Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
People apying attentio to campaign rehtoric too much. Once the primary is over watch the shift. You notice that nprmary last time rethoric of the Clinton's being racist dissapeared.Clinton and Biden nObama wasn't ready to be president ;disappeared.
Yeah, this is like how "Santorum's preacher said Non-Christians should leave America."
In other words, more liberal spin, lies, and mischaracterization.
"Might as well" is not the same as "better off"
Quote:
we might as well stay with what we have instead of taking a risk with what may be the Etch A Sketch candidate of the future
Let me make it easy for you.
Stay with what we have (Obama)
versus
taking a risk with Romney.
This is stating that it's better to stick with Obama.
Both Romney and Gingrich have jumped on Rick for his statement.
Quote:
Romney, who made no public appearances Thursday, issued a statement expressing disappointment “that Rick Santorum would rather have Barack Obama as president than a Republican.”
“You win by giving people a choice,” Santorum said during a campaign stop in Texas. “You win by giving people the opportunity to see a different vision for our country, not someone who’s just going to be a little different than the person in there.”
Santorum added: “If they’re going to be a little different, we might as well stay with what we have instead of taking a risk of what may be the Etch A Sketch candidate for the future.”
Santorum did not assert that Romney would be as bad as Obama. He wasn't even comparing Romney and Obama at all. You need to consider the context of the remark, not just pick out 1 sentence. What he said is that if Romney is going to wipe the slate clean as soon as the general election comes up, then you have no idea what you're going to get with him later when he's in general election mode when you vote for him now when he's in primary election mode.
Of course he compared them. He meant he'd rather see Obama in the White House than Romney
Romney isn't perfect, but if Santorum can’t tell the difference between a radical far left Marxist and center right Republican he is too dumb to be POTUS.
Very, very stupid if Santorum wants to be the next in line in 2016.
This is Mitt's last shot, but it doesn't have to be Santorum's. Until now, that is.
Elephants don't forget.
Oh, I don't know.
They gave George HW Bush a pass on "voodoo economics!".
They gave John McCain a pass on a whole slate of apostasies -- saying he didn't want Roe v. Wade repealed, calling Falwell an 'agent of intolerance', opposing the Bush tax cuts, etc.
Ditto for Romney -- disavowing the Reagan-Bush era, not just being pro-choice but giving an impassioned speech about why he was pro-choice and adamantly declaring that he would never change his position, "I absolutely like mandates!", etc.
However, the thing about Santorum is that I don't know that he's as clever a politician as GHW Bush, McCain and Romney -- not that that trio stands out as anything special, I'm just not sure Santorum even rises to that level.
But running and losing a nomination bid seems to work well for a lot of eventual Republican nominees. So we shall see...
I think Obama is just going to sit back and watch the GOP implode once again. They are their own worse enemy.
We are going to need a new party to counter the democratic party in this democracy because the GOP is full of crazy people.
You might not need a new party. But you sure need a reformed party that is refocused clearly in it's views.
If I was a Repub, I would put forth a vote to censure Santorum. This would be a good first step to either unify or lose those who are splitting the party so severely now. One way or the other, a bunch of people need to leave the Republicans and form their own party.
This could mean losing in 2016- it probably will mean losing- but it is a better trade off than having a 40 year minority, as the Republicans did after losing 5 times in a row to the Democrats. 8 years of loss is nothing compared to that.
And, if not for the Dixiecrats deserting the Democratic party in the 60's, the Repubs would still be a minority. Picking up the South was the very thing that turned them around, and is the very thing that's breaking them up now.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
