Posted on 03/09/2012 7:06:50 AM PST by SeekAndFind
Saying he'd look for a "strong and principled conservative" as a running mate should he win the Republican presidential nomination, former U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum tells Newsmax that he certainly would consider rival Newt Gingrich for that vital role.
When asked if he would consider the former House Speaker as number two on his ticket, Santorum said Gingrich had been "tested" by the bruising GOP race and that makes him an attractive vice presidential candidate.
Santorum tells Newsmax that his choice would be a core conservative who is “willing to stand up and fight for the things that I believe in.”
“My principal and only criterion for vice president is to make sure that I have someone that I have confidence that if something should happen to me that they could carry on and do what I promised the people of America I would try to do,” he said.
Gingrich would seem to fit the bill more than any of the other candidates. He and Santorum have been battling for the same voters on the right of the party as they try to defeat front-runner Mitt Romney.
Santorum said the GOP only has to look to history to see that conservative candidates do better in general elections that do moderates.
“If we have another moderate Republican we are going to end up with the same situation we had four years ago,” he said, referring to John McCain’s loss to Barack Obama. “We’ll have the same situation we had with Bob Dole and the same situation we had with Gerry Ford.
“You go back. If we nominate conservatives we win. If we nominate moderates we lose. We can’t afford to lose this one.”
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
Those people aren’t Catholics... they are most likely Episcopalians in denial.
Lady Heron is correct, they aren’t one issue votes, they are into identity politics. They are easily led and even more easily led astray.
They put Carter, a good Christian man, into the White House. Liked B.J. Clinton when he walked around, Bible in hand, until they caught him where his willy didn’t belong. They also stayed home and didn’t vote for George H.W. Bush in ‘92. Finally, they supported the Huckster in ‘08.
Someone said it quite well, “We have some very good people in our party but they should leave their theology in the churches.”
compared to McCain he was right.
Newt made similar stupid ‘team’ plays too.
The problem with that type of thinking at this point is that neither one will get a chance to be president if they do not work something out.
If they really want to be in the top political office in the country and are not just in the race to split the conservative vote so Romney can be the chosen one then they need to work it out....TODAY...and who cares who sits on top because if they do a good job the other will get his chance.
Not the first time he’s said it. He said the same thing in a debate last year, although the question was narrowed to only include the candidates up on stage.
BAIER: Again, if you had to choose a running mate, one of the people on the stage with you, who would you choose and why? Thirty seconds down the row.
SANTORUM: And — and I — and I would say that, you know, right now that, you know, the guy that I’m agreeing with most up on stage is probably the guy to my left. So I would say that Newt Gingrich would be the guy that I would — I would pick as someone who — who would follow through with what I’m saying.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2846108/posts
Newt Gingrich: Yes, I’d team up with Santorum to beat Romney
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2828613/posts
I wonder if this couldn’t be the first attempt at uniting against Romney? My immediate impression is that Gingrich (whom I support) has too large an ego to take a backseat to Santorum but he is also smart enough to see the wrting on the wall.
After Alabama and Mississippi (where he has to win in a spectacular fashion) Newt may come to the realization that he needs to settle. He could 1) see Romney destroyed which would certainly put a smile on his face, 2) help beat the daylights out of Obama be in the general and 3) be in a position to make life a living hell for Democrats as VP and push the conservative agenda (being the “spokesperson” on the talking head circuit and presiding over the Senate).
Newt likes a big stage and the VP stage may be the biggest stage he is going to get.
If Newt’s response is a flat out “no” then the deal is off. If Newt says something cagey like “it is too early to talk about folding my campaign” then the tender offer has been accepted and the American people catch a break and will have a couple of decent-enough conservatives in the White House for a change.
I smell victory...
LOL, it's funny because it's true. Catholics prefer to elect Muslims and atheists.
The other problem with your statement is that our founders depended on a citizenship with a strong Judeao/Christian faith to keep our freedoms so leaving your faith at home is stupid. Without a moral population that as individuals keeps themselves in check you lose your freedoms...which is happening daily as we lose our faith foundations. We are being regulated to death.
“It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded ... on the gospel of Jesus Christ.”
—Patrick Henry
“God who gave us life gave us liberty. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure if we have removed their only firm basis: a conviction in the minds of men that these liberties are the gift of God?”
—Thomas Jefferson
“We have staked the future of all of our political institutions upon the capacity of mankind for self-government, upon the capacity of each and all of us ... to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God.”
—James Madison
McCain had better military credentials and a better pro-life record than Mittsky. He also was more honest and less of a flip-flopping opportunist. I never considered Mittsky over McCain for a second in 2008.
There’s not much of a clear path to the nomination for either Newt or Rick if one drops out, or if they both stay in. In any scenario, they’re most likely going to end up in a contested convention, and Romney still has a chance to get just enough delegates to win outright in any scenario. It’s also very hard to see which option would help them end up with more delegates and Romney with less. If Romney would gain ANY votes from either of them, then it might be better if they both stay in for proportional states. Like Oklahoma, all 3 got 13 or 14 delegates each. If one dropped out, would all the votes worth 13 delegates go to the other guy or would Romney get some? For WTA states, it would be better if one dropped out, but unfortunately most of those states are Romney territory anyway (New Jersey, Utah). The reality is it would be best if they stayed in and would announce to the voters to vote for one or the other in specific states, but that’s awkward of course.
Better yet would be Newt and West. That is a winning ticket.
It would be dangerous bringing in someone that new to the political scene and untested and unvetted on the national stage. Plus you have people asking is he really ready to fill in as president based on limited experience in politics. Better to give West a cabinet position at this point and let him build up his credentials.
Newt alluded to this possibility the other night on Greta. Probably waiting to see how the delegates shake out to see who should get the top spot. But in the end I see Newt being the adult and taking second chair. Hell they’d probably even find a spot for Paul in there somewhere if they need his delegates too.
Too funny.
Right up until he opens his mouth.
Still I'd take him over hussein. But when he starts in trying to sound passionate it sounds so amateurishly contrived.
Actually it will be even worse because there is nothing you can put behind Romney to make him more palatable to those voters. Even I who has voted Republican since Regan and forced myself to go vote for those other losers will not be able to vote for Romney this time.
The GOP will finally have gone to far for me.
“Saying he’d look for a “strong and principled conservative” as a running mate should he win the Republican presidential nomination, former U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum tells Newsmax that he certainly would consider rival Newt Gingrich for that vital role.”
This is a conversation that he a Newt should be having in private. IF Romney wins the nomination it will be due to these two men not privately sitting down and discussing who will be the runner and who will be the veep. In my opinion I would settle for either being the nominee with the other as veep. (although I admit I think Romney would be the better head of the team). Whatever, they need to team up.
“although I admit I think Romney would be the better head of the team”
God have mercy on me....I meant to type Newt not ROMNEY...I shudder that I could have even by mistake have typed that...Arggh!!!!
Newt/Santorum or Santorum/Newt NEVER EVER ROMNEY!!!!!
RE: Hell they’d probably even find a spot for Paul in there somewhere
How about the treasury department or Fed chairman? Just drag him as far away from Foreign Affairs and the Military as possible.
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.