Posted on 03/04/2012 8:35:15 PM PST by lilyfreeper
Georgia: Gingrich 47, Romney 24, Santorum 19, Paul 8. Looks like some chance Newt could even hit 50...
Irrelevant (for now) but interesting: GA if Newt wasn't in race is Romney 38, Santorum 37. Mitt may do better in South than expected.
Santorum definitely the loser in tonight's 3 polls. Good news for both Romney (in OH and TN) and Gingrich (in TN and GA)
Exactly,.....we have one freeper who said "Santorum is every Conservative Woman's Dream"............... It's these voters who haven't a clue and unfortunately there's too many of them in this nation.
Editor:.....”Sanntorum couldn’t get reelected in his home state; missed by 19%.”
Napscoord:....”You are a liar. He did get reelected in his home state. So much for you knowing all about Santorum. Do research before you get back to me.”
Me:....Well Buck-oo you just fell off the cliff for credibility..again...
I am from Santorums state and Editor is correct....
Santorum goes in the history books as the record holder for losing by ‘the greatest landslide’ of any incumbent in the entire history of Pennsylvanian .
And just so you know Santorum was raised where I live.
Reelection means being reelected in Pennsylvania where I am from too. He was elected in 1994 and REELECTED in 2000. Why is that so hard to believe. So YES he was reelected to the state. Some of you guys are so thick it kills me. Don’t say a blanket he was not reelected to the state when that is CLEARLY a lie.
Did Santorum get REELECTED to Pennsylvania in 2000 or not? That is the problem with your little FRIENDS statement. He said that Snatorum did NOT get reelected in his homestate and that is why he is a liar. He did. He was elected in 1994 and REELECTED in 2000. Why that is so difficult for such intelligent people like yourselves is unknown.
Um, the only poll that counts is tomorrow.
Don’t count your chickens....
If we open a window, by tomorrow your stink may be gone from the ‘room.’
.
You can pretend but you know that he identified the race by using the figure of a 19% loss.
You seem to be going down the Clintonesque road, personally I think you knew immediately what the poster was trying to say, the rest of us did.
“Santorum’s sinking like a rock.”
He should stayed on message instead of taking on circuit-riding-preacher persona. He was doing well for a while, but crossed a line.
I agree. He made some missteps, and couldn’t stay on message because he kept falling into media traps.
>> He said that Snatorum did NOT get reelected in his homestate and that is why he is a liar.
He, “little FRIEND”, is not a liar. It is indeed a fact that Santorum did not get reelected. It’s also a fact he got reelected.
>> Why that is so difficult for such intelligent people like yourselves is unknown.
Like I said, not is not never.
I always thought naps coordinator is a mother from the name.
“Santorum used to be so liberal, and of course pro-abortion, that might be seeping out to some voters.”
Do you have a source? If true we need to get that out.
This post in this thread shows a number of them.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2855093/posts?page=43#43
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.