February 24, 2012

"Michigan GOP Primary: Romney 40%, Santorum 34%."

Rasmussen's new poll, conducted yesterday — that is, the day after the last debate. The margin of error is +/-4.

36 comments:

Mark O said...

So long, Frank Lloyd Santorum.

MadisonMan said...

So Santorum can win by beating expectations, but Romney can only win by actually winning.

Santorum is in the better spot.

Will Cate said...

So MadisonMan, by this logic, if Santorum were down 16 points, he'd be in an even "better spot?"

Jay said...

And here we go:


Former Sen. Arlen Specter said Friday that he thought fellow Pennsylvanian Rick Santorum was too extreme to be president.

“Where you have Senator Santorum’s views, so far to the right, with his attitude on women in the workplace and gays and the bestiality comments and birth control, I do not think it is realistic for Rick Santorum to represent America,” Specter said on MSNBC’s “Daily Rundown.”



For some bizarre reason Santorum feels some sort of allegiance to this guy.

garage mahal said...

The margin of error is +/-4

Romney responds "11001000100011001100"

MadisonMan said...

@Will, you take my comment, extrapolate it to something I didn't say but that suits your purpose, and then comment on the result.

Republicans can take heart though: Jeb is being readied!

garage mahal said...

Seen a teaser tweet from PPP that Santorum was up big in Wisconsin. Cannot wait to see the full poll.

Santorum has an ace in states like OH, PA, IN, PA, WI. Obama continues to sign these stupid trade deals. Santorum voted against NAFTA. I think it could be powerful to use against Romney and Obama for working white class voters that have been bent over hard by both parties, if Santorum only knew how to exploit it.

John Stodder said...

Will, isn't that by definition, true? Clinton was the "comeback kid" when he finished 2nd in the N.H. primary in 1992. So if Santorum were in fact 16 points behind and finished 4 points behind, not only would it be good for Santorum, it would be bad for Romney. That's political journalism 101.

But the fact that Santorum was at one time ahead and now seems primed to lose, albeit by a small margin, is not good for Santorum and is excellent for Romney. It's too late for Santorum/Gingrich and the mainstream media to credit Romney's win to Michigan being his home state, because they built up the drama around Santorum's "surge." Romney turned things around, and if his people are smart, they'll herald his win in MI as showing he's a "turnaround artist."

Sorry, non-RINOs. Your fake conservative is losing to my fake conservative. The Establishment has spoken!

edutcher said...

Had a feeling. And AZ is looking the same way.

John Stodder said...

Will, isn't that by definition, true? Clinton was the "comeback kid" when he finished 2nd in the N.H. primary in 1992.

No, he liked to tell everybody it was because he wiggled out of his many scandals.

If the media felt about him the way they did about Nixon, of course, he'd never have gotten past the first.

Hagar said...

Does anyone here know of anything that Santorum has actually accomplished while in public office?
Bills passed? Anything?

Unknown said...

Rick Santorum is a practicing Catholic. The teachings of the Church are over 2000 years old and while considered extreme in the first century, have been generally considered fairly mainstream since about 450 AD. Those who say that Mr. Santorum is too extreme to be president of this country are saying that this country can never again elect a Catholic to a public office. Really?

Don't Tread 2012 said...

If you believe in the dem 'pump and dump' strategy then we may see Mr. Santorum take a dive.

Should be interesting!!!

MadisonMan said...

Does anyone here know of anything that Santorum has actually accomplished while in public office?

He enriched his bank balance!

John Stodder said...

Those who say that Mr. Santorum is too extreme to be president of this country are saying that this country can never again elect a Catholic to a public office.

That's an absurd conclusion to draw. Santorum is a flawed messenger, and I think what people are taking from his utterances is not Catholicism, but the obsessions of an individual with some strange responses to the evolving role of women in the past 50 years, and separately an obsessive interest in the sexuality of strangers.

Not all Catholics, not even conservative Catholics, talk the way Santorum talks about these things.

garage mahal said...

Romney is giving a speech to an almost empty Ford Field. Ouch

Amexpat said...

Intrade tends to show trends ahead of the polls. Right now Romney is at 80% to win Michigan.

AprilApple said...

Bain controls my brain! Bain controls my brain! Koch! Koch! Clear Channel! Dominoes Pizza! Radical! waa!

Jay said...

garage mahal said...
Romney is giving a speech to an almost empty Ford Field


Um, yeah, I bet.

Anyway:

Democratic pollster Stanley Greenberg is out with a must-read polling memo this morning, which offers some eye-opening advice to President Obama and his re-election team. After testing several of the president’s economic messages, he finds the argument that the economy is back on the right track polls miserably – and “produces disastrous results.”
“It is weaker than even the weakest Republican message and is 10 points weaker in intensity than either Republican message,” Greenberg wrote. “A third said this message made them less likely to support Barack Obama. Alarmingly, this message barely receives majority support among self-identified Democrats – and even less support among all other groups.”

Lyssa said...

Unknown said: Those who say that Mr. Santorum is too extreme to be president of this country are saying that this country can never again elect a Catholic to a public office.

Dude, do you know many Catholics? I grew up Catholic in a red state, and believe me, while there are some that are Santorum-like, he's certainly not representative. You know that Nancy Pelosi, John Kerry, and Joe Biden are all practicing Catholics*, right?

*(Some will argue that they're not really Catholics because of their disagreement with the Church's doctrine on abortion. But bear in mind that almost every Republican is also in deep disagreement with several Church doctrines as well, most notably, the war effort.)

Dan in Philly said...

I predict Romney will win by 20.

Don't know for sure that Team Rom is behind the current character hit job by the media or if he's just benefitting from it. However there's a clear trend. Ever time a second runner has emerged, that man has been put under the microscope and the shine has come off rather quickly. Romney has done some, as in Florida against Gingrich, but it is hard for me to tell how much his team has been silent and how much active here...

Writ Small said...

There's your answer about whether Santorum lost the debate.

Unknown said...

Dude, do you know many Catholics? I grew up Catholic in a red state, and believe me, while there are some that are Santorum-like, he's certainly not representative. You know that Nancy Pelosi, John Kerry, and Joe Biden are all practicing Catholics*, right?

While I kind of resent being called "Dude" by someone I don't even know - I'll overlook that. I am a well-educated (meaning I've read the Catechism of the Church) practicing Catholic. John Kerry, Nancy Pelosi, and Joe Biden are hardly representative of believing Catholics. In fact, I believe that their bishops have found it necessary to "correct" their rather interesting theology. I'm not concerned about how many Republicans follow Catholic teaching...that's kind of a weird thing to say. Republicanism isn't a religion. My comment was directed at those who can't figure out that Catholic teaching is what it is and whether you like him or not, Rick Santorum is pretty representative of Catholics who follow the teachings of their church.
I live in a liberal state, in a rather "liberal" archdiocese and attend mass twice weekly. I know what I'm talking about.

John Stodder said...

Romney is giving a speech to an almost empty Ford Field. Ouch

Uh, yeah, he didn't invite a lot of people. There was no attempt to fill the stadium. Optics bad, for sure, but not the indication you're implying.

garage mahal said...

Uh, yeah, he didn't invite a lot of people.

Inviting 1% of the people won't fill many stadiums.

John Stodder said...

Inviting 1% of the people won't fill many stadiums.

Hah! OWS humor! Points for you, Garage!

Lyssa said...

Unknown, is "dude" an insult, now? (This morning, Amanda Marcotte told me that "female" is an unacceptable alternative to "women and girls", so I guess anything's possible).

Anyhow, my point is that, while Pelosi,et al, are not representative of Catholics, nor is Santorum. You said that if Santorum can't be elected to public office, then no Catholic can. That's just not true; Santorum is, for better or worse, an unusually conservative Catholic. I'm not saying that's bad of him, but it's definitely not representative of Catholics as a whole.

EDH said...

Santorum: "Hell, they would have voted for Barabbas."

Bender said...

The answer, Unknown, is "no."

Someone who is faithful to the teachings of the Church could never be elected. A person who is, in thought and mind, one with the Church would be rejected out of hand.

They could never be elected because it is the teachings of the Church that are themselves despised and hated.

Your Catholicism is expected to be left behind at your doorstep. Maybe you can have it one hour a week, if you keep it in the Church building, but under no circumstances are you to take it out in public.

Do you think that Mother Teresa could have been elected to anything anywhere in this country? She would be smeared as the worst hater of women and the poor ever to exist.

No, the only good Catholic is a bad Catholic.

But that is what was promised us. We are a sign of contradiction, and the world does not take lightly to being contradicted.

Bender said...

The question is not whether one is representative of Catholics.

The question is whether one subscribes to and is therefore representative of the Catholic Church.

By definition, individual Catholics are personally a rather bad and unseemly lot. That's why we are so desperately in need of the Church. We are not a hotel for saints, we're a hospital for sinners.

Representative of "Catholics"? Sure, Pelosi is an excellent representative of Catholics. But she is an utter SCANDAL, worthy of that millstone around her neck, with respect to being representative of the Holy Catholic Church.

Unknown said...

Bender said: The question is whether one subscribes to and is therefore representative of the Catholic Church.

I couldn't have said it better myself. Thanks for getting my point. I guess I'll have to start getting used to being at best "quaint" and at worst hated.

Mark Nielsen said...

EDH -- good one! LOL

Steve Koch said...

Thread winners:

"Inviting 1% of the people won't fill many stadiums."

"The only good Catholic is a bad Catholic."

Writ Small said...

Bender & Unknown

1) The nomination process isn't over.

2) Santorum got spanked in the debate not because he was attacked from the left as too socially conservative. He was attacked from the right as too compromising.

3) One reason Newt had a double bump was because the first rise in the polls brought two things: attacks from Romney and big cash from donors. The cash arrived too late to prevent getting knocked down, but that cash fueled the second rise. The same thing is happening to Santorum. He is raising big bucks right now and will be able to counter Romney better shortly.

Your guy took a hit and you feel bad. I get it. Buck up. Self pity doesn't help and the battle is far from over.

crosspatch said...

With only 2% to 5% of Republicans showing up for polls so far this primary season, I don't put much faith in these polls.

Phil 3:14 said...

Santorum was guaranteed to self-destruct.

Now Dems can get back to the important message:

Rich, flip-flopping magic under wearer

Carol_Herman said...

Hey, they all sat down! And, if you've seen pictures, it looks like the four of them were in wheelchairs.

I think FDR would have stood!

And, I think the GOP is losing voters ... because words spread through the Internet. While inside the "studio" in Arizona ... the audience got packed with shills.

I wonder if there were any pickpockets who got in? Usually, when you see suckers you see pickpockets.

Of course, we'll always have "GILBERT."