Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Wait a minute - could the RNC/RSCC be giving up on Rick Santorum

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
LynneSin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-07-06 10:40 AM
Original message
Wait a minute - could the RNC/RSCC be giving up on Rick Santorum
Edited on Mon Aug-07-06 10:40 AM by LynneSin
I'll see if I find more information but I found this blurb in an article about the Green/Rick scandal:

http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=10186

Washington Prowler
Rick Sees Green
By The Prowler
Published 8/7/2006 12:09:01 AM
His polling numbers stalled out for almost a year, his campaign mired with miscues and poor performances, and operating under a threat of having campaign dollars cut off by the Republican National Committee and the National Republican Senatorial Committee, Sen. Rick Santorum did what any desperate candidate would do: he got a third party candidate into the race.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-07-06 10:50 AM
Response to Original message
1. great find..now we need to get this article to PA people!!
folks this is how an election is stolen..they have to get the numbers close..the polling numbers have to be somewhat close to steal an election..so now they are again using the green party to help their dirty deads..

they did it in NH and Fla with Nader..


now with their formula in hand..they are going to local states! with the Greens obliging..if you can't see this ..well.........

here is an important snip for this article..

http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=10186


snip:

According to Santorum campaign insiders, Santorum knew about plans by his supporters to get Green Party candidate Carl Romanelli into the Pennsylvania Senate race, in hopes that Romanelli would siphon off votes from Democrat nominee Bob Casey, Jr.


snip:
Santorum had informed party officials that he believed he'd require as much as $1 million a week, perhaps more, to win his race against Casey. "And he wasn't talking about footing that bill himself," says an RNC staffer. "He expected the national party and the Senate campaign committee to help. That's money that would have gone to more competitive races."

Now Santorum has his polling numbers looking up a bit, a third party to peel away some votes from Casey, and three months to right what had been a badly listing ship. Something Santorum apparently believes is doable.

And you won't hear Romanelli whistling, "It's Not Easy Being Green." When you're bought and owned by another party's candidate, it's the easiest job in the world.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheVirginian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-07-06 10:56 AM
Response to Original message
2. Its probably an embellishment.
Not that that sort of thing would ever be publically confirmed by anybody in the Republican Party.

I would assume that all potential NRSC clients are under a standing threat of a similar nature, but on a strategic level, when they have Mike McGavick within five points of Cantwell, Kean within five points of Menendez, Chafee trailing by five points to Whitehouse, and Talent trailing by five points to McCaskill, there are other races that are more a priority for the NRSC than what most observers of both parties have concluded is an inevitability at this point.

If I were the NRSC, my top priorities would be in this order:

1. Missouri
2. New Jersey
3. Rhode Island
4. Washington
5. Ohio
6. Minnesota
7. Maryland
8. Montana
9. Michigan
10. Pennsylvania
11. Tennesee
12. Nebraska
13. Arizona
14. Virginia
15. Nevada

That's based on the viability of each candidate, the particulars of each race, and the current fundraising ability and CoH of each candidate.

The NRSC has also been sluggish in fundraising this cycle, though don't be confused that people aren't donating to the Republican Party. The RNC still continues to be the top dog, and individual candidates are still fundraising on target (with some exceptions). However, the NRSC hasn't done as well nearly as it has in previous cycles, so I can imagine that they would need to scrimp on races that aren't considered a priority, relatively speaking.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dogmudgeon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-07-06 11:00 AM
Response to Original message
3. Or, Rick may WANT to lose
There was an article in the Inqy a few months ago to the effect that losing the election would be the best thing that could happen to Santorum. He's hated, he's having financial problems, and his kids will be hitting college soon. On his own, he can be a big-ticket political consultant.

It's actually difficult to say what he wants -- either way, he's the Right's blow-dried golden boy, and will stay in that role for at least another few years. But I still think the only real problem we'll have after the election is keeping Casey from becoming actively anti-choice.

--p!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LynneSin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-07-06 12:08 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Yes but Rick has presidential aspirations
So why would he blemish his record with a possible defeat? He could have played it safe and retired like Bill Frist did. Anyhow, Santorum was part of that 1994 Contract on America which said that if elected he would only serve 2 terms
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 10th 2024, 03:47 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC