Author Topic: Should we consider Santorum given that Newt and Romney make us vomit? (Read 4386 times)

eb22 · « **Reply #25 on:** December 12, 2011, 06:49:36 PM »

Exactly. To the point that he became a Democrat.

Daniel Michael ben Avraham · « **Reply #26 on:** December 13, 2011, 09:10:55 AM »

I wasn't necessarily "in favor" of Santorum so much as I was saying we should reevaluate the messages that all of the candidates are spouting given that there is no clear choice. I was saying the obvious litmus test is their support for Am Yisrael. Perhaps Santorum is not the ideal candidate, but the question remains, will Newt and Romney be the only options?

The recent story that covers Newt calling the fakestinians an invented people is encouraging if he does end up getting the nomination.
http://www.jpost.com/International/Article.aspx?id=248865

So, does that cinch it? Is Newt far more in support of Am Yisrael and against a fakestinian state whereas Romeney is still in favor of an eventual fakestinian state? If that is the case and it comes to a choice between Romney and Newt, then I would support Newt purely on his assertion that there is no Fakestine and fakestinians are just Arabs etc. etc.

BritishSword · « **Reply #27 on:** December 13, 2011, 07:42:39 PM »

Quote from: Dr. Dan on December 12, 2011, 04:51:07 PM

The truth is that Israel doesn't need America nor any other country...it's the other way around.

Assuming the Jews running it are sane.

briann · « **Reply #28 on:** December 13, 2011, 07:47:49 PM »

The latest poll shows voters are now fleeing Newt. I am a little bet nervous here, that if the voters dont start backing someone, we could end up with a Donald Trump.

Debbie Shafer · « **Reply #29 on:** December 14, 2011, 08:40:00 AM »

I think that Rick Santorum has been unfairly disregarded by many people....He is a true Conservative and does support Israel....The danger is that we get too critical of all the candidates and don't vote...allowing Obama to win re-election. That is what the Progressive Socialists are hoping for, that they can discredit all the candidates and disatisfy the voters by showing us that none of them are electable...This is pure deception....Can anyone really believe that another 4 years of Obama would be better than these GOP Candidates?

Daniel Michael ben Avraham · « **Reply #30 on:** December 14, 2011, 09:16:52 AM »

Debbie, that is a very good point. I was very suspicious when they scheduled so many debates between the candidates. It seemed to me like opportunity after opportunity to make themselves look incompetent. The debates were often about image and not substance. Today the left is laughing because they no longer have a monopoly on their politician being an idiot in front of the camera. I think one of the most awesome projects out there would to hack the presidents teleprompter to see if you could sneak in a few choice words. I seriously wonder if he would notice.

Baltimore · « **Reply #31 on:** December 28, 2011, 07:05:25 PM »

Santorum is now surging in Iowa apparently...

briann · « **Reply #32 on:** December 28, 2011, 07:24:33 PM »

Quote from: Baltimore on December 28, 2011, 07:05:25 PM

Santorum is now surging in Iowa apparently...

Please Please Please!!!

heyuguys · « **Reply #33 on:** December 28, 2011, 07:42:00 PM »

it is looking like it will be an obama/clinton ticket for the dems. if over 50% of americans will vote for that, the idea of america is dead and america is a lost nation soon to be ripped into little statelike countries.

Dr. Dan · « **Reply #34 on:** December 28, 2011, 07:54:11 PM »

We should consider anyone but Ron Paul

Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks · « **Reply #35 on:** December 28, 2011, 09:50:59 PM »

Quote from: Dr. Dan on December 28, 2011, 07:54:11 PM

We should consider anyone but Ron Paul

Even Dennis Kucinich?

mord · « **Reply #36 on:** December 29, 2011, 06:11:35 AM »

Quote from: Rubystars on December 11, 2011, 09:46:47 PM

My state has very little power in deciding this, most of the runners will drop out of the race before it gets here.

I have nothing against Iowa or the other pipsqueak states that front loaded but it's just idiotic that a huge state like Texas has no say

Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks · « **Reply #37 on:** December 29, 2011, 06:34:07 AM »

All primaries need to be on the same day.

mord · « **Reply #38 on:** December 29, 2011, 06:40:54 AM »

Quote from: Axl Rose on December 29, 2011, 06:34:07 AM

All primaries need to be on the same day.

I agree.Santorum would make a great President

Daniel Michael ben Avraham · « **Reply #39 on:** December 29, 2011, 01:59:21 PM »

Quote from: Baltimore on December 28, 2011, 07:05:25 PM

Santorum is now surging in Iowa apparently...

Check this out:
http://hotair.com/archives/2011/12/28/cnn-iowa-poll-romney-25-paul-22-santorum-16-gingrich-14/

Hmm, maybe Santorum has a fighting chance after all. It is quite interesting that he is now third in the running in Iowa. The thing about RINOmney is that he has lots of kesef and R(acist)on Paul has idiotic blind fanatic followers. It will be quite daunting for Santorum to battle those kinds of political machines. I hope the RP campaign implodes soon. That schmuck is getting way too much airtime.

I would take Newt or Santorum over RINOmney.

heyuguys · « **Reply #40 on:** December 29, 2011, 03:14:36 PM »

santorum is a much better candidate in terms of his beliefs than gingrich or romney. at least he is a bible-believing person and not a fraud. i saw some dick on cnn already attacking santorum saying he cant win. they want romney or nothing!!!!

Baltimore · « **Reply #41 on:** December 29, 2011, 07:31:12 PM »

Rick Santorum Response To Iran:
http://www.ricksantorum.com/response-iran

"Santorum Administration’s Response To Iran:

* Reinstate full funding authorized under the Iran Freedom and Support Act to assist pro-democracy groups within Iran
* Bring greater attention to human rights violations of the Iranian regime against democracy protestors and minority religious groups
* Would work with Israel to eliminate the Iranian nuclear threat immediately; and developing a potential plan for military action if needed
* Would work with Israel to determine the proper military response needed to stabilize the region, protect our allies and protect this country – including the authorization of targeted airstrikes on Iranian nuclear facilities.
* Any nuclear scientist proven to be working for Iran’s nuclear program would be treated as an enemy combatant
* Help create Strike Funds to help organizers on the ground publicly protest and overthrow the regime
* Economically target Iran by sanctioning Iran’s central bank coupled with opening all forms of energy production in the U.S effectively devastating Iran’s only economy
* Ensure Iranian officials cannot access any of their funds by freezing bank accounts and significantly limit their travel by revoking visas
* Refuse to negotiate on any level with the terrorist state of Iran
* Neutralize Iran’s relationships with their primary allies in The Middle East by increasing pressure on Hezbollah and Syria
* Eliminate the post of U.S. Ambassador to Syria
* Stand with Israel as an ally and in any efforts Israel may take to defend themselves from Iranian aggression
* Would push for, fully fund and build a comprehensive missile defense system, and reevaluate the ramifications of the Start Treaty
* Authorize more research on the Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Threat
* Develop a National Prevention Plan to prevent a severe terrestrial and space emergencies that would take down our information systems or electrical grids

Tag-MehirTzedek · « **Reply #42 on:** December 29, 2011, 07:37:56 PM »

He is good.

Chaim Ben Pesach · « **Reply #43 on:** December 29, 2011, 07:56:05 PM »

בס''ד

Rick Santorum is a complete phony. He attacked Newt Gingrich for saying there are no "Palestinians". He is against Iran, but he would pressure Israel to commit suicide.

Daniel Michael ben Avraham · « **Reply #44 on:** December 30, 2011, 11:15:14 AM »

Quote from: Chaim Ben Pesach on December 29, 2011, 07:56:05 PM

בס''ד

Rick Santorum is a complete phony. He attacked Newt Gingrich for saying there are no "Palestinians". He is against Iran, but he would pressure Israel to commit suicide.

Chaim, I saw the part of the debate where every candidate jumped all over Newt for stating the truth about the fakestinians. The fact that every other candidate said it was not prudent to do so concerned me very much. What do you feel about the way Santorum approached the fakestinian issue in the videos I shared? At least he is against Isdrael giving away land that he states plainly is Israeli land justly theirs won in a war. Would you please explain how he is a phony? I do not think he is willing to be as black and white as Newt, but then none of the other candidates were either. Doesn't he seem like a better alternative to RINOmney if Newt can not get the votes he needs to pull off the nomination? I am speaking strictly from a pragmatic perspective here. Please share the examples of Santorum being a phony. I am not an expert and welcome better information.

Shabbat Shalom!
Buenas entradas de Saba!
Daniel

briann · « **Reply #45 on:** December 30, 2011, 04:07:55 PM »

It looks like Santorum is now getting the majority of the evangelical vote in Iowa. This is the same group that pushed Huckabee to the top in 2008.

Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks · « **Reply #46 on:** December 31, 2011, 12:18:10 AM »

Whether we want to accept it or not, Gingrich's telling the truth about the Fakestinians was very unpopular with voters, and was the major factor behind his rapid collapse in the polls.

briann · « **Reply #47 on:** December 31, 2011, 01:22:47 AM »

Quote from: Axl Rose on December 31, 2011, 12:18:10 AM

Whether we want to accept it or not, Gingrich's telling the truth about the Fakestinians was very unpopular with voters, and was the major factor behind his rapid collapse in the polls.

Newt was attacked for his fannie/freddie invovlement. If you saw the debates, THATS what everyone ganged up on him for. If you've seen ALL the anti-Newt smear commercials, THATS what they focus on, because they know thats what turns off convervative voters. I'm not saying his opponents didnt try to leverage his fakestinian comments... but they barely touched it, and few who left Newt are even aware of his comments on the fakestinians.

From every conservative Ive talked to... they all steered away from Newt because of they beleive he is a typical hypocritical career politician who beleives in big government solutions. I'm not saying they are right.... Im just saying thats what they feel.

cjd · « **Reply #48 on:** December 31, 2011, 03:10:43 AM »

Quote from: briann on December 31, 2011, 01:22:47 AM

Newt was attacked for his fannie/freddie invovlement. If you saw the debates, THATS what everyone ganged up on him for. If you've seen ALL the anti-Newt smear commercials, THATS what they focus on, because they know thats what turns off convervative voters. I'm not saying his opponents didnt try to leverage his fakestinian comments... but they barely touched it, and few who left Newt are even aware of his comments on the fakestinians.

From every conservative Ive talked to... they all steered away from Newt because of they beleive he is a typical hypocritical career politician who beleives in big government solutions. I'm not saying they are right.... Im just saying thats what they feel.

Newt would be a 100% improvement over what we have now however the fact that he is a product of the system has to be a factor... Newt would be a place holder president at best if he were to be elected... He might reverse some of our sitting presidents worse policy however in the long run he would not take the drastic measures needed to make meaningful change... Honestly I don't see him even running for a second term even if he made it this time around... I could live with a Newt presidency however come primary day it looks more and more like I will be pulling the lever for Romney... It's my hope that Romney's business background might correct some of the bad policy thats killing off any chance of recovery.

Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks · « **Reply #49 on:** December 31, 2011, 07:00:46 AM »

Quote from: briann on December 31, 2011, 01:22:47 AM

Newt was attacked for his fannie/freddie invovlement. If you saw the debates, THATS what everyone ganged up on him for. If you've seen ALL the anti-Newt smear commercials, THATS what they focus on, because they know thats what turns off convervative voters. I'm not saying his opponents didnt try to leverage his fakestinian comments... but they barely touched it, and few who left Newt are even aware of his comments on the fakestinians.

From every conservative Ive talked to... they all steered away from Newt because of they beleive he is a typical hypocritical career politician who beleives in big government solutions. I'm not saying they are right.... Im just saying thats what they feel.

I see it almost the other way. The Fannie Mae crap certainly doesn't look good but the Fakestinian comments can be used to create the impression of Newt being a "racist", which is the ultimate sin in contemporary America, especially with brainwashed under-30 voters.