Surge: Santorum gains 13 points nationally after Tuesday sweep, now tied with Romney; Update: Santorum leads in … Michigan?

posted at 8:46 pm on February 10, 2012 by Allahpundit

On Monday and Tuesday of this week, it was Romney 35, Gingrich 26, Santorum 17. On Wednesday and Thursday, after he hit the Missouri/Minnesota/Colorado trifecta: Santorum 30, Romney 30, Gingrich 16. And remember, there are no southern primaries between now and Super Tuesday, so if Newt’s counting on a regional split to put him back in the game, he’ll have to weather another three weeks of Santorum as the (momentary) designated Not Romney.

Key footnotes:

Most GOP primary voters — 80 percent — think someone other than frequent frontrunner Romney could still win the Republican nomination, and over half say it’s too soon for any of the current contenders to drop out (54 percent). Moreover, nearly half would still like to see someone else jump in the race (49 percent)..

Santorum (36 percent) is seen by GOP primary voters as the candidate most “in touch” with everyday Americans. That’s more than twice as many as any other Republican contender: Paul (16 percent), Romney (16 percent) and Gingrich (12 percent). Eight percent say none of the Republican candidates are in touch with voters.

Gingrich is 10 times more likely than anyone else in the field to be seen as a “Washington insider,” which should be lethal for his strategy of running as the anti-establishment grassroots champion. As for Mitt, there’s only one thing to do when you’re a “severe conservative” being threatened by an opponent’s surge: Nuke him with negative ads, of course. But will that fly this time? Byron York’s hearing pushback at CPAC:

Mitt Romney met privately with a group of conservative activists and opinion leaders Thursday, on the eve of his speech to the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington. In a wide-ranging discussion, a number of participants urged Romney to refrain from attacking rival Rick Santorum with the scorched-earth intensity that he directed at Newt Gingrich…

“He said Rick has to be held up to the same scrutiny as everyone else,” says one meeting participant. (This account is based on conversations with three people who were in the room.) Romney specifically mentioned hitting Santorum on his record on earmarks and other federal spending.

It’s not clear whether Romney’s answer satisfied the group. In general, a number of participants don’t want to see a repeat of the Romney-Gingrich attacks because a) they feel Santorum doesn’t deserve it, and b) they believe the negativity has been bad for Republicans overall. Romney told the group that the attacks on Gingrich were not his doing but rather the work of the super PAC that works on Romney’s behalf but not under his control.

I can’t believe he tried the “I have no control over my Super PAC” crap on a bunch of savvy political insiders. Good lord. The quandary for Mitt here is that there is a decent line of attack available against Santorum but, for understandable reasons, he almost certainly can’t use it. Namely, he could argue that Santorum’s as unelectable as Gingrich because once the media starts zeroing in on his positions on social issues, that’ll become the focus of campaign coverage instead of the economy and suddenly independents will start to drift away. He’s got three problems with that argument, though. One: Unlike Gingrich, Santorum’s favorable numbers are as good as Romney’s right now, and in some polls better. Doesn’t mean they’ll stay that way but it’s hard to point fingers when your own numbers are worse. Two: Obviously, Romney’s conservative credentials are already so suspect that he can’t afford to hit Santorum from the left on social issues. And the more Planned Parenthood and O’s contraception mandate are in the news, the truer that is. Three: Santorum could counter that, in light of the solid jobs numbers in the last unemployment report, it’s actually Romney who’s on shaky ground in the general. If the economy starts to heat up, Romney’s left with no argument for his candidacy but Santorum will still have cultural issues to fight on. Read Matthew Continetti’s latest post for an elaboration on that point. If all you’ve got is “electability” and the chance of a poor economy persisting into the fall, you don’t have much. And even if the bad economy does persist, any GOP nominee will benefit, not just Romney.

For what it’s worth, the head of the group that runs CPAC told the Daily Mail today that he can see Jeb Bush emerging as a consensus choice at the convention if Super Tuesday ends up being split three ways. Remember, Ohio’s the big one. I’ll leave you with this clip of Santorum talking about women in combat, just because it’s making the rounds and the left’s interpretation of his comments has been bugging me. They thought that his reference to “other types of emotions” was his way of saying that women will wilt under pressure in war. Not so; I knew instantly what he meant and my interpretation was affirmed today. What he means is that discipline among men in a mixed-gender unit might break down if they see a woman comrade injured or killed and their protective instinct kicks in. It’s not mere speculation; there’s evidence confirming that this is a risk. Maybe that instinct can be drilled out of male soldiers, but he’s getting a bad rap here on what he meant. Noted for the record.

Update: I hit “publish” and then immediately saw the latest tweets from PPP. Not only does Santorum have a “healthy” lead in their new national poll, apparently he’s also leading in Michigan, home to former Gov. George Romney and his son Mitt. Quote: “This may be the biggest surge yet”.


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 4 5 6

Wait…just a few minutes ago, you were saying that Romney was “reliable in spending”. Now, you say you opposed Romneycare.

Arguing with yourself?

kingsjester on February 11, 2012 at 10:21 AM

It’s like watching a bad junior high school stage production of The Three Faces of Eve. ;)

Kent18 on February 11, 2012 at 10:24 AM

Link?

Prediction: you won’t produce it and you’ll start calling me names.

joana on February 11, 2012 at 10:25 AM

joana on February 11, 2012 at 10:24 AM

You’re as Conservative as Mitt Romney…when it’s convenient…and that ain’t saying a whole lot.

kingsjester on February 11, 2012 at 10:26 AM

Joana, I’m going to go with what the Club for Growth says over soome foaming at the mouth militant atheist says about Santorum’s record on fiscal issues.

In your world, a devout Christian can’t be a fiscal conservative. I don’t think they must be mutually exclusive.

Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 10:26 AM

Prediction: you won’t produce it and you’ll start calling me names.

joana on February 11, 2012 at 10:25 AM

Wow. You love dishing it out…but you can’t take it.

kingsjester on February 11, 2012 at 10:29 AM

Me:

From a fiscal perspective, I have doubts if he isn’t to the left of Obama.

Obama is an union shill and anti right-to-work. Ditto for Santorum. The idea that the GOP will nominate an union goon like Santorum is laughable. I wonder how Scott Walker, Mitch Daniels and Chris Christie feel.

Obama defends the Medicare and Medicaid status-quo. Santorum was the guy creating it. He voted for the biggest expansion of entitlements since FDR. Just a few years ago. Besides being the guy that cut the Dole/Clinton deal back in 1995 on welfare, undercutting the conservative wing that was trying to pass a true welfare reform.

Obama is a big spender. So was Santorum. There wasn’t a single big spending, pork ladden bill he wouldn’t vote for.

Obama believes in federal solutions for education. Santorum enthusiastically supported big government programs like NCLB.

Obama believes in those uber-expensive “infra-structure bills”.
Santorum voted for the Transportation Act, the Energy bill, etc.

Obama believes that the tax code should be used by politicians to pick winners and losers. So does Santorum.

Obama endorsed liberal democrat Arlen Specter. So did Santorum.

I mean, what are the differences?

Crazy:

You hate Christians. You love Romneycare.

Oh well. I guess one shouldn’t expect that some faction of socialists would be strong on intellectual honesty.

“Hey guys, I’m actually too liberal! Minimum wage! Using your money to fund businesses!” – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tHT6SJd2KFg&feature=youtu.be

joana on February 11, 2012 at 10:29 AM

Prediction: you won’t produce it and you’ll start calling me names.

joana on February 11, 2012 at 10:25 AM

Wow. You love dishing it out…but you can’t take it.

kingsjester on February 11, 2012 at 10:29 AM

You’re a liar. You quoted me wrongly. Show where I said that “Romney was reliable on spending”. You made that up. Pathetic. What kind of person does that? I pity you.

joana on February 11, 2012 at 10:31 AM

Joana, I’m going to go with what the Club for Growth says over soome foaming at the mouth militant atheist says about Santorum’s record on fiscal issues.

In your world, a devout Christian can’t be a fiscal conservative. I don’t think they must be mutually exclusive.

Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 10:26 AM

Look, in the name of civility and politeness, I’d appreciate if you could stop questioning my faith. It means a lot to me and it bothers me to read that kind of stuff. Can you do that? Thank you very much. I’d sincerely appreciate your effort.

Other than that, forget me and childish personal insults and talk about politics.

joana on February 11, 2012 at 10:33 AM

you’ll start calling me names.

joana on February 11, 2012 at 10:25 AM

Like “Bible-thumping freaks,” you mean? Pfffftt. Spin faster; there might conceivably be oil reserves somewhere directly underneath.

Kent18 on February 11, 2012 at 10:33 AM

joana on February 11, 2012 at 10:31 AM

Reviewing…you actually said Nelson Rockefeller was reliable on spending. But…while we’re on the subject…are you agreeing, then, that Romney was not reliable on spending?

kingsjester on February 11, 2012 at 10:34 AM

Look, in the name of civility and politeness, I’d appreciate if you could stop questioning my faith. It means a lot to me and it bothers me to read that kind of stuff. Can you do that? Thank you very much. I’d sincerely appreciate your effort.

Other than that, forget me and childish personal insults and talk about politics.

joana on February 11, 2012 at 10:33 AM

Why is it okay for you to make fun of Christians and, then, when folks question your Christianity, that’s just wrong?

kingsjester on February 11, 2012 at 10:36 AM

Maybe the bible thumping freaks who live on public dime.

joana on February 11, 2012 at 9:33 AM

Look, in the name of civility and politeness, I’d appreciate if you could stop questioning my faith. It means a lot to me and it bothers me to read that kind of stuff. Can you do that?

joana on February 11, 2012 at 10:33 AM

You. Just. Can’t. Make. This. Stuff. Up. Folks. ;)

Kent18 on February 11, 2012 at 10:36 AM

I’m willing to listen to anyone explain why should a conservative vote for Santorum’s big government, intrusive, socialist, pro unions, pro entitlement expansion, anti free-market, spending record and views.

joana on February 11, 2012 at 10:24 AM

And yet you just described Romney to a tee, and have yet failed to explain why we should vote for Romney.

opustx on February 11, 2012 at 10:39 AM

Other than that, forget me and childish personal insults and talk about politics.

joana on February 11, 2012 at 10:33 AM

I think your attacks on Santorum were callow. Bible thumper, Jesus freak, Christian socialist? What? You use the same sort of language anti-Christian people use and you act like you some innocent virginal person on here. There is no way in hell you are a Christian…your hatred of Christians is transparent. You dont’ even try to hide your contempt for them.

Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 10:49 AM

Joana acts like she hasn’t been one of the biggest shills for Romney on here. It’s like she thinks we have no memories.

Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 10:50 AM

kingsjester on February 11, 2012 at 10:34 AM

After blatantly lying and making up stuff I said and not even being man enough to apologize, I’d advise you to not bother to reply to me. I certainly am not replying to you any more.

opustx on February 11, 2012 at 10:39 AM

Proven correct once again.

Santorum-freaks can’t present a single conservative thing about him.

Santorum’s pro-unions anti-right to work stance is the complete deal-breaker for me. It’s a litmus test. I’d vote for a pro-free employment democrat over an union goon republican, let alone Romney.

joana on February 11, 2012 at 10:52 AM

I think your attacks on Santorum were callow. Bible thumper, Jesus freak, Christian socialist? What? You use the same sort of language anti-Christian people use and you act like you some innocent virginal person on here. There is no way in hell you are a Christian…your hatred of Christians is transparent. You dont’ even try to hide your contempt for them.

Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 10:49 AM

How is that anti-Christian?

I’ve been fighting Socialist Christians and Christianized Marxists – namely adepts of the Liberation Theology within the Catholic Church – for years.

Now you come here and say that’s anti-Christian? In that case, you’re accusing Pope John Paul II of being anti-Christian too? Get a clue already.

A socialist is a socialist is a socialist. Regardless of how much he talks about God.

joana on February 11, 2012 at 10:55 AM

A socialist is a socialist is a socialist. Regardless of how much he talks about God.

joana on February 11, 2012 at 10:55 AM

Ok,but I noticed you ignore Santorum’s record as being the man on taxes, welfare reform, social security reform, and private sector solutions to healthcare. None of that is socialist. I don’t think being anti-free trade necessarily makes you a socialist, or voting for some bad spending bills.

Your basic assertion is Santorum is for big government b/c he’s a devout Christian.

Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 10:58 AM

This single mom from PA who has voted Republican in every election since I turned 18 is going to have a heard time pulling the lever for Santorum. His stance on single mothers irritates me, but it’s the comments he’s made about gay people that would prevent me from pulling the lever for him at this point. He needs to figure out a way to walk those statements back without offending the evangelicals to win a general election.

I would vote for Obama over Paul, Romney or Gingrich over Obama and possibly just stay home if our guy is Santorum.

LawnGnomeFanFirst on February 11, 2012 at 10:59 AM

Joana,

Do you deny you have touted Romney on here? I have an excellent memory and you are one of the Romney SuperFans.

I understand you want to seem objective and not to have explain how you can support Romney while calling Santorum a socialist.

Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 11:00 AM

I think anybody that would vote for Obama over Santorum is a socialist, especially if your reaosn for it something to do with the gays.

Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 11:01 AM

Liberals in general are very gay-centric. Think the whole world revolves around gays along with other minoriies. We have serious problems due to Obama’s out of control spending and implementation of Obamacare and these liberals and moderates want to talk to us about the plight of the gay folk. The economy sucks, people are out of work, but you are talking about gay people and how you’d vote for Obama over Santorum b/c of some comments about the gays.

Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 11:03 AM

Santorum is the only Republican that has a serious chance of getting my vote.

elfman on February 11, 2012 at 7:36 AM

I wonder if that means that you’ll vote for Obama or “stay home” if Santorum is not the nominee.

If so, and if there are enough independents who think like you, then it means four more years of Obama. Oh–and the end of the USA.

RedCrow on February 11, 2012 at 11:04 AM

What the hell has Obama done for the gays? They still complain about the same stuff.

Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 11:05 AM

I think anybody that would vote for Obama over Santorum is a socialist, especially if your reaosn for it something to do with the gays.

Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 11:01 AM

1) I don’t care what you think
2) I think you can’t read
3) Calling people who disagree with you a socialist seems a bit Alinskyish with no goal other than to shut dissenters up. Are you sure you aren’t a Socialist?

LawnGnomeFanFirst on February 11, 2012 at 11:05 AM

Ok,but I noticed you ignore Santorum’s record as being the man on taxes, welfare reform, social security reform, and private sector solutions to healthcare. None of that is socialist.
Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 10:58 AM

Santorum is the guy who never had a problem with more and more spending and voted for every single debt limit raising and big government (ergo, voted for more taxes – only the economic illiterate are fooled with the trick of raising spending without raising tax rates), he was the guy who cut the deal with Dole and Clinton to crash the efforts of the conservative wing of the GOP to achieve real welfare reform in the 90s, I have no idea what social security reform you’re talking about (maybe the fact he introduced legislation to raise the minimum wage?) and his “private solutions to healthcare” consist of the biggest entitlement expansion since FDR – Romneycare is peanuts in terms of cost when compared with the Medicare bribe.

Not to mention his anti-free trade, anti right-to-work, pro-unions record, his unabashed love for pork, his staunch support for the Bridge to Nowhere, etc, etc.

The fact that you think Santorum’s record on these issues is conservative tells a lot about you.

As another commentator of your ilk put it “Social issues fire me up, I don’t care about the Transportation Act or the Energy bill and neither should you”.

Problem is: I’m a conservative, so I care with what really matters.

joana on February 11, 2012 at 11:07 AM

1) I don’t care what you think
2) I think you can’t read
3) Calling people who disagree with you a socialist seems a bit Alinskyish with no goal other than to shut dissenters up. Are you sure you aren’t a Socialist?

LawnGnomeFanFirst on February 11, 2012 at 11:05 AM

I think everybody has gotten carried away with the Alinsky accusation. What you said indicating you wouldn’t vote for Santorum if he doesn’t “walk back” his comments on the gays. Is that not true?

Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 11:08 AM

Problem is: I’m a conservative, so I care with what really matters.

joana on February 11, 2012 at 11:07 AM

The problem is, you are a Romney supporter who not addmitting that right now b/c you want to use conservative ideology to beat down Santorum while giving Romney a free pass on everything. I have a good memory and you are one of the Romney SuperFans on here.

Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 11:10 AM

I said that I would probably sit it out, not that I would vote for Obama. I would prefer that Santorum finds a way to make peace with the indies and moderates so I could vote for him.

I also said I would vote for Obama over Paul. Obama is making me broke, Paul could make me dead.

LawnGnomeFanFirst on February 11, 2012 at 11:10 AM

Listening Santorum talking is like a flashback to listening to those freaks like Dom Helder Câmara, Leonardo Boff and Richard Shaull. I can swear that in some stuff he’s just quoting them.

joana on February 11, 2012 at 11:11 AM

Oh, and being from PA I can assure you that Santorum is probably to the left of GWB on conservative fiscal issues.

LawnGnomeFanFirst on February 11, 2012 at 11:11 AM

Again, Club for Growth gave Santorum a decent grade on fiscal issues, and they are tough but fair.

PA is a very unionzed state and you won’t win elections up there by talking tough about unions. It’s just the way it is. You won’t advance conservatism if you don’t get elected.

Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 11:11 AM

I don’t think all moderates are sociallly liberals. They aren’t really independent if that’s the case.

A lot of lower middle class Democrats are socially conservative. They do care about abortion, gay marriage, gun rights, etc. Santorum can appeal to those type of Democrats who aren’t happy with Obama. A rich Republican like Romney isn’t going to get those votes.

Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 11:13 AM

Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 11:10 AM

You don’t seem to grasp the concept of the lesser evil.

Anyway, let me know when you’re willing to refute my demonstration that Santorum’s record is so socialist he makes Romney and Nelson Rockfeller – two guys I’d only vote for as a last resort – look good.

joana on February 11, 2012 at 11:14 AM

Toomey just got elected in PA, fiscal conservatives can be elected.

LawnGnomeFanFirst on February 11, 2012 at 11:15 AM

Oh, that’s right, Toomey the person that Santorum endorsed Specter over….

LawnGnomeFanFirst on February 11, 2012 at 11:16 AM

Anyway, let me know when you’re willing to refute my demonstration that Santorum’s record is so socialist he makes Romney and Nelson Rockfeller – two guys I’d only vote for as a last resort – look good.

joana on February 11, 2012 at 11:14 AM

There aren’t many conservatives who agree with you that Santorum makes Romney look good. And you do like Romney, regardless of Santorum being in the race or not. You’ve shilled for him consistently on here. You act like I don’t remember things, and that’s a bad assumption.

Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 11:17 AM

Toomey would have endorsed Specter of Santorum if the roles were reversed. Specter did vote for Roberts and Alito and that was part of the deal there.

Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 11:18 AM

I think Newt is toast at this point. He didn’t even compete in the 3 states Santorum swept. It’s hard enough to win the nomination without our own media savaging you daily, and I never seen any Republican candidate be attacked as much as Newt has. GOP pundits and political consultants would rather run Stalin over Newt.

Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 9:47 AM

He didn’t even compete in the 3 states Santorum swept… which is the only reason Rev. Sanctimonious won. (duh)

stenwin77 on February 11, 2012 at 11:18 AM

I think I heard Toomy was looking to make a deal with Democrats to raise taxes in exchance for spending cuts.

I don’t consider that a fiscal conservative, if it’s true.

Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 11:19 AM

You’re right, Toomey is a liberal RINO and Santorum is the true conservative…

LawnGnomeFanFirst on February 11, 2012 at 11:20 AM

He didn’t even compete in the 3 states Santorum swept… which is the only reason Rev. Sanctimonious won. (duh)

stenwin77 on February 11, 2012 at 11:18 AM

Are you a homosexual? In my view, most of the rabid Santy haters are gay. Your average straight person doesn’t get all emotionl about gay issues.

Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 11:20 AM

Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 11:19 AM

Yeps, the guy who voted to raise spending to these levels, created unsustainable new entitlement programs and wasn’t even responsible to pay for it is the “tru conservative”.

The guy trying to cut spending is the liberal.

Ladies and gentlemen, Santorum conservatives for you.

joana on February 11, 2012 at 11:22 AM

You’re right, Toomey is a liberal RINO and Santorum is the true conservative…

LawnGnomeFanFirst on February 11, 2012 at 11:20 AM

I think Santorum is conservative enough. I never said he was pure, but I doubt Toomey is either. You are obsssesed with gays and “gay rights”. To me, that’s a trivial issue.

Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 11:22 AM

The guy trying to cut spending is the liberal.

Ladies and gentlemen, Santorum conservatives for you.

joana on February 11, 2012 at 11:22 AM

I didn’t know raising taxes was fiscal conservatism. That seems to be the new definition used by liberals like you who support RomneyCare guys. :)

Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 11:23 AM

You don’t seem to grasp the concept of the lesser evil.

joana on February 11, 2012 at 11:14 AM

I tried to catch up on the “discussion” you and Tesla are having. I’m from MI and finally looked at this thread this morning.

It concerns me a little bit how vitriolic folks here on HA get towards other commenters when they disagree with their pick for GOP nominee–mainly because of your statement that I quoted above.

As has been proved here, again and again (and again), there is no perfect candidate. We can say bad things about ALL of them. (I don’t think I’ve ever met a single person with whom I agree on everything.)

Our choices are made by selecting the best “thing” available relative to the alternatives available. Seems to me a lot of people want “all or nothing”.

RedCrow on February 11, 2012 at 11:26 AM

It’s not a lack of tax revenue that is the cause of deficits and debt. It’ss the spending and borrowing that are the cause of deficits and debt. Raising taxes isn’t the solution b/c tax cuts are not the culprit. You just giving politicians an excuse to spend and borrow money if you accept this notion it’s the taxpayer’s duty to balance their bloated budgets.

Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 11:28 AM

Anyone at CPAC who thinks putting a Bush on the ballot is a wise consensus choice is insane.

Not because Jeb is necessarily a bad candidate, but seriously: How dumb do you have to be to allow Obama a “return to the failed Bush policies” life saver right now.

BKennedy on February 11, 2012 at 11:29 AM

I

didn’t know raising taxes was fiscal conservatism. That seems to be the new definition used by liberals like you who support RomneyCare guys. :)

Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 11:23 AM

Again: I was against Romneycare before it was fashionable.

Here’s a tip: taxes are raises when spending is raised. Obama raised taxes, Bush raised taxes. It’s just that lots of people are economically illiterate and they take advantage of that. But eventually you’ll need to pay the money you borrow, so financing spending increases with borrowed money is raising taxes – just in the future.

I doubt you can understand this, but other readers will.

joana on February 11, 2012 at 11:29 AM

Romney is basically a white version of Obama on healthcare, taxes, gun control, abortion, gay marriage, campaign finance, immigration, spending (RomneyCare) etc.

He has the resume of a Democrat.

Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 11:30 AM

Are you a homosexual? In my view, most of the rabid Santy haters are gay. Your average straight person doesn’t get all emotionl about gay issues.

Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 11:20 AM

Actually, I’m an extreme homophobic, and proud (pardon the pun) of it. Where did homosexuality come into my statement?

My problems with Rev. Sanctimonious:
1 – He’s borrrrring
2 – He’s a fiscal, big-government liberal
3 – He want’s to ban contraception
4 – He has his kids wear pins with a picture of his disabled daughter (for votes)
5 – His sweater vests are putrid
6 – He is too inexperienced to be President (much like the current one that we have).

No where in those reasons are any gay-agenda statements. As I said, I’m very anti-gay.

My father is a Bible-thumping Baptist preacher, I know the cloth that ministers are cut from. Rick is one of them.

I am supporting Newt ONLY based on comparing the records of the three candidates. Newt is the only one that fought for a conservative, smaller government and gave the GOP the majority for the first time in decades. He knows how to execute a bold plan and his conservative accomplishments are well-known and well-documented.

Do I really, really like Newt? No. But he will “git ‘er done”.

stenwin77 on February 11, 2012 at 11:31 AM

Here’s a tip: taxes are raises when spending is raised. Obama raised taxes, Bush raised taxes. It’s just that lots of people are economically illiterate and they take advantage of that. But eventually you’ll need to pay the money you borrow, so financing spending increases with borrowed money is raising taxes – just in the future.

I doubt you can understand this, but other readers will.

joana on February 11, 2012 at 11:29 AM

I’ve heard this argument before, but it’s stupid…you are saying wew should support higher taxes now to avoid higher taxes in the future. You are pro high taxation to maximize government revenues. Tax cuts aren’t to blame for deficits and debt. Politicians are for spending too much and borrowing too much. Giving them more money is like giving a crack addict more crack and expecting them to get over their addiction.

Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 11:33 AM

Newt’s toast. He only won 1 primary. Santorum’s won 4. Santorum is clean on healthcare, and I think it’s pretty dishonest to say Newt is a small government conservative while attacking Santorum as big government. Newt’s sort drifted to the left over the years.

Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 11:35 AM

Newt supported a federal individual mandate to buy health insurance. The only reason I would support him if he was the only not-Romney left. But Santorum appears to be the most viable anti-Romney and he’s clean on healthcare unlike Newt and Romney.

Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 11:37 AM

Yeps, the guy who voted to raise spending to these levels, created unsustainable new entitlement programs and wasn’t even responsible to pay for it is the “tru conservative”.

The guy trying to cut spending is the liberal.

Ladies and gentlemen, Santorum conservatives for you.

joana on February 11, 2012 at 11:22 AM

joana, you are the one the other day who personally attacked me, and when I shot back you whined about being personally insulted…so your faux indignation doesn’t fool anyone.
You continued harping about Rick is entertaining, each of your repeated charges have been answered time and again…it’s just that we don’t see the need of education you every 10 minutes, like you seem to want to educate us.
Rick is the most fiscally conservative man left standing…and along with that he walks a faith that many are comfortable with.
You can rail against the facts all you want, but of the ones left standing he is separating himself from the pack…for a variety of reasons. And he is now shown that steady, sincere, focus on issues at hand, and not personal attacks (something you should take note), is why he is winning the hearts and minds of the people who indeed are not so closed minded and absolute that they can actually analyze and make their own decisions.
I notice you have not been here long posting, every election cycle we get people like you on HA, after the elections they are gone…some are paid shills, some are just random extremists who probably have no one in their life who will listen to them…but after the election, we won’t hear from you, we know that.
Good for you for supporting…well actually you don’t say who you support come to think of it…you just feel attacking someone is good enough…ask Mitt how that is working now?
So relax, absorb some of the goodness that Rick has to offer, and realize that IF you are a conservative, Rick is all you have…and it’s a whole lot better than Obama…despite your shrill, whining, posts…

right2bright on February 11, 2012 at 11:38 AM

I want these deficit hawks on here to demonstrate with historical exmaples when deficits and debt have gone down b/c of higher taxation. If you believe that jacking up tax rates is the solution to deficits and debt, you should be able to point to historical examples. In general, both tax rates and spending and debt have all increased since FDR. We are not undertaxed in this country. We are overtaxed. Therefore, raising taxes isn’t the solutiong to a spending and borrowing problem.

Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 11:41 AM

My father is a Bible-thumping Baptist preacher, I know the cloth that ministers are cut from. Rick is one of them.

stenwin77 on February 11, 2012 at 11:31 AM

You should sit down with a professional and talk about this…what an interesting post…you must hate Billy Graham, probably reminds you of your dad…seek some help, you need it.

right2bright on February 11, 2012 at 11:41 AM

I’ve heard this argument before, but it’s stupid…you are saying wew should support higher taxes now to avoid higher taxes in the future. You are pro high taxation to maximize government revenues. Tax cuts aren’t to blame for deficits and debt. Politicians are for spending too much and borrowing too much. Giving them more money is like giving a crack addict more crack and expecting them to get over their addiction.

Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 11:33 AM

Nope.

I’m saying that new spending now – the type that Santorum supported – will be paid by higher taxes now or in the future.

Understood?

joana on February 11, 2012 at 11:42 AM

right2bright on February 11, 2012 at 11:38 AM

Who the heck are you? You people need to realize that kind of obsessions are creepy.

As for Santorum’s fiscal record, I’d challenge people to show he’s significantly better than Obama:

From a fiscal perspective, I have doubts if he isn’t to the left of Obama.

Obama is an union shill and anti right-to-work. Ditto for Santorum. The idea that the GOP will nominate an union goon like Santorum is laughable. I wonder how Scott Walker, Mitch Daniels and Chris Christie feel.

Obama defends the Medicare and Medicaid status-quo. Santorum was the guy creating it. He voted for the biggest expansion of entitlements since FDR. Just a few years ago. Besides being the guy that cut the Dole/Clinton deal back in 1995 on welfare, undercutting the conservative wing that was trying to pass a true welfare reform.

Obama is a big spender. So was Santorum. There wasn’t a single big spending, pork ladden bill he wouldn’t vote for.

Obama believes in federal solutions for education. Santorum enthusiastically supported big government programs like NCLB.

Obama believes in those uber-expensive “infra-structure bills”.
Santorum voted for the Transportation Act, the Energy bill, etc.

Obama believes that the tax code should be used by politicians to pick winners and losers. So does Santorum.

Obama endorsed liberal democrat Arlen Specter. So did Santorum.

I mean, what are the differences?

joana on February 11, 2012 at 11:44 AM

I’m saying that new spending now – the type that Santorum supported – will be paid by higher taxes now or in the future.

Understood?

joana on February 11, 2012 at 11:42 AM

That’s only true if you believe that spending can’t be cut in the future. I believe it can.
You seem to believe that we must spend whatever the politicans say we must spend. I say no, they must cut spending and implement budgets that can be fully funded with a reasonable level of tax revenue. You want to keep feeding the beast with more tax revenue. That will not solve the problem, it’s just throwing fuel on the fire.

Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 11:45 AM

Santorum wasn’t for big government healthcare. Romney and Obama are.

Case closed as far as I’m concerned. :)

Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 11:46 AM

Our choices are made by selecting the best “thing” available relative to the alternatives available. Seems to me a lot of people want “all or nothing”.

RedCrow on February 11, 2012 at 11:26 AM

That would be an accurate first reaction…but after posting here for multiple elections, and been though many open registrations, your analysis leaves one group out.
Some are posting here for another reason, it has nothing to do with “all or nothing”, some are paid, some are just angry, some have “issues”, like the most recent poster who I responded to about Rick being just like his dad, and many, you will be surprised, are actually democrats who end up attacking whomever they think will be the leading contender.
They will say the support Mitt, for instance, but when Mitt is about to sew up the nomination, they suddenly shift gears.
You will see the dynamics play out…Joana fits into one these extreme postitions, don’t know which one yet…but we will eventually find out.
The other day I called out a poster for being here 24/7 on every Mitt post, commenting and supporting Mitt, I think he was a paid poster…haven’t seen him since, so I imagine he folded up his name, and is now using another.
Many have several names under different IP’s…

right2bright on February 11, 2012 at 11:48 AM

What has Romney ever done in political power that is considerd conservative? It would have to be a lot to negate RomneyCare. But there’s nothing there but more liberalism.

I’m baffled that Romney supporters pretend to have a problem with Santorum on the basis of he’s too big government. Do you know anything about Romney? Or are you just a hack?

Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 11:49 AM

Who the heck are you? You people need to realize that kind of obsessions are creepy.

joana on February 11, 2012 at 11:44 AM

Good try, like I said…faux indignation…I have seen it before, it doesn’t work on here. Try another tactic.

right2bright on February 11, 2012 at 11:50 AM

Joanna believes we are undertaxed in this country. That is her basic premise if she thinks Spending = Higher Taxes.

Others disagree.

Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 11:51 AM

That’s only true if you believe that spending can’t be cut in the future. I believe it can.
You seem to believe that we must spend whatever the politicans say we must spend. I say no, they must cut spending and implement budgets that can be fully funded with a reasonable level of tax revenue. You want to keep feeding the beast with more tax revenue. That will not solve the problem, it’s just throwing fuel on the fire.

Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 11:45 AM

Nope. Even if spending is cut in the future, taxes will still need to be higher than they would need to be if spending wasn’t increased in the first place. How hard is this to understand? If you increase spending, you’re raising taxes – government money comes from taxes and that’s it. Really, it’s basic arithmetic.

Oh well, I guess I was proven right:

I doubt you can understand this, but other readers will.

joana on February 11, 2012 at 11:29 AM

joana on February 11, 2012 at 11:52 AM

What Democrats and some Republicans like to do is spend money like crazy and then blame conservatives for not caring about deficits and debt if we don’t support their jacking up tax rates in the name of balancing the budget and paying off debt that isn’t the result of a lack of tax revenue but rather their out of control spending and borrowing.

You are misunderstanding the problem if you think the solution to spending and borrowing is to punish taxpayers with higher taxes.

Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 11:53 AM

Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 11:45 AM

What a strange debate, she is arguing your point, and then saying you are wrong, she is right…listen, she has another agenda, no one knows that much detail about one of the candidates without a very sophisticated “cheat sheet”…take it from a long time veteran, I have seen these guys before, nobody is that obsessed to know that many facts, unless they are a real live stalker. In that case, do not give out your address…

right2bright on February 11, 2012 at 11:56 AM

It’s citizens like Joana that big government politicians love. She’ll get on board with their calls for raising taxes to fix the problem of deficits and debt that they created by spending and borrowing too much. We’ll cough up mpore money to them, they keep spending and borrowing, and then tell us they need us to pay more taxes to deal with the deficit and debt.

It’s an obvious scam to anybody who thinks about it at all. You won’t break the cycle by supporting tax hikes..you just encouraging it to continue if you do so.

Opposition to tax hikes is the only thing we as citizens can do to encourage politicians not to spend and borrow. We can’t force them to be responsible with money but we can oppose them taking more money from us.

Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 11:56 AM

Santorum wasn’t for big government healthcare. Romney and Obama are.

Case closed as far as I’m concerned. :)

Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 11:46 AM

I think that by now everybody knows you’re a troll, but thanks for giving me the opportunity to mention this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicare_Prescription_Drug,_Improvement,_and_Modernization_Act

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicare_Part_D

At least Romney is only for big government health-care at the state level. Santorum and Obama want it at federal level too. What do you think it’s more repugnant to conservatives?

joana on February 11, 2012 at 11:56 AM

At least Romney is only for big government health-care at the state level. Santorum and Obama want it at federal level too. What do you think it’s more repugnant to conservatives?

joana on February 11, 2012 at 11:56 AM

What a load of crap…big government at the state level is big government. WHy should any intelligent citizen entrust the RomneyCare guy to support a full repeal of Obamacare? It’s the same idea, he supported it at the state level and it seems highly illogical to expect him to be a warrior against the same idea at the federal level.

You can’t make ROmney out as a small government guy if he implemented RomneyCare. IT’s intellectual dishonesty on crack.

Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 12:01 PM

I love this notion that some of these psuedo-conservatives have that there’s no such thing as big government at the state level. What do I care if somebody is mandating I buy something is located in Boston rather DC? I’m still being controlled by a politician in the end.

You can’t defend big government with state rights. You actually hurt the states right argument when you do that. Slavery supporters used states rights to defend slavery.

Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 12:04 PM

right2bright on February 11, 2012 at 11:48 AM

No, I’m not surprised. I know that stuff goes on.

I’ve been around here a while (only since 2006 or so), but don’t usually comment much. I also have to take a break from this stuff every now and then, you know, for my mental health.

Lol–Stay vigilant.

RedCrow on February 11, 2012 at 12:06 PM

Yeps, Dr. Tesla really doesn’t get the concept of the lesser evil. Too nuanced for him.

joana on February 11, 2012 at 12:08 PM

Joanna believes we are undertaxed in this country. That is her basic premise if she thinks Spending = Higher Taxes.

Others disagree.

Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 11:51 AM

No, I think we are overtaxed.

And yes, government spending = taxation. I mean, what else do you think it’s part of the equation?

This is a basic premise of economy. Government spending = current taxation + future taxation. The trick used by Bush/Obama/Santorum and other borrow’n'spend socialists is to make the future taxation as big as possible.

joana on February 11, 2012 at 12:11 PM

Yeps, Dr. Tesla really doesn’t get the concept of the lesser evil. Too nuanced for him.

joana on February 11, 2012 at 12:08 PM

I don’t think you’ve made a case Romney is the lesser evil. He was a liberal across the board as governor. It’s not debatable. There’s not a Democrat in southern and midwestern states that wouuld even contemplate doing something like RomneyCare. That’s the guy you think is the lesser evil.

Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 12:11 PM

This is a basic premise of economy. Government spending = current taxation + future taxation. The trick used by Bush/Obama/Santorum and other borrow’n’spend socialists is to make the future taxation as big as possible.

joana on February 11, 2012 at 12:11 PM

Do you think RomneyCare is free? You do know that Romney worked with Ted Kennedy to secure federal subsidies, right? In other words, tax payers in other states are helping to pay the bloated coasts of RomneyCare. Government run healthcare solutions are always fiscal boondoggles yet you are trying to tell us ROmney is the fiscal conservative. You so ignorant.

Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 12:13 PM

Joanna’s problem with Santorum is he’s a devout Christian.

The spending thing is a smokescreen, b/c she’s really supports higher taxes but doesn’t want to admit to that.

Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 12:16 PM

She’s attacking Santorum for being a Jesus freak, bible thumper and then when kind of question her tolerance of Christians based her contempt, Joanna kind of pivots over to attacking Santorum on some bad votes for spending legilation. Meanwhile she’s pretending she hasn’t been on of the biggest shills for Romney on this comment board. And there’s no conservative case for Romney, most Romney supporters don’t even try to make a conservative case for him. They just stick with their myth that only he is electable and his private sector success which to me is irrelevant to how he will govern.

Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 12:19 PM

Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 11:10 AM

You don’t seem to grasp the concept of the lesser evil.
joana on February 11, 2012 at 11:14 AM

Yes he does. And so do I.
I believe Rick Santorum IS the ‘lesser evil’.

But that that doesn’t mean you have agree with me, either.

listens2glenn on February 11, 2012 at 1:04 PM

Joanna’s problem with Santorum is he’s a devout Christian.
Dr. Tesla on February 11, 2012 at 12:16 PM

What? A devout Christian ! ?
.
THEOCRACY, AHOYYY ! ! !
.
Be afraid . . . be very AFRAID . . .

listens2glenn on February 11, 2012 at 1:12 PM

And then there is Mark Levin and Laura Ingraham and Rush Limbaugh. They have been vicious with Romney.

Terrye on February 11, 2012 at 12:48 AM

Rush has said jack and is refusing to endorse anybody. As to Levin telling you about Willard Fillmoure Romneycare’s past achievements…

…when did “vicious” become a synonym for “telling the truth?”

Hah! The truth is what it is.

If Mitt Romney the Democrat, had not spent his entire political career banning guns, appointing liberal judges, spending like a maniac, supporting global warming alarmism, and imposing socialized medicine on the poor people of his state, then perhaps he could brag about his accomplishments – rather than hiding from them.

Oh, yes, and the way in which he’s decided to drag this entire campaign into the mud has just endeared people to Ken-Doll’s cause!

Your record sucks Mitt?

Get some well known pundits to re-write or “rationalize” away your liberal background.

The conservative base hates you and is jumping from candidate to candidate – just so long as it IS NOT YOU?

Why get your opposition research teams to donate the fruits of their labors to all the other candidates, pummel the frontrunner with negative ads, send out your Moderate news shills out, sic your giant PACS full of thugs and hatchet-men to try and tear down every single person running polling better than you.

That’s the ticket to influencing people and making them love you! Politically kill everyone that the public likes better than you! So simple!

Too bad for Willard Fillmoure Romneycare – this is the only thing he can really do -
since his record is, after all, that of a liberal.

Try running as a democrat in 2016. You fit better with them.

SilverDeth on February 11, 2012 at 2:09 PM

joana should be banned as spam

Pragmatic on February 13, 2012 at 8:28 AM

Santorum leads in Michigan! wohooooo! Mitt Romney should drop out for sure if that holds (he should drop out anyway because he’s a Democrat trying to run as a Republican and then trying to fake conservatism). As Sarah Palin says, conservatism can’t be taught. . . .YOU CAN’T TEACH CONSERVATIVE VALUES TO ROMNEY!

Pragmatic on February 13, 2012 at 8:32 AM

Why don’t the Republicans take up the cause head-on and make the REPEAL of OBAMACARE a top priority instead of being so mealy-mouthed about it? That would easily solve so many problems:

1. Voter turn-out
2. Obamacare’s repeal would help loosen the stranglehold on the economy
3. Both the religious freedom and the individual liberty issues would be addressed solved simultaneously

Caveat: Romney could NOT be the nominee because he has no credibility on the Romneycare/Obamacare issue

Pragmatic on February 13, 2012 at 8:32 AM

Comment pages: 1 4 5 6