Gingrich or Santorum. As long as all three or even two of the three remain in the race the conservative vote will be split and RINO Romney will get the nomination.

Gingrich should challenge Santorum to a series of Lincoln-Douglas style one-on-one debates and if there is a clear winner, then the loser should drop out, or in the very least, we may be able to better decide which one is better suited to take on Romney and Obama.

May our very best conservative take on and defeat Romney/Paul and then wipe out Obama!!


TOPICS: News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: elections; gingrich; perry; ronpaulnotrepublican; santorum
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-208 next last
To: SENTINEL

Well said.


151 posted on 01/17/2012 6:48:55 PM PST by Conservative Patriot86 (Newt/Sarah 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: CatherineofAragon

““Couldn’t we just roll Romney in an alley in Charleston? /s”

I’m choking!! LOL!


152 posted on 01/17/2012 6:53:43 PM PST by FryingPan101 (Perry 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: UnwashedPeasant

.

I’d like Santorum to explain THIS also:

Voted for Federal funding of the National Endowment for the Arts.
Voted against a 10% cut in the budget for National Endowment for the Arts.

Bankruptcy
Voted for a Schumer amendment to make the debts of pro-life demonstrators not dischargeable in bankruptcy.

Defense and Foreign Policy

Voted for the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC).
Voted against requiring the President to certify that the CWC is effectively verifiable.

Voted against requiring the President to certify that that Iran, Iraq, Syria, Libya, North Korea, China, and all other countries determined to be state sponsors of terror have joined CWC prior to submitting the instrument of ratification.

Voted for the START II Treaty
Voted to allow the sale of supercomputers to China.
Voted to ban antipersonnel landmines
Voted against increasing defense spending offset by equivalent cuts in non-defense spending.
Voted to require that Federal bureaucrats get the same payraises as uniformed military.
Voted to allow food and medicine sales to state sponsors of terror and tyranical regimes such as Libya and Cuba.
Voted to limit the President’s authority to impose sanctions on nations for reasons of national security unless the sanctions were approved by a multilateral regime.
Voted against requiring Congressional authorization for military action in Bosnia.
Voted to give $25 million in foreign aid to North Korea
Voted to weaken alien terrorist deportation provisions. If the Court determines that the evidence must be withheld for national security reasons, the Justice Department must still provide a summary of the evidence sufficient for the alien terrorist to mount a defense against deportation.
Voted against delaying the India Nuclear until the President certified that India had agreed to suspend military-to-military exchanges with Iran.
Voted against the Conventional Trident Missile Program

Nominations
Voted for Richard Paez to the 9th Curcuit (cloture)
Voted for Sonia Sotomayor, Circuit Judge
Voted for Richard Holbrooke to be Ambassador to the UN
Voted for Margaret Morrow to be District Judge
Voted twice for Marsha Berzon to the 9thg Circuit
Voted for Mary McLaughlin to be District Judge
Voted for Tim Dyk to be District Judge
Voted for James Brady to be District Judge

Labor
Voted against National Right to Work Act
Voted against Real of Davis-Bacon Prevailing union wages
Voted for Alexis Herman to be Secretary of Labor
Voted for mandatory Federal child care funding
Voted for Trade Adjustment Assistance.
Voted for Job Corps funding
Voted twice in support of Fedex Unionization
Voted against allowing a waiver of Davis-Bacon in emergency situations.
Voted for minimum wage increases six times here here here here here and here
Voted to require a union representative on an IRS oversight board.
Voted to exempt IRS union representative from criminal ethics laws.
Voted against creating independent Board of Governors to investigate IRS abuses.
Guns

Voted to require pawn shops to do background checks on people who pawn a gun.
Voted twice to make it illegal to sell a gun without a secure storage or safety device
Voted for a Federal ban on possession of “assault weapons” by those under 18.
Voted for Federal funding for anti-gun education programs in schools.
Voted for anti-gun juvenile justice bill.

Reform

Voted for funding for the legal services corporation.
Voted twice for a Congressional payraise.
Voted to impose a uniform Federal mandate on states to force them to allow convicted rapits, arsonists, drug kingpins, and all other ex-convicts to vote in Federal elections.
Voted for the Specter “backup plan” to allow campaign finance reform to survive if portions of the bill were found unconstitutional.
Voted to mandate discounted broadcast times for politicians.
Voted for a McCain amendment to require State and local campaign committees to report all campaign contributions to the FEC and to require all campaign contributions to be reported to the FEC within 24 hours within 90 days of an election.

Immigration
Voted against increasing the number of immigration investigators
Voted to allow illegal immigrants to receive the earned income credit before becoming citizens
Voted to give SSI benefits to legal aliens.
Voted to give welfare benefits to naturalized citizens without regard to to the earnings of their sponsors.
Voted against hiring an additional 1,000 border partrol agents, paid for by reductions in state grants.

Taxes
Voted against a flat tax.
Voted to increase tobacco taxes to pay for Medicare prescription drugs
Voted to increase tobacco taxes to fund health insurance subsidies for small businesses.
Voted to increase tobacco taxes to pay for an $8 billion increase in child healh insurance.
Voted to increase tobacco taxes to pay for an increase in NIH funding.
Voted twice for internet taxes.
Voted to allow gas tax revenues to be used to subsidize Amtrak.
Voted to strike marriage penalty tax relief and instead provide fines on tobacco companies.
Voted against repealing the Clinton 4.3 cent gas tax increase.
Voted to increase taxes by $2.3 billion to pay for an Amtrak trust fund.
Voted to allow welfare to a minor who had a child out of wedlock and who resided with an adult who was on welfare within the previous two years.
Voted to increase taxes by $9.4 billion to pay for a $9.4 billion increase in student loans.
Voted to say that AMT patch is more important than capital gains and dividend relief.

Welfare
Voted against food stamp reform
Voted against Medicaid reform
Voted against TANF reform
Voted to increase the Social Services Block Grant from $1 billion to $2 billion
Voted to increase the FHA loan from $170,000 to $197,000. Also opposed increasing GNMA guaranty from 6 basis points to 12.
Voted for $2 billion for low income heating assistance.

Waste
Sponsored An amendment to increase Amtrak funds by $550 million
Voted to use HUD funds for the Joslyn Art Museum (NE), the Stand Up for Animals project (RI) and the Seattle Art Museum’s Olympic Sculpture Project (WA)
Voted to increase spending on social programs by $7 billion
Voted to increase NIH funding by $1.6 billion.
Voted to increase NIHnding by $700 million
Voted to for a $2 million earmark to renovate the Vulcan Monument (AL)
Voted for a $1 billion bailout for the steel industry
Voted against requiring that highway earmarks would come out of a state’s highway allocation
Voted to allow Market Access Program funds to go to foreign companies.
Voted to allow OPIC to increase its administrative costs by 50%
Voted against transferring $20 million from Americorps to veterans.
Voted for the $140 billion asbestos compensation bill.
Voted against requiring a uniform medical criteria to ensure asbestos claims were legitimate.
Voted to increase community development programs by $2 billion.

Spending and Entitlements
Voted to make Medicare part B premium subsidies an new entitlement.
Voted against paying off the debt ($5.6 trillion at the time) within 30 years.
Voted to give $18 billion to the IMF.
Voted to raid Social Security instead of using surpluses to pay down the debt.

Health Care
Voted to allow states to impose health care mandates that are stricter than proposed new Federal mandates, but not weaker.
Voted twice for Federal mental health parity mandates in health insurance.
Voted against a allow consumers the option to purchase a plan outside the parity mandate.

Education
Voted to increase Federal funding for teacher testing
Voted to increase spending for the Department of Education by $3.1 billion.
Voted against requiring courts to consider the impact of IDEA awards on a local school district.

Energy

Voted to allow the President to designate certain sites as interim nuclear waste storage sites in the event that he determines that Yucca Mountain is not a suitable site for a permanent waste repository. Those sites are as follows: the nuclear waste site in Hanford, Washington; the Savannah River Site in South Carolina; Barnwell County, South Carolina; and the Oak Ridge Reservation in Tennessee.

Voted to make fuel price gouging a Federal crime.

http://www.redstate.com/erick/2012/01/06/what-a-big-government-conservative-looks-like/

Voted AGAINST increasing the number of immigration investigators?

VOTED AGAINST HIRING AN ADDITIONAL 1,000 BORDER PATROL AGENTS?

VOTED TO GIVE SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS TO ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS?

Perry also stated that in his administration he would start all countries getting U.S. foreign aid at ZERO, until they proved to be our allies.

He was also the first to mention the war on religion.

Rick Perry is twice the Conservative Santorum is!

.

.


153 posted on 01/17/2012 6:56:24 PM PST by patriot08 (TEXAS GAL- born and bred and proud of it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies]

To: patriot08

OUCH.... just a few more reasons why Santorum won’t get my vote, the main one being he can’t possibly beat the Kenyan Marxist.


154 posted on 01/17/2012 6:59:01 PM PST by mojitojoe (SCOTUS.... think about that when you decide to sit home and pout because your candidate didn't win)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 153 | View Replies]

To: patriot08

“Rick Perry is twice the Conservative Santorum is”

Absolutely.


155 posted on 01/17/2012 6:59:50 PM PST by FryingPan101 (Perry 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 153 | View Replies]

To: mojitojoe; FryingPan101

.

Santorum should drop out for the sake of his country.
I doubt if his ego will let him.


156 posted on 01/17/2012 7:04:09 PM PST by patriot08 (TEXAS GAL- born and bred and proud of it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies]

To: Individual Rights in NJ

Barry Soetoro the Kenyan isn’t a NBC and apparently the courts don’t give a rat’s a$$ so let Rubio run. If the Dems are going to elect candidates that shouldn’t even be running, then we play that game too.


157 posted on 01/17/2012 7:04:30 PM PST by mojitojoe (SCOTUS.... think about that when you decide to sit home and pout because your candidate didn't win)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
New CBS/WSJ poll in South Carolina shows Romney at 34%, Perry at 22%, Gingrich at 16%, Paul at 13%, and Santorum at 11%. Now who needs to drop out?
158 posted on 01/17/2012 7:33:31 PM PST by shield (Rev 2:9 Woe unto those who say they are Judahites and are not, but are of the syna GOG ue of Satan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shield

CBS.


159 posted on 01/17/2012 7:37:55 PM PST by Jim Robinson (Rebellion is brewing!! Impeach the corrupt Marxist bastard!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: RedMDer; Jim Robinson; trisham; DJ MacWoW; musicman; JoeProBono; TheOldLady; upchuck

But for Romney’s and Paul’s attacks ads in Iowa on Gingrich, Santorum wouldn’t be in this race, so let’s give New Gingrich his due for fighting his way back to rebound in South Carolina now that we’re out of two purple states -— one a causcus state and the other a North Eastern state

Sarah Palin’s endorsement tonight of Newt Gingrich, should signal to his rivals, that she thinks it’s “now or never” time to STOP ROMENY in South Carolina, so the “process can continue” like she said.

I sure hope and pray South Carolina TEA Party voters are paying attention to Sarah Palin!

I know that several are disgusted with Nikki Haley’s endorsement of Romney.

I happen to like Perry second best, but agree that it would be an act of real courage for him to throw his support to Newt Gingrich right now. I don’t see Santorum stepping aside at all. I think he would be happy to be Romney’s VP.


160 posted on 01/17/2012 7:40:54 PM PST by onyx (PLEASE SUPPORT FREE REPUBLIC - DONATE MONTHLY! If you want on Sarah Palin's Ping List, let me know!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

Its true Jim; Perry and Santorum have failed to improve their position in any meaningful way; it is time for them to take the pill and endorse their successor. They’ll only look like stalking horses for Mitt if they stay in any longer.


161 posted on 01/17/2012 7:46:42 PM PST by editor-surveyor (No Federal Sales Tax - No Way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Brian Kopp

There are just simply way too many voters that dislike Santorum for him to be a VP choice. Its time for him to concede and look statesmanlike.


162 posted on 01/17/2012 7:50:05 PM PST by editor-surveyor (No Federal Sales Tax - No Way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: onyx

Yes! We need to rally to Newt. If either Santorum or Perry would join forces with Newt. We Conservatives can beat zero like a drum in the greatest lib defeat in history and turn America back into the ‘Shining City on the Hill’.
Come on Sen. Santorum and Gov. Perry, Fight for America!
Support Newt! Defeat OBAMA!


163 posted on 01/17/2012 7:51:15 PM PST by RedMDer (Forward With Confidence!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: onyx

Very astute analysis. Dead on. Thanks.

Go Newt!!


164 posted on 01/17/2012 8:21:07 PM PST by upchuck (Let's have the Revolution NOW before we get dumbed down to the point that we can't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

There are way too many voters on FR who dislike the fact Santorum is a real unapologetic Catholic for them to accept him as a VP candidate. That doesn’t mean he is not a good or viable VP candidate.


165 posted on 01/17/2012 8:31:04 PM PST by Brian Kopp DPM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

I agree Jim but I’ve seen this movie before and doubt the egos will allow it to happen.


166 posted on 01/17/2012 9:54:45 PM PST by Bigun ("The most fearsome words in the English language are I'm from the government and I'm here to help!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

I think everybody should vote for Herman Cain. That way nobody is supporting a candidate they don’t want, but we can beat Romney in South Carolina. And we have Steve Colbert helping us.


167 posted on 01/17/2012 10:33:33 PM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

I agree with you, Jim. I don’t want Santorum out this early. There is a chance Gingrich can shoot himself in the foot. And like palin says, steel sharpens steel. I liked Perry last night too, but maybe he should be the first to take one for the team.


168 posted on 01/17/2012 10:36:33 PM PST by Yaelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shield
New CBS/WSJ poll in South Carolina shows Romney at 34%, Perry at 22%, Gingrich at 16%, Paul at 13%, and Santorum at 11%. Now who needs to drop out?

Do you have a link?
169 posted on 01/17/2012 10:55:37 PM PST by af_vet_rr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: Yaelle
There is a chance Gingrich can shoot himself in the foot.

Gingrich has had every chance to shoot himself in the foot, and it just hasn't happened. His problems only occur when Romney's PACs dump millions into negative advertising. Even then he overcomes it and embarrasses Romney in the debates.

The other candidates are churning out well-rehearsed 30 second soundbites during the debates while Gingrich is providing articulate reasons why people should not vote for Obama. Some candidates will say that some policy isn't good or they don't believe in it and leave it at that. Gingrich proceeds to explain why that policy isn't good or why he doesn't believe in it. It's a huge difference, and it will be necessary to have somebody who can give reasonable explanations when going head-to-head with Obama.

If it comes down to a candidate who throws 30-second soundbites out there, Obama will walk away with the debates. He's the master of soundbites that have no depth.

I was against there being so many debates, but it's clear that the longer this goes on, the more damage can be done to Romney, and the more Newt can make the case that he's the logical one to take on Obama.
170 posted on 01/17/2012 11:02:25 PM PST by af_vet_rr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

Santorum has not fizzled. In fact, he probably won Iowa, making him tied with “ historic “ Romney. And his wife in her 20s before she met him was with an older, unsavory type whom her parents didn’t like. Shock of shocks. No other young 20-something girl has ever been rebellious like that.


171 posted on 01/18/2012 12:17:18 AM PST by Yaelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: af_vet_rr

I can’t disagree with you much, except to say that Santorum can stay in a bit longer especially if Romney doesn’t win SC. After SC, it may be his time to take his hit for the team too. But maybe Perry can help now.


172 posted on 01/18/2012 12:19:01 AM PST by Yaelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies]

To: Clintonfatigued

Santorum would make the best, most conscientious, conservative President. He’d be a good steward of the Presidency and would not scare us to death with any sudden listings to the left like an Italian cruise ship. We won’t ever wake up Monday morning to find Santorum in the park on a bench with Nancy Pelosi.

But he doesn’t have the command of intellect and history, and the debate zingers like Gingrich. Still, Newt would not be a very stable or trustworthy President. It takes a special amorality to cheat for YEARS on one wife, and to cheat at some point with all your wives, and to tell your mistresses that oral ain’t sex, and to try and bring down your political opponent due to a sex scandal when you yourself are participating in one too. Gingrich has some amazing talents. I loved him last night. But beware. That’s not the whole package. He may not be suited for anything but the campaign.


173 posted on 01/18/2012 12:30:15 AM PST by Yaelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: All

On Monday, Laura Ingraham interviwed Santorum, and on Tuesday, she interviewed Gingrich.

Listen to both interviews, and maybe it will help you make your decision:

http://www.lauraingraham.com/mediabits

Both audios are Freebies!


174 posted on 01/18/2012 1:32:13 AM PST by Sun (Pray that God sends us good leaders. Please say a prayer now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 173 | View Replies]

To: JediJones; CajunConservative; Jim Robinson
Now that’s what I call Cajun spice...

Tell me about it. In all my years coming here, that's the first time I've ever seen someone demand to be zotted.

175 posted on 01/18/2012 4:10:53 AM PST by danielmryan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: BrewingFrog

I agree with your assessment. Santorum is more likely to go with the establishment. He was a senator, after all.


176 posted on 01/18/2012 4:21:58 AM PST by jersey117 (Perry 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut

Perry isn’t in the tank for anyone.

They can barely stand each other.


177 posted on 01/18/2012 4:25:01 AM PST by wolfcreek (Perry to Obama: Adios, MOFO!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: JediJones
A simple google search before you call someone a liar would show some manners.

In his book “Change” and in January 2008 when Newt was on ABC's “This Week” he stated and I quote, “We are at the end of the Reagan era.”

The next day Rush Limbaugh let the RINO have it.

178 posted on 01/18/2012 4:30:15 AM PST by Happy Rain (The more regulations the better chance of violating them and coming under the heel of the tyrant.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: shield

Rick Perry swayed a lot of SC voters on Saturday afternoon during the women’s forum with Frank Luntz. He is the real deal. I would say he’s going to Florida.


179 posted on 01/18/2012 4:38:56 AM PST by jersey117 (Perry 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

After SC, Perry, Santorum and Newt need to call a press conference and announce, “We are living in historic, perilous times in American history where our Constitution is under attack by the potus. We are at this time taking a historic stand together by two of us immediately dropping out of the race and endorsing (whichever of those 3 wins SC) in order to advance the Republican candidate who will protect the Constitution and individual rights as the next potus.”

It would be monumental and ensure a win against Romneycare AND zero!


180 posted on 01/18/2012 7:41:38 AM PST by Reddy (B.O. stinks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

wonder if Santorum could bring PA...his track record there is spotty


181 posted on 01/18/2012 8:05:25 AM PST by wardaddy (I am a social conservative. My political party left me(again). They can go to hell in a bucket.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Josh Painter
THANK YOU for posting this debate! What a gem!

Geez, any wonder why it wasn't covered?

The Bulldog & the Golden Retriever Puppy

182 posted on 01/18/2012 8:13:50 AM PST by b9 (NEWT all the way)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: FryingPan101

“I’m choking!! LOL!”

LOL! “What’s that you say, Willard?” :::slap::: “You’re gonna drop out and endorse Perry, right?” :::slap:::

“Anderson?! Anderson?!”


183 posted on 01/18/2012 8:18:29 AM PST by CatherineofAragon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: CatherineofAragon

““Anderson?! Anderson?!””

LOL! If life could only be so easy.


184 posted on 01/18/2012 8:20:53 AM PST by FryingPan101 (Perry 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies]

To: chrisnj

While opinions differ, most experts agree that a person born in the USA to people purposely availing themselves of the laws of the USA (e.g., green card permanent residents) are natural born citizens.


185 posted on 01/18/2012 8:33:52 AM PST by Jewbacca (The residents of Iroquois territory may not determine whether Jews may live in Jerusalem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

Count me in. I wanted Newt to run back in ‘96. Alas, it was not to be.


186 posted on 01/18/2012 8:34:57 AM PST by jboot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Joe 6-pack; ConfidentConservative

It happened Dec 10, not November.

Watch it, it’s good. Both get their digs in.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2834159/posts?page=59#59


187 posted on 01/18/2012 8:42:54 AM PST by b9 (NEWT all the way)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: b9; ConfidentConservative
"It happened Dec 10, not November."

I know Newt is the smartest person in the entire universe, but I don't think he's going to get to the time travel issue until he's conquered global warming. Check the date the video was uploaded to youtube. It was in early November, just before Newt started to climb in the polls and both candidates were trying to get recognition. Santorum issued his challenge for a L-D with Newt on Greta's show in early December (12/3, IIRC.)

188 posted on 01/18/2012 8:54:10 AM PST by Joe 6-pack (Que me amat, amet et canem. meum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 187 | View Replies]

To: All

Santorum; Big government spender:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zt6XCZz2X1Y&feature=player_embedded


189 posted on 01/18/2012 9:21:47 AM PST by patriot08 (TEXAS GAL- born and bred and proud of it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 188 | View Replies]

To: Joe 6-pack; Josh Painter

I don’t see the date you’re talking about. Josh Painter says it was Dec 10.


190 posted on 01/18/2012 9:34:22 AM PST by b9 (NEWT all the way)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 188 | View Replies]

To: Joe 6-pack; Josh Painter

Wait a minute, yes I see it. You’re right, Nov 11.

What a humane event, letting them sit down instead of standing for 2 hrs.

It’s still a really good view of their differences. I watched the whole thing. Another debate between them isn’t really necessary.


191 posted on 01/18/2012 9:40:28 AM PST by b9 (NEWT all the way)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 188 | View Replies]

To: Joe 6-pack; b9

Time travel, cute! LOL

My guess is Newt didn’t see Santorum as a threat and didn’t need to spend time and money that needed to be spent on Romney. Specially since they did meet one on one. I realize you don’t like that but it is as it is.

Sorry I didn’t get back to you sooner but I have had a very busy last view days.


192 posted on 01/18/2012 10:42:20 AM PST by ConfidentConservative (If my people shall humble themselves and pray,I will hear from Heaven and heal their land.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 188 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Brian Kopp

Santorum blew it here when he defended the indefensible Specter and snubbed Toomey. Most only recently became aware of his questionable religious tendencies, and I do not believe that they even come into play for him. Its his tendency to go with the establishment over common sense.


193 posted on 01/18/2012 11:33:20 AM PST by editor-surveyor (No Federal Sales Tax - No Way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

I’m in PA too, and I was extremely critical of Santorum over the Spectre issue. But between Santorum and Newt, I think Santorum’s credentials as a social conservative are much better. Neither man is “perfect” but I can support either one for President.


194 posted on 01/18/2012 12:12:25 PM PST by Brian Kopp DPM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 193 | View Replies]

To: TLI
>>> The answer here is begging to be stated...
Gingrich-Santorum 2012
Newt is the pro that is needed to unravel the rat-knot of Obammyness the communists have created.
Two terms of elections follow in which the idiot GOP can be returned to conservatism.
Santorum picks up the reins in 2020.
<<<<

Newt will lose to Obama if he is the nominee. The Dems have so much dirt on Newt they'll make him radioactive to voters in November. The only thing "getting behind Newt" would accomplish for Rick Santorum is killing his career a second time as the Gingrich-Santorum ticket gets crushed.

195 posted on 01/18/2012 12:45:31 PM PST by BillyBoy (Illegals for Perry/Gingrich 2012 : Don't be "heartless"/ Be "humane")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor
>> Santorum blew it here when he defended the indefensible Specter and snubbed Toomey. <<

Yes, if had instead endorsed the even more liberal Dede Scozzafava and snubbed Doug Hoffman, I suppose it would be a-okay with the Neuticles on FR. After all, they have no problem with Newt endorses RINOs far worse than Specter.

196 posted on 01/18/2012 12:52:02 PM PST by BillyBoy (Illegals for Perry/Gingrich 2012 : Don't be "heartless"/ Be "humane")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 193 | View Replies]

To: John Valentine
>> I’d be less likely to vote for a Gingrich/Santorum ticket than one featuring Gingrich/Almost Anyone Else. <<

Interesting. I'd be far happy voting for a Santorum/Almost Anyone Else ticket than a Santorum/Gingrich ticket. Hate the thought of having to hold my nose for that slimy backstabbing jerk Newt just because the man at the top of the ticket is decent.

197 posted on 01/18/2012 12:54:49 PM PST by BillyBoy (Illegals for Perry/Gingrich 2012 : Don't be "heartless"/ Be "humane")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: BillyBoy

The senate is a bigger problem than the house, and no one is worse than Take-the-money-and-run Specter.


198 posted on 01/18/2012 2:28:05 PM PST by editor-surveyor (No Federal Sales Tax - No Way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 196 | View Replies]

To: shield; All
New CBS/WSJ poll in South Carolina shows Romney at 34%, Perry at 22%, Gingrich at 16%, Paul at 13%, and Santorum at 11%. Now who needs to drop out?

Link?
199 posted on 01/18/2012 2:31:02 PM PST by af_vet_rr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: ConfidentConservative; b9
"My guess is Newt didn’t see Santorum as a threat..."

Then he really has no business calling on Santorum to drop out now, does he?

"Specially since they did meet one on one."

Not when one looks at things in context. When they met, neither was doing particularly well in the polls, and either would have been happy for any forum to present their views. Shortly after they met, around the time Cain dropped out, Newt started his first rise in the polls. Newt was going around talking about how eager he was to debate one-on-one, talking incessantly about following Obama around, and even indulging Huntsman in a Lincoln Douglas forum. During that time frame, Santorum had still not gained a lot of traction, and presented his challenge to Newt...which Newt has ignored.

Now, if Santorum is no threat to Newt, and not worth acknowledging, why urge RS to drop out? If on the other hand, RS is worthy of asking to drop out to put Newt over Romney, why not go one-on-one and prove it to everybody's satisfaction?

200 posted on 01/18/2012 3:19:00 PM PST by Joe 6-pack (Que me amat, amet et canem. meum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 192 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-208 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson