Posted on 01/11/2012 10:29:36 PM PST by Lazlo in PA
The final tally in the New Hampshire primary showed Rick Santorum clinched fourth place and Newt Gingrich took fifth, according to the New Hampshire secretary of state.
Throughout late Tuesday night and early yesterday morning when the votes were tallied, Gingrich had been fourth, but Santorum overtook him, beating him by just 138 votes, with 23,174 votes for Gingrich and 23,312 for Santorum.
It was the second close race for Santorum, who lost to Mitt Romney in the Iowa caucuses by eight votes.
(Excerpt) Read more at bostonglobe.com ...
No one knows that and it’s largely irrelevant. The parade has moved on by.
Have you read Santorum’s voting record? http://www.redstate.com/erick/. Read this and decide if you want this guy in charge of trying to bring this country back to economic prosperity.
Yes, it's better than Newt's record, including fiscal and economic issues. For example, In the last two years of his Senate career, he had an average Club for Growth rating of 77%, compared to an average of 73% for all Senate Republicans over that same time period, so Santorum is 4-points better on free market policies than the average Senate Republican. On taxes, for his lifetime score, Santorum accumulated an average score of 76% on the National Taxpayers Union scorecard. This compares to a 71% average among all Republicans so Santorum is 5-points better on taxes than the typical Republican. By contrast, Newt Gingrich voted to to his left and had an average lifetime score of only 61% (100% being a perfect record of supporting lower taxes and limited government). Santorum opposed Bush's TARP, Obama's "stimulus" bills, the auto bailout, and the Fannie-Freddie bailout. In fact, Rick Santorum went on record and strongly OPPOSED TARP and the Wall Street bailouts while MOST of the GOP politicians -- including "fiscal conservative" Newt Gingrich -- supported it.
Those are some undistributed facts. It paints a far clearer picture of their records than some Newt fans claiming Newt is "more conservative" by virtue of the fact he had a "100% rating" from the ACU during his last year in office, when the Speaker traditionally doesn't vote on legislation so Newt probably got his "100%" rating that year by voting the right-way on two Republican bills.
I'll trust what the National Taxpayers Union and Club for Growth say about Santorum's fiscal record over some pro-Gingrich freepers bashing him, thanks.
>> http://www.redstate.com/erick/. Read this and decide if you want this guy in charge of trying to bring this country back to economic prosperity. <<
I started reading it and I'm not sure why the heck is your point. The article that appears when the page opens is blabbering on about "Evangelicals" and whining about how they "they slander and attack Romney". Boo hoo. Why should I care what Evangelicals do? I'm a Catholic and so is Rick Santorum. That's why the article is particularly amusing when it says evangelicals are for Santorum because they want "one of their own the nomination” Huh? That's like saying "Jews vote for Obama because they want one of their own for the nomination". Is writer even aware Santorum is Catholic? I doubt it. The only thing that article proves is the writer's own ignorance.
I've had enough of that page, the splashy ad with Donald Trump touting his new book is getting on my nerves, so I headed back to FR. I'm sorry Erick Erickson buys into the mainstream media speak and has devoted his website to getting more "red states". I'd prefer more conservative states and don't want to be "red". Thanks but no thanks, Erick.
This country had the alternative to choose a real conservative--Rick Perry-but they'd rather have a very weak conservative and it doesn't matter which one we're talking about. They're all weak compared to Perry.
Historical results, momentum factor, establishment-annointing, robotic voters, yes yes, all known factors...but, the exciting part about this election cycle is this:
Did something really happen in 2008, expressed by the electorate in the results of the mid-term elections, that woke the “robots” up?
Will one of the candidates, who has not been annointed by the establishment, go rogue and drag this out long enough for some of the known unknown political and financial factors that are sure to occur between now and the convention, or an unknown game-changing event to occur? or will they drop out and this all be over this month as you seem to think?
I think there are enough people out there now who recognize the election-rigging that is happening, and remember the 2008 financial “crisis”, that the historical results you base your prediction on, may not hold this election cycle either.
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.