Posted on 02/21/2012 3:58:39 PM PST by jenk
That said, each side has always wanted to win their way. And, each side has always known they could not win without the other. Each of us represents about 35% of the base GOP electorate.
If either one pulls out, we all lose.
Our challenge has always been and will continue to be how to find accommodation. This time the little l's settled in on Gingrich. The Socons on Santorum. We don't like the other side's candidate.
At least THIS time we still have a choice on the eve of Super Tuesday.
That's progress folks. Celebrate that, then get back in the ring and kick each others' ass.
Conservatives need to understand that moderate Republicans do not think abortion and teaching homosexuality in schools, and passing condoms out in schools are bad things. They are actively against us on the social issues and find it embarrassing to be associated with people who think they are important.
This is a cultural thing—the establishment R’s went to the right schools and know that their friends and profs there would make fun of them if they even trod in those areas. The social pressure in the ruling class to conform in the key cultural areas is almost overwhelming. They would, quite literally, lose almost all their friends and business associates if they went off the reservation. Look what happened to the poor moderate R lady at Komen.
Culturally, conservatives and blue collar dems have a lot more in common with each other than conservatives do with the establishment R’s. Similarly, establishment R’s have much more in common with Barak Obama than they do with us.
Fiscally they are FAR more conservative than Republicans.
They are classic big (L)ibertarians. Some of the small l's went over, but they'll be back as soon as Paul is out.
The Pro-Life message Santorum is delivering is very important!
It WILL NOT help him get elected President!
Get on Obama’s case and STAY THERE!
say what?
I love his intellect, spine and fighting spirit.
The religious establishment backed the Ned Flanders/Mr Rogers nice guy sweater vest wuss.
That is not what social conservatism is to me.
Newt has a few warts but he is a fighter.
We need a fighter, not Joel Osteen.
This is a war for the soul of our nation.
War is not for the faint of heart.
Only real Christ morality will save this country. People with your opinion are the real enemy of this country.
Similarly, establishment R’s have much more in common with Barak Obama than they do with us.
Exactly, that’s why the establishment’s candidate always looks like Obama’s philosophical first cousin.
What is l(L?)ibertarian about forcing employers to pay for birth control?
“Only real Christ morality will save this country. People with your opinion are the real enemy of this country.”
Think it over, bmw boy!
I agree with you and Christian morality, but nothing is worse that a big government politician using social conservatism to enrich himself.
Did Santorum ever do anything illegal? Yes. He founded a charity which didn’t register with the state of Pennsylvania as required under that state’s law.
Senator Santorum founded the Operation Good Neighbor Foundation, a charity that was actually a bit of a scam. In 2001, following up on a faith-based urban charity initiative around the 2000 GOP convention in Philadelphia, Santorum launched a charitable foundation. While in its first few years the charity cut checks to community groups for $474,000, Operation Good Neighbor Foundation had actually raised more than $1 million, from donors who overlapped with Santorum’s political fund raising. Where did the majority of the charity’s money go?
In salary and consulting fees to a network of politically connected lobbyists, aides and fundraisers, including rent and office payments to Santorum’s finance director Rob Bickhart, later finance chair of the Republican National Committee.
This charity (2001-07), doled out just 36% of income as grants, far less than the 75% of responsible causes. It can only be coincidence the charity which spent most of its money on lobbyists, aides and fundraisers closed after he was defeated for reelection in 2006.
Note: my file on Santorum is now 24 pages long. This is really sad, and most Republicans are getting suckered into believing this man is decent when he is actually two-faced.
Be that as it may, my vote will go the Republican candidate whoever it is because removing BHO2 - a truly evil man - from the White House must be our common goal. Hard as it is to vote for someone I perceive as dishonest, I will vote for Santorum if he is the Republican candidate.
When a middle-class citizen is elected to Congress and returns home 12 plus years later a multi-millionaire, it is due to corruption in government.
We have to change Washington in order to get our nation back on the right track. Unfortunately I believe Santorum will not do anything of the kind.
However, I am a Conservative Republican who will vote for all other Republicans. My vote goes to boot BHO2 out of the White House!
Non sequitor
No GOP candidate advocates that, though I THINK Romney supported it at the state level.
>Oh, and the Ron Paul types are not liberals. Far from it.
>Fiscally they are FAR more conservative than Republicans.
>They are classic big (L)ibertarians. Some of the small l’s went over, but they’ll be back as soon as Paul is out.
On that note, I found what has to date been the best* political ad/promo this election cycle while browsing youtube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wXjfvyNnLYI&feature=related
* It is a little long, but gets the point across pretty well.
What you say is true for a segment of Republicans who are not social conservatives. However their is another segment who do not trust social conservatives for another reason. As you say social conservatives and blue collar dems have a lot in common, we suspect in economics also. Free market conservatives do not want a candidate who is socially conservative but populist in his economic policy. Kind of like a 1930’s style New Deal Democrat. I do not want a socially conservative hand in my pocket no more than a liberal democrats hand.
“Free market conservatives do not want a candidate who is socially conservative but populist in his economic policy.”
Fair enough in theory. But in general, if you look for reliable votes on cutting deficits and spending, look for social conservatives. It’s easy to talk about being a fiscal conservative. Most RINO’s do. Heck, even Zero has given “fiscal conservative” speeches.
OTOH, being a social conservative makes you a pariah in many places. So social conservatives have actually proven they will take ridicule and accusations of extremism to stand for what they believe in. The overwhelming majority of social conservatives are also fiscal conservatives. And they are more reliable voters in congress for fiscal conservatism than a lot of the folks thumping their chests about it because they are used to taking brickbats for their votes.
If by “populist,” you mean old-fashioned class warfare, I’m with you. But today, we have an entrenched ruling class that is most generously labeled “crony capitalist” and probably more accurately labeled “trending toward fascism.” There are big companies, big unions and big banks that are part of that sickness—they have become and stayed big thru governmental largess rather than competition. I don’t regard attacking them as related to the old-fashioned class warfare at all. They ought to have to compete without the help of their buds in the administration and congress. Give me that kind of populism any day.
I don’t remember who it was who dubbed Jennifer Rubin a “one-woman wrecking crew” but she is really living up to that appellation.
But she’s been busted, big time, with Santorum, because she’s posted many, many positive things about him, until he became a threat to her beloved BOT, Mitt Romney.
It’s a shame, because she was really one of my faves when she was at Commentary.
The Romney-bots are a sad bunch because their guy is so bad. I’m sorry Mitt, you seem to be a nice person, well-intentioned, etc. but you just are the worst politician ever.
He can’t/won’t/doesn’t give one stirring speech? His sound-bites so far have been (paraphrasing) “i like to fire people”, “i don’t care about the poor”, “the trees in Michigan are just the right height”.
As we used to say in big, bad NYC back in the bad old pre-Giuliani days (not paraphrasing) “give to me a f*cking break!”
We will see if Santorum can hang on, if Gingrich will come back, but what I’m pretty sure we’ll NEVER see is Romney breaking “out of the box” of botness.
Do you have a comprehension problem?
Yes, “only real Christ morality will save this country”.
Santorum’s approach to marketing his candidacy will not win him the election.
Those are objective facts which make me the messenger, and certainly not the enemy of anybody.
If Rick plans on winning, he needs to get on a message that will gain him the votes to get into office.
Being right counts for nothing if you can’t get elected.
Do you have a problem recognizing the difference between being right and getting elected?
Voters understand Rick’s position on values.
If he’s going to get elected he needs to get on message with criticizing a broader range of Obama’s flaws, and plans for how he’ll resolve them.
What’s with reporting me to the mod?
Did I say something that confuses you?
Rick is right.
The folks that care know where he stands.
Now he needs to move on to other subjects of concern to MORE VOTERS, and beat the stuffing out of Obama on issues on which he is vulnerable.
Get 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.