Skip to comments.CNN/Time Poll: Race for South Carolina tightening
Posted on 01/18/2012 1:38:33 PM PST by TBBT
Charleston, South Carolina (CNN) - With three days to go until the first-in-the south primary, Mitt Romney remains in the lead in the Palmetto State, but according to a new poll, his advantage over Newt Gingrich is rapidly shrinking.
A CNN/Time/ORC International poll indicates that 33% of likely South Carolina Republican primary voters say they are backing Romney, with 23% supporting Gingrich. The former Massachusetts governor's 10 point advantage over the former House speaker is down from a 19 point lead two weeks ago. According to the survey, former Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania is at 16%, Rep. Ron Paul of Texas is at 13%, and Texas Gov. Rick Perry stands at 6%.
(Excerpt) Read more at politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com ...
“I thought it was about principles, not intimidation. Apparently I was wrong.”
BenKenobi, I’ve enjoyed your other posts in the past, so I’m not trying to pick a fight when I say:
Politics is a strange blend of acting upon principles . . . and dirty street fighting. The principles give us something worthwhile to aim at. But sometimes we must employ the street fighting mode to get there.
I personally am supporting Newt, not because he’s wonderful, but because I think he can *ultimately* win against Obama. Santorum is a good guy. A very good guy, in fact. But I think he is utterly unelectable against Obama. In his personal presentation (i.e., how he speaks, walks, holds himself, blinks at the camera) Santorum comes off as weak. The human animal has a strong inclination to pick the alpha male in any confrontation. Seriously, look back at the presidential elctions within our lifetimes, and you’ll see that it was always the “weak” appearing, “beta” male that lost. He also holds extremely conservative social positions (being against birth control, for example) that will not attract any Independent voters at all, and won’t even attract a lot of people who don’t pay a lot of attention to politics, but usually vote Republican.
Love Santorum as much as you want to . . . but please be aware that he really is unelectable in the general. Then act according to your conscience. *My* conscience tells me to support the guy who I think can *win* against Obama.
We’re in the dirty street fighting phase of the election.
“Love Santorum as much as you want to . . . but please be aware that he really is unelectable in the general. Then act according to your conscience”
I’ve seen polls putting Santorum at 45-48 within the MOE vs Obama nationally.
He CAN win against Obama. Here’s the thing, anytime an incumbant polls under 50 percent against a challenger, he’s vulnerable because the challenger is less known and the undecideds usually break towards the challenger.
“In his personal presentation (i.e., how he speaks, walks, holds himself, blinks at the camera) Santorum comes off as weak.”
“Seriously, look back at the presidential elctions within our lifetimes, and youll see that it was always the weak appearing, beta male that lost”
Carter won, Obama won, GHW Bush won. I could go back further.
Coolidge one of the best presidents ever - look at the guy. Wilson, again, Truman, etc. Even FDR.
I see what you are saying, but here’s the problem. Newt is radioactive with independents. People are going to crawl over broken glass to vote against him. Some of these folks are the folks whom we need to win.
This is true for Santorum too, but for him, it’s the hardcore gay folks, the atheists, etc, folks who are very unlikely to vote for us. The difference is that folks are going to crawl over broken glass to vote for him. Santorum is the kind of candidate that a lot of folks have been waiting for a long time.
Newt, a lot of people are going to be less motivated to vote for him. Everyone who comes out says, we gotta get behind him because ‘he has the best chance to win’, etc.
Vote for Santorum, get Romney.
Vote for Romney, get Obama.
Plain as the nose on one’s face.
But try convincing Santorum. Funny how politicians turn into specific idealists. He thinks he can win.
He hasn’t a Specter of a chance.
I have come back to Newt after more than 10 years.
His Monday night performance reminded me of the revolutionary Newt of ‘94.
He is powerful and bold. I will pray that he stays this way and permanently stops the bloody appeasing of RINOs and Leftists that have purposefully pillaged and derided this great country for their own ends.
I urge all my longtime conservative friends to get behind Newt with intense passion.
Gingrich - President
Perry - Vice President
Cain - Secretary of State
Palin - Secretary of Defense
Bachmann - Attorney General
Paul - Secretary of Treasury
Romney - Whitehouse Dogwalker
Perry hasn’t enough numbers in any poll to make a difference by dropping out. Nor could he credibly endorse Newt, after that pointed remark he made about Newt’s character (”If you’d cheat...”)
It’s Santorum who’s being dog in the manger right now. The numbers he’s polling will do him no good, but he won’t let anyone else have them.
You know that's not what TBBT meant.
It's not rocket science. It's pretty simple arithmetic. Santorum simply does not have enough support to beat Romney in South Carolina. Newt, on the other hand, is running between 3 and 10 points behind Mitt (depending on what poll you're consulting).
Newt is much closer to catching Romney than Santorum is, ergo, any vote for the guy who can't catch Romney, is a vote taken from the guy who can.
If you want to vote for Santorum out of purely ideological reasons, then fine, but you really ought to quit trying to convince everyone that the numbers don't say what they do, and that Santorum has any chance of beating Romney for the nomination. He just doesn't.
Well that's a relief, since we all know one poll snapshot will clinch the nominee.
Seriously, I like Santorum's conservatism, but he's a mild mannered, doofus with poor logic and communication skills, and would be eaten alive by the $1 bn Obama teleprompter machine.
Perhaps you've missed dozens of these types of comments by Gingrich.
Catch a glimpse of Santorum as "Howdy Doody" look.
By already announcing a challenge to Obama for seven three hour debates, Gingrich has pre-empted all the other candidates.
Does anyone think any of the other candidates can put Obama's feet to the fire as strongly as Gingrich can?
Well, I'm sorry to hear that you're so conflicted. You must be, if you'd even consider voting for Mitt.
If you can't vote for any of our candidates with a clear conscience, at least get to the polls and vote the down-ticket races.
Newt is IT !!
Here we go.
“You know that’s not what TBBT meant.”
Uh, two people said he meant exactly that. I stand by my interpretation. If you support anyone other than Newt you are supporting Romney.
“It’s not rocket science. It’s pretty simple arithmetic.”
K, let me explain something to you. You’re arguing that we should always support the candidate with the best chance of winning correct?
What happens if we were to universalize that principle?
I’m arguing that people should support the candidate that best represents them. This way, if everyone were to do this, that you would get the representation that actually represents the people.
“Santorum simply does not have enough support to beat Romney in South Carolina.”
I reject that premise. Ergo, your entire ‘strategic voting argument’ falls apart.
I think he does have enough of a base of support to win. I am assuming that he gets 50 percent of Thompson voters and 80 percent of Huckabee voters in South Carolina.
That is enough. He got close to that in Iowa, and I think he can get that in South Carolina.
“Newt, on the other hand, is running between 3 and 10 points behind Mitt”
What that tells me is that even with strategic voting, he’s not got enough to win. If we back him and he loses, then what have we gained that we didn’t gain by supporting the candidate that best represents us?
See what I’m saying?
Is there a guarantee that if we all get behind Newt that he’s going to be able to win? No. So until that guarantee is there, I’m going to support Santorum and let the chips fall where they may.
“ergo, any vote for the guy who can’t catch Romney, is a vote taken from the guy who can.”
Nonsense. You are assuming two things. One, that Newt will get more support, and two, that Newt and Santorum together will be sufficient to win.
You aren’t taking into account the fact that Santorum supporters will go to Paul and yes, some will go to Romney rather than support Newt.
This is fatal to your argument. If Santorum supporters are actually sticking with him rather than going to Paul or Romney, then they are actually helping Newt by staying in, rather then getting out.
“you really ought to quit trying to convince everyone that the numbers don’t say what they do”
Why should I? You aren’t going to stop trying to convince people to support Newt. You support Newt, fine. You lobby for Newt, fine.
But don’t tell me what I can and can’t do. I don’t tell you to stop lobbying for Newt.
And yes, I have actual facts to back my arguments, inconvenient as they may be. If you want to actually address them, I’ll be happy to debate their merits.
“He just doesn’t”
Absolutely he does.
Glad to know that I can expect reasoned discourse on conservatives and their respective merits on FR.
What do you do for an encore?
So if Free Republic and the rest say I have two choices and Perry, Santorum and Paul do not matter, I will choose Romney based solely on the fact he can beat Obama and he has executive experience. You see if Mitt and Newt are my choices ethics, conservatism and honesty are no longer options in a Republican candidate. That leaves me scrambling for other reasons to vote for our candidate. Electability and governing experience would be the other factors to consider.
I haven't been lobbying for Newt. I simply express my support for him in various responses on election threads. You, on the other hand, have been working like a paid campaign worker on this website, on behalf of Rick Santorum. I think you're now personally responsible for 15% of the comments on EVERY election related thread, and it's ALL non-stop cheer leading for Santo.
And yes, I have actual facts to back my arguments, inconvenient as they may be. If you want to actually address them, Ill be happy to debate their merits.
Sure you will. You're completely impervious to simple logic, as demonstrated on dozens and dozens of threads, over the last week or two. No matter what the polls say, or how many goofs your guy makes, you're convinced that Santorum is winning this thing.
I've got to hand it to you. Even though you get very few people agreeing with your posts, and are battling a virtual flood of disagreement, you doggedly soldier on. We'll see what happens to your stamina after the SC vote. Good luck.
Well, I think you're wrong about Newt, but that's a matter of opinion. Sorry to see that you can't get past his warts (as most of us have), and haven't realized that, of all the candidates, he is the most solid on founding American principles, and has the courage and bent to actually fight the Dems and Obama - then I must leave you to your moral dilemma.
If you honestly believe that Mitt Romney stands a chance of beating Obama, then you haven't been studying, and are woefully uninformed about the man's character and record in office. There's a big reason that he can't get over 25% of the center-right vote, even though he's been running for the presidency for two cycles already. Mitt ain't fit.
The “reasoned discourse” was contained in Gingrich’s spoken words as former Speaker of the House, his proven accomplishments, and some of his proposals outlined in the comments made in the 5 video links I presented to you.
“I haven’t been lobbying for Newt.”
Yes, you have. You’ve been lobbying for him consistantly.
“I simply express my support for him in various responses on election threads.”
As do I.
“You, on the other hand, have been working like a paid campaign worker on this website, on behalf of Rick Santorum.”
Well I assure you, I have received exactly zero dollars from Rick Santorum from his campaign.
“I think you’re now personally responsible for 15% of the comments on EVERY election related thread, and it’s ALL non-stop cheer leading for Santo.”
I wouldn’t be surprised if that were the case. There aren’t very many Santorum supporters willing to speak out for him.
You should see my letters. I get letters, oh boy, do I get letters, from other Santorum supporters expressing a thank you for speaking out for him.
So while, folks are asking me to continue posting on him, I will continue to do so until the South Carolina primary.
I’ve already agreed to support Newt should he win in SC.
“Sure you will. You’re completely impervious to simple logic”
Still waiting on the Spock endorsement, btw.
Logic would dictate that if your argument were in fact based on logic that labelling my arguments as illogical would have no merit.
“No matter what the polls say”
I’ve been looking into the polls, digging into them, posting the cross tabs, letting people know that there is more to them then just the headlines.
Isn’t that what this site is for? Digging through the data and posting it? Or is it to shill for Newt?
“We’ll see what happens to your stamina after the SC vote.”
I’ve already said that I will endorse Newt if he wins in SC.
No personal attacks. However, referring to the former Speaker of the United States House of Representatives as "Noot," is disrespectful to a man who was two steps away from being the most powerful man on the planet.
I’m deaf, so anything in a video I can’t hear.
“is disrespectful to a man who was two steps away from being the most powerful man on the planet.”
Ah I see.
I suppose ‘Plugs’ Biden deserves even more respect given that he’s just one step away.