Feb 8, 2012 9:05am

Is Rick Santorum’s Sweep A Game Changer? (The Note)

By MICHAEL FALCONE (@michaelpfalcone) and AMY WALTER (@amyewalter)

Even before any of the votes had been tallied last night, Rick Santorum told supporters earlier in the day, “I feel great that Minnesota is going to change the direction of this race tonight.”

He got his win in Minnesota, and add two more in Missouri and Colorado to that equation and the former Pennsylvania senator just might be right.

Last night’s results amounted to kick-start to the Pennsylvania senator’s campaign and a serious rebuke to Mitt Romney.

Though Missouri’s primary was little more than a “beauty contest” (caucuses held on March 17 will actually count) Santorum’s margin of victory — 30 percentage points over Romney — was decisive.

In Minnesota, Santorum left the competition in the dust. With all but a small percentage of precincts there reporting as of this morning, Santorum bested second-place finisher Ron Paul, 44.8 percent to 27.2 percent. Paul finished ahead of Romney by 10 percentage points.

Consider this: four years ago, Romney trounced the rest of the field in Minnesota. He won the state’s caucuses by a 19 percentage point margin, 41 percent to 22 percent, over the eventual Republican nominee, John McCain.  Four years ago, Romney won 45 of the state’s 87 counties.

On Tuesday night, Romney appears to have failed to win even one county, falling prey to Santorum who had strong showings in every corner of the state, including the most populous counties that include the twin cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul.

But Colorado was last night’s real shocker. Santorum clawed his way to victory in a state that Romney was expected to win. It was close but it wasn’t a squeaker. Santorum mustered just over 40 percent of the vote compared to Romney’s roughly 35 percent.

Last night’s results did serious damage to the “Mitt Romney will sail to the nomination” narrative. It also highlights Romney’s continued struggle to win over skeptical conservative GOP voters and energize the base.

“I don’t stand up here claiming to be the conservative alternative to Mitt Romney,” Santorum said during his victory speech in Missouri, before the results from Colorado were known. “I am here claiming to be the conservative alternative to Barack Obama.”

After big wins in Florida and Nevada, the conventional wisdom was that Romney had vanquished his strongest rival — Newt Gingrich — and had this nomination all but sewn up. But, the voters of Colorado, Minnesota and Missouri did not get the message.

Santorum has now won more states that Romney.

WHAT HAPPENS NEXT? ABC News’ Political Director Amy Walter looks into her crystal ball: Expect Romney and the pro-Romney Super PAC to start to reload and regroup in Arizona and Michigan – the next two major contests on the docket on Feb 28. Romney is hoping his money and organizational muscle will pull him through in these states, much like money and organization helped him win Florida. Either way, the nomination fight continues and Romney will once again have to bat away the questions about the lack of enthusiasm among GOP voters for his candidacy. Another big loser tonight: Newt Gingrich. He’s betting on a good showing on Super Tuesday, March 6th. But, for now at least, Santorum, not Newt, owns the mantle of the “conservative alternative” to Romney. As for Santorum, he was already making clear during a round of morning interviews that he plans to focus less on Arizona and more on Michigan, a state where Romney has a home-field advantage. http://abcn.ws/w47GkC

FLASHBACK. From a Romney campaign memo circulated on Tuesday titled:The Road Ahead – A Reality Check”: As our campaign has said from the outset, Mitt Romney is not going to win every contest.  John McCain lost 19 states in 2008, and we expect our opponents will notch a few wins, too.  But unlike the other candidates, our campaign has the resources and organization to keep winning over the long run.  A winning conservative message, hard work, and old-fashioned delegate math will win this race for Governor Romney.”

ABC’s John Berman reported for “Good Morning America,” on Rick Santorum’s trifecta last night. WATCH: http://abcn.ws/xtKx9r and ABC News political analyst Matthew Dowd breaks down the significance of the former senator’s wins. WATCH: http://abcn.ws/wFAnhv

WHAT HAPPENED IN COLORADO? ABC’s Elizabeth Hartfield offers an after-action report on Santorum’s win over Romney in Colorado: Romney won Colorado with 60 percent of the vote in 2008. El Paso County, where Colorado Springs is located, provides a large hub of GOP votes. In 2008, Romney won with 58 percent. McCain got 17 percent. Last night Santorum claimed a strong victory in the county — 47.1 percent to Romney’s 31 percent. Another notable county is Mesa County, where Grand Junction is located. Romney won this county in 2008 with 67 percent of the vote — a 51 percent margin of victory over McCain. Last night he lost the county to Santorum by a double digit margin — 47.1 percent to 35.8 percent. In Larimer County, Santorum beat Romney by another double digit margin — 44.1 percent to 29.7 percent. Romney swept this county in 2008 with 59 percent of the vote. McCain only got 15 percent. In 2008 70,006 votes were cast- about 2 percent of the voting eligible population. Last night that number was down a bit, though not substantially — 65,916 votes were cast (around 2 percent of the voting eligible population).

 

THE BUZZ

SANTORUM’S WINNING MESSAGE. “Conservatism is alive and well,” Rick Santorum triumphantly announced to supporters Tuesday night after winning the states of Minnesota and Missouri, ABC’s Shushannah Walshe reports from St. Charles, Mo.  ”Your votes today were not just heard loud and wide across the states of Missouri and Minnesota, but they were heard loud and louder all across this country and particularly in a place I suspect maybe in Massachusetts, they were heard particularly loud tonight,” Santorum said, referring to Romney headquarters in Boston. He then set his sights squarely on President Obama. “He thinks he’s smarter than you,” Santorum said. “He think he’s someone who is a privileged person, who should be able to rule over you.” He then compared the two saying the former Massachusetts governor “has the same positions as Obama and in fact would not be the best person to fight for your voices and freedom in America.” http://abcn.ws/wT2NJM

NOTED: Time Magazine’s Mark Halperin called Santorum’s Missouri remarks, “one of the better speeches Santorum has given in this campaign. He was conversational and inspirational at the same time. Interestingly, Santorum delivered without either a Teleprompter or written text. He drove a message that was optimistic and forward looking. And Romney-style, he trained his guns on his GOP rivals and Obama simultaneously.” http://ti.me/zD9iqC

NEWT GINGRICH TURNS TO OHIO. “On a day that was not kind to Newt Gingrich, he traveled to a place he hopes will help get him back in the saddle next month: Ohio,” The New York Times’ Rich Oppel reports. “Dealt a big defeats in the Minnesota and Colorado caucuses on Tuesday, Mr. Gingrich is campaigning for two days across Ohio, which does not vote until Super Tuesday — March 6 — but is a place he feels he can win. A strong showing in this state, with its 66 delegates, would help him claw back from disappointing showings in Florida and Nevada and play into his strategy of trying to regain momentum in conservative Southern states and working-class battlegrounds that hold contests on Super Tuesday or later. At a Tuesday morning speech at a chili restaurant in Cincinnati, Mr. Gingrich suggested that he might even be leading the race here, though it is far from clear where he actually stands against Mitt Romney, particularly since the contest is so far off. ‘We need your help to make it a bigger margin,’ he told the crowd of about 200. Then in Dayton he made a pocketbook appeal to hundreds of people who packed in, standing-room only, at a meeting hall. Noting that opponents had mocked him for proposing to colonize the moon, he suggested that his lunar gambit would be a lucrative shot in the arm for a region where aerospace remains a dominant industry.” http://nyti.ms/xqHZki

RON PAUL’S MIXED NIGHT. Ron Paul posted his best numbers of his presidential bid Tuesday night in Minnesota despite coming in second, notes ABC’s Jason Volack. He received 13,030 total votes – marking and increase of about 3,000 votes compared with his run four years ago. The Congressman managed to expand his base and place ahead of Mitt Romney.  He told an audience last night in Minnesota that “he knows what to do about getting delegates” and “when the dust settles” he will receive “the maximum number of delegates coming out of Minnesota.” And although he came in third in Missouri’s primary — there too he received more vote (and a larger percent of the vote) compared with four year ago. Only in Colorado did Paul slip. He finished the night dead last, receiving less votes than he did in 2008.  The next test for Paul is Maine. While his GOP rivals were campaigning in Florida – Paul was in the state and he remains to date the only presidential candidate this election cycle to visit there. During his Tuesday speech, Paul predicted that the results will be “very good” for him there.

ROMNEY’S RIVALS TAKE AIM AT HIS ‘ASSAULT ON RELIGION’ LINE. Mitt Romney’s Republican rivals pounced yesterday on his accusations that President Obama has an “assault on religion” by forcing Catholic institutions to provide contraceptives and abortion services, suggesting it was a hypocritical statement, ABC’s Emily Friedman notes. Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum charged that Romney made the same demands on Catholic facilities when he was the governor of Massachusetts and implemented his health care plan. Romney kept up his attack on Obama’s policies and Romney spokeswoman Andrea Saul dismissed the remarks by Gingrich and Santorum. “We expect these attacks from President Obama and his liberal friends. But from Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum, it’s a clear indication of desperation from their campaigns,” said Saul. http://abcn.ws/ziHxyy

ABC’s Jake Tapper reported for “World News” on the contraception controversy. WATCH: http://abcn.ws/xVeKGh

BEHIND OBAMA’S CONTRACEPTION DECISION. “President Barack Obama ended months of internal White House debate by siding with a group of mostly female advisers who urged him not to limit a health-care law mandate to provide contraceptives, even at the risk of alienating Catholic voters in November, people familiar with the discussions said,” Bloomberg’s Mike Dorning and Margaret Talev write. “Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, a Catholic and a two-term governor of Kansas, was joined by several female Obama advisers in urging against a broad exemption for religious organizations. To do so would leave too many women without coverage and sap the enthusiasm for Obama among women’s rights advocates, they said, according to the people, who spoke about the deliberations on condition of anonymity. Vice President Joe Biden and then-White House chief of staff Bill Daley, also Catholics, warned that the mandate would be seen as a government intrusion on religious institutions. Even moderate Catholic voters in battleground states might be alienated, they warned, according to the people familiar with the discussions.” http://bloom.bg/ycWttE

LOS ANGELES MAYOR HAS HARSH WORDS FOR ROMNEY.  Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa Wednesday plans to rip Mitt Romney for the Republican candidate’s immigration stance, ABC’s Matthew Jaffe reports. “For the first time in modern memory, a major political party is poised to nominate a presidential candidate who has abandoned immigration reform and instead advocates self-deportation,” Villaraigosa plans to say in a speech to the National Association of Latino Elected Officials in Washington, DC, Wednesday, according to excerpts. “We have a candidate who on Martin Luther King Day, a day celebrating racial reconciliation, had the architect of Arizona and Alabama’s draconian anti-immigration laws campaign for him. Villaraigosa is receiving NALEO’s Edward R. Roybal Award for Outstanding Public Service in Washington, DC. He will deliver the speech at 7:00 pm ET tonight.

 

WHO’S TWEETING?

@NKingofDC: Santorum beat Romney by 20 points in the Minn county where Tim Pawlenty has lived his entire life, and represented in the state House.

@LarrySabato: Wonder if Romney will study another weak frontrunner for tips. Some guy named Clinton in ’92, ran against Mitt’s choice, Tsonga

 

@FixRachel: Santorum on CNN: Romney “had a great career in the private sector, but we’re not running for CEO of this country.”

@murphymike: I have to recant all my tweets this week about AZ being huge battlefield. Santo says MI. I think AZ is slightly better terrain for him.

@Amy_Bingham: What ever happend to Obama Girl? Joe the Plumber? John Edwards’ mistriss? abcn.ws/zQ0uZX

 

POLITICAL RADAR:

–Rick Santorum will take his campaign to Texas, with stops in McKinney, Allen and Plano

–Mitt Romney will hold an afternoon event with supporters in Atlanta, Georgia

–Newt Gingrich will tour and speak to employees at Jergens, Inc. in Cleveland, Ohio

–ABC’s Joanna Suarez

 

Check out The Note’s Futures Calendar: http://abcn.ws/ZI9gV

 

* Get The Note delivered to your inbox every day.

* For breaking political news and analysis check out The Note blog: http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/and ABCNews.com/Politics: http://abcnews.com/politics

 

User Comments

Hopefully so, as there’s not much of a difference between Barry and Mitt except that Romney knows business and Obama knows community organizing.

Posted by: Noz | February 8, 2012, 9:23 am 9:23 am

Stop calling Santorum a former Pennsylvania Senator. He and his family lived in Virginia while he was SUPPOSEDLY a PA Senator. He billed his “local” PA school district for over $100,000 to cyber school his kids in Virginia. He still resides in Virginia. All you Santorum supporters, come to Pennsylvania and find out the truth.

Posted by: Bob | February 8, 2012, 9:36 am 9:36 am

Rick didn’t win in Mo, the Caucus isn’t until next month, yesterday was a popularity contest of who could promise the most ice cream at lunch.

Posted by: snewsom2997 | February 8, 2012, 9:37 am 9:37 am

Just a further sign of GOP discontent, as evidenced by the low voter turnouts everywhere. No one really cares except the extremists and religious zealots.

Posted by: Dr. Bubba | February 8, 2012, 9:40 am 9:40 am

“Just a further sign of GOP discontent, as evidenced by the low voter turnouts everywhere.” Or possibly because most of the Republicans don’t care for whom they’ll end up voting to oust the current administration. As Santorum said, it’s not about beating the other GOP candidates, it’s about beating Barack Obama.

Posted by: MyTake | February 8, 2012, 9:51 am 9:51 am

Posted by: MyTake—That is a mighty risky run, To me Romney and Obama are little different from each other, they are both big government politicians, Santorum lost his reelection bid in PA by 19%, if the people in PA were not willing to give him a second chance why should the rest of the country. Just voting in opposition is almost as bad as voting for Obama. None of the present (R) Candidates will get my vote, with exception of Ron Paul and he won’t win. As long as Americans are content to pick the lessor of two evils, we will not have any kind of government the people are proud of, and the people will get the government they deserve.

Posted by: snewsom2997 | February 8, 2012, 9:57 am 9:57 am

Ricky’s win is nothing more than a red herring — it means nothing in terms of who will be the nominee. And, as a Pennsylvanian, I can promise you that the more the GOP voters learn about him, the less they’ll like him. He’s unfit for the presidency.

Posted by: Bobby Jo | February 8, 2012, 10:36 am 10:36 am

The sad part is that we’re still going to get one of these looney tune hacks as Romney’s VP running mate.

Posted by: SpinDoctor | February 8, 2012, 10:44 am 10:44 am

“The sad part is that we’re still going to get one of these looney tune hacks as Romney’s VP running mate.” – SpinDoctor

I hear you Spin Doctor.
Then let’s pray that we at least get a Repub Congress so that we have a chance at ending the madness in Washington DC.

Posted by: Noz | February 8, 2012, 10:57 am 10:57 am

Its time to hand Congress back to the Democrats so they can get the job done ! This gridlock created by the tea party cooks has got to stop once and for all.

Posted by: Cary | February 8, 2012, 11:29 am 11:29 am

More news, and yet nothing has changed: Obama still sucks. And he will be sucking just as badly come November.

Posted by: Sai | February 8, 2012, 11:31 am 11:31 am

“Its time to hand Congress back to the Democrats so they can get the job done !”
Posted by: Cary
You mean like the Democratic Senate, who hasn’t passed a budget in like…forever? Get real, and drop the lame talking points.

Posted by: meg | February 8, 2012, 11:34 am 11:34 am

“The sad part is that we’re still going to get one of these looney tune hacks as Romney’s VP running mate.”
Posted by: SpinDoctor
Far better than Biden, and far better than the corrupt community orgnaizer in cheif, Obama. Most sane adults realize this.

Posted by: barry | February 8, 2012, 11:38 am 11:38 am

I strongly doubt that Obama can win against any of these people, but I do believe that bigger, better government is the answer. We all need to pay more taxes too.

Posted by: lexingtonlady | February 8, 2012, 11:40 am 11:40 am

Makes no diff to me. As a gay man who receives food stamps cos i can’t find a job i like, i will be voting for Obama no matter what.

Posted by: davem | February 8, 2012, 11:44 am 11:44 am

A game changer? Only in the sense that the Republicans have a very WEAK group vieing for the nomination and that Mitt who has that SMUG look on his face just because he THINKS he has it locked up is someone MOST Republicans do NOT want. I don’t like ANY of them but hey my vote is for Obama anyhow. As for Santorum, his religion is weighing in on his campaign WAY TOO MUCH for my liking. I want a President NOT a preacher!

Posted by: demNme5 | February 8, 2012, 11:45 am 11:45 am

Santorum is a terrible choice. He can’t even tell the difference between church and state, much less keep them properly separate. Romney is Obama-lite. Gingrich is a complete proven unethical crook. Obama, well, no more need be said; his “results” speak for him. I will never cast a vote for any of those.

Ron Paul is the only one worth a damn. If he isn’t the R nominee, I’m writing him in anyway.

PhilB

Posted by: Phil Boncer | February 8, 2012, 11:50 am 11:50 am

Santorum is unelectable in the general election. I am an independent and I wouldn’t cast a vote for him and I can’t see any other independent voting for him. I am more likely to vote for Romney over Obama, but if the Republican put up someone like Santorum then they might as well default and let Obama run unchallanged.

Posted by: Dean | February 8, 2012, 11:55 am 11:55 am

NOZ | February 8, 2012, 10:57 AM, SAID:

“Then let’s pray that we at least get a Repub Congress so that we have a chance at ending the madness in Washington DC.”
=========================
LMAO! ….. It was the last Republican congress that implanted that “madness”. Is your memory that short?

…. Two Wars, paid for by borrowing…
…. a new Federal Department (Department of Homeland Security), paid for by borrowing and brought to us by those supposed “smaller government” Republicans (LOL!)…
…. MEDICARE Part D, paid for by borrowing…
…. Larger and larger total annual interest payments on all that debt racked up by all the borrowing… LOL!… also paid for by borrowing.

All while simultaneously cutting taxes (Bush Tax Cuts), that benefited primarily the top 2% income earners.

And the Republicans want to do more of the same. Only a fool would think that voting back ANY Republican is going to solve the nation’s fiscal problems. Twelve years of a Republican controlled Senate and House (January 1995 to January 2007) resulted in where we’re at today, and voting them back in, with all their talk about “more tax cuts” will only exasperate the problem.

Posted by: Forrest Gump is DEFINITELY a Republican | February 8, 2012, 11:57 am 11:57 am

He’s running third in a group of four…115/38/34*/20…Get Real…..

Posted by: Parallex View | February 8, 2012, 11:59 am 11:59 am

Oh look, the little immature republican name stealing troll now steals names of people that aren’t even commenting yet on something.

Posted by: lexingtonlady | February 8, 2012, 11:59 am 11:59 am

And who won the nomination last time after losing in those states? McCain.

Posted by: Barbara | February 8, 2012, 12:00 pm 12:00 pm

Remains to be seen. Only bona fide primaries tell the real tale. Caucuses are a total mess.

Posted by: Rick McDaniel | February 8, 2012, 12:04 pm 12:04 pm

Here is your chance to root for a Howdy Doody cartoon caricature lookalike!!

Posted by: John | February 8, 2012, 12:11 pm 12:11 pm

Thank God the Teaparty “cooks” stop the dems from spending even further into debt as Obama swindled money and sent it off to his buddies. Obama should be in prison.

Posted by: beensaidsaid | February 8, 2012, 12:13 pm 12:13 pm

Mitt Romney is going to change tune from attacking Obama to attacking Rick Santorum. Tomorrow, if Newt wins, Mitt Romney will sing a different tune. This man glides faster than an ice skater. His stand on issues depends on the direction the win blows.

Posted by: NoFlyZone2 | February 8, 2012, 12:23 pm 12:23 pm

__”Makes no diff to me. As a gay man who receives food stamps cos i can’t find a job i like, i will be voting for Obama no matter what.”

POSTED BY: DAVEM | FEBRUARY 8, 2012, 11:44 AM 11:44 AM___________LOL, you wish you were gay.

Posted by: NoFlyZone2 | February 8, 2012, 12:30 pm 12:30 pm

Mitt Romney will be the republican nominee. The GOP establishment wants someone to protect their corporate interests. Forget the tea party, they are bought and paid for by the health insurance industry and Grover Norquist, They will go along with anything the GOP establishment wants.

Posted by: tmferretti | February 8, 2012, 12:41 pm 12:41 pm

Obama’s healthcare and the resulting uproar over contraceptives by the Catholic church gave Santorum these victories.

Posted by: S Norton | February 8, 2012, 12:44 pm 12:44 pm

Here is my prediction for the general erection in November: Rick Santorum, Ron Paul, and Newt Gingrich will eventually fall to the wayside. Bruised and battered after all the political mud slinging, Romney will stumble to the finish line as the GOP nominee. However, the next president of the United States—Barrack Obama— is already in the white house. Right now, the Republicans are putting on a clown show to entertaining us.

Posted by: NoFlyZone2 | February 8, 2012, 12:45 pm 12:45 pm

BARRY: “but I do believe that bigger, better government is the answer. ”

I really hope that this statement was tongue-in-cheek. The words “bigger” and “better” don’t go together when you’re talking about govt. What we need, what I fear we will never have, is SMALLER BETTER government.

Posted by: JRC | February 8, 2012, 1:08 pm 1:08 pm

Good post, NOFLYZONE2 — I believe we’ll be seeing round 2 of Obama and I’m feelin’ pretty good about that. It is obvious the Repubs can’t make up their minds and that’s because they don’t have much to choose from. If anyone makes it, Romney will and he isn’t going to win the presidency.

Posted by: carole | February 8, 2012, 1:15 pm 1:15 pm

“LOL, you wish you were gay.”
POSTED BY: NOFLYZONE2
What is that supposed to mean? You are some sort of true gay, and I am a fake gay. Very weird.
Are you also on food stamps like me, and for that reason support Obama?
And FORREST GUMP IS DEFINITELY A REPUBLICAN, how many times does a person with a brain have to point out the ultra-obvious to you that you are COMPLIMENTING Republicans by calling them Forrest Gump. Are you really that stubbornly dense?

Posted by: davem | February 8, 2012, 1:27 pm 1:27 pm

A candidate needs a plurality in 5 states to put their name into nomination at the convention. So does Missoury count for Santorum or does the caucus in March count? If it counts, Santorum only needs one more plurality in one more state to have his name in to nomination. That’s important, because there will have to be a prime time speech, which gives Santorum a lot of leverage on the platform. He can demand anti-gay planks in exchange for a speech that isn’t a huge embarrassment.

Posted by: Greggw | February 8, 2012, 1:35 pm 1:35 pm

“What is that supposed to mean? You are some sort of true gay, and I am a fake gay. Very weird.
Are you also on food stamps like me, and for that reason support Obama? ”
Posted by: Davem
You got it right, finally. That’s what I meant. I used to be on food stamps when I was depressed and lost my city gov’t job because of a bad break up, but now I am working for a dem pac and doing great.

Posted by: noflyzone2 | February 8, 2012, 2:09 pm 2:09 pm

Just when you thought the media had this all wrapped up for Romney, Rick Santorum has to come in there and screw everything up.

Posted by: don raihala | February 8, 2012, 2:11 pm 2:11 pm

NoFlyZone2 , please stop teasing me and calling me a “silly tool”. it is irrelevant to this topic.

Posted by: demnme5 | February 8, 2012, 2:11 pm 2:11 pm

Ron Paul – a better choice than Santorum, Romney, Gingrich or Obama.

Posted by: Aaron Ververs | February 8, 2012, 2:14 pm 2:14 pm

“Oh look, the little immature republican name stealing troll now steals names of people that aren’t even commenting yet on something.”
Posted by: LexingtonLady
Sorry, but nearly everyone is on to your pathological game of fake posting yourself, and then whining about fake posts. Wise up.

Posted by: tmferretti | February 8, 2012, 2:22 pm 2:22 pm

Romney will prep an attack ad barrage, and he will kill Santorum, in the same way he killed Gingrich in Iowa, and FL.

Posted by: Rick McDaniel | February 8, 2012, 2:38 pm 2:38 pm

DAVEM | February 8, 2012, 1:27 PM, SAID:

“And FORREST GUMP IS DEFINITELY A REPUBLICAN, how many times does a person…have to point out …to you that you are COMPLIMENTING Republicans by calling them ‘Forrest Gump’.”
==============================
DaveM, you’re absolutely correct. “Forrest Gump” is actually a “step-up” from the words “imbeciles” and “cretins”, so you can consider it a “compliment”.

hehehehehe!

Posted by: Forrest Gump is DEFINITELY a Republican | February 8, 2012, 3:00 pm 3:00 pm

DAVEM | February 8, 2012, 1:27 PM, SAID:

“And FORREST GUMP IS DEFINITELY A REPUBLICAN, how many times does a person…have to point out …to you that you are COMPLIMENTING Republicans by calling them ‘Forrest Gump’.”
==============================
DaveM, you’re absolutely correct. “Forrest Gump” is actually a “step-up” from the words “imbeciles” and “cretins”, so you can consider it a “compliment”.

LOL!

Posted by: Forrest Gump is DEFINITELY a Republican | February 8, 2012, 3:02 pm 3:02 pm

Uh, and duh… Forrest Gump is certainly a wise and intelligent character, if you even remotely understood the film, which is not a terribly difficult film to understand for most people. In fact, one of the main themes is the ironic discrepancy between the way mundane and shallow folks see Gump, versus how wise he really is. But hey, I guess we can’t expect that much elementary sense and perception from a copy and paste obamabot. LOL, indeed.

Posted by: True Not True | February 8, 2012, 4:15 pm 4:15 pm

Santorum > Obama. Also true: 5 dead possums in a basket > Obama.

Posted by: ripster | February 8, 2012, 4:30 pm 4:30 pm

Crusty the Clown > Obama.
OBA > Obama.

Posted by: Noz | February 8, 2012, 5:03 pm 5:03 pm

Oops!

: o )

ABO > Obama

Posted by: Noz | February 8, 2012, 5:10 pm 5:10 pm

I see, above, the copy and paste man tried to reply, but failed again. LOL. And naturally, hehehehehe.
Advice: see and understand fairly straightforward films before using characters from those movies to “insult” people. Might save you some ongoing boomerang embarrassment, and the destruction of your last shred of credibility. Forrest Gump. Right.

Posted by: davem | February 8, 2012, 6:48 pm 6:48 pm

DAVEM | FEBRUARY 8, 2012, 6:48 PM, SAID:

“Advice: see and understand fairly straightforward films before using characters from those movies…”
================================
LMAO! …… What’s funny is that you’re really, actually, taking the time to defend a fictional character, named Forrest Gump in front of the rest of America. Must be that you actually see a lot of yourself in that character, including the “dunce” part.

Posted by: Shallow "R's" Are Fun to Laugh At | February 9, 2012, 6:17 am 6:17 am

Posted by: Shallow “R’s” Are Fun to Laugh At | February 9, 2012, 6:17 am 6:17 am

DaveM, give it up. He doesn’t get it.

Posted by: Noz | February 9, 2012, 8:54 am 8:54 am

no.

Posted by: hemnebob | February 9, 2012, 11:07 am 11:07 am

so rick santorum says catholic priests can cover up child abuse if they want? so he wants to impose his will on women and unborm children. Sieg Heil Rick! We need to stop this Nazi.

Posted by: colin newton | February 19, 2012, 7:17 pm 7:17 pm

Leave a Reply

Do you have more information about this topic? If so, please click here to contact the editors of ABC News.