Posted on 05/27/2015 8:29:13 AM PDT by GIdget2004
Rick Santorum, the former Republican senator from Pennsylvania, will announce today that he will seek the GOP nomination for president in 2016, ABC News has learned. ABC News' Chief Anchor George Stephanopoulos will sit down for an exclusive interview with Santorum this afternoon.
Santorum, 57, is set to reveal his presidential intentions at an event today in Cabot, Pa., near his childhood home. It will be his second run for the White House, almost four years after he won primaries and caucuses in 11 states and finished second to former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney in the race for the Republican nomination.
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
Yawn.
ditto
We have way too many candidate already in the race. It is confusing and hurtful.
We need 2 or 3 and then we need to start building name recognition among the entertainment tonight crowd.
All these extra candidates are doing the work of the DNC. I am pulling my hair out!
A couple of things at work. First, you have second-stringers thinking “if a cipher like Obama can be president, then so can I”.
And you have the oft-repeated tactic of slicing and dicing the conservative vote into ever-smaller pieces so that an unlikable establishment candidate can skate away with the nomination.
I like Santorum. He should run for senate or something.
Rick voted for raising the minimum wage SIX TIMES. Rick opposed cuts in food stamp programs. Rick LOVES BIG GOVERNMENT -- the only difference is that he wants to use it to do Christian acts of charity. THAT IS ANTI CHRISTIAN ultimately because when government usurps moral duties such as charity, it becomes AMORAL. Evil results -- such as we see now, generations of people living in sloth and promiscuity because WE the people are forced to support them via government "charity." Givers become slaves and receivers become entitled dependents; morality is completely erased from the equation.
Santorum is a STATIST at heart and my vote will go elsewhere if he is nominated. I refuse to vote FOR amorality and the evil it creates.
Rick just adds to the dog and pony circus. So now it's what -- SIXTEEN declared Republicans versus the Democrats' SEVEN?
The Republican party represents schizophrenia at its worst.
He got swamped in PA by the equivalent of a department store mannequin, Bob Casey Jr. Casey is the INVISIBLE Senator from PA. I challenge anyone on FR to name ONE thing Casey has done as a Senator besides being a rubber stamp for Obama.
Rick has NO chance. NONE.
Unfortunately, Santorum is the picture-perfect definition of the kind of career political jerk who should never be allowed in a position of public trust. It's more than a bit ironic that he's making this announcement in his home state of Pennsylvania ... where he lost his last election by a landslide ... and where he'd lose to any Democratic opponent in a presidential election, too.
At some point, you are hurting Republicans and Conservatives and the nation you love (i.e. John McCain) and if you really love America and conservatism, you take one for the team and step aside.
There must be a lot of some type of reward for all these nochancers to join. It almost makes you wonder if they are paid by some Soros group.
If Newt wouldn't have performed so badly at the Florida debate, Newt would have been second or first.
So please, go away!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I said that Rick was better, not perfect. Given the choice between Romney and Santorum in 2012, who would YOU rather have gotten the nomination? Would Romney have been any better as president? Hardly.
Again, which candidates do you support, and why? I find that those who abhor Santorum are generally of the libertarian persuasion, and also abhor the so-called “social” issues.
He got defeated by double digits by an empty suit in Pennsylvania. How does he intend to improve?
While I like the guy who ever he’s been using for advisors has come up way short. This idea of giving the Greek midget “some creds” to announce his bid is another example shows he’s out of it. Too bad.
Hey SOTC, X, Lake - did you know Santorum was the ONLY ONE opening his mouth about the good fight? I didn't know that.
/s
Engraved, puhleeze....rinse the kool aid off.
Forgot about the “Arlen” supporter meme.
I agree with Santorum on the social issues, but he’s a very poor ambassador to those who may not agree with him, and he’s shamelessly weak and liberal on economics, unions, global warming, etc.
But he got beaten badly by an empty suit in 2006. Plus there are younger candidates and better choices who both cover his issues and stand a far better chance of winning ten years later.
Maybe not.
Agreeing to an interview with a well-known Clinton sycophant is one more reason he shouldn't be running.
I don’t meet your characterization. Right now I adhor Santorum and all the other nochancers who are selfishly jumping up and down shouting me too, me too, instead of getting behind one of the top couple of front runners that most closely match their personal views.
I don’t care about Santorum’s record or that he lost by a huge amount in his own state. I just think we have too many candidates and most, like him, have no chance of winning the nomination and might allow a moderate or rino to win. And, they might force money to be spent that could have been spent against the Democrats in the general.
I don't abhor Rick Santorum. I do abhor him throwing his hat into the POTUS ring again though. I'm a conservative, not a libertarian. And we have Cruz!
Compared to Romney, Rick is better. Compared to Cruz (and even Walker) ... hell no.
Rick Santorum has great social conservatism. His fiscal conservatism? Not so much ... Medicare drug entitlement, No Child Left Behind ...
The ability to win elections is an entry-level qualification for a nominee for POTUS.
It doesn’t make a bad candidate good. It doesn’t mean you should vote for somebody, JUST BECAUSE HE CAN WIN ELECTIONS.
But losing your seat in the Senate, by 16 points, in a winnable state which by polls is not anti-life - that means only one thing.
It means you are a loser.
Doesn’t mean you’re bad, doesn’t mean you’re wrong, doesn’t even mean you wouldn’t be a good President.
But it does mean you’re a loser.
Never nominate a loser.
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.