Off to the races: Gingrich-Santorum or Santorum-Gingrich?

Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich almost teamed up to take down Mitt Romney to form a Santorum-Gingrich, or Gingrich-Santorum ticket, Josh Green reports. Problem: Neither wanted to be vice president.  

National Journal: “President Obama’s health care law—a killer issue in 2010 but an afterthought among voters in 2012—will face another round of attacks in 2014 as its thorniest parts go into effect, potentially supplying Republicans fresh ammunition in their war against ‘Obamacare’ and creating renewed problems for a plethora of vulnerable Democrats. Neither party knows for sure how smoothly the law will be implemented or if Americans will ultimately support it. But it’s clear that seismic change is coming in health care, and that any disruption to the system could alienate voters who today are mostly ambivalent toward the law.”

But Ron Brownstein says the one thing that could turn Texas blue is Rick Perry. And it’s because of ObamaCare and Perry’s decision not to expand Medicaid (unlike other GOP governors) or set up a statewide exchange: “Rejecting the federal money might not pose an immediate political threat to Texas Republicans, whose coalition revolves around white voters responsive to small-government arguments. But renouncing the money represents an enormous gamble for Republicans with the growing Hispanic community, which is expected to approach one-third of the state’s eligible voters in 2016. Hispanics would benefit most from expansion because they constitute 60 percent of the state’s uninsured. A jaw-dropping 3.6 million Texas Hispanics lack insurance.”

And he concludes: “In 1994, California Republican Gov. Pete Wilson mobilized his base by promoting Proposition 187, a ballot initiative to deny services to illegal immigrants. He won reelection that year—and then lost the war as Hispanics stampeded from the GOP and helped turn the state lastingly Democratic. Texas Republicans wouldn’t be threatened as quickly, but they may someday judge their impending decision on expanding Medicaid as a similar turning point.” 

GEORGIA: Seriously, Paul Broun says he shot a lion on safari in Africa and ate it. He called it not “particularly tasty.” “It was kind of chewy, but I ate it too. … If I shoot it, I'm gonna eat it." (H/T: Political Wire.) Just asking, but does this apply to intruders, too?

OHIO: Want to see the Republican confusion same-sex marriage, look no further than Ohio Gov. John Kasich (R). Kasich said in a local TV interview in Ohio that he was in favor of civil unions for gay couples, but then took it back.

"I talked to Rob and encouraged him," Kasich said of Rob Portman’s decision to announce he was in favor of same-sex marriage now that his son came out as gay. "If people want to have civil unions and have some way to transfer their resources, I'm for that. I don't support gay marriage."

But a spokesman later said in a statement, “The governor's position is unchanged. He opposes gay marriage and opposes changing Ohio's constitution to allow for civil unions."

Here’s how the Cleveland Plain-Dealer framed it: “Ohio Gov. John Kasich revealed on Wednesday that he supports civil unions for same-sex couples. But don't quote him on that.”

Discuss this post

Hahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Santorum-Gingrich/ Gingrich/Santorum to take out the Mittster. Didn't happen since neither wanted second billing. You can't make this stuff up. Did those two nincompoops really think that would change the outcome? Unbelievable.

  • 6 votes
Reply#1 - Fri Mar 22, 2013 9:44 AM EDT

will face another round of attacks in 2014 as its thorniest parts go into effect, potentially supplying Republicans fresh ammunition in their war against ‘Obamacare’ and creating renewed problems for a plethora of vulnerable Democrats. Neither party knows for sure how smoothly the law will be implemented or if Americans will ultimately support it. But it’s clear that seismic change is coming in health care, and that any disruption to the system could alienate voters who today are mostly ambivalent toward the law.”

This along with the 100%-200% increase in premiums coming next year especially for those who purchase their own "plan".

And you dem/lib/liv/progressives think you are taking back the House and maintaining the Senate in 2014 elections? Can't wait to see the spin doctors try to ease this one into the households of America.

    #1.1 - Fri Mar 22, 2013 9:57 AM EDT

    Hand, is you whole life made up of lies. I would ask you to think for yourself, but I know thinking would scare you to death. Kind of like those buggy men under your bed.

    • 6 votes
    #1.2 - Fri Mar 22, 2013 10:01 AM EDT

    And just what lie is told above Mo?

      #1.3 - Fri Mar 22, 2013 10:04 AM EDT

      Talkto the Hand:

      "The CBO expects insurance premiums to increase by 5.7% annually for individuals. But the ACA doesn't seem to have alot to do with those increases. The CBO estimates that the health law will increase premiums in the individual market, but the insured will be getting the extra benefits the healthcare plan affords. Healthcare costs more because they're delivering more benefits. Customers will be paying more--and getting something in return. The impact on large employers will be relatively modest since their plans already cover the new benefits under Obamacare.

      So when you make the ridiculous 200% increase----you're a liar.

      • 5 votes
      #1.4 - Fri Mar 22, 2013 10:19 AM EDT

      http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/obamacare-healthcare-reform-costs/2013/03/20/id/495564

      -you're a liar.

      And you are an LIV

      Oh and can you cite your assertion source please? I would like to read the full context. Thanks.

        #1.5 - Fri Mar 22, 2013 10:24 AM EDT

        Hand

        First of all, the link you provide cites a study done by the House Committee on Energy, the Senate Committee on Finance - Minority Staff, the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions - Minority Staff. In other words, by Republicans!!!! How stupid are you?

        Second, the CBO is NOT partial to any party. They put out a non-partisan study on healthcare. My source for this information was quoted in the Washinton Post on 10/4/12 after the Presidential debate on 10/3.

        • 4 votes
        #1.6 - Fri Mar 22, 2013 10:41 AM EDT

        This along with the 100%-200% increase in premiums coming next year especially for those who purchase their own "plan".

        Where did you get that?.....

        But perhaps you should "Talk" to your own insurance carrier about those increases.

        Switch if you so choose, and hopefully, you won't be cancelled/denied due to a pre-existing condition.

        • 4 votes
        #1.7 - Fri Mar 22, 2013 10:52 AM EDT

        Chilled

        I think Talk to the Hand doesn't like facts. Seems to have gotten lost.

        • 4 votes
        #1.8 - Fri Mar 22, 2013 11:05 AM EDT

        Off to the races: Gingrich-Santorum or Santorum-Gingrich?

        what?

        Are they trying to make it an easy win for the Democrats?

        • 4 votes
        #1.9 - Fri Mar 22, 2013 11:28 AM EDT

        Talk only likes facts that are made up. When did you learn how to read Hand? Guess you don't need someone sitting there reading the post to you anymore. Oh you meant you would like to have Dee's source so you could have someone read the full context to you. Doesn't matter you wouldn't understand it anyway.

        • 3 votes
        #1.10 - Fri Mar 22, 2013 11:32 AM EDT

        If the GOP wants to win an election in the future they need to change their platform which is based in exclusion of minorities, woman's rights, sexual preference and they need to become more secular... after all this is government not Sunday school...

        While watching the GOP convention last year, I was sickened by all the hatred they expressed towards other fellow Americans, it was sickening to watch...

        • 3 votes
        #1.11 - Fri Mar 22, 2013 11:42 AM EDT

        DEE-752177

        Chilled

        I think Talk to the Hand doesn't like facts. Seems to have gotten lost.

        I gave you my source. If it is wrong (at least in your mind) so be it. No need for the typical lib "pile on". I will accept credible rebuttal will you?

        And yes Mo(ron) I did want a link to Dee's copy/paste to read the whole thing for myself. You know, that little thing you libs call education? I would like to see it and judge for myself as you have judged my source.

          #1.12 - Fri Mar 22, 2013 11:47 AM EDT

          And from the same article (emphasis added by me)

          "Studies and analyses from the Congressional Budget Office, independent actuaries, state insurance commissioners, health plans, benefit consultants, and others have reached the same conclusion Obamacare will significantly increase premiums," the congressional report states.

            #1.13 - Fri Mar 22, 2013 11:55 AM EDT
            Reply

            The 100 to 200% increase is an out and out lie. We currently pay twice as much as anyone else on earth, that is a fact. We also have one of the worst medical systems on earth because we manage to leave 50 million people without access to affordable health care. That is the truth hand, that is what it looks like. Just so you know, in the AHCA, there is a provision that insurance companies have to pay 80% on actual health care, raising the premiums will do nothing for their bottom line. They must refund anything in access. Unless the cost of medical care itself goes up the insurance companies do not realize any more profit from it.

            The dumb part hand is you are paying for others health care right now. The difference is you are paying twice as much as any other person in any other country. How does it make sense not to reform health care and try and make it more affordable so that many more can enjoy this basic human right?

            • 4 votes
            Reply#2 - Fri Mar 22, 2013 10:12 AM EDT

            http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/obamacare-healthcare-reform-costs/2013/03/20/id/495564

            Read it.

            The difference is you are paying twice as much as any other person in any other country.

            Look at the tax rates in those other countries and add to that the VAT taxes they collect on everything to pay into the kitty. You wanna pay 40% on your income only to be taxed again when you buy food or clothing or other necessities?

              #2.1 - Fri Mar 22, 2013 10:15 AM EDT
              Reply

              Santorum really wanted to be president, but never had a shot. Gingrich didn't actually want to be president, but only found himself competing at all because his opponents were Rick Santorum and a bunch of other, similarly pathetic candidates. A combined ticket never could have happened because their agendas are completely at odds. Gingrich is con man. Santorum is only conning himself.

              • 2 votes
              Reply#3 - Fri Mar 22, 2013 10:23 AM EDT

              So Tweedle Dum and Tweedle Dee wanted to form a team but egos got in the way. Typical!

              • 1 vote
              Reply#4 - Fri Mar 22, 2013 12:08 PM EDT
              You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
              As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.