As I said, I’m not picking my President over a vote on NEA funding that has been included in every appropriations bill passed by a republican house and senate, a minor part of huge appropriations bills. Especially not on votes that won by a 76-22 margin.
Santorum has said that he voted on some things in the Senate based on what he knew the people he represented would want. I’m not sure I agree with that, and I know others want more conservative purity from their candidates, but it is a sound principle of representative government. I have no idea why he voted the way he did on this particular issue, but I bet if he was given time to refresh his memory, he’d answer the question, whether we liked the answer or not.
It’s a fool’s errand trying to explain every vote taken by a senator over their career. Individual votes can be found and spliced together. Santorum apparently voted conservatively enough during his time in office that he ended up with a lifetime 88.1 ACU rating, only 1.9 points less than Gingrich, who I am assured is a solid Reagan conservative. Organizations know which votes were important, and which were not, and are often better at judging and rating candidates.
You can vote for a candidate based on anything that you want Charles. I didn't even bring up the subject about the NEA. I'm just responding to your comment pointing out what is fact.
And the fact remains that the vote wasn't on a full appropriations bill containing NEA funding. Instead is was an amendment to specifically eliminate NEA funding (and exchange it for park funding).
Santorum voted "no" on it.
There is a logical difference between a person who votes for a full appropriations bill that may contain something undesirable and a person who specifically votes against defunding a undesirable item in a separate amendment.