"Mississippi...between Gingrich and Romney with Santorum falling well back"

Public Policy Polling ^ | 3/10/12 | Public Policy Polling (via Twitter)

[BCrago66]

Public Polling Polling is polling both Mississippi & Alabama Saturday (today) and Sunday, and will release the full results sometime tomorrow night.

Tweets from within the last hour:

1) "Mississippi looks like it's between Gingrich and Romney with Santorum falling well back"

2)"Alabama looks like a 3 way tie with maybe slight advantage Romney...but it's just the first round of calls"

[BCrago66]

You’re a very excitable personality. But not too interesting. But I guess we need people like you head up all the local Church-Ladies-for-Santorum chapters.

[mtrott]

I’m not so sure about that. If it comes down to it, I think the vast majority of Newt’s supporters better jump to Santo.

My reason is that Romney scares the h out of me with regard to potential Supreme Court nominees, which there may be two or more of in the next term. I don’t care much for Santorum, but from hearing him speak on social issues, he at least seems like he could be counted on to make good selections for the court.

[trappedincanuckistan]

Brilliant! You think it’s over if Romney wins either Alabama or Mississippi, but want Newt ( who is beating him in both) to drop out?

Makes perfect sense.

[pgkdan]

From Rassmussen today:

With the perception growing that he will be the GOP nominee, Romney leads President Obama by five points in a hypothetical 2012 matchup. Today's numbers show Romney at 48%, Obama at 43%. That’s Romney’s largest lead since December. Matchup results are updated daily at 9:30 a.m. Eastern (sign up for free daily e-mail update).

If Santorum is the Republican nominee, he is up by one point over the president, 46% to 45%. This is the second time since polling began in 2011 that Santorum has had a slight lead over Obama. Romney is the only other candidate to lead the president more than one time in the polls. See tracking history for Obama vs. all four Republican candidates.

Notice that Noot's not evgen mentioned? Nobody but freepers think he has any chance iin the world! He's only spoiling it for the rest of us and paving Romney's path to the nomination! Get real for crissake!

[trappedincanuckistan]

Obfuscation. Address the point I’m making.

You think that if Romney wins Alabama or Mississippi it’s over. Newt is beating him in both. Why would you want Newt to drop out?

[Patton@Bastogne]

.


Mark Steyn used to be my favorite EIB Guest Host ... he's refreshing, with a keen Shakespearean wit ...

Then came the 2012 Florida Primary, with Newt Gingrich leading in Florida ...

I (living in Florida) listened to Mark Steyn day-after-day ... while he performed a hatchet-job on Newt Gingrich ...



So ... it's radio ... and everyone has a right to their expressed opinion ...

Of course ...



But Mark Steyn's "grevious" crime was lambasting Newt Gingrich, while leaving Mitt Romney virtually untouched ...

And all of this happened from behind Rush's (self-proclaimed) Golden EIB microphone of "GOP political primary neutrality" ...

It was disgusting to listen to ... day after day ...



I'm just calling Mark Steyn to account for this ... that's all ...

I could try to get in as an EIB caller ... but that's almost impossible ...

And besides, I'm beginning to suspect that Rush Limbaugh has his own cadre of "seminar callers" ...

who faithfully support Rush's "party line" for the day ...



Again (again, LOL) ...

Rush Limbaugh, Mark Steyn and Shawn Hannity have every right to say what they want ...

But (when appropriate) they should stop the "pious nonsense" of claiming "conservative" political neutrality ...




Did anyone hear Rush's defense of Mitt Romney's "southern grits" verbal gaffe(s) yesterday (Friday, 2012-03-09) ?

It was amazing ...

Rush has formerly "dive-bombed" Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and John Kerry (et al) when they've tried to put on a "racial" or "regional" accent for a speech ...

Mitt Romney tried it ... failed MISERABLY ...

and yet Rush Limbaugh defended Romney to the hilt ...

Something I haven't heard Rush Limbaugh do since ...


Well, not since Rush Limbaugh was (daily) defending Little Ricky Santorum's campaign gaffes ...



.

[VinL]

Rush is, and has always been, for Romney.

“What has gone largely unnoticed, however, is Romney’s corporate connection to Limbaugh. While Limbaugh owns the company that produces his show, it’s syndicated and broadcasted by Premiere Radio Networks, which also handles Limbaugh’s advertising. Premiere is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Clear Channel, the radio and outdoor advertising behemoth. Clear Channel, meanwhile, is owned by a partnership of two private equity firms, Bain Capital and Thomas H. Lee Partners — the same Bain Capital that Mitt Romney once ran.

[heshtesh]

Notice that Noot’s not evgen mentioned? Nobody but freepers think he has any chance iin the world! He’s only spoiling it for the rest of us and paving Romney’s path to the nomination! Get real for crissake!

Maybe you should try reading somewhere other than just Free Republic, if you need some help finding Newt supporters you might want to try C4P,Hot Air,Gateway Pundits,Big Government,Riehl World along with many other,you might want to do a little research before you try to lay BS at our feet!

[Utmost Certainty]

I’m starting to think that Newt & Santorum are beginning to appeal to different brands of voters.

I've been beginning to think that more and more. I think a lot of the divide is FiCons vs. SoCons.

I'm more strongly in the FiCon camp, since my overarching concern is rolling back the size and scope of the Federal Govt. It's not that I don't care about social issues, it's just that I think once you liberate individuals from statism, that social issues will largely resolve themselves in a morally constructive way with no govt interference necessary.

Since Santorum is incredibly weak as a financial conservative and is on record denouncing laissez-faire individualism, he just doesn't appeal to me.

There's also practical considerations I bear in mind—such as, I really want Obama gone because he's murdering my future. My perception is that if Santorum were the nominee, his inexperience would be a major liability, and he'd generally alienate many potential voters, ergo ensuring 4 more years of BO. As much as I hate to say it, even Romney has a better chance than Santorum.

Whereas Newt or Paul would be optimal nominees IMO because they actually present vision and ideas, which invigorates and broadens the base, and actually grows new Republicans. For instance, many may not like this, but a lot of the Ron Paul kids probably aren't going away and will continue to assert an active role within the party. So there'll have to be some corresponding evolution in the Republican party IMO, or it will certainly go extinct as it's on the precipice of doing now. Pandering to the status quo (Romney, Santorum) will assure this.

If that’s the case, then both staying in may be the best chance for denying Romney a majority of delegates. If both Newt & Santorum get in the neighborhood of 650 delegates, that keep Romney under 900 delegates.

Yes.

But if, e.g., if Newt drops out, Romeny would roll over Santorum and get over 1,144, with delegates to spare.

That's what I'm thinking, too. I suspect it would be incredibly easy to marginalize Santorum in a very permanent way once he was the sole focal point of fire.

[JediJones]

Newt’s not mentioned because it’s a FOX News polling outlet, who is in bed with the RNC, who clearly decided in February to instruct their puppets to stop talking about Newt to try to render him irrelevant, because he is the only threat to Romney winning the nomination. Santorum is an easy target and only appeals to a niche of voters, the deeply religious types who will vote for whoever their religious leaders tell them to. Gingrich was the 2nd choice of those religious voters, so if Santorum dropped out and endorsed Newt, Newt would get all his votes either just due to that endorsement or due to church leaders switching over.

[JediJones]

a lot of the Ron Paul kids probably aren't going away and will continue to assert an active role within the party. So there'll have to be some corresponding evolution in the Republican party IMO, or it will certainly go extinct as it's on the precipice of doing now.

There's no fit in the party for the Ron Paul activists. If you look at their forums, if Ron Paul's not nominated, their next choices are Libertarian Party Gary Johnson, Obama, a tiny bit of Romney, and I think I saw one Newt guy. They absolutely despise Santorum 100% down the line on every issue. They despise social conservatives, moral values, family values and are vigorously anti-war. Their states' rights issues is much less about a core conviction than it is a cynical vehicle to make it easier for them to stop war and pass radical policies locally that would never fly nationally. Economic issues are not really their biggest focus despite Ron Paul's using that plank most often to try to persuade Republicans to vote for him. I noticed the Keystone Pipeline was one of the few issues that actually divided them right down the middle. The absolute best and only approach we should take is to marginalize Ron Paul and expose him as the radical he is, so that he doesn't peel off soft Republican voters who just like his economic talking points.

[Utmost Certainty]

There's no fit in the party for the Ron Paul activists. If you look at their forums, if Ron Paul's not nominated, their next choices are Libertarian Party Gary Johnson, Obama, a tiny bit of Romney, and I think I saw one Newt guy. They absolutely despise Santorum 100% down the line on every issue. They despise social conservatives, moral values, family values and are vigorously anti-war. Their states' rights issues is much less about a core conviction than it is a cynical vehicle to make it easier for them to stop war and pass radical policies locally that would never fly nationally. Economic issues are not really their biggest focus despite Ron Paul's using that plank most often to try to persuade Republicans to vote for him. I noticed the Keystone Pipeline was one of the few issues that actually divided them right down the middle. The absolute best and only approach we should take is to marginalize Ron Paul and expose him as the radical he is, so that he doesn't peel off soft Republican voters who just like his economic talking points.

I can't speak for RP forums, since I don't frequent them. But I did talk to a bunch of Ron Paul supporters yesterday at some pre-caucus Tea Party rally. The demographic breakdown of Ron Paul supporters was odd/interesting—mostly young people <30 or elderly people >60, with few in between.

There were a few kooks in the bunch, but most of the individuals I spoke to were quite reasonable, decently informed, and voiced legitimate concerns about the overactive role of government, the necessity for free and open markets, the urgency for massive spending cuts, sound money, etc.

Yeah, Ron Paul supporters hate Santorum. But I'm convinced that if the Republican party doesn't begin co-opting some of these planks in a very serious and profound way, then it will continue to diminish in political viability. Sarah Palin said as much also re: her suggestion to not drive away Ron Paul supporters from the party. I think Newt sees the writing on the wall here as well, which is part of why he's been keen to push states' rights and a gold standard as components of his message (and because they are genuinely good ideas).

The GOP won't survive if it fixates on social issues.

[WKB]

Mississippi ping

[JediJones]

There were a few kooks in the bunch, but most of the individuals I spoke to were quite reasonable, decently informed, and voiced legitimate concerns about the overactive role of government, the necessity for free and open markets, the urgency for massive spending cuts, sound money, etc.

The Ron Paul people discuss on their forums about how to win support from average Republicans by focusing on those issues where there might be common ground, or by softening their rhetoric. They just don't come out and tell you about all their extreme and radical views right away. Of course like any party it's a coalition and some may be more moderate on some issues than others. But their core base, like with any party, is what defines them. Bottom line, there isn't even any room to fit in Ron Paul's economic views...0% taxes aren't going to be making it into the party platform. We've had candidates talk about cutting some departments, like Perry. It didn't get them any traction. We'll get the Ron Paul supporters if they mature and change. It's not our job to change for them.

[Gene Eric]

LOL, well, there ya’ go. Santorum is in it only for the buzzkill, the party pooper, the spoiler, a vote for Romney, Obama... did I forget anything?

[Gene Eric]

>> DROP OUT NOW NEWT!

>> You have no frigging chance of getting he nomineation or ever winning the WH.

You’re more serious than Rick, the humorless, Bush reincarnate.

[Gene Eric]

“In case you haven’t seen this” ping.

[onyx]

The local news confrimed this news tonight!

Santorum has a robo call tonight urging a vote for him because Gingrich and Paul are not in the running.

NO SALE!

[trappedincanuckistan]

Go Newt!

[onyx]

GO Mississippi!
FOR NEWT!!!!

WooHoo!!

GO Mississippi!
FOR NEWT!!!!

WooHoo!!