Posted on 02/12/2012 6:30:58 PM PST by writer33
DURHAM -- Mitt Romney was the inevitable nominee - until he wasn't.
In order to sustain a lead, a candidate's message must resonate with the heart and the mind. Romney's cakewalk to the Republican presidential nomination has been stymied by the inability to get anyone excited about his campaign. He has supporters, but not believers.
Rick Santorum's message resonates with voters' hearts and minds, lately at least, because he is a true believer. He believes in his message and his message is consistent with core Republican values. What gave Santorum the edge in Iowa, Minnesota, Colorado and Missouri last week can give him an edge in the general election against President Barack Obama.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsobserver.com ...
Santorum can beat Obama. Romney cannot. Romney is too much like Obama, so why change?
This has been my contention all along. Further, optics wise, and one must consider this as it is in many cases the only thing many American’s consider when voting, there is not enough of a significant difference to sway voters either way. Both are young, both have supporting wives and nice looking children. Both are reasonably nice looking, slim, well-groomed, clean shaven. Obama in the winter is the same color as Santorum in the summer! Therefore, putting these two side-by-side forces people to listen to what they say, or else really vote race. It would be the first real challenge for American politics. I’d love to see it.
As much as I respect Newt’s rebel attitude, when the optics hit, it will look to the average uninformed American voter very much like the McCain/Obama match up. Newt may sound different, but those voters will only hear McCain saying “that one!”
Of course, Romney is a well-groomed man, and can survive the optics until the O team plasters the airways with the many “deer caught in the headlights” facial expressions Romney consistently delivers! Thurston Howell will look like Romney’s twin brother when the O team is through with him.
People talk about the independent vote. Fine, but let’s at least put equal time into discussing the TV fed voter! They also can be election changers! Don’t forget demographics, but also remember optics.
Obama never forgets these folks. Why do you think Michelle has been everywhere lately? She is his best campaign weapon and he knows it. She’s building the foundation for him to stand on in a few months.
Antonius is right.
Rick Santorum is a faithful member of the Roman Catholic Church. His church has taken positions on economic issues with which nearly all secular conservatives will disagree, as well as most evangelicals who have a Christian worldview about economics. As a Calvinist I have massive disagreements with Santorum on underlying views of what it means to have a Christian economic philosophy.
I cannot and will not blame Santorum for being a faithful Roman Catholic. I can and will strongly disagree with him on his faith, but as long as he is a member of the Roman Catholic Church he should believe what the church teaches.
At this point I believe Santorum is the best shot we have at winning back the White House and winning the general election this fall. I'll put up with some things I don't like about his views, knowing that the reason he supports those views is the same reason he has a long track record of trying to stop baby-killers.
Politics is the art of the possible. Right now Santorum appears to be the best possibility. One thing I **DON'T** have to worry about with Santorum is the possibility of him changing his views if the polls show what he believes is politically dangerous, and under the circumstances that's good enough for me.
Yep. And for those who think that's an exaggeration, I recommend going to Newt's offical website and taking the considerable time to read his detailed plan which is LONG on specifics -- unlike other candidates, who are mostly long on platitudes. They say they'll govern conservatively. Newt says HOW he'll govern conservatively, addressing every detail.
Godspeed Newt Gingrich.
My dear, claiming that Santorum has "lived a life above reproach" and putting it forth as a political argument is neither intellectual nor factual, hence an "intellectual, factual rebuttal" to it is impossible.
"Gag me with a spoon" is about the most appropriate response THIS Christian could muster for such a ridiculously Pollyannish statement.
You want intellecutal, factual rebuttal? Go to Newt's website and READ his detailed plan about WHAT he plans to do to CORRECT and SHRINK government. If you are able to swallow your pride and actually take the time to FIND OUT the facts on where Newt stands on the issues and his proposals to restore liberty and freedom from government oppression in the U.S., you will find that God has -- as He has MANY TIMES BEFORE -- used a very flawed man as a vessel for GOOD works. Remember too the stores in the Gospel where men who congratulated themselves for living "above reproach" and asked God to prefer them over repentent sinners, were rebuked.
Early Reagan understood economics. Check out his speeches for GE. Check out his speech for Goldwater. They were long before he was governor of CA.
Picking winners and losers among sectors of the economy has zero to do with subsidiarity. Forcing sheetmetal jobs offshore by blocking the import of sheet steel has zero to do with subsidiarity. Voting pro-labor union boss has zero to do with subsidiarity.
Subsidiarity is totally consistent with capitalism, but not with Rick’s inconsistent positions, some of which are capitalist; some of which are not.
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.