Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Lazlo in PA
...I am looking at this-- If he could not stop nor defeat millions of dollars of negative ads in his own state, how can he manage billions of $$$ spent on negative ads — big alert! he has NOT been vetted to date...soon, the left will focus on one thing (his stern religious beliefs to which they will tie around his neck and no reforms nor governing plans will be discussed )I am only trying to help/we are on the same side. Rush has given Rick a bump. After the vetting, that will change. Don't you wonder why the media is not vetting him ...2 weeks, nothing....
32 posted on 02/13/2012 11:28:55 PM PST by Christie at the beach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies ]


To: Christie at the beach
After the vetting, that will change.

I live in PA and Rick has been run through the wringer more than anyone running right now in all the elections he went through. I keep hearing this argument from the Newt supporters about this so called vetting that Santorum will endure. What exactly is going to be the line of attack that you think is being over looked? You don't have to look any further than Ricks treatment by Gregory on Meet the Depressed Sunday to see the crap that he gets put through and how well he handles it. He does a great job handling these attacks.

33 posted on 02/13/2012 11:43:08 PM PST by Lazlo in PA (Now living in a newly minted Red State.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies ]

To: Christie at the beach

Like a lot of people outside of PA, you don’t seem to get why he lost in 2006. He ran against Bob Casey, Jr., the son of Bob Casey, Sr., a beloved pro-life “blue dog” Democrat governor who fought and criticized the Democrat party. And this was in a year that Republicans were absolutely destroyed at the polls and Nancy Pelosi destroyed the majority Newt built in Congress. What happened in 2006 has no bearing on this election. It was Nixon who lost a presidential election, then later came back and won one, right? Times change and circumstances change. Bottom line, it wasn’t anything Rick did that made him lose that election, it was external factors and a Democrat candidate that no moderate, independent, or liberal Pennsylvania voter would have dreamt of voting against. It would be a big difference if, like Romney in 1994, he lost the election in a year where Republicans won nationally in a landslide. The case was just the opposite in 2006.

Rick’s not a phony. He actually was the regular Friday host of Bill Bennett’s Morning in America show for some time before he started his run for presidency. He did a good job as a conservative radio talk show host. Can you imagine Romney trying to talk about issues from a conservative perspective off the cuff for 3 hours at a time? Finding a reliable conservative is the best way to win this election, because conservatism has a built-in 2-to-1 advantage over liberalism among the population in this country.

I don’t know how you could think Obama is going to win by going up there and attacking someone over their religious beliefs. This is a pro-life country. This is an anti-gay marriage country. This is a country that respects freedom of religion. And there is absolutely nothing unusual or radical about Rick’s religious views. Only a leftist could think that.

Rick’s negatives are his voting record, raising the debt ceiling, that sort of thing. He’s vulnerable there. But that kind of stuff does sound like inside baseball to people sometimes. For example, it’s easier to say Romney “fired people” then to explain how his private equity leveraged buyouts led to bankruptcies.


39 posted on 02/14/2012 12:01:44 AM PST by JediJones (Newt-er Romney in 2012!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson