[libertarian neocon]

“I think the Romney camp prays that Newt hangs on because they currently attract a number of votes under the theory that “Romney is the most electable”. If Santorum ever got enough momentum to challenge Romney again with a comparable “most electable” claim, it might dawn on a significant number of voters that they can get a fairly strong conservative that has a good a shot as anyone in the general too. Dangerous idea for Romney, that must not catch on.”

If that is true, why is a Romney shill like Jen Rubin also pushing Santorum? I think they are using Santorum to eat into Newt right now, knowing Santorum is not much of a threat.

And yes Santorum is performing well in “vs. Obama” polls but that is before any negative stories get into the press. But wait until his very strong social conservative views chase away libertarians, women and centrists. Remember everybody already knows Newt’s negatives, do they know Santorum’s?

[noiseman]

"But wait until his very strong social conservative views chase away libertarians, women and centrists."

Allow me to translate that into the plain English we used to use before political correctness infected our discourse:

"But wait until his firm moral conviction to stand for what is right chases away anarchists, feminists, and the perpetually confused."

Much clearer now. No charge for the editing.

[throwback]

I'll grant you that Santorum will definitely be painted as an extremist. Maybe that's what the real purpose of this election is. It's an opportunity for Americans to decide is it extreme to advocate for the traditional family and the lives of the unborn, or is it extreme to view the child in the womb of an unmarried daughter as a punishment. I'd like to see that come up in a debate with Obama, so that he can defend it.