What does that really say about voters? Moreso about conservativism...or should I say those who say they are.
It's apparent conservativism is not their priority, nor the principles of....or they simply are fools for thinking that a single vote for Santorum would mean anything other than a no vote at all.
No different then me filling in the blank today with John Doe for alternative delegates....Santorum was no more than a name in a slot that counted for nothing at all.
What I don't understand is these are Freepers who voted against a 'running' conservative candidate by voting for Santorum.
I'm beginning to think there are many more foolish "informed" voters as there are who aren't.
“It’s apparent conservativism is not their priority, nor the principles of....or they simply are fools for thinking that a single vote for Santorum would mean anything other than a no vote at all.”
It’s obvious to me. You have to work to earn the support of people, and Newt didn’t work to earn their support.
Speaks volumes, now what people have been saying since January, that Newt Gingrich could not beat Romney anywhere outside of the South.
To be fair, Newt did well in Delaware, and managed to convince Santorum supporters there to come over. Everywhere else, he did as well as he did in January, and in Rhode Island, he did even worse, losing core support to Romney.
Tonight would be a different night if Newt managed to establish himself as the anti-romney in the absence of Santorum. His failure to do so, raises questions to everyone as to where they should park their anti-Romney vote, since Newt failed to rise past Santorum or Paul.
I want to deny Romney delegates, and it’s clear to me that supporting Newt won’t acheive that end.