Quantcast

Comments about ‘Rick Santorum's slippery surge against Mitt Romney’

Return to article »

Published: Monday, Jan. 2 2012 1:51 p.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Christy
Beaverton, OR

I predict a Santorum win in Iowa. But, as was shown with Huckabee last time around, the evangelists are not president makers.

Christy
Beaverton, OR

*evangelicals, rather.

Kouger
Lehi, UT

And we say yada yada yada.... Santorum is surging at the right time, and may win in Iowa, BUT that's the best he's going to get. He's irrelevant from that point on. Besides Huntsman, all other candidates had surged and fallen. Romney is the only consistent candidate and the ONLY ONE who can - and WILL - beat the Community Organizer!

Joshua Steimle
Draper, UT

Santorum, Romney, Perry, Obama, what's the difference? They're all liberals who favor bailouts, crony capitalism, bigger government, war, etc. Ron Paul is the only conservative in this race. If we want more innocent people dead, more debt, more welfare, etc., then it doesn't matter who you choose. If you want constitutional government as the Founder intended, Ron Paul is the only one who has a clue.

lost in DC
West Jordan, UT

Anybody but the naive Paul (who cares if Iran has nukes?! what, me worry??) as repub nominee and ANYBODY but BO in the general election!

David King
Layton, UT

@lost in DC

Would you also call anyone naive who didn't believe we needed to lose thousands of men and women to prevent the Soviet Union from having THOUSANDS of nuclear weapons? Anyone who is determined that Iran should not get a nuclear weapon should be at the selective service right now, signing up to fight in a preventive war of aggression. If you're only willing to send other peoples fathers, sons, daughters, and mothers just so that no other country in the world can get one nuclear weapon, your words ring hollow.

The truth is that the threat of Iran is being greatly exaggerated by some to achieve political ends and satisfy an appetite for war. It has little to do with national security.

Waipahuboy
WAIPAHU, HI

Iowa is an irrelevant, early voting state. Newt (philanderer, ethically challenged, Fannie money-grubber, arrogant) deserves all he gets - it ain't negative campaigning if it's true, former Mr. Spkr. NH not much better, but at least candidates won't have to do much kissing of evangelical posteriors.

Won't start getting interesting until after S. Carolina, imo.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments