Posted on 02/21/2012 7:12:42 AM PST by Marguerite
HERE'S A THOUGHT for Presidents Day: President Santorum.
Did you just shiver?
How in the name of all that's holy is Rick Santorum atop national polls for the Republican nomination?
Get it? All that's holy? Maybe that's the answer. You know, the Tebow factor; the Jeremy Lin effect? Well, I have another theory.
I wrote Rick off after his strong showing in Iowa, a state that - in an example of what a wacky year this is - he officially won weeks later by one-tenth of 1 percent.
I predicted that after Iowa, members of the national media would find what Pennsylvanians found in 2006 - namely, that Santorum's core beliefs and personal traits are untenable in a general election.
They did not.
Instead, they continued to ignore him as he finished third or fourth in subsequent contests in New Hampshire, South Carolina, Florida and Nevada.
Then came three wins on Feb. 7: two in low-turnout caucuses in Colorado and Minnesota; one in a nonbinding primary in the "show-me state" of Missouri.
(His combined vote total in these three wins, by the way, was 35,296 votes fewer than he got in his third-place finish in Florida.)
Still, national media did not "show me" the roiling Rick whom many Pennsylvanians came to know and loathe.
To the contrary, they helped elevate him (as it did Trump, Bachmann, Perry, Cain and Newt) to the level of an alternative to the mushy Mitt Romney.
How did we get here? And how does this prove that GOP voters are nuts?
We got here via media overhype, Mitt's underdeveloped political skills, finance laws allowing rich guys to keep any campaign afloat and the fact that stuff Rick says plays well in primaries, which forces candidates to appeal to base voters.
Yes, polls change, as we've seen. But some things do not change.
For example, everybody knows that Santorum doesn't like gays in relationships and doesn't like gays in the military.
But he also doesn't like women in the workplace, doesn't like women in combat, doesn't like women (or men) using contraceptives.
He says that contraception is "harmful to women" and society, and that "radical feminism" ruined society by encouraging women to work outside the home, which is one reason an Inky reviewer of his 2005 book, It Takes a Family, called Rick "one of the finest minds of the 13th Century."
(This is an asset in many GOP primaries.)
The problem is that women vote in national elections. They vote more than men. They've done so in every presidential race, by proportion since 1980 and by raw numbers since 1964, says the Rutgers Center for American Women and Politics.
Santorum's beliefs energize women's fundraising and turnout.
As to his personal traits, think preachy arrogance and doctrinaire judgmentalism.
Over the weekend, he slammed government-supported public education as "anachronistic" (he home-schools his kids), and said that President Obama's agenda is based on "some phony theology . . . not a theology based on the Bible."
If you're shaking your head thinking, "Here we go again," believe me, I feel your pain.
But, he perhaps said it best in a recent Fox interview: "He believes he's the smartest guy in the room and he should tell people what to believe and how to run their lives."
He was talking about Obama. But his words are a perfect self-assessment.
That’s the REAL reason why Santorum lost his incumbent Senate reelection in 2006 by such a wide margin 41% to 59% - because of the residency dispute and the school tuition fraud.
In Pennsylvania in the leadup to the 2006 race, people were extremely angry over Santorum’s empty Pittsburgh house and Santorum receiving dozens of thousands of dollars in tuition reimbursement.
You may wish that were true but that is exactly what happened! Newt showed us all who is before the FL primary and his descent has been the consequence. If my analysis is sooo bad why don't you provide your own? How did Newt fall so low after telling us all to just accept the inevitablity of his being the nominee? Let me guess...obama's HHS blunder? Not even close.
According to you, when others point out Santorum’s very Moderate Big Government insider history, as well as the issues he has that contradict the image, you and he is trying to sell to the ignorant public, that is designated as a “Smear” and is untrue because you say so. (”Liberal Drivel”)
But when you smear Newt, you are merely pointing out that it is an “argument” and quite necessary as well as appropriate.........(OK, what else can you define for the rest of the World?)
... on Pennsylvania taxpayers’ $100,000 tuition money, while he and family lived in Virginia, where he still lives today.
Wow. You keep raising the refund. Is that because the truthful amount is not as dramatic for your agenda?
You missed the point. Yeah, the Santorums have a lot of kids. If they sent the kids to public school we’d be talking about double the $7,000 per kid you mention.
The other point you ignored is that the actual marginal cost (to the system as a whole) of adding kids to a cyber program is gonna be a lot less than $7,000 per kid.
We should be thanking the Santorums for having enough children to help keep Social Security solvent for a while longer. The amount they will pay into the system over time will dwarf the $7,000 per kid you are talking about now.
Of course, this isn’t the kind of issue that real people typically pick a presidential nominee on.
How about you support Newt (whom has expenditure issues of his own) or attack Obama oer Romney instead? Your posts are not helpign conservatives get a nominee.
(When I'm good, I am very, very good. But! When I'm bad, I'm even more destructive and rotten to the core)
She’d rather have Zero reelected
Or . . . Santorum could take a lesson from W (or Kerry) and just let the attacks multiply, spread, and morph. I agree it wastes time in some cases, but the lies need to be corrected fast. Ignoring them validates them.
You’re most welcome. I’ll accept your last line as an open invitation to correct your error whenever I spot them. I don’t know that I have the time but I’ll do my best.
“You’d rather have Pres. Romney??”
Rick Santorum is a social conservative but other than that he is a big government republican. He will do nothing to cut the size and scope of govt.
I’d rather have Newt. The only candidate who has a plan to hit the ground running on day one to restore the constitutional republic.
In about 2 years we will be Greece if we don’t get a grown up in the Oval Office.
dozens of thousands
LOL.............
More experienced than Obama...check
Was not mentored by racists....check
Was not mentored by people who hate America....check
No history of cocaine abuse.....check
Easily verifiable history....check....
....wait, WE are the crazy ones?!?
In looking at your posts, you have also bashed Newt. So since you are against Santorum, Newt, and Mitt, who does that leave? RuPaul?
I’m pragmatic. We’ll see
Is anybody watching the House or SENATE?!
We should be watching the congressional races. The more we focus on all the races the harder it is for the MSM to distract us.
A majority (filibuster proof) majority essentially eunachs the entire WH.
The democrats may howl “power sharing” and “peaceful coexistance” but the only viable AMERICAN solution is to crush the democrat party electorally out of existence.
Worse than that.
How did a man who:
...attended a racist 'church' for 20 years
...launched his political career in the living room of an admitted domestic terrorist
...voted to deny medical care to newborns who survived a partial birth abortion
...had the most radically leftwing voting record in congress
become president?
Yet here we are again, ripping our own candidates to shreds over his conventionally christian beliefs, or his two failed marraiges, or perceived innapropriate comments made to women made years ago, or being mistaken about Elvis's birthplace.
I'm so sick of this crap, sick of our side making the same mistakes & eating our own, election after election. I'm to the point now where I'm praying I wake up one day not caring anymore.
You never did answer my questions from the other day:
Before the fla primary, newt won South Carolina, and part of his win was turnout increased by 22%, and there were also turnout increases in the Florida counties where he won. Newt withstood 17 million dollars of negative advertising in Florida, much of it vicious, nearly all of it false or borderline. The ad ratio was 65/1 against Newt. THAT’s what happened to Newt. he is now building back, and you know what? When people give him a fair look, which doesn’t happen often here because of all the belligerence, stubborness and stuck in gear folks here, they like him, and he wins them over. People like you trade in stereotrypes and the past when it comes to Newt. Young people, and openminded people at least give him an honest look and many many come away converted.
After our pleasant conversation yerterday I thought I would take this opportunity to provide some background on the 2006 election that you're not going to get from the charliesheen media.
Santorum in 2006 ran into a "perfect storm" that resulted in an epic defeat. The elements of that storm were:
1. W was under intense fire over Iraq(this was pre-Surge) and Santorum was in direct line of fire
2. Santorum, at the urging of W, supported Arlen Spincter which PO'd PA conservatives (this support resulted in Roberts and Alioto on the USSC)
3. The PA GOP was under the thumb of Ellsie Hillman, and to a lesser extend Theresea Heinz, both of whom HATED Santorum for his pro-life position. Furthermore, the Pres. of the PA GOP, a guy named Gleason, was/is a certified RINO who unofficially supported Murtha in his House race.
4. The dims cynically ran Bob Casey Jr, son of stauch pro-life late PA Gov Bob Casey (of the important USSC decision Casey vs PA)and sold him as pro-life! Jr is a non-entity but his pappa was well-loved (hell, I voted for the guy!).
5. Santorum had risen to a prominent roll in the Senate as a conservative bulldog and tore apart B Boxer in a partial birth abortion debate on the Senate Floor. That put him in the DNC cross-hairs and there was a lot of national $$ pumped into Jr's campaign chest.
But the final, fatal, nail in the coffin was that Santorum was working hard w/ W on Social Security Reform. As we all know, SS is the famous 3rd rail, touch it and die.
Santorum had the brass to address SS in an honest fashion in an atttempt to pull it back from the brink it's currently tilting over.
PA is one of the most elderly states in the country. The dims scared the old folks (patent pending) & the rest is history.
I invite you and other Newt supporters to take an honest look at Santorum, but I'll tell you this: he is both a social and a fiscal conservative.
and he ain't afraid.
What was wrong or incorrect with Santorum's remarks about Obami?
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.