Santorum's Surge - Good and Bad, Here's Why

[1836]

Actually ON THE GROUND reports report that media outnumber voters at many events. teh MEDIA and polls, starting with one that only polled GOP, are reporting he is surging, but I'm sure he is, from evangelicals banding together. I don't know how much of that will turn out, but we will see.

Then our on the ground reports are different, but I assure you that he indeed is gathering hose last minute votes.

 

[The Free Hornet]

Actually I think Sanford would have had this whole thing in the bag had he not pulled his stunt.
Honestly, I've joked before that I'd love to cut off his penis for how terribly he failed this country. He could have pulled all of Romney's establishment votes and potentially allowed Dr Paul to support him instead of running himself. He would have gotten the soccer mom vote easily, the religious, and the establishment. I'm still pissed at him!

This Sanford?:

Voted YES on prohibiting needle exchange & medical marijuana in DC. (Oct 1999)
Voted NO on decreasing gun waiting period from 3 days to 1. (Jun 1999)

http://www.issues2000.org/Mark_Sanford.htm

More:

End parole for repeat violent offenders. (Nov 2002)
Voted YES on funding for alternative sentencing instead of more prisons. (Jun 2000)
Voted NO on more prosecution and sentencing for juvenile crime. (Jun 1999)
Voted NO on maintaining right of habeas corpus in Death Penalty Appeals. (Mar 1996)
Voted YES on making federal death penalty appeals harder. (Feb 1995)
More prisons, more enforcement, effective death penalty. (Sep 1994)

No civil unions; define one-man-one-woman marriage. (Nov 2002)
Affirmative action in state contracts, but not colleges. (Nov 2002)
Voted YES on banning gay adoptions in DC. (Jul 1999)
Voted NO on ending preferential treatment by race in college admissions. (May 1998)

The top thing is not the best evidence. The marijuana bill was tied to spending so it wasn't a stand alone issue. However, if he hasn't spoken very publicly against the war on drugs, then he is a waste of time. Drug warriors are not libertarian by ANY definition of the term and are not to be trusted. If you don't know the war on drugs is evil incarnate prior to assuming office, you have no business holding a position of power.

I don't see the appeal in the guy.

 

[tbone717]

Sanford was by no means a perfect candidate, but could have been a far cry better than the others that ran this time out. SC governor would almost be a certain victory in SC. He could have done well in IA as well. While he is not as libertarian minded as Paul, he could have been palatable to many Paul supporters and would have done fine with mainstream GOP folks as well. Were it not for his (ahem) indiscretions, Sanford would have been a major player this year.

 

[MMXII]

I think it is good. Santorum has so much baggage! He's the anti-civil liberties candidate. Once he gets his 15 minutes of fame and the media starts to re-hash some of the hateful things he has said......it's game over for rick.

 

[kasjun]

Santorum really worked Iowa. You have to give him credit for that. I did'nt really like his message but alot of what he did was he went and got endorsements. He hooked up with Sioux City radio-KSCJ and Sam Clovis and got a bunch of free advertising. Got an endorsement from Vanderplotts. Overall worked it hard but when it comes down to the finals he's a hothead and will probably shoot himself in the foot before long. Just push his buttons on gays and he goes ballistic.
I think the media has been giving him a free ride so far but I doubt that will continue.

 

[Joey Wahoo]

Perry is going after Santorum hard. Let's hope he spends enough of his warchest over the next couple of days dragging down Santorum enough to keep him in third place. I think it is imporant that Romney and Dr. Paul finish first and second in both Iowa and NH.

It's going to be a long 3 days.

And by the way, whatever RP says on the news shows on Sunday will become fodder for the enemy. The media and the other guys will pluck a line or two out and plaster it all over the news and airwaves. I expect it will get ugly down the stretch.

 

[apriori]

Nothing could be better for us than Santorum embarrassing Romney by taking second. Ideally, this becomes a race between three Republican factions: Establishment/Moderate (Romney), Anti-Establishment/Tea Party (Paul), and Evangelicals/Social Conservatives (Santorum).

While Grinch/Bachmann/Perry/Huntsman draw support away from Paul by pandering to Tea Partiers, Santorum is running on an insane Bush nostalgia ticket which is attractive only to a segment of Evangelicals. To his own detriment, Santorum is actually the only other candidate who believes what he's saying. As such, he has neither camouflaged himself as anti-Establishment, nor pandered to the Tea Party by stealing Paul's talking points. He simply wants to stop the gays and start wars with everyone, and couldn't be more clear about it.

Assuming Romney remains strong, Santorum's entrance into the top-tier would provide the contrast necessary for rallying the fractured Tea Party vote behind Paul. In such a scenario, Paul continues to divide Ind/Dem crossovers with Romney and Evangelicals with Santorum (don't forget we're still neck-and-neck with Frothy among Iowa Evangelicals), but monopolizes the anti-Establishment/Tea Party vote. Furthermore, Romney and Santorum will divide the above-55 vote, thereby preventing the elderly from coalescing behind Romney. Under this scenario, the South becomes a completely different terrain for Paul.

So, basically, GO FROTHY! (But not too far.)

 

[1836]

Nothing could be better for us than Santorum embarrassing Romney by taking second. Ideally, this becomes a race between three Republican factions: Establishment/Moderate (Romney), Anti-Establishment/Tea Party (Paul), and Evangelicals/Social Conservatives (Santorum).

While Grinch/Bachmann/Perry/Huntsman draw support away from Paul by pandering to Tea Partiers, Santorum is running on an insane Bush nostalgia ticket which is attractive only to a segment of Evangelicals. To his own detriment, Santorum is actually the only other candidate who believes what he's saying. As such, he has neither camouflaged himself as anti-Establishment, nor pandered to the Tea Party by stealing Paul's talking points. He simply wants to stop the gays and start wars with everyone, and couldn't be more clear about it.

Assuming Romney remains strong, Santorum's entrance into the top-tier would provide the contrast necessary for rallying the fractured Tea Party vote behind Paul. In such a scenario, Paul continues to divide Ind/Dem crossovers with Romney and Evangelicals with Santorum (don't forget we're still neck-and-neck with Frothy among Iowa Evangelicals), but monopolizes the anti-Establishment/Tea Party vote. Furthermore, Romney and Santorum will divide the above-55 vote, thereby preventing the elderly from coalescing behind Romney. Under this scenario, the South becomes a completely different terrain for Paul.

So, basically, GO FROTHY! (But not too far.)

Ding!