Posted on 01/31/2012 12:02:51 PM PST by RetSignman
For those in Florida who haven't been to polls yet, I urge you to consider the questionable values of the 'squeaky clean' image he tries to portray.
(Excerpt) Read more at archives.cnn.com ...
Rush is supporting Romney and Santorum is his beard, to go after Newt.
12 minutes into his third hour today, you heard him tell us that Santorum voters will go to Romney, NOT NEWT, when Santorum drops out.
Seems as if you are whining about an effective close. Gingrich and Romney had plenty of money to spend to counter anything that Santorum said in a debate.
It’s called politics and was a fair play for a closing statement. No comparison whatsoever to the scorched earth ‘slampaign’ Romney is waging. Newt wanted to keep it clean, but Romney insisted on going gutter.
It’s called politics and was a fair play for a closing statement. No comparison whatsoever to the scorched earth ‘slampaign’ Romney is waging. Newt wanted to keep it clean, but Romney insisted on going gutter.
This has got to be the most absurd attack on Santorum - or any individual - I have seen on the matter of character. Is this meant to be sarcasm, I hope?
If character really mattered, Gingrich would have been buried months ago.
I guess you weren’t being sarcastic.
Beyond absurd - now it shows ‘poor character’ for a candidate to claim he believes he’d be the strongest candidate to draw a contrast with the opposing candidate and has the nerve to explain why he believes that’s the case...? And that’s a sign of “desperation”?
Specter put everything on the line for Santorum twice before in tight races and no doubt helped him go over the finish line - it would have required a complete lack of integrity on the part of Santorum to have stabbed Specter in the back at that juncture after what Specter had done for him before. In the end, Specter stabbed everyone in the back (including, ironically enough, himself), but that’s on Specter, not Santorum.
This is pretty thin gruel as criticism of his character.
You did not answer the question. The responses to those issues had already been hashed out during the debate, and in his close, Santorum was drawing the contrast making the case he believes he would be the strongest because those previous positions could not be brought back on him like he believes could be used against the other candidates. So in order for this to be a 'slam' or an 'ambush' it would have to be something either untrue or not previously discussed in the campaign - and this of course has been rehashed repeatedly over the course of the campaign.
This is a flimsy, nonsensical attack on Santorum's integrity. You should be embarrassed.
Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Michigan? He can win all the polls in those three states and means nothing, they will still go blue. All that would tell me is that they have polled the two dozen registered republicans in all three states and Santorum wins.
I am not a hater, but we can not defeat Romney this way. We are splitting the vote. There will be another day for Rick. He still needs to bow out.
I am not a hater, but we can not defeat Romney this way. We are splitting the vote. There will be another day for Rick. He still needs to bow out.
I understand what you are thinking however, Newt and Santorum together with every vote would have caused Newt to lose to Romney anyway. In all 4 states, Santorum has not taken one vote from Newt.
False.
False? Simple math is 32+13= 45 percent. Romney won with 46 percent. And that is assuming every vote went to Newt.
True that Newt took votes away from Santorum in Iowa and NH, but that is the past.
Newt won SC so the whole thing is mute.
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.