PPP 2012 Arizona Republican Nomination Survey
If the Republican candidates for President
were Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul, Mitt Romney,
and Rick Santorum, who would you vote for?• Mitt Romney 36%
• Rick Santorum 33%
• Newt Gingrich 16%
• Ron Paul 9%Would you say you are strongly committed to
that candidate, or might you end up supporting
someone else?Strongly committed to that candidate………….. 56%
Might end up supporting someone else ………. 44%Who is your second choice for President?
Newt Gingrich …………………………………………. 16%
Ron Paul ………………………………………………… 9%
Mitt Romney……………………………………………. 21%
Rick Santorum………………………………………… 25%
Someone else/Not sure ……………………………. 29%If the Republican candidates for President
were just Ron Paul, Mitt Romney, and Rick
Santorum, who would you vote for?Ron Paul ………………………………………………… 9%
Mitt Romney……………………………………………. 41%
Rick Santorum………………………………………… 43%
Not sure …………………………………………………. 8%PPP surveyed 412 likely Republican primary voters between February 17th and 19th. The
margin of error for the survey is +/-4.8%. This poll was not paid for or authorized by any
campaign or political organization. PPP surveys are conducted through automated
telephone interviews. PPP is a Democratic polling company, but polling expert Nate
Silver of the New York Times found that its surveys in 2010 actually exhibited a slight
bias toward Republican candidates.
February 20th, 2012 at 11:51 am
48% 39% 36% Romney is imploding in Arizona
February 20th, 2012 at 11:55 am
PPP has consistenly been an outlier for romney. They are the only ones that had santorum with a 15 percent national lead. They had santorum up 38-23 nationally when other polls taken at the time had santorum up about 3 and romney around 30.
PPP had romney only winning florida by 8.
If Romney is ahead of anyone in a ppp poll he is a lock for that state.
And arizona is a closed primary so the kossacks and unions can’t flood the primaries to vote for santorum to hurt romney like they are doing in michigan, tennessee, georgia which all have open primaries.
February 20th, 2012 at 11:58 am
I’d say Rasmussen is more accurate. Romney has made no gaffs lately, so there is no reason for him to implode. The last time I saw Romney down in a poll when there was no reason for it, that poll turned out to be an outlier. So, no, I think this poll is an outlier.
February 20th, 2012 at 11:58 am
If anti-libertarian Rick Santorum can win in a Western state with a decent size Mormon population which is the home of a sitting Senator and former presidential candidate who is endorsing Romney, he can win anywhere.
February 20th, 2012 at 12:01 pm
#1
Imploding? Really?
Sounds like an alternate reality.
February 20th, 2012 at 12:07 pm
#1 Killjoy
Does the polling take the early voting into consideration?
I don’t think he is imploding, I think that is an overstatement….race has tightened up that is for sure but I still think Mitt pulls out MI and AZ.
February 20th, 2012 at 12:07 pm
gallup daily out!!! Romney down 2, Sanorum even. Santorum 36, Romney 26!!!!!
February 20th, 2012 at 12:08 pm
#5
Rasmussen Arizona 2/1 Romney 48%, Santorum 13%
Rasmussen Arizona 2/16 Romney 39%, Santorum 31%
PPP Arizona 2/20 Romney 36%, Santorum 33%
I clearly see the pattern here… can’t you?
February 20th, 2012 at 12:08 pm
Gallup DTP of GOP contenders:
Santorum 36% (0)
Romney 26% (-2)
Gingrich 13% (0)
Paul 11% (0)
National rankings
February 20th, 2012 at 12:10 pm
2. In this case, there’s no reason to believe this survey is wrong. Take a look at the latest ARG (2/13-14) and Rasmussen (2/16) surveys. Their numbers comfortably match these PPP numbers. That serves to reinforce the likelihood that all three are correct. Proceeding on that assumption, one can crunch the candidates’ CPSRs and obtain appropriate results. I post them below, and include trend markings from the previous Rasmussen survey conducted on the 1st:
ARIZONA Composite 2/13-19 Final
1. Santorum 28-35 +11-26
2. Romney 35-40.8 -3.2-17
3. Gingrich 11.2-19 -1-16.8
4. Paul 7-11
4. Undecided 4-9
Romney and Santorum are in a statistical tie at the moment, overlapping at 35%. However, given the fact that Romney has moved down somewhere between 3 and 17 points since the 1st while Santorum has moved up between 11 and 26 points, I believe the conclusion is inevitable that it is Santorum who currently enjoys the momentum in this state. I believe he probably has a slight edge therefore.
Of course, that’s today. What happens if Santorum continues to eat his feet and Romney’s SuperPAC’s unleash their venom? That’s why the above is a snapshot, NOT a prediction. In this, of all races, predictions are generally a bad idea!
February 20th, 2012 at 12:12 pm
#7 Santorum now up by double digits ?
lol
but… but… the Rombots on race42012 told us that Santorum was imploding? I don’t understand
February 20th, 2012 at 12:13 pm
Lol at 42% “very conservative” sample, 2008 AZ was 30% “very conservative”. I don’t think any primary broke 40 percent in “very conservative” only caucuses have done that.
2008 exit poll political distribution makes it Romney 36%, Santorum 30%.
February 20th, 2012 at 12:14 pm
#11:
They wish. It’s their guy who has been sliding backwards for the past week or so.
February 20th, 2012 at 12:15 pm
I thought Romney was supposed to win Arizona in a blowout?
February 20th, 2012 at 12:21 pm
The Party is pretty well split, and all you have to do is read a blog to know that one half is just about as unhappy with the other. Only the voting sorts this out.
If Rick Santorum wins the nomination, the SoCons will have the Scotch blessing of discovering what the true floor is in a national election for their vision of America.
Rick is poised to wipe the memory of Barry Goldwater from the political annals of epic failure.
February 20th, 2012 at 12:23 pm
#15 Or Romney is doomed to be added to the long list of moderate losers …. Dole, McCain, Romney.
February 20th, 2012 at 12:25 pm
Or actually since there seems to be rounding down in the cross tabs, in reality it is more like 37-30 based on that poll.
February 20th, 2012 at 12:25 pm
Eric,
Romney’s a lock in Arizona. If PPP has him up 3 points, he’s up 8 or 9. Minimum.
February 20th, 2012 at 12:25 pm
11. Killjoy: The far right is sawing off the limb they sit on and yelling “Timber!”, believing that the tree will fall. . . . actually wanting the tree to fall. Sometimes tragedies are comedies. This is a bit of both.
February 20th, 2012 at 12:27 pm
#10 I agree with your analysis. This whole primary may come down to the debate next week (which might be the last)
February 20th, 2012 at 12:29 pm
#19 the moderates spent the entire primary telling us conservatives that all the not-romney were not really conservatives and that Mitt was, but now that we support a candidate that they can’t say isn’t conservative .. they now claim he is to conservative.
February 20th, 2012 at 12:30 pm
PPP has the percentage of Evangelicals at 43%. In the 2008 GOP primary it was at 33%. PPP did the same oversampling for their Michigan poll as detailed below and then showed a huge swing to Romney. I expect this will occur again. Although, I don’t know if this is intentional or not they have done this twice now. Should be interesting.
February 20th, 2012 at 12:31 pm
It’s the NBR’s (nobody but Romney’s) that are causing the fracture in the party. The ABR’s would have been happy with nearly anyone that ran.
February 20th, 2012 at 12:33 pm
I can clearly see race42012 has become polarized between those who dance when Romney is up and those who dance when Romney is down.
Have you ever noticed how it’s not “Oh great, Santorum is gaining!” instead it’s a celebration about how Romney is falling or “imploding”. It’s not the great virtues of their own candidate (good luck on that one) or promoting why we would want that candidate, but rather it’s about taking pot shots at Romney.
If you look on Google News at the Top 10 Stories summary on the left, Gingrich and Santorum never show up, it’s just Romney who is consistently in the top ten.
I’m proud of Romney. He has not had it easy, but he is a fighter. A wonderful fighter. Kudos to him.
This is all about taking the best candidate down, under the guise of some pretext or another.
This is all about either supporting the guy on top or bashing the guy on top. That’s it.
February 20th, 2012 at 12:38 pm
21. Too socially conservative. Fiscally liberal. He loves Jesus but is a wealthy stingy tight wad when it comes to sharing. He’s a liberal spender and spent his life at the government trough. He’ll get pummeled in the general if he makes it.
February 20th, 2012 at 12:38 pm
4.8% is a large margin of error due to only contacting 418 people. Like in Florida I want to see the percentage of people who have already voted via early ballots. I have heard quite a few have been returned (much more than last year at this point) anyone have any information on this topic?
February 20th, 2012 at 12:38 pm
I’m so sick of people just disregarding PPP polls anytime they show any bad news for Romney, or suggesting that PPP somehow insidiously downplays Mitts support as part of some conspiracy to defeat him. I’ve looked back at the final pre-voting PPP polls for every state so far, and this is what they show:
IOWA:
PPP/ACTUAL: ROMNEY 19/24; PAUL 20/21; SANT 18/24; GING 14/13
NH:
PPP/ACTUAL: ROMNEY 35/39; PAUL 18/22; SANT 11/9; GING 12/9
SC:
PPP/ACTUAL: ROMNEY 28/27; PAUL 14/13; SANT 16/17; GING 37/40
FL:
PPP/ACTUAL: ROMNEY 39/46; PAUL 11/7; SANT 15/13; GING 31/32
NV:
PPP/ACTUAL: ROMNEY 50/50; PAUL 15/18; SANT 8/9; GING 25/21
CO:
PPP/ACTUAL: ROMNEY 37/35; PAUL 13/11; SANT 27/40; GING 21/12
MN:
PPP/ACTUAL: ROMNEY 24/17; PAUL 20/27; SANT 33/45; GING 22/11
MO:
PPP/ACTUAL: ROMNEY 32/25; PAUL 19/12; SANT 45/55
No evidence whatsoever to back up the ridiculous charges that PPP is out to get Mitt. This data shows (1) PPP is pretty damn accurate in predicting who is going to win, and (2) actual numbers for the eventual winner in a state tend to outperform the poll – which is what you would expect, since last minute deciders usually go for the candidate who is winning. PPP has never understated Romney by more than 6 points, but has overstated him by 7 twice. Meanwhile, they understated Santurm’s support by 13 in CO, 12 in MN, and 10 in MO. That is understandable given the nature of those contests. Bottom line, stop bagging on PPP, its another feeble, desperate attempt to explain away Mitt’s problems by blaming someone other than Mitt himself. He may go on to win the nomination, but if he loses it won’t be because of some damn conspiracy. It will be because he can’t beat a weak field of GOP contenders, which tells you all you need to know about mitt.
February 20th, 2012 at 12:39 pm
I think it’s time for the Romney supporters to start questioning how truly strong of a candidate is Romney…forget about Santorum for moment.
Maybe there is a Romney Surge happening in Michigan right now…
Maybe the Gallup poll is just showing the last gasp of the Santorum Surge and it just hasn’t been able to record the Romney’s Surge yet…
Maybe the AZ PPP poll has a bad sample…because…come on….Mitt should be ahead of Santorum by 13 points in AZ..not just 3pts, even in a bad sample.
There are just too many MAYBES in that for all of it to be the truth.
Mitt Romney is a weaken candidate today….he has lost any resemblance of a front runner.
Romney is down 10 points in Gallup today?
…ok…maybe he is only down 5pts…another bad sample?……but if Mitt was truly the candidate I have been told he is here at RACE42012 than Mitt should be ahead of Santorum by 5 points and making Santorum feel pressed to close the gap.
This is not a position that Mitt Romney should be finding himself in……….
….forget about Santorum….Mitt is the problem.
February 20th, 2012 at 12:40 pm
I don’t claim they have any bias, I’m happy show their sample so clearly that you can judge their polls individually, and judge the poll based on that.
February 20th, 2012 at 12:41 pm
24 — I’m with you. I for one have not been negative towards any candidate except Gingrich
Does he qualify still?
February 20th, 2012 at 12:46 pm
By the way, early voting started Feb 2, almost week before Santorum’s victories. Somewhere by Feb 14 or Feb 15, Maricopa county alone had received back 144.5k early votes, 46% of 2008 turnout in that county, equaling 27% of turnout in the whole state. Pima county had received 30.2k votes, over 50% of 2008 turnout in that county.
http://www.myfoxphoenix.com/dpp/news/elections/large-turnout-seen-in-early-voting-for-arizonas-primary-2-15-2012
February 20th, 2012 at 12:47 pm
Thank you Keith for that post.
PPP has had another outstanding election cycle (even if they are run by a lefty) and they are not showing any anti Mitt tendencies. Nate Silver actually had a piece out that show Santorum has been the candidate that has outperformed his last poll numbers more than any other candidate.
PPP messed up on the Florida poll for Mitt…but it does not make them Anti Mitt…or anybody else.
The Romney supporters are looking for the Boogeyman behind every curtain…Fox News…Talk Radio…..Pollsters.
I think you all know what the real issue is…….is right in front of you……Mitt does not connect.
February 20th, 2012 at 12:47 pm
27 – I think you could make a case that PPP is actually helping Romney. See my comment 22. Now like they did in Michigan they could change their demographics to more of how the actually electorate will be and show a surge for Romney as they did today with Michigan. Polls are estimates. Don’t take them so serious..
February 20th, 2012 at 12:50 pm
PublicPolicyPolling – tweet
In Washington state Santorum’s favorability is 69/18, Romney’s is 47/42. Similar to the divides we saw in Minnesota and Missouri
might as well put Washington in Santorums column
February 20th, 2012 at 12:50 pm
28. Nice spin.
If Romney were a weak candidate, he would have buckled from the extreme pressure of anti-Mitt FOX, Rush, the liberal MSM, Pastor _______, and the heavy campaign waged against him by the DNC and Obama by now. In short, no one else would have held up to what he’s gone through and still be as far up as he is at this point. These aren’t the capabilities of a weak man, but rather a very strong one. Romney is a fighter.
You know what’s funny? Santorum is getting his short-lived day in the sun and some are acting like it’s the firm decree of things how they will be. Santorum hasn’t been under the limelight long enough to prove anything about himself now or for the General Election in Nov. He’s just a FOTM and the last stand for the FOTM group. That’s it. He will go the same way as Moon Man, and he’s already started his decline. Why? Because he’s opening his mouth and showing us all what’s really in there.
February 20th, 2012 at 12:52 pm
31 — Thanks for the info.
Pollsters should ask respondents if they have already voted so we could get a better picture like they did in Florida.
February 20th, 2012 at 12:53 pm
#15 “Rick is poised to wipe the memory of Barry Goldwater from the political annals of epic failure.” That is epic BS. Goldwater won 52 electoral votes winning only the very deep south and losing the following states (among others): TN, KY, WV, IN, AR, AK, OK, MO, TX, KS, NE, SD, ND, MT, ID, WY, and UT. So, if Santorum is going to do worse, I assume you think he is going to lose all those, and a few more deep south states to boot? Mississippi or Alabama? Obama is gonna win Utah and West Virginia? How about, there is no way in holy hell Santorum loses a single one of the states I listed or the ones Goldwater won. Plus he’ll likely add VA, NC, and make a play for IA, MI, and OH. Maybe won’t be enough, but all this talk about landslide loss by Santorum is fear mongering and complete garbage.
I’ve said it before, I don’t care how many votes Mitt can get nationally, he has to get them in the right states so they translate to electoral strength. Millions of extra votes in CA, IL, NY and MA mean NOTHING because we aren’t going to beat Obama there. This isn’t 1984 – we aren’t going to paint the whole map red. We have to win the safe republican states plus some mixture of NC, VA, FL, OH, MI, IA, NV, WI, and NH. One small New England state, one big transplanted yankee state (FL), a couple of old dixie states with changing demographics, and four rust belt states. Looking at it that way, I’ll take the blue collar socon over the New England moderate multi-millionaire any day.
February 20th, 2012 at 12:56 pm
SixMom,
There hasn’t even been millions of dollars in negative ads ran against Romney yet……nobody has the money to do so, and yet Romney is only getting 47 FAV in Washington State?
This has not been a heavy attack against Mitt….not as heavy as it was against McCain.
Mitt did not seal the deal when it was there for him to do so.
The Turn Around Artist needs to turn around his campaign…needs to win MI.
February 20th, 2012 at 12:56 pm
Smack, I don’t know how you can say a man with double the delegates of the others is a weak candidate.
February 20th, 2012 at 12:57 pm
39. I think I read he has double the actual votes, too.
February 20th, 2012 at 12:57 pm
38. Smack, you don’t think that’s largely because the media is doing the negative job for the candidates?
February 20th, 2012 at 12:58 pm
#35 It all depends what this race is really about. For the Rush, Ingraham, Hannity, Palin crowd it isn’t really about winning. It’s about picking the right Conservative, according to their definition, whether or not that person is qualified to be POTUS. It’s all about social conservative values. You are correct about Romney who never whines or says anything is unfair. Romney is a leader and it’s very apparent right now. People have to decide whether or not they really want Obama out of the WH. Not only will Santorum lose the WH, he will also take others down with him in the Senate and the House races.
February 20th, 2012 at 1:01 pm
By the way Santorum’s blue collar creds are myth.
http://decoded.nationaljournal.com/2012/02/santorums-working-class-opport.php
February 20th, 2012 at 1:03 pm
38.
“There hasn’t even been millions of dollars in negative ads ran against Romney yet…”
Right….
“This has not been a heavy attack against Mitt….not as heavy as it was against McCain.”
Are you comparing the primaries to the general election, by chance?
February 20th, 2012 at 1:03 pm
Why John McCain was a way better politician than Romney?
By convincing traditional conservatives he was one of them on foreign policy and fiscal policy.
Unfortunately for Mitt he doesn’t talk enough about FP, people don’t care what he says anymore on fiscal policy and hate his guts because of social conservative issues.
February 20th, 2012 at 1:08 pm
#35 Not really, McCain faced all the same challenges from the socons backing Huckabee, fiscal cons backing Romney, the anti-McCain media, Rush, etc.; and by this time in 08 he was polling nationally over 50%, Mitt was out and Huckabee was on his last legs. And McCain wasn’t even a very good candidate, who went on to lose in a landslide – but he was good enough to put away a weak field that included Mitt Romney. This is easily the weakest republican field in my lifetime, and I think we should make some noise about that – its a great disservice because this is an important election and we need to beat Obama. We are losing a great opportunity. Where was the leadership of our party? They couldn’t find anyone better than these four? How hard did they try? Or did they just figure this was Romney’s “turn?” That sounds more like the GOP.
Because I like to beat a dead horse, someone please tell Rick Perry to jump back in. We apologize for being hasty, and promise to be good from now on.
February 20th, 2012 at 1:10 pm
37 -
While I agree with you that Santorum could play well in swing states like Pennsylvania, Ohio, Iowa, Michigan and perhaps Wisconsin. I believe Romney would play very well in states like Nevada, New Mexico, Colorado, New Hampshire, Florida, Virginia, North Carolina, Michigan, and even Maine (trending more conservative/republican). My fear with Santorum is that he would lose states that Romney would put in play or bring to our side (Florida, Virginia, New Hampshire, and Maine) due to his hard and controversial stances on social issues. Personally I don’t have any issues with his social stances.
— Also he struggles with raising money and doesn’t seem to have the organizational skills required to compete.
February 20th, 2012 at 1:14 pm
#39 “I don’t know how you can say a man with double the delegates of the others is a weak candidate.” Your statement assumes that someone in the race must be a strong candidate, since you will always have someone with more delegates, even if the candidates are Moe, Curly, Larry and Shemp. Also, I think its disingenous to talk about delegate counts when so many of the states that have voted have yet to allocate their delegates; but they will and it seems unlikely that states like MO and MN are going to go on to award lots of delegates to Romney. I played with the delegate calculator on CNN – highly recommended for any political junkies – and I admit its hard to envision a scenario where Santorum wins without Romney getting out of the race or Newt pledging his delegates to Rick; but if the current polls hold, it looks increasingly clear that Romney won’t hit the magic number and we will have a brokered convention. Now if that doesn’t say “weak candidate” I don’t know what does.
February 20th, 2012 at 1:14 pm
46 – Keith, how about you run for president and see how you do. I say we force people to run for president. That sounds like a great conservative idea.
February 20th, 2012 at 1:15 pm
46. I was there. The MSM gave McCain a free pass, while they bashed Romney. It was reported and documented that the DNC had 400 times as many ads against Romney as they did McCain. They were scared to death of Romney, but not McCain. He was an easy opponent. And the DNC is still targeting Romney heavily. Santorum is an easy opponent as well.
McCain didn’t face anything remotely similar in depth, or severity. Not during the primaries especially, he supposedly had a good relationship with the MSM UNTIL he was the official nominee. Then the MSM let loose. They’ve been hammering Romney all a long.
Not the same, McCain underperformed the same situation, not the other way around.
Romney is nowhere near out of this race. And those who like to pretend that Santorum’s short-lived surge is some significant event can enjoy their delusion while it lasts.
February 20th, 2012 at 1:16 pm
37.
I think it’s WAY too early to begin counting electoral votes. 3rd/4th party efforts will almost surely upset the balance of EVs. Gary Johnson likely to steal libertarian-leaning GOP votes (probably also a few Dems), and who knows who Americans Elect puts on the ballot (maybe a Bloomberg/Huntsman ticket?)
February 20th, 2012 at 1:22 pm
Dave,
Is Gallup in the tank for the Democrats?
KAVON, you really should ban those who SMEAR a pollster.
Analyzing is good, smearing is evil.
February 20th, 2012 at 1:23 pm
#47 We won’t win NM no matter who our candidate is. Obama has a huge lead, the demographics have swung radically against us there and none of our candidates have any significant minority appeal (another reason I’m upset with this field).
Romney: Obama is up in NH, but that could change. Dunno about Maine. I have serious doubts about Romney in NC, VA, and (you didn’t list) OH. VA and NC are like two separate populations, one older very conservative dixie population and a lot of newer northern settlers that are pretty liberal. The side will win that best motivates and gets out the base of the party, I like Santorum for that. Colorado will be interesting, I could see him winning it. Michigan would be a stretch, especially if he can’t win the primary there. His auto bailout stance is neutral in the primaries (b/c many pure conservatives in MI support it) but will hurt in the general. NV I agree he wins.
Santorum: I think his biggest weakness you listed is FL. I think he wins VA. He loses NH and Maine, but I don’t think we should be relying on those small states to make the difference. The money concern is very real, although I have to think if he is the nominee he will get money. Organization actually has been very sound but small, he’s run a heck of a campaign on a shoestring. He’s got a chance, I think at least as good as Romney, maybe a smidge better.
February 20th, 2012 at 1:24 pm
51. By the way, AE’s most tracked candidates:
Ron Paul
Obama
Huntsman
Bernie Sanders
Buddy Roemer
Gary Johnson
Dennis Kucinich
Al Franken
Mitt Romney
Newt Gingrich.
WACKADOO.
February 20th, 2012 at 1:30 pm
“#7 Santorum now up by double digits ?
lol
but… but… the Rombots on race42012 told us that Santorum was imploding? I don’t understand ” Bingo!
February 20th, 2012 at 1:30 pm
McCain had MSM on his side, Romney has both the MSM and most of right wing media against him, considering that he is doing just fine. For example of broad
Broadcast Results On the broadcast networks, evaluative comments of Romney were 78% negative vs. only 22% positive. Other candidates had majority of the commentary positive.
http://www.cmpa.com/media_room_press_1_18_12.html
February 20th, 2012 at 1:32 pm
52 — Actually Gallup’s presidential approval ratings have been scathing against Obama. He is at 44% today while Rasmussen has the Obama at 49%. Not to mention Gallop’s Unemployment rate is currently sitting at 8.8%. So unless you’re talking about a tank filled with sharks I would have to say no.
February 20th, 2012 at 1:33 pm
#51 Perot was by far the most successful third party candidate in recent memory, he got a whopping 19% of the popular vote (a really big number for a third party) and it yielded him a grand total of zero electoral votes. I can’t imagine any state in the union going to Bloomberg/Hunstman. They would both lose their home states for sure.
February 20th, 2012 at 1:37 pm
It looks like Gingrich’s bleeding has either stopped or slowed down at least according to Gallop’s Daily Tracking per Aron’s blog site. He’s held at 13% 3 days in a row. Romney’s support is still trickling down another 2 points to 26%. Santorum is still holding onto his slight lead at 36%. Will he reach 37%?
February 20th, 2012 at 1:39 pm
#56 I just don’t see the MSM assault on Romney, although I usually ignore the MSM, I have seen a lot of attacks on Santorum for the contraception and other out of mainstream religious/gender stances. With Romney the “negative” reporting I’ve seen generally criticizes his failure to wrap up the nomination given his money/organization advantages, which criticism is warranted. If Newt Gingrich had uttered “I am not really concerned about the very poor” they would still be devoting half hour programs to discussing how evil and polarizing Newt is, explaining how it is proof that he is imploding, etc., and Juan Williams would be telling everyone that this was “racial code” for “I hate black people.” Instead, the MSM just plays mitt’s comment as showing he’s out of touch – negative to be sure, but more innocuous.
February 20th, 2012 at 1:40 pm
58.
I’m not suggesting that any 3rd/4th party candidate will win any EVs. However, they could have a dramatic effect on whether a state goes blue or red. For example, a reasonably-effective Johnson LP campaign will paint NM and NV blue, regardless of whether Romney or Santy is nominated. A Bloomberg AE campaign could put NY into play (which is why Bloomie won’t run), and maybe ME, NJ, …
February 20th, 2012 at 1:46 pm
HOW many of the early votes were cast for Romney ??? Over 200,000 cast before santorum rise in ppp, Big advantage for Romney…
February 20th, 2012 at 1:46 pm
#61 Ah gotcha. Good point. If a Powell or Petraeous or someone of that stature runs it could change things I agree.
February 20th, 2012 at 1:48 pm
IF FAT PILL HEAD RUSH is for santorum, I am against anything pillhead supports…
February 20th, 2012 at 1:50 pm
53 –
New Mexico is a tough sale although locally they have had some gains so I agree with you there. (Sad)
Michigan – In the general election I believe many people will come around to Mitt being that he grew up there and his roots in the auto industry there. Just like here in AZ with pathetic McCain (glad he is retiring and he will be replaced by a much more conservative candidate).
NH/Maine – If you check out gallop’s state of states you these have trending more Republican and less Democrat.
Many of these other states will come down to organization and money and you can’t assume that Santorum will get the money he needs once he is the nominee. He certainly won’t get close to Romney’s $. I read somewhere that he has 17 billionaires (not including Trump) on his donations lists. If you are a Santorum or a Gingrich fan you hate this right now but when he is carpet bombing Obama it will be much more fun to watch. I think he has the potential to out raise Obama. He definitely has the backing to do it. I think this is why Obama made the political damaging switch to accept Super Pack funds. He had to.
February 20th, 2012 at 1:52 pm
If you want to know what the real chances are, check Intrade. There people put their money down, is not cheap talk and speculations only.
Romney is doing just fine on Intrade, in AZ, MI and in the primary generally.
February 20th, 2012 at 1:55 pm
USA Today poll has romney up over obama 50-46 while santorum is down 49-48.
Limbaugh is willing to give obama four more supreme court picks and have kamela harris replace scalia and have janet napalitano replace kennedy all so his ratings can stay high with obama in office. Limbaugh doesn’t care if the court has six obama justices for the next generation.
I keep reading about unions telling their members to vote for santorum in michigan to hurt romney. Liberals are also voting for santorum in tennessee and georgia to hurt romney.
February 20th, 2012 at 1:56 pm
IF all the religious rightwingers, freedomworks, rush limbaughs, sarah palin. mark levin, fox news , msnbc, all smashing at Romney, are successful in getting Obama his choise(santorum or gingrich), I hope to heaven that Mitt Romney teams u[p with Ron Paul and runs as an independent, The GOP need to have their tails whipped, if they are that stupid to fall into this mess..
February 20th, 2012 at 1:59 pm
#66 Hope you’re wrong, intrade has obama at almost 60% chance of reelection, but suspect you’re right.
February 20th, 2012 at 2:05 pm
4. He can’t but nice try and keep spinning.
Cracks me up the double standard of TPers, there are far fewer Mormons in Az than Catholics in Mi, how can Santo be set for a loss w his religion, his message cherry picked for Mi, and a pliant media that has carried his water????
The issue isn’t Romney’s supposed weakness, it’s how Santo Claus is going to be able to spin a loss in a state that was cherry picked and one of the few that fit his message?
Santo is going nowhere; the more you know about him the more he loses TP support.
He’ll keep Evangelicals but he’ll lose more and more TP.
Mark it dow, Romney by 12+ in Az, ad 10 in Mi!
Load up on kleenex ABRs, storms a comin’ your way:)
February 20th, 2012 at 2:07 pm
37. Keith! Let’s make it truly simmple. Santorum, if he’s our nominee, will be going into a general election dominated by women 53/47, with a huge female vote deficit.
and he isn’t making it any better, is he?
February 20th, 2012 at 2:07 pm
Let’s spoil Rush and Sarah’s day on the 28th.
give em severe hell ‘comeback kid” Mitt!
February 20th, 2012 at 2:08 pm
I predict Santorum has hit his peak and he is on his way down not only in Arizona and Michigan but across the entire nation.
He had a bad weekend. The narrative is developing about how radical he is on birth control and issues relating to reproduction and regarding his comments that Obama not governing according to the Bible.
Romney has been sitting back somewhat and waiting for the inevitable. By week’s end, I believe Romney will be back in the lead. Talk radio today was abuzz with conversations about how unelectable Santorum is given his recent comments.
February 20th, 2012 at 2:16 pm
I’ve bet $4000 on Mitt to Arizona! If he loses I’ll promise never to post on here again!
February 20th, 2012 at 2:17 pm
70 – Tea Parties aren’t all the same and you will need their support for any chance Romney has of winning. They do have some valid points against Romney and we all know what they are.
Michigan is going to be within 5 points probably 3. There is no evidence anywhere of a 10 point performance. The only way this occurs is if Santorum makes a huge gaff or is Romney cleans his clock in the debate.
By the way your name makes me hungry.
February 20th, 2012 at 2:19 pm
73—Agreed.
I was surprised to read SMACKDADDY writing Santorum has the momentum.
Seems counter intuitive to me…
February 20th, 2012 at 2:20 pm
74- At what odds?
February 20th, 2012 at 2:22 pm
74 — You have alot of faith in Mitt. Talk about putting your money where your mouth is. Although I think your money is safe.
February 20th, 2012 at 2:23 pm
Are the efficient attack ads by the Paul campaign hitting the airwaves yet?
February 20th, 2012 at 2:23 pm
Killjoy Says:
February 20th, 2012 at 12:31 pm
It’s the NBR’s (nobody but Romney’s) that are causing the fracture in the party. The ABR’s would have been happy with nearly anyone that ran.
Time to man up Killjoy…hiarious article in Reuters about Santo voters in Ohio. To call the sheople would be offensive to both sheep and mobs. Santo’s supporters know very little about him and don’t seem too bright (many of them at TP rallies openly confessing ignorance of his record).
For political junkies like all of us, we assume the ABRs supporters have any knowledge of any issues. They don’t…they are 30 watt bulbs in a world where 100 watts is essential. Once the TPers soak in the juice of Santo’s anti libertarian positions, his support will drop in half.
Santo has some of the softest support out there. Romney’s people are there through thick and thin.
Being a millionaire lobbyist, anti libertarian big gov guy is just not a fit…and that is why anyone that thinks Santo has legs outside of a few midwestern states needs to hide the vodka for a while.
It’s just a matter of time before they learn Santo’s positions, and since he is so gaffetastic it’s coming faster than I expected.
Me likey!!!
February 20th, 2012 at 2:24 pm
78– her money is safe. I’m just curious what odds she’s got!
February 20th, 2012 at 2:26 pm
74 — Hey me and my wife are mailing our early ballots today. Does that mean we get a cut of the winnings!
February 20th, 2012 at 2:30 pm
#76 Katechon,
I was curious about Smack too because usually he has his pulse on the race and is good at picking up the shifts.
There was a definite difference today in what I was hearing on talk radio. I think even the right-wingers that have been promoting Santorum as the penultimate ABR are coming to the realization that the things he says won’t play well at all in the General.
Next up in surge land: Ron Paul!
February 20th, 2012 at 2:30 pm
Limbaugh says we win with a true conservative every time. If they get “their true conservative” ie. Bauchman, Perry, Cain, Pawlenty, Gingrinch, or Santorum and we lose the election then limbaugh and “his party” better own up to what they have done.
It is very thin to say “Romney is weak” after he has already pounded out of the race 5 of the last 6 political pugilists you said would take him out. And he did this in a republican primary with the crazy right and the fanatical left against him.
Romney has proven he will be able to thread the needle and handle any foreign diplomacy after this.
February 20th, 2012 at 2:31 pm
#68 Yep, yep.
February 20th, 2012 at 2:32 pm
74.
What’s the vig?
Can we parley Michigan?
Give em severe hell “comeback kid” Mitt.
February 20th, 2012 at 2:36 pm
Folks,
Santorum ain’t winning Arizona. If he’s not ahead now, he will not be. The momentum is against him and he’s not picking up any more from Noot because Noot has hit rock bottom.
If Santorum’s gonna want to pass Mitt in Arizona, he’s going to have to hit a whole new level of momentum.
And as for Gallup, the fact that Santorum didn’t go up today suggests that he’s near his peak.
February 20th, 2012 at 2:37 pm
Katechon – Ci2Eye,
I have been trying to explain away the Gallup National numbers…but I can’t anymore.
Mitt is in trouble. Mitt should be 10-15 points ahead in AZ..but he is not.
I have come to the belief Mitt’s hole is bigger than I thought.
Yes, I know he is ahead in delegates andd in raw votes…but I’m not convinced he is surging back…not a bit.
February 20th, 2012 at 2:39 pm
Massachusetts Conservative,
Yep…Santorum is at his peak.
But Newt is not out of the race yet..there will be a new Santorum peak once that happens. And Romney is falling..it will take time to turn those numbers around..better have a good debate.
Yep, Santorum is not going to win AZ….but for it to be this close is the biggest evidence of a true serious Mitt weakness out there in the GOP electorate…it just is.
February 20th, 2012 at 2:41 pm
#69 “intrade has obama at almost 60%”
That is because they factor in the possibility that Romney will not be the GOP candidate. If Romney was the nominee for sure, the odds would be much closer to 50-50.
Romney’s chances for nominee are at 70%. Although that’s too low. All these Gingrich, Santorum surges are a sideshow. As James Carville(a democrat analyst , but very good with politics and relatively unbiased) said: “The GOP establishment won’t allow Gingrich or Santorum to get anywhere near the nomination. That’s just not going to happen”. Even if things go to the convention, if Romney has a decent number of delegates (which he will), and he doesn’t do some disastrous mistake (and he won’t), then he’ll get the nomination. He knows it, the GOP knows it, anybody with a brain knows it, that’s just a fact.
February 20th, 2012 at 2:45 pm
Drudge in full anti Santorum mode today!
February 20th, 2012 at 2:46 pm
84. Sharp analysis. I like it. Santorum really doubled down on his all Socon, all the time message this weekend. If he wants any other message to somehow bleed through the fog of “phony theology” and “not based on the Bible”, and “Obama dislikes the physically impaired”, and states should get out of education, oh boy! Oh boy, oh boy.
I know some of you out there hate moderates. Quite a few of us dislike immoderates in return.
February 20th, 2012 at 2:46 pm
88
Me neither. How could he be? He’s never on TV, he has few ads running anywhere that pump him up, there have been no debates in 3 weeks, and he hasn’t won a state that mattered in 3 weeks.
Of COURSE he isn’t surging back. It would be impossible to.
And the only reason Santorum had surged is because he won those contests 2 weeks ago. Prior to those contests he had no momentum and no money. Those wins brought him all the attention that led to his inflated polling numbers.
If Mitt has a good debate on Wednesday and starts gaining a little bit of steam, and follows it up with 2 wins next week, it’s off to the races again.
Here are some things in this race that you can be sure of:
Romney’s ceiling is 37%. Gingrich’s ceiling is 37%. Santorum’s ceiling is 37%. Paul’s ceiling is 14%.
Romney’s floor is 20%. Gingrich’s floor is 15%. Santorum’s floor is 15%. Paul’s floor is 8%.
Everything else is ENTIRELY, ENTIRELY dependent on whoever has won a recent contest or debate.
February 20th, 2012 at 2:48 pm
Watchinitall,
Read the following:
This is Rick Santorum in OH today. Tell me what in this message does not work in the GOP electorate. What part of this is extremet?
“He charged that the president’s health care overhaul was heading toward “a brave new world” in which doctors would be pressured to make decisions based on cost, not the interests of the patient. “Let’s take a child who is high-cost and who the world, particularly, unfortunately, the medical profession increasingly is looking at as less utility, less value than others in society,’’ he said. “‘I don’t want to see this patient. This is going to be a real cost for me. I’m going t get nailed on this one, so let’s minimally treat, let’s not treat all because it’s going to be such a cost to the system.’ That’s happening now, folks.’’
Mr. Santorum also revisited his charge that Mr. Obama was motivated by “a phony theology,’’ which he said was criticized by some “of our less-than erudite members of the national press corps.’’
He explained he was referring to the president’s embrace of “radical environmentalism” that valued all species equally.
That attitude, he said, was responsible for thwarting energy development including in coal country, although he also excoriated the president’s veto of a pipeline from Canada.
Global warming, he said, “is not climate science, it is political science,’’ adding, “Affordable low-cost energy really drove this country.’’
“Ladies and gentlemen,’’ he said, “We need somebody who comes from the coal fields, who comes from the steel mills”
February 20th, 2012 at 2:48 pm
89— I thought the race was over after Florida!
This Santorum surge is the best thing ever for Intrade traders!
Since the Gingrich surge …
We’ve all seen this movie before : surge and crash …
Sure, Romney is finished if he were to lose Michigan. It’s just not going to happen.
Even if he’s sacked his Jedi debate trainer!
February 20th, 2012 at 2:49 pm
#88 Smack,
Mitt will never “surge” back but it appears Santorum has hit his peak and will begin to drop back. I believe Romney’s numbers will begin to rise again this week.
Mitt appears to be trying to slowly rebuild his positives which have taken a beating since New Hamphire. I don’t think we’ll see any huge swing but I expect to see a gradual shift back toward Mitt this week.
Santorum, in my opinion, did considerable damage to himself over the weekend. My anecdotal evidence is that a narrative is building that he is a so-con zealot that carries things to the extreme and is un-electable. That’s based on talk radio and comments I am hearing from voters so it is far from scientific but enough for me to sense another shift.
February 20th, 2012 at 2:52 pm
88 — I have to agree to a point. His national numbers are almost back to his floor which I believe is 25%. If he continues to slide anymore especially below 25% it will be telling. Also if Santorum breaks the 37% barrier that no candidate has been able to break it will also be telling. It is going to come down to the performance in Wednesday’s debate in Mesa (wish I was able to attend I would be the loudest in the audience) and the outcome of AZ and MI which is directly related to the debate. So come Wednesday night hold on because it is going to be a wild ride. Especially since they canceled Gingrich’s debate (yes he owned it). Last chance before SUPER TUESDAY!!!
February 20th, 2012 at 2:53 pm
Oh oh!
I shall post something that contradicts my position! :
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/211627-romney-adviser-says-michigan-not-a-must-win-state
MAYBE MITT’S INTERNAL POLLS SHOW HIM LOSING MICHIGAN!
February 20th, 2012 at 2:55 pm
Watchinitall,
Nothing extreme in that message….only extreme when you take the Liberal taking points.
Is Santorum too extreme…or is he too much for big government?
Did you know Santorum has voted for free Contraception for the very poor?
Santorum does not want the FED government to be able to tell religous insitutions what exact Health care policy they can offer their employees.
Obama is extreme…not Santorum.
Once again Mitt is not driving this Conservative messgae home…………that may be reasonable Conservativism to you….I call it ineffective.
February 20th, 2012 at 2:56 pm
The debate looms large. In the military, before we ever go into battle we’ve dynamically shaped the battle. Perhaps Santorum has been over the top with loaded statements all weekend trying to shape the debate as much as he can to get questions on Socon issues. If they ask him anything about those statements they’ll be setting him up for Gingrich-like gotcha moments.
Lots hangs in the balance Wed night.
February 20th, 2012 at 2:56 pm
Smacks #94. Great find there. Santo actually manages to find the common threads that bind the various issues together.
February 20th, 2012 at 2:57 pm
91 — I have to agree with you on Drudge.
February 20th, 2012 at 2:58 pm
Katechon #98. Whaaaaaa?! Didn’t Mitt proclaim firmly last week that there was no way he would lose MI? Mouth writing checks his buttocks cannot cash?
February 20th, 2012 at 2:59 pm
Question: Would you rather have Drudge or Rush?
February 20th, 2012 at 2:59 pm
100- we’ll know Wednesday if Santorum is a clever strategist!
February 20th, 2012 at 3:00 pm
This race is pretty simple to forecast. Nothing ever changes in this race unless someone has won a state of importance or won a debate.
As soon as that happens, 20-25% of the electorate swings hard in favor of the winner.
As soon as someone else wins somewhere else, those 20-25% swing hard for the next person.
It’s really predictable.
And sad.
February 20th, 2012 at 3:00 pm
104 Dave
Yes.
February 20th, 2012 at 3:02 pm
#96 you need to leave the Romney central boards and visit some other places. Because everywhere else in conservative land what Santorum is saying makes sense. I am not even a big Santorum fan, but the things he has been talking about this week have made me like him more, not less.
February 20th, 2012 at 3:02 pm
This election is putatively about getting rid of Obama. Mitt can, and Santorum can’t.
But what is’t REALLY about is cutting the size of the state enougn to end the Debt crisis that threatens to capsize America. Romney has a blueprint to cut it back from 25% to less than 20% in a single term. That would ensure we have a future….particularly if he succeeds in Capping it there.
On the other side are the Leftists in the Party fighting to nominate a man Obama laughs at.
February 20th, 2012 at 3:04 pm
Shaping the battefield is important.
Energy will be the top economic issue heading into this election..with energy prices skyrocketing.
Santorum is starting to develope the story that Obama’s world view has made it impossible for us to develope Keystone (many other examples)to promote lower energy costs to help grow our economy and to take care of our people.
Obama does have a screwed up world view….taking the ultra environmental side in these battles.
It might have unnerved some of you how Santorum has gone about it..the messaging.
But RUM is winning the mesaging war in the GOP electorate..not losing it.
Many of you have said in the last week Mitt needed to grab on to a bold idea..a new message and drive it home. What is it?
February 20th, 2012 at 3:04 pm
106– Sad for aristocratic gentlemen such as yourself.
Exciting betting opportunities for circus junkies plebeians such as myself!
February 20th, 2012 at 3:05 pm
Romney people,
You aren’t going to win by calling Santorum “too socially conservative.”
You just aren’t. Period.
How can you be that clueless? Do you know which party you’re in? Santorum calling Obama a Muslim and opposing pre-natal testing HELPS HIM. Stop HELPING HIM.
February 20th, 2012 at 3:07 pm
111
Aristocratic? Not the right word. “Aristocrat” implies that I was born into money and power. Nothing could be further than the truth. I grew up the son of a milk truck driver in dirt poor Keene, NH.
February 20th, 2012 at 3:09 pm
98:
Dunno. I think saying must-win over any states is much more risky than saying “I’m going to win”.
If you loose a state that you said you are going to win, the reaction is, “So you didn’t win it after all. Haha”. If you loose must-win the reaction “So you lost a must-win, are yo going to drop out now? Haha.”
February 20th, 2012 at 3:09 pm
110. Yeah, well. If you’ve got six-figure speaking gigs and can bet 10k, you’re none too concerned about the price of gas.
I have to admit that I was on the cusp of thinking I could at least tolerate Mitt as the nominee. But his gaffe on being unconcerned with the poor — they’ve got a safety net, and I’ll fix it — has made me hostile towards him all over again. How could anyone who claims to be severely conservative not know the argument that the poor shouldn’t be treated as permanent wards of the state, but instead provided with opportunities to improve their own lives?
Mitt. Does. Not. Get. It.
February 20th, 2012 at 3:09 pm
110– what refrain me from going ballistic on Romney is his inability to promote a message of bold reform.
What are the first points of his 59 economic plan? :
– maintain the current ..
– maintain the current ..
Mitt’s problem is rhyming with STATU QUO.
February 20th, 2012 at 3:10 pm
Not dirt poor, but cetainly not wealthy.
February 20th, 2012 at 3:11 pm
Michigan isn’t a must win state for Mitt from any tactical or strategic vantage point….but it is to Mitt. It doesn’t matter, because he will win it. But Mitt has more than twice as many delegates, and Arizona is WTA. Further, if Michigan is close, and in IMP and Ask America polls, it’s as close as it can get, Michigan is a wash.
Mitt’s actually winning Michigan will only give him a slight edge in delegates from the state.
February 20th, 2012 at 3:11 pm
113- I meant it in the noble, poetic sense.
February 20th, 2012 at 3:13 pm
118– I promise you : if Mitt loses Michigan, I’m gonna short the sky out of him!
February 20th, 2012 at 3:14 pm
115
Do you know what a safety net is?
It’s something people can fall onto if they fall on hard times. Things like unemployment benefits. Medicare and Social Security for those too old to work.
It’s not a hammock. A hammock is what Obama wants.
February 20th, 2012 at 3:16 pm
Katechon,
You’re going to have increase your attention span long enough to read past the first 2 points in Mitt’s 59-point plan.
His bold idea is balancing the budget in a single term, but getting the economy moving fast enough again to average 4% annual growth, combined with eliminating One Fifth of Federal spending, and capping it below 20%. If a BBA can be achieved, we have a permanent solution to the debt crisis.
Santorum can’t even get elected.
February 20th, 2012 at 3:16 pm
118:
Michigan GOP clarified last week how they deal with the penalty, what is the new delegate math. For each congressional district won you get 2 delegates, total 28, 2 delegates are split proportionally to the people getting over 15% of the delegates, so both winner and second get 1 delegate in most cases. In 2008 this math would have given Romney 27 of 30 delegates, so with clear win Michigan can be close to de facto winner take All.
February 20th, 2012 at 3:20 pm
#108 Killjoy,
The only “board” I visit is here and I am not suggesting that the things he says don’t resonate with some Republicans. The question is do they resonate with all Republicans? Do they resonate with female Republicans? Even my very conservative Mom was turned off by Santorum over the weekend and now says Newt would be more likely to beat Obama than Santorum.
Republicans want to beat Obama more than anything and if they sense that Santorum has gone too far into right-land on the social issues, they will back off of supporting him even if they agree with what he says.
That’s what I have been hearing all day at my office and at lunch on talk radio. Essentially “We can’t win with Santorum, he’s a SoCon warrior that takes things too far”.
I could obviously be entirely wrong but I am in the heart of the Bible belt and if they are saying those things here, I don’t think I am completely wrong. We’ll see as the week goes on. I predict Santorum has hit his peak and will begin to fall back and Romney will rise again. As I said though, we’ll see.
February 20th, 2012 at 3:21 pm
At least he isn’t outright offensive to blue-collar whites and their aspirations. They are decidedly underenthused by your severe Mr. Fixit Businessman. If there’s an easier way to hand the Bamster reelection, it’s hard to figure what it might be.
February 20th, 2012 at 3:21 pm
122- I’m talking *perception*, Dave.
Anyway, you’re a petulant, arrogant rhinoceros, — promptly charging with ad hominem attacks and smears — and I shall ignore you henceforth.
February 20th, 2012 at 3:22 pm
MassConserv
Don’t you think if Newt has a big night at the debate it actually helps Mitt? I think Mitt will have a good night but I’m kind of hoping Newt does as well, he could begin again to split votes with Ricky.
February 20th, 2012 at 3:23 pm
Anybody see USA/GALLUP poll today Romney up 4 on Obama NATIONALLY. Maybe his campain is not over yet.
February 20th, 2012 at 3:24 pm
So if dems and union members in Michigan (and any other state with an open primary) vote for Santorum in order to hurt Romney…..Not much Romeny can do about that. Open primaries should not be allowed. Dems help choose the easiest target to take down in the general.
February 20th, 2012 at 3:26 pm
#129
I totally agree, doesn’t make much sense.
February 20th, 2012 at 3:26 pm
127
Yes, I suppose. But Mitt is going to need to increase his own numbers to win this nomination. Hoping Santorum and Gingrich each hold 20% while Mitt has 25% is not going to last. The media wants a 2-person race, not a 3-person race. And they’ll get it.
So in the short term, yes I want Noot to split with Santorum. But Mitt needs a convincing win a week from tomorrow to grow his own support.
February 20th, 2012 at 3:28 pm
Do you know what moral hazard is?
In Mitt’s infamous remarks, he said he would fix the safety net for the “very poor” if there are problems. He never said how. The message was just, trust me, I’m Mr. Businessman and I’ve got a plan. Don’t you go worrying your silly heads about what I’ll do.
There’s no depth. There’s no mooring in principle or philosophy or ideology. That’s not too reassuring for a guy who would have to convince Congress to enact the appropriate laws. But Mitt can’t even muster a whiff of a hint of a suggestion as to what he would do.
February 20th, 2012 at 3:29 pm
#122 Dave,
Sadly that’s the problem. Most Americans can’t get past point number two in Mitt’s 59 point plan. Even I only got half-way through it. He needs to keep the 59 point plan but distill it down to less than five key inititives and hammer those home over and over again. And, I would advocate for a name; Beyond the 10 bullet point inititives, the “Contract with America” worked because it had a name everybody could remember.
Likewise, the beauty of 9-9-9 was that everybody could understand it. It was woefully inadequate to deal with the massive economic and long-term structural problems we face but it was memorable and catchy.
Alas, Mitt needs to dumb things down a bit for Republicans.
February 20th, 2012 at 3:34 pm
129. Yeah, I absolutely don’t understand why any party would allow open an open primary.
February 20th, 2012 at 3:34 pm
I feel this will be a very good week for Romney. First you have the debate this Wednesday. If Romney has a debate as good as what he did in Florida, this will give him a big surge in polling. Then on Friday, Romney gives his big economic speech at Ford Field in Detroit. All media attention will then on him and his policies. There is only one fiscal conservative in this race, and it is NOT Santorum or Newt. Romney is the only one running with real leadership experience and the ability to truly understand and fix this economy. Just think how much better shape we would be in if Romney would have won in 2008.
February 20th, 2012 at 3:35 pm
Santorum is appealing to Evangelicals. They seem to want political battles to really be religious battles. Frame it all in religious terms. It’s all theology or doctrine, Biblical or heretical.
Even if Santorum is on thr right side of policy, he’s poisoning the legislative well.
The parties that are least interested in compromise seem to me to be the parties least likely to reach any sort of legislation.
Smack! To a guy like me, Romney seems far better positioned to work towards conservative policies that get implemented, conservative judges who get approved by the Senate, precisely because his way of framing the issues isn’t over-laden with the onerous burden of “Faith of Our Fathers at Stake!!!”.
Voters won’t trust Santorum to be wise, fair, or even-handed when he’s displayed so little self-restraint in his self-promotion, and turned it all into a religious war instead of policy differences.
Ugghhh.
February 20th, 2012 at 3:35 pm
133. In most interviews, when asked about his plan, he focuses on 7 key things he’ll do. Too much for most people, but I kind of like that he’s not over simplifying it.
But, I admit: I can’t name the 7.
February 20th, 2012 at 3:39 pm
132
I’ll agree with you on that. I’ve criticized him a lot in the last 2 weeks on this very problem.
As for how “fixing the safety net” means he’s a liberal, your case is nonexistent.
But I agree on the depth thing. He needs to fire all his folks and get new ones, preferably fewer, and all of them from this site.
February 20th, 2012 at 3:39 pm
137– that proves the point.
Mitt’s so bad at massaging is message into the voters minds that even his most devoted supporters can’t spell it.
February 20th, 2012 at 3:40 pm
Ci2Eye,
How much does he have to dumb it down so that people understand he has the expertise and the will to balance the budget in a single term? How much sophistication does it take to know that Trillion Dollar Budget Deficits are unsustainable, and that means a run on the dollar and economic collapse?
Anybody with sentience knows Santorum can’t win, and couldn’t handle the problem if he could.
This isn’t rocket science.
February 20th, 2012 at 3:43 pm
139. I’ll agree with that. But, what he HAS done with his devoted supporters is convince us that he knows what he’s doing and will do it.
If I need a heart transplant, I want my surgeon to convince me he’s highly skilled and knowledgeable and that he’s confident in the outcome. I don’t want to know exactly what he’s going to do and how.
February 20th, 2012 at 3:45 pm
I stopped truly caring who the Republicans nominate about a month ago. Obama is going to win this election so easily it doesn’t matter. My only hope is that the GOP sends someone like Gingrich or Santorum to the general so that I can watch a theocrat or blowhard red meat, bumper-sticker-slogan candidate get eviscerated by the American public.
February 20th, 2012 at 3:45 pm
BTW,
Trump said on the radio that if Romney doesn’t get the nomination, he will run 3rd Party. It would be an option. A protest vote could go Libertarian or Trump. It would depend on the Platform.
It’s nice that he would be willing to make the sacrifice, out of patriotism.
February 20th, 2012 at 3:46 pm
Santorum’s message seems to be “Free Jerusalem from the Unbelievers!”
February 20th, 2012 at 3:51 pm
So now you are all proud that you have Trump on your side?
good grief….
..and you said Mitt needs to dumb down his message for us peasants to understand it?…well.he just did.
I’m going to tell you all a little secret…Trump will hurt Romney..not help him, in the end.
February 20th, 2012 at 3:52 pm
Who’s going to the AZ debate…. Dave in AZ, Arizona ?
February 20th, 2012 at 3:53 pm
More evidence Rupert Murdoch (and Fox News) are in the tank for Rick Santorum:
http://www.politico.com/blogs/burns-haberman/2012/02/murdoch-on-santorum-win-michigan-game-over-115006.html
February 20th, 2012 at 3:53 pm
#140 Dave,
He needs to dumb it down a lot.
Talk to voters. Most know virtually nothing about the candidates. They can usually cite one or two bits of biograghy and maybe a policy inititive or two.
Hope and Change was pretty pathetic as policy but as a rallying cry for a campaign, it was pitch perfect.
Romney’s messaging is only fair and as a candidate I don’t give him high marks but I think his potential to turn aournd the country and be a great president is very high.
Trouble is, he never gets that opportunity to turn around America until he develops a simplified message that people can understand. The other critical factor is to be positive and uplifting.
Positive and uplifting always wins and Romney I think is naturally optomistic and has a can-do spirit. Santorum is somewhat angry. He’s a determined cultural warrior who will not be disuaded and will not back down. Those are admirable qualities to be sure but not exactly the spirit that wins elections.
Think about the type personalities that win and think about the messages that sell them. It’s always simple and happy that takes home the prize.
February 20th, 2012 at 3:54 pm
Wathinitall,
“Romney seems far better positioned to work towards conservative policies that get implemented”
Why is that?…because he is reasonable?
Mitt was just reasonable enough to get Romneycare passed through MA with Kennedy patting him on the back as he signed the bill.
No thank you.
That kind of leadership I can do without.
February 20th, 2012 at 4:00 pm
#145 Smack,
Nobody needs to dumb anything down for you or the folks here. It’s the rest of America that still names Cheney when asked who the Vice-President is that needs to have their information feed to them in tiny little spoonfuls.
February 20th, 2012 at 4:01 pm
Dave in Az, Sorry didn’t see your post in #97.
February 20th, 2012 at 4:02 pm
146 — I wish. I would be the loudest person in the audience! I will be out of town but I will be watching every minute of it.
February 20th, 2012 at 4:04 pm
$1.26 Katcheon (79.37%).
Should have waited a couple more weeks and got $1.40 (71%)!
A win’s a win though.
February 20th, 2012 at 4:06 pm
149
Are you still indignant and morally outraged that Mitt tried to get people health insurance?
wow
February 20th, 2012 at 4:06 pm
140 — Dave..
Most people aren’t into politics like us and with the pathetic media you need something easy that people can grab onto and remember. This way they will have a few “one liners” to repeat to their friends. He needs to have 5 zingers that tear at Obama’s middle voters.
February 20th, 2012 at 4:07 pm
Katechon Heath is a boy’s name (obviously).
February 20th, 2012 at 4:09 pm
Smack, I like you, admire your input, and enjoy your ability to laugh at yourself.
Playing the religion card in policy debates at nearly every turn, with nearly every issue is short-sighted, heavy-handed, and ill-advised. Is there an issue before the body politic that won’t qualify for religious status in Rick Santorum’s universe?
This isn’t conservative. It’s Theocon. Theoconism isn’t Republican Party politics. Rick is an outlier.
February 20th, 2012 at 4:12 pm
116. “What are the first points of his 59 economic plan?”
Katechon: See the Peter Suderman article I posted to a different thread: http://reason.com/archives/2012/02/08/consultant-in-chief
A short excerpt — Suderman’s take on the 59-point plan:
“Which is why Romney’s book, his speeches, his debate performances, and his interviews are not necessarily indicators of who Romney is and what he believes. Aside from being rhetorically pro-business, Romney appears to have no consistent ideological outlook. The best way to understand his campaign is as a top-of-the-line consultant’s report on the contemporary GOP.
His first set of major policy proposals, a 150-page PDF document titled “Believe In America,” has all the worst hallmarks of consultancy. It also reflects the baseline incoherence and inconsistencies of the client.
The document is heavy on information but light on insight, long on minutiae yet short on solutions. It has no sense of proportion: An appendix offers a 59-point list of “policy proposals that will get America back to work,” from minor bureaucratic tweaks (“establish fixed timetables for all resource development approval”) to specific legislative updates (“reduce corporate income tax rate to 25 percent”) to undefined wholesale federal overhauls (“undertake fundamental restructuring of government programs and service”). The proposals Romney does elaborate on tend to be carefully couched in the language of possibility and technocratic tinkering. “A robust investment tax credit, extending the write-off for capital expenditures for an additional year, and a lower payroll tax,” he writes, “could each have a positive effect if properly structured.” Implementation—management—is the key.
This constant hedging appears designed to avoid commitment whenever possible, but it also mirrors the indecision of the Republican base. Medicare—the single biggest driver of America’s long-term debt—is mentioned just three times in “Believe In America,” including a familiar jab at Obama for cutting $500 billion from the program to fund his health care overhaul. By the beginning of October, Romney could be found cajoling GOP voters in Florida with the line, “When you see your friends with signs that say keep your hands off our Medicare, they are absolutely right.”
February 20th, 2012 at 4:14 pm
If Romney was a “born again” instead of a Mormon, would this election be already wrapped upped? If I was a betting person, I would say it would. He would have won Iowa, and probably SC. I feel there are so many bigots in the Republican party that it is really sad.
February 20th, 2012 at 4:30 pm
156– my bad. Wasn’t obvious to a French Canadian like me!
February 20th, 2012 at 4:38 pm
Ryan,
Romney is NOT an ideologue. He IS an economic problem solver. He’s decided to reduce the size of government far below where it is now. He’s calling for the end, or reduction, to several taxes. He’s calling for tabling all Obama Administration regulations, and, on a case by case basis, reinstating the ones that actually make sense and don’t have a negative economic impact. He’s calling for ending programs, bureaus, and agencies that don’t benefit us enough to justify borrowing money to pay for.
I could go much farther, but it all comes down to rolling back the State. He wants it radically downsized, because that’s necessary to avoid economic collapse. Don’t miss the forest for the trees.
February 20th, 2012 at 4:59 pm
161.
“Romney is NOT an ideologue. He IS an economic problem solver.” — I Agree
“He’s decided to reduce the size of government far below where it is now. He’s calling for… I could go much farther, but it all comes down to rolling back the State. He wants it radically downsized, because that’s necessary to avoid economic collapse. Don’t miss the forest for the trees.”
I respectfully disagree. I think Romney is much more of a status quo republican, and will reduce the size of government at the margins, but it won’t result in any material difference. Mitt Romney will never “radically downsize” Federal Government. It’s not in his nature.
February 20th, 2012 at 5:31 pm
Stick with the Katechon alias!
February 20th, 2012 at 5:36 pm
It all comes down to this:
If Newt or Santy win the Republican nomination ..60. it will be a landslide victory for Obama because he will take 55% + of independent vote. If Newt or Santy head the ticket we could lose house and most certainly the Senate
If Romney wins…. Republicans have a chance to win and if they lose it will not be a landslide and they can hold on to the house and win the Senate.
We do not need a social conservative (Santy) or a so-called conservative with a ton of baggage and lose lips like Newt.
February 20th, 2012 at 5:49 pm
162
Ryan, what in Romney’s actual record suggests he’s a status quo Republican?
In his single term as governor, what he did to reduce government and balance their budget was drastic, not status quo.
What he did to turn around the Olympics was heroic, not status quo.
The way he turned around and grew businesses was anything but status quo. It was remarkable.
So, other than bias, why would you say he’s a status quo Republican?
February 20th, 2012 at 5:57 pm
Ryan,
With respect, radically downsizing government is EXACTLY what’s in Romney’s nature. I’ve been following him since he was elected in Massachusetts, and commenting for him for 5 years now, and if you DON’T think radically downsizing government is what’s in his nature, you don’t understand him.
It would be one thing if we were running surpluses and didn’t have a $15 Trillion debt….but while he wants to get rid of the debt, he REALLY wants to get rid of the deficits. While he’s not an ideologue, he hates waste, and when I say he hates it, I’m not exaggerating.
I don’t anticipate him becoming a Miniarchist or an AnarchoCapitalist in his life, but he can get us closer, faster, than anyone else. Of those running, he’s the only guy who can stop the statist cycle in its tracks.
February 20th, 2012 at 6:37 pm
166. Right ON, Dave!
I’m curious… what about Mitt caught your attention as far back as when he was gov? What made you decide to start following him?
February 21st, 2012 at 3:12 am
163–