Skip to comments.Santorum surges into the lead (National poll Santorum 38%, Romney 23%)
Posted on 02/11/2012 6:19:11 AM PST by Rational Thought
Riding a wave of momentum from his trio of victories on Tuesday Rick Santorum has opened up a wide lead in PPP's newest national poll. He's at 38% to 23% for Mitt Romney, 17% for Newt Gingrich, and 13% for Ron Paul.
Part of the reason for Santorum's surge is his own high level of popularity. 64% of voters see him favorably to only 22% with a negative one. But the other, and maybe more important, reason is that Republicans are significantly souring on both Romney and Gingrich. Romney's favorability is barely above water at 44/43, representing a 23 point net decline from our December national poll when he was +24 (55/31). Gingrich has fallen even further. A 44% plurality of GOP voters now hold a negative opinion of him to only 42% with a positive one. That's a 34 point drop from 2 months ago when he was at +32 (60/28).
(Excerpt) Read more at publicpolicypolling.com ...
Romney = Patriots. Santorum = Giants. At least I hope it plays out that way-——sorry you New England fans about the painful analogy.
Orange..impossible and this is why:
Rick will field no delegates In Ill.
He will field none in TN, either.
He is not on the ballot in IN
He is not on the ballot in DC
He is not on the ballot in VA
He will not field any delegates in ND
He is not on the ballot in 20% of OH
He could not even try to compete in the first big state of FL, and has already said as much about CA and NY.
Heres the bad news:
Delegates are going to be pledged; and no matter how much you beg, they aren'tt going to be assigned to Rick Santorum later just because you really want them to be.... And really, in that above scenario, TN is the only one that assigns them later, anyway....... Rick CANNOT win the nomination. He CANNOT. ...
There is NO PATH to 1140+ delegates for him, period.
(Special acknowledgment to TITANS for his fact finding info and comments)
Best reminder yet! Thanks for posting this, C. Edmund Wright. I remember that line and laughing. I was a Reagan supporter back when virtually everyone in the Michigan Republican Party thought nominating him was the kiss of death and we were headed back toward a Goldwater 1964 experience.
Sound bites work... but if not backed up with detail, the speakers fall on their faces.
290 posted on Saturday, February 11, 2012 12:32:49 PM by C. Edmund Wright: “Note: Chuck Norris is coming out with reasons why he does not support Santorum - Monday in World Net Daily. The irony? Norris will be proven more up to speed on Santorum than Rush. Amazing aint it?”
I want to read that. We need to know everything we can about every serious candidate for the Republican nomination.
176 posted on Saturday, February 11, 2012 10:38:25 AM by cripplecreek: “I think Santorum is going to yank the Michigan rug out from under Romney.”
I hope you're right.
I've been out of Michigan for a long time, and my “on-the-ground” contacts are now mostly retired, but social issues conservatives and economic conservatives have worked with the Romney family for so long that this would be a massive blow not only to the Romney campaign but to much of the Republican Party leadership in Michigan.
To give an idea how far I go back, my father was the executive director of the Kent County Republican Party (basically metro Grand Rapids) when Gerald Ford was the House Minority Leader, and then moved to a position on the Republican staff for the Michigan House of Representatives while Ford was in the White House. I saw the chaos caused by the rise of the Christian conservative movement in the 1980s, both as an outsider and then from a different perspective when I was converted myself and left secular politics — a decision that today I believe was a major mistake. Let's just say that I personally grew up with and saw things that made me decide a career in secular politics wasn't what I wanted to do with my life, until I realized the hard way that church politics were far nastier, far more vicious, and more laced with sex scandals and financial scandals than anything I saw growing up in a Republican Party leader's home.
I'm a Calvinist and should have known that total depravity affects church politics as much if not worse than secular politics, but apparently I had to learn that the hard way.
The Michigan Republican Party has leaders who are deeply committed to the Romney family and its brand of a moderate emphasis on family values combined with a big focus on the role of government in economic growth and progress. A Santorum win in Michigan means much more than just delivering Romney what might be a knockout blow — it means major changes in the state's Republican Party are underway or will soon come.
45 posted on Saturday, February 11, 2012 8:54:16 AM by GoCards: “Everyone STOP IT! We are going to win this thing. We want the perfect candidate, isn't going to happen. Buck up and get behind the candidate whomever wins! As far as the dork complex of Santorum this could be in our benefit... Dorks are cool too! Calm, boring, patient, loving, is all good things. :)”
53 posted on Saturday, February 11, 2012 9:02:42 AM by ohioWfan: “No one who is unabashedly pro-life is ‘inexperienced’ in the fight against evil. Abortion is the single most demonic issue in our culture, and anyone who strongly stands against it publicly is attacked by Satan himself. Don't underestimate Rick's understanding of evil, nor his willingness to fight it.”
Hey, if the worst thing reasonable people can say about you is you wear a sweater vest, and if the nut-case opponents have made the name Santorum synonymous on the internet with the byproducts of anal gay sex, it's pretty hard to argue you can't fight wild-eyed liberal attacks and come out looking fairly good.
As someone said on another thread: “It's time to FEAR THE VEST!!!”
My goal is to defeat Romney in the primary and Obama in the general. I think Santorum may be the one to do it because he can motivate the conservative Christian base voters, has a fighting shot at winning key industrial swing states, and if Obama keeps up his Catholic-bashing, has a real shot at winning Hispanic Roman Catholic voters.
But if Gingrich ends up being the nominee, that's not the end of the world.
It's too early for anyone to drop out yet. In the northern industrial states, Santorum has a better chance at defeating Romney. In the southern states, it's probably Gingrich who has a better shot at Romney. Let's hope that Santorum and Gingrich can work together to get rid of Romney, and then figure out how to work together to defeat Obama.
131 posted on Saturday, February 11, 2012 9:58:57 AM by C. Edmund Wright: “You make a very important and over looked point. Santorum has NOT been vetted. Consider that Chuck Norris understands Santorum better than Rush Limbaugh and Mark Levin do. Why? Santorum has been ignored with Newt and Mitts ridiculous obsession with each other. I think I can say with some confidence that as the truth of Santorums liberal record comes out, you will see Rush and Levin start to back away from him a bit. But a word of warning to Newts folks - you damned well better start getting some of this stuff out there now before Levin and Rush become too invested in their love of Santorum to admit they were wrong.”
125 posted on Saturday, February 11, 2012 9:52:27 AM by LuvFreeRepublic: “I am not out to destroy Santorum. Santorum has not been vetted and he needs to be. If he can't get past conservatives/Republicans he will not get past Obama. FACT.”
I'm not disagreeing that Santorum needs more vetting. While I'm going to delete the swear words, I agree with C. Edmund Wrights’ “word of warning to Newts folks (to) start getting some of this stuff out there now before Levin and Rush become too invested in their love of Santorum to admit they were wrong.”
HOWEVER... Santorum has been a national target of the pro-abortionists and the radical gay movement for many, many years. He's also run for office and won office repeatedly in a left-of-center pro-Democrat state. Let's not minimize that. If there were anything **REALLY** horrible in his background, we'd know.
I think whatever gets dug up in the vetting process will be more damaging to Santorum in the Republican primary race than in the general election.
My guess is the worst stuff out there is going to be directly connected with his commitment to Roman Catholicism. Let's be honest here: the Roman Catholic bishops have taken stances which most evangelicals like on abortion and gay marriage, but there are important differences not only with evangelicals but also with secular conservatives on key political issues such as capital punishment and unfettered capitalism.
A practicing Roman Catholic and a conservative evangelical Protestant can't just be lumped into the same group as amorphous “social issues conservatives.” I'm willing to vote for a Roman Catholic, but I do so knowing that the Roman Catholic is condemned by the confessions of my church, is barred from communion in my church as I am barred from taking communion as his, and if faithful to the teachings of his church, he will disagree with me on some very important political issues related to capital punishment and capitalism.
I cannot and will not blame Rick Santorum for being faithful to the teachings of his church. If we want somebody whose church supports family values and unfettered capitalism, that guy's name is neither Gingrich nor Santorum, and that guy's church is based in Utah, not Rome. Sorry, but I'll put up with some Roman Catholic views of “compassionate conservatism” that I don't like rather than deal with Romney's problems.
Romney would equal some mascot that has no spine.
Your reading ability leaves much to be desired.
Texas doesn’t get to vote for a few months, but I will gladly still vote for Gingrich if he is leading Santorum when the race gets to Texas. But I have no intention of throwing away my vote on Gingrich if he is poll 5% by then and Santorum is in a neck and neck delegate race with Romney at that point. My primary goal is to stop Romney. And voting for someone who has no shot is not much different than voting 3rd party. Hopefully I will have an easy choice either way, it’s the people who live in the next few states that have the hard choice.
I'm not so sure it's a matter of "groove" as much as Newt's planned strategy.....he was not even being much considered and just layed lowed for a time while he restructured his campaign to come into line as he wanted, not how they wanted. He said that he knew they would have a huge wave ahead but hadn't thought it would be as large as it was.
Also look how he maneuvered with Cain to get the visibility the press was denying him. Newt knows full well all he's up against and said all along his campaign would not be traditional and take many twists and turns. But isn't that how he got things done in Congress as well?
I think Santorum is paving the way and both Newt and Santorum are doing this to keep Romney, media and the left otherwise occupied
I just do not underestimate Newt's strategy....he knows the game and the moves his opposition is making and will pick his fights accordingly....he's flushing out their tactics as well.
It's going to be a ride...hang on!!!! and watch Newt work!!!
I support NEWT, so I don’t understand your post.
I speaking about vetting vis a vis 0bama’s lack thereof.
Cain was my guy, though.
Another one doesn’t get my drift at all. If you think my posts are harsh, I don’t see how you can bear to log on a place like this. But have a nice day.
Additionally Newt spoke to congress opposing Gores work on Global Warming....and still opposes it today....lots of videos to see on that for googling.
So bring yourself up to date instead of pushing the left's talking points.
If Santorum meets the standard of being a "career politician" or an "establishment candidate" then certainly Newt does as well - that's embarrassing for you to claim Santorum is but not Gingrich. Specter had not voted for Obamacare in 2004 at the time of the endorsement and had previously been a staunch opponent of nationalized healthcare and was one of the architects in crafting the message that helped to defeat it the previous time it had been tried - with regard to healthcare that was what was on Specter's resume in 2004, not the vote 6 years later. He is not on record as being 'against' the tea party he is on record as being against focusing only on economic issues and leaving other issues by the wayside (i.e. Ron Paul).
Fair enough, LL. I’ll vote for the Punk’s opponent, no matter who wins. And I can’t STAND Milt. Bob
You had better believe it. Rick will be relentless against the Punk. He will be BEGGING for a return of the lame Juan McCain. Bob
Thanks for the thoughtful ping!!
I’m with you brother! Time to get real as much as it sucks.
I don’t understand-—why isn’t Santorum registered in all the states? He’s been running for quite a few months.