Slashdot Mirror
Santorum Defends Robocalls To Democrats
Hugh Pickens writes "The LA Times reports that Rick Santorum defended his robocalls urging Democrats in Michigan to vote in today's critical primary, a tactic that has come under withering criticism from rival Mitt Romney as a 'terrible dirty trick' and a 'new low for his campaign.' Santorum says he reached out to Democratic voters, who can vote in the primary, to show that 'we can attract voters we need to win states like Michigan,' and noted that the former Massachusetts governor has wooed Democrats in the past and used Santorum's own words endorsing him in the 2008 race on a robocall of his own. 'I didn't complain about it. I don't complain. You know what, I'm a big guy. I can take it.' Romney crossed party lines himself to vote for Paul Tsongas in the 1992 Democratic primary over Bill Clinton in order to cause mischief for the general election. 'In Massachusetts, if you register as an independent, you can vote in either the Republican or Democratic primary,' said Romney, who until he made an unsuccessful run for Senate in 1994 had spent his adult life as a registered independent."
This has no place on /.
My roomba got a robo call once telling him to vote skynet.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
Why would Santorum want to engage Democrats in the Republican primary. He's the fringe right wing candidate. Romney is nigh indistinguishable from the Democratic incumbant. If a Democrat shows up at the Republican primary, the odds are very good that he'll vote Romney.
The only way I can see a Democrat voting for Santorum in the primary is to help Obama win in the general election. Is Santorum banking on his own unelectability to win the primary? Or is that reading too much into this?
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Personally I think they should do away with "special rights" of parties, etc.
There is nothing in our constitution that creates- or gives special rights to political parties. There is nothing about our brand of democracy that benefits from having parties. George Washington actually called them a bad idea and thought the US should stay away from them.
The government by including party affiliation on ballots- and helping organise- and give public spaces to primaries are interfering with fair elections- it gives an unfair advantage to the two largest parties and does not give a level playing field.
Being a two-party system the majority of the population are pressured into voting for one of two ideologies. "an independant or a third-party can't win" is a common belief... certainly it is made harder by states allowing people to vote "straight-party ticket". This makes it harder for independants or third parties to be elected.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
WW-III anyone?
I believe Santorum prefers to call it The Tenth Crusade.
Seconded. And imagine the calls these people must have received:
"Hi there Democrat voter, have you ever thought that you might like Santorum? A lot of people who at first found the idea repulsive were glad they tried playing on the other team and haven't gone back. I'm here to convince you that what would make America great, is a big heaping helping of Santorum."
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Perhaps all the Democrats should heed Santorum's call to vote in the Michigan Republican primary - and vote for Ron Paul. :-)
That will show 'em.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
Of course, you shouldn't be eating it.
This is just part of the Republican Party's unconscious effort to self-destruct.
I'm not sure it's unconscious. I think they may be running a longer game. When McCain picked Sarah Palin as his running mate, I couldn't help wondering if he was deliberately throwing the 2008 election to Obama. Perhaps he saw the biggest economic shitstorm since the Depression approaching, and knew that it would be blamed on whoever was in office.
If the GOP actually nominates Santorum, this will no longer be an unlikely-sounding conspiracy theory, but an irrefutable fact. It will mean that the Republicans are absolutely terrified of something that they're reasonably certain will happen in the next four years, and that they don't want anyone from their party in the Oval Office when it does.
I'm not going to vote for Obama again, either way, but I'm glad I'm not in his shoes.
No matter who is in the White House, there's a very good chance WWIII will be started on his watch. There's not one plausible candidate, D or R who doesn't have warmongering with Iran as a major part of their foreign policy platform.
If anything, Obama is a bigger threat to world peace than Santorum. The cult of personality behind him has made most voters oblivious to the fact that he has doubled down on all the worst offenses of the Bush administration. Obama could ask for any power whatsoever, and the so-called "moderates" would hand it over to him just because he's "not Bush".
I'd be extremely surprised if we didn't see an Obama reelection shortly followed by a propaganda blitz extremely similar to what we saw in the lead up to Iraq. And he'll get away with it, because people are more concerned about their team winning, than not being hypocrits.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
All of the euthanasias in the US are against the will of the person dying, we just use the euphemism "death penalty". I'm constantly amazed at how the side that's "Pro-Life" is so intent on killing adults.
Most ignorance is vincible ignorance. We don't know because we don't want to know. --Aldous Huxley
Frothing, not foaming.
Remember Santorum frothes.
thegodmovie.com - watch it
Of course, he hasn't actually started any wars on his watch, unlike, say... every other US President going back to Carter. (No, a handful of drone strikes in Libya and Somalia don't count.) He did end the war in Iraq and is ending the war in Afghanistan. He got Bin Laden with a minimal incursion that didn't become a full-blown invasion.
He's talking tough on Iran, but is showing no signs of actually planning for a military operation there. The budget cuts to the military show that.
Reality conflicts with your fear-mongering and false equivalency.
You catch enchiladas by picking them up behind the head and holding them underwater until they don't kick anymore -VeGas
No, a handful of drone strikes in Libya and Somalia don't count.
I think if a drone struck your home, you might have a different opinion on whether that's an act of war. Although, Libya would be a rather minor transgression, if he hadn't violated the War Powers Act by staying there past the deadline.
He did end the war in Iraq and is ending the war in Afghanistan.
Yeah, he ended the Iraq War on the exact date Bush set, and was trying to stay longer. If you're happy that the Iraq war is over, you can thank the Iraqis for kicking us out. Obama had nothing to do with it.
I'll believe that Obama is ending the Afghanistan war when the Afghanistan war actually ends. He could have left when he killed OBL. I don't know what he's waiting for, but it's unlikely it will ever come. Afghanistan is the graveyard of empires. Cut and run at the first opportunity is the only reasonable option.
Yes, BHO killed OBL, but he's also killed american citizens. Even juveniles. I'm far more frightened of living in an America where the president can have citizens assassinated with no oversight or detained without habeas corpus than I am of living in the same world as OBL.
Reality conflicts with your apologetics.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!