Gallup 2012 GOP Nomination Daily Tracking Poll
- Rick Santorum 36%
- Mitt Romney 28%
- Newt Gingrich 13%
- Ron Paul 11%
- Rick Santorum 36% (35%) {34%} [32%] (31%) {30%} [30%] (27%) {24%} [22%] (20%) {17%} [16%] (16%) {16%} [17%] (16%) {17%} [16%] (15%) {13%} [13%] (13%) {12%} [12%] (11%) {12%} [12%] (13%) {13%} [14%] (15%) {14%} [14%] (14%) {14%} [15%] (15%) {17%} [18%] (18%) {16%} [15%] (11%) {8%} [6%] (5%) {4%} [4%] (3%) {3%} [3%] (4%) {4%} [4%] (4%) {4%} [4%] (4%) {4%} [4%] (3%) {2%} [3%] (2%) {2%} [3%] (3%)
- Mitt Romney 28% (29%) {30%} [31%] (33%) {32%} [32%] (34%) {34%} [34%] (36%) {37%} [37%] (35%) {33%} [31%] (31%) {27%} [27%] (26%) {26%} [24%] (25%) {28%} [27%](29%) {30%} [31%] (30%) {33%} [33%] (34%) {37%} [37%] (35%) {34%} [34%] (31%) {30%} [30%] (31%) {29%} [27%] (27%) {26%} [24%] (26%) {27%} [25%] (24%) {23%} [22%] (21%) {23%} [23%] (24%) {24%} [24%] (24%) {23%} [22%] (23%) {23%} [23%] (23%) {25%} [23%] (22%)
- Newt Gingrich 13% (13%) {14%} [14%] (15%) {16%} [16%] (16%) {17%} [18%] (20%) {21%} [22%] (24%) {25%} [25%] (26%) {28%} [28%] (28%) {32%} [32%] (31%) {31%} [31%](28%) {25%} [23%] (20%) {17%} [16%] (15%) {14%} [13%] (13%) {15%} [14%] (16%) {18%} [17%] (16%) {17%} [19%] (19%) {22%} [23%] (24%) {23%} [25%] (25%) {26%} [26%] (27%) {25%} [25%] (26%) {28%} [28%] (29%) {31%} [31%] (33%) {33%} [35%] (37%) {34%} [36%] (37%)
- Ron Paul 11% (11%) {11%} [10%] (8%) {8%} [8%] (8%) {8%} [10%] (10%) {12%} [11%] (12%) {11%} [12%] (11%) {13%} [13%] (14%) {13%} [14%] (13%) {12%} [12%] (13%) {13%} [14%] (13%) {13%} [12%] (12%) {12%} [12%] (13%) {12%} [13%] (13%) {12%} [13%] (13%) {12%} [12%] (13%) {13%} [13%] (11%) {11%} [11%] (11%) {12%} [13%] (12%) {12%} [12%] (11%) {10%} [10%] (10%) {9%} [8%] (8%) {9%} [9%] (9%) {10%} [9%] (8%)
Survey of at least 1,000 registered Republicans and Republican-leaning independents was conducted February 14-18, 2012. The margin of error is ± 3 percentage points. Results from the poll conductedFebruary 13-17, 2012 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted February 12-16, 2012 are in curly brackets. Results from the poll conducted February 11-15, 2012 are in square brackets. Results from the poll conducted February 10-14, 2012 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted February 9-13, 2012 are in curly brackets. Results from the poll conducted February 8-12, 2012are in square brackets. Results from the poll conducted February 7-11, 2012 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted February 4-10, 2012 are in curly brackets. Results from the poll conductedFebruary 3-9, 2012 are in square brackets. Results from the poll conducted February 2-8, 2012 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted February 1-7, 2012 are in curly brackets. Results from the poll conducted January 31 – February 6, 2012 are in square brackets. Results from the poll conducted January 30 – February 3, 2012 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted January 29 – February 2, 2012 are in curly brackets. Results from the poll conducted January 28 – February 1, 2012 are in square brackets. Results from the poll conducted January 27-31, 2012 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted January 26-30, 2012 are in square brackets. Results from the poll conducted January 25-29, 2012 are in square brackets. Results from the poll conducted January 24-28, 2012 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted January 23-27, 2012 are in curly brackets. Results from the poll conducted January 22-26, 2012are in square brackets. Results from the poll conducted January 21-25, 2012 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted January 20-24, 2012 are in curly brackets. Results from the poll conductedJanuary 19-23, 2012 are in Results from the poll conducted January 18-22, 2012 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conductedJanuary 17-21, 2012 are in curly brackets. Results from the poll conducted January 16-20, 2012 are in square brackets. Results from the poll conducted January 15-19, 2012 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted January 14-18, 2012 are in curly brackets. Results from the poll conducted January 13-17, 2012 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted January 12-16, 2012 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted January 11-15, 2012are in curly brackets. Results from the poll conducted January 10-14, 2012 are in square brackets. Results from the poll conducted January 9-13, 2012 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted January 8-12, 2012 are in curly brackets. Results from the poll conducted January 7-11, 2012 are in square brackets. Results from the poll conducted January 6-10, 2012 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted January 5-9, 2012 are in curly brackets. Results from the poll conducted January 4-8, 2012 are in square brackets. Results from the poll conducted January 3-7, 2012 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted January 2-6, 2012 are in curly brackets. Results from the poll conducted December 29, 2011 – January 5, 2011 are in square brackets. Results from the poll conducted December 28, 2011 – January 4, 2012 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted December 27, 2011 – January 3, 2012 are in square brackets. Results from the poll conducted December 26, 2011 – January 2, 2012 are in Results from the poll conducted December 23-29, 2011 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted December 22-28, 2011 are in curly brackets. Results from the poll conducted December 21-27, 2011 are in square brackets. Results from the poll conducted December 20-26, 2011 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted December 19-23, 2011 are in curly brackets. Results from the poll conducted December 18-22, 2011 are in square brackets. Results from the poll conducted December 17-21, 2011 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted December 15-20, 2011 are in curly brackets. Results from the poll conducted December 14-19, 2011 are in square brackets. Results from the poll conducted December 13-18, 2011 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted December 12-17, 2011 are in curly brackets. Results from the poll conducted December 11-16, 2011 are in Results from the poll conducted December 10-14, 2011 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted December 9-13, 2011 are in curly brackets. Results from the poll conducted December 8-12, 2011 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted December 7-11, 2011 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted December 6-10, 2011 are in curly brackets. Results from the poll conducted December 5-9, 2011 are in square brackets. Results from the poll conducted December 4-8, 2011 are in parentheses. Results from the poll conducted December 3-7, 2011 are in curly brackets. Results from the poll conducted December 2-6, 2011 are in square brackets. Results from the poll conducted December 1-5, 2011 are in parentheses.
–Data compilation and analysis courtesy of The Argo Journal
February 19th, 2012 at 2:08 pm
Click on this link and scroll down to see the chart.
February 19th, 2012 at 2:10 pm
When o when will Rick start to fall? How many asinine statements can a candidate make in consecutive days before they start falling? Rick was explaining controversial statements in all the shows he was on this morning, and as they say in politics, when you are explaining you are losing. Man I hope to start seeing some better numbers out of Michigan for Mitt!
February 19th, 2012 at 2:15 pm
When you are high in the polls you get tough questions. Romney is nearly irreverent now. Santorum will seal the deal on February 22nd Tuesday at the Debate. I cant wait I am so excited.
Poor liberal democrat who only switched parties in 1992 to Run after Ted Kennedy’s Senate BUT LOST.
Conservative people who support Romney are not conservative.
February 19th, 2012 at 2:17 pm
#2: Santorum polls continue to rise. Obama camp cheering, yea, 4 more years, as the Limbaugh, Palin, kristol world think putting Romney down and building Newtorum up is good. UGH!!!!!
February 19th, 2012 at 2:17 pm
It’s hard to imagine Santorum with less than a 4 point lead in Michigan at this point in the race….but not more than his National lead in this Gallup poll.
MI is going to be close…..late night.
February 19th, 2012 at 2:20 pm
Why wasn’t Mitt on any of the Sunday shows again?
There are many times is seems Mitt is avoiding the action. It’s one thing to not show up for grass-roots events during the Spring…it’s a whole another affair when you don’t show nearly as much as you ought to on the Free media outlets on Sunday’s…especially 9 days before Michigan.
It makes no sense.
February 19th, 2012 at 2:22 pm
post #4 Eddy its like this little dude
REAL conservatives ARE NOT FOOLED by the Liberal Obama fans. Obama is like that childs story of Brer Rabbit.
Obama as Brer Rabbit: NO NO NO Dont Nominate Romney. No no Republicans, please, anything but Romney, anybody but Mitt Romney.
Obama smiles as we nominate Romney and out hopes for the White House into suicide.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7tyhpWiZyM
Sadly for you Massachusetts Conservative, the reverse psychology game you are playing, is well aware in savvy minds of REAL Conservatives just like in 1980 in the nomination against Bush Sr v the real electable Ronny Reagan.Its ok, We REAL conservatives ARE NOT FOOLED by the Liberal Obama fans. Obama is like that childs story of Brer Rabbit.
Obama as Brer Rabbit: NO NO NO Dont Nominate Romney. No no Republicans, please, anything but Romney, anybody but Mitt Romney.
Obama smiles as we nominate Romney and out hopes for the White House into suicide.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7tyhpWiZyM
Sadly for you Massachusetts Conservative, the reverse psychology game you are playing, is well aware in savvy minds of REAL Conservatives just like in 1980 in the nomination against Bush Sr v the real electable Ronny Reagan.
February 19th, 2012 at 2:23 pm
Rick was explaining controversial statements in all the shows he was on this morning, and as they say in politics, when you are explaining you are losing.
Liberals do not understand social conservatives at all. But, when they give Rick a chance to explain other SoCons do understand. Maybe the libs trying to make the social issues part of the campaign will come back to bite them.
From Social Issues and the Santorum Surge
February 19th, 2012 at 2:23 pm
#2 why would Santorum start to fall? this isn’t the general election… this is the primary where conservatives reign, which all you moderates keep forgetting.
February 19th, 2012 at 2:24 pm
6
It frustrates me to no end, Smack. His campaign is clueless. I wish he would fire all those folks and hire all of Race42012′s good commenters to advise him… for a fee
February 19th, 2012 at 2:26 pm
Post #4 Eddy
Its like this buddy, Us REAL conservatives ARE NOT FOOLED by the Liberal Obama fans. Obama is like that childs story of Brer Rabbit.
Obama as Brer Rabbit: NO NO NO Dont Nominate Romney. No no Republicans, please, anything but Romney, anybody but Mitt Romney.
Obama smiles as we nominate Romney and out hopes for the White House into suicide.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7tyhpWiZyM
Sadly for you Massachusetts Conservative, the reverse psychology game you are playing, is well aware in savvy minds of REAL Conservatives just like in 1980 in the nomination against Bush Sr v the real electable Ronny Reagan.
February 19th, 2012 at 2:28 pm
“It makes no sense.”
Well, quite frankly, the media is against Romney. The media on the left is against Romney because he is a bigger threat to Obama, the media on the right is against Romney because he isn’t conservative enough for the die hards who swear by anything Fox reports, and both sides are against Romney because they want a long race. Romney can’t win with the press, so why bother? The last time he went on TV, the media spun his comments completely out of context, to his detriment.
====
“It’s hard to imagine Santorum with less than a 4 point lead in Michigan at this point in the race….but not more than his National lead in this Gallup poll.
MI is going to be close…..late night.”
Actually, I could see Santorum with less than a 4 point lead, because there are ads being run in Michigan that aren’t being run other places. Further, I would expect Santorum’s lead in Michigan, which he probably does still maintain, to be much closer to that “4%” mark, as opposed to that “8%” mark.
In any case, I wouldn’t say quite yet that it was going to be a long night – Remember, Romney had a far more significant lead coming off his New Hampshire win, and Gingrich had a far more significant lead coming off his South Carolina win, and we’re only just now at a similar point, relative to the next contest. Between further campaigning, more ads, and a debate – I think its far too soon to tell just how long the results will take for the winner to be known.
=====
The interesting thing for me will be to see if Santorum can hit, much less break, that magical 37% level.
February 19th, 2012 at 2:34 pm
Matthew Kilburn, thanks for proving my point. Lots of deceptive tricks wont fool the flock though. If you were as wise as you wish you were you might actually be able to convince Most Republicans that you were right so you get the weakest candidate that still could win the nomination. Romney is you guy because you know Conservatives hate him and WILL SHOW UP IN LOW NUMBERS ON November. You also know Romney wealth will not play to Union white households.
Santroum on the other hand won Pennsylvania TWICE first in 1994 and Reelected in 2000 Apparently he has rust belt GENERAL ELECTION Electability, I rest my case.
February 19th, 2012 at 2:36 pm
The meltdown goes on.
February 19th, 2012 at 2:37 pm
Well, you “conservatives” are the ones driving this country towards ruin. By pushing the GOP to select Senator Pork over the one candidate in the race who actually has record of successful leadership, you are giving up the opportunity to elect the most experienced and qualified candidate, at a minimum, in decades.
Santorum strikes me neither as a man likely to be very effective in the Oval Office, nor as someone future generations will look to, or future candidates claim to emulate.
You aren’t looking for a “Conservative” – you’re looking for an indignant rabble rouser, and I’m sick of this you-offended-me-therefore-I-hate-you attitude which if just half a step or less above the liberal entitlement mentality.
There are four Republicans running for office. Only one has executive experience. Only one has private sector experience. And yet he’s the one you’re fighting against.
February 19th, 2012 at 2:37 pm
Because Gallup has a 4 or 5 day composite polling, changes obviously lag. I expect these numbers to be Santorums peak and they will start trending down tomorrow. PPP ‘s narrowed Michigan numbers will begin to have an effect plus media coverage on Santorum’s weekend of whacked out comments
Why doesn’t Romney go on weekend TV. LOL Why should he dilute the focus on the inane and ludicrous comments of his competitors. If they were all getting good press, it would be a problem……but they are all getting machine gunned by the media while Romney bones up for Wednesdays debate. Pretty smart, I would say
Now, what is Ricky saying about Protestants and Pre- Natal care ? How did the election get refocused on contraceptives and abortions and away from jobs, $ 4.00 / gallon gas and a $ 16 trillion debt……….none of which is remotely close top Santorum’s ” wheelhouse.”
February 19th, 2012 at 2:40 pm
Matthew Kilburn, PORK HAHA. Obama your best friend/Communist buddy, Is the GOD of Pork.
February 19th, 2012 at 2:41 pm
“You also know Romney wealth will not play to Union white households.”
And I don’t give a damn. You go, take your red scraf, and the rest of your socialist-wannabe ilk, and run off to support the current anti-wealth occupant of the White House if that is what you’re looking for.
You support a “conservative” by using class warfare rhetoric.
Is that what you want this party to be? A torch and pitchfork mob against anyone who has done well for themselves?
There’s a reason I say this primary could destroy my confidence in the Republican Party.
February 19th, 2012 at 2:41 pm
Depressing, but we’ve been here before.
February 19th, 2012 at 2:42 pm
#14 who is worse those that would of supported anyone but Romney, or those that say they wont anyone but Romney?
who is being narrow minded?
any of the candidates were acceptable besides Romney, you Rombots are the ones causing all the issues
February 19th, 2012 at 2:43 pm
we’ll start calling them the NBR’s (nobody but Romney’s)
February 19th, 2012 at 2:44 pm
For the FEW REAL Conservatives here that are “not” Democrats “Faking being Republicans” who are “pushing Romney” who Obama really wants to run against, Lets take be honest This site is not going to change any minds. Its just a bullcrap site anyway. I dont know I even waste my time posting.
February 19th, 2012 at 2:45 pm
“any of the candidates were acceptable besides Romney, you Rombots are the ones causing all the issues”
None of the other candidates are as qualified, as competent, or as experienced as Romney. None of the other candidates have executive experience. None of the other candidates have private sector experience. None of the other candidates have proven their ability to be successful, even with a hostile legislature.
The fact is that we have high standards, while the only thing you care about is having anyone not named “Romney” as the nominee.
February 19th, 2012 at 2:45 pm
19. I don’t know why you’re griping. If your guy wins you’ll be rid of us. What more do you want?
February 19th, 2012 at 2:45 pm
“Lets take be honest This site is not going to change any minds. Its just a bullcrap site anyway. I dont know I even waste my time posting.”
Good. Then you can take you idiotic trolling, GTFO, and leave the rest of us in peace.
February 19th, 2012 at 2:46 pm
Oops. #24 was meant for #20.
February 19th, 2012 at 2:48 pm
Matthew Kilburn, Non of the other candidates are liberals and would lead the seconds the were President like Obama either.
Being Gov Ma was the best thing that ever happened to Romney and his “executive experience”, It showed that Romney Care = Obama Care. STAY AWAY if you love capitalism.
February 19th, 2012 at 2:51 pm
“It showed that Romney Care = Obama Care. STAY AWAY if you love capitalism.”
So which do you favor, allowing people to continue to freeload, or chucking all the poor people out of hospitals to die on the curb?
February 19th, 2012 at 2:52 pm
All the following people would of been a fine Republican Nominee, Romney was one of the few politicians alive that wasn’t acceptable.
Rick Santorum–14.3% New Gingrich–3.9% Jeb Bush–3.5% Mitch Daniels–1.0% Chris Christie–1.2% Paul Ryan–0.6% Sarah Palin–0.5% Mike Huckabee–0.2% John Thune–0.4% Bobby Jindal–0.2% Marco Rubio–0.3% Rudy Giuliani–0.1% Rick Perry–0.1% John Huntsman–0.1% Michele Bachmann–0.1% Herman Cain–0.1% Tim Pawlenty–0.1% Tom Coburn–0.1% John Bolton–0.1% George Pataki–0.1% Thad McCotter–0.1% Jim DeMint–0.1% Rand Paul–0.1% David Petraeus–0.1% Mike Pence–0.1% Haley Barbour–0.1% Dick Cheney–0.1% Fred Thompson–0.1% John Kasich–0.1% Stanley McChrystal–0.1% Clarence Thomas–0.1% Allen West–0.1%
All the problems in this primary are being caused by rabid Romney supporters who believe that moderate Mitt is the only acceptable choice.
February 19th, 2012 at 2:53 pm
opps Huntsman shouldn’t of been on that list
February 19th, 2012 at 2:55 pm
I just was on Twitte and Santorum is now up by +10% in PPP newest Washington State poll. Looks like Santorum is running away with this nomination. Colorado is the reason Romney lost AGAIN just like in 2008.
Albert Einstein said “Everything Happens in pairs of TWO”
February 19th, 2012 at 2:55 pm
28. I think Rick Santorum may have found his national spokesperson right here at R42012. I recommend Malinda highly. She will speak to the demographic Rick is targetting in that special, unmistakable way that says, “They think they’re smarter than you!”, which is Rick’s campaign theme.
February 19th, 2012 at 2:57 pm
Malinda,
PPP has consistently underpolled Romney and Washington State will end up voting for whoever has the momentum coming out of MI and AZ. If Rick wins MI and Romney wins AZ then Rick will probably win Washington State but if Romney takes both states on Feb. 28th that along with him being endorsed by the most popular Republican in Washington State will probably win it for him. There is still plenty of time left.
February 19th, 2012 at 2:57 pm
Hi All,
Interesting to look at Santorums 2006 PA. Senate loss in detail. He lost by 700,000 votes and 18 %. But, he lost women’s vote by 22 %. He lost 3/4 of all PA counties including the Suburban bedroom counties of Philadelphia that are normally GOP. Bucks County…lost by 18 %, Montgomery County….lost by 24 %. This guy is an election disaster waiting to bite the GOP. Cannot win in the 21st century with 18th century ideas
CraigS
February 19th, 2012 at 2:59 pm
34
It cannot be overstated enough that Rick Santorum lost by more points than any other incumbent U.S. Senator in the history of the United States, that is pretty telling!
February 19th, 2012 at 2:59 pm
So Romney is unacceptable.
But Cain and Gingrich, who are ravenous womanizers, are acceptable.
But Giuliani and Pataki, who support abortion, are acceptable.
But Mike Huckabee, who released a career criminal from jail who went on to murder four cops, is acceptable.
But Petraeus, who has never held political office, and who we know nothing about his positions, is acceptable.
But Palin, who quit and ran, her ego leading the way, from the position to which she was elected, is acceptable.
You have got to f’ing be kidding me. You hand me that list, claiming all of them are more acceptable than Romney, and you lose your right to call yourself either a fiscal Conservative, or a social Conservaitve.
February 19th, 2012 at 3:00 pm
Yea looks like Santorum is sealing the deal. I agree Colorado changed everything. I bet Romney is kicking himself for being lazy and not pouring million in negative ads Against Santorum. He didnt see Santorum as a treat and this is what proved his undoing!!!!
Found the link Malinda for you. http://twitter.com/#!/ppppolls
February 19th, 2012 at 3:01 pm
Michigan prove the polls and elite pundits wrong who say that there is no chance Santorum will lose.
Help spoil Palin’s day on the 28th and help make Romney the true Comeback Kid.
Give em severe hell Mitt!
February 19th, 2012 at 3:02 pm
#36 the difference is .. I KNOW where I disagree with those people. But with Romney … you lies about everything, you have no idea where he really stands on anything.
February 19th, 2012 at 3:03 pm
you = he
February 19th, 2012 at 3:04 pm
29 KillJoy
You are aptly titled. You surely know that the media would have destroyed all these folks long before this. Their financial interest is significantly based on an extended primary season, a Tampa Convention picketed by hundreds of anti- Wall Street whackos and a successful reelection for Obama. You really don’t get it do you ? They are playing your enthusiasm and the Tea Party folks like a bad fiddle. Santorum is only the latest and probably most flawed candidate available. Loses the women’s vote in PA in 2006 by 24 %. Loses 3/4 of all PA counties including the Philadelphia GOP bedroom counties like Montgomery, Delaware and Bucks by over 20 %+
Hannity may have to wind up his 1000 day clock in November and start counting down to 2016. He’ll be sad……but Murdoch and Aisles will be ecstatic
February 19th, 2012 at 3:07 pm
What I find truly hysterical is that Santorum endorsed Romney in 2008 because ” he is the most conservative candidate ” Mitt was more conservative to Santorum than Mike Huckabee and Fred Thompson ? What are this guys values anyway ???
February 19th, 2012 at 3:07 pm
Meh.
Several days after suspending his campaign and endorsing McCain, Romney still got 15.45% of Washington caucus vote, and of the Washington primary vote couple weeks after the suspension he got 16.25%. LDS population relative GOP population is 50% higher in Washington state than in Colorado. Also Santorum didn’t compete in Florida and Nevada so he had advantage when it came to time spend on ground, since he has decided to try compete in Michigan, he wont have that advantage either.
February 19th, 2012 at 3:08 pm
“Hannity may have to wind up his 1000 day clock in November and start counting down to 2016.”
Like I’ve said, if Romney doesn’t win the nomination this year, I may be through with the GOP. I’m really not satisfied with the complete lack of executive experience among our bench warmers. This isn’t just about Romney being better than Santorum, its about Romney having more executive leadership than the remaining 2012 competitors, and half the 2016/2020 field…Combined.
February 19th, 2012 at 3:09 pm
43:
To add, Washington caucus was only continental caucus won by McCain, so it is also less cranky/”anti-establishment” for sake of being “anti-establishment” caucus.
February 19th, 2012 at 3:10 pm
16. CraigS Yes, and wasn’t that a very strange phrase for Santorum to use yesterday . . . “phony theology” . . . to describe Obama’s approach to public policy?
“Phony theology”. “Not based on the Bible.”
As a Romney supporter, was he really aiming those very weird phrases at Obama? Really?
February 19th, 2012 at 3:10 pm
37 Jason,
Turns out Mitt seems to be getting more Colorado delegates than Santorum and Ron Paul is doing well in Iowa. Just goes to show you that Caucus non binding straw polls don’t mean spit……except to the media, who seldom really understand the process anyway
February 19th, 2012 at 3:11 pm
Like I said, the problem with Romney is, you just dont know where he actually stands on the issues. He could be as conseravtive as Reagan, or as liberal as Ted Kennedy, or anything in between. No one really knows. Everyone thinks he is lying, even his supporters. Liberals and moderates love Romney because they think he is secretly one of them (and thus is lying about what he believes). Conservatives distrust Romney because they think he is secretly a liberal or moderate (and thus is lying about what he believes).
February 19th, 2012 at 3:13 pm
Where the hell was Romney on the Sunday shows?
I give up.
February 19th, 2012 at 3:15 pm
” I KNOW where I disagree with those people”
So, basically, you would rather support someone you completely and totally disagree with on critical issues, including the issues which are the very underpinning of the campaign of the man you are currently supporting, all so that you can supposedly avoid some huge risk that you’re taking with Romney…
Yeah, thats bull.
February 19th, 2012 at 3:16 pm
#49 the same place is has been since the start of this race… in hiding. Because he gives horrible interviews because once you get him off script he says things like “I don’t care about poor people” “I will raise the minimum wage” “I will repair the safety net” “I like to fire people” ect
February 19th, 2012 at 3:17 pm
#50 yep. A known known is always better than an unknown. You know where they stand
February 19th, 2012 at 3:18 pm
plus there is something admirable about someone with principles and strong beliefs even when you disagree with those beliefs
February 19th, 2012 at 3:22 pm
What is Santorum’s stance on illegal immigration? I have heard a lot on Gingrich’s stance or lack thereof but have heard little of Santorum’s. I know Romney has a hard stance on illegal immigration.
February 19th, 2012 at 3:24 pm
for instance… I am adamantly pro life.
BUT
If a candidate said something like…. I am personally pro choice and I know that’s not going to be popular in the Republican primary… BUT, I can promise you know that as president I will only appoint judges that will strictly interpret the constitution. I might be more willing to vote for that person than one that I was unsure about who might be hiding his pro-choice views and who would appoint judges that believe in a “living” constitution.
February 19th, 2012 at 3:24 pm
“plus there is something admirable about someone with principles and strong beliefs even when you disagree with those belief”
There’s a difference between being able to admire someone, and being able to support someone.
You’re basically saying, “I’m going to oppose Romney, becuase he might be a squishy Conservative on issue X, where he might change his position or trade the issue away for a deal…so instead, I’d be willing to support someone who I KNOW is completely opposed to what I believe in.”
The WORST that could possibly happen with Romney is that he ends up holding the same position as those you are willing to support instead of him…far more likely is that he holds the Conservative line at least SLIGHLTY better.
Knowns are better than unknowns, except when the knowns are definitely as bad as the unknowns could be.
February 19th, 2012 at 3:25 pm
know=now
February 19th, 2012 at 3:26 pm
CraigS Post 42 Enjoy the laugh. I myself a Santorum supporter, back in 2008 Supported Romney ONLY TO STOP McCain I never liked Romney.
This is Why Romney was FOOLED into thinking he would keep his supporters from 2008. In the states that already voted he is getting LESS VOTES than in 2008. That is because People like me who given REAL CONSERVATIVES CHOICES THE CYCLE.
Dont be upset its just politics and you cant win them all not matter how much you want you guy to win.
I know Santorum would nominate Conservatives to the U.S. Supreme Court. Where I Know Romney would nominate Liberal at worst or Moderates ProChoice who would vote to UpHold Roe V Wade.
This is why Romney is losing Conservatives DONT TRUST THE BASTARD.
February 19th, 2012 at 3:26 pm
#56 not when the unknown could be someone to the left of Ted Kennedy.
February 19th, 2012 at 3:27 pm
” can promise you know that as president I will only appoint judges that will strictly interpret the constitution. I might be more willing to vote for that person than one that I was unsure about who might be hiding his pro-choice views and who would appoint judges that believe in a “living” constitution.”
Again, that makes no sense. Because either man could be just as likely to be saying what you want to hear to get elected.
You’re being offered two boxes, one that definitely contains $1; and one that could contain $1, or $100, or anything in between, but not lower than $1.
Why, the hell, are you picking the first box?
February 19th, 2012 at 3:27 pm
I really don’t understand what is going on with my fellow Republicans
They want to give me a guy who said that Satan is having a 200 year war
with the USA. That Satan uses tools such as Gambling, Sex for any purpose
other then creating children, porn, NBA Peacocks, and Rock concerts. That
said separation of church and state is wrong for the USA. That said the right
to pursuit of happiness does not exist as the government has the right to
what goes on in your home including your bedroom. That said Iran has the
best form of government except it was created by Muslims. A guy that seems
to have a 15th century view of women.If that is what my fellow Republicans
want they will have to go along in November without me.
February 19th, 2012 at 3:28 pm
#61 no we wanted anyone BUT Romney.
February 19th, 2012 at 3:30 pm
“#56 not when the unknown could be someone to the left of Ted Kennedy.”
And you think any of the men you listed are less capable of lying? You think its any harder to break a promise to appoint pro-life judges than it is to claim you’re pro-life yourself?
You’ve got to be kidding me. You’re devoid of any and all logic. So either you’re paranoid, or you simply hate Romney.
February 19th, 2012 at 3:30 pm
almost all the people who ran and many who thought of running but didn’t would have been acceptable. This has little to do with Santorum and everything to do with Romney
February 19th, 2012 at 3:32 pm
#63 I think Romney is fairly unique when it comes to dishonestly. I honestly can’t think of a single Republican candidate or potential candidate for President in my nearly 50 year life that I trust less than Romney.
February 19th, 2012 at 3:34 pm
OUCH! Romney’s getting spanked. The 5-day averages are serving to minimize the actual spread (Santorum is higher and Romney lower). I’m surprised to see this much volatility this far into the race. The media playing up Santorum’s hat trick and downplaying Romney’s wins that could have helped turn the momentum has had significant effect. Romney incessant badgering of Romney by the left-wing and right-wing press could very well give us 4 more years of Obama. However, I am still hopeful that Romney can turn this around over the next nine days and then build toward super Tuesday. I cannot imagine Rick Santorum or Newt Gingrich as the GOP nominee. If this happens, I hope a new party emerges for 2016.
February 19th, 2012 at 3:35 pm
Hey Killjoy, where did you get your handle from?
February 19th, 2012 at 3:36 pm
I want to know where a person stands on the issues, even if I disagree with them on many of their positions, I want to be able to weigh those against the things we do agree on, since no candidate live or dead have I agreed with 100% on all issues. But if I don’t know where they truely stand on ANY issue, then I can’t make that determination and have to assume that I disagree with them on everything
February 19th, 2012 at 3:38 pm
Killjoy,
Not to be rude but you seem a little crazy.
Did you take your meds…
February 19th, 2012 at 3:39 pm
Your name seems pretty fitting…
Did you come up with this yourself?
February 19th, 2012 at 3:41 pm
Another Arizona guy !
February 19th, 2012 at 3:41 pm
the only difference between you and me #69 is that you assume the best of Romney, and I assume the worst, because no one knows for sure what Romney really believes.
February 19th, 2012 at 3:43 pm
Jason…..the laughs on you, guy. I’ve been involved in GOP politics since Nixon- Kennedy. I know exactly how the game is played. I remember the last time you guys on the right played a game on the GOP. Results were the same as 2012 may become. I even remember Bill Miller, another strong conservative known only to his wife, Stephanie . Do you?
Folks like you don’t really want to win the election. You just want to play the game, year after year after year. That’s what’s fun for you. That’s why Santorum has been running for office his entire life . Its all about the game. If the GOP really wanted to beat Obama, they would select a nominee now, put together a Lincoln style “Team of Rivals” and run straight at Obama and totally by- pass the Democratic media.
But they don’t want to do that
They want to play.
Good luck
February 19th, 2012 at 3:43 pm
So, Killjoy, why do you think that Gingrich, Perry, and Santorum changed their abortion stance for this election, from “exception in case of mother’s life, rape and incest” to just mother’s life exception, just nicely for the Iowa caucuses?
February 19th, 2012 at 3:44 pm
By the way, only idiot could claim that Romney was running left of Kennedy
http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/61101-1
February 19th, 2012 at 3:44 pm
The second debate:
http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/61159-1
February 19th, 2012 at 3:46 pm
I think that nearly everyone who ran this cycle, and many who thought of running but didn’t, met at least the “minimum” threshold for consideration (completely different than 2008 where almost no one who ran did)
Those that didn’t meet that threshold: Romney, Huntsman, Paul (all for slightly different reasons)
February 19th, 2012 at 3:47 pm
36. For the record, Huckabee did not release him. He allowed him to be elligible for parole. The next governor released him….but you dont care much about facts anyway.
February 19th, 2012 at 3:49 pm
CraigS You just outted yourself good job. Moderates are low trash. We need to Clean out the Mold Nixon types and McCain, types so we can have Reagon’s every election
February 19th, 2012 at 3:49 pm
73
Wow i forget about Bill Miller but now that you mention him i remember him.
February 19th, 2012 at 3:49 pm
quote “why do you think that Gingrich, Perry, and Santorum changed their abortion stance for this election, from “exception in case of mother’s life, rape and incest” to just mother’s life exception, just nicely for the Iowa caucuses?”
because they are like most politicians and pander a certain amount to secure the nomination then moderate those positions a bit once they secure the nomination. But I don’t think anyone ever thought that any of those three were “secretly” pro abortion and just dying to appoint more pro choice judges after fooling the stupid tea party people in the primary.
February 19th, 2012 at 3:51 pm
FOX News is NOT showing the Santorum love on the talk shows. One lady on the panel said he unfit for the presidency.
February 19th, 2012 at 3:52 pm
79
Your spelling and grammar are atrocious.
And you know what spelling and grammar reveal to the reader? Your attention to detail, intelligence, and effort. Yours is telling us that you’re totally unserious, and frankly, clueless.
February 19th, 2012 at 3:52 pm
82
Do you know who that was ?
February 19th, 2012 at 3:52 pm
72….including romney
February 19th, 2012 at 3:53 pm
I am more of a straight shooter. I give people the benefit of the doubt until they personally prove they don’t deserve any benefits! You seem to have difficulty with this so the average person has a hard time taking you serious. I would vote for either Santorum or Romney or even Paul without too much difficulty. Gingrich is another story due to his losing all respect from me as a person of no moral character. I lean towards Romney mainly on these issues.
Illegal Immigration (Joe Arpaio is my hero)
Union Busting abilities (Scott Walker is my Hero)
Organization (Past and present experience)
Creating Jobs and opportunity. (I have a family)
Raise money to counter Obama. (Get rid of that….)
February 19th, 2012 at 3:57 pm
Well anybody who thinks Romney is, is kinda silly. There isn’t pro-choice judges and pro-life judges, judges don’t have simple check list but rather base their decision on law and their judicial philosophies. Even pro-choice GOP senators always vote for the originalist candidates of GOP presidents, because with living constitution judges come with lots of other liberal crap.
February 19th, 2012 at 3:57 pm
71 – Arizona
Another Arizonan fighting to keep this country safe on the border.
While California, New Mexico and even Texas continue to slide further to the left we stand strong and continue to stay to the right! Obama thinks this is a swing state.
Only in his dreams!
February 19th, 2012 at 3:59 pm
88
Well you and i make two Arizona votes for Romney !
Sheriff Joe is great. No comment about Pinal.
February 19th, 2012 at 4:00 pm
Speaking of the Sunday talk shows, did anyone else hear John McCain denounce the SCOTUS Citizen’s United decision while mischaracterizing it as having opened the floodgates for Super PACs?
Sure, J-Mac helped author the law that was partially struck down. But his remarks were incredibly glib and, in fact, wrong. That ruling didn’t create SPACs; it simply found that corporations have personhood regarding free speech.
I’ll politely refrain from blaming Mitt for stupid crap his endorser says, FWIW…
February 19th, 2012 at 4:01 pm
Meant to add that J-Mac was interviewed by Jake Tapper on ABC’s This Week.
February 19th, 2012 at 4:02 pm
Dave… here is where I think Romney stands on those issues (just my opinion, since no one knows for sure)
Illegal Immigration – I don’t think he would do more than Bush did and a fence along the entire border would never be built.
Union Busting – He wouldn’t do anything to force right to work nationally, but might try to undo some of the mess with the auto companies being given to the unions.
Organization – I agree, he would be very organized.
Creating Jobs and Opportunity – I don’t know.. maybe. He would probably try to push through a tax cut, but would also be far more likely to try and “fix” obamacare instead of repealing it outright.
Raise Money to counter Obama – I agree, he would be very good at raising money
February 19th, 2012 at 4:03 pm
82. I didn’t recognize her but it was on America’s News Headquarters. There were three ladies and all of them bagged on his comments past and present concerning religion.
February 19th, 2012 at 4:04 pm
oops 84.
February 19th, 2012 at 4:06 pm
I honestly don’t understand all the hype about abortions when it comes to a president.
I am pro-life but when choosing a president I don’t understand all the hype. All have committed to nominate pro-life judges which is the only direct way they can impact this decision. Why not look to other daily, weekly areas that the president will impact you and your family with…
What about the following?
Security of our Nation.
National Debt.
Unemployment Rate.
Schools.
Constitution.
Corruption.
Crime.
Opportunity.
Border Security.
February 19th, 2012 at 4:06 pm
Is Dave saying Gallup is in the tank for the Democrats too now?
February 19th, 2012 at 4:07 pm
Serious question : is Romney pushing the postal votes like he did in Florida?
February 19th, 2012 at 4:08 pm
95 I agree.
February 19th, 2012 at 4:08 pm
Malinda keeps saying “we REAL conservatives.” I wonder if she even knows what “conservative” means. There are very few true conservatives, and people like Rush, Santorum, and Hannity do not fit the bill.
February 19th, 2012 at 4:09 pm
97
yes
February 19th, 2012 at 4:10 pm
97
Yes for sure in Arizona.
February 19th, 2012 at 4:11 pm
99
no, she has no clue
February 19th, 2012 at 4:14 pm
Katechon,
How are you playing Michigan?
Gonna be real close.
Nate Silver wrote a column a week ago (you can still find it)about how Rick Santorum support has actually been underpolled vs. real results thus far in this cycle. Nate uses the PPP as an example. Almost in every contest so far Santorum’s real results exceed the last poll taken in each state.
I think we are going to see the Michigan numbers slide to even by next weekend…….but I don’t think will see Mitt’s MI numbers blow by Santorum in polls leading up to the vote.
I think I read that you are playing Mitt to win MI….is that still true?
It’s gonna be a late night…very close.
February 19th, 2012 at 4:16 pm
I haven’t been watching TV. Right-wing media must be propping up Santorum.
February 19th, 2012 at 4:18 pm
104.
I’ve turned off Fox. I just can’t stand it anymore.
February 19th, 2012 at 4:19 pm
Let’s be real with each other on the following…
Illegal Immigration – I don’t think he would do more than Bush did and a fence along the entire border would never be built.
– Most of his hard stances on illegal immigration came in Florida with all the pressure from the Hispanic vote (which he won handily) If he was going to bend it would have been then.
Union Busting – He wouldn’t do anything to force right to work nationally, but might try to undo some of the mess with the auto companies being given to the unions.
– Same argument as above. He is taking a hard stance on Unions in the toughest place to do it Michigan.
Organization – I agree, he would be very organized.
- Nice I see you have some reason…
Creating Jobs and Opportunity – I don’t know.. maybe. He would probably try to push through a tax cut, but would also be far more likely to try and “fix” obamacare instead of repealing it outright.
– There is SOOOO much more to the economy than tax cuts and healthcare. But to respond he has committed in every state and every election that he will repeal this bill. I would and will be the first to tear him up if he didn’t stand by what he has made crystal clear.
Raise Money to counter Obama – I agree, he would be very good at raising money
– Some additional reasoning skills — Nice!!
February 19th, 2012 at 4:20 pm
104 They are trying to prop him up, but he is making it more and more difficult. Even admitted Catholics are swallowing hard on FOX.
February 19th, 2012 at 4:27 pm
When 40% in this nation say they are conservative I don’t understand why people try to divide this into sub-groups and by so doing weaken the conservative position.
Things that make me laugh…
True conservative…Genuine conservative..or any form like unto it. As if the person speaking has the rights of whom and who isn’t conservative.
Do we ever here the left talk about how to be a true liberal ect…
That’s because they are smart enough to figure this out…
February 19th, 2012 at 4:28 pm
I have a couple of hundreds shares of Mitt winning Michigan. No intention of selling yet.
But honestly all the rest of my money is tied on *The Artist* to win Best Picture at the Oscars.
2 nights before Michigan.
I expect the Teavangelical votes to dissolve into a higher turnout,
February 19th, 2012 at 4:30 pm
Higher turnout = more non base voters
February 19th, 2012 at 4:33 pm
110
Not always true.
February 19th, 2012 at 4:33 pm
I’m also betting on Viola Davis to win Best Actress!
February 19th, 2012 at 4:36 pm
111– Not even in Michigan, the state where the name “Romney” is known and highly respected?
Paul will hammer Santorum too, on the air, and during the next debate.
February 19th, 2012 at 4:44 pm
Katechon – Massachusetts Conservative,
I just know that both groups of supporters are going to have valid point to make on why their guy can still pull it out come a week from this Tuesday,,no matter what the polls show.
Mitt’s TV ADS will start moving the needle now….but the more committed voter is still with Santorum.
The Romney supporters have made good arguments on the bases of PPP underpolling Mitt in IA & FL. But the Santorum people canmake the same argument…on pretty much all of the states..IA,CO,MN.
Mitt has the establishment hekping him to the move the votes out….this is a big state primary..establishment support will help MiTT.
They only thing I think we can be reasonably assured of is that it won’t be a blowout..it just won’t be.
IMO.
February 19th, 2012 at 4:45 pm
113
Nah, high turnout always corresponds with high enthusiasm for one of the candidates, usually the one who has the momentum and wins.
February 19th, 2012 at 4:47 pm
Anyone else thinking the new $10m Gingrich received does increase the odds of a broken convention?
February 19th, 2012 at 4:49 pm
116
Actually, yes.
February 19th, 2012 at 4:51 pm
116 Maybe but only if doesn’t take anyone out.
February 19th, 2012 at 4:54 pm
There should be a market on Intrade called “2012 GOP nominee to be decided after the first ballot at the convention.”
I might join Intrade if so.
February 19th, 2012 at 4:54 pm
Not really, Iowa caucus is just hard to poll because of turnout, and the CO having 3 times lower turnout and MN having 5 times lower turnout, makes polling them impossible.
February 19th, 2012 at 4:56 pm
Yes.
But the act that would really increase the odds of a brokered conventin is a Mitt loss in MI. If Mitt wins in MI, Adelson can give Newt $100 million it’s not going to do a lick of good.
February 19th, 2012 at 5:00 pm
“36. For the record, Huckabee did not release him. He allowed him to be elligible for parole. ”
Ok then,
Huckabee ALLOWED a career criminal to be released, and said career criminal then went on to kill four cops. And that wasn’t Huckabee’s only bad pardon.
February 19th, 2012 at 5:01 pm
116:
Depends what’s the effect of it. If it keeps Newt enough in game, and prevents Santorum from getting over 50% in pretty much all Southern congressional districts, since most southern states have system where if winner has majority, then winner gets all 3 CD delegates, if winner has plurality, then it is 2 CD delegates to winner, one to second.
In a CD where Santorum gets 51%, Romney 29%, Gingrich 13%, Paul 7%, Santorum would get all delegates.
In a CD where Santorum gets 45%, Romney 29%, Gingrich 19%, Paul 7%, Santorum would get 2, Romney 1 delegates.
February 19th, 2012 at 5:02 pm
Obviously, the fact that a brokered convention looks possible means we are going to have to reform our primary process next time, no matter who wins or whether they become President. Even if Romney were to win the nomination sometime in April, that would still be far too long of a time that things took.
But considering this is probably Romney’s last opportunity to be President, I’ll take a Romney win, even at the convention, over anything else.
February 19th, 2012 at 5:04 pm
Thanks for the feedbacks Smackdaddy and Masskiddy
February 19th, 2012 at 5:07 pm
I think every state should hold a runoff ballot and give delegates proportionately to the top 2 finishers every time. That would keep the race from going to convention but still maintain some level of parity.
February 19th, 2012 at 5:16 pm
Malinda….LOL…What are you 12 years old ? You would never vote for Reagan. He wouldn’t pass your 19th century litmus test. Neither would Goldwater. Both of them would vote to throw you out of the party. I knew Barry and he certainly would be embarrassed by the antics of the parts loony right. Only Reagans? How about Reagans 1986 EMTALA mediical care bill that Newt voted for ? Are you in favor of that Melinda ??
February 19th, 2012 at 5:20 pm
Santorum is having a rally in Cumming GA tonight.
Rick is spending a whole lot of time outside of Michigan. I know he is trying to expand his wins…his delegates for Super Tuesday, but there won’t be a Super Tuesday with any meaning if he doesn’t win in MI.
I think Team Santorum is putting the cart before the horse and is rolling the dice. I know they are spending a high percentage of the cash flow on TV in MI…but they are not hitting the ground war very heavy in MI.
Very odd.
Will see how it plays out.
Romney is spending tonight at the Ice Capades in Utah in celebration of the 2002 Olympics. Can’t blame the guy for doing that, but he still should have been on TV today in the morning shows…can’t go in the dark for a whole 24 hours at a time like this…IMO.
February 19th, 2012 at 5:21 pm
Let’s be serious. As Karl Rove said, the chance of a brokered convention is the same as life on Pluto. Santorum has won exactly Zero binding delegates from Non binding Caucus votes although his has some intelligent estimates from the AP. He has a total of 1 SuperDelegates. Romney has 18 alreadyRomney has won 2 binding primaries out of 3 and has more votes than all the other votes combined
On the 28, Romney will get a big majority of available delegates. On Super Tuesday, Romney will get more delegates than anybody else, by far. Get serious folks. reality is what it is
February 19th, 2012 at 5:25 pm
128
I am stumped by Santorum’s campaign schedule as well. What is he thinking? Big mistake IMO, but he’ll be called a genius if it works.
And again, Mitt’s handlers are buffoons.
February 19th, 2012 at 5:26 pm
Well, I for one haven’t given up. Romney is not incapable of a comeback and the percentage differences are not that large.
Santorum is not capable of staying on top. He is Gaffe Man.
Not only that, Santorum = Business As Usual.
February 19th, 2012 at 5:26 pm
Yes, on FEB 28th Mitt will get the majority of delegates. Mitt will still have the majority after Super Tuesday…but if Rick wins MI, he will win WA (March 3rd) he win OH on March 6th…along with OK,TN & ND.
Mitt’s lead in the delegate math will get smaller, Santorum’s lead in Momentum will get larger.
February 19th, 2012 at 5:31 pm
Massachusetts Conservative,
I think it’s a case of TEAM RICK having a few bucks in their pocket now and they want to start acting like the Big Engine..instead of the Little Engine that could.
If I was in the room I would say let’s win MI. and then we can be the Big Engine,if you all want that.
They should be doing Michigan like they did IA…on the ground with 5 events every day.
I know MI is a much bigger state….but you would still think they woud have hit the ground harder than they have so far.
Too greedy…I think.
February 19th, 2012 at 5:34 pm
Question of the Day:
Why is it every week Romney has to give a “do or die speech” or win a “must win state” – in order to remain in the race?
What does Santorum have to do to prove he’s a valid and realistic nominee? Just stand around in some dorky sweater vest making questionable reliously tainted statements?
Santorum is a sure loser as a nominee.
He has at best, a fair Senate record, having achieved nothing of significant importantace that anyone remembers.
Once bounced out of the Senate by one of the largest margins in history, he worked as a lobbist the last few years.
I for one can’t picture this paraochial narrowminded dork in the WH.
February 19th, 2012 at 5:36 pm
Santorum has been in Michigan a lot recently. I’m in Michigan and have seen him on TV and on the radio a lot.
February 19th, 2012 at 5:36 pm
I hope that all of my fellow Rombots are paying attention to this crap from Malinda, Killjoy, Jason etc. Apparently we are all liberals and need to be cleaned out of the party. Well then, let’s just do that and us 20-25% of the party who actually like Romney can leave and let the other fools flagellate themselves alone in the wilderness.
February 19th, 2012 at 5:36 pm
Smack, you know what they say in business, and you probably know this well as a promotional type.
If you try to appeal to everyone, you end up appealing to no one.
Santorum is stretching his appeal and his resources too far across the spectrum this early in the game. He needs to appeal to Michigan right now, lock down the midwest and lakes region, and expand elsewhere later on momentum later.
February 19th, 2012 at 5:37 pm
Smack,
Could it be the reason they aren’t spending much time in MI is b/c they think in the end it will go to Romney? I know his Super Pac is spending money on TV in MI but I’m not sure his actua campaign is, maybe they just don’t think they have a shot when all is said and done?
February 19th, 2012 at 5:39 pm
134
Very good post, Doug.
By the way, good to see you. I thought for some reason that Kavon banned you as well, but I guess not.
February 19th, 2012 at 5:40 pm
Eric,
I understand Rick has been on radio and TV….I get that. I said so much in one of my posts. TEAM RICK has put their money into Michigan no doubt. But the Ground War has been lacking..really it has.
February 19th, 2012 at 5:41 pm
I didn’t mean his ads have been on the radio and TV. He has done lots of interviews with local media.
February 19th, 2012 at 5:42 pm
Also I read the other day about Rick Santorums campaign is in disarray b/c they are much smaller and there has been many disagreements among staff members as to where to play at in what state, so in the end you will see how a better organized campaign is essential, that’s why when all is said and done, Romney will start pulling away, because he is much better organized then the other candidates.
February 19th, 2012 at 5:43 pm
#136 Yep, you got that right. Diehard so-cons are some of the worst. They’re destroying the party’s ability to hang together. I get pushed closer to the exit all the time.
February 19th, 2012 at 5:44 pm
#139:
No banning. I left for Vermont that morning and got back yesterday. Skiing with some childhood friends – guys trip. We’ve doing it for 5 years now. Lots of fun – but no TV or computer. I was Jonesing for this stuff.
I was making a Novena all week Craig was banned. Were my prayers answered?
Who actually got the axe?
February 19th, 2012 at 5:44 pm
Florida Conservative,
Both SUPER PAC and Santorum’s own money is in Michigan. Santorum is only being outspent as of right now 3 to 1 on TV & Radio. That will probably grow to be a bigger gap this week but that is where we stand now….which is good news for TEAM RICK
I can understand the WA & ND trip….but not the Ohio days. If Santorum wins MI he will win OH…so why in the hell has he spent so much time in OH??!!
I know they share some TV coverage…but it really does not make much sense to me.
February 19th, 2012 at 5:44 pm
Eric,
Who are you planning to vote for in Michigan and what is your feel of things in the state? Do you think Romney pulls it out in the end or Rick surprises?
February 19th, 2012 at 5:45 pm
#134 Doug
Nicely said. The dire doom and gloom is ridiculous.
February 19th, 2012 at 5:46 pm
#136: Good point.
All we hear from the “baqse” is how they’ll stay home if Romney gets the nod.
We I say we see their challenge. I say WE”LL stay home if he DOESN”T get it and see how far they get with 30% of the party watching Santorum choke on his own words.
February 19th, 2012 at 5:47 pm
I’m just wondering where all the polls have been this weekend b/c I haven’t seen any out of Michigan? I guess there will just be a plethora on Monday and Tuesday this coming week. I know PPP is coming out with one later tonight but I’m not holding my breathe on that one, bet they still have Rick way on top, who knows?
February 19th, 2012 at 5:49 pm
148
I really think if Rick does get the nomination you will most definitely see a 3rd Party semi-moderate candidate run for president, there is no way they will all sit back and watch Rick go down, someone will run, whether that be Trump or some other big name who knows?
February 19th, 2012 at 5:50 pm
Eric,
Ok…Rick has done some interviews….that’s good.
Rick also jetted into MI for one day to make two economic speeches…one in Detroit and one in Oakland county….two places that will be Romney Country.
I don’t get it. Get your ass into Michigan and do some 3 rally’s everyday. Rick is going to have to win some areas of Michigan by big margins to keep Mitt at bay. Got to get in there..on the land.
Maybe I’m wrong…but Rick needs to get back to being Rick in Iowa….on the ground baby….win it on the ground.(with of course, your big TV ad buys)
February 19th, 2012 at 5:51 pm
Doug,
CF, Jax, Craig for Losers, and Harold are all perma-banned. Kavon said he banned 4 others as well, but I can’t figure out whom. Anyway, it’s nice around here now. Plenty of not-Mitts, but few trolls.
February 19th, 2012 at 5:51 pm
Thanks guys.
Now all the pressure on Michigan and no one is talking about AZ where Romney is romping. That happens the same day as MI but no is building it up. Just like Nevada was down played.
I was raised Catholic, but this continued beat down on Romney is looking more and more to me like something more than policy differences.
The only reason Santorum is enjoying a bounce is because of his heavy handed exploitationof social and religius issue.
The Talk Radio Truth Twister all say they hate Identity Politics and cite Obama-mania. But they are some of the most hypocritical practioners, boosting an empty suit with an inferiority complex like Santorum, strictly because he wraps himself in the cloak or Christianity.
I want to hurl my lunch.
Just sayin.
February 19th, 2012 at 5:52 pm
#152;
Praise Da Lord! Praise Da Lord!
February 19th, 2012 at 5:54 pm
#152: Hi! I’m still here, MassCon. And hurlin’ my lunch like Doug NYC GOP!
February 19th, 2012 at 5:54 pm
#154: Amen and Amen.
February 19th, 2012 at 5:55 pm
Wassup?
February 19th, 2012 at 5:56 pm
It’s really odd. In many respects, I qualify as a social conservative, but I am coming to loathe the way SoCons swing their weight around and the way they believe they have cause to look down their nose at anyone who doesn’t agree with them 100%.
As much as I believe in social conservative issues, government officials are powerless to ram them down the populous’s throats. It is our collective job as families, churches and citizens to teach the rising generation social values. The government cannot do that anymore than they can make sure no child is left behind.
Fiscal matters are as precarious as they have ever been. Foreign matters as well. Congress is tanking. Come on folks…Santorum?
February 19th, 2012 at 5:57 pm
Santorum is now speaking at the Mega Church in Cummings GA. The place is packed…over 2000.
I guess Rick is going to try to take out Newt in GA…..Rick is swinging big..I hope he has a big enough stick to pull it off.
February 19th, 2012 at 5:59 pm
159
Yes, he is swinging big. Good way to put it.
No other explanation has him in Georgia right now. He may be making a fatal error.
February 19th, 2012 at 6:03 pm
Is everyone in the USA a Mormon hater? Kinda sounds like it from where we’re looking. They are Christians, for crying out loud. We have lived next to a Mormon family for years and they are as Christian as how we think Christians come. Better than many that we know who claim to be Christians. Cancel the mormon-hating. The more we see, hear, read about this republican race – and we are interested, even though we live thousands of miles away – the more we realise that there seem to be two major reasons why interested people online, on tv, dislike Romney. 1. He’s successful and is too rich for people to accept. 2. He’s Mormon. If we are right, I guess you deserve whatever people in power you get, huh?
February 19th, 2012 at 6:05 pm
According to Politico’s caledar Santorum is in Ohio, Texas and Arizona this week. Definitely all over the place.
February 19th, 2012 at 6:10 pm
Massachusetts Conservative,
I have tried to post Santorum’s schedule for the next three days but it’s not working.
Santorum is in Ohio again tomorrow, and in AZ for Tuesday and Wednesday.
Not joking. HOLYSMOKE!!
Rick should worry about MI right now…not be fixated on the delagate count.
Avoiding Michigan…WOW…I don’t get it.
February 19th, 2012 at 6:11 pm
162– Délusion des grandeurs?
February 19th, 2012 at 6:15 pm
164. Surely Santorum knows he doesn’t have Michigan wrapped up no matter what the polls show now. Maybe he doesn’t think he can win Michigan and he needs to go elsewhere. Of course if Mitt wins Michigan then they will all begin to say Ohio is the “make or break” state.
February 19th, 2012 at 6:16 pm
Maybe Santorum figured he would end up losing MI no matter what he did? I donno. I’m stumped. Whatever he’s doing, it’s not smart, so there’s that.
February 19th, 2012 at 6:20 pm
How does Santorum get from state to state now? Is he taking commercial flights or is he able to charter a plane now?
February 19th, 2012 at 6:21 pm
Santorum will probably head back to Michigan at some point, but he spent a lot of time there earlier already. Arizona is a tight race, so I see why he’s headed there. Texas is probably fundraising. Michigan isn’t a make or break state for Santorum. It’s Romney’s home turf. A must win for Santorum is a state like Tennessee or Oklahoma. He’s not going to those kinds of states. He’s in Georgia to knock out Newt. If Newt wasn’t a Georgian, then Santorum wouldn’t be there.
February 19th, 2012 at 6:22 pm
Santorum has nothing to lose by being in Michigan. Nothing. Everything to gain, nothing to lose.
February 19th, 2012 at 6:22 pm
161 – Very interesting insight! And I quite agree with the “they get what they deserve” bit. . . . Mitt bailed out the Olympics with a salary of $1. He worked as Mass Gov for $1. And part of the time at Bain for – yep, $1. Mitt is not ‘beholding’ to anyone in politics. He has nobody that’s currying favor for his ‘payback.’ Mitt is the one non-Washington outside who can actually DO something in this country to help!!!! What’s Santorum the Birth Control Godfather done??? Not much. Certianly never lead anything, created jobs (except for the zoo keepers at the PA zoo I guess), or had any executive experience. And let’s all face facts: Poor Noot is disturbed at best, mentally ill at worst. Not the kind of guy we want at the helm.
152 – I have to chuckle. . .. because no sooner said than “Craig for Santorum” pops up with his smiley faces. He reminds me of a cockroach; I could never get those suckers to die when I lived in Asia for 7 years. . . .
153 – You hit it on the head with the Talk Radio Truth Twister business. . . . I used to be a fan of Faux News, but now find it as deceptive and manipulative as MSNBC. And Rush? Wow. . . . he took a turn down the Crazyville Turnpike, and I don’t know what happened to him. . .. and Levin, Sean Hannity, Sarah Palin. . . . just really astounding. It’s one thing to push your candidate, but it’s quite another to trash another with the lies from the left. . . . it’s just astounding. I am of the opinion that these talk show people are fighting for relevancy. If Mitt wins the nomination, they will be rendered completely irrelevant. ” What??? You mean the people actually had a brain and voted for the guy I fought tooth/nail to oppose??? How dare they!” And I would SO love to see Sarah Palin relegated to Reality TV where she belongs. . . .
February 19th, 2012 at 6:23 pm
I’m not upset that Socons have strengthened at this time in GOP history. It’s happened in the past with ficons, war hawks, isolationists, etc. It happens in every party as time progresses and the political environment changes. The GOP today is vastly different from what it was in 1980 and 1950 and 1920 and especially pre-Teddy Roosevelt days. The same can be said for the Dem Party, by the way. So if the GOP suddenly chooses to be a Socon party, so be it. The rest of us can deal with it or find somewhere else to go, like others have done since Lincoln’s days.
What saddens me more is that the GOP is choosing the absolute worst time, in both party history and post-WWII American history, to have an identity crisis. People seem to have no clue just how bad things are with our economy. There’s a theory in human philosophy – I can’t remember what it’s called – that says that human beings will not accept the reality of events which haven’t happened yet, no matter the evidence presented to them. It’s one explanation cited for why the Holocaust was allowed to continue for so long despite evidence of concentration camps and war crimes. In the case of present times, since we’ve never experienced an actual economic collapse, Americans don’t really think it’s going to happen and aren’t preparing for it, despite all the signs that it’s coming.
We really are heading for a crisis the level of which is unknown to Americans. We can choose to ignore it as a party and concentrate on class warfare, contraception and biblical theology, or we can focus on fiscal restraint and actually try to deal with a crisis which has the serious potential to reshape the future of this country.
While I don’t pretend to think Romney is the best answer, I do believe he is the best shot by far among our choices, being the only one in the race who understands economic issues, or even cares about them. Ron paul understand this, I think, but reality says he could never accomplish anything in a political system which requires cooperation and compromise with Congress. Romney most certainly could, as evident in his time as Governor of MA. Will he reverse the tragic course we’re headed down? I don’t know. Frankly, I don’t know that any one person can. But he will, I believe, do enough good to give us as a nation time to figure out how to prevent the utter and total destruction of our nation. That’s more than anyone else can do, if you ask me.
February 19th, 2012 at 6:26 pm
171
Awesome comment, on all counts.
February 19th, 2012 at 6:27 pm
Like a virus, my name is Replication.
February 19th, 2012 at 6:31 pm
171 – Alaska Jake – I think your’e exactly right. Good post. The So Cons seem anxious to control the party, IMO. It seems very much “our way or the highway.” I don’t’ get that. This is not the time for making birth control, gay marriage, abortions the TOP priority of our party, nor this election. And aside from all this – Romney has come out on the side of traditional marriage, as well as has legislated in a Pro-Life manner as Mass Gov. Why is that not GOOD enough for the So Cons?? What else is at play here??? Oh wait. . .. i forgot. So Cons seem to want to elect a Pastor in Chief.
February 19th, 2012 at 6:31 pm
171. Thanks for your comments. Over the last few days we are definitely seeing what the tone for the race would be if Santorum was the nominee. I have always been a strong Mitt supporter but thought Santorum would be okay. However after his comments of the last few days even I am getting disgusted and I think most people would consider me an evangelical !! He is not helping any cause.
February 19th, 2012 at 6:33 pm
172 Thanks. I just don’t understand people sometimes. Arguing over who is more pro-life or who voted for Reagan three decades ago or who was too accommodating of homosexual rights is akin to rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. When the American economy collapses, and it will at the rate we’re heading, we’re all going down with the ship, no matter who we sleep with or voted for in the past.
February 19th, 2012 at 6:33 pm
Rick is coming to Arizona because we have the debate here.
He only has one rally planned the same day as the debate.
February 19th, 2012 at 6:35 pm
You know what, Alaska Jake? I seriously think the party has become accustomed and numb to the bad economy and debt crisis. It’s as if we’ve all forgotten how things used to be and how bad things are now.
It’s the new normal.
Well, not if I have anything to say about it.
February 19th, 2012 at 6:36 pm
171 Alaska Jake
Great post…
February 19th, 2012 at 6:38 pm
178 The whole nation has. When unemployment drops from 9% to 8.5% and everyone is celebrating, there’s something definitely wrong with the USA. When the deficit decreases from $1.2 Trillion to “only” $980 Billion, we shouldn’t be happy. These aren’t clues to a turnaround. If the Titanic hit a slightly smaller iceberg, it still would have broken in two and sunk.
February 19th, 2012 at 6:45 pm
83.
Why do the personal attacks not surprise me? Typical Rombot behavior,lol. Malinda I love your comments
Don’t let these jerks get you down.
February 19th, 2012 at 6:49 pm
PPP will release its new Michigan numbers sometime between 10 and 11 tonight, they say.
February 19th, 2012 at 6:49 pm
next debate:
Mitt to Santo: how many jobs have you created
Mitt to Newt: How many jobs have you personally created?
Answer = same as Obama – NONE!
Mitt is the turnaround master – he needs to brand himself BETTER as such.
And we will watch as he turns around this race, for the umpteenth time!
February 19th, 2012 at 6:49 pm
LSo if the GOP suddenly chooses to be a Socon party, so be it. The rest of us can deal with it or find somewhere else to go, like others have done since Lincoln’s days.
The real question is whether Santorum is simply being accepted by the Republican base as the only RomNot left, or if Santorum IS the Republican base. The horse-trading that has gone on between the two parties with regard to the nation’s demographics has made the GOP more blue collar, more Middle American, still as old and white as ever, more religious, and more downscale. That’s actually a party made for Santorum-ism. That’s why it will be interesting to see what the Electoral College will look like if Santorum gets the nomination, and if the economy keeps “getting better,” which is already moving Obama’s job approval into a position prime for re-election. I can envision a scenario where Santorum wins Ohio and Iowa while Obama wins Florida and North Carolina, given the economic trends and demographic shifts in each of those regions.
February 19th, 2012 at 6:53 pm
To all dissing talk radio, media – TOTALLY AGREE – they are obviously VERY WELL coordinated. Looks like they are the “NEW” establishment trying themselves to decide the outcome.
Who knows how many cigar smoke-filled room meetings Murdoch, Limbaugh, Palin, Fox execs and others were in and have been in since, coordinating the dynamics,the ABRs, etc. Talk about manipulating – has been monumental this cycle!
The herd continues to go along…
February 19th, 2012 at 6:58 pm
122. The so called career criminal was a poor black teenager who received 10 times the sentence a white kid would have in the same situation. After getting released the man later violated his parole and should have been sent back to prison long before he killed any police officers. Huckabee had nothing to do with any of it. But hey, you seemingly play fast and loose with the truth so I quess blatently promoting untruth doesn’t bother you much. I seriously hope you decide to leave the Republican party very soon and please don’t let the door hit you on the way out ok.
February 19th, 2012 at 7:02 pm
148.
You malcontents don’t make up 30% of the party,lol.
February 19th, 2012 at 7:04 pm
Alaska Jake and Masscon,
I really don’t get this meme about the party being controlled by the SoCon extreme, to the neglect of the Econ-Cons. We have rarely heard about social issues in the debates. The rhetoric from the debates has been a steady torrent of economic libertarianism. It has involved the candidates finding a million different ways to say we need to cut regulations, spending, and taxes, and all our problems will be solved by the free – market. Our candidates are so committed to the agenda of Grover Norquist that they have refused to even be open to a grand deficit cutting compromise if it involves even $1 of tax-hikes for every $10 in spending cuts. The congress is so committed to the Grover Norquist agenda that they threatened the country with default over not compromising on the issue of tax hikes. All the candidates, including Rick Santorum, who use to portray himself as part of the compassionate conservative wing, have shown themselves willing to dance to the tune of the most extreme element of economic reactionary libertarians. By their promise to not base tax policy on economic and political reality, that happens to require compromise in a Democracy, they have essentially promised to continue running up the debt. And yet we’re supposed to believe it the SoCon extreme that has taken over the party and is preventing sensible solution to our debt crisis? I just don’t get that narrative.
February 19th, 2012 at 7:04 pm
184 DaveG. . . Yeah I think you make a good observation there. It’s too bad we’re choosing 2012 to decide who we are. So much is at stake today, yet we’re ignoring the big picture. We’re arguing over who gets to hold the umbrella while an asteroid is crashing down from above. It’s a dumb fight which benefits no one.
February 19th, 2012 at 7:08 pm
152.
Trolls = Non-Romney supporters right? I was under the impression this site was for everyone including those whosupport different candidates… but maybe I’m wrong. What, you think they oughta rename it ‘Romney Central’ or something?
February 19th, 2012 at 7:09 pm
188
It’s not that SoCons have taken over the party. It’s that social issues are Santorum’s bread and butter, and those issues ought to be on the back burner against Obama.
The more we’re talking about condoms being evil, the less time we are talking about the $15,000,000,000,000.00 debt and the 8.5% unemployment rate.
February 19th, 2012 at 7:11 pm
190
The point of my comment you cited was that not all not-Romney commenters are trolls. Mind reading my comment again?
Here’s the quote: “Plenty of not-Mitts, but few trolls”
In other words, the trolls are gone but we have plenty of not-Mitt people who are not trolls.
February 19th, 2012 at 7:13 pm
191 Yes. Thank you. When we’re all standing on food lines fighting over meat rations and fuel vouchers, no one will give a darn about social issues anymore.
February 19th, 2012 at 7:16 pm
“I expect these numbers to be Santorums peak and they will start trending down tomorrow.” We have heard that from you guys for at least a few days now. ‘Santorum has peaked, he’ll never get 20%’ and ‘Santorum has peaked, he’ll never get 30%.
February 19th, 2012 at 7:19 pm
“I say WE”LL stay home if he DOESN”T get it and see how far they get with 30% of the party watching Santorum choke on his own words.” Yup Romney’s way or the highway.
February 19th, 2012 at 7:26 pm
John Mark,
Raising taxes must be a non-starter. With a caveat. Throwing out, completely, the existing tax code and restructuring it so that EVERYONE has some skin, even a little, in the game. This would actually raise taxes on almost half the population and have a reduction in rates for the top 50% with an increase in revenues.
The Bowles-Simpson plan doesn’t look at this method of increasing revenues. We let the Democrats frame the debate to be about “fairness” (and even then they’re lying), rather than “revenue”.
What we need to talk about is a restructured tax code that increases revenues. This is what I miss Hermain Cain for… not because his 999 plan was the right plan, but he brought the issue to the table to be talked about. Gingrich has some good ideas about it. I’m a Romney guy, but worry that Romney just nibbles at the edges.
The other issue that needs to be brought home, is as you correctly point out is pushed by the Libertarian side, is that government interference is expensive with little to show for it. We lose liberties and money with no gain.
Are we safer with the TSA? No, but we spend more money.
Is education better with the Department of Education? No, but we spend more money.
Is our energy policy sane with the Department of Energy? Not hardly, but we waste money.
I can go down the list showing program after program doesn’t do what it’s meant to do and only spends money. These programs include Medicare, Medicaid and even Social Security. When the federal government steps outside it’s role of protecting individual rights, or put differently, our liberty, and starts providing some sort of security, we don’t just get liberty without security, but we lose our wealth, too.
February 19th, 2012 at 7:27 pm
191: Exactly
February 19th, 2012 at 7:31 pm
195 – Ohio Joe: What are you talking about “Romney’s way or the highway?”
You clearly misunderstand. Santorum is a nice guy. He’s just not presidential. I agree with many of the things he says, but they are NOT federal government issues and especially not issues for the 2012 election. He’s firing up the people who’ll vote for whoever the GOP nominee is and alienating the “independents” in the middle who will not vote for him.
Santorum can get the nomination, but will lose the election. He’s said too many things that will be sound-bite heaven for the MSM. Forget context– he won’t have enough hours in the day to shove those worms it back in the context can.
I’ll vote for Santorum in the GE if he gets the nod, but I don’t expect he’ll be any better at governing than Obama. A better choice, yes… but a better president? Probably not.
February 19th, 2012 at 7:32 pm
#192 I got it the first time. Nice comment.
February 19th, 2012 at 7:33 pm
#198 Nicely said. I’m in the same place.
February 19th, 2012 at 7:36 pm
PPP says Romney and Santorum tied in Arizona.
February 19th, 2012 at 7:39 pm
When the debate Wednesday night begins to focus on these social issues I hope Mitt says something like this : “You are seeing now exactly what the debate will look like this fall if Santorum is the nominee and we will lose. The deficit is the biggest obstacle facing this country and I am the only one that can take Obama to task for this and I’m the only one that has the skills to do anything about it.”
February 19th, 2012 at 7:41 pm
I won’t vote for Santorum if he’s the nominee, but the reason is that he’s not gonna win MA anyway. Neither is Mitt, but at least I want to vote for Mitt anyway.
If Santorum is the nominee, I will go vote for Scott Brown (who is WAY, WAY better than Elite-a-beth Warren, and I will likely write in Mitt or vote third party.
If I lived in Ohio or Florida, sure, I’d vote for Santorum against Obama. But he ain’t winnin’ Massachusetts.
February 19th, 2012 at 7:46 pm
“It’s not that SoCons have taken over the party. It’s that social issues are Santorum’s bread and butter, and those issues ought to be on the back burner against Obama.”
Yes, but this isn’t a sign of the party looking for a new extreme socially conservative as suggested by some on this thread. If the party had gone from Santorum to another it might, but let’s consider the other folks the ABR crowd was interested in. Some of them were SoCons, but what about their flirtation with Donald Trump way back when and their flirtation with Herman Cain. I don’t wth Donald Trump’s social positions are and Herman Cain couldn’t make a coherent statement on the issue. And look at the issue that the candidates keep bashing Romney on; it’s not primarily abortion or his wishy-washiness on gay rights; it’s the fact that he used a government program to help people get insurance. Now they’ve hit on a Social Conservative, but if their last preference are any indication it’s not because of his social conservatism. It’s the economic side of this party that needs to face reality not the social side.
Patrick Henry,
Whether you’re ideas are right or not, we live in a Republic which means you have to come up with a policy that will an election. We have to have taxes that will pay for the government that can actually pass congress, not a tax rate that pays for the government the Cato institute or CFG dreamed up.
February 19th, 2012 at 7:46 pm
202
That’s a good point for him to make. Many will agree with him on that.
February 19th, 2012 at 7:49 pm
203 I’m kinda in the same position. Santorum’s bible comments the other day sealed the deal for me. I can’t in good conscience vote for someone who has no problem rating people based on how Christian they are. I was ok with voting for Santorum before that, as I’ve said many times, despite his class warfare and super concentration on socon issues, but I can’t tolerate religious identity politics at all. Fortunately for me, I live in a very red state which will vote GOP anyway, so I’ll reluctantly pull the lever for Gary Johnson. My vote won’t much matter anyway, because if Alaska instead was going for Obama the GOP won’t stand a chance nationally.
February 19th, 2012 at 8:01 pm
What were Santorum’s Bible comments?
February 19th, 2012 at 8:01 pm
I guess I should order my “Gary Johnson 2012: Yes, Really” bumper sticker if Santorum is nominated.
February 19th, 2012 at 8:04 pm
204
The SoCon side as an ideological movement does not really present a problem at all. It’s just that some are willing to throw the debt and economic issues off the table in favor of someone who responds in full whenever asked about condoms. Someone like that is just not going to win the election.
As for the Norquist folks, yes there is more dogma among them than among SoCons.
For example, remember the Boehner-Obama compromise which addressed entitlements in a serious way and raised $40 billion in taxes per year? I’d have voted for it. Throwing that one out was just plain dumb.
February 19th, 2012 at 8:09 pm
207. . . About his own vs Obama’s political theology, and how Christian each one is. It’s discussed elsewhere on this site, and I think Drudge still has it posted on his page.
February 19th, 2012 at 8:18 pm
Massachusetts Conservative Says:
February 19th, 2012 at 6:49 pm
PPP will release its new Michigan numbers sometime between 10 and 11 tonight, they say.
Hope good news for Mitt
February 19th, 2012 at 8:18 pm
#207: Santorum was speaking to some “Christian Tea Party” group. (Things have gone down hill since the “Christians” took over the Tea Party, it seems. Anyway, Rum said: “Obama doesn’t care about you or your jobs. He’s interested in a phony theology that is not in the Bible.”
To that the group cheered their heads off. We are left scratching OUR heads wondering what the heck he meant. But the remarks (you can’t call them gaffes: just intemporate, thoughtful blathering) have recieve a lot of play from the media and folks with thing Santorum was judging Obama’s “phony theology” as “not biblical.”
Who knows? What we do know is this man cannot be president. The POTUS cannot go around spouting off with every wild, inane, poorly articulate thought that bounces into his head.
February 19th, 2012 at 8:19 pm
#212: “thoughtful?” Uh, no. ThoughtLESS. Sorry about that.
February 19th, 2012 at 8:20 pm
148.
Or at least vote for someone else on for third party.
But I am ready to make good on this. I will not vote for Santorum, no matter what.
February 19th, 2012 at 8:22 pm
Fellow Romfolks,
If you live in a state that is close, you shouldn’t be swearing off voting for Santorum over Obama. He’s better than Obama.
February 19th, 2012 at 8:26 pm
According to PPP, Santorum’s favs have not changed in MI since last week but the race is closer because folks are warming up to Mitt.
February 19th, 2012 at 8:31 pm
215.
Well, I’m in California. My vote won’t swing the electoral college one way or the other, I’m sorry to say.
February 19th, 2012 at 8:34 pm
Post. 216
Massachusetts Conservative, That is great news to Santorum because Mitt is not able to lower Santorums margins. Romney therefore can NEVER CATCH Santorum in Michigan. You do know this dont ya ProChoicer. Using the last polls composition of the Electorate, this would give Santorum a 5-7 point lead taking away from the undecideds.
February 19th, 2012 at 8:35 pm
It’s possible that the Center-Right and Libertarian light Republican voters are calling themselves Independents now.
I don’t know much about polling, but the pollsters sampling could scew the results in Santorums favor.
February 19th, 2012 at 8:38 pm
112….thats like blaming parents for the grown adults crimes….they “allowed” the child to be born, hence it is their fault. You are full of crap….as usual.
February 19th, 2012 at 8:40 pm
He must get >40% if somebody want to win Michigan.
February 19th, 2012 at 8:42 pm
218
“You do know this dont ya ProChoicer.”
February 19th, 2012 at 8:42 pm
219
I just call myself a Libertarian. Well, I did register as a Republican to vote in the primary, but….Libertarian first and foremost.
February 19th, 2012 at 8:42 pm
Massachusetts Conservative Says:
February 19th, 2012 at 8:26 pm
According to PPP, Santorum’s favs have not changed in MI since last week but the race is closer because folks are warming up to Mitt.
Problem: How close in MI
February 19th, 2012 at 8:46 pm
PPP:
56% GOP in Michigan favorable to contraception, 22% unfavorable
February 19th, 2012 at 8:47 pm
224
Numbers not out yet
February 19th, 2012 at 8:47 pm
ClassyMitt I used to work for Rasmussen Reports LLC, and the polls will be change their turnout models to reflect a more conservative electorate basely solely on Past states api rating per favorable, turnout in 2012 for those states that have already held their elections using a baseline of turnout from 2008. This adjustment has so far favored Santorum in Iowo, and post Nevada by 12 percent more than prior polls have shown for Santorum pre-Colorado.
Using the the A.P.I. or Adjusted Participation Index, you would therefore assume the model will hold by a margin of vetween -6 to -.04%
This translates to a more conservative electorate of 12% using this calculation. So assuming the support of santorum has remained the same for Santorum and assuming Romney increased his share from the undecided column, Romney should have a deficit of between 5-7%
THe poll will be released tonight according to PPP’s twitter posts.
February 19th, 2012 at 8:50 pm
PPP:
10% of MI primary voters think Santorum is too liberal
February 19th, 2012 at 9:10 pm
I agree with John Mark. The GOP is every bit as dogmatic on fiscal issues but at a much louder volume. Democrats propose all sorts of millionaires taxes and Buffet rules, which poll at 70%- which occasionally even get plurality support among Republicans- and yet any Republican who went along with these popular policies would be burned at the stake. Economic libertarianism is no more popular than hard-core social conservatism, it just happens to be less declasse in establishment circles. And the GOP has been papering over how unpopular it is by cutting taxes for everyone, deficits be damned, whenever the opportunity arises.
February 19th, 2012 at 9:10 pm
10 minutes to go till PPP poll released
February 19th, 2012 at 9:13 pm
SWEET Santorum is still up big over Romeny
February 19th, 2012 at 9:15 pm
Santorum up 4% over Romney 37% to 33%
February 19th, 2012 at 9:15 pm
How fell tea party if Obama get re-election in 2012
February 19th, 2012 at 9:17 pm
#233: eric
You want to try that one again?
February 19th, 2012 at 9:18 pm
Michigan GOP race tightens
The Republican race for President in Michigan has tightened considerably over the last week, with what was a 15 point lead for Rick Santorum down to 4. He leads with 37% to 33% for Mitt Romney, 15% for Ron Paul, and 10% for Newt Gingrich.
February 19th, 2012 at 9:19 pm
while this is not a huge lead it shows Romney is maxing out his support potential. He fails to Hurt Santorums favorables. With All Mitts Money this appears to be the best he can do.
Michigan will vote in 8 days and Romney is running out of time. I expect Gingrich’s numbers to fall of by another 4% and go into Santorum’s column increasing his lead over Romney to a 8 point lead come election day
February 19th, 2012 at 9:21 pm
229
Where you and John Mark go wrong is to pretend that being a fiscal Conservative is merely about volunteering to wash Ferraris for free and write billionaires checks.
Being a fiscal Conservative to me is about entitlement reform and spending cuts. And again, with Santorum, we forfeit the issue in favor of talking about how condoms are evil.
February 19th, 2012 at 9:24 pm
OH MY GOD I Newt Ginrich is according to DICK MORRIS is in talks with THE SANTORUM CAMPAIGN TALKING STRATAGY. This cant be true as Sheldon Adelson just gave Gingrich 10 million smacks?
February 19th, 2012 at 9:25 pm
Santorum getting the nomination…. That would mean the Republican party will demise in November.
The GOP is dead. Long live the GOP.
February 19th, 2012 at 9:25 pm
Mass Con,
On that score, not getting enough attention (fortunately for him) is Santorum’s position on entitlement reform. He wants to implement the Ryan plan for current seniors. Needless to say, this is going to be a problematic position in a general election. Although, in my fantasy world, it gets a lot of attention JUST before Ryan jumps into the race himself, therefore mitigating the “Ryan is a Radical” line of attack.
February 19th, 2012 at 9:27 pm
232.
The poll says that the race has tightened. Perhaps the poll showing them at a dead heat was not an outlier after all.
February 19th, 2012 at 9:35 pm
I would say that if Mitt Romney was only able to cause Santorum to lose 2% from the last PPP poll and Romney went up 9% from the last PPP poll, Team Romney is in deep deep trouble. Why, simple he needs Santorum to go down in order to catch him. All the ads Romney and his Super Pac have blown all over the Airwaves 24 7 and he still cant shake Santorum LOOSE means Santorum will likely HOLD HIS SUPPORTS THOUGH ELECTION DAY 8 days from Tuesday.
February 19th, 2012 at 9:39 pm
240
The problem with Santorum is not his positions on entitlement reform, it’s how his nomination would ensure that the entire election would focus on his insistence on responding defiantly and forcefully whenever asked about any given divisive social issue like condoms or Obama’s religion.
His nomination would be a total disaster. Entitlement reform wouldn’t even be a side issue. It would be a non-issue.
February 19th, 2012 at 9:42 pm
Romney is running out of Undecideds falling in his column. As long as Santorum Holds his base supporters, Santorum will defeat Romney on the 28th Its just math
February 19th, 2012 at 9:42 pm
“Where you and John Mark go wrong is to pretend that being a fiscal Conservative is merely about volunteering to wash Ferraris for free and write billionaires checks.”
I totally agree with you that’s not what fiscal conservatism should mean. What gets called fiscal conservative is amazingly reckless, and isn’t conservative in any sense of the word but it’s own. The version of fiscal conservatism I would support is something along the lines of Burkean conservatism, with maybe a touch more populism. I like the core principles MWS once proposed as being fiscal conservatism: sustainability, security, and stability. However, the conservative media and the Republican establishment seem more interested in the volunteering to wash Ferraris and write billionaires checks version.
February 19th, 2012 at 9:53 pm
Well I’d rather have a candidate who offers to cut taxes for the middle class and keep the rates the same on the rich (which is a totally acceptable position) than have a candidate who responds defiantly to every question about condoms for the entire election.
That said, the dogmatic obsession over lower taxes for the rich is a bit odd, especially given that the obsession is far greater on that issue than, for instance, entitlement reform or school choice.
February 19th, 2012 at 10:03 pm
The new PPP poll for Michigan:
Link: http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2012/02/michigan-gop-race-tightens.html
February 19th, 2012 at 10:13 pm
246,
Yes, I’m not saying Santorum is any better than Romney on this issue. He did espouse the principle of compassionate conservatism years ago, in a way that would appeal to me. However, now he seems to be dancing to same Grover Norquist insanity as everyone else. I think I might be closer to Santorum on ideology, but Romney definitely seems more qualified.
February 19th, 2012 at 11:30 pm
236. You make good points, but don’t forget the impact of the debate this week. Last time it was all on the line, Romney blitzed Newt. The matchup this week is Mitt and Rick. I have no idea how it turns out, but Rick is a much harder target, and Mitt’s going to have to figure it out, because there’s no question Rick can bring it when it comes to bright contrasts.
I’m a big RomBot, but debates are wonky, and weirdness happens.
February 19th, 2012 at 11:32 pm
247. Last cycle the split between men/women voters in the Michigan primary was 54/46.
Romney needs to find a way to get the ladies to the polls.
February 19th, 2012 at 11:55 pm
#250: Godiva chocolate. It’s probably cheaper than TV ads.
February 20th, 2012 at 1:51 am
It is refreshing to see ” bumskyred, K.G. and others in the party are waking up to the fact AM talk radio is owned and operated by corporate. These shock jocks that were minimum wage DJ’s before corporate transformed them into overnight all knowing political gurus(Limbaugh was the first on the scene to make the big time) took the Republican party by storm and became their voice,heart and soul. Corporate picked those with talent and has made them multimillionaires (feeding the lions red meat).The mass of the party ate this corporate spin up. It has been the largest dividing factor in America. It drove a wedge between the Democrats/Republicans, liberals/conservatives to the point our government is non functional. It does do one thing, it keeps the people divided while the ruling class gain more control and wealth, This will continue as long as the people let the power to be keep us divided. Example:Tea party in the House brought the House to its knees as far as legislation goes(a few think that is good,wrong)in doing so now the Republican congress has the lowest rating of any congress in history.It has become paralyzed.No mater how radical you are this is not good for the nation. Corporate has achieved its goals. It keep the country divided, we are unable to solve any problems, we change parties, it changes nothing.Corporate owns all politicians through K street lobbyist(Santorum and Gingrich were both pedaling influence through the revolving doors)(Ron Paul and Bernie Sanders do not deal with lobbyists).We need to rock the foundations of the corrupt corporate controlled two party system.The aim should be to rebuild America, it industry, its crumbling infrastructure, revisit our failed free trade policies, renegotiate them into fair trade agreements, rework the tax system to initiate the return of the worlds greatest middle class. This existing system is broke and can’t be repaired as long as we say in the existing framework. Santorum will never win a general election. Romney is still the best the party has to offer.