Come on Michigan do the smart thing! (Romney/Rubio 2012!)

[Xavier_Onassis]

That isn't Patton: it is George C. Scott playing the role of Patton.

Patton was a far dumpier little fellow, and considerably wackier.
He did, however, know a lot more about tanks.

[BT]

(which surprises me that Bt would be pushing for a more socially conservative candidate vs a fiscal one.)

And if you look at their fiscal responses, Paul is the most fiscally conservative.

Most to least
Paul
Santorum
Newt
Romney

Romney is just the Beltway favorite.
Business as usual

[Xavier_Onassis]

I agree with all of that, BT.

It still looks like Romney will be the nominee, but if he loses big in Michigan, that will be a problem.

The Mittster has a rather plastic personality. He tries too hard at being what he thinks people think he should be. he reminds me of a car salesman who once failed to sell me a Buick.

[sirs]

I'd put Newt closer to Paul than Santorum.

from least to most
Paul
Newt
Romney
Santorum

I wouldn't, since I was referring to who's more of a social conservative.  Romney & Paul have trashed them from the get go.  Santorum & Newt have been right up front advocating their social conservative credentials

[BT]

from sirs:
(which surprises me that Bt would be pushing for a more socially conservative candidate vs a fiscal one.)

nah you brought both into the discussion.

And what has Newt advocated that would be considered socially conservative?

[sirs]

Although not the best example, he has frequently referenced family values, publically acknowledging his intermittent swaying from his vows, has been an ardent supporter of faith in one's religion, going so far as to reference how we are a country founded on the Constitutional premice in the Freedom of religion, not from religion.....I could go on, but the point is that while he's not Santorum, on the scale of social conservatism, as it relates to our current crop of GOP candidates left, Newt would be not far behind Santorum, with Paul & Romney on the other side of the scale

[BT]

Newt is a recent convert to Catholicism. Hardly rock of ages staunch, if you ask me.

I think even an agnostic could successfully argue that the Obama administration is unconstitutionally mandating religious organizations to provide contraception as part of some Universal Health Care utopia.

[sirs]

Not sure what that last referece has to do with anything, but whatever.  Point being, that on the scales, Newt's not the one with a history of trashing social conservatives.  Romney & Paul have that distinction.  Newt, OTOH has consistently sided with social conservatives.  As I said, I'm impressed you're supporting him vs someone like Paul who I agree is fiscally probably the MOST conservative, while arguably the least socially conservative candidate

[BT]

And if you look up thread or in the other one i do say Paul is starting to look good.

He is the most fiscally conservative, he is the least socially conservative and he is the least likely to declare war without Congressional blessing. Somewhere i read that he has the second highest count of confirmed delegates so he will be a player one way or  another.

But i certainly don't see Newt as a beacon of social conservatism, he doesn't have the moral standing to be an advocate of that kind.

[sirs]

And if you look up thread or in the other one i do say Paul is starting to look good.  He is the most fiscally conservative, he is the least socially conservative and he is the least likely to declare war without Congressional blessing.

Well, there we go