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 ...
That would probably be the consensus from most conservatives, although I personally rank Newt even worse than Romney. I think both of them are self-serving jerks who would run over their own grandmother to get elected, although Romney seems to have a picture-perfect family and have a squeaky clean private life, whereas Newt's "personal life" has been a train wreak (and his fans say if you don't accept that he's sincere about his "I found Jesus" stuff then you're either a bad Catholic or hate Catholics. Please.)
I think Romney has a shot of beating Obama, I think if Gingrich is the nominee it will be a repeat of Kathleen Harris or Christine O'Donnell at the national level. Not only will the Democrats have a field day and make this guy less popular than Darth Vader, but Newt driving away independents in droves could jeopardize many of our close races in Congress. I don't care if he's a great debater, so is Alan Keyes and look at his totals in political campaigns. Under no circumstances should Newt be the nominee, it would be a disaster for the GOP. Just remember you were warned.
If I was evaluating them solely on their "conservative record", (and ignoring the other 90% factors that make up a campaign), then yes, Gingrich is "better" than Romney. But since Gingrich ran in a strongly conservative Georgia district and Romney ran in Massachusetts, he doesn't get any brownie points for that either. (neither does Rick Perry by being conservative in Texas because he needs to be)
>> And if you had to pit Santourm vs Newt in terms of DC experience and political skills its Newt > Santorum.? <<
About even. Santorum was elected to Congress at age 32 by defeating an incumbent in a district that was majority RAT. The RATs redrew the district to make it even more RAT and Santorum continue to win when registered Dems outnumbered Republicans 3:1. He served three terms. That is a remarkable accomplishment. Santorum was then elected to the U.S. Senate by also defeating an incumbent in a statewide race, while running as an apologetic Reagan conservative in a northeast state that is hardly conservative a bastion of conservatism. He was named "most ambitious" of the freshman class by the Washington press and rose to become Senate Republican Conference Chairman. He was re-elected handily even as Gore carried the state and served as a Senator for 12 years before his downfall in the heavily Dem year of 2006.
Gingrich tried to defeat an incumbent Democrat in fairly conservative district, and failed both times. He then finally won the seat in an open race, and it was redrawn to be majority Republican as he won it repeatedly in races against token opponents for 20 years (representing Georgia's 6th from '78-'98). He rose up thru the ranks of the GOP, became whip, and got to be House Speaker thanks to leading the GOP cause in '94 and thanks to longtime GOP stalwart Bob Michell retiring. He proved to be a poor leader from 1995-1998 and stepped down in disgrace after the GOP lost 5 seats in a midterm election that was supposed to be favorable for them.
>> in a perfect world dontcha think: <<
>> 1. Paul needs to be defeated. <<
And he will be, regardless of what happens. He's doing better than he did in '08 but without crossover votes from Dems and Libertarian loons this guy is probably in single digits with actual Republicans. He won't win closed primaries. The GOP is not going to nominate a 80 year old Libertarian kook.
>> 2. Romney needs to be exposed. <<
And he will be, regardless of which Republican is running against him. Plus the mainstream media will be sure that he is "exposed" AFTER he is the nominee.
>> 3. Have it out between Santorum and Newt, best man wins? <<
Iowa and New Hampshire have given us vastly different outcomes and are very different electorates but with the final numbers now in from N.H., one this has proven to be consistent between Iowa and New Hampshire. Of the candidates going strictly after the CONSERVATIVE vote, Santorum gets the most votes (in both Iowa and N.H.), Gingrich gets the second highest, and then Perry is in a distant, distant third. Yet Newt's fans say he's the "front runner" and despite not winning a single county yet, everyone should drop out and throw their support to him. That seems to be a denial of reality.
>> Thats my best case scenario. <<
My best case scenario is Newt and Perry both leave the race (Perry is too much of a doofus to get anywhere, Gingrich is too damaged to "beat Obama"), although outspent, Santorum gets a tea party boost and beats Romney narrowly in the remaining primaries after it becomes a one-on-one fight, and Santorum names Susana Martinez as his running mate at the Republican National Convention this fall.
Pretty good scorecard ya got goin there.
The man spends every debate talking about I, I, I, me, me, me, over selling his meager senatorial accomplishments, pandering excuses for his failings and whining like the bratty, petulant Obama. Another failed lawyer, he attacks the 10th amendment, he voted for Medicare Part D, he choses the establishment over principle time and again, he's neocon interventionist and thinks gov't is the solution if only it were just a little more theocratic and involved in our personal lives. He's a dangerous charlatan. He's no conservative in ways that W was no conservative. The difference is W was not delusional enough to believe his own PR.
Santorum lacks the self-awareness to be a good president, even as good as W. I would not vote Santorum or Romney in the general.
Exactly.
In fact, functionally it’s pretty much like a second place finish. Ron Paul’s support is a not reflective of the conservation/GOP/TP base and Huntsman also was an aberration.
Anyway, you are hurting your Newt Gingrich and helping both Mitt and RuPaul with such negative behavior.
It won’t take Newt or Santorum dropping out for Romney to win. He has the momentum now, regardless.
I think if/when Newt drops out, his support will divide between Romney and Santorum. To the extent the support for Gingrich was based on him being Not Romney, it will go to Santorum.
The race will become a two-man race here shortly, whether or not anyone drops out first.
The reality is that Romney is very likely to be the nominee. Is it possible that Santorum could overtake him? Yes. But it’s more likely Santorum will give him a good challenge, but end up finishing a strong second overall.
Gingrich will quickly become a non-factor, except to the extent that his attacks on Romney push fiscal conservatives to Romney and social conservatives to Santorum. While his attacks have dented Romney a little bit, the political benefit has not redounded to Gingrich, nor will it in the future, imo.
An excellent analysis.
I do think Santorum could squeak out a win over Romney, but I think it’s more likely he will have some very strong showings at second place and end up as the VP.
I was looking with interest in Newt, but when he kept starting to shoot himself in the foot, Rick interested me more. The latter shows a sense of maturity and clear thinking. Plus it seems that Newt blows up too much. Rick stays calm even when he is offended.
Has that been proven yet? O'Keefe just showed ON CAMERA how easy it is to commit fraud in New Hampshire...who knows what happened in Iowa...
My sentiments, too. But I'm afraid our little Republican primary voters will never come around. But Santorum is steady. He should use that adjective in his advertising. I find him likeable, but others say he is an arrogant bore.
The dead and out of staters were voting for Paul in NH...
Unfortunately; Romney = second term for Obama.
The problem I haved with naming S. Martinez is not about her credentials at all, but that it would be a mere ploy to try to pick up moderqate Hispanic voters, most of whom are pre-committed to the Democratic Party. We just have to hope Santorum does not self-destruct in SC, but more likely he will run out of money by the time of FL. Gingrich, I believe, is already finished, as is Perry.
The problem I haved with naming S. Martinez is not about her credentials at all, but that it would be a mere ploy to try to pick up moderate Hispanic voters, most of whom are pre-committed to the Democratic Party. We just have to hope Santorum does not self-destruct in SC, but more likely he will run out of money by the time of FL. Gingrich, I believe, is already finished, as is Perry.
Good thinking; this says it all!
Though the odds are overwhelming, and more miracles are needed, at this point Santorum is our only possible candidate from the conservative viewpoint. Newton Leroy Gingrich will self-destruct if nominated; in fact, he can’t be nominated in my view.
I won’t concede that. If Romney gets the nomination, I’m going to vote for him as the nominee and do everything I can to make sure he gets elected.
Among other things: the Supreme Court.
I’d take anybody Mittens could nominate and get through the conservative base test (see Harriet Myers) over someone nominated by Obama and the Rats.
The stakes are different for me at the general election.
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.