Rick Santorum Announcing Run for President [today in PA]

ABC News ^ | 05/27/2015 | Ben Gittleson

[GIdget2004]

Rick Santorum, the former Republican senator from Pennsylvania, will announce today that he will seek the GOP nomination for president in 2016, ABC News has learned. ABC News' Chief Anchor George Stephanopoulos will sit down for an exclusive interview with Santorum this afternoon.

Santorum, 57, is set to reveal his presidential intentions at an event today in Cabot, Pa., near his childhood home. It will be his second run for the White House, almost four years after he won primaries and caucuses in 11 states and finished second to former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney in the race for the Republican nomination.

[Rennes Templar]

Yawn.

[FreeAtlanta]

ditto

We have way too many candidate already in the race. It is confusing and hurtful.

We need 2 or 3 and then we need to start building name recognition among the entertainment tonight crowd.

All these extra candidates are doing the work of the DNC. I am pulling my hair out!

[marron]

A couple of things at work. First, you have second-stringers thinking “if a cipher like Obama can be president, then so can I”.

And you have the oft-repeated tactic of slicing and dicing the conservative vote into ever-smaller pieces so that an unlikable establishment candidate can skate away with the nomination.

I like Santorum. He should run for senate or something.

[Finny]

"What was my vision? I came to the uncomfortable realization that conservatives were not only reluctant to spend government dollars on the poor, they hadn’t even thought much about what might work better. I often describe my conservative colleagues during this time as simply ‘cheap liberals.’ My own economically modest personal background and my faith had taught me to care for those who are less fortunate, but I too had not yet given much thought to the proper role of government in this mission." [-----–Rick Santorum, p. IX It Takes a Family: Conservatism and the Common Good (2005)

Rick voted for raising the minimum wage SIX TIMES. Rick opposed cuts in food stamp programs. Rick LOVES BIG GOVERNMENT -- the only difference is that he wants to use it to do Christian acts of charity. THAT IS ANTI CHRISTIAN ultimately because when government usurps moral duties such as charity, it becomes AMORAL. Evil results -- such as we see now, generations of people living in sloth and promiscuity because WE the people are forced to support them via government "charity." Givers become slaves and receivers become entitled dependents; morality is completely erased from the equation.

Santorum is a STATIST at heart and my vote will go elsewhere if he is nominated. I refuse to vote FOR amorality and the evil it creates.

Rick just adds to the dog and pony circus. So now it's what -- SIXTEEN declared Republicans versus the Democrats' SEVEN?

The Republican party represents schizophrenia at its worst.

[LeonardFMason]

He got swamped in PA by the equivalent of a department store mannequin, Bob Casey Jr. Casey is the INVISIBLE Senator from PA. I challenge anyone on FR to name ONE thing Casey has done as a Senator besides being a rubber stamp for Obama.

Rick has NO chance. NONE.

[Alberta's Child]

He exposed himself as a complete fraud and a Beltway political hack with that whole Arlen Specter debacle.

Unfortunately, Santorum is the picture-perfect definition of the kind of career political jerk who should never be allowed in a position of public trust. It's more than a bit ironic that he's making this announcement in his home state of Pennsylvania ... where he lost his last election by a landslide ... and where he'd lose to any Democratic opponent in a presidential election, too.

[FreeAtlanta]

At some point, you are hurting Republicans and Conservatives and the nation you love (i.e. John McCain) and if you really love America and conservatism, you take one for the team and step aside.

There must be a lot of some type of reward for all these nochancers to join. It almost makes you wonder if they are paid by some Soros group.

[11th Commandment]

Rick needs to understand that he only finish second after all the other "ANYONE BUT ROMNEY" candidates went down.

If Newt wouldn't have performed so badly at the Florida debate, Newt would have been second or first.

So please, go away!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[fwdude]

I said that Rick was better, not perfect. Given the choice between Romney and Santorum in 2012, who would YOU rather have gotten the nomination? Would Romney have been any better as president? Hardly.

Again, which candidates do you support, and why? I find that those who abhor Santorum are generally of the libertarian persuasion, and also abhor the so-called “social” issues.

[CPT Clay]

He got defeated by double digits by an empty suit in Pennsylvania. How does he intend to improve?

[mosesdapoet]

While I like the guy who ever he’s been using for advisors has come up way short. This idea of giving the Greek midget “some creds” to announce his bid is another example shows he’s out of it. Too bad.

[C. Edmund Wright]

He is a good man who fought the good fight during the dark years when everyone else was keeping their mouths shut. He at least deserves some respect for that.

Hey SOTC, X, Lake - did you know Santorum was the ONLY ONE opening his mouth about the good fight? I didn't know that.

/s

Engraved, puhleeze....rinse the kool aid off.

[CPT Clay]

Forgot about the “Arlen” supporter meme.

[C. Edmund Wright]

I agree with Santorum on the social issues, but he’s a very poor ambassador to those who may not agree with him, and he’s shamelessly weak and liberal on economics, unions, global warming, etc.

[Vigilanteman]

Yes he is. He consistently sided with Main Street against Wall Street when he was a U.S. Senator for two terms and a member of the House from my district before that. He was also the runner up in 2012 and a better choice than the finalist.

But he got beaten badly by an empty suit in 2006. Plus there are younger candidates and better choices who both cover his issues and stand a far better chance of winning ten years later.

[CPT Clay]

Maybe not.

[Vigilanteman]

ABC News' Chief Anchor George Stephanopoulos will sit down for an exclusive interview with Santorum this afternoon.

Agreeing to an interview with a well-known Clinton sycophant is one more reason he shouldn't be running.

[FreeAtlanta]

I don’t meet your characterization. Right now I adhor Santorum and all the other nochancers who are selfishly jumping up and down shouting me too, me too, instead of getting behind one of the top couple of front runners that most closely match their personal views.

I don’t care about Santorum’s record or that he lost by a huge amount in his own state. I just think we have too many candidates and most, like him, have no chance of winning the nomination and might allow a moderate or rino to win. And, they might force money to be spent that could have been spent against the Democrats in the general.

[Servant of the Cross]

I find that those who abhor Santorum are generally of the libertarian persuasion, and also abhor the so-called “social” issues.

I don't abhor Rick Santorum. I do abhor him throwing his hat into the POTUS ring again though. I'm a conservative, not a libertarian. And we have Cruz!

Compared to Romney, Rick is better. Compared to Cruz (and even Walker) ... hell no.

Rick Santorum has great social conservatism. His fiscal conservatism? Not so much ... Medicare drug entitlement, No Child Left Behind ...

[Jim Noble]

The ability to win elections is an entry-level qualification for a nominee for POTUS.

It doesn’t make a bad candidate good. It doesn’t mean you should vote for somebody, JUST BECAUSE HE CAN WIN ELECTIONS.

But losing your seat in the Senate, by 16 points, in a winnable state which by polls is not anti-life - that means only one thing.

It means you are a loser.

Doesn’t mean you’re bad, doesn’t mean you’re wrong, doesn’t even mean you wouldn’t be a good President.

But it does mean you’re a loser.

Never nominate a loser.