Santorum thinking of Newt as VP pick

1. 93

   habeeposted 12 years ago

   What a shocker. Now there's a combo that would certainly appeal to moderates and Indies! (BIG NOT!!!!)

   replyreport
   1. 67

      Michael Willisposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Santorum must have heard about Newt's rant against a TV series called GCB. Newt needs a new platform.
      Tried to post the link to the story, but my reply disappears every time I try to link it.
      
      (Can we no longer link to article online???)

      replyreport
   2. 85

      mbwalzposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Lordy, Lordy, Lordy!!

      replyreport
   3. 60

      ackman1465posted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Santorum/ Gingrich.... now THERE's a ticket that could be overwhelmed even WORSE than Goldwater/ Miller pair, in 1964.
      
      What IZZIT with these Republicans that they think they have to include kooks in their Presidential/Vice Presidential nominations?????

      replyreport
2. 60

   Evan G Rogersposted 12 years ago

   That would be more fail that McCain Palin

   replyreport
   1. 60

      canadawest99posted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Hard to believe there are actually people who would cast a vote for newt.  After what he did in congress presiding over the stupidest impeachment attempt ever and then was pretty much being run off for fraud and shady activity and then now going around the country preaching family values after being divorced twice.  His hubris has no limit.

      replyreport
      1. 84

         Pamela Kinnaird Wposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Hubris -- I had to look up the meaning.  What a great comment,  canadawest99.

         replyreport
3. 57

   MelissaBarrettposted 12 years ago

   Now I'm confused... I wouldn't know whether to take a bullet for Santorum or not.
   
   Who's third in command in that case?  I guess I could always hope for a targeted drone attack that takes both of them.

   replyreport
   1. 93

      habeeposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      
      
      The GOP seems determined to shoot itself in the proverbial foot. I don't see how anyone could support Newt or Santorum. Newt is very smart and savvy, but read what those in Congress who served with him have to say. Santorum is far right on social issues, but he's not really conservative on fiscal issues. I prefer a fiscal conservative and a social moderate, so St. Rick is the opposite of what I'd like to see in a candidate.
      
      I was just reading some comments on a conservative blog, and numerous commenters from AL and Miss. say they won't vote for Romney because he's a Mormon. Of course, some of these same folks are also convinced that Obama is a Muslim.

      replyreport
      1. 60

         Lisa HWposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         If either of those two (particularly Santorum) ends up anywhere on the ticket a whole lot of dead people are going to be voting.

         replyreport
4. 67

   Charles Jamesposted 12 years ago

   When there are so many wonderful people in America how are these two conceivable as candidates for a major American political party?

   replyreport
   1. 93

      habeeposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      That's a good question, Charles.

      replyreport
      1. 67

         Charles Jamesposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Write a Hub on it.

         replyreport
         1. 93

            habeeposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Great idea, Charles, but I think I'm too depressed about the issue to write an even semi-objective hub. Perhaps I'll do so after I calm down some. LOL. This isn't the same Republican party I used to know. Hope it's a temporary glitch.

            replyreport
   2. 0

      Peelander Gallyposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      I've been wondering that myself for a while now... I think some unspoken free-for-all was declared when McCain's people brought in Palin to shake things up. I don't even know how so many people like her finished high school.

      replyreport
      1. 67

         Charles Jamesposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Standards are dropping.

         replyreport
5. 67

   Charles Jamesposted 12 years ago

   This is a malaise that does not just affect the US Republican Party.
   
   In the UK all three party leaders (Cameron Clegg and Miliband) were research assistants and then became MPs and eventually party leader. So far as I am aware they have spent no time in the real world at all.
   
   The political "characters" are blended out nowadays so they are just identikit blamonge squidgy pap with bright smiles.
   
   One common problem is that the party activists want red meat and choose people who offer the reddest meat - but that frightens the independent voters and
   galvanises the opposition voters.
   
   And the things these guys do for campaign money!

   replyreport
   1. 93

      habeeposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Sad state of affairs, isn't it?

      replyreport
6. 59

   Ron Montgomeryposted 12 years ago

   Ron Paul 2012

   replyreport
   1. 93

      habeeposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Who are you, and what have you done with the real Ron??

      replyreport
      1. 67

         Charles Jamesposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Ron Montgomery has seen the light. Ron Paul is the least tacky Republican candidate.

         replyreport
         1. 64

            Ralph Deedsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Not sure what you mean by "least tacky." He has a kindly and sincere demeanor, but he's by far the most radical and unrealistic of the GOP candidates. His regulatory and economic policies would take the country back a couple hundred years at least. I do like his ideas about the folly of overseas military adventures and stationing U.S. troops on a hundred or so countries around the world.

            replyreport
            1. 67

               Charles Jamesposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               Only one wife - his own!
               
               Did military service.
               
               No suggestion of dishonesty.
               
               Ideologically consistent over a long time frame. That you and I may not like his ideology is a different issue. Neither of us rushes to support any Republican. Better than Mitt who says what the audience wants to hear.
               
               Does not think "middle income" is  $700k a year.

               replyreport
               1. 64

                  Ralph Deedsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  "Ideologically consistent over a long time frame."
                  
                  True, but he's consistently wrong about the government and economics. As Bernard Shaw said "Consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds." If Paul were elected he would be stymied by Congress and the courts. He is a decent, likeable fellow, sort of an anti-Gingrich. I'll concede he's smart but ill-informed about government, the Constitution, and the economy. I might well vote for him in preference to Gingrich or Santorum. But I'm an Obama supporter despite some significant reservations.

                  replyreport
         2. 0

            Peelander Gallyposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            It's probably time to reevaluate your priorities when the best you can do is "still radical and unrealistic, but the least tacky".

            replyreport
      2. 59

         Ron Montgomeryposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Hey, the world's gonna end this year anyway.  Might as well have some nutjob usher it out.

         replyreport
7. 67

   Charles Jamesposted 12 years ago

   I would find it difficult to support any of the current Republican candidates. I sympathise with those who object to Obama and are looking for a good candidate to put up against him. Where are the good Republican candidates?
   
   And Ron Paul is the least tacky.

   replyreport