Posted on 02/23/2012 9:33:59 PM PST by Steelfish
Rick Santorum Winning More Support From Republican Women
By Amy Gardner, February 23
Over the past several weeks, Republicans have watched squeamishly as presidential contender Rick Santorum has waded into multiple controversies that risk alienating half the 2012 electorate: women.
But in fact, Santorum has grown more popular among women while talking about his opposition to abortion, his disapproval of birth control and his view that the federal government shouldn’t pay for prenatal screenings. A new Washington Post-ABC News poll shows not only that Santorum is doing better among GOP women than he was a few weeks ago, but also that he is less unpopular — and also less well known — among Democratic and independent women than his Republican rivals Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich.
Voters and political strategists alike say Santorum’s rise has less to do with his views on these issues than on his ability to relate to the daily struggles of the middle class.
Nonetheless, the former senator from Pennsylvania and the other Republican candidates remain largely untested by the dynamics of a general election in which independent and Democratic women are expected to play a deciding role.
All of the campaigns — and the White House — are paying close attention to this major voting bloc, exploring how women feel about hot-button social issues and economic matters. Santorum’s views on health issues do not appear to have hurt in the primary. Yet he and the other Republican candidates are acutely aware of the danger those issues could present this fall.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
BTW Perry could not veto that bill, it passed with 4 dissenting votes
Too bad Perry couldn’t verbalize that in debates or in his campaign.
You mean like a candidate who is polling 9% in MI and is barely ahead in his home state of GA and is on the verge of self-imploding like seeking permanent moon-based colonies at a time of $16T national debt and budget deficits exceeding $1T and promises pie-in-the-sky $2.50 gas?
I don’t see Saintorum verbalizing so well himself. Obama is sucking some major *** too, but he is the king of the BSers.
Are elections about eclecting the best BSer?
“I don’t waste time selling Rick to haters. Why waste the time. If you are genuinely on the fence in supporting Rick, figure out how Google works.”
Why do you always lie about what I believe? I’ve made it pretty clear that I oppose Saint Rick. I’ve never said that I was on the fence with him. As for the Nooby campaign worker. It is you who has never actually engaged in a legitimate debate of ideas. You just give your one liners, your mindless talking points and emotional appeals, and then you bash people. I know your game. You can’t hide it from me. And I’ll call out your hypocrisy every time you assault some member on this forum.
Unlike you, I never have to invent accusations of going after little children or being a deranged anti-Catholic. You give me all that I need just from what you write.
Oh so when confronted with the YouTube video clip, Rush is “full of crap.” This is becoming pathetic.
Unfortunately, you are the one who is rather ignorant about the voting public. People DO vote on looks and feelings. Sad, but, true. We are in the era of the American Idol presidency. This is why Newt doesn’t have a prayer. Here is just another old, white-haired, Republican (remember Bob Dole, and John McCain?) Who beat them? Younger, better-looking men. I don’t vote that way, but, like I said - millions do.
For the record, I don’t think obama is good looking, but, compared to McCain............
No, go take a look at the NRO Editorial before jumping the shark. Have you tried rehab?
“You mean like a candidate who is polling 9% in MI and is barely ahead in his home state of GA and is on the verge of self-imploding like seeking permanent moon-based colonies at a time of $16T national debt and budget deficits exceeding $1T and promises pie-in-the-sky $2.50 gas?”
We’ll see how things go, since Santorum did rather pitifully in the debate last night. As for the moon base. This only reveals your ignorance. Newt has no plan for some trillion dollar moon base. He was talking about promoting private enterprise into the space race.
But if you admitted that, you’d also have to admit that your candidate doesn’t have a freaking platform, which is why you probably refuse to even acknowledge what Newt actually says or believes.
The level of Santorum supporters convinces me that they’re definitely on the lower levels of the food chain. I was for Herman Cain originally until he dropped, and I had much better debates with people supporting Newt early on than I’ve ever had with Santorum supporters. And I was pretty vicious with Newt too, until I did some serious reading of his biography.
Well said. We all saw how the Nixon-Kennedy TV debates went.
“Private enterprise”!!!! Heck,we can’t get them to bring their overseas dollars to invest here and you are talking private enterprise. This is worse than day-dreaming.
Tell that to the people of OH, PA, MN, CO, MO- they vote with their heads and their feet.
Which private developers? Trump and Las Vegas casino mogul Adelson?
You say this because you probably, on some level, realize that Santorum’s “solutions” don’t really fix anything. So you also refuse to believe in a flat or a fair tax, or any other significant reforms. You just want us to suffer like you do.
I heard that particular show. He was referring to the fact that most of the conservatives had dropped out of the race.
Rush mistakenly believes that anyone who espouses conservative themes in a campaign are actual conservatives. Saying and doing are two different things.
For the record, I’m a 24/7 subscriber and have listened to nearly every show of Rush’s for the past 20 years. In this case, Rush is full of crap.
Forgive me, but what does that have to do with basing an opinion on the media?
Here’s Stacy McCain from the American Spectator on why Obama fears Santorum:
_________________________________________________________________________
A recent Washington Post article reported that the Obama campaign, which has spent most of the past year operating on the assumption that Romney would be the Republican nominee, had re-assigned researchers to begin “digging into Santorum’s background.”
In recent days, the president’s Chicago-based campaign staff has “begun to consider the implications of a Santorum victory,” the Post’s Sandhya Somashekhar reported. “They view him as a weaker general election opponent, but one who has shown an ability to connect with the population that is most disillusioned with Obama: white, blue-collar voters.”
One look at the Electoral College map should make clear why, despite their description of Santorum as the “weaker” Republican candidate, Team Obama may be especially worried about his potential strengths as an opponent in the fall campaign. The so-called Rust Belt states — from Santorum’s home state of Pennsylvania, across West Virginia and Ohio all the way west to Wisconsin, Minnesota — are home to many millions of those “white, blue-collar voters” and Santorum has indeed shown an ability to connect with that “disillusioned” population.
These are Americans who were notoriously described by Obama in April 2008: “They get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”
I guess the National Taxpayer's Union is "full of crap" then.
The National Taxpayers Union (NTU) has been rating members of Congress for 20 years for "lower and less wasteful spending, individual liberty, and free enterprise.” Steve Forbes serves on its board of directors. For each session of Congress, NTU scores each member on an A-to-F scale. NTU weights members’ votes based on those votes’ perceived effect on both the immediate and future size of the federal budget. Those who get A’s are among “the strongest supporters of responsible tax and spending policies”; they receive NTU’s “Taxpayers’ Friend Award.” B’s are “good” scores, C’s are “minimally acceptable” scores, D’s are “poor” scores, and F’s earn their recipients membership in the “Big Spender” category. Fifty senators served throughout Santorum’s two terms: 25 Republicans, 24 Democrats, and 1 Republican/Independent. On a 4-point scale, those 50 senators’ collective grade point average (GPA) across the 12 years was 1.69 — which amounts to a C-. Meanwhile, Santorum’s GPA was 3.66 — or an A-. Santorum’s GPA placed him in the top 10 percent of senators, as he ranked 5th out of 50. (This is from www.weeklystandard.com)
The Club for Growth ranks Santorum better than Romney and Gingrich "in the smaller government sense" as well. I guess they're also "full of crap". Funny how you guys didn't think so when they were bashing Mike Huckabee's record, though.
Sorry, it turns out I trust these "small government watchdog" organizations that have been studied the issues for decades over the "Santorum's a pro-life socialist!!!" loudmouth internet warriors. Imagine that.
No not really. It does not have to be them and he did not mean them to be the ones silly.
That would be the long term development of the moon and its resources. Man will eventually exploit space for economic gain. It is a long term endeavor. You carping about Newt's idea to develop space is goofy like Romney.
BTW, Rick has big problems starting to develop.
Santorum lied. Spector said he did not promise to back Bush's Supreme Court picks for endorsement.
Yeah, you know petulant and crappy, for sure.
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.