Santorum’s Trifecta is a Game Changer

On February 9, 2012, in Uncategorized, by Matvej32MIRONOV

Romney still has the most delegates and Newt has the second most, but last night just flung Rick Santorum to the front of the pack. Romney is still at the top of the National polls followed by Newt, but that will most likely change soon. A trifecta of wins last night was quite

See more here:
Santorum’s Trifecta is a Game Changer

Tagged with:
 

Over on the homepage , a quick look at what yesterday revealed, most notably, the likelihood that Santorum has overtaken Gingrich as the preeminent anti-Romney candidate: Santorum began this contest as the man of the hour, the little engine that could in a sweater-vest who challenged and beat the much-better-funded Mitt Romney . . . and yet he has, at the moment, an entire three delegates committed to him. (Iowa’s delegates to the national convention will formally be selected at a state convention on June 16.) Keep reading this post . . .

Originally posted here:
‘Missouri tells me that in a clean one-on-one against Romney, we beat him.’

Santorum steps up to the plate

On February 7, 2012, in Uncategorized, by stuartbramhall

Tuesday could be Rick Santorum’s big day – his chance to break back into the news cycle with some strong primary performances, and make the case that he’s a better choice than Newt Gingrich for those seeking an alternative to Mitt Romney. On the national level, it’s really still a fairly close race.

AP

The chatter among those who cover politics Monday has centered around Rick Santorum’s sudden uptick in polls and endorsements, perhaps indicating that some are buying in to his claim that Newt Gingrich had his chance to be the main challenger to front-runner Mitt Romney, and failed.  The latest polls surveying the states set to hold their GOP caucuses tomorrow have Santorum jumping to second behind Romney in Colorado and slightly ahead of the former Massachusetts governor in Minnesota. The last  PPP poll on Missouri found Santorum leading Romney by 11 points before the state’s Tuesday “beauty king” Republican primary(Gingrich did not qualify for the state’s ballot.) The news may justify the former Pennsylvania Senator’s decision to skip out early before the Nevada GOP caucuses held last Saturday in order to campaign in Colorado and Minnesota. Santorum finished last in Nevada where Romney thoroughly dominated, at the end of the day tallying a higher number of votes than the other three Republican candidates combined. Santorum has also been the topic of conversation Monday within two of the nation’s most highly regarded conservative publications; The Weekly Standard and The National Review. In piece titled ” Again, Why Not Santorum? ” Quinn Hillyer of the National Review writes: “Rick Santorum  can  win the Republican nomination. Rick Santorum can indeed beat Barack Obama in the fall. And Rick Santorum can and would govern at least as conservatively as Ronald Reagan did. The evidence of his principled, mainstream conservatism is unambiguous, as is his record of winning long-shot races. What hasn’t been fully understood yet is why, and how, Santorum could win the Republican nomination and the presidency.” [....] “For all of Gingrich’s and Romney’s vaunted debating skills, both of them have put forth at least two real clunkers of debate performances. Santorum hasn’t had a single bad debate or a single major stumble, and his reviews have become only more favorable with each contest. In a race where the economic lay of the land disfavors the incumbent, flash matters less than solidity in a challenger. It probably won’t require some sort of game-changing debate performance for a Republican to defeat Obama — but a game-changing gaffe or embarrassment could well lose it. Of all the Republican candidates, Santorum has shown himself the least prone to such gaffes.” In William Kristol’s  “Romney vs. Santorum?”   within The Weekly Standard, we once again hear the argument that a Romney-Santorum bout might be the best moving forward: “The Romney-Gingrich slugfest of negativity seems to have produced a low turnout in Florida and Nevada. But the choice before you remains no less important than it was before all the negative ads started airing. Indeed, you who will vote tomorrow have a chance to get us beyond the unseemly spectacle of the last couple of weeks. You can put Romney on a likely path to the nomination. Or you can create the possibility of a serious and constructive Romney vs. Santorum race.” Santorum has recently gained a pack of official endorsements from conservative commentators and legislators including Michelle Malkin, David Limbaugh, and former Rep. Bob Schaffer. A poll basement dweller in the early stages of the campaign, it is truly remarkable to see how far Santorum has come. Going into the primary season Santorum was known for occasionally appearing as a Fox News commentator, the hateful media campaign against him by those in disagreement with his ideas of marriage,  a crushing defeat in his last election in 2006, or unlike his household name rivals Gingrich and Romney, not known at all. Hillyer is correct in his analysis that Santorum can tout a conservative record while being far less gaffe-prone than Gingrich or Romney, and much closer to the mainstream than Texas Rep. Ron Paul. He has stuck around with far less money than any of his opponents, and is yet to have a major scandal rattle his campaign and momentum. POLITICO’s Alexander Burns summarizes Santorum’s progress: “In some ways, Santorum is just the beneficiary of elite discomfort with Romney and Newt Gingrich, who leave upscale conservatives cold thanks to their perceived lack of substance (Romney) and total incapacity for political or mental discipline (Gingrich). He’s also a candidate who consistently shows fluency when it comes to policy and has a real conservative record. Santorum’s message — focused on revitalizing American manufacturing and taking an aggressive approach to containing Iran — has some genuinely original elements to it. The rap on Santorum is that none of that matters without a far superior campaign organization and treasury than the ones he has. A more magnetic political personality would help, too. But win or lose, the Pennsylvanian’s image has come a long way since 2006, when he was run out of town as a dim and angry culture warrior.” Indeed.

See more here:
Santorum gaining ground before Tuesday’s primaries shows progression of both candidate and campaign

Tagged with:
 

Will Mexico turn to the left in 2012?

On February 6, 2012, in Uncategorized, by VecchiarelliKearny599

Signs are strong that the center-right National Action Party will be out of power this year.

Excerpt from:
Will Mexico turn to the left in 2012?

Tagged with:
 

File this under “Well, Crap.” Kimberley Strassel has a real upper of a column at the Wall Street Journal today: “Reimagining Speaker Pelosi.” While the GOP and the Right are focused on the fight for the White House and getting rid of President Obama, there’s a creeping political menace that too many are not seeing: The 2010 takeover of the House could be short-lived. Conservatives are by nature optimists. They are intensely focused on retaking the White House and the Senate. But what if, in that optimism, they are missing a growing threat? That threat is to the House of Representatives. Republicans claimed a sweeping victory there in 2010, a win that stopped President Obama’s marauding legislative agenda. Yet that has led to a certain Republican nonchalance about the House in 2012. What the optimists are missing is that the House remains the linchpin of all their future ambitions. A Republican presidency will mean little with Speaker Nancy Pelosi redux. Mr. Obama may well win re-election. What leverage will a Republican-run Senate have in the face of that, and a Democratic House? Or consider the possibility that Republicans botch both the Oval Office and the Senate. True, the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC), under Texas Rep. Pete Sessions, is aware of the challenge and is energetically fund-raising and recruiting. True, the party is already coaching its newer members about the rigors of re-election. And true, John Boehner and Eric Cantor are going all out to collect money for their members. The speaker alone raised some $46 million in 2011—nearly double his take for the entire last election cycle. What Messrs. Boehner and Cantor know is that they’ll need all this, and more. The House is no sure thing. Read the whole thing for a sobering account of what could happen if the Right and the GOP don’t get their act together.

More:
Too optimistic about 2012? This will cure you

Tagged with:
 

Reuters – He won’t be in this Sunday’s Super Bowl and his Denver Broncos are already 50-to-1 longshots for next year’s National Football League title, but if Tim Tebow swapped the pigskin for politics, he just might be a shoo-in for the White House.

Continue reading here:
Forget Romney or Obama, the voters want Tim Tebow: poll
(Reuters)

Tagged with:
 

ContributorNetwork – COMMENTARY | According to a transcript of his remarks, President Barack Obama used the occasion of the National Prayer Breakfast to enlist Jesus Christ in a partisan political battle. He suggested that Jesus would be in favor of his plan to tax the rich.

Excerpt from:
Obama Recruits Jesus Christ in His Fight to Soak the Rich
(ContributorNetwork)

AP – President Barack Obama attends the National Prayer Breakfast this morning in Washington, along with the first lady and Vice President Joe Biden.

See the article here:
Obama to attend National Prayer Breakfast
(AP)

It is days like today that make me thankful I think they all suck. At least I’m thankful I’m in the firmly not Romney camp. Having told us only Romney was viable (with half-nods to Huntsman and Santorum) and having trotted out Elliot Abrams to smear Newt Gingrich with out of context quotes, even National Review is having trouble defending their candidate today. This morning Mitt Romney said he wasn’t concerned about the poor. The poor, after all, have food stamps and Medicaid. But don’t worry. If the safety net is broken, Patrician Mitt Romney will fix it so the poor can stay comfortably poor. After all, just look what he did in Massachusetts. The poor can now wait 44 days to get in to see a doctor. Excelsior! After making sure we all understood the poor were for the Democrats to be worried about, Romney decided to keep digging his hole even bigger. By the end of the day, Jim DeMint had to rebuke him. Romney, digging his hole deeper, said his remark needed more context. The context, according to Romney, is that we have government programs to keep the poor . . . well . . . poor but comfortable: We do have a very ample safety net in America, with Medicaid, housing vouchers, food stamps, earned income tax credit. We have a number of ways of helping the poor. And yet my focus and the area that I think is the greatest challenge that the country faces right now is not, is not to focus our effort on how we help the poor as much as to focus our effort on how to help the middle class in America. Oh, but that’s not all. If you misunderstood patrician Mitt Romney, he trotted out the other New England patrician, John Sununu — the man who advised George H. W. Bush to go with David Souter — to dig the hole even deeper. Sununu told the National Review that their candidate has no intention of changing policies to those that might actually lift the poor out of poverty into the middle class. “He was saying that we do not need to change policies for them . Same goes for the super-rich, who are fine. It’s the middle class; they’re the ones we need to be aggressive in helping. They’re the ones who’ve taken the brunt of the bad Obama policies of the past three years.” Note the use of “they’re” in talking about the middle class. They have been hurt most . Not the poor. Not the rich. So much for the GOP condemning class warfare. Romney’s folks are going with it too. Where Obama goes for “fair shares”, Romney wants to focus only on those hurt “most.” But the coup de grace came late today when, to mitigate the damage, Romney reminded everyone he supports automatic hikes in the minimum wage — a truly conservative position. The National Review sure does know how to pick them. Glad they’ll be defending him in the general. I’m not sure I’ll waste my time. Sure, I’ll vote for him. But I think I’ll focus on House and Senate races so when the buyers remorse sets in on those who backed Romney we’re not completely screwed down ballot.

Original post:
The National Review’s Candidate Won’t Stop Digging

Tagged with: