Hucks Army - Faith. Family. Freedom. [Grassroots] JOIN HUCKS ARMY | GET INVOLVED | FUNDRAISING | LINKS | LEADERSHIP | ABOUT
It is currently Tue Jan 21, 2020 8:15 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: The Secret Unity Ticket
PostPosted: Sun Mar 24, 2013 4:21 pm 
Offline
***** General

Joined: Sat May 31, 2008 3:14 pm
Posts: 2120
Likes: 509
Liked: 440
Would it have worked? We'll never know.

http://www.businessweek.com/printer/articles/104016-the-secret-gingrich-sant



Post by IowaforHuckabee Liked by: christopher.wilkerson
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 24, 2013 4:33 pm 
Offline
***** General
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 11:13 pm
Posts: 1623
Location: Atlanta, GA
Likes: 177
Liked: 225
Quote:
But the negotiations collapsed in acrimony because Gingrich and Santorum could not agree on who would get to be president. “In the end,” Gingrich says, “it was just too hard to negotiate.”

They couldn't agree to just flip a coin? To think, we might have avoided a second Obama term if not for the egos of two men.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 24, 2013 6:46 pm 
Offline
Lieutenant General

Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2010 10:56 pm
Posts: 960
Likes: 3
Liked: 58
Oh please...

Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich had NO chance of beating Barack Obama. None whatsoever. Romney had a chance, but made a few strategic mistakes (ignoring minorities - something Gingrich/Santorum would have done as well).

I honestly don't get the hype. I understand you guys are sad that Huckabee didn't run - I was too! But Santorum? That man is a disaster, he's done more damage to the SoCon cause than Barack Obama has ever done. He's a freaking ICON for the left-wingers - when they want to demonize us, they compare us to Santorum!

Did Santorum lead Obama in a single poll? Did Gingrich? Did they show the necessary smoothness to win an election? Yeah, Ronald Reagan was radical - but he was smooth about it. He would never have brought up contraceptives for example. A good presidential candidate talks about what people want to talk about, and then ties in his own issues to those issues (ie show the connection between values and the economy - something Huckabee does very well).

I know this isn't a popular opinion around here, but among the candidates who were left when January 2012 rolled around, I actually preferred Romney (I supported Cain earlier).

Winning an election on social issues alone was never going to be possible, no matter how much Santorum tried.

And with Santorum's comments on Paul's filibuster, I like him even less.

What we need to make the GOP understand is that the party doesn't need to move away from social issues; it just has to move away from certain SoCon representatives who are making a mockery of social conservatism.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 24, 2013 10:50 pm 
Offline
***** General
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 11:13 pm
Posts: 1623
Location: Atlanta, GA
Likes: 177
Liked: 225
Wendero wrote:
Oh please...

Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich had NO chance of beating Barack Obama. None whatsoever. Romney had a chance, but made a few strategic mistakes (ignoring minorities - something Gingrich/Santorum would have done as well).
I agree that both had the potential to be disasters, no matter what their position on the ticket. But we are told that we lost because of reduced voter turnout. I think Gingrich and Santorum both had more fight in them than Romney, and could have more effectively rallied our base. Whether or not that would equate to a Republican win...I don't know.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 25, 2013 6:21 am 
Offline
Lieutenant General

Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2010 10:56 pm
Posts: 960
Likes: 3
Liked: 58
We can always hypothesize that "if only X had turned out, we would have won".

Here's the thing: If everyone voted, democrats would win in a landslide. There are so many welfare-dependent people who don't vote that that would more than negate the positive impact republicans would get from the additional evangelicals.

If all our voters turned out and none of theirs, we would have won, that's obvious. But that's not how real elections work.

Santorum and Gingrich would have also raised turnout among the Democrats base - they hate them with a passion. And no, they don't hate them because Santorum/Gingrich are right-winged, or because they are passionate about their conservative cause, or because they're prolife... they hate them for the way they always appear to look down on everyone else, the way they always try to dictate other people's lives, the way they don't live according to what they preach (Gingrich in particular).

Huckabee can rally the Republican base, without rallying the Democrat base. Santorum and Gingrich? Not so much.

The gamble with Romney was that we thought he'd be able to rally the Republican base (through, for example, his VP choice) without rallying the Democrat base. The Democrat base remained largely un-rallied... but then, so did the Republican base.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 26, 2013 1:41 pm 
Offline
MODERATOR
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2007 12:08 pm
Posts: 6634
Location: South Beloit, IL
Likes: 479
Liked: 152
christopher.wilkerson wrote:
I agree that both had the potential to be disasters, no matter what their position on the ticket. But we are told that we lost because of reduced voter turnout. I think Gingrich and Santorum both had more fight in them than Romney, and could have more effectively rallied our base. Whether or not that would equate to a Republican win...I don't know.


IMO Santorum/Gingrich would have had a better chance than Romney because it would have unified the religious right. There were plenty of conservative and moderate Democrats and Independents that didn't see enough of a difference between Romney and Obama to warrant a change. My own sister (an Independent) voted for Obama because of that reason - plus she didn't trust Romney since even he didn't seem to know where he stood on some of the issues. Besides, the GOP doesn't win if we have a moderate as our nominee!

For the record: I picked Santorum for the top of the ticket only because he won 11 states compared to Gingrich's 2 states at the time of the supposed "unity" discussion and I feel voters ought to have more say than either of their ego. IF Newt would have won more votes he would have been the right choice for the top of the ticket. It's a shame ego ruined the chance.

_________________
Psalms 144:1 "Blessed be the LORD my strength, which teacheth my hands to war, and my fingers to fight:"


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 10, 2013 2:45 pm 
Offline
***** General

Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 7:37 am
Posts: 1623
Likes: 0
Liked: 31
Wendero wrote:
What we need to make the GOP understand is that the party doesn't need to move away from social issues; it just has to move away from certain SoCon representatives who are making a mockery of social conservatism.

Agreed........


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
POWERED_BY