Endorsements: Gary Bauer goes to Santorum, Huntsman picks up first congressional backer

posted at 6:28 pm on January 7, 2012 by Tina Korbe

Endorsements might not matter much in the grand scheme of things (how many of you change your minds based on an endorsement?), but, cumulatively, they do say something about a candidate’s ability to campaign effectively and about the kind of supporters a candidate attracts.

Then, too, endorsements sometimes have the opposite of their intended effect. Case in point: Some Republican voters have said they would reconsider a candidate if Donald Trump endorsed that candidate. For that matter, does anybody actually like Mitt Romney better because John McCain endorsed him?

In advance of New Hampshire, both Rick Santorum and Jon Huntsman have picked up relatively notable endorsements. What does each say about Santorum’s and Huntsman’s chances in the Granite State?

First, Santorum’s new supporter:

A source close to the presidential campaign of Rick Santorum tells ABC News that the former Pennsylvania senator will pick up the endorsement of Christian conservative activist Gary Bauer on Sunday.

Bauer ran for president himself in 2000, and is part of the group of conservative leaders trying to figure out around which candidate the movement should coalesce so as to stop Mitt Romney from grabbing plurality wins all the way to the nomination, with conservatives like Santorum, Newt Gingrich, Rick Perry and Ron Paul splitting the non-Romney vote.

Given Gary Bauer’s blatant social conservative credentials, this likely doesn’t help Santorum much in moderate New Hampshire — but it is a nice little sign that Santorum’s perceived viability as a challenger to Romney continues to mount. The newest objections to Santorum center around his supposed religiously-motivated big-government conservatism and this endorsement might just give added credence to those objections, but, at the same time, Santorum’s social conservatism won’t hurt him in South Carolina, where, actually, Mitt Romney is now trying to make the case that he is also a faith-based candidate. Overall, the endorsement just adds to the image Santorum has been building: He’s a “holistic” candidate — a full-spectrum conservative — who actually stands a chance to beat Romney, not necessarily by rising dramatically in New Hampshire, but by competing everywhere and doing exceptionally well in states like Iowa and South Carolina.

Next, Huntsman’s new backer:

GOP presidential candidate Jon Huntsman will pick up his first congressional endorsement in the final days before the New Hampshire primary, CNN has learned.

Rep. Richard Hanna, a first-term Republican congressman from New York, has decided to back Huntsman, two sources said Saturday. …

The aide said Hanna came to support Huntsman in part because of the candidate’s push for better education in the fields of science, technology, engineering and math.

However, the two Republicans also share some similarities in their independent approach to party orthodoxy. In Congress, Hanna is a member of both the conservative Republican Study Committee and a caucus that promotes equality for gays and lesbians.

This says nothing about Huntsman so much as it says that he hasn’t yet had support from a single member of Congress. Perhaps it will make some kind of difference among Hanna’s constituents or in New Hampshire, the one state in which Huntsman is expected to do well, but, overall, it’s just another indication of Huntsman’s barely-above-an-asterisk national polling throughout the campaigns.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Took Huntsman long enough…

The Nerve on January 7, 2012 at 6:32 PM

………………. So I`m guessing Hanna is getting primaried?

ThePrez on January 7, 2012 at 6:37 PM

WHO? & WHO?
Who cares!

KOOLAID2 on January 7, 2012 at 6:40 PM

Target Hanna for defeat, please, New York.

Warner Todd Huston on January 7, 2012 at 6:41 PM

News that the former Pennsylvania senator will pick up the endorsement of Christian conservative activist Gary Bauer on Sunday.

Will this help Santorum raise money? Otherwise this is on social conservative endorsing another social conservative. Bauer is waiting till after the debate to endorse, why not before?

Dr Evil on January 7, 2012 at 6:41 PM

A candidate can only embarrass Gary Bauer on the few issues that he represents, and the person least likely to go squish on those few issues is Santorum. There’s nobody else he could’ve picked.

RBMN on January 7, 2012 at 6:42 PM

Loser

Kermit on January 7, 2012 at 6:44 PM

I think Bauer endorsement hurts a bit…Santy needs endorsements from fiscal conservatives because the social liberal wing of the Repbulican party is trying to pigeon hole him as a social conservative obsessed with gays, even though they are the ones that bring up the gays.

Here is what the Club for Growth had to say about Santorum, which I think is fair:

Note they do not call him a statist. Sorry Red Staters:

SUMMATION

On the whole, Rick Santorum’s record on economic issues in the U.S. Senate was above average. More precisely, it was quite strong in some areas and quite weak in others. He has a strong record on taxes, and his leadership on welfare reform and Social Security was exemplary. But his record also contains several very weak spots, including his active support of wasteful spending earmarks, his penchant for trade protectionism, and his willingness to support large government expansions like the Medicare prescription drug bill and the 2005 Highway Bill.

As president, Santorum would most likely lead the country in a pro-growth direction, but his record contains more than a few weak spots that make us question if he would resist political expediency when it comes to economic issues

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 6:38 PM

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 6:44 PM

Like I’ve been saying, he’s been the man on taxes…this gets me excited…from Club for Growth:

Santorum has consistently supported broad-based tax cuts and opposed tax increases either by sponsoring key legislation or by casting votes on relevant bills. Some high profile votes include:
•Voted NO on the Clinton tax hike in 1993
•Voted YES on the capital gains tax cut in 1997
•Voted NO on a cigarette tax hike in 1998
•Voted YES on repeal of the Alternative Minimum Tax in 1999
•Voted YES on the 2001 Bush tax cuts
•Voted YES to repeal the Death Tax in 2002
•Voted YES to the 2003 Bush tax cuts
•Voted YES to extend the Bush tax cuts in 2006

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 6:47 PM

Club for Growth on Santy and entilement reform:
On Social Security, Santorum has been very outspoken in favor of pro-growth reforms. Even when Social Security was considered the “third rail” in politics, Santorum was advocating personal savings accounts as a way to strengthen the program while giving taxpayers ownership over their retirements. In 1998, he did a town hall meeting with President Clinton advocating for personal savings accounts. In 2005, Santorum led the charge to adopt personal accounts on behalf of President Bush. He also co-sponsored a bill that would “stop the raid” on the Social Security Trust Fund. He followed that up in 2006 when he voted YES on a similar piece of legislation.

Santorum is opposed to ObamaCare and advocates its full repeal. In a recent interview, he said that if he were president, the second thing he would do once in office after repeal, would be to end Medicaid as a federal entitlement. “We need to give a block of money to the states. We need to pare back some of these strings attached to this money, and let the states devise their own program,” he said.

Santorum supports allowing people to buy health insurance across state lines and open up tax free health savings accounts. But as previous stated, Santorum supported the massively expensive Medicare prescription drug program in 2003.

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 6:50 PM

I just don’t get why Hunstman is not leading the polls. He is by far the smartest and most electable candidate. Can someone explain?

raf on January 7, 2012 at 6:52 PM

I wonder if he is the son or grandson of the legendary Hank Bauer, Yankees’ player in the 50′s. Or Hank Bauer, the great running back for the Chargers in the ’70′s.

Or maybe he’s just a little weasel.

Horace on January 7, 2012 at 6:52 PM

I just don’t get why Hunstman is not leading the polls. He is by far the smartest and most electable candidate. Can someone explain?

raf on January 7, 2012 at 6:52 PM

He’s got a problem with name recognition. Who is Waldo Huntsman?

Dr Evil on January 7, 2012 at 6:55 PM

I just don’t get why Hunstman is not leading the polls. He is by far the smartest and most electable candidate. Can someone explain?

raf on January 7, 2012 at 6:52 PM

Yes Huntsman was Obama’s ambassador in China, so Republican voters are not likely to support somebody willing to serve Obama in any capacity.

Secondly, Huntsman started off his campaign by sneering at conservatives for being skeptical of global warming and evolution theories. He annointed himself Guardian of Science despite the fact he probably couldn’t hold his own in a debate on either of these issues. :)

Plus his first campaign ad with him on a dirt bike in the desert was weird.

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 6:56 PM

raf

“Can someone explain?”

Well, just for starters, Huntsman is a former Obama employee who wrote a glowing, almost-loving letter when he left Obama’s employment which stated our totally awesome Obama is.

He seems to have received lots of money from Dada,(and seems to view this as “earning” it), but little else other than an elitist attitude and a condescending tone – “In Iowa they pick corn…”

Finally, there is the question of his first name, which seems to be as complex a mystery as the location of the Nativity or Assembly of The One.

And remember, these are just for “starters.”

Horace on January 7, 2012 at 6:57 PM

I just don’t get why Hunstman is not leading the polls. He is by far the smartest and most electable candidate. Can someone explain?

raf on January 7, 2012 at 6:52 PM

Where’s your snark tag?

CaliforniaRefugee on January 7, 2012 at 6:58 PM

Part of being electable is winning your party’s nomination.

Huntsman never got that memo.

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 6:59 PM

I just don’t get why Hunstman is not leading the polls. He is by far the smartest and most electable candidate. Can someone explain?

raf on January 7, 2012 at 6:52 PM

Have you watched any of the debates? Lame jokes and everything being a “human tragedy” = vomit enducing.

thphilli on January 7, 2012 at 7:00 PM

enducing = inducing.

thphilli on January 7, 2012 at 7:00 PM

He’s got a problem with name recognition. Who is Waldo Huntsman?

Dr Evil on January 7, 2012 at 6:55 PM

Or it could be that he used to look like a Disco King. lol

TinaKorbe Tina Korbe
Too funny: Both @JonHuntsman and @RickSantorum looked exactly as I would have guessed in high school. bit.ly/x1w15J
29 minutes ago

Flora Duh on January 7, 2012 at 7:02 PM

Huntsman strategy was and still is to be the moderate alternative to Romney. Basically Romney without the RomneyCare.

But Romney’s too good of a candidate to lose to a guy like Huntsman.

Huntsman would not have won the Not Romney contest so this was his only path to the nomination.

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 7:03 PM

I just don’t get why Hunstman is not leading the polls. He is by far the smartest and most electable candidate. Can someone explain?

raf on January 7, 2012 at 6:52 PM

Huntsman is an odd fellow.

Voice on January 7, 2012 at 7:04 PM

I just don’t get why Hunstman is not leading the polls. He is by far the smartest and most electable candidate. Can someone explain?

raf on January 7, 2012 at 6:52 PM

It’s a shame. Part of it is the poor way his campaign has been run and part of it is the state our party is in.

BTW, good to meet another Huntsman supporter on here.

McDuck on January 7, 2012 at 7:07 PM

I’m a cradle conservative-born and bred. Though I’ve become slightly more of a libertarian as I’ve gotten older-I’m a libertarian conservative. I rarely consider a candidate ‘too’ far-right.
Well for me-Rick Santorum is too far right. Perry is still my first choice-followed by Biff Huntsman. I’ll still vote for whomever them nominee is-and long as it ain’t David Duke and Don Black’s favorite republican. Bobby Jindal…you shoulda run.
*sigh*

annoyinglittletwerp on January 7, 2012 at 7:09 PM

I just don’t get why Hunstman is not leading the polls. He is by far the smartest and most electable candidate. Can someone explain?

raf on January 7, 2012 at 6:52 PM

He comes across as a fancy pants prig who never got his hair mussed and would be a good SFO sommelier but not a solid U.S. CIC.

profitsbeard on January 7, 2012 at 7:10 PM

just don’t get why Hunstman is not leading the polls. He is by far the smartest and most electable candidate. Can someone explain?

raf on January 7, 2012 at 6:52 PM

Maybe it’s because he is not either of the above.

chemman on January 7, 2012 at 7:13 PM

Reed will be next. The only thing these people care about is abortion and gay activity. Santorum has made a career out of that.

Oh and BTW, Perry is pandering to this crap too. So-con activism in federal law is no less offensive than lib-prog activism. In a word: NO.

MTLassen on January 7, 2012 at 7:14 PM

After Santorum loses to Romney, a reporter will ask him,

“Mr. Santorum, do you have regrets or theories about why you were not able to win the nomination?”

“I wasn’t gay enough despite my love of sweater vests and turtle necks, I guess LOL” Santorum

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 7:15 PM

just don’t get why Hunstman is not leading the polls. He is by far the smartest and most electable candidate. Can someone explain?

raf on January 7, 2012 at 6:52 PM

Maybe it’s because he is not either of the above.

chemman on January 7, 2012 at 7:13 PM

He’d made a great regional market weatherman though.

profitsbeard on January 7, 2012 at 7:17 PM

How can Santorum be the man on taxes, and tax cuts, and a statist at the same time?

Yes, he voted for some bad spending bills, but a statist is somebody who is going to support raising your taxes. That’s the first power of government that a statist abuses. Santorum opposed tax hikes and supported tax cuts.

That’s not a statist. Sorry Erick Erickson fans. All 3 of you.

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 7:18 PM

I think Huntsman will remain in low teens on Tuesday’s NH primary.

Santorum will leave NH with Top 3 finish and continue surge in SC. I have Romney down 9 points in last 3 days and Santorum within 5.

Very good possibility Santorum goes to Florida with 1st place tie (with Romney) in Iowa, 2nd/3rd place in NH, and 1st in SC (but close). Therefore, we head to Florida with a 2-man race–Romney with 1st, 1st, 2nd finish primaries against Santorum with 1st, 3rd, 1st place finishes. I thought Perry had potential to gain spark in SC but don’t see it so far. Gingrich may do better in SC than most people think–solid 3rd place.

Time will tell.

Deep Timber on January 7, 2012 at 7:18 PM

If those two endorsements don’t tell you everything you need to know about those two candidates…

Rational Thought on January 7, 2012 at 7:18 PM

How can Santorum be the man on taxes, and tax cuts, and a statist at the same time?

Yes, he voted for some bad spending bills, but a statist is somebody who is going to support raising your taxes. That’s the first power of government that a statist abuses. Santorum opposed tax hikes and supported tax cuts.

That’s not a statist. Sorry Erick Erickson fans. All 3 of you.

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 7:18 PM

Good point. But I doubt MSM will look much into that disparity.

Deep Timber on January 7, 2012 at 7:21 PM

Romney came in 4th place in SC in 2008 in South Carolina. Even the “lackluster” Fred Thompson beat him there. And Romney spent more than all the other candidates combined there.

I think Perry is toast at this point. You’ve got to do better than he did in Iowa if you are going to be the eventual nominee.

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 7:23 PM

profitsbeard on January 7, 2012 at 7:10 PM

Yeah, who cares about science, geopolitics, and silly things like that? A man who knows his wine is a sissy. That’s what I say.

What we need is someone who knows his beer. A cowboy like Perry or someone who likes to play dress up as one on the campaign trail like Romney! Yeehaw!

McDuck on January 7, 2012 at 7:24 PM

Good point. But I doubt MSM will look much into that disparity.

Deep Timber on January 7, 2012 at 7:21 PM

The mainstream media is going to go after all the candidates but nobody’s more of a statist than Obama. Let them play the statist card if they want. :)

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 7:24 PM

gary bauer endorsement. the kiss of death

gerrym51 on January 7, 2012 at 7:25 PM

I’ve always had the impression Bauer was trying to pray the gay away. Anyone else get that vibe from him?

Rational Thought on January 7, 2012 at 7:26 PM

gary bauer endorsement. the kiss of death

gerrym51 on January 7, 2012 at 7:25 PM

I tend to agree with this. Santy is a full sprectrum conservative with some exceptions on free trade and spending heresies, but a Gary Bauer endorsment plays into his critic’s strategy of pigeonholing him as a social conservative obsessed with the gays.

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 7:28 PM

I saw Bauer when he endorsed John McCain in 2000….they both came to Clemson University.

All McCain talked about was his POW experience and campaign finance reform.

Bauer tried to make McCain out as some kind of awesome social conservative but I don’t think anybody thinks McCain cares much about those issues.

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 7:32 PM

If there was a way to “cure” homosexuality, something harmless like taking just one pill and it was free, do you think Democrats would oppose it?

I do. Let me know what you think.

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 7:34 PM

Slightly OT: but did I miss HA posting the YouTube video of McCain telling everyone that President Obama “would turn things around” during intro of Romney in SC? I just saw the video and LOL’d. I remember in 07-08, McCain just not have much spontaneity or ability to speak outside of “canned” lines on the campaign trail. BL: Just sad to see McCain in these moments.

Deep Timber on January 7, 2012 at 7:44 PM

If there was a way to “cure” homosexuality, something harmless like taking just one pill and it was free, do you think Democrats would oppose it?

I do. Let me know what you think.

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 7:34 PM

Democrats only want 2 things from people….to get them dependent on the government for something and to get their votes, regardless of legality of it. In this case, a pill would provide the opportunity for the former part.

Deep Timber on January 7, 2012 at 7:47 PM

McDuck on January 7, 2012 at 7:07 PM

My impression of him is as a good capable man, but with a tin ear that makes him a lousy candidate. And his strong support of AGW is a huge liability in my book.

MJBrutus on January 7, 2012 at 7:48 PM

Well, the thing is, liberals argue being a homosexual is normal because it occurs with some frequency in nature. So this leads me to assume they would oppose any legitimate research for a “cure” for homosexuality. I’m assuming not every homosexual wants to be.

I have epilepsy so I scoff at this notion homosexuality is normal…..it’s no more normal than epilepsy.

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 7:52 PM

Yeah, who cares about science…

McDuck on January 7, 2012 at 7:24 PM

If he truly cared about science he would be informed enough to know that AGW has done more damage to the reputation and practice of science than any Luddite could fantasize.

MJBrutus on January 7, 2012 at 7:53 PM

Mitt Romney is a big global warming guy.

But hey, no big deal, he was a Republican in a very blue state.

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 7:55 PM

Just sad to see McCain in these moments.

Deep Timber on January 7, 2012 at 7:44 PM

Agreed. He needs a ticker tape parade, the key to the city of Phoenix and a nice long retirement.

MJBrutus on January 7, 2012 at 7:55 PM

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 7:55 PM

You’re incapable of making a single, honest statement. Romney is squishy at most on the topic. He certainly has made it clear that he would not allow CO2 fears to stand in the way of domestic oil and gas production and use. Thanks for playing.

MJBrutus on January 7, 2012 at 7:57 PM

You’re incapable of making a single, honest statement. Romney is squishy at most on the topic. He certainly has made it clear that he would not allow CO2 fears to stand in the way of domestic oil and gas production and use. Thanks for playing.

MJBrutus on January 7, 2012 at 7:57 PM

Oh so trust the coy Republican who you call a squish to not implement cap and trade or other global warming related regulations, because he says he won’t.

Gotcha.

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 8:02 PM

Romney is squishy at most on the topic.

MJBrutus on January 7, 2012 at 7:57 PM

As shocking as Sarah Palin trying to get a new reality show

McDuck on January 7, 2012 at 8:04 PM

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 8:02 PM

Thanks for admitting your lie, even if only tacitly. That’s progress. You give the same smear of everything remotely positive said of Romney. You say he is lying.

Romney has a long history of honesty and integrity in his personal and professional life. He has published his agenda in a widely available form. Go read his energy policy at his web site. It is quite detailed and leaves no doubt. It isn’t just that he says so, he has made himself accountable by publishing such specific commitments.

MJBrutus on January 7, 2012 at 8:07 PM

Was the ALaska documentary show a “reality show” in the true sense? It wasn’t Jersey Shore.

I understand McDuck is a gay man but his hatred of Palin is amusing. You think Palin is out to get you, man?

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 8:08 PM

Romney is known for flip flopping.

This is another way of saying he lies all the time.

But you are telling me I must trust a liar when he tells me something during a campaign.

You are such a hack for Romney.

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 8:09 PM

McDuck on January 7, 2012 at 8:04 PM

I’m all for Mitt, but I’m not going to say there aren’t some areas I wish he could improve on. He’s not perfect, but in my mind he is far and away the best.

MJBrutus on January 7, 2012 at 8:09 PM

All I know is the RomneyCare guy who governed as a solid liberal in Mass for 4 years is now telling me he’s a awesome conservative.

But can’t question it, according to geniuses like Brutus. Romney’s a straight shooter, how could anybody be confused about his core convictions?

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 8:11 PM

When Rick Santorum gets endorsements from non-social cons and evangelicals, that will be news.

Philly on January 7, 2012 at 8:12 PM

and non-evangelicals, I meant.

Philly on January 7, 2012 at 8:13 PM

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 8:08 PM

You love to accuse others of the consuming obsession that you yourself have with sexuality. Seek professional help.

MJBrutus on January 7, 2012 at 8:13 PM

Mitt would be the best if he was a conservative.

That’s kind of the main part of the job of the president, promoting a consistent conservative political philophsy from which your policy agenda blooms.

Romny just wants to blow off the political philosophy part of the job, but that’s like a college basketball coach blowing off the recruiting aspect of the job. Good luck being successful like that.

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 8:13 PM

I understand McDuck is a gay man but his hatred of Palin is amusing. You think Palin is out to get you, man?

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 8:08 PM

What does my being gay have to do with anything? Why would you even bring that up?

Anyway, I used to be a Palin fan. I was really excited when she was selected to be Mitt’s VP. Unfortunately, I didn’t like the decisions she made after the election. My opinion changed as a result. I’m no longer a fan.

McDuck on January 7, 2012 at 8:14 PM

Brutus,

Any time a straight guy talks about gays or homosexuality after they bring up the subject, some gay guy accuses him of being obsessed with it. You are predictable as hell.

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 8:14 PM

McDuck on January 7, 2012 at 8:14 PM

Obviously I meant McCain’s VP, not Mitt’s.

McDuck on January 7, 2012 at 8:15 PM

McDuck,

Palin’s not on the ballot but you are personally attacking her.

I do find that amusing. To borrow a Rush phrase, she seems to live rent free in your head.

I’ve noticed gay people really hate Palin. I never understood thaat one b/c as far as I know she’s never said anything about gays.

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 8:16 PM

McDuck,

If I was able to “cure” homosexuality either with medicinal purposes or a non-invasive surgery, would you want me jailed? I think a lot of Democrats would b/c they always say it’s normal.

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 8:18 PM

Anyway, I used to be a Palin fan. I was really excited when she was selected to be Mitt’s VP. Unfortunately, I didn’t like the decisions she made after the election. My opinion changed as a result. I’m no longer a fan.

McDuck on January 7, 2012 at 8:14 PM

She was never Mitt’s VP.
By the way, Go Suck a Romney!

CoolChange80 on January 7, 2012 at 8:21 PM

She was never Mitt’s VP.
By the way, Go Suck a Romney!

CoolChange80 on January 7, 2012 at 8:21 PM

McDuck,

You going to let that homophobe get away with that kind of comment?

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 8:23 PM

she seems to live rent free in your head.

I would charge her rent, but due to her drop in popularity, she can no longer afford it. Consider it charity.

Seriously though, that saying is really getting old. You could say the same about any number of politicians that people randomly joke about.

I’ve noticed gay people really hate Palin. I never understood thaat one b/c as far as I know she’s never said anything about gays.

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 8:16 PM

You seem to notice a lot about gay people. You talk about the matter more than I, a gay man, do.

And I agree that Palin has not criticized the gays.

McDuck on January 7, 2012 at 8:24 PM

She was never Mitt’s VP.
By the way, Go Suck a Romney!

CoolChange80 on January 7, 2012 at 8:21 PM

I corrected myself almost instantly.

Thanks for keeping the discussion civil.

McDuck on January 7, 2012 at 8:25 PM

I think Palin would beat Romney in a one on one race. He’s not that popular with vast majority of Republican voters.

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 8:27 PM

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 8:14 PM

If I were gay, I wouldn’t mind saying so. I’m not. But keep trying.

MJBrutus on January 7, 2012 at 8:29 PM

Why can’t I talk about gay people and issues? Only gays and liberals can talk about it?

I think I have a better interpretation of freedom of speech than most people. :)

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 8:29 PM

I’ve noticed gay people really hate Palin. I never understood thaat one b/c as far as I know she’s never said anything about gays.

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 8:16 PM

Once again you’ve shown you don’t really know all that much about gays. Try telling these guys they hate Governor Palin.

She was never Mitt’s VP.
By the way, Go Suck a Romney!

CoolChange80 on January 7, 2012 at 8:21 PM

And once again you’ve shown that you have the mind of an adolescent, who does harm to Governor Palin’s image and that of her ‘sane’ supporters who know she would never condone comments such as yours.

Flora Duh on January 7, 2012 at 8:30 PM

Brutus,

I know for a fact you would let us know if you were gay. That’s like being the star quarterback at your college within your subset of Republican voters. :)

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 8:31 PM

Well,

I do know a lot about gays based on what they say on the internet. Most gay men hate Palin. It’s not even debatable.

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 8:32 PM

The thing is, when I discover a cure for homosexuality, I will have to sell my product or service on the black market because Democrats and some REpublicans will criminalize it.

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 8:36 PM

I will be like an illegal immigrant, forced to live in the shadows of society, simply because I can make a pet issue of liberals go away.

I’m writing a book with this as the general theme. I don’t know if you’ve read Childen of Men or seen the movie but it’s kind of like that.

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 8:39 PM

By the time Huntsman entered the race (he was still in China when Romney, Pawlenty, and others were revving up) the field consisted of Romney and a group of more-conservative Not Romneys — Pawlenty, Santorum, Gingrich, Bachmann, Cain, plus a group who did not run — palin, daniels, J Bush, Barbour, Jindal,etc. All were perceived as more conservative than Romney. The only room was on Romney’s left. Hunts accordingly maximalized a very few – VERY few — positions or statements he had made over the years in an overwhelmingly conservative career that might be construed as moderate or liberal in order to carve out a position for himself. You might argue with the strategy or how it was executed — I think myself he did as good a job as possible — but it should be judged in those terms.

Huntsman had the additional problem of differentiating himself from Romney. How many candidates who are wealthy Mormon ex-governors with good hair, beautiful blonde wives and big attractive families can the voters take in at a time? This is the area where I think he has failed. He needs to take Romney on.

str8tface on January 7, 2012 at 8:42 PM

Huntsman is a pretty liberal guy.

I’m not going to get into his record b/c he won’t out-Romney Romney for the moderate slot on our ballot, but he’s no conservative.

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 8:46 PM

When Rick Santorum gets endorsements from non-social cons and evangelicals, that will be news.

Philly on January 7, 2012 at 8:12 PM

You do realize that Santorum is Catholic, and thus, not an evangelical. Evangelical is the word liberals use to describe Protestants who are also pro-life and/or anti-gay marriage.

Evangelical means they believe the Bible is the word of God.

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 9:06 PM

Huntsman is the only one with a WSJ endorsed tax policy, and btw, he’s now in 2nd according to a breaking ARG poll in NH. Where’s that story Alla/HA? Zzzz.

SuperBunny on January 7, 2012 at 9:55 PM

Why should we think that Huntsman’s single congressional endorsement is bad? Doesn’t it indicate that he’s not beholden to the establishment? oh but wait, that would destroy the myth that he’s an establishment hack. Oops, we can’t have that.

SuperBunny on January 7, 2012 at 9:56 PM

Um…..

Rep. Richard Hanna, a first-term Republican congressman from New York, has decided to back Huntsman,

I’m no expert on NY-24 politics or the demographics of Utica but I do know that if a freshman Congressman endorses a liberal like Huntsman it is an attempt to shore up his own bmase.

Think about it. Endorse the GOP version of Obama knowing full well he will not be the nominee. You can then campaign as a “Republican” while garnering votes from the left.

Bottom line, Hanna wants a second term.

Happy Nomad on January 7, 2012 at 10:09 PM

Evangelical means they believe the Bible is the word of God.

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 9:06 PM

The Bible is the word of God.

Evangelical refers to spreading the good news.

The leftist media has demonized the term “evanglic” to mean Bible hugging zealot.

Happy Nomad on January 7, 2012 at 10:16 PM

So the Republicrats are forcing a choice between a giant douche and a turd sandwich, Romney and Santorum? not much of a choice at all. Ones a squishy nobody flip flopper without a single conviction core conviction past wanting to be president or an owner of a backbone. The other is a sick, twisted, religious weirdo believer in big government who happens to be a frothy mixture. The Republicrats have a great field really top notch let’s look at some of these freaks. You have Herr Doktor who’s nuts and going senile. Gingrich who’s a super ego so ethically challenged he almost makes Prezident Downgrade look like a virtuous saint. Rick Perry has nice hair. Huntsman is a covered by the collective, who?

The Republicrats really don’t want to win the White House back do they? I mean look at some of the other losers they’ve tried to pass off as viable

1. Beard Bachman who while still kinda hot is a nutso religious freak show and probably more twisted by dangerous religious crappola then even Frothy Mixture Santorum is. I mean she’s been a beard for a self hating homosexual for how many years now?

2. Sarah “I’ve never failed to quit” Palin. You betcha she had no chance of doing anything.

3. Herman Caine yeah right.

“Good”(yeah right!)lord that’s just an appalling pathetic group of chumps and religious wackos.

Your Mamma loves me on January 8, 2012 at 3:33 AM

The Bible is the word of God.

No its not. It a collection of fictional tales written by men, voted on by men and bound up by mean and distributed by men so they can control other men with made up stories about a magical sky friend super hero that wears long robes and mandals and his gay son.

I always found it absurd that the religious weirdos rail against the gays even though they profess to love DA Jesus who by every metric available for that time, if he was actually real, would have been considered gay. An unmarried 33 year old childless rabbi who hangs out exclusively with 12 other dudes. Who wears wonderful linen get ups and man sandals. Who has wonderful beach jaunts with those dudes. Sounds like any summer weekend on Fire Island to me.

Your Mamma loves me on January 8, 2012 at 3:43 AM

How can Santorum be the man on taxes, and tax cuts, and a statist at the same time?

Yes, he voted for some bad spending bills, but a statist is somebody who is going to support raising your taxes. That’s the first power of government that a statist abuses. Santorum opposed tax hikes and supported tax cuts.

That’s not a statist. Sorry Erick Erickson fans. All 3 of you.

Dr. Tesla on January 7, 2012 at 7:18 PM

Are you really that silly? Sound just like many running for President, tax cuts but the spending cuts aren’t discussed. If you cut taxes and spend like Santorum did under Bush you are going to get taxed for it anyway, deficits are not a free lunch, and pay more in interest and inflation.

LevStrauss on January 8, 2012 at 12:51 PM

Tina, I am very disappointed that you continue to peddle this “full-spectrum conservative” nonsense about Santorum. Medicare Part D, NCLB, myriad earmarks, voting AGAINST right-to-work…that’s full-spectrum conservatism?

I know you like Santorum because of his social conservatism- and that’s fine, I respect that. But I’d like to see you be a little more dispassionate in some of your posts about Mr. Santorum.

Publius 2.0 on January 9, 2012 at 1:47 PM