economics102
02-19-2012, 02:27 PM
"You know, we haven't won a state yet, it's true, but we've got very strong numbers overall. Think about it. We were only 3% behind Santorum/Romney in Iowa. We were a strong 2nd in New Hampshire and Minnesota, with Gingrich/Romney/Santorum over 10 points behind us in each state. Statistically tied for 1st in Maine. And we're getting larger percentages as the campaign proceeds: 21% in Iowa, 22% in New Hampshire, 27% in Minnesota, 36% in Maine. The idea that one campaign is "strong" because they get 39% and another is "limping along" with 36% is just the media playing up a narrative.
We're the only serious alternative to Mitt Romney. I'm the only candidate the polls have consistently shown, since before this campaign even began, I'm the only candidate besides Mitt Romney that the polls show has a good shot at beating Obama. And more importantly I'm the only candidate who's actually serious about cutting spending. What's the point of electing Romney, Santorum, or Gingrich? Obama makes speeches about being more fiscally responsible and then doesn't do it. So did Reagan, Bush Sr, Bush Jr. Why should we believe that Romney, Santorum, or Gingrich are any different? If the American people really want to cut spending, they'd better vote for the candidate who has a 30-year history of rejecting every spending increase, otherwise they're going to be just as disappointed in Romney, Santorum, or Gingrich as the serious progressives were in Barack Obama. And this country can't afford to be disappointed again because we're on the brink of economic collapse."
We're the only serious alternative to Mitt Romney. I'm the only candidate the polls have consistently shown, since before this campaign even began, I'm the only candidate besides Mitt Romney that the polls show has a good shot at beating Obama. And more importantly I'm the only candidate who's actually serious about cutting spending. What's the point of electing Romney, Santorum, or Gingrich? Obama makes speeches about being more fiscally responsible and then doesn't do it. So did Reagan, Bush Sr, Bush Jr. Why should we believe that Romney, Santorum, or Gingrich are any different? If the American people really want to cut spending, they'd better vote for the candidate who has a 30-year history of rejecting every spending increase, otherwise they're going to be just as disappointed in Romney, Santorum, or Gingrich as the serious progressives were in Barack Obama. And this country can't afford to be disappointed again because we're on the brink of economic collapse."