and one would observe Mr. Newt totally dropped the Reagan Torch in disdain and disgust. What a flip flopper. Watch that guy, I'll tell you. Folks are in for a big heartbreak if he ever seized the nomination. (long shot).
(Mid-point of short clip)
Posted on 03/12/2012 9:36:23 PM PDT by red flanker
BIRMINGHAM, Alabama ---Republican presidential primary candidates Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich, vying for the image of the most conservative candidate, spoke to a packed audience in downtown Birmingham tonight.
The candidates, speaking at a forum at the Alabama Theatre sponsored by the Alabama GOP, both heavily criticized President Barack Obama while also critiquing the other candidates, even if it wasn't always by name.
"You need to look to a leader that believes in you, and that's where I lie," Santorum said.
The crowd was friendly to both candidates but seemed most warm to Gingrich, as was apparent by multiple cheers of "Newt, Newt, Newt."
(Excerpt) Read more at blog.al.com ...
Electing a man known for coming into companies, redoing and them ripping them apart to sell off doesn’t bode well for a president over an entire country.
Gekko Romney as a US POTUS. Where’s the carving knife?
Photoshopping fake endorsements by Ronald Reagan should be universally condemned on this site.
You got a quote from ROnald Reagan “expressing his support for Newt”? Clearly not in the context of THIS century’s Newt Gingrich and his run for the Presidency. But anything else?
Michael Reagan is a good man, but can hardly speak to the dead, nor pass their endorsements on for the living.
Nancy Reagan did once say “Ronnie” passed the torch to Rick Santorum as a member of the House of Representatives. :-)
How did Gingrich do in Alaska?
Do you think FR welcomes people like you coming here to brag about Mitt Romney’s wins? You’re on the wrong forum. Go praise the Mormon GOTV effort somewhere else.
You were right but I gave Morris credit for his “conversion” which now I feel was a perversion. I don’t want Mitt Romney and the MSM, Fox and even Morris want to shove him down my throat. I am gagging.
“I guess I could live with Ricky, but why go there when we can have a proven leader and change agent like Newt Gingrich?!? “
“Wish I may, wish I might, make Newt Gingrich win tonight!”
OMG here we go again with “Hope and Change”
Click your heels 3 times and maybe just maybe you will find yourself back in reality.
A vote for Newt in the primary is a Constitutional right being exercised. Your statement is not only incorrect... it is downright unAmerican. BTW... I am casting my vote for Newt in Mississippi in about an hour and a half.
LLS
Sorry but little Ricky is the new Huckabee - prolife but a big govt, union lovin’ liberal.
No thanks!
Newt is the ONLY candidate with a proven record of BIG changes and he is the ONLY true Conservative.
Newt got Sarah’s vote/endorsement which is highly valued and respected by the Tea party patriots.
I use to vote mid-morning, I’m next door here in AL near Rocket City USA . . . and I’ll vote later this afternoon around 3:30 to see how turn out is.
stealing ‘Wish I may..” and pic.
Great Nancy Pelosi’s special friend wins another state that borders GA, All Newt is doing now is ensuring a Romney nomination.
Santorum always has that sweaty nixon look. He can’t help that part. But newt is a proven leader. Santorum has never led anyone. Although I could live with santorum I think Newt is a better choice IMO.
That’s a good way to look at it. We ARE lucky they’re both in. I felt how it was here in Virginia with only Romney and Paul on the ballot ....and so did Virginia voters ...as hardly any of them turned out to vote!
That’s rich, coming from the team that has excitedly cheered Santorum’s losses to Romney, and praised Gingrich for his efforts driving Santorum below 20% in Georgia, getting Romney extra delegates.
I guess if you have no real answer, it’s just easy to fall back on the “Romney card”.
But since you mention it, Alaska was a Caucus. In 2008, in the West Virginia caucus, Romney was winning, and Huckabee was coming in 3rd. Huckabee, wanting to stop Romney, called his Caucus workers and told them to switch their votes to John McCain. This put McCain over Romney, and cost Romney delegates, at the expense of votes for Huckabee. That is how you beat the guy you want to beat, and a Caucus is the ONE place you can easily do this.
Well, in 2012, in Alaska, Romney was winning narrowly. Gingrich was a distant 3rd. So, did Gingrich call up his Caucus workers and tell them to switch their votes to Santorum? There were probably only a few caucus meetings where this would have been necessary, Santorum only needed a few hundred votes. GIngrich might have lost a delegate or two, but maybe he could have done this just in those meetings where he wasn’t winning anyway, to push Santorum past Romney.
But he did not do this. I don’t say he NEEDED to do this, he’s competing to win, not just to beat Romney after all.
But don’t whine about how just MENTIONING that Gingrich lost to Santorum in Alaska is somehow cheering on Romney, when Gingrich had it in his power to beat Romney in Alaska, just by picking up a phone and making some calls.
Alaska is the state that proves that all this talk about Gingrich “taking one for the team”, said to attack Santorum for actually running a nationwide campaign for votes, is just talk. When there was a REAL opportunity to give up votes, Gingrich did not take it.
I think that of all the candidates, he is the most able to grasp the incredibly complex and nuanced financial situation we find ourselves in, not to mention the incredibly complex and nuanced foreign affairs situation, and to craft a strategy for getting us back on a sound footing. Moreover, though he has some troublesome social tendencies, (which I think are a result of his non-ideological pragmatism), I think he’s the one most likely to think outside the box and come up with fresh solutions to difficult problems.
I watched the two candidates in the Alabama forum and had a much different impression of both men’s performance last night than most of the people on this thread.
The Alabama forum allowed each candidate to showcase their ideas, their style, their strengths. Both did well.
My impression are - Gingrich would be a topdown manager; Santorum would be a bottom up type. Gingrich comes across as more of a micromanager; Santorum - the opposite.
A Gingrich presidency would be about Gingrich and his specific ideas on fixing America; a Santorum presidency would be about principles and focus on us by getting out of our way.
They are both good, and I could support either one, but despite all the comments about what a sweaty mess Santorum was last night, I disagree - totally. When Santorum talks like this, his talks are inspiring, presidential, focus on core principles of conservatism (freedom). Granted, he started out slow, but finished well.
Gingrich inspires cheers for his sound bites about people (things he says about obama) or specific ideas ($2.50/Gal gas). Santorum inspires you to believe in yourself; in the American dream. He espouses core conservative principles, sans teleprompter.
My two cents
“Nancy Reagan did once say “Ronnie” passed the torch to Rick Santorum as a member of the House of Representatives. :-)”
You sure about that? I mean, REALLY sure? Seriously.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ec_Nunb6izo
0:35
Take an extra Newt supporter with you. If every Newtron takes one more he’ll win in a landslide.
and one would observe Mr. Newt totally dropped the Reagan Torch in disdain and disgust. What a flip flopper. Watch that guy, I'll tell you. Folks are in for a big heartbreak if he ever seized the nomination. (long shot).
(Mid-point of short clip)
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.