Posted on 01/05/2012 1:35:21 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
..........."Romney and Santorum (like Gingrich and Obama) both go 4-for-4 on the ethanol lobby's scorecard. Paul goes 2-for-4 because he would cut oil subsidies and allow 15-percent ethanol blends to be sold, but opposes the mandate and other subsidies. Rick Perry went 0-for-4."
(Excerpt) Read more at campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com ...
Bump!
It is not tearing down another candidate in my opinion.
It is a political race. Why be childish enough to think we should not point out the failings of other candidates and espouse the virtues of our own candidate?
That’s the sort of fake comity the press wants and why they dissed Newt Gingrich for not congratulating Romney. After what Romney did to him, Newt should have punched him in the mouth. Love to see what the effete sissy Romney would have done if Newt had done that. Sadly, Newt’s a little out of shape.
Rick Perry could do it, but, dang it, he’s a gentleman.
I’ve posted over and over again, and answered this question from you numerous times.
I support conservatives.
Santorum. And if he leaves, barring a miracle entry, I’m voting 3rd party/write in.
Thanks for figuring out a way to distinquish the two Ricks.
Rick is Governor Rick Perry.
Ricky, or as we call him ‘Little Ricky’ is the candidate who had one victory and will soon go home to the state that loves him so much that he lost his run for senator by the biggest margin ever in that state.
Exactly.
When they can’t counter your points, they say you’re wrong to make them.
Good grief!
Why in the world are we having a primary then?
Some of the constant Perry bashers will admit their candidates. Most of them won’t because their candidates have flaws far surpassing the nits they focus on with Perry.
I still think they all need to be on medication or on a psychiatrist’s couch.
What do they gain? They don’t erode support for Perry here as it is solid.
They certainly don’t gain support for their candidates most of whom they dare not name.
Maybe just knowing that they annoy us is reward enough.
If that so, it’s sad but ...
Live long and prosper.
Santorum was a real fireball in the debates, wasn’t he?
There are people who have gone from adoration of one loser to the next to the next to the next and finally to Santorum.
Bet a dollar (or in Romney’s world $10,000) that none of them even considered Santorum a couple of weeks ago.
And then they say things like ‘if my candidate doesn’t win I won’t vote or I’ll write in this one or that one or I’ll vote 3rd party.’
I need to reiterate my four ways to vote for Obama.
1. Vote for Obama
2. Don’t vote
3. Write in somebody
4. Vote 3rd party.
It’s very selfish as a citizen of the United States to make any of those moves.
I love my candidate but I will vow (as he did) to support the Republican nominee.
This is funny. I’m not sure when they’ll correct the headline (Perry is living in their heads rent-free).
http://www.wrdw.com/politics/headlines/Rick_Perry_focusing_on_New_Hampshire_136735438.html
Rick Perry focusing on New Hampshire
Relishing the momentum he’s gained from Iowa, former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum is talking as if he’s the Republican presidential standardbearer, focusing his campaign rhetoric on President Barack Obama rather than his GOP campaign rivals........
“Actions and one’s record speak the loudest. Gov. Perry has a record of accomplishment and the Texas model.”
...and a fifth-place showing in Iowa.
I’m not particularly against Perry, I like his positions fine. However, he’s not shown that he’s got what it takes to defeat 0 or be a good President. I’ll watch him closely during the coming debates.
He’s an easy target for the Dems, as they’ll simply paint him as “another Texas governor in the mold of GWB”.
Whoever is the nominee will be a target.
So let’s move past that obvious point and give Obama the hardest target to hit.
Gov. Rick Perry.
“Santorum was a real fireball in the debates, wasn’t he?”
He wasn’t given much time then - he’ll get plenty now. We’ll see.
Frankly, I could be happy with either him or Perry as the nominee, but I do have concerns about Perry’s intellectual horsepower. Santorum seems sharp as a tack.
Given Santorum’s recent momentum, and Perry’s lack of same, I’m going with Santorum for the time being. We’ll see how he does here in SC - that will be a crucial outcome for the entire field of candidates.
Precious, do you think any Republican candidate will be immune from attacks? Maybe Romney a little.
Rick Perry has withstood attacks for lo, these many years.
The liberals and the press in Texas are as nasty as they are anywhere and they totally despise Rick Perry because he is conservative.
They despise him more than they despised the Bushes.
But nothing they could say or do about him destroyed his popularity in Texas.
They persuaded Kaye Bailey Hutchison to run against him for the Republican nomination for governor.
Chuckling nastily to themselves, they thought Kaye would leave Perry a little puddle on the ground. Turned out, it was the other way around.
Perry has withstood attacks for years. He’s not as vulnerable to attacks as Newt or Santorum.
I understand your concern but it is baselss.
“So let’s move past that obvious point and give Obama the hardest target to hit.
Gov. Rick Perry.”
I’d love to hear how you figure that...?
Perry can’t even generate much enthusiasm among Republicans, given his showing in Iowa and recent poll numbers.
Further, there is plenty of ammo the Dems can bring to bear against Perry, #1 simply being that he’s from Texas. After the successful smearing of GWB, the Texas governorship is an anathema.
Perry might be a fine VP pick for Santorum though... ;-)
Precious. Think about this.
Newt Gingrich was a dirty word on Free Republic a year ago.
One could be banned on the ‘no profanity’ clause by speaking his name.
Then Palin decided not to run and the extremely odd cult of Cain worshippers formed, and he dropped out.
Then the Palin/Cain people flocked to Newt, most because of his debate performances and a lot because he stuck it to the press and everyone despises the press.
Then, Newt’s negatives, which were always there, were emphasized in negative ads by Romney and Newt fell dramatically.
I hope you’re not gonna try to say that Rick Santorum was everybody’s favorite before he won Iowa. He wasn’t a blip on the radar. Apparently he spent an entire year in Iowa and won some hearts there.
Now, he’s a candidate with some momentum but not much money or organization.
He’s also a candidate who has never been attacked because he was never noticed.
The attacks begin today. They will be mean and effective.
the lack of enthusiasm you perceive for Perry could switch as quickly as all the other switches have happened.
People seem to be falling for the next candidate in line that they don’t hate.
South Carolina will tell the tale but don’t count Rick Perry out.
Ah, but I’ve seen many a pretty speech. Rick S. (to distinguish him from Rick Perry)is a lawyer and a legislator: He talks for a living. He’s never actually done the kind of actual decision-making that Perry has (whether you agree his decisions or not).
If “wit and intellect” are your criteria for President, instead of actual work experience and success in an executive branch,obviously I won’t be able to convince you of the obvious shortcomings of having a rookie President.
Also, Santorum is not rising on anything other than “non-Romney of the month.” Otherwise, he would have been doing well earlier. He’s just the “last man standing” for social conservatives.
....Santorum is also going to have trouble in South Carolina because of his voting record. He opposed National Right to Work legislation.
In the 104th Congress Sen. Santorum joined all Democrats and a minority of Republicans in voting to filibuster the bill S. 1788, the National Right to Work Act of 1995. (“On the Cloture Motion (motion to invoke cloture on motion to proceed to consider S.1788),” Senate Bill Clerk, Vote Number: 188, www.senate.gov, 7/10/1996)
During that same congressional session, Santorum also voted to retain the 1930s-era Davis-Bacon Act that forces taxpayers to pay union wages in government-funded construction and gives Big Labor an unfair advantage over non-union companies and workers (“On the Motion to Table (motion to table Kennedy Amendment No. 4031 to S.Amdt. 4000 to S.Con.Res. 57),” Senate Bill Clerk, Vote Number: 134, www.senate.gov, 5/22/1996)
Santorum supported Arlen Specter over Pat Toomey in 2004 helping Specter secure the nomination. Specter went on to cast the 60th vote for Obamacare and then lost, in 2010, to Pat Toomey. Toomey, now in the Senate, is con-sponsoring Jim DeMint’s National Right to Work legislation — the very legislation Rick Santorum filibustered.
Santorum being on the wrong side of National Right to Work and Jim DeMint will do him no favors in South Carolina.”
Bump!
LLS
You have got to admit that it is interesting that those candidates who support ethanol subsidies got the vote from Iowans. I don’t blame the people there since it benefits them, but it is interesting nonetheless. The info on farm subsidies on Perry is interesting also. All of it needs to be in the mix so we can look at it, give it whatever weight we think it deserves, ask the candidates questions about it, get our answers and decide accordingly. In the spirit of transparency you know. I don’t see it as tearing down another candidate. If it is a fact, we should know about it.
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.