ABC: “Top” GOP Senator says if Mitt can’t win Michigan …

posted at 10:30 am on February 18, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Silly me; I thought that when one candidate in a primary race lost a state, it meant that another candidate was stronger.  Not so, according to an unnamed but “prominent” Republican Senator contacted by ABC’s Jonathan Karl.  If Romney can’t win, it’s time to call in … Jeb Bush?

“If Romney cannot win Michigan, we need a new candidate,” said the senator, who has not endorsed anyone and requested anonymity.

The senator believes Romney will ultimately win in Michigan but says he will publicly call for the party to find a new candidate if he does not.

“We’d get killed,” the senator said if Romney manages to win the nomination after he failed to win the state in which he grew up.

It would have to be somebody else, the senator said.  Who?  “Jeb Bush,” the former Florida governor.

The Secret Senator believes that Rick Santorum would lose 35 states in a general election, and apparently thinks so little of Newt Gingrich’s chances that he doesn’t even raise him as an alternative.  No, it would be better to call the younger Bush and skip over the rest of the primaries, apparently, since it would be almost impossible at this point for a new candidate to qualify on enough ballots to win a majority of the delegates.

I have nothing but respect for Jeb Bush, but … really?  I recall a point in the race where people objected to Rick Perry because Barack Obama and the Democrats would paint him as a second coming of George W. Bush.  Perry’s defenders on that score — and I was one of them — never once offered an argument that it would be just great to have a return of an Obama vs Bush debate in 2012; we rejected the idea that Perry somehow equaled a Bush in terms of policy or temperament.

Jeb Bush did a terrific job as governor of Florida and is very well regarded in the state, but he’s still a Bush, and his elevation to the nomination without having bothered to enter the race would look like the ultimate establishment act.  Needless to say, the grassroots Tea Party movement doesn’t remember either President Bush with particular fondness, the first on the reneging of his pledge not to raise taxes, and the second on his big-spending “compassionate conservatism” platform.   A move to install Jeb Bush at the top of the ticket without having subjected himself to the vetting and the tough work of earning the votes in the field would be a disaster for the Republican Party, especially if that push came entirely at the convention.  Winning 15 states at that point might be an optimistic outcome.

How about this for an idea: let’s hold a primary among those candidates who had the courage to put themselves on the line for almost a year, and stop worrying about those who sat on the sidelines.  Stop looking for a Deus ex machina and start building the organization that will help whomever the voters choose as the nominee win the general election.


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 6 7 8

Research, not for her, on her.

Bmore on February 18, 2012 at 5:43 PM

Why? I only responded to her post because it jingled a subject Rick Santorum brought up in an interview. As I explained in my response to her post.

You are making an entire different point that has frankly went over my head.

Conservative4Ever on February 18, 2012 at 5:53 PM

Conservative4Ever on February 18, 2012 at 5:53 PM

Suit yourself. I don’t argue with them. Not worth my time.

Bmore on February 18, 2012 at 6:00 PM

Suit yourself. I don’t argue with them. Not worth my time.

Bmore on February 18, 2012 at 6:00 PM

I think you have missed something. I wasn’t arguing with her. I was pointing out something related to her post. It is as simple that.

If it wasn’t worth your time why make two cryptic posts?

Conservative4Ever on February 18, 2012 at 6:06 PM

I don’t know. I think the “last-minute desperation” aspect of this would turn off more people than the candidate himself. Jeb Bush was never my first, second, third, or fourth choice, but I’d certainly vote for him, and would frankly consider it moronic not to, if he were the ultimate candidate.

I’m pretty sure this is all moot, however, as Jeb has made it clear he has no intention of running.

J.E. Dyer on February 18, 2012 at 6:09 PM

It’s not time for another Bush (although I like Jeb). It’s time for a courageous conservative – Santorum.

WannabeAnglican on February 18, 2012 at 6:14 PM

A brokered convention would be a disaster. From the last primary until the convention in August, the party would be paralized and whoever ended up as the nominee would be severely diminished.

That being said, what this GOP Senator is proposing is even worse.

Norwegian on February 18, 2012 at 6:19 PM

Will this be the choice in November? Neo-fascist Obama or the return of a monarchy? I think I might prefer the neo-fascist. Jeb Bush, the founding fathers say wor you to go fornicate yourself.

VorDaj on February 18, 2012 at 6:21 PM

Conservative4Ever on February 18, 2012 at 6:06 PM

My mistake, enjoy. Oh I was just trying to save you some aggravation. It won’t happen again.

Bmore on February 18, 2012 at 6:25 PM

I would NEVER vote for another BUSH. NEVER! I’d join ACORN and get myself registered a dozen times to vote for Obama if Bush were the Pub. nominee. Are we that desperate? The Bush Monarchy? This proves the Pub. party is finished.

they lie on February 18, 2012 at 6:36 PM

Today, I was thinking that it would be great to have a true social conservative in the general election. You know, someone who could make the arguments necessary to prove the connection between the health of the soul and the economic health of the nation. I love Santorum, but it’s pretty clear that he does not have the intellectual acumen to make these arguments. He believes in social conservatism, but his arguments for it are at the fifth grade level. I fear his nomination will take moral philosophy out of the public discourse for good.

In short, I think it might be better to run a squish (Mittens) than someone who is unequipped to make the arguments necessary to support something the public has no ear for at this point.

HTnFBCoachnTX1980 on February 18, 2012 at 6:37 PM

HTnFBCoachnTX1980 on February 18, 2012 at 6:37 PM

What does your posting name here stand for? Just curious.

karenhasfreedom on February 18, 2012 at 6:43 PM

arguments for it are at the fifth grade level. I fear his nomination will take moral philosophy out of the public discourse for good.

HTnFBCoachnTX1980 on February 18, 2012 at 6:37 PM

Talk about 5th grade arguments. Yours is classic one on Santorum. You really don’t know what he is saying. You are getting your information from the media on what Santorum is campaigning on as opposed to actually listening what Santorum is saying himself.

Educate yourself. You are wrong about Santorum’s statements on the “health of the soul and the economic health of the nation.”

Conservative4Ever on February 18, 2012 at 6:48 PM

One more time on correcting what people are hearing from the media on Santorum. Stop listening to the media on what they think Santorum is stating on social engineering.

Santorum’s own words:

“I didn’t vote for any kind of ban on contraception, nor did I vote for any ban on sodomies, nor would I as president,” he told CNN’s John King this week. “I don’t believe that everything that is immoral should be illegal. The government doesn’t have a role to play in everything that, you know, that either people of faith or no faith think are wrong or immoral. That was one. And I said it at the time that I wouldn’t have voted for the Texas sodomy law that was in place nor would I vote to ban contraception, even though I think that – as a Catholic who the Catholic Church teaches that contraception is wrong – I would not do it myself.” ~ Rick Santorum

Conservative4Ever on February 18, 2012 at 6:51 PM

Conservative4Ever on February 18, 2012 at 2:20 PM

You can tell Romney, who lost SC and the polling was correct. Same with Florida. Same with Nevada. Same with CO, MN, and MO.

The GOP will vote for Romney. There is a certain few Romney haters here will stay home and hack their noses off with dull butter knife.

csdeven on February 18, 2012 at 6:55 PM

Jeb Bush is not the cavalry. Anyone with the last name Bush is carrying baggage.He won’t be able to unite the GOP,let alone be elected President of the United States

pamiam on February 18, 2012 at 6:56 PM

Romney will not lose Michigan.

liberal4life on February 18, 2012 at 6:57 PM

liberal4life on February 18, 2012 at 6:57 PM

No offense little one, but I don’t trust your dreams.

Bmore on February 18, 2012 at 6:59 PM

***caveat to comment: I haven’t read but a few posts.

Frankly, I don’t really care what a “TOP” Senator has to say. Its his damn opinion and he probably has his head so stuck up his butt, he has NO clue as to the REAL mood of the nation, inside the “beltway” thinking….THE GOP needs to do their own damn job better anyway.

It will be REAL SIMPLE. Anyone one BUT Obama! It can be won just sticking to what he has done or haven’t, what ever the case may be. A sophmore in high school could debate this fool, O has NOTHING to be proud about.

mr_west on February 18, 2012 at 7:02 PM

Romney will not lose Michigan.

liberal4life on February 18, 2012 at 6:57 PM

liberal4life, as you being a radical liberal who is for the life of unborn children, you will be proven wrong on the night of Feb 28th 2012.

But keep your fantasies going.

Conservative4Ever on February 18, 2012 at 7:14 PM

One more time on correcting what people are hearing from the media on Santorum. Stop listening to the media on what they think Santorum is stating on social engineering.

Conservative4Ever on February 18, 2012 at 6:51 PM

do you think that Americans aren’t going to listen to the media in the general election? As they pillory this clown?

V7_Sport on February 18, 2012 at 7:19 PM

Remember, In ABC anonymous-sources-speak:

“prominent (unnamed) Senator” = “We’re making this up.”

viking01 on February 18, 2012 at 7:34 PM

Romney will not lose Michigan.

liberal4life on February 18, 2012 at 6:57 PM

.
Explain how 1% Romney can win a big labor state, that desires Govt bailouts and has been a democrat State SINCE Reagan. Those are not Romney voters- those are Santorum’s base voters. He should win in a landslide. Ohio as well. Nobody really liked AMC cars anyways- sorry car guy

FlaMurph on February 18, 2012 at 7:37 PM

I can’t be around here a lot, but this better be gossip from the establishment to tease us and or bully Romney.

ProudPalinFan on February 18, 2012 at 7:37 PM

do you think that Americans aren’t going to listen to the media in the general election? As they pillory this clown?

V7_Sport on February 18, 2012 at 7:19 PM

I guess if Americans are only listening to the media tell them what a candidate said as opposed to the candidate’s actual words. Sure seems like bots to me. Kinda like Mittbots, Paulbotts…..

I understand clueless liberals doing this…..and ^

Conservative4Ever on February 18, 2012 at 7:50 PM

csdeven on February 18, 2012 at 6:55 PM

Did you say this?

“I’m a mother of a soldier, and you’re disrespecting me!!!”

SparkPlug on February 18, 2012 at 7:52 PM

“If Romney cannot win Michigan, we need a new candidate,” said the senator, who has not endorsed anyone and requested anonymity.

True true and true.

SparkPlug on February 18, 2012 at 7:53 PM

“If Bush Dole McCain Romney cannot win Michigan, we need a new candidate,” said the senator

Shut up and legislate.

29Victor on February 18, 2012 at 7:53 PM

I guess if Americans are only listening to the media tell them what a candidate said as opposed to the candidate’s actual words. Sure seems like bots to me. Kinda like Mittbots, Paulbotts…..

I understand clueless liberals doing this…..and ^

Conservative4Ever on February 18, 2012 at 7:50 PM

So the citizenry will have to ignore the media and give the benefit of the doubt to a will be fair to a gaffe prone Republican who has some bazzar opinions on contraception. Yeah that ought to get the independents we need to defeat Obama. (IS that the priority anymore?)

V7_Sport on February 18, 2012 at 8:00 PM

How bout charlie crist? I read he was “available!

rik on February 18, 2012 at 8:00 PM

“If Romney cannot win Michigan, we need a new candidate,” said the senator, who has not endorsed anyone and requested anonymity.
True true and true.
SparkPlug on February 18, 2012 at 7:53 PM

.
For Secret Senator and the rest of you ABR evolvers – Michigan is not a state GOP can win – NOT even Sanctitytorum – you’ll have to dig up Reagan to find the last R who won Michigan- It ain’t gonna happen- Big Labor obummer has that state- keep dreamin.

FlaMurph on February 18, 2012 at 8:05 PM

If Senator Gutless Turd Insider is not going to reveal his identity, then he can keep his opinions to himself as well.

Vermin.

AttaBoyLuther on February 18, 2012 at 8:11 PM

So the citizenry will have to ignore the media and give the benefit of the doubt to a will be fair to a gaffe prone Republican who has some bazzar opinions on contraception. Yeah that ought to get the independents we need to defeat Obama. (IS that the priority anymore?)

V7_Sport on February 18, 2012 at 8:00 PM

Again, the citizenry should be listening to the actual words that the candidate said. They should not be listening to the media’s interpretation of what they think the candidate said.

Are you being obtuse or lack reading comprehension? You also seem to be following the media’s interpretation as opposed to educating yourself on what the candidate actually said. I even placed Santorum’s own words what his thoughts were on contraception.

I made it easy for you, yet you still would rather believe the media.

Conservative4Ever on February 18, 2012 at 8:14 PM

Bush.

The People have failed. Only Oligarchy can save the Republic now.
/

Kenosha Kid on February 18, 2012 at 8:16 PM

The media hype is absolutely ridiculous. They want ‘brokered convention’ which has ZERO chance of happening.

Instead of focusing on the liberal loon in the WH the media is hell bent on destroying all of our candidates…and who is this ‘secret senator’…crazy talk

Redford on February 18, 2012 at 8:24 PM

Jonathan Karl, the ABC “reporter” who started all this crap by quoting an anonymous Republican Senator who may well be his own invention, is sitting back drinking a beer and laughing at how he’s sent all you idiots into a state of apoplexy with his little joke.

Adjoran on February 18, 2012 at 8:54 PM

So the citizenry will have to ignore the media and give the benefit of the doubt to a will be fair to a gaffe prone Republican who has some bazzar opinions on contraception. Yeah that ought to get the independents we need to defeat Obama. (IS that the priority anymore?)
V7_Sport on February 18, 2012 at 8:00 PM

No, because it is more important that we please a bearded man in robes sitting on a cloud than worry about what is actually happening here on the temporal plane.

JFS61 on February 18, 2012 at 9:38 PM

I would rather vote for Ron Paul as a Third Party candidate than vote for Jeb Bush.

Also, if Jeb wanted to run he should have got in and gone through the rough and tumble like everyone else, if that was too much of an inconvience then he should stay away. No one who has not stood before the Primary voters, debated, organized, or been put through the grinder should even be considered.

thmsmgnm on February 18, 2012 at 9:45 PM

both buzzfeed and mediate hav a clip of Santorum on Meet The Press in june saying abortion doctors should be prosecuted.

Just imagine how this would be played over and over by Obama superpac.

Just imagine any President saying abortion doctors should be prosecuted

gerrym51 on February 18, 2012 at 9:48 PM

Conservative4Ever

Again, the citizenry should be listening to the actual words that the candidate said. They should not be listening to the media’s interpretation of what they think the candidate said.

Yeah, well, they wont. They really, really wont.
“The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.” – Winston Churchill

Are you being obtuse or lack reading comprehension?

I am trying to show you how this will go down. Rick Santorum will be buried by the media, the press, Hollywood and when Obama and his billion dollars, his PR and Ad agencies get done with him he will be unelectable. Finished.

You also seem to be following the media’s interpretation as opposed to educating yourself on what the candidate actually said.

What he said was stupid and untenable. The idea that sex is only for procreation is not going to fly anywhere outside the Vatican.

I made it easy for you, yet you still would rather believe the media.

You missed the point: Perception equals reality and Santorum will be perceived as a zealot. The Amazing thing to me is that he isn’t even fiscally conservative.

V7_Sport on February 18, 2012 at 9:50 PM

No, because it is more important that we please a bearded man in robes sitting on a cloud than worry about what is actually happening here on the temporal plane.

JFS61 on February 18, 2012 at 9:38 PM

:-D
I’m starting to think the Bearded man has it in for us.

V7_Sport on February 18, 2012 at 9:51 PM

pamiam on February 18, 2012 at 6:56 PM

Romney will not lose Michigan.

liberal4life on February 18, 2012 at 6:57 PM

liberal4life on February 18, 2012 at 6:57 PM
No offense little one, but I don’t trust your dreams.

Bmore on February 18, 2012 at 6:59 PM

W E T ? !

KOOLAID2 on February 19, 2012 at 12:25 AM

I am trying to show you how this will go down. Rick Santorum will be buried by the media, the press, Hollywood and when Obama and his billion dollars, his PR and Ad agencies get done with him he will be unelectable. Finished.

V7_Sport on February 18, 2012 at 9:50 PM

Here we go folks another of these morons who knows the future. Can you tell me what the Powerball numbers will be?

Grow up sport. You don’t have total omniscience.

Conservative4Ever on February 19, 2012 at 12:54 AM

FlaMurph on February 18, 2012 at 7:37 PM

Simple. Mitt lied to the Massachusetts people that he was pro-choice, and only governed like that, to curry favor with those voters (as no real pro-lifer will EVER get elected in that brain-dead leftist state). Or he deliberately abandoned his principles in order to get votes.

Either theory is unacceptable to the nth degree.

Second look at Marshall Philippe Pétain?

Myron Falwell on February 19, 2012 at 2:47 AM

Michigan is not a state GOP can win – NOT even Sanctitytorum – you’ll have to dig up Reagan to find the last R who won Michigan- It ain’t gonna happen- Big Labor obummer has that state

FlaMurph on February 18, 2012 at 8:05 PM

Ah, and the expected MittBot attempts at preemptive spinning, re: Herr Hair’s inevitable curb-stomping within his own home state (!!!), is already well and truly underway. Which one of Kübler-Ross’ stages of grief is that, again…? ;)

Kent18 on February 19, 2012 at 4:29 AM

You’re losing it. But it’s just going to get worse during the Mitt Meltdown.

There Goes The Neighborhood on February 18, 2012 at 2:55 PM

02/28 — when Mittens’ doomed, inept dreams of coronation will receive a righteous pimp-slapping at the hands of a barely-funded opponent, within the former’s own home state (!!!) — will be the deliciously thrilling entree.

Super Tuesday, however — where simultaneous renunciations by the conservative voting base in both Ohio and the crucial (for any conceivable Republican victory, come November) southern states of Tennessee, Georgia, etc. will absolutely thunder, beyond any possible hope of after-the-fact spinning by Mitten’s sulky online jihadis — will be the sweet, sweet dessert, glazed to perfection with stunned, disbelieving CINO tears.

Get here early that evening, if you can… before all the best seats end up being taken. ;)

Kent18 on February 19, 2012 at 4:47 AM

You missed the point: Perception equals reality and Santorum will be perceived as a zealot. The Amazing thing to me is that he isn’t even fiscally conservative.

V7_Sport on February 18, 2012 at 9:50 PM

He’s more conseevative than Romney. And of course the media will always and forever portray Mitt just the way his adoring Mittbots want him to be portrayed, right? He’s already perceoived as a nasty, ideologically bankrupt squish. So far, “religious zealot” is leading “nasty squish”. You’re going to have to find some other excuse for Romney, because the “electability” thing has expired.

ddrintn on February 19, 2012 at 8:02 AM

“I’m a mother of a soldier, and you’re disrespecting me!!!”

SparkPlug on February 18, 2012 at 7:52 PM

Why don’t you go find it before repeating it?

csdeven on February 19, 2012 at 8:12 AM

So far, “religious zealot” is leading “nasty squish”. You’re going to have to find some other excuse for Romney, because the “electability” thing has expired.

ddrintn on February 19, 2012 at 8:02 AM

A+++. As plainly and patiently explained to the remaining Mittens jihadis, over on the conservative political site, Ricochet:

“Instead of counting on an agenda or an ability to personally inspire, the argument has over and over again hinged on Romney’s purported electability. This is one of the weakest arguments to make in a primary, as Romney’s funders have acknowledged recently (because when you win, it’s expected; but when you lose, instead of a speedbump, it strikes at the core of the case you’re making). As the cracks developed in Romney’s armor, his prominent backers went from denial of their existence to an argument that they don’t matter to increasingly loud demands that Obama’s badness as a president will bring everyone together, so there’s nothing to worry about.

Here’s the problem: that last argument can be used by every candidate in the GOP field — it’s not specific to Romney at all.”

Read the whole thing. ;)

Kent18 on February 19, 2012 at 8:18 AM

you will be proven wrong on the night of Feb 28th 2012.

Conservative4Ever on February 18, 2012 at 7:14 PM

Hmmmmmm…..After making the proclamation above, who pronounced the following just 6 hours later?

Here we go folks another of these morons who knows the future. Can you tell me what the Powerball numbers will be?

Yep, that’s right folks! Conservative4Ever predicted the future just 6 hours previous to his proclamation that only morons think they know the future. And here is the entire despicable display of disgusting hypocrisy…..

Here we go folks another of these morons who knows the future. Can you tell me what the Powerball numbers will be?

Grow up sport. You don’t have total omniscience.

Conservative4Ever on February 19, 2012 at 12:54 AM

Conservative4Ever….in addition to your own comment making you the MORON, you now have zero credibility. Be gone troll! Back to KOS with you!

csdeven on February 19, 2012 at 8:34 AM

The thing that Senator Asshat is missing is the fact that whoever wins the nomination will get the votes of the base plus those precious independents. We all have our preferred candidate but almost would agree to coalesce around the winner. If the chicken little’s in congress would actually start listening to the people instead of the media they might learn a thing or two. It is amazing that all these people go to Washington with good intentions and then wind up being the problem that they went there to get rid of. They must be sucking on lead paint chips or there is too much radon gas in the place.

jistincase on February 19, 2012 at 8:56 AM

Sounds as if the elites are falling out of love with Mitt. What happened to the ‘he’s the only one who’s electible’ meme? We better start acting like the field is at least acceptable or this mode of thinking will be used against our candidate in the fall.

Kissmygrits on February 19, 2012 at 9:26 AM

Michigan is not a state GOP can win – NOT even Sanctitytorum – you’ll have to dig up Reagan to find the last R who won Michigan- It ain’t gonna happen- Big Labor obummer has that state
FlaMurph on February 18, 2012 at 8:05 PM

Whoever wins the Republican nomination for POTUS, will carry Michigan, because we have the ‘second coming of Jimmy Carter’ in the White House NOW.

listens2glenn on February 19, 2012 at 9:29 AM

joana on February 18, 2012 at 5:15 PM

Found it.

Conservative4Ever on February 18, 2012 at 5:26 PM

This interview proves why Santorum is unnaceptable to me.

He’s just like Obama and the liberals: he believes he has the right to use the government to promote his worldview and what he believes is the best for the society.

There’s an overriding political question: what’s the proper role of the government?

Santorum’s answer to this is not satisfactory to me.

Just start watching at 15:33. Santorum can’t even notice his own contradictions – just like progressive liberals. Look at this quote:

“Of course it’s not the government’s business [to decide if non-traditional families are any worse or better], but should the government encourage things that are best to society? And the answer is I think they should. And that’s why we have the marriage statures and we have because we believe marriage is good for society”.

I’m sorry, but this complete nonsense. Sure, I believe marriage is good for society. But I also believe in a good diet and physical exercise. Should the government encourage those things? Of course not – because the government shouldn’t be in the business of enforcing my believes (or Rick Santorum’s or Barack Obama’s).

It’s amazing that in this same site everybody disagrees with nanny-statism and then the same people turnaround and support Rick Santorum. Schizophrenia?

joana on February 19, 2012 at 10:53 AM

joana on February 19, 2012 at 10:53 AM

Excellent comments, thank you!!!

georgealbert on February 19, 2012 at 11:08 AM

joana on February 19, 2012 at 10:53 AM

Excellent comments, thank you!!!
georgealbert on February 19, 2012 at 11:08 A

Encouragement is NOT imposition, and/or enforcement.

But, the REAL ‘biggie’ issue where Rick Santorum is concerned, is the ‘overt, public recognition of God’, as opposed to secular atheism.

listens2glenn on February 19, 2012 at 12:14 PM

@joana:

I hear what you’re saying, but I wonder, have you considered the fact that there ultimately has to be a basis for the principles of a free society that is rooted in particular statements of fact? For example, we could say our freedoms are ultimately given a rational basis by statements like the one in the Declaration of Independence that we are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights. Should Jefferson not have said that because it encourages certain beliefs? Does doing do take away anyone’s religious freedom? Or does it instead make clear – in as nonsectarian a way as possible – what the rational basis of religious freedom is, along with all other freedoms? Though the difference between encouragement and enforcement can be a fine line, there are some institutions without which a free society doesn’t work. Families with a married mother and father are one of them. For the government to pretend agnosticism about the favorability of so basic a truth, to me seems a very dubious proposition. I, too, don’t like the idea of government being our nanny or our preacher. But a government that is agnostic about everything would quickly be a government with no guiding principles at all.

Mycroft Holmes on February 19, 2012 at 12:30 PM

“Of course it’s not the government’s business [to decide if non-traditional families are any worse or better], but should the government encourage things that are best to society? And the answer is I think they should. And that’s why we have the marriage statures and we have because we believe marriage is good for society”.

joana on February 19, 2012 at 10:53 AM

Context is everything. What did he say after that? That part where he explains how government has a marriage penalty. His answer explains it. Please, listen again. With an open mind.

Conservative4Ever on February 19, 2012 at 12:32 PM

How about this for an idea:

we stop getting worked up about anonymous quotes. 1)Do you really trust someone who works for abc? It’s 50-50 this was entirely made up and 2)even if it wasn’t made up, who cares about someone who isn’t man enough (or maybe woman enough) to state their opinions publicly. Credibility is given to these stupid anonymous quotes by making a big deal out of them and when none is deserved.

peacenprosperity on February 19, 2012 at 12:33 PM

Santorum will lose at least 35 states? Bull. There are at least 20 that will go Republican no matter who the nominee is. It won’t win us the election, but it’s a place to start. http://www.270towin.com/2012_election_predictions.php?mapid=gPD

Vanilla Salt (Jake_W) on February 19, 2012 at 5:30 PM

Jeb Bush did a terrific job as governor of Florida and is very well regarded in the state, but he’s still a Bush, and his elevation to the nomination without having bothered to enter the race would look like the ultimate establishment act.

So if Jeb Bush is very well regarded in Florida, let him roll up his sleeves and run for Senate against Bill Nelson, and endorse Harry Reid for Senate Minority Leader. President Romney or President Santorum will need a friendly Senate to confirm conservative justices to SCOTUS.

Steve Z on February 20, 2012 at 9:38 AM

Comment pages: 1 6 7 8