Open thread: Colorado, Minnesota, Missouri; Update: Santorum wins Missouri; Update: Santorum wins Minnesota

posted at 7:45 pm on February 7, 2012 by Allahpundit

The polls in Missouri’s “beauty contest” primary close at 8 p.m. ET, right as the Minnesota caucuses get going. Colorado’s caucuses will start an hour later. Here’s your thread to follow the returns as they roll in. No delegates at stake tonight, but this is probably Santorum’s last chance to breeze past Newt as the race’s designated Not Romney. Read Ed’s post on the latest PPP numbers if you missed it this morning: He’s up by 13 points in Missouri (where Gingrich isn’t on the ballot) and by nine in Minnesota. If he wins both easily, then he gets a bunch of positive media coverage this week and maybe a few more big-name conservative endorsements, which in turn could mean enough movement in the polls to put him on at least an equal footing with Gingrich. Once that happens, the pressure will shift to Newt to explain why he should stay in and divide the conservative vote on the strength of having won one state while Santorum should drop out after having won three. Is that enough to get Gingrich to quit? Why … no, but it’ll make an increasingly dull primary interesting again until Super Tuesday.

In the interest of equal time, Nate Silver is bullish on what this all means for Santorum:

The results, nevertheless, will provide an important test of how robust Mitt Romney’s coalition is on less favorable terrain than in states like New Hampshire or Nevada. And they could potentially revitalize the campaign of one of Mr. Romney’s opponents, Rick Santorum.

Nor should one go too far in dismissing the results. The process that Minnesota and Colorado use, holding separate votes for presidential preference and delegate selection at their caucuses, is essentially the same one that was used in Iowa. Missouri is a more debatable case, but as the first primary of any kind held in the Midwest — perhaps Mr. Romney’s weakest region — it may tell us something about how states like Michigan and Ohio are likely to vote when they hold key primaries on Feb. 28 and March 6, respectively.

Here’s the handy dandy Google Elections page for results. To toggle between Colorado, Missouri, and Minnesota, just use the “Showing results for” menu on the upper right. While we wait, two dumb clips to entertain you — one of Obama learning how a marshmallow cannon works and the other of Newt finally lapsing into tongues from his rage at Romney. Stay tuned for updates.

video platform
video management
video solutions
video player

Update: At 9:45 ET, multiple networks are calling Missouri for Santorum. He’s up by almost 30 points with 40 percent reporting as I write this. Still early in Missouri and Colorado, though.

Update: At 10:20 ET, NBC calls Minnesota for Santorum too. And no wonder: As I write this, he’s leading there by 17 points over … Ron Paul. (Gingrich is dead last, incidentally.) Can he sweep by winning Colorado too? Romney won big there in 2008, but with nearly eight percent of precincts reporting, Santorum’s out to an almost 30-point lead. Stand by for possible declaration of Santorumania.


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

Comment pages: 1 14 15 16

WOW. Worth reposting:

This shook up the GOP establishment in Colorado, make no mistake.

Its pretty simple: The state GOP apparatus, with former McCain people and all the Romney people, supported Romney. Large numbers of LDS voters here as a pool to draw on. Lots of money spent on direct mail, and he was basically the only one making robo-calls – some folks got 4 of them plus a live call! On top of that, Romney won Colorado in 2008. Romney had everything going his way in CO –
yet despite all those advantages, Romney still didn’t get more than 35%, and got beat by a guy on a shoestring budget. Why? Message, Obamacare, and state/local politics.

We don’t trust the so-called GOP elites here anymore. And we are now angry enough to get out and do something. The rest of us, the “grass roots” GOP members, especially the newly active Tea Party types, got trained in how to do caucuses and precinct elections, and showed up in larger numbers than the establishment expected. And Santorum was the beneficiary. At our precincts, Gingrich was seen as an untrustworthy beltway bandit, Romney as the ultimate sell-out establishment guy, and many of us were simply tired of both of those types of GOP “elites”. So we voted for the only other viable conservative choice we had: Santorum. He has flaws, but they are probably the most easily mendable.

But the big thing is that we put our people in as delegates to the county and state instead of the usual people who ahve been there for decades in some cases — we will be making changes to the bosses; we are out to kick in the door of the old boy network personified by the Owens clique, Dick Wadhams et al, who have been running the GOP in Colorado for nearly a decade, and who have blown every election cycle since 2004.

We aim to misbehave.

OrdinaryColoradan on February 8, 2012 at 2:45 AM

ProudPalinFan on February 8, 2012 at 9:18 AM

Last night, during CNN’s coverage, they were saying how they were sure that the Dems were absolutely ecstatic over Santorum’s wins. BHO and the rest of the Dems are anything but happy about this. They’re prepared for Romney, not Santorum.

Norky on February 8, 2012 at 8:25 AM

They don’t have to be prepared for Santorum. Heck, they could probably not spend a single penny against Santorum, and they’ll beat him in a landslide.

Dante on February 8, 2012 at 9:18 AM


Colorado, Minnesota and Missouri

Three important “beauty contests” with no delegates at stake.

by John Hayward

And Newt Gingrich, who didn’t seem to be part of the story Tuesday night, might just have won a valuable consolation prize: a few weeks of respite to prepare for March, while the Romney campaign turns its full attention to Rick Santorum.

I don’t think anyone is dropping out. I’m for Newt, but if it can’t be Newt then I’m for a brokered convention.

Kaffa on February 8, 2012 at 9:20 AM

These three primaries were a joke. Turnout was was almost nonexistent. No delegates were awarded. They were pretty meaningless in terms of who the GOP nominates.

NuclearPhysicist on February 8, 2012 at 6:42 AM

A week ago, I wouldn’t have interrupted a good nap to go vote. Conservatives were in a state of temporary confusion because Newt was beclowning himself, Santorum “couldn’t win” and Mitt was inevitable. The game is changing fast, though, and this morning I sent in a donation to Rick. I imagine I’m not the only one who did that. If Santorum’s momentum continues, I predict the next vote will be a heavy turnout.

Burke on February 8, 2012 at 9:20 AM

Gotta go, but listening to Glenn: Voters are voting for the defense and protection of the Divine Providence. We are voting for our values.

ProudPalinFan on February 8, 2012 at 9:22 AM

But the big thing is that we put our people in as delegates to the county and state instead of the usual people who ahve been there for decades in some cases — we will be making changes to the bosses; we are out to kick in the door of the old boy network personified by the Owens clique, Dick Wadhams et al, who have been running the GOP in Colorado for nearly a decade, and who have blown every election cycle since 2004.

We aim to misbehave.

OrdinaryColoradan on February 8, 2012 at 2:45 AM

This is what the Tea Party has started to do in other states as well(no it’s not dead.) Get people elected as party committee members, precinct leaders, etc. These people hold the power in the state not the so-called DC elites. They decide who gets on ballots, oversee voting, get the funding, etc. Maybe it won’t make a difference in the national or maybe it will. But it will make a difference in your local and state elections and your congressional ones too. Way to go Colorado!

Deanna on February 8, 2012 at 9:22 AM

I woke up this morning with a feeling of hope. The first time since Florida and the absolute seedy campaign waged by Romney.

It’s time. I’m sending my mite to Santorum today. Maybe, just maybe, Wall Street and thug politics won’t work. And didn’t we just have a conversation yesterday about how the Tea Party was dead? Maybe that obituary was a little premature.

Portia46 on February 8, 2012 at 9:23 AM

So I didn’t watch the events last night, but I’m going to go out on a limb here and guess that Mitt called to congratulate Santo on his win. Just sayin’.

MJBrutus on February 8, 2012 at 7:04 AM

Who cares what that phony, finger-in-the-wind politician does? I don’t. If he calls to congratulate, it will simply be because polls showed that people didn’t like it when he taunted Newt earlier with a cake.

Burke on February 8, 2012 at 9:27 AM

National Review already has a post theorizing that Santorum got votes because Catholics are mad at Obama.

flyfisher on February 8, 2012 at 1:15 AM

That theory could explain the sudden surge for Santorum in the last couple days.

ghostwriter on February 8, 2012 at 7:30 AM

If that is even partially true, Divine intervention works in mysterious ways. lol

Even liberal Catholics who use birth control don’t like Obama disrespecting their religion and aren’t comfortable paying for abortions or abortion pills and don’t like him trashing the Constitution.

Elisa on February 8, 2012 at 9:28 AM

Mitt Romney said last night that his dad could stuff nails in his mouth and blow them out, nailgun style.

Second look at George Romney?

YYZ on February 8, 2012 at 8:38 AM

Old George, my former Governor.
His religious beliefs were foreign to most Americans at the time.
You know, the “Lost Boy” (George Romney) who escaped from the polygamist compound in Messiko because his daddy and his old pals were marrying all of the young women, thus leaving none for the young men?
THAT George Romney?
Mittens might win Michigan, his so-called “home”, but …

♫♪ People:
Trouble, oh we got trouble,
Right here in River City!
With a capital “T”
That rhymes with “P”
And that stands for Pool,
That stands for pool.
We’ve surely got trouble!
Right here in River City,
Right here!
Gotta figger out a way
To keep the young ones moral after school!
Trouble, trouble, trouble, trouble, trouble…
♫♪

Professor Harold Hill aint got nothin’ on Mittens!
LOL

~(Ä)~

Karl Magnus on February 8, 2012 at 9:28 AM

WOW. Worth reposting:

This shook up the GOP establishment in Colorado, make no mistake.

Its pretty simple: The state GOP apparatus, with former McCain people and all the Romney people, supported Romney. Large numbers of LDS voters here as a pool to draw on. Lots of money spent on direct mail, and he was basically the only one making robo-calls – some folks got 4 of them plus a live call! On top of that, Romney won Colorado in 2008. Romney had everything going his way in CO –
yet despite all those advantages, Romney still didn’t get more than 35%, and got beat by a guy on a shoestring budget. Why? Message, Obamacare, and state/local politics.

We don’t trust the so-called GOP elites here anymore. And we are now angry enough to get out and do something. The rest of us, the “grass roots” GOP members, especially the newly active Tea Party types, got trained in how to do caucuses and precinct elections, and showed up in larger numbers than the establishment expected. And Santorum was the beneficiary. At our precincts, Gingrich was seen as an untrustworthy beltway bandit, Romney as the ultimate sell-out establishment guy, and many of us were simply tired of both of those types of GOP “elites”. So we voted for the only other viable conservative choice we had: Santorum. He has flaws, but they are probably the most easily mendable.

But the big thing is that we put our people in as delegates to the county and state instead of the usual people who ahve been there for decades in some cases — we will be making changes to the bosses; we are out to kick in the door of the old boy network personified by the Owens clique, Dick Wadhams et al, who have been running the GOP in Colorado for nearly a decade, and who have blown every election cycle since 2004.

We aim to misbehave.

OrdinaryColoradan on February 8, 2012 at 2:45 AM

ProudPalinFan on February 8, 2012 at 9:18 AM

thanks for reposting that, I might not have seen it. Very interesting.

Elisa on February 8, 2012 at 9:30 AM

I woke up this morning with a feeling of hope. The first time since Florida and the absolute seedy campaign waged by Romney.

It’s time. I’m sending my mite to Santorum today. Maybe, just maybe, Wall Street and thug politics won’t work. And didn’t we just have a conversation yesterday about how the Tea Party was dead? Maybe that obituary was a little premature.

Portia46 on February 8, 2012 at 9:23 AM

I feel the same hope.

Like I said last night I can’t believe he won Colorado too.

This is some year.

Anything is possible this year, guys.

After Florida I was feeling so disgusted that I was going to have to endure months of Obama and Romney or Newt. That I was going to have to put Romney or Newt’s bumper sticker on my car and try and talk them up to people with no enthusiasm myself. Actually being embarrassed to have one of those bumper stickers on my car.

I was thinking of all the candidates I liked who dropped out. Palin, Bachmann, Cain and Perry (who I had such high hopes for.) And it looked like Santorum was over.

Now the candidate I liked the most, who was last on my list of conservatives because I though he had zero chance of winning this thing, actually has a shot at this.

I might actually be enthused for this election instead of being afraid and disgusted.

God bless Santorum.

Yes, Portia, send some money. Those of you who can’t send money, send your prayers.

Elisa on February 8, 2012 at 9:33 AM

Hope is fresh today!!!!!

I will enjoy it while I can.

Ahhhhhhhhhhh

PappyD61 on February 8, 2012 at 7:07 AM

I’m glad to see you in good spirits today, Pappy. You’ve been sort of grouchy these last two months, I hope you know.

Burke on February 8, 2012 at 9:33 AM

his disingenuous attacks on MassCare;

Ahhh poor Mittbot… did he bring up the fact that Willard Fillmoure Romneycare is a gun grabbing, socialized medicine loving, big spending, liberal judge appointing global warming alarmist?

Too f(*&^%g bad. Perhaps if Ken-Doll was not a statist democrat who trampled all over the liberty and freedom of his serfs, then he’d not have to p*ss himself every time someone points out his horrible record.

SilverDeth on February 8, 2012 at 9:34 AM

Sarah Palin is the reason we have a long and contested primary.

CoolChange80 on February 8, 2012 at 3:08 AM

I don’t know if I agree with that but when you look up the word “Patriot” in the Dictionary, there should be a picture of her there.

Elisa on February 8, 2012 at 9:37 AM

This is what the Tea Party has started to do in other states as well(no it’s not dead.) Get people elected as party committee members, precinct leaders, etc. These people hold the power in the state not the so-called DC elites. They decide who gets on ballots, oversee voting, get the funding, etc. Maybe it won’t make a difference in the national or maybe it will. But it will make a difference in your local and state elections and your congressional ones too. Way to go Colorado!

Deanna on February 8, 2012 at 9:22 AM

This is good to hear. National politics gets 95% of coverage in the media. But local events, city/county/state have a much bigger direct impact on people’s day to day lives than what happens in DC.

angryed on February 8, 2012 at 9:37 AM

Sarah Palin is the reason we have a long and contested primary.

CoolChange80 on February 8, 2012 at 3:08 AM

Sarah Palin: the cause of and the solution to every problem on earth.
Kinda like beer.

angryed on February 8, 2012 at 9:37 AM

I woke up this morning with a feeling of hope. The first time since Florida and the absolute seedy campaign waged by Romney.
Portia46 on February 8, 2012 at 9:23 AM

Ironically, I woke up with a feeling of disgust.

Make no mistake about it, if Santorum winds up being the nominee, I’ll vote for him. Four more years of Obama is just too much.

But that’s not to say that I won’t work – even if I have to do so with liberals and Democrats – to utterly cut him off at the knees, if he wins the presidency, whenever the SLIGHTEST notion of his so-con bullsh!t starts creeping up.

Soon as he stars with the anti-gay, big-brother-sticking-its-nose-in-the-bedroom crap, like he wants to do (good little so-con fascist statist that he is), I’m going to help put an end to those policies as soon as they begin.

Vyce on February 8, 2012 at 9:39 AM

absolute seedy campaign …

Romney did not wage a seedy campaign against Santorum, think again?

Portia, it is also Seedy for Santorum, who needs to take the high road, to say that Romney supported what Obama is doing forcing the catholic church to do things they don’t want to do.

The Massachusetts Catholic Bishops are fighting Obama care right now, along with the rest of the country, why? because right now they have religious freedom not to have insurance with services they don’t want. If that is so, Romney did not force it on them.

Santorum was also saying that Romney forced Catholic Hospitals to provide abortion for rape victims. That’s totally false.

Catholic Hospitals in MA offer an Individual Right of Conscience for health care workers. They do not have to participate in anything they don’t believe in, they are allowed to step away from any case that is not morally correct in their eyes.

Romney did not approve of the law to make Catholic Hospitals give rape victims morning after pills of what ever purpose. HE VETOED that law.

Santorum has also been using the parsed sentence fragment about the poor last week, to say that Romney doesn’t care about the poor. If Romney is the candidate, how will Santorum correct that? I think he is morally obligated.

Seedy Santorum, oh it sounds awful and not in his character…except when you think he supported Specter, and lost his race in PA, when he was morally obligated to win because he was socially more conservative.

Fleuries on February 8, 2012 at 9:40 AM

there may be other reasons. My take.

kingsjester on February 8, 2012 at 7:37 AM

Lots of good insights in your linked post, KJ, but this one resonates with me in particular.

Unfortunately for the Romney Campaign, “the best laid plans of mice and men often go awry”. The posters offering their support for Romney have, through rude and obnoxious comments and insults aimed at everyday posters on these sites, have actually done more to reinforce the image Conservatives in the Heartland hold of Romney as a pompous, stuffed shirt.

Burke on February 8, 2012 at 9:44 AM

Can’t wait to vote for Rick on Super Tuesday in Virginia!

Oh. What?

crash72 on February 8, 2012 at 9:46 AM

there may be other reasons. My take.

kingsjester on February 8, 2012 at 7:37 AM

Pal, I will continue to say it until you are banned…participate in the discussion, or don’t post.
We have no inclination to allow you to promote your blog…I am sure you think it is just dandy, but self promotion of a product is irritating.

right2bright on February 8, 2012 at 7:48 AM

I love your blog, KJ. Thanks for linking to it frequently. I’ve found it’s always relevant to the discussion and full of good sense.

Burke on February 8, 2012 at 9:47 AM

Burke on February 8, 2012 at 9:47 AM

Thanks! Much appreciated.

kingsjester on February 8, 2012 at 9:49 AM

It is really interesting. I bet the Romney campaign has some very important decisions to make about how to respond to this. And for those who think I am talking about the congratulatory call, get real.

Cindy Munford on February 8, 2012 at 8:20 AM

Romney is in a tight spot with that, because his fingerprints can’t be all over it or he might lose conservative voters for good.

He will try to say Santorum isn’t a “real conservative” and bring up the whole “big government conservative” thing. That was tried and failed because it isn’t true and real conservatives know a kindred spirit when they see one. Especially those of us who have followed Santorum and know that (while no one is perfect) he is as true a conservative as it gets and has the right instincts and has done alot for the cause (fiscally, foreign policy wise and socially.) Conservatism is in his soul, so he knows how to explain it to the masses. Something Rush said we need.

And Santorum wouldn’t let conservatives down, either in the campaign or as President.

Santorum is kind of a nerdy, but the smart type that people trust with their (homework) taxes and country and the likable type nerd, not the obnoxious type. Plus he is good looking. Unfortunately, looks and likability go far in the general election.

Santorum is squeaky clean, so the only card left to Romney is the one that Obama will try, the one that they’ve been trying on Santorum for a while. That he is some religious extremist kook.

The problem with that is that it will only stick with liberals who would be voting for Obama anyway and conservatives like Santorum. So conservatives can’t see these attacks coming from Romney. They have to look like they are from someplace else.

As far as the Independents, when they hear Santorum talk and learn more about him, they will see that he is not extremist, is not going to legislate religion and is a reasonable, main stream, down to earth, sincere, honest, capable and likable person with integrity.

Elisa on February 8, 2012 at 9:52 AM

I believed the GOP campaign promises in 2010. That led nowhere. I will not believe them again.

Scott H on February 7, 2012 at 8:35 PM

Exactly sir, I ate their crap sandwiches for decades, and they let me down, backstabbed me, and now they treat me like some sorta vote-slave, “Oh you WILL vote for us, because we are less-evil!”

Wanna bet you Turds? I am not a leftist, I don’t unthinkingly provide my time, money, and votes just because of your stupid mascot. I am a conservative, NOT A REPUBLICAN.

Now step up and EARN MY VOTE RePubic Establishment turds.

Willard Filmoure Romneycare is NOT earning my vote. Neither is Salamander. I am able to choke down Santorum, but even then, we are looking at nowhere near a perfect candidate.

THIS is why few are showing up to the polls. The establishment entrenched in the cities are so dislocated from the values and beliefs of the rest of us, that they can’t relate to us, can’t understand why we are pissed off, and at a core level, cannot legislate in a way that is not repugnant to us.

The divide is not democrat v.s. conservative anymore – it’s urban and big city v.s. rural and small town. I find that the citified republicans are more statist and less freedom loving than country democrats.

Like Romney for example.

The city dwellers can’t see why people out here are angry with a gun grabbing commie-health-care promoting big spending, commie-judge installing global warming freak. They seem to be by and large ok with that crap. They’ve been converted by the statists in their cities, and they are liberalizing the republican party.

Frankly, I am of the opinion that we are hurtling headlong into the next civil war. People in the flyover are sick of having New York and California style totalitarianism shoved up their ass, and the people on the coasts can’t figure out why the the “trogs” won’t just sit down and take the stripping of their freedom like good little frogs.

God help us.

SilverDeth on February 8, 2012 at 9:54 AM

What does this have to do with the Tea Party? Nothing. Romney, Newt, and Santorum are all establishment candidates
Dante on February 8, 2012 at 7:56 AM

The Tea Party is not the “pure” party. We are looking for the most conservative candidate who can win. Also, in contrast to what Mitt supporters assume (according to what I read on this site), we are not looking for the one “true” conservative.

In any case, whatever it is we’re seeking, it is pretty certain that Mitt is not it, since we don’t want someone who goes around touting the supposed merits of state-fascist health care.

Burke on February 8, 2012 at 9:58 AM

Where is the UPDATE: Santorum Wins Colorado? That’s even more impressive since he’s polling wasn’t as strong there. I voted for him, and my precinct went 67 Santorum, 30 Romney, 12 Gingrich, 5 Paul.

Overall on the State Gingrich 12.8, Paul 11.7. Gingrich is toast! I hope.

kirkill on February 8, 2012 at 10:01 AM

[...] the only card left to Romney is the one that Obama will try, the one that they’ve been trying on Santorum for a while. That he is some religious extremist kook.

The problem with that is that it will only stick with liberals who would be voting for Obama anyway[...]
Elisa on February 8, 2012 at 9:52 AM

I’m not sure you can defend that. There are plenty of libertarian leaning conservatives who would be completely turned off, if not projectile-vomit disgusted, by Santorum’s anti-privacy, anti-contraception, anti-gay routine.

We needed one and only one type of candidate in this primary–a strong fiscal conservative. We got one in Ron Paul. Too bad he’s batsh1t crazy.

ElectricPhase on February 8, 2012 at 10:06 AM

Sarah Palin: the cause of and the solution to every problem on earth.
Kinda like beer.

angryed on February 8, 2012 at 9:37 AM

I’ll drink to that ..:)

idesign on February 8, 2012 at 10:15 AM

Interesting … David Limbaugh of MO, Ed Morrissey of MN and Michelle Malkin of CO all endorse Santorum and he takes the trifecta. So is it the candidate, the endorsements, the voters or all three? Yeah, I’ll take the combo plate.

So, I’m very late to the party, but hey, when you have as many kids as I do, you have to sleep sometime or you’re toast.

Anyhoo…I’ll have one of those combo plates, too! With a healthy helping of encouragement thrown in, to boot!

mom29js on February 8, 2012 at 10:21 AM

ElectricPhase on February 8, 2012 at 10:06 AM

You should have quoted the rest of my point and not cut it off.

Santorum is squeaky clean, so the only card left to Romney is the one that Obama will try, the one that they’ve been trying on Santorum for a while. That he is some religious extremist kook.

The problem with that is that it will only stick with liberals who would be voting for Obama anyway and conservatives like Santorum. So conservatives can’t see these attacks coming from Romney. They have to look like they are from someplace else.

As far as the Independents, when they hear Santorum talk and learn more about him, they will see that he is not extremist, is not going to legislate religion and is a reasonable, main stream, down to earth, sincere, honest, capable and likable person with integrity.

My whole point is that Santorum is not going to legislate religion or go into people’s bedrooms. That is spin and propaganda. If people bring their bedrooms into the public square themselves, like demanding gay marriage or demanding that private religious institutions let gay couples adopt children, then conservatives like me and Santorum object.

Santorum’s views (like them or not) are mainstream and reasonable.

That was my point about that line of attack on Santorum.

Elisa on February 8, 2012 at 10:21 AM

As far as the Independents, when they hear Santorum talk and learn more about him, they will see that he is not extremist, is not going to legislate religion and is a reasonable, main stream, down to earth, sincere, honest, capable and likable person with integrity.

Elisa on February 8, 2012 at 9:52 AM

That’s how he’s always come across to me.

Burke on February 8, 2012 at 10:22 AM

AAACK….sorry about the strike through….should have been quoted.

mom29js on February 8, 2012 at 10:22 AM

My whole point is that Santorum is not going to legislate religion or go into people’s bedrooms. That is spin and propaganda. If people bring their bedrooms into the public square themselves, like demanding gay marriage or demanding that private religious institutions let gay couples adopt children, then conservatives like me and Santorum object.

Santorum’s views (like them or not) are mainstream and reasonable.

That was my point about that line of attack on Santorum.

Elisa on February 8, 2012 at 10:21 AM

YES!!!

mom29js on February 8, 2012 at 10:24 AM

Santorum’s views (like them or not) are mainstream and reasonable.

Elisa on February 8, 2012 at 10:21 AM

They aren’t.

That’s MY whole point.

Again, if he happens to win the nomination, I will vote for him.

If he somehow manages to win the Presidency (a doubtful conclusion), the moment he stars the so-con crap, I will work with the “opposition” (read: liberals) to cut him off at the pass on every step of the way.

Vyce on February 8, 2012 at 10:35 AM

I’m pleased Romney did poorly last night. Still for Newt as having vastly more experience and knowledge than Santorum (also, given the choice, I’d prefer an adulterer to one who thinks women don’t belong in positions of authority), but this was a great result considering there were no EVs at stake.

Missouri turnout was 6%. Our last special election for state house got 10%. Argh.

alwaysfiredup on February 8, 2012 at 10:46 AM

Santorum’s views (like them or not) are mainstream and reasonable.

Elisa on February 8, 2012 at 10:21 AM

Er…no, they are not. He may win despite them, but they are neither mainstream or reasonable.

Do you recall how he thought Palin had a lot of kids to be running for president? How his team fought Bachmann in Iowa by saying God didn’t want women in charge of the church or the nation? How Santorum opposes all forms of birth control? These are most certainly not mainstream views. He’s pretty enough to get women’s votes but by and large they will prefer Obama to that.

alwaysfiredup on February 8, 2012 at 10:50 AM

Soon as he stars with the anti-gay, big-brother-sticking-its-nose-in-the-bedroom crap, like he wants to do (good little so-con fascist statist that he is), I’m going to help put an end to those policies as soon as they begin.

Vyce on February 8, 2012 at 9:39 AM

You’re saying that opposing state-sanctioned marriage between persons of the same sex is anti-gay? Like Westboro anti-gay? I would object. I totally support states granting civil contracts between two people, but pretending that partnership is a marriage in the traditional, legal and religious definition opens a whole new legal mishmash of First Amendment problems.

Historically—and I’m talking back BEFORE written history–marriage was a union designed for procreation and to protect children and inheritance. Even ancient Greece which celebrated and glorified gay sex, marriage was held sacrosanct. For Christians, it is one of the most important sacraments. I’m assuming you grant Christians the right to determine their own beliefs? The legal mess starts just as it’s started with Obama telling Catholics they have to pay for contraception and abortion and sterilization. Catholics will close hospitals, schools, and all manner of social help programs because this government says “Mind our dictates or go to Hell.” How is gay marriage the same? Right now, as we discuss the unintended consequences (I assume they are unintended, except for gay activists maybe not), the Catholic adoption services in Mass has been closed because their beliefs prevent them from placing children with gay couples. Will churches be put on notice that they lose their tax status if they don’t sanction gay marriage? If they refuse to rent their recreation facilities for gay marriage? How about an owner of a wedding venue? If that owner’s beliefs are that it’s a sin, are they required to accomodate gay marriages?

As regards Santorum’s statement about the state having a right to make laws affecting private matters, again he’s right. Everything from pedophilia to rape within marriage can be subject to the law.

If you are outraged about how society treated gays historically—sodomy laws

If your objection has to do with persecution of gays, that has always been illegal, just as persecution of women has been illegal. Bullying is disgusting no matter who the victim is, but strangely, it’s not a problem for bullies who are anti-Palin or anti-Santorum, or for anyone who disagrees with gay marriage. It’s perfectly fine for these people to toss glitter on folks (can you imagine what would happen if that got into someone’s eyes?). It’s an attack and it’s bullying and apparently it’s acceptable. I sincerely doubt Rick Santorum has ever, ever participated in bullying any gay person.

The history of anti-sodomy laws go back to Henry the VIII and he used them to take over monastaries and nunaries. Priot to that it was handled by ecclesiastic courts. US laws were based on English Common Law and statutes. BTW, if you think gays were the only ones who lived under the threat of death or severe punishment, think again. Women could also be hung for adultery and as we all know, many of those women were raped.

Portia46 on February 8, 2012 at 10:57 AM

Time to start bashing Santorum’s personal beliefs, for lack of anything better.
Ready, set, GO!

Norky on February 8, 2012 at 11:00 AM

If you are outraged about how society treated gays historically—sodomy laws

Thoughts that changed direction and order. I know. Preview is my friend. Sorry.

Portia46 on February 8, 2012 at 11:01 AM

Yeah! The Tea Party sure is dead!
(The silent majority was at work last night…Nixon rolled over in his grave 3 times).

KOOLAID2 on February 8, 2012 at 11:04 AM

Romney did not wage a seedy campaign against Santorum, think again?

Portia, it is also Seedy for Santorum, who needs to take the high road, to say that Romney supported what Obama is doing forcing the catholic church to do things they don’t want to do.

The Massachusetts Catholic Bishops are fighting Obama care right now, along with the rest of the country, why? because right now they have religious freedom not to have insurance with services they don’t want. If that is so, Romney did not force it on them.

Santorum was also saying that Romney forced Catholic Hospitals to provide abortion for rape victims. That’s totally false.

Catholic Hospitals in MA offer an Individual Right of Conscience for health care workers. They do not have to participate in anything they don’t believe in, they are allowed to step away from any case that is not morally correct in their eyes.

Romney did not approve of the law to make Catholic Hospitals give rape victims morning after pills of what ever purpose. HE VETOED that law.

Santorum has also been using the parsed sentence fragment about the poor last week, to say that Romney doesn’t care about the poor. If Romney is the candidate, how will Santorum correct that? I think he is morally obligated.

Seedy Santorum, oh it sounds awful and not in his character…except when you think he supported Specter, and lost his race in PA, when he was morally obligated to win because he was socially more conservative.

Fleuries on February 8, 2012 at 9:40 AM

Concentrate here. I called Romney on his absolute trashy campaign in Flordia against Gingrich. I could have also mentioned his sleazy campaign in Iowa. And Romney–not anyone else–threw the first mud. Romney has waged a campaign of personal destruction and Romney’s attacks were personal and disgusting. He and his supporters did to Newt what Hollywood and the Democrat media did to Sarah Palin.

Santorum using Romney’s very progressive and Obama concept of not worrying about the poor or the rich but the middle is so anti-conservative thought, it’s jolting. Parsed sentence my foot. I’ve listened to the whole statement several times and it’s pure Obama class warfare. That scared a LOT of conservative commentators.

Finally, did you actually just say that Rick had a “moral” obligation to win the election in PA? Really? You lose an election, you’re “immoral”? Really? Does that mean when Mitt didn’t run again because all polls said he would have lost, he was immoral too?

Finally, about Romney forcing hospitals to furnish morning after pill, looks like you need to research it. Here’s a summary. I’m fairly certain National Review isn’t making stuff up: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/290423/santorum-accuses-romney-forcing-mass-catholic-hospitals-offer-emergency-contraception-

Portia46 on February 8, 2012 at 11:20 AM

As far as the Independents, when they hear Santorum talk and learn more about him, they will see that he is not extremist, is not going to legislate religion and is a reasonable, main stream, down to earth, sincere, honest, capable and likable person with integrity.

My whole point is that Santorum is not going to legislate religion or go into people’s bedrooms. That is spin and propaganda. If people bring their bedrooms into the public square themselves, like demanding gay marriage or demanding that private religious institutions let gay couples adopt children, then conservatives like me and Santorum object.

Santorum’s views (like them or not) are mainstream and reasonable.

That was my point about that line of attack on Santorum.

Elisa on February 8, 2012 at 10:21 AM

Oh, but I have listened to him talk–over many years. You are correct that he wouldn’t be able to legislate religion or go into people’s bedrooms. Congress and the courts wouldn’t let him. The problem is that he clearly wants to. Santorum can’t disavow that any more than Romney can disavow Romneycare. A Santorum nomination would turn voters away from conservatives for a decade.

I believe that Santorum is a good man. I’ve said it before, and I mean it. I don’t agree with his prescription for America, and I don’t want him running for President. Saying that Santorum’s views are mainstream doesn’t make it so. I suppose, to some extent, we all see what we want to. I see a country that is leaning moderate (not liberal) in it’s social views, but pulling hard to the right on fiscal issues. We don’t have a candidate for that.

ElectricPhase on February 8, 2012 at 11:21 AM

It’s not a good day to be a moderate poster-boy for Socialized Healthcare!!!!!!!!!

Congrats RS….you’re a class act.

Tim_CA on February 8, 2012 at 11:23 AM

If I were any candidate in this race I wouldn’t consider this a mandate but a wake up call. All of you are doing it wrong.

Cindy Munford on February 8, 2012 at 11:33 AM

I hate to say it, but CNN’s election coverage, last night, was better than Fox. I probably wouldn’t have been jumping over to CNN, but their result numbers were way ahead of what Fox was showing.
What really shocked me was how civil CNN was being, when they discussed Santorum. The spinners on Fox were all getting in their jabs and digs on Rick. I know most at Fox are all in for Romney, but come on.

Norky on February 8, 2012 at 11:42 AM

If I were any candidate in this race I wouldn’t consider this a mandate but a wake up call. All of you are doing it wrong.

Cindy Munford on February 8, 2012 at 11:33 AM

How can someone wake up from being something they’re not?

Norky on February 8, 2012 at 11:43 AM

Norky on February 8, 2012 at 11:43 AM

I don’t really think they are being asked to do much, real reductions in spending, reducing the debt, getting rid of Obamacare and rolling back regulations. Even if that isn’t part of their personal DNA, that’s the job they are being given. I don’t want to see a bunch of convoluted plans that no one understands or believes, show me the veto pen.

Cindy Munford on February 8, 2012 at 12:08 PM

show me the veto pen.

Cindy Munford on February 8, 2012 at 12:08 PM

Perfectly put.

Tim_CA on February 8, 2012 at 12:11 PM

Er…no, they are not. He may win despite them, but they are neither mainstream or reasonable.

Do you recall how he thought Palin had a lot of kids to be running for president? How his team fought Bachmann in Iowa by saying God didn’t want women in charge of the church or the nation? How Santorum opposes all forms of birth control? These are most certainly not mainstream views. He’s pretty enough to get women’s votes but by and large they will prefer Obama to that.

alwaysfiredup on February 8, 2012 at 10:50 AM

Grasping at straws…

congma on February 8, 2012 at 12:23 PM

I feel the same hope.

Elisa on February 8, 2012 at 9:33 AM

me,i have no hope for this election or this so called ”small government,” party! the GOP is a bad joke!!

svs22422 on February 8, 2012 at 12:28 PM

Cindy Munford on February 8, 2012 at 12:08 PM

I agree, but my point is that maybe the reason they are “doing it all wrong” is because they don’t know how to do it right, Romney specifically. Santorum comes across as someone that believes what he is saying and does it in a sincere tone and whether or not he actually is, remains to be seen. Romney on the other hand can say all the same things as Santorum and still get it wrong (my dad sold aluminum paint out of his trunk). Romney’s record contradicts the person he claims to be. His delivery and body language prove that he’s still that guy. I don’t believe he can do it right.

Norky on February 8, 2012 at 12:30 PM

right2bright on February 8, 2012 at 7:48 AM

Pal, I have been participating in discussions around here since 2008, extremely vociferously. Rather than Troll the finest Conservative site on the internet, as so many are doing now, I merely stage my thoughts and rants at a separate location. I don’t stay on here all day, as some, because I actually have to go to work. I’m sorry that the fact I share my opinions offends you, but, having written 678 blogs, which are being shared on several websites, I have no intention of stopping. If you don’t want to read my opinion, don’t click on it.
I won’t be offended at all.

kingsjester on February 8, 2012 at 7:58 AM

Blah blah blah BLAHBLAH blah blah since 2008 blahblah blah 678 blogs blah BLAHBLAH BLAH blah my take blah blah blah Christian conservative blahblah BLAH…

AttaBoyLuther on February 8, 2012 at 12:46 PM

Blah blah blah BLAHBLAH blah blah since 2008 blahblah blah 678 blogs blah BLAHBLAH BLAH blah my take blah blah blah Christian conservative blahblah BLAH…

AttaBoyLuther on February 8, 2012 at 12:46 PM

uh huh.

Says absolutely nothing, then shows his intolerance towards other’s religious beliefs.

100% libtard troll
Voted for Obama.
Will vote for Obama again.
Thinks the Government is its daddy.

I’m right aren’t I sweetheart?

Tim_CA on February 8, 2012 at 12:58 PM

congma on February 8, 2012 at 12:23 PM

They are my reasons for wanting nothing to do with Santorum. Whether you find them slender reeds is your call. Women’s equality in the public arena is a big issue for me. Santorum is not going to get anywhere near McCain’s share of the women’s vote. I hope he has some extra voters in his back pocket.

alwaysfiredup on February 8, 2012 at 1:00 PM

Norky on February 8, 2012 at 12:30 PM

Action speaking louder than words definitely is a drawback for Gov. Romney.

Cindy Munford on February 8, 2012 at 1:04 PM

This was a devastating loss for Romney.

I live in CO, and believe me, Romney spent a TON of cash and resources in this state. Almost all the ads I saw was for Romney. I got direct mail, phonecalls and even a house visit from a ROmney campaign worker.

And yet, he got beaten to pulp by someone who spent next to nothing in this state. Imagine what the margin would have been if Santorum had money & organization.

Tells you how incredibly weak Romney really is. I don’t think he will become the nominee after this disaster.

Norwegian on February 8, 2012 at 1:52 PM

I’ll pass on Santorum. And Romney too. If not Newt, I agree with above poster…brokered convention.

sunshinek67 on February 8, 2012 at 2:22 PM

Turn out is reportedly low in these early states correct? Not a good sign for the GOP~

sunshinek67 on February 8, 2012 at 2:23 PM

I desperately want to get Obama out of office. Nevertheless, if Santorum is the candidate, I will not vote for president.

In many ways, Santorum is similar to the left of today – simply with conservative views instead of liberal. Santorum wants to impose his views, his lifestyle and his religion on each and every one of us. It’s wrong when the left does it – and – I will not vote for someone on the right who doesn’t allow Americans to choose to live as they see fit, within the constraints of our Constitution.

pbundy on February 8, 2012 at 2:28 PM

Shades of the election of 1960.

Fools across the nation; Republican AND Democrat were in a panic because they thought JFK was going to turn the nation over to the Pope, since he was a ‘good Catholic’.

LegendHasIt on February 8, 2012 at 2:43 PM

I’m right aren’t I sweetheart?

Tim_CA on February 8, 2012 at 12:58 PM

Exactly.

kingsjester on February 8, 2012 at 2:50 PM

Women’s equality in the public arena is a big issue for me.

Why do people hide behind the phrases “Women’s Equality” and “Woman’s Rights” when what they really mean is babies fetuses in the heads with forceps, sucking them out of a woman’s uterus with a vacuum, or chemically destroying the baby?

Equality has nothing to do with it. Stop hiding behind Orwellian double speak. Have the testicular ovarian fortitude to come out and say what you REALLY SUPPORT.

Come right out and say you want the right to kill a baby any time you like.
That’s what you are after, and you are entitled to pursue whatever soulless, f(*&^ed up belief system you want in America, and I would die or kill for you say whatever you want – but knock off the mother-f(*&^%g disingenuous the double talk, I grow sick of it.

You want to be able to have a doctor kill a baby that you don’t want, whenever you want. That IS what is happening during an abortion. Have the guts to say it, to stand up for your principles – the fact that you have to cower behind garbage double-speak strait out of 1984 proves that you are either ashamed of your position, or you think most people will find it unpalatable for you to truthfully discuss it.

Gutless.

SilverDeth on February 8, 2012 at 3:50 PM

Oh let’s just be true to ourselves. The Republican Party is a discriminatory party. We want a Christian, because Mormonism is irrational. Meanwhile our Christian Savior walked on water.

I hope Rick or Newt gets the nomination. It’s going to be funny how all their supporters are going to have to explain how Obama wins in a landslide. I guessing the excuse is going to be some mysterious Republican Establishment – who no one specifically identify did not support Rick or Newt against Obama.

Please everyone vote for the True Conservative as Rick states. Let’s see please don’t judge his stance raising the debt limit 5 times, less than Obama. Don’t judge his vote against Right to Work, or government supported healthcare in the form of Medicare Part D which has cost the US taxpayer over $200 billion dollars. Remember just like Newt, Rick is the True Conservative because Rush tells you so.

mark cantu on February 8, 2012 at 4:13 PM

Last night, during CNN’s coverage, they were saying how they were sure that the Dems were absolutely ecstatic over Santorum’s wins. BHO and the rest of the Dems are anything but happy about this. They’re prepared for Romney, not Santorum.
Norky on February 8, 2012 at 8:25 AM

They don’t have to be prepared for Santorum. Heck, they could probably not spend a single penny against Santorum, and they’ll beat him in a landslide.
Dante on February 8, 2012 at 9:18 AM

See you in November, Dante.

listens2glenn on February 8, 2012 at 6:11 PM

Comment pages: 1 14 15 16