Santorum Super PAC ad: “We just can’t trust Mitt Romney”

posted at 3:05 pm on March 27, 2012 by Tina Korbe

As Rick Santorum has shifted his sights from securing the GOP nomination outright before Tampa to merely blocking Mitt Romney, the pro-Santorum Super PAC Red, White and Blue Fund has correspondingly gone progressively negative in its ads. Where once the PAC sought to sell Santorum, it now seeks to undermine Mitt Romney. As far as strategy goes, it’s about the only one that makes sense. Romney’s negativity toward Newt Gingrich in both Iowa and Florida certainly weakened the former Speaker. Who’s to say the Red, White and Blue Fund won’t significantly weaken Romney with ads like this one, which airs in Wisconsin? Click the image to watch.

Again, Rick Santorum, Ron Paul and Newt Gingrich collectively needed to win 55 percent of all the delegates up for grabs after March 14. Between then and now, they’ve collected about 23 percent. Next Tuesday, 96 delegates are up for grabs in D.C., Maryland and Wisconsin. Santorum isn’t even on the ballot in D.C. and he trails Romney by 13 points in Wisconsin, which is winner-take-all by district and statewide. Romney is also expected to win Maryland.

Santorum has kinda, sorta hinted that Wisconsin could be the end of the line for him, but he has also signaled he intends to go all the way to Tampa. As his fighting words to New York Times reporter Jeff Zeleny yesterday indicated, he’s still got a few tricks up his sleeve. This week’s respite from primary on top of primary — especially in conjunction with the Obamacare hearings — might just give Wisconsin voters the space they need to reassess Rick Santorum and deliver an unexpected win for him.


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

ok right2bright- who’s your guy?

drballard on March 27, 2012 at 5:44 PM

Who is has always been, the same as last time…the guy that can beat Obama.
If Mitt is chosen, you will be embarrassed by your vitriol, how foolish it is.
Steel sharpens steel…the nomination process is to find the best of the rest…I have stated, from the very beginning, I think that we have the best candidates ever assembled.
Ricks conservative record is next to none (the real record that is actually defined by organizations that study these things, not the whining of opponents), Newt’s leadership and what he has done in the conservative party can hardly be measured, his history and experience is unmatched, Mitt has the money and intelligence to forge an awesome campaign, he has the ability to create organizations to accomplish seemingling impossible tasks, I just want him to focus on conservative tasks. And focus on whatever his core values are and show them to us, instead of always “campaigning”.
I feel more comfortable with someone who can make a mistake, admit it, and fix it…Rick has done that (No Child Left Behind), Newt has done that…but Mitt won’t, he is afraid, and I don’t feel comfortable with a leader who is afraid of being honest, thus by opinion that he would be a good VP, because he could step in and take over, but honest leadership? I don’t know.
Search and you will find that I said I would whole heartily support him for President, last elections cycle, if he chose to spend the next couple of years showing us his conservative credentials, supporting conservative causes…and he did not.
But if he is selected, he will have my full support…that is unlike you guys if the others were selected, and that’s the difference between you and I.
I am not hung up on personality, faith, looks…but on a record and as a “package”, and to win you have to have that “it” factor, and Mitt does not have it, he just doesn’t connect. He is too afraid to connect to people, because than he is vulnerable…too bad, it will tough for him to win, he won’t have the monetary edge he has had, he won’t have a record, except a liberal one, it will be tough.

right2bright on March 27, 2012 at 5:56 PM

Silence from the conservative right2bright. Unable to say who his conservative savior is.
Go back to your mosque and pray for me.

drballard on March 27, 2012 at 5:56 PM

Buttercup on March 27, 2012 at 4:28 PM
Both of them ran as conservatives.

antisocial on March 27, 2012 at 4:45 PM

Mo kidding. What’s your point?

Buttercup on March 27, 2012 at 5:59 PM

1) Hope for a brokered convention so the nominee (romney) is weakened in the general
2) Grit your teeth and support Romney now.
Which do you choose?

drballard on March 27, 2012 at 5:26 PM

3) Santorum wins the brokered convention and the General
4) Mitt wins it and the Tea Party runs a candidate for President. Unlikely he would win but you have to flush a corrupt party down the drain somehow. This is how the Wig Party ended nominating candidates that only had marginal support but strong establishment support.

Either of mine are vastly better as it is impossible for Mitt to win the General. He would have to be the first in History (100+ years) to do it.

If Mitt wins there is no Republican party just two Democrat Parties. The real one and the lite one called Republican.

Steveangell on March 27, 2012 at 5:59 PM

So Rick is your conservative savior? First off, he has lost the nomination. He lost. Get over it.
Second, was he conservative when he kept Penn a closed shop state? And when he enacted rx drug benefit? And when he voted 8x for record deficits? and when he tried to crush right to work. And when he was pro- choice?
Which of those positions scream “consistant conservative” to you?
Oh, yeah, he also lost the nomination process.

drballard on March 27, 2012 at 6:00 PM

So steveangell, you think it’s the right thing to deny the nom and give it to the guy who got less than 1/2 the votes? Are you a liberal? So redistribution of wealth is bad, but redistributing votes is good?

drballard on March 27, 2012 at 6:02 PM

If Santorum lost the primary porcess, what in the he!! makes you think he can win the general? No one outside of evangelical kooks are supporting him now.
(Not all evangelicals are kooks- justthe ones supporting a losing candidate)

drballard on March 27, 2012 at 6:04 PM

See, right2bright, this is where your stupid, thoughtless self show through. if you really meant what you said, that you’re just looking for a conservative, you’d say “Well, I support Rick because he voted x, y, and z” or “He accompliished this or that” but, you just hate Romney, so for you, it really is just anybody but romney even when there is no one else. How conservative is that?

drballard on March 27, 2012 at 5:52 PM

I have trumpeted Ricks accomplishments, all 8,000 votes have been analyzed by the National Taxpayers Union, and they deemed him the most conservative for the 12 year he served…and the only one to receive an “A” rating the last four years of Bush, against many of Bush’s budget proposal…I have stated that dozens of times, been accused of being a recording, and you say you have never seen it, well you can’t be everywhere. And of course it is Thomas Sowell who has confidence in Newt and in Rick, but not Mitt…and I consider him one of the great conservative minds in America. Most do, but of course when he made those statements he immediately became senile and stupid, ignorant, by Mitt supporters, instead of stepping back and asking “why?”…
Rather than accusing, just ask pal.
Now read what I wrote above…you should be ashamed, but you won’t, your kind never are, you just throw out accusations, and comments without any thought or knowledge of the person you are posting about.
It is humorous to me, and quite entertaining reading you guys flail about with your faux indignation and your “brilliant analysis”.

right2bright on March 27, 2012 at 6:04 PM

you 2 are cultists. Enjoy the kool aide.

drballard on March 27, 2012 at 6:05 PM

Silence from the conservative right2bright. Unable to say who his conservative savior is.
Go back to your mosque and pray for me.

drballard on March 27, 2012 at 5:56 PM

Tell me…how foolish do you think you know look?
HAHAHAHAHA!, just above is your answer, one from the “silent right2bright”…HAHAHAHA! I am embarrassed for you…look in the mirror and you will see a foolish man.

right2bright on March 27, 2012 at 6:06 PM

hey, if you’re going to rely on authority like a little girl, I’ll see your thomas sowell and raise you an Ann coulter, Christie, Rubio, Lee, Odonnel, rick santorum (“Romney is a true, consistant conservative ( I guess churchy Ricky was lying then)), NRO, Hugh Hewitt, Medved, Limbaugh, shall I go on?

drballard on March 27, 2012 at 6:08 PM

You have no penis. Neener neener.

drballard on March 27, 2012 at 6:08 PM

Glad you added those HAHAHA. Like a laff track. Point set and match for you, I guess.

drballard on March 27, 2012 at 6:10 PM

Regan the best known conservative of our time a moderate. Right. Regan droped out of the Democrat party long before running for President and wining the nomination. He sincerly changed his positions explaining in great detail his conversion to conservatism.

GWB was also a Conservative he flirted with moderate but got slapped down big time and went back to Conservative to win reelection.

But in your evil twisted mind all conservatives are moderates.

Steveangell on March 27, 2012 at 4:34 PM

Now I’m evil and twisted? Why because you don’t like facts?
Grow up. I thought liberals had to rewrite history to suit their needs.
I very much admire both Reagan and GWB but neither would pass the Trucon test for this Primary. I’m not going to give you a history lesson here, do your own research.

Buttercup on March 27, 2012 at 6:10 PM

I’m out. right2bright, I’ll pray for you.

drballard on March 27, 2012 at 6:12 PM

From the guy that still can’t provide the link or the quote he says Rick stated…yeah, keep calling me a moron, that makes you appear sane…and as usual, you have to change a quote to make it fit, par for the course.

right2bright on March 27, 2012 at 5:42 PM

Ok MORON just because you are incapable of doing your own research.

Here is the video of Richard saying it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIZKZHhONpU

And google is your friend

https://www.google.com/search?q=%22He+is+the+worst+Republican+in+the+country%22&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

Perhaps you would believe Rush Limbaugh.

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2012/03/26/rick_picks_a_fight_with_the_times

Gunlock Bill on March 27, 2012 at 6:12 PM

Well, it doesn’t matter at this point. At this point I would describe the possibility of Santorum getting the Republican nomination as about that of a meteor directly hitting me within the next 5 minutes.

It is practically a mathematical impossibility. There is no way to stop Romney from getting enough delegates before the convention. My figuring shows him with more than enough.

It just isn’t going to happen. So if there is no way for Santorum to be nominated, why is he still in the race?

To do as much damage as possible to Romney in his campaign against Obama.

At this point the only possible reason for Santorum to still be campaigning is to help Obama because it is impossible for him to help his own candidacy. For whatever reason he feels a need to see that Obama beats Romney.

Santorum *can not win the nomination* at this point. I mean, sure, if he won all the rest of the primaries he could, but that just isn’t going to happen. Just the contests where Romney has a “phone it in” lead are enough to win him the nomination.

Even if Santorum and increasing polling numbers, that might be reason enough to stay in it but Romney’s lead in the polls is widening.

There is no common sense logical reason for Santorum to continue this race OTHER than to help Obama and it is clear that is what he is trying to do.

crosspatch on March 27, 2012 at 6:14 PM

Tell me…how foolish do you think you know look?

right2bright on March 27, 2012 at 6:06 PM

Not nearly as foolish as you, MORON!!!!

Gunlock Bill on March 27, 2012 at 6:14 PM

I’m one who thinks this election is about taking Obama out of office. That’s not a Moby Moby. Now I’m of the impression you don’t know what projection means or what a Moby is.

Buttercup on March 27, 2012 at 5:54 PM

This election is about taking as many Democratic Socialists out of office as possible. That includes, but is not limited to, Obama. And you don’t do that by nominating a “moderate” “progressive” who is now claiming to be “severely conservative”.

I’m looking for a repeat of the 2010 election results. Are you?

And as to your calling me a Moby, I’ll let another commenter speak to that…

carefull 0DS, most of us know ITguy has brought the cred many times.

DanMan on March 19, 2012 at 2:37 PM

ITguy on March 27, 2012 at 6:18 PM

3) Santorum wins the brokered convention and the General
4) Mitt wins it and the Tea Party runs a candidate for President. Unlikely he would win but you have to flush a corrupt party down the drain somehow. This is how the Wig Party ended nominating candidates that only had marginal support but strong establishment support.

Steveangell on March 27, 2012 at 5:59 PM

Give me one reason why the delegates would overrule the voters and nominate the candidate who lost the popular vote.

If there is a Tea Party candidate, why didn’t he or she run in the first place?

Gelsomina on March 27, 2012 at 6:22 PM

So all the distorting of the Etch-A-Sketch comment by a campaign adviser, vulture capitalist charges and “Between Romney and Obama we might be better sticking with what we have” was not all out negativity? Good to know how low the bar is set.

Dark Star on March 27, 2012 at 6:25 PM

3) Santorum wins the brokered convention and the General

Romney is on track to win the nomination outright. There will be no “brokered convention”. He is currently on track to win the nomination with several states to spare.

4) Mitt wins it and the Tea Party runs a candidate for President.

Not going to happen either as all the major tea party organizations have already endorsed Romney. Why would they run a candidate against one they have already endorsed?

crosspatch on March 27, 2012 at 6:31 PM

The cognitive dissonance among some people is amazing. For all practical purposes it is *OVER*. This is not neverland. Wishing really, really hard isn’t going to make something come true. That is called “living in a fantasy world”.

crosspatch on March 27, 2012 at 6:32 PM

Romney won the “tea party” vote in Illinois, too. There is no major support anywhere for Santorum except in the anti-Mormon religious bigots. That’s it, that’s the extent of Santorum’s support.

crosspatch on March 27, 2012 at 6:37 PM

There is no major support anywhere for Santorum except in the anti-Mormon religious bigots. That’s it, that’s the extent of Santorum’s support.

crosspatch on March 27, 2012 at 6:37 PM

I remember some commenters here in 2008 saying the same thing about Mike Huckabee.

Yeah, sure, whatever. You think that anyone who does not trust and support Romney must be an “anti-Mormon religious bigot”.

You are no different from the Obama supporters who think that anyone who does not trust and support Obama must be a racist.

It’s a pathetic worldview. The problem could never be with “your guy”! The problem must be that there is something vile and wrong about the people who do not support your guy!

ITguy on March 27, 2012 at 6:43 PM

And how did Huckabee’s campaign turn out? Santorum’s will turn out the same. It already has, just that some people for whatever reason fail to recognize reality.

I really don’t give a darn about Santorum’s supporters, I just want Santorum to stop campaigning for Obama.

crosspatch on March 27, 2012 at 6:47 PM

Not2bright has been a cult anti-Mormon poster here for several years.

Perhaps you are new here.

Gunlock Bill on March 27, 2012 at 4:34 PM

I’ve been posting here for several years, and reading even longer. If you have evidence of your claim about right2bright, then , please produce it.

JannyMae on March 27, 2012 at 6:49 PM

And Romney was not “my guy” until all the previous candidates I could possibly support fell out. At this point it isn’t a matter of “my guy”, it is a matter of what is best for this country. Rick Santorum is an absolute nut that I don’t want anywhere near the White House. Newt Gingrich would be a waste of time and money because he can’t win the national election. Romney is the best shot we have.

If you aren’t supporting Romney then you ARE supporting Obama. Santorum is not going anywhere.

crosspatch on March 27, 2012 at 6:50 PM

So Rick is your conservative savior? First off, he has lost the nomination. He lost. Get over it. — drballard, echoing umpteen romneybots.

He has the required number of delegates to secure the nomination? Since when?

JannyMae on March 27, 2012 at 6:51 PM

More precisely, he made his fundraisers pay for her debt.

Gelsomina on March 27, 2012 at 5:24 PM

..a belated “thanks”; that sure is interesting!

The War Planner on March 27, 2012 at 6:55 PM

Perhaps you would believe Rush Limbaugh.

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2012/03/26/rick_picks_a_fight_with_the_times

Gunlock Bill on March 27, 2012 at 6:12 PM

Maybe you should have actually read that link before you posted it.

RUSH:  There you have it! David Plouffe of the regime saying Romneycare is Obamacare.  “Mitt Romney’s the godfather of our health care plan.” They finally admitted it.  Actually, they’ve it said before, but this is just out in the open now.  “Mitt Romney is the godfather of our health care plan,” and that’s Santorum’s point

You really just keep proving, over and over again, that you are a dim bulb with not one original thought in your head. If I were a Romney supporter, I’d be embarrassed to have you in my camp.

JannyMae on March 27, 2012 at 6:58 PM

Romney won the “tea party” vote in Illinois, too. There is no major support anywhere for Santorum except in the anti-Mormon religious bigots. That’s it, that’s the extent of Santorum’s support.

crosspatch on March 27, 2012 at 6:37 PM

Prove this claim, please?

JannyMae on March 27, 2012 at 7:01 PM

Barfingly immature.

birdhurd on March 27, 2012 at 7:02 PM

If you aren’t supporting Romney then you ARE supporting Obama. Santorum is not going anywhere.

crosspatch on March 27, 2012 at 6:50 PM

Crosspatch has it 100% right!

lhuffman34 on March 27, 2012 at 7:05 PM

If you aren’t supporting Romney then you ARE supporting Obama. Santorum is not going anywhere.

crosspatch on March 27, 2012 at 6:50 PM

No, sorry. If I’m not supporting Romney then I’m not supporting Romney. It’s bad enough that I will likely get stuck voting against Obama when the primary is over. I will not do so now, because some obnoxious whiny-ass on a blog says I’m supporting Obama.

Go, Rick! Go Newt! Make Romney earn this nomination!

JannyMae on March 27, 2012 at 7:06 PM

Crosspatch has it 100% right!

lhuffman34 on March 27, 2012 at 7:05 PM

Says you.

JannyMae on March 27, 2012 at 7:07 PM

Says you.

JannyMae on March 27, 2012 at 7:07 PM

The Mitt wits are out in force…one accused me of not answering, meanwhile two were posted…he left with prayers for me, not quite getting the irony.
Then this Gunlock guy, who can’t post without an insult…poor soul, a fine representative of his faith…
Oh wait, they think Ann Coulter is equal to Thomas Sowell…good grief, they must be kids in high school…oh well…what are we “bigots” going to do…

right2bright on March 27, 2012 at 7:14 PM

I thought negative advertising was bad, or something? Or does that just apply to the candiate you don’t prefer?

kjl291 on March 27, 2012 at 7:18 PM

And how did Huckabee’s campaign turn out?

crosspatch on March 27, 2012 at 6:47 PM

If Romney had been a man of his word and kept fighting, McCain would have run out of public financing money for the primary. Things would have gotten interesting. Romney, Huckabee, and Paul together could have kept McCain from reaching a majority.

But you have Mitt Romney to thank for breaking his word, quitting, lying, and releasing his delegates to McCain on a silver platter.

ITguy on March 27, 2012 at 7:24 PM

Let’s pretend for just a moment that Romney really was a “severely conservative” Governor, after having run as a “moderate” and saying his views were “progressive”.

If that were true, then how could you trust Romney not to govern in a “moderate” or “progressive” manner after having run as a “conservative”?

ITguy on March 27, 2012 at 7:26 PM

I thought negative advertising was bad, or something? Or does that just apply to the candiate you don’t prefer?

kjl291 on March 27, 2012 at 7:18 PM

Well, it isn’t bad when Romney is doing it. I’ll let you figure the rest out yourself.

JannyMae on March 27, 2012 at 7:31 PM

right2bright on March 27, 2012 at 7:14 PM

I haven’t read Thomas Sowell lately, but I thought he supported Newt.

So many of these people just keep repeating the same talking points. They are really getting boring.

JannyMae on March 27, 2012 at 7:32 PM

Let’s pretend for just a moment that Romney really was a “severely conservative” Governor, after having run as a “moderate” and saying his views were “progressive”.

If that were true, then how could you trust Romney not to govern in a “moderate” or “progressive” manner after having run as a “conservative”?

ITguy on March 27, 2012 at 7:26 PM

The funny thing is, a lot of them admit he isn’t conservative. He can draw in the moderates and independents that we need to defeat Obama. We were told the same thing about McCain.

JannyMae on March 27, 2012 at 7:35 PM

If I’m not supporting Romney then I’m not supporting Romney. It’s bad enough that I will likely get stuck voting against Obama when the primary is over. I will not do so now, because some obnoxious whiny-ass on a blog says I’m supporting Obama.

Go, Rick! Go Newt! Make Romney earn this nomination!

JannyMae on March 27, 2012 at 7:06 PM

* 1 Million!

In proportional primaries, I’d even add, “Go Ron!”

In winner-take-all primaries, the best not-Romney vote is to consolidate forces behind Rick Santorum. Imagine the earthquake that would be caused should Santorum win California… it wouldn’t put Rick ahead of Mitt in delegate count, but it would raise serious doubts as to whether or not Mitt can really reach 1,144.

ITguy on March 27, 2012 at 7:36 PM

I thought negative advertising was bad, or something? Or does that just apply to the candiate you don’t prefer?

kjl291 on March 27, 2012 at 7:18 PM

Well, it isn’t bad when Romney is doing it. I’ll let you figure the rest out yourself.

JannyMae on March 27, 2012 at 7:31 PM

No, No – many people at this blog told me it was bad when Mitt did it.

kjl291 on March 27, 2012 at 7:37 PM

We were told the same thing about McCain.

JannyMae on March 27, 2012 at 7:35 PM

Exactly. And insanity is doing the same thing all over again, expecting a different outcome.

ITguy on March 27, 2012 at 7:38 PM

No, No – many people at this blog told me it was bad when Mitt did it.

kjl291 on March 27, 2012 at 7:37 PM

And many told me it was fine when Mitt did it, and Newt and Rick and whoever should stop their whining!

I take your original point though. It depends on who the disher and the dishee are, when it comes to negative ads.

JannyMae on March 27, 2012 at 7:45 PM

right2bright on March 27, 2012 at 7:14 PM

I haven’t read Thomas Sowell lately, but I thought he supported Newt.

So many of these people just keep repeating the same talking points. They are really getting boring.

JannyMae on March 27, 2012 at 7:32 PM

He is, but if not Newt than Rick…but not Mitt, of course, anyone who supports Cap and Trade, bailouts/TARP, is not a conservative…pretty obvious, even to the Mitt supporters I imagine, but they are too embarrassed to admit it.

right2bright on March 27, 2012 at 7:50 PM

No, No – many people at this blog told me it was bad when Mitt did it.

kjl291 on March 27, 2012 at 7:37 PM

And many told me it was fine when Mitt did it, and Newt and Rick and whoever should stop their whining!

I take your original point though. It depends on who the disher and the dishee are, when it comes to negative ads.

JannyMae on March 27, 2012 at 7:45 PM

Well, I agree with that. I get a big yawn whenever anyone starts complaining about “negative advertising” and “going negative” – because it happens every election. It is part and parcel of our system, and of freedom in general, and plus it works. The only criticism in that context that I care about is if the ad/attack is true, or false.

kjl291 on March 27, 2012 at 7:54 PM

Well, I agree with that. I get a big yawn whenever anyone starts complaining about “negative advertising” and “going negative” – because it happens every election. It is part and parcel of our system, and of freedom in general, and plus it works. The only criticism in that context that I care about is if the ad/attack is true, or false.

kjl291 on March 27, 2012 at 7:54 PM

What gets me is when people say, “This is most negative campaign in American history.” they say it every election cycle, and they obviously have no clue that negative, personal campaigns have been around since this republic was founded.

JannyMae on March 27, 2012 at 8:28 PM

JannyMae on March 27, 2012 at 8:28 PM

Agreed

kjl291 on March 27, 2012 at 8:47 PM

What gets me is when people say, “This is most negative campaign in American history.” they say it every election cycle, and they obviously have no clue that negative, personal campaigns have been around since this republic was founded.

JannyMae on March 27, 2012 at 8:28 PM

Worth watching:

Attack Ads, Circa 1800

ITguy on March 27, 2012 at 8:49 PM

Oh wait, they think Ann Coulter is equal to Thomas Sowell…good grief, they must be kids in high school…oh well…what are we “bigots” going to do…

right2bright on March 27, 2012 at 7:14 PM

I think Ann Coulter really believes Romney is a horribly weak candidate who would probably lose in a big way. But she decided he would be nominated, so she had to get in his corner and push as hard as she could to drag him across the finish line. This explains why she reversed course all of a sudden and is now promoting Romney, and attacking everyone else.

My evidence for this? Something she said at CPAC a year ago.

“Republicans will nominate Mitt Romney. And he will lose.” — Ann Coulter

tom on March 27, 2012 at 8:54 PM

The Mitt wits are out in force…one accused me of not answering, meanwhile two were posted…he left with prayers for me, not quite getting the irony.

Yes we are

gerry-mittbot-mittwit

gerrym51 on March 27, 2012 at 9:17 PM

Ok. We know there are WAY too many RINOs in the party and all they want is to get this over with and nominate Romney.

Write this down. He is a RINO. He is worse than Bush. He is worse than McCain. But that’s ok we’ll go with him. If he doesn’t do what he says (lies) he will do when he gets in there, because he will win against the Marxist, will all of you Romney supporters shut the hell up and support a primary challenge in 2016? I don’t think so.

Bush was no conservative. He lied to get elected and then we voted for him for a second term because he was better the that a$$wipe Kerry. But not by much. We have to stop voting for people people because they are a little better than what the Dems have to offer because we are still committing suicide as a nation only not as fast.

Sporty1946 on March 27, 2012 at 9:24 PM

Republicans will nominate Mitt Romney. And he will lose.” — Ann Coulter

tom on March 27, 2012 at 8:54 PM

I believe the libs about Ann now…she was just being a bomb thrower to make money and draw attention to herself.

Ann Coulter is no better than David Brooks or Brock. Nothing conservative to see in her. Bye Ann.

Sporty1946 on March 27, 2012 at 9:28 PM

The Mitt wits are out in force…one accused me of not answering, meanwhile two were posted…he left with prayers for me, not quite getting the irony.

Yes we are

gerry-mittbot-mittwit

gerrym51 on March 27, 2012 at 9:17 PM

Yes, name calling – will they be throwing food next?

kjl291 on March 27, 2012 at 9:29 PM

What is Romney’s popular vote margin over Santorum thus far in the primaries? Isn’t it something like 50% more?

kjl291 on March 27, 2012 at 10:36 PM

What is Romney’s popular vote margin over Santorum thus far in the primaries? Isn’t it something like 50% more?

kjl291 on March 27, 2012 at 10:36 PM

Depends on what state you’re talking about. This is done on a state by state basis.

JannyMae on March 28, 2012 at 1:56 AM

ITguy on March 27, 2012 at 8:49 PM

Fun!

JannyMae on March 28, 2012 at 2:05 AM

Desperate. Say he stops Romney, how much loyalty can HE count on from those who think he should have gotten out instead of dividing the party? He’s running ads that remind one of horror movies. Obamaville = Term of the Living Dead.

flataffect on March 28, 2012 at 2:19 AM

Desperate. Say he stops Romney, how much loyalty can HE count on from those who think he should have gotten out instead of dividing the party? He’s running ads that remind one of horror movies. Obamaville = Term of the Living Dead.

flataffect on March 28, 2012 at 2:19 AM

I’m rooting for a brokered convention, and I will be thankful to Rick Santorum if he is able to make it happen. But I also think that there will be so much bad blood between Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum that neither one of them will be able to secure a majority of delegates. (Remember, Mitt Romney also ticked off Newt Gingrich with an avalache of negative advertising). And Ron Paul clearly can’t stand Santorum, but seems to like Romney.

So, do we end up with a Romney/Paul alliance against a Santorum/Gingrich alliance? Would either alliance win a majority of delegates, or would someone else be nominated?

ITguy on March 28, 2012 at 8:40 AM

And as to your calling me a Moby, I’ll let another commenter speak to that…

carefull 0DS, most of us know ITguy has brought the cred many times.

DanMan on March 19, 2012 at 2:37 PM
ITguy on March 27, 2012 at 6:18 PM

Oh gee golly gosh tough ITguy. Don’t get your pocket protector in a bunch goin all cred on me. I’ve yet to see you ABRtards have one rational or original thought except to vent your frustration that your candidate is nothing more than an also-ran or never-ran.
My preferred candidate didn’t run either but this election isn’t really about me. It’s all about you because you’re special ;)

Buttercup on March 28, 2012 at 2:22 PM

DanMan on March 19, 2012 at 2:37 PM
ITguy on March 27, 2012 at 6:18 PM

I just realized the quote you used was from a comment someone made about you over a week ago. That’s pretty funny that you actually found it so validating that you noted the article, date and time to reuse it now. I’m sure being an IT guy you have a little word doc denoting every time someone said something supportive of you on here so you can dredge it up weeks later to fabricate support for yourself.

Buttercup on March 28, 2012 at 2:35 PM

ROMNEY IS THE ONE WHO DIVIDED THE DAMN PARTY WITH HIS LIES, LIES, AND DISTORTIONS!?!

Colatteral Damage on March 28, 2012 at 6:11 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3