Not well - but the point, which you're apparently not capable of grasping, is that what's good for the goose is good for the gander. If it applies to Newt for not campaigning in states he wasn't doing well in to begin with, then the same must apply to Santorum.
“is that what’s good for the goose is good for the gander”
Newt’s goose is cooked. The poster was making excuses for Newt because “he didn’t campaign” - no excuses were being made for Santorum in that regard, therefore the precedent in the groundbreaking case of Goose v. Gander does not apply.