Angry Santorum: I never said I’d vote for Obama over Romney!

posted at 6:00 pm on March 23, 2012 by Allahpundit

Twelve minutes from today’s Cavuto. I agree, he never said he’d vote for Obama over Romney. What he said was that “we” the electorate might collectively conclude that there’s not enough difference between them to justify replacing the incumbent, the implication being that that would be a perfectly reasonable conclusion. Right? Read his comments from yesterday again or watch the video; the clear impression I got was “I wouldn’t blame anyone who thought that way,” an impression apparently shared by Santorum supporter Ed Morrissey. There are a lot of ways to hit Mitt for being a squish, first and foremost that America can’t afford one when bold action on entitlements is desperately needed, but anything that legitimizes the idea that the differences between Romney and The One are too “little” to justify a strong preference for one or the other is poisonous to the larger Republican effort. What he said yesterday did that, and his spokesman doubled down on it this morning by calling Romney a “mirror image” of O before adding the perfunctory bit about supporting the nominee. They’re not mirror images; there are hugely compelling reasons to strongly prefer one to the other, as I’d expect any committed pro-lifer who pays attention to Supreme Court vacancies to understand. I don’t mean to begrudge a guy a line of attack when he’s desperate to get traction somehow, but the attack on Romney from the right should never go beyond arguing that America needs a strong conservative to achieve meaningful improvements in policy. If you’re a prominent Republican with a big soapbox and you’re comparing Romney to Obama generally — even in the context of how “we,” not you, might feel — you’re playing with matches. (The only exception I can think of is on the specific issue of “ObamneyCare” because it’s hugely relevant to the primary and, let’s face it, there’s really no way around the mirror-image conclusion. But even in that case, the more likely it is that Romney will be the nominee, the more counterproductive that argument is.)

Interestingly, it’s Gingrich who’s made a bigger deal about this today than Romney. Statement one from Team Newt:

Newt 2012 Campaign Chairman Rep. Bob Walker released the following statement today criticizing Sen. Santorum’s comments about the possibility of an Obama reelection:

“As a former Pennsylvania colleague of Rick Santorum in the Congress, I am stunned by his statement that if he is not the Republican nominee, we might be better off with the reelection of President Obama. An Obama reelection would assure full implementation of Obamacare, a continuation of the assault on American energy production, more economic policies that destroy American jobs and the appointment of more radically leftist judges including perhaps to the Supreme Court. Whatever our differences inside the Republican primaries, no candidate should be suggesting that Barack Obama is a reasonable alternative.”

And statement two, a letter to RNC chief Reince Priebus (slightly edited):

Republicans must not lose sight of our ultimate goal in 2012: defeating President Obama in November. While we may disagree on which candidate will be the strongest opponent to the President in the general election, we can agree that any of the current Republican candidates would be a better president than Barack Obama.

As chairman of the Republican National Committee, you are in a position to focus our candidates on this goal. I request that you issue a pledge asking all the Republican presidential candidates to support our eventual nominee. It is imperative that Republicans unite once the nomination process is complete in order to defeat President Obama. We cannot afford four more years of his leadership.

Newt’s angle here, I assume, is to paint Santorum as a traitor to the cause so that voters will turn away from Team Sweater Vest in disgust and back to Newt as the designated Not Romney for the eleventh or twelfth time in the race. (I’ve lost count.) Mitt’s angle is not to mention what Santorum said anymore lest he end up repeating the “Romney = Obama” message inadvertently.



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 2 3 4 10

Climb off the ledge. Release the hostages. Mitt’s not going to be taking your guns away.

MJBrutus on March 23, 2012 at 6:35 PM

Bullshit he’s not. Listen to the man’s own words. Or is your face too fixed to his posterior for you to do so?

Dunedainn on March 23, 2012 at 6:36 PM

No, Santorum is lying out of desperation, anger, and frustration. It’s evident in everything he says and does. He sees his chances slipping away and there’s nothing he can do to stop the slide.

No, Santorum is telling the truth. If you can find a quote where he said to actually go out and vote for Obama, provide it. He said you might as well stick with what you’ve got. He made a case that a vote between two such candidates is pointless. Stop lying.

Insofar as you are concerned, there’s nothing principled or patriotic about encouraging others to throw away their votes while the country is at a decision point.

Actually, it’s a way of telling the GOP to stop shoving garbage down our throats, or else we can rescind our support. It is the only tool you have at your disposal to get them to stop imitating the Democrats.

In this election, not voting or voting for an inconsequential protest party would be the moral equivalent of doing nothing. Encouraging others to do nothing when their country needs them is despicable. You’re despicable.

troyriser_gopftw on March 23, 2012 at 6:32 PM

You’re selling out for the sake of “unity,” selling out your beliefs for the sake of winning. That’s an opportunist. You’re the despicable one.

Stoic Patriot on March 23, 2012 at 6:36 PM

Dire Straits:And TGIF to both of ya!!:)

canopfor on March 23, 2012 at 6:35 PM

TGIF to you friend..:)

Dire Straits on March 23, 2012 at 6:36 PM

Santorum will still win Louisiana, but by less than he would have a week ago. And the voters Santorum loses will mostly go to Newt, not Romney.

ITguy on March 23, 2012 at 6:25 PM

That’s wish-casting… the polls of a Sant/Romney race show that Newt’s supporters divide nearly equally.

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on March 23, 2012 at 6:28 PM

Re-read what I said. I didn’t say that if Newt quit that all of his votes would go to Santorum.

I said that anyone in LA who would have voted for Santorum, but is now upset with him over this fumble, will likely vote for Newt, not Romney.

ITguy on March 23, 2012 at 6:37 PM

Meltdown? Did you guys actually watch the clip?

fadetogray on March 23, 2012 at 6:31 PM

LOL.

rubberneck on March 23, 2012 at 6:37 PM

The War Planner on March 23, 2012 at 6:35 PM

I agree..:)

Dire Straits on March 23, 2012 at 6:38 PM

Dunedainn on March 23, 2012 at 6:36 PM

And who, pray tell, among the candidates is not a “neo-Fascist gun-grabber?” Name any or all to whom that doesn’t apply.

KingGold on March 23, 2012 at 6:38 PM

angryed on March 23, 2012 at 6:25 PM

If you can’t tell any difference between Obama and Romney you’re simply not very bright, or you’re just here making mischief.

DrSteve on March 23, 2012 at 6:38 PM

1.) That’s for your sake, not mine – words like that get you banned. Not that I’ll lose a whole lot of sleep over that, but whatever.

Golly. I’m so warmed by your thoughtfulness.

2.) When the “Constitution” Party (they seem to have forgotten that the document’s been amended a few times) develops a platform that doesn’t disgust a full majority of the voting public, maybe I’ll pull for them. Until then, I’ll focus on getting the socialist out of the White House.

KingGold on March 23, 2012 at 6:34 PM

You’re free to do as you will. As will I.

Stoic Patriot on March 23, 2012 at 6:38 PM

Meltdown? Did you guys actually watch the clip?

fadetogray on March 23, 2012 at 6:31 PM

I heard they called in the national guard to set up a 10 mile perimeter around the radioactive candidate.

MJBrutus on March 23, 2012 at 6:38 PM

whatcat on March 23, 2012 at 6:31 PM

*shaking the head*

cmsinaz on March 23, 2012 at 6:38 PM

y’all get the Hewitt transcript.

Sanct-orum TOTALLY cut his own throat AGAIN.

Ragspierre on March 23, 2012 at 6:39 PM

I have to laugh when I read this site. You people are living in your own little political junkie bubble.

Most of the republicans and conservatives I know are not going to vote for Obama. About 80% of them are just not going to vote at all if Romney is the nominee. They think, as i do, that Romney is not going to actually change much. I cannot believe that four years after the debacle that was McCain, we are going to repeat the same mistake again.

The sad fact is, four years from now the GOP will stick us with another RINO. We need a new conservative party.

fight like a girl on March 23, 2012 at 6:39 PM

To quote The Magnificent Bastard, Andrew Breitbart:

“I don’t care who our candidate is and I haven’t since the beginning of this. I haven’t! Ask not what the candidate can do for you, ask what you can do for the candidate! …When I walk through CPAC or a I travel the United States to meet people in the Tea Party who care – black, white, gay, and straight – anyone that’s willing to stand next to me to fight the Progressive left, I will be in that bunker. And if you’re not in that bunker because you’re not satisfied with [a certain] candidate, more than shame on you! You’re on the other side!

Resist We Much on March 23, 2012 at 6:32 PM

God, I really, really miss that guy! Sometimes I go back and watch his CPAC speech and when it hits that part, I gotta tell you the tears begin welling up.

Good comment, RWM. Your math is spot on!

The War Planner on March 23, 2012 at 6:39 PM

..crosspatch had it right. 3rd party == support for Obama.

The War Planner on March 23, 2012 at 6:35 PM

Again, only a vote for Obama increases Obama’s vote total in a given state. A vote for a third party does not do that. A vote for a third party is a vote for a third party. It’s not a hard concept to grasp.

Stoic Patriot on March 23, 2012 at 6:39 PM

I heard they called in the national guard to set up a 10 mile perimeter around the radioactive candidate.

MJBrutus on March 23, 2012 at 6:38 PM

Really? I’ve heard no such news from the Romney camp.

Dunedainn on March 23, 2012 at 6:40 PM

Dire Straits on March 23, 2012 at 6:33 PM

you got it :)

canopfor on March 23, 2012 at 6:35 PM

Hey there good buddy

cmsinaz on March 23, 2012 at 6:40 PM

Romney-I’m an etch-a-sketch

Santorum-I’m not an etch-a-sketch-but i play one on TV

gerrym51 on March 23, 2012 at 6:41 PM

anyone that’s willing to stand next to me to fight the Progressive left, I will be in that bunker. And if you’re not in that bunker because you’re not satisfied with [a certain] candidate, more than shame on you! You’re on the other side!”

Resist We Much on March 23, 2012 at 6:32 PM

And if that candidate IS a member of the Progressive left? What then?

One of the few times I’ve ever disagreed with Breitbart.

Dunedainn on March 23, 2012 at 6:41 PM

Honestly…Gingrich doesn’t have a dog in this hunt anymore, right? Same for Paul? No way they would be able to have the delegates to even be considered in a brokered convention. This could only be between Romney and Santorum, at best.

Santorum must be trying to woo those voters who are only tickled by seeing media types get yelled at.

Sammo21 on March 23, 2012 at 6:42 PM

We’re all either Romney supporters or Obama supporters at this point.

crosspatch on March 23, 2012 at 6:12 PM

Wrong. Some of us are brokered convention “none of the above” supporers.

ITguy on March 23, 2012 at 6:42 PM

Unpresidential interview. First sentence includes the word “laughable”. Tells Cavuto “you are all riled up” while speaking in a combative tone. Poor showing by Rick, and I’m a fan.

DrStock on March 23, 2012 at 6:43 PM

Most of the republicans and conservatives I know are not going to vote for Obama. About 80% of them are just not going to vote at all if Romney is the nominee. They think, as i do, that Romney is not going to actually change much. I cannot believe that four years after the debacle that was McCain, we are going to repeat the same mistake again.

You must only know ONE.

gerrym51 on March 23, 2012 at 6:43 PM

2.) If anyone wants to vote for someone who has switched his position on just about every issue, and served as the architect for Obamacare, then they can vote for the perpetual charlatan Republicans.

Stoic Patriot on March 23, 2012 at 6:31 PM

Aren’t you describing every politician? Regardless, I’d still vote for a politician as opposed to a tinfoil hat wearing nutjob from a third party who could get elected dog catcher.

Just stop with the pretense, just vote for Obama if you’re so hell-bent on wasting a vote. I’m sure he’ll be happy to get it.

Pcoop on March 23, 2012 at 6:44 PM

DrStock on March 23, 2012 at 6:43 PM

I think he said, “wound up,” which is a kissing cousin to the phrase, “wee weed up,” if I have my etymology right :-)

MJBrutus on March 23, 2012 at 6:44 PM

Newt is the only one to be posititvely impacted.

ITguy on March 23, 2012 at 6:23 PM

Yeap…

… Hang in there Newt!!!

:)

Seven Percent Solution on March 23, 2012 at 6:44 PM

Santorum-I’m not an etch-a-sketch-but i play one on TV

gerrym51 on March 23, 2012 at 6:41 PM

No, he’s a game of Jenga.

Pcoop on March 23, 2012 at 6:45 PM

Wrong. Some of us are brokered convention “none of the above” supporers.

ITguy on March 23, 2012 at 6:42 PM

Not when the curtain’s pulled behind you and you know no one else but God is watching you.

Pcoop on March 23, 2012 at 6:46 PM

This is an unfortunate situation where the President has taken a horrible tragedy, where someone did a heinous act, and that the authorities did not, did another horrible act in not following and prosecuting that to the fullest extent of the law.

http://www.hughhewitt.com/blog/g/effa3f08-3eb7-4b98-9d70-2fba245df63f

He calls out the president for politicizing it, but I doubt he is up on the facts of the case. Just another case of Santorum being off message.

rubberneck on March 23, 2012 at 6:46 PM

Aren’t you describing every politician? Regardless, I’d still vote for a politician as opposed to a tinfoil hat wearing nutjob from a third party who could get elected dog catcher.

Just stop with the pretense, just vote for Obama if you’re so hell-bent on wasting a vote. I’m sure he’ll be happy to get it.

Pcoop on March 23, 2012 at 6:44 PM

I’m hardly describing every politician. Almost every politician has changed at least 1 position, I grant you, but not nearly every position. Romney has changed on abortion, gay marriage, gun control, healthcare, the minimum wage, union-busting, cap & trade, free trade, etceteras.

There is no pretense. I won’t vote for Obama because I’m not going to vote for someone as bad as Romney, and I won’t vote for Romney because I’m not going to vote for someone as bad as Obama. That’s why I’ll vote 3rd party.

Stoic Patriot on March 23, 2012 at 6:46 PM

I think he said, “wound up,” which is a kissing cousin to the phrase, “wee weed up,” if I have my etymology right :-)

MJBrutus on March 23, 2012 at 6:44 PM

Aha! That’s it, “wound up.” Anyway, accusing someone who seems quite calm of being wound up while using Santorum’s tone comes of poorly. So you study etymology?

DrStock on March 23, 2012 at 6:48 PM

He got all rickricked up.

Swerve22 on March 23, 2012 at 6:48 PM

Wrong. Some of us are brokered convention “none of the above” supporers.

ITguy on March 23, 2012 at 6:42 PM

I support Gingrich, but I know there is no chance he will win, and if it goes to a brokered convention, which now seems the best case scenario, I’ll probably be back to Pawlenty.

If the nominee is Romney, I’ll be supporting him. With my vote and with money. Obama is sinking America. Four more years and the quicksand will be up to our nostrils.

fadetogray on March 23, 2012 at 6:48 PM

“This is the hatchet job of all time!”

Someone take the hatchet from Ricky before he hurts himself even more.

crosspatch on March 23, 2012 at 6:49 PM

Dire Straits on March 23, 2012 at 6:33 PM

you got it :)

canopfor on March 23, 2012 at 6:35 PM

Hey there good buddy

cmsinaz on March 23, 2012 at 6:40 PM

You guys started without me…

:)

TGIF

*clink*

Seven Percent Solution on March 23, 2012 at 6:49 PM

So you study etymology?

DrStock on March 23, 2012 at 6:48 PM

LOL! No, I just play etymologist on the internet :-)

MJBrutus on March 23, 2012 at 6:49 PM

We’re all either Romney supporters or Obama supporters at this point.

crosspatch on March 23, 2012 at 6:12 PM

Thanks for putting me in a corner there. Appreciate it. So if I oppose the status quo and am tired of the GOP pissing on my back and telling me it’s raining, somehow I instantly become an Obama supporter? Is that what you’re saying?

Because if it is, then I’m afraid you have no firm grasp on the concept of Conservatism.

Dunedainn on March 23, 2012 at 6:49 PM

Poor Angry Rick is off the reservation.

Roy Rogers on March 23, 2012 at 6:49 PM

Aren’t you describing every politician? Regardless, I’d still vote for a politician as opposed to a tinfoil hat wearing nutjob from a third party who could get elected dog catcher.

Pcoop on March 23, 2012 at 6:44 PM

And I’d rather vote for a 3rd party than your tin-pot dictator who isn’t fit to be dog catcher because he strapped his dog to the roof of his car.

FloatingRock on March 23, 2012 at 6:49 PM

they can find the Constitution Party on their own.
KingGold on March 23, 2012 at 6:29 PM

Why aren’t you trolling at the fringe party’s sites instead of being here? Seriously?

whatcat on March 23, 2012 at 6:34 PM

Oops, my apologies. My bad, that should have been directed to the commenter you were responding to. Dang, it is Friday!

whatcat on March 23, 2012 at 6:49 PM

Rule #1 in marketing: If you’re explaining, you’re losing.

crosspatch on March 23, 2012 at 6:13 PM

Agree…so, the Mitt camp have been explaining the Etch-A-Sketch since yesterday morning.

Schadenfreude on March 23, 2012 at 6:50 PM

Some of us are brokered convention “none of the above” supporers.

That isn’t going to happen and that should be crystal clear at this point. Romney’s polling lead is widening. There will be no brokered convention. It’s over. You’re either a Romney supporter or an Obama supporter.

crosspatch on March 23, 2012 at 6:50 PM

1. The re-election of Barack Obama Romney will result in the demise of the Republican Party.

fiatboomer on March 23, 2012 at 6:19 PM

Figured I would correct your post.

Mitt for President knows not a single Republican in 2002

Mitt is NOT a Republican never was.

So if wins the Republican Nomination that will mean there are two Democratic Parties and no Republican Party.

Steveangell on March 23, 2012 at 6:50 PM

Why do serious, Rick? “I beeeeleeeve Wick samptorum is that mannn”

Rusty Allen on March 23, 2012 at 6:50 PM

That’s why I’ll vote 3rd party.

Stoic Patriot on March 23, 2012 at 6:46 PM

“Third party?” Nobody cares. It is the exact same as not voting.

You are a child. They don’t vote either.

fadetogray on March 23, 2012 at 6:51 PM

Seven Percent Solution on March 23, 2012 at 6:49 PM

Happy TGIF to you sir..:)

PS..Remember the GOP will betray you..:):)

Dire Straits on March 23, 2012 at 6:51 PM

Schadenfreude on March 23, 2012 at 6:50 PM

So I take it you are in the Obama camp?

crosspatch on March 23, 2012 at 6:51 PM

That isn’t going to happen and that should be crystal clear at this point. Romney’s polling lead is widening. There will be no brokered convention. It’s over. You’re either a Romney supporter or an Obama supporter.

crosspatch on March 23, 2012 at 6:50 PM

Or a third-party supporter — an option that I urge anyone who’s eligible to vote to seriously consider.

Stoic Patriot on March 23, 2012 at 6:51 PM

Again, only a vote for Obama increases Obama’s vote total in a given state. A vote for a third party does not do that. A vote for a third party is a vote for a third party. It’s not a hard concept to grasp.

Stoic Patriot on March 23, 2012 at 6:39 PM

..nor was crosspatch’s assertion. A vote for a third party is, as someone in a previous commented correctly asserted, a pretense and does nothing to rid us of that scum bag, Obama.

A vote for a third party ensures a liberal SCOTUS, 4 trillion more in deficits, ObamaCare, and that unfettered idiot vetoing everything in an attempt to ensure his socialist historical legacy.

You want to tag-and-bag America in the next four years, then gord on ahead. Guarantee your conservative Nirvana will not arrive in 2016.

The War Planner on March 23, 2012 at 6:52 PM

“Third party?” Nobody cares. It is the exact same as not voting.

You are a child. They don’t vote either.

fadetogray on March 23, 2012 at 6:51 PM

It’s unseemly when a crying infant like yourself throws a temper tantrum. A third party vote differs from not voting because it increases the vote tally of that third party. Not voting does not result in this consequence.

Your grasp on reality needs some serious reworking.

Stoic Patriot on March 23, 2012 at 6:53 PM

There is no pretense.

I won’t vote for Romney because I’m not going to vote for someone as bad as Obama. That’s why I’ll vote 3rd party.

Stoic Patriot on March 23, 2012 at 6:46 PM

Pcoop on March 23, 2012 at 6:53 PM

If you don’t see that America will not survive 4 more years of the most dangerously radical president we have ever had you are a moron.

If Rick can’t handle this, how will he handle Chairman One-bama?

NickDeringer on March 23, 2012 at 6:53 PM

A vote for a third party ensures a liberal SCOTUS, 4 trillion more in deficits, ObamaCare, and that unfettered idiot vetoing everything in an attempt to ensure his socialist historical legacy.

The War Planner on March 23, 2012 at 6:52 PM

And a vote for Romney gets us…what, exactly?
That’s right, the same exact thing.

Dunedainn on March 23, 2012 at 6:53 PM

Hearing the angry, ranting Rick Santorum in this interview has made me feel much, much better about my decision to vote for Mitt Romney and NOT Rick Santorum.

Angry Rick Santorum does not have the temperament required for a nominee of a national party. As Instapundit said, Rick “Porn Police” Santorum is someone who can’t hold up under pressure. Santorum needs to end his campaign now for the good of the party and the good of the country.

Hey, Rick, it’s time to pack it in!

bluegill on March 23, 2012 at 6:53 PM

Twelve minutes from today’s Cavuto. I agree, he never said he’d vote for Obama over Romney. What he said was that “we” the electorate might collectively conclude that there’s not enough difference between them to justify replacing the incumbent, the implication being that that would be a perfectly reasonable conclusion. Right? Read his comments from yesterday again or watch the video; the clear impression I got was “I wouldn’t blame anyone who thought that way,” an impression apparently shared by Santorum supporter Ed Morrissey.

I — and others — tried to tell you all this yesterday. I think Drudge may have led you around by the nose on this one. Everybody adopted his interpretation of the comments as, “Obama is better than Romney,” rather than the far more likely, “Romney is not sufficiently better than Obama.”

And I can see already that a whole lot of people are going to insist on the misinterpretation being the actual truth and any clarification being a lie.

tom on March 23, 2012 at 6:54 PM

I cringed when I heard Santorum say what he did, and nothing he says today to walk it back is enough because it’s not honest. The man is all about Rick, and not about us. I hope Karen leaves him and runs off with some octogenarian to The Villages.

jan3 on March 23, 2012 at 6:54 PM

“Third party?” Nobody cares. It is the exact same as not voting.

You are a child. They don’t vote either.

fadetogray on March 23, 2012 at 6:51 PM

..ouch! That was delicious!

The War Planner on March 23, 2012 at 6:55 PM

Santorum’s statement implied strongly that there’s no difference and we could just as well stay the course with Obama if Romney is the nominee. This just gives those inclined to stay home and not vote another excuse to do so which would impact the congressional elections as well as the presidency. He should have admitted he misspoke and backed down but instead he attacks.

Nomas on March 23, 2012 at 6:56 PM

Just because there’s a new party doesn’t mean it will be the 3rd party. If it’s a good one it may be the new 1st party, or at least 2nd. In dire times such as these it’s entirely possible that in ’16 either the D or R party might not even bother running a candidate, they’re so unpopular.

FloatingRock on March 23, 2012 at 6:56 PM

jan3 on March 23, 2012 at 6:54 PM

Did you hear him with Cavuto today? If you didn’t think he could make it worse for himself, think again. Call a carpenter, the man is completely unglued!

MJBrutus on March 23, 2012 at 6:56 PM

..nor was crosspatch’s assertion. A vote for a third party is, as someone in a previous commented correctly asserted, a pretense and does nothing to rid us of that scum bag, Obama.

And a vote for Romney does nothing to improve your situation.

A vote for a third party ensures a liberal SCOTUS, 4 trillion more in deficits, ObamaCare, and that unfettered idiot vetoing everything in an attempt to ensure his socialist historical legacy.

SCOTUS is going to be liberal regardless. Romney will appoint justices of the Souter variety. Do you honestly believe that the guy who ran to the left of Ted Kennedy on abortion and gay marriage will do anything differently?

You want to tag-and-bag America in the next four years, then gord on ahead. Guarantee your conservative Nirvana will not arrive in 2016.

The War Planner on March 23, 2012 at 6:52 PM

Maybe. Maybe not. But it sure as hell won’t come in 2012.

Stoic Patriot on March 23, 2012 at 6:56 PM

That’s why I’ll vote 3rd party.

Stoic Patriot on March 23, 2012 at 6:46 PM

“Third party?” Nobody cares. It is the exact same as not voting.

You are a child. They don’t vote either.

fadetogray on March 23, 2012 at 6:51 PM

Any time a new commenter jumps in with the “Hey gang, lets all vote against the GOP!” routine, the first thing that should come to mind is “Moby/concern troll”.

whatcat on March 23, 2012 at 6:56 PM

That isn’t going to happen and that should be crystal clear at this point. Romney’s polling lead is widening. There will be no brokered convention. It’s over. You’re either a Romney supporter or an Obama supporter.

crosspatch on March 23, 2012 at 6:50 PM

Built on a huge lie that good people like Ed bought into and made it far worst.

Like Rick said he says this at every event. Mitt says almost exactly the same thing at his events.

We does not mean and never has meant the Candidate making the statement.

The statement was totally valid. Every single election we measure the candidates. If we see no significant difference we keep the incumbent in voting for him. We the People. In other words so Ed can understand the overall voting public is WE.

Man it is sickening to me how Ed is destroying the only chance of defeating Obama. Mitt can not win. No liberal Republican will ever win the general election. Never has happened never will happen.

Steveangell on March 23, 2012 at 6:57 PM

Just because there’s a new party doesn’t mean it will be the 3rd party. If it’s a good one it may be the new 1st party, or at least 2nd. In dire times such as these it’s entirely possible that in ’16 either the D or R party might not even bother running a candidate, they’re so unpopular.

FloatingRock on March 23, 2012 at 6:56 PM

One can always hope.

Dunedainn on March 23, 2012 at 6:58 PM

And a vote for Romney gets us…what, exactly?
That’s right, the same exact thing.

Dunedainn on March 23, 2012 at 6:53 PM

..not even close. Look, I’m not trying to be snotty here, but do a little thinking. RWM laid the difference out pretty succinctly:

Resist We Much on March 23, 2012 at 6:32 PM

The War Planner on March 23, 2012 at 6:58 PM

Unless up now means down and black now means white, the only “hatchet job” going on here is what Santorum yesterday & his spokesperson today said about Romney.

Dark Star on March 23, 2012 at 6:58 PM

There was a raccoon rustling around in a dumpster outside my work and I was convinced it was Rabid Rick just off his Cavuto interview trying to find porn magazines.

Rusty Allen on March 23, 2012 at 6:58 PM

Again, only a vote for Obama increases Obama’s vote total in a given state. A vote for a third party does not do that. A vote for a third party is a vote for a third party. It’s not a hard concept to grasp.

Stoic Patriot on March 23, 2012 at 6:39 PM

I HATE all the 5 weasels who are running, no secret here.

However, your math gave you Clinton.

The land is so Fluked.

Schadenfreude on March 23, 2012 at 6:58 PM

Remember Rick, fold the sweater vest carefully, lining each fold with white, crisp tissue paper and remember a few moth balls will work wonders…it’s over Rick, you should get out while you still have a reputation. (BTW – lose the Etch-A-Sketch, it’s pitiful) In 2008, Romney left the race when it was obvious he had no path to the nomination and was back to fight another day. Huckabee lingered longer but didn’t say the wacky things you did, didn’t burn bridges and ended up with a successful career in cable TV. Rick, give it up – a graceful exit and a full endorsement of Romney may just pull you out of this career-killing road you’re on.

BabysCatz on March 23, 2012 at 6:59 PM

I HATE all the 5 weasels who are running, no secret here.

However, your math gave you Clinton.

The land is so Fluked.

Schadenfreude on March 23, 2012 at 6:58 PM

No, “Read my lips, no new taxes,” and Bob Dole gave us 8 years of Clinton.

Dunedainn on March 23, 2012 at 7:00 PM

I HATE all the 5 weasels who are running, no secret here.

However, your math gave you Clinton.

The land is so Fluked.

Schadenfreude on March 23, 2012 at 6:58 PM

When you have nothing but turkeys as your main candidates, there’s really no point in siding with one turkey over another. Recall that it was George HW Bush, not Clinton, that gave us Souter, and that was with a guy who had a far less troubling record than Romney.

I do agree that the country’s Fluked, however.

Stoic Patriot on March 23, 2012 at 7:01 PM

And a vote for Romney gets us…what, exactly?
That’s right, the same exact thing.

Dunedainn on March 23, 2012 at 6:53 PM

No, we get someone with business experience that has actually saved businesses from the brink of bankruptcy. That’s what who I want to save us from that very brink.

Pcoop on March 23, 2012 at 7:01 PM

Seven Percent Solution on March 23, 2012 at 6:49 PM

*clink*
welcome aboard 7%

cmsinaz on March 23, 2012 at 7:01 PM

In dire times such as these it’s entirely possible that in ’16 either the D or R party might not even bother running a candidate, they’re so unpopular.

FloatingRock on March 23, 2012 at 6:56 PM

One can always hope.

Dunedainn on March 23, 2012 at 6:58 PM

..and if Romney gets elected and performs as you suspect he might, then I will be right there beside you at the barricades with the torches and pitchforks.

I just want to cut the cancer out now so we can handle the treatable stuff before the patient dies.

The War Planner on March 23, 2012 at 7:01 PM

Schadenfreude on March 23, 2012 at 6:58 PM

Is she still sleeping?

Syzygy on March 23, 2012 at 7:01 PM

Hugh Hewitt Santorum Transcript:
http://www.hughhewitt.com/blog/g/effa3f08-3eb7-4b98-9d70-2fba245df63f

Hewitt helped him out

tbrickert on March 23, 2012 at 7:02 PM

No, “Read my lips, no new taxes,” and Bob Dole gave us 8 years of Clinton.

Dunedainn on March 23, 2012 at 7:00 PM

Jimmy Carter gave us Ronald Reagan.

Pcoop on March 23, 2012 at 7:02 PM

Schadenfreude on March 23, 2012 at 6:58 PM

Young Jedi I see we are still working on following the Buckley rule??!!??..Any progress?..:)

Dire Straits on March 23, 2012 at 7:02 PM

Did you hear him with Cavuto today? If you didn’t think he could make it worse for himself, think again. Call a carpenter, the man is completely unglued!
MJBrutus on March 23, 2012 at 6:56 PM

While I agree with your analysis, wouldn’t “Call Elmer!” be a more exact plea?

whatcat on March 23, 2012 at 7:02 PM

So, Rick prefers Obama over Romney but he wouldn’t actually vote for Obama.

And the critics’ responses are a hatchet job????

Rick is splitting hairs and he’s lost any support in the primaries I may have had for him. For the record, I don’t like any of the candidates, but I’ll support the evenutal winner, even if it is Santorum because a head of cabbage would be better than Obama.

BMF on March 23, 2012 at 7:03 PM

The War Planner on March 23, 2012 at 7:01 PM

+ 100.Nice post sir..:)

Dire Straits on March 23, 2012 at 7:04 PM

So I take it you are in the Obama camp?

crosspatch on March 23, 2012 at 6:51 PM

Your take would lose any lottery. If there is one thing I despise more than him, it’s the stupid people of a once great land who brung him.

I see 2008 repeating itself right in front of my very eyes.

Schadenfreude on March 23, 2012 at 7:04 PM

While I agree with your analysis, wouldn’t “Call Elmer!” be a more exact plea?

whatcat on March 23, 2012 at 7:02 PM

Well yeah. I was thinking that carpenter’s use carpenter’s glue and all, but I like your version better :-)

MJBrutus on March 23, 2012 at 7:04 PM

+ 100.Nice post sir..:)

Dire Straits on March 23, 2012 at 7:04 PM

Nice post :)

Schadenfreude on March 23, 2012 at 7:04 PM

Insofar as you are concerned, there’s nothing principled or patriotic about encouraging others to throw away their votes while the country is at a decision point. In this election, not voting or voting for an inconsequential protest party would be the moral equivalent of doing nothing. Encouraging others to do nothing when their country needs them is despicable. You’re despicable.

troyriser_gopftw on March 23, 2012 at 6:32 PM

Wrong. Nobody owes their vote to someone else. Romney doesn’t deserve anyone’s vote. Neither does Santorum. Neither does Gingrich.

If you’re a candidate, you have to give people a reason to vote for you. If they don’t vote for you, you failed to give them a reason.

If Romney manages to get the nomination, but loses the election, it won’t be the fault of the people who didn’t vote for him. It will be the fault of Romney as a candidate.

The same applies to Santorum, by the way.

tom on March 23, 2012 at 7:05 PM

I see 2008 repeating itself right in front of my very eyes.

Schadenfreude on March 23, 2012 at 7:04 PM

we didn’t have four years of Obama as a reference point to work off of in 2008. Not the same thing.

Pcoop on March 23, 2012 at 7:05 PM

This is an unfortunate situation where the President has taken a horrible tragedy, where someone did a heinous act, and that the authorities did not, did another horrible act in not following and prosecuting that to the fullest extent of the law.

A heinous act? Why doesn’t Rick just call up Sharpton and have him hold him a spot at the riots?

lowandslow on March 23, 2012 at 7:05 PM

Any progress?..:)

Dire Straits on March 23, 2012 at 7:02 PM

Nope; I looked in on the fat lady, and she’s still snoring.

Schadenfreude on March 23, 2012 at 7:06 PM

Nice post :)

Schadenfreude on March 23, 2012 at 7:04 PM

Nice post :)

JPeterman on March 23, 2012 at 7:06 PM

Rick, I hate to break this to you, but you deserve this. What you said was stupid, although you’re right that it’s been distorted.

JannyMae on March 23, 2012 at 7:06 PM

Schadenfreude on March 23, 2012 at 7:06 PM

LoLz..Keep looking..:):)

Dire Straits on March 23, 2012 at 7:07 PM

That’s why I’ll vote 3rd party.

Stoic Patriot on March 23, 2012 at 6:46 PM

Ah, yes, the coward’s way out — just have the balls & vote for Obama then, because that is exactly what voting 3rd party or not voting equates to.

And those who think Santorum is right, that the guy who founded Bain Capital is the “mirror image” of community organizer Obama obviously do not know the basic difference between capitalism and socialism. I just can’t with you.

Dark Star on March 23, 2012 at 7:07 PM

So, Rick prefers Obama over Romney but he wouldn’t actually vote for Obama.

And the critics’ responses are a hatchet job????

Rick is splitting hairs and he’s lost any support in the primaries I may have had for him. For the record, I don’t like any of the candidates, but I’ll support the evenutal winner, even if it is Santorum because a head of cabbage would be better than Obama.

BMF on March 23, 2012 at 7:03 PM

We the people prefer Obama over Romney.

We the people that is all the people of the US that will vote for these two possibly.

That is what Rick said and meant.

Mitt says exactly the same think We will vote for Obama not Santorum because Santorum is an economic light weight.

We when said by a politician means We the people nearly 100% of the time.

This was a baseless attack only a true Marxist would love.

Steveangell on March 23, 2012 at 7:07 PM

A vote for a third party ensures a liberal SCOTUS, 4 trillion more in deficits, ObamaCare, and that unfettered idiot vetoing everything in an attempt to ensure his socialist historical legacy.

If a 3rd party is so terrible and impossible then all the more reason for small-gov supporters like me to stop big-gov people from hijacking the Party. I mean, if there are three parties and two of them are big-gov and one small-gov, then that’s one thing, but if there are only two big-gov parties then there is no party to represent people like me.

FloatingRock on March 23, 2012 at 7:07 PM

Did you hear him with Cavuto today? If you didn’t think he could make it worse for himself, think again. Call a carpenter, the man is completely unglued!

MJBrutus on March 23, 2012 at 6:56 PM

Just watched it. Unglued is a kind way of putting it.

jan3 on March 23, 2012 at 7:07 PM

And those who think Santorum is right, that the guy who founded Bain Capital is the “mirror image” of community organizer Obama obviously do not know the basic difference between capitalism and socialism. I just can’t with you.

Dark Star on March 23, 2012 at 7:07 PM

Amen.

Pcoop on March 23, 2012 at 7:08 PM

Not the same thing.

Pcoop on March 23, 2012 at 7:05 PM

Same weasels. No leaders. Look at the Congress, the Senate and the 5 squishes. The land pivots like hardly ever before and there’s no one with a core of 4-5 steady items to follow them for.

I’m glad for you if you see anything different. I’m a realist.

Schadenfreude on March 23, 2012 at 7:08 PM

Nice post :)

Schadenfreude on March 23, 2012 at 7:04 PM

Nice post :)

JPeterman on March 23, 2012 at 7:06 PM

rofl..Good one..:)

Dire Straits on March 23, 2012 at 7:08 PM

Nobody owes their vote to someone else.
tom on March 23, 2012 at 7:05 PM

So – why are you here? As opposed to Kos, DU or some other “vote-against the GOP” site?

whatcat on March 23, 2012 at 7:09 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 10