Rasmussen IA poll: Romney 23, Paul 22 … Santorum 16

posted at 2:45 pm on December 29, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

Bear in mind Tina’s caveats about the difficulty of polling in the holiday season, but this does look as though the predictions of Rick Santorumentum have been realized.  In the latest Rasmussen poll of 750 likely caucus-goers in Iowa, conducted yesterday, Santorum leaps up to third place, behind a virtual dead heat between Mitt Romney and Ron Paul:

After months of volatility, Mitt Romney and Ron Paul remain the front-runners in Iowa for the third week in a row with the state’s Republican caucus just five days away.

The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of likely GOP caucus participants finds Romney with 23% support to Paul’s 22%. Former U.S. Senator Rick Santorum has moved into third place with 16%, his best showing to date, closely followed by former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and Texas Governor Rick Perry who earn 13% of the vote each.

Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachmann picks up five percent (5%) support, while former Utah Governor Jon Huntsman gets three percent (3%) of the vote, marking no movement on either candidate’s part over the past week. One percent (1%) like some other candidate, and six percent (6%) are undecided.

That’s a six-point jump for Santorum in one week, outside the margin of error.  In contrast, Romney and Paul both only shifted within the MOE to get closer together.  Perry also added to his total by three points, again within the MOE, while Gingrich dropped four points in the same period to fall into a tie for fourth place.

The sample improves over the CNN poll, which only surveyed Republicans.  According to the sample data provided by Rasmussen, 30% of respondents are independents, a good representation.  None are Democrats, though, who could cast votes in the caucus, and who thus far favor Paul.  The survey was taken in a single day, which sometimes makes the results a little less reliable, but I believe the Rasmussen polls in this series have all used that methodology, so the trending is still significant.

Where does Santorum pick up his support?  He comes in second to Romney among Republicans, 26/19.  He falls into a three-way tie among women, far behind Romney, 27/15, and third among men at 17%, with Paul leading Romney 27/19.  Santorum has a double-digit lead among very conservative respondents over Romney, 28/18, but lands in fourth place among “somewhat conservative” voters at 15%, behind Romney (27%), Paul (18%), and Gingrich (17%).  Santorum also leads among Tea Party adherents, 25/19 over Romney, with Paul fourth at 14% behind Perry’s 15%, and Santorum wins evangelicals with 24% to Perry’s 17%.

Is that enough to ignite Santorum for a win?  He may not need an outright win.  As long as he bests Perry, Gingrich, and Bachmann, Santorum could be a rallying figure for social conservatives and evangelicals, which would stand him in good stead in South Carolina.  It’s still a long shot, but it’s not out of the question.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

I predict that Santorum will win in Iowa, followed by Romney and Paul in no particular order.

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on December 29, 2011 at 2:47 PM

Santorum was thrown out of office in ’06 for good reason.

FloatingRock on December 29, 2011 at 2:48 PM

If Santorum comes in third, I’ll bet his numbers skyrocket in SC.

Kataklysmic on December 29, 2011 at 2:48 PM

Sen. Santorum is a knowledgeable and conservative man, I’m glad to see him get some attention. Can he carry Pennsylvania?

Cindy Munford on December 29, 2011 at 2:48 PM

I thought IA doesn’t matter *

* If Romney or Paul win

gatorboy on December 29, 2011 at 2:48 PM

A million posts about how Ron Paul could never win in the general election due to newsletters/foreign policy, yet not a peep about how ridiculous a Santorum nominee would lose??

I mean seriously, this guy would get slaughtered against Obama.

thphilli on December 29, 2011 at 2:49 PM

Obama is not a god, after all, “just a dude“.

Schadenfreude on December 29, 2011 at 2:50 PM

I am still going with what I said last week:
Paul, Romney, Gingrich, in that order

ConservativePartyNow on December 29, 2011 at 2:51 PM

I mean talk about not vetted!

Santorum was for No Child Left Behind. He was for Prescription Drug Program. He regularly rails against free-market economics.

He’s no economic conservative. He’s authoritarian on both personal and economic liberty.

NewLiberty on December 29, 2011 at 2:51 PM

Santorum was for No Child Left Behind. He was for Prescription Drug Program. He regularly rails against free-market economics.

He’s no economic conservative. He’s authoritarian on both personal and economic liberty.

NewLiberty on December 29, 2011 at 2:51 PM

Not only for NCLB, but he tried to insert an amendment to mandate the teaching of intelligent design within NCLB. I mean, wtf.

thphilli on December 29, 2011 at 2:52 PM

FloatingRock on December 29, 2011 at 2:48 PM

How was that conclusion arrived at?

listens2glenn on December 29, 2011 at 2:52 PM

Ricko…!

Seven Percent Solution on December 29, 2011 at 2:53 PM

I’m hoping Ron Paul and Santorum both pick up 30% so we can completely disregard the cluster—- and start the real primary in New Hampshire.

Hey Iowa? You’re supposed to winnow down the choices. That’s the argument for having special whiny states go first. You’re not supposed to give first place and runner up to non-candidates and split the rest equally among candidates not named Romney.

I mean seriously, this guy would get slaughtered against Obama.

thphilli on December 29, 2011 at 2:49 PM

Well, some things go without saying, which is why they aren’t said, unless challenged by a legion of dedicated supporters.

HitNRun on December 29, 2011 at 2:54 PM

Santorum has his flaws. Not sure they’re worse than the other candidates, though- just has a different set of them.

And, if Santorum gets into the top 3, I’d call that a big “win” for him.

‘Course, then he gets the “frontrunner” nonstop attacks, and I don’t know if he can hold up under them & stay in the top tier…

cs89 on December 29, 2011 at 2:54 PM

Will he stop whining now?

Gunlock Bill on December 29, 2011 at 2:55 PM

Let the vetting begin.

teri_b on December 29, 2011 at 2:55 PM

social conservative = liberal.

Both advocate using the force of government to prevent particular behaviors. Neither groups are for individual liberty.

Dante on December 29, 2011 at 2:55 PM

I’m beginning to think Iowa has some really slow witted citizens. GOP needs to dump that state as the lead off. I guess Santorum was the ass end of the list to have a bump.

Google Santorum, cause apparently Iowa has not.

rubberneck on December 29, 2011 at 2:56 PM

Bachmann & Huntsman out by next week, followed by Perry & Santorum after Romney wins New Hampshire handily. Newt could take South Carolina and Florida at which point Paul is out and it’s a two-horse race.

Trafalgar on December 29, 2011 at 2:56 PM

I’d like to see Santorum come from behind to win it.

SnarkVader on December 29, 2011 at 2:57 PM

I’d like to see Santorum come from behind to win it.

SnarkVader on December 29, 2011 at 2:57 PM

Crude double entendre?

Dante on December 29, 2011 at 2:58 PM

The moderates supporting Romney think Santy wants to spy on them in their bedrooms.

It’s a weird combibination of paranoia and vanity.

Dr. Tesla on December 29, 2011 at 2:58 PM

When I look at Santorum as a candidate, it’s the only time I feel like the media hasn’t influenced my considerations. The more I know about Santorum, the more I like him. I’m beginning to think my hesitation was by design.
I think everyone who hasn’t considered him should take the time to look closer. He may not be perfect, but compared to the current leaders in the field he is very appealing. Are we seriously going to allow Romney, Newt, or Paul to represent us? Of them, are any capable to leading our country in the right direction? I just don’t see it. With Santorum, I do.

mtucker5695 on December 29, 2011 at 2:58 PM

Santorum….YAWN.

Lizzy on December 29, 2011 at 2:58 PM

Romney lost 2 points since yesterday….where did they go?
Good for Rick Santy…I don’t know how he will do after Iowa though.

KOOLAID2 on December 29, 2011 at 2:59 PM

Angry Seinfeld looks happy!

29Victor on December 29, 2011 at 2:59 PM

Like I have said before, if Santorum holds a Sodomy Summit with the gays and the moderates, I think they could patch things up, and he’s be our candidate.

Dr. Tesla on December 29, 2011 at 3:00 PM

Santorum is Newt Gingrich doused in holy water.

Notorious GOP on December 29, 2011 at 3:00 PM

Are we seriously going to allow Romney, Newt, or Paul to represent us?

mtucker5695 on December 29, 2011 at 2:58 PM

Well not Paul, that’s for sure.

Trafalgar on December 29, 2011 at 3:00 PM

Angry Seinfeld looks happy!

29Victor on December 29, 2011 at 2:59 PM

lmao

Kataklysmic on December 29, 2011 at 3:00 PM

I wonder what his support would look like after some democrats run ads quoting him and his wife stating that they showed off their dead child to their other children and then slept with the body overnight before returning it to the hospital. I’d bet that within 48 hours he would be branded a lunatic weirdo by a majority of the nation. And you KNOW that would be coming, since his family are the ones who took that ridiculously private moment and made it public in an effort to win over crazy social cons.

thphilli on December 29, 2011 at 3:01 PM

Dr. Tesla on December 29, 2011 at 3:00 PM

Gee, what would that Summit entail?

Cindy Munford on December 29, 2011 at 3:01 PM

Will he stop whining now?

Gunlock Bill on December 29, 2011 at 2:55 PM

Ron Paul? He is persistent whiner, isn’t he? Whiners do not make good leaders.

BruthaMan on December 29, 2011 at 3:01 PM

Another Iowa poll released today, which I have not seen on Hotair today (maybe I missed it) from InsiderAdvantage:

Date of polling: 12/28

Romney: 17
Paul: 17
Gingrich: 17
Santorum: 13

BCrago66 on December 29, 2011 at 3:01 PM

No thank you.

DanStark on December 29, 2011 at 3:02 PM

The moderates supporting Romney think Santy wants to spy on them in their bedrooms.

It’s a weird combibination of paranoia and vanity.

Dr. Tesla on December 29, 2011 at 2:58 PM

And Santorum saying he doesn’t believe in a right to privacy OVER AND OVER AND OVER again.

thphilli on December 29, 2011 at 3:02 PM

Ok, so the guy who believes Joseph Smith was Prophet of God can’t be made out as a weirdo, plus strapped his dog on top of his car for a 12 hour trip?

You can make anybody out as a weirdo if you want.

Dr. Tesla on December 29, 2011 at 3:03 PM

I think Santorum is going to win Iowa. If people get wind of these polls, there are plenty of voters in Iowa whom he appeals to who have been supporting a more likely winner. If it looks like he can win, expect a late charge and a victory. He’s more appealing than Ron Paul in any case.

That being said, he has about as much chance of winning the nomination as one of us, so Iowa would prove its irrelevancy once again.

RepublicanInMA on December 29, 2011 at 3:03 PM

thphilli on December 29, 2011 at 2:49 PM

I’m sure the anti-gay crowd would find Santorum too homophobic.

gyrmnix on December 29, 2011 at 3:03 PM

thphilli on December 29, 2011 at 3:01 PM

I don’t fault so much that Santorum did it, but that he exploited his family’s private pain for political gain. Reminds me of John Edwards.

BCrago66 on December 29, 2011 at 3:03 PM

Do you guys ever get tired of re-cycling this crap…lol. I don’t even think they write new posts anymore, they just change the names. Romney will win. It’s best to stop fighting it, and accept it.

He is the M I double tizzle…lol. Just taunting the Romney haters now.

Chudi on December 29, 2011 at 3:04 PM

Well there is no right to privacy, and I think Santy was making that point because abortion advocates make the case for abortion based on a right to abortion.

If there’s a right to privacy, how come cops can bust child predators and prostitutes? How come the government can tax our personal income?

Dr. Tesla on December 29, 2011 at 3:05 PM

Sen. Santorum is a knowledgeable and conservative man, I’m glad to see him get some attention. Can he carry Pennsylvania?

Cindy Munford on December 29, 2011 at 2:48 PM

He couldn’t even win a third term in Pennsylvania.

Good Lt on December 29, 2011 at 3:05 PM

I would be happy if Santorum won or came in ahead of Mitt.

Southernblogger on December 29, 2011 at 3:05 PM

When I look at Santorum as a candidate, it’s the only time I feel like the media hasn’t influenced my considerations. The more I know about Santorum, the more I like him. I’m beginning to think my hesitation was by design.

mtucker5695 on December 29, 2011 at 2:58 PM

AP: I mean, should we outlaw homosexuality?

SANTORUM: I have no problem with homosexuality. I have a problem with homosexual acts. As I would with acts of other, what I would consider to be, acts outside of traditional heterosexual relationships. And that includes a variety of different acts, not just homosexual. I have nothing, absolutely nothing against anyone who’s homosexual. If that’s their orientation, then I accept that. And I have no problem with someone who has other orientations. The question is, do you act upon those orientations? So it’s not the person, it’s the person’s actions. And you have to separate the person from their actions.

AP: OK, without being too gory or graphic, so if somebody is homosexual, you would argue that they should not have sex?

SANTORUM: We have laws in states, like the one at the Supreme Court right now, that has sodomy laws and they were there for a purpose. Because, again, I would argue, they undermine the basic tenets of our society and the family. And if the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything. Does that undermine the fabric of our society? I would argue yes, it does. It all comes from, I would argue, this right to privacy that doesn’t exist in my opinion in the United States Constitution, this right that was created, it was created in Griswold — Griswold was the contraceptive case — and abortion. And now we’re just extending it out. And the further you extend it out, the more you — this freedom actually intervenes and affects the family. You say, well, it’s my individual freedom. Yes, but it destroys the basic unit of our society because it condones behavior that’s antithetical to strong healthy families. Whether it’s polygamy, whether it’s adultery, where it’s sodomy, all of those things, are antithetical to a healthy, stable, traditional family.

Every society in the history of man has upheld the institution of marriage as a bond between a man and a woman. Why? Because society is based on one thing: that society is based on the future of the society. And that’s what? Children. Monogamous relationships. In every society, the definition of marriage has not ever to my knowledge included homosexuality. That’s not to pick on homosexuality. It’s not, you know, man on child, man on dog, or whatever the case may be. It is one thing. And when you destroy that you have a dramatic impact on the quality —

AP: I’m sorry, I didn’t think I was going to talk about “man on dog” with a United States senator, it’s sort of freaking me out.

SANTORUM: And that’s sort of where we are in today’s world, unfortunately. The idea is that the state doesn’t have rights to limit individuals’ wants and passions. I disagree with that. I think we absolutely have rights because there are consequences to letting people live out whatever wants or passions they desire. And we’re seeing it in our society.

AP: Sorry, I just never expected to talk about that when I came over here to interview you. Would a President Santorum eliminate a right to privacy — you don’t agree with it?

SANTORUM: I’ve been very clear about that. The right to privacy is a right that was created in a law that set forth a (ban on) rights to limit individual passions. And I don’t agree with that. So I would make the argument that with President, or Senator or Congressman or whoever Santorum, I would put it back to where it is, the democratic process. If New York doesn’t want sodomy laws, if the people of New York want abortion, fine. I mean, I wouldn’t agree with it, but that’s their right. But I don’t agree with the Supreme Court coming in.

rubberneck on December 29, 2011 at 3:05 PM

Well there is no right to privacy, and I think Santy was making that point because abortion advocates make the case for abortion based on a right to abortion. privacy.

If there’s a right to privacy, how come cops can bust child predators and prostitutes? How come the government can tax our personal income?

Dr. Tesla on December 29, 2011 at 3:06 PM

social conservative = liberal.

Both advocate using the force of government to prevent particular behaviors. Neither groups are for individual liberty.

Dante on December 29, 2011 at 2:55 PM

Libertarian = Liberal

The groups share a common prefix, and both love rotting out minds with drugs, blaming the United States for everything wrong in the world, perverting marriage so it gets away from child-rearing and family and instead focuses on self-gratification, and advocate for abortion on the grounds of maximizing choice. Both admire the “Me” culture of the 1960s, and hold the very idea of goodness in contempt.

Stoic Patriot on December 29, 2011 at 3:06 PM

Good Lt on December 29, 2011 at 3:05 PM

Republicans got thrown out as a group just like the Dims did in 2010.

Southernblogger on December 29, 2011 at 3:07 PM

Why is there an assumption that only Evangelicals and Social Conservatives are hoping for Rick Santorum to win? Economic and Foreign Policy Conservatives should be hoping for it as well, the other front runners are not conservative on either front.

Reserve the term Social Conservative for Conservatives who’s Conservative credentials are solely on the social front, like Mike Huckabee or Pat Robertson. Rick Santorum’s credentials are all around.

vegconservative on December 29, 2011 at 3:07 PM

NewLiberty on December 29, 2011 at 2:51 PM

thphilli on December 29, 2011 at 2:52 PM

I opposed him (and W) on the Prescription Drug Program, and NCLB.
But you’re going to have to show me where he regularly rails against free-market economics, or even irregularly for that matter.
He will not be spying on you’re home, or motel room, or tent in the woods, etc.
I’m for mandating the teaching of intelligent design, so maybe we can argue that.

listens2glenn on December 29, 2011 at 3:08 PM

Crude double entendre?

Dante on December 29, 2011 at 2:58 PM

It would make for a great story. The candidate the media completely ignored ends up with an upset. He won’t win New Hampshire but it would still be a great story.

SnarkVader on December 29, 2011 at 3:08 PM

Sorry, can’t see him going anywhere past Iowa

I think he would be worse than Perry debating dear leader

cmsinaz on December 29, 2011 at 3:08 PM

People breaking drug laws also like to hide behind the “right to privacy”.

Criminals in general suppport the right to privacy.

Dr. Tesla on December 29, 2011 at 3:08 PM

Sen. Santorum is a knowledgeable and conservative man, I’m glad to see him get some attention. Can he carry Pennsylvania?

Cindy Munford on December 29, 2011 at 2:48 PM

No. The Terri Schiavo thing killed him, as well as his full-throated support of the Iraq War and his warmongering against Iran. Conservatives are still mad at him for backing Arlen Specter against Pat Toomey in 2004. He basically has no constituency in his own home state.

But he is certainly the most committed social conservative in this field.

rockmom on December 29, 2011 at 3:09 PM

Am I the only one who thinks Santorum comes off as a dumb school boy? I’m sorry but there is no way Santorum can win. He is literally too dumb to be considered.

ModerateMan on December 29, 2011 at 3:09 PM

I don’t even recognize you anymore

apocalypse on December 29, 2011 at 3:09 PM

Santorum isn’t presidential material. Could be a could secretary, but not president.

andy85719 on December 29, 2011 at 3:09 PM

Republicans got thrown out as a group just like the Dims did in 2010.

Southernblogger on December 29, 2011 at 3:07 PM

And Santorum couldn’t hold his own.

Good Lt on December 29, 2011 at 3:09 PM

Libertarian = Liberal

The groups share a common prefix, and both love rotting out minds with drugs, blaming the United States for everything wrong in the world, perverting marriage so it gets away from child-rearing and family and instead focuses on self-gratification, and advocate for abortion on the grounds of maximizing choice. Both admire the “Me” culture of the 1960s, and hold the very idea of goodness in contempt.

Stoic Patriot on December 29, 2011 at 3:06 PM

Well libertarians are classical liberals like many of the Founders, yes, but the rest of your post is nothing but ignorance. Maybe you lashed out because you are uninformed and because the truth was a little uncomfortable.

Dante on December 29, 2011 at 3:09 PM

Is Obama this awesome debater? Is Romney, for that matter? I don’t see it.

I don’t even remember the Obama-McCain debates so it’s not like Obama cleaned house there.

Dr. Tesla on December 29, 2011 at 3:10 PM

Dr. Tesla on December 29, 2011 at 3:06 PM

This is correct, but paints Santorum no less of a dolt. You don’t run for president to evangelize or massage legal theory, you run to win. You do that other stuff after you’re elected.

It would be like Newt constantly emphasizing that adultery is legal or Romney and Huntsman that Mormons are the fastest growing so-and-so or Ron Paul that cannabis is not more harmful than alcohol.

Basically, the media sprung the keep-asking-Republicans-about-religion-and-gays trap, and every single candidate avoided it except Santorum.

HitNRun on December 29, 2011 at 3:11 PM

I like Santorum alot. He is young and can run in 2016. He needs to be elected to Senate again and Fight Harry Reid. Bauchmann needs to be Speaker of the House to bring Conservative bills to Republican contolred Senate in 2012.
Gingrich fought Clinton and gave us Welfare reform, Balanced Budget (with surplus)and stopped HillaryCare.
He shows the skill of working with 534 Congressmen from 50 states to get good legislation passed. He knows History and Govt Policy and will not be fooled by Pelosi and Reid. Supreme court nomination important. Gingrich knows Foreign Policy and Israel.

Romney brought us RomneyCare, Liberal judge appointments and a high tax state because he bows down to Democrats of Massachusetts. Romney knows little about Govt policy and has NOT battled 534 Congressmen from 50 states (he only governed one small state and caved into Dems). No Foreign Policy experience.
Obama vs Romney in debate says Romney “Wall Street” guy and a 1%er.

Ron Paul vs Obama> Obama says Paul a racist for his news letter, Paul would NOT kill Osoma Bin Laden, Paul would destroy US dollar by killing Federal Reserve, and Paul would let Iran have Nuke..

Obama wins every Debate against Ron Paul.

blondie2011 on December 29, 2011 at 3:11 PM

Well libertarians are classical liberals like many of the Founders, yes, but the rest of your post is nothing but ignorance. Maybe you lashed out because you are uninformed and because the truth was a little uncomfortable.

Dante on December 29, 2011 at 3:09 PM

Or perhaps it is because your post was so replete with falsehoods that it merited a counterargument.

Stoic Patriot on December 29, 2011 at 3:11 PM

I think conservatives should have been against Terri Schiavo being starved to death.

Her entire biological family plus all of her friends wanted her alive, and a judge overruled them. In my mind, that’s big government on crack.

Dr. Tesla on December 29, 2011 at 3:12 PM

rubberneck on December 29, 2011 at 3:05 PM

Thanks rubberneck. It’s good to know that although Santorum disagrees with the act of homosexuality, he understands that it’s a states rights issue and that the supreme court over steps when ruling on cases such as Roe v. Wade. Again, feeling stronger about him.

mtucker5695 on December 29, 2011 at 3:12 PM

Well, good luck with Santorum…

Because liberals hate him because of his anti-gay comments… and, for heavens sake, just Google his name and see what comes up first…

Second, independents will definitely turn away from him once the media beats his “dead infant” story into the ground. They will take the guy with the terrible economy over the parents who couldn’t let go, because they’ll think it’s just plain weird.

Washington Fancy on December 29, 2011 at 3:12 PM

And Santorum saying he doesn’t believe in a right to privacy OVER AND OVER AND OVER again.

thphilli on December 29, 2011 at 3:02 PM

I would agree with Rick that “the right to privacy” doesn’t wash on the abortion issue.

The other privacy issues are discussed in my previous post.

listens2glenn on December 29, 2011 at 3:08 PM

listens2glenn on December 29, 2011 at 3:13 PM

Santorum isn’t presidential material.

Considering who is president now and what material he’s made of (stuff you find at the bottom of an outhouse), is this a good or bad thing?

NoDonkey on December 29, 2011 at 3:13 PM

Also among Santorum’s greatest hits:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santorum_Amendment

Good Lt on December 29, 2011 at 3:13 PM

But Dr., when they did the autopsy, the found her brain stem was the only non-mushy part left. It is not the responsibility of Congress to get involved in such matters.

andy85719 on December 29, 2011 at 3:14 PM

I think it’s kind of gay silly to rule out Santy based on those comments about the gays and sodomy.

It’s the Economy, stupids.

Others disagree. It’s the sodomy.

Dr. Tesla on December 29, 2011 at 3:15 PM

OT: Rick Perry’s favorability with New Hampshire Republicans is 26/62.

andy85719 on December 29, 2011 at 3:16 PM

I remember watching the Obama vs McCain debates, Obama always agreed with McCain. And the Dems always portray themselves as Moderates to get the vote.

blondie2011 on December 29, 2011 at 3:16 PM

Andy,

But in your view, it’s the courts responsiblity to get involved.

What’s it it you if the majority of family, including her entire biological faimly, wants her alive? You seem to have your nose in their business, siding with a government that was overruling their wish.

Don’t use liberterian arguments to justify your position

Dr. Tesla on December 29, 2011 at 3:16 PM

Bachmann Perry Cain Newt Santorum is totally going all the way to the White House.

Red Cloud on December 29, 2011 at 3:16 PM

Obama wins every Debate against Ron Paul.

blondie2011 on December 29, 2011 at 3:11 PM

Don’t worry about any Obama/Paul debates. Paul will be gone well before the real Dem/Republican campaign gets started.

Trafalgar on December 29, 2011 at 3:17 PM

And Ron Paul is the Christian bigot? :P

aryeung on December 29, 2011 at 3:17 PM

Or perhaps it is because your post was so replete with falsehoods that it merited a counterargument.

Stoic Patriot on December 29, 2011 at 3:11 PM

There wasn’t a single thing in my post that was false, so it certainly couldn’t have contained falsehoods, plural. And you provided no counterargument.

Social conservatives wish to use the force of government to punish and change behaviors they don’t like.

If you think you can provide a counterargument, then do so and refute my statement with facts. Name some social conservative issues.

Dante on December 29, 2011 at 3:17 PM

I’m glad to see Santorum climbing. Hopefully he can use this momentum and climb higher still.

Stoic Patriot on December 29, 2011 at 3:18 PM

Those comments about gays were like cyanide to his electability. Most people don’t want big brother poking its head into bedroom windows to determine if a sex act is government approved.

andy85719 on December 29, 2011 at 3:18 PM

Obama must be the man if a majority of Americans prefer him to anybody we throw up there, given this economy.

I think most Americans with a functioning brain are more than happy to give somebody else a shot.

Dr. Tesla on December 29, 2011 at 3:19 PM

How can ANYONE back someone that endorsed Arlen Specter over Pat Toomey?? Santorum is a joke of a candidate who didn’t even TRY to get on Virginia’s ballot for their primary. He has NOTHING after Iowa.

jrfromdallas on December 29, 2011 at 3:19 PM

Santorum is picking up all the Ron Paul voters as they learn the truth about his past. This could happen.

Face it you Romney and Gingrich fake conservatives …

Conservatives can’t stand either of the global warming, healthcare mandate, illegal alien amnesty loving, socialist frauds.

Gregor on December 29, 2011 at 3:19 PM

Well, good luck with Santorum…

Because liberals hate him because of his anti-gay comments… and, for heavens sake, just Google his name and see what comes up first…

Second, independents will definitely turn away from him once the media beats his “dead infant” story into the ground. They will take the guy with the terrible economy over the parents who couldn’t let go, because they’ll think it’s just plain weird.

Washington Fancy on December 29, 2011 at 3:12 PM

On second thought, you’re right. I should allow google to decide my candidate. Once again, here I go allowing the media to determine who I pick. I was foolish to think for myself and I hope others can forgive me.

Also, independents are all that matter. What I really want is a bunch of too lazy “I can’t decide because I didn’t care enough to follow politics for the past 47 months” to decide our next president. I guess those of us with well thought out beliefs and an ability to understand politics clearly should just shut up and sit back.

At least Rick isn’t sitting on the couch with Nancy. But hey, I guess that would win some independents.

mtucker5695 on December 29, 2011 at 3:19 PM

I will support anyone in the general election except Romney. Anyone I tell ya!

davemason2k on December 29, 2011 at 3:20 PM

And Santorum couldn’t hold his own.

Good Lt on December 29, 2011 at 3:09 PM

His own what?

Snorkdoodle Whizbang on December 29, 2011 at 3:20 PM

Andy thinks Santy is going to set up cameras in his bedroom.

Who’s the kook, now?

I don’t think anybody wants to watch you have sex, man. Trust me.

Dr. Tesla on December 29, 2011 at 3:20 PM

The guy is anti privacy, anti birth control, wants to criminalize adultery. He is a disaster and is just plain creepy. I hope he goes down in flames.

bopbottle on December 29, 2011 at 3:20 PM

thphilli on December 29, 2011 at 2:49 PM

Are you saying RP is not racist based on his newsletters? Incompetent at best.

antisocial on December 29, 2011 at 3:20 PM

Bye bye Perry
Bye bye Gingrich
Bye bye Bachmann

Falz on December 29, 2011 at 3:21 PM

Of course, the real news here is that Romney is probably going to win Iowa. But Hot Air would rather spin this as a possible game changer for the single most unattractive candidate in the Republican primary. Way to show your canny political instincts there, fellows!

Mr. Arkadin on December 29, 2011 at 3:21 PM

I think conservatives should have been against Terri Schiavo being starved to death.

Her entire biological family plus all of her friends wanted her alive, and a judge overruled them. In my mind, that’s big government on crack.

Dr. Tesla on December 29, 2011 at 3:12 PM

I think conservatives should have spoken up about the federal government overriding a sovereign state court – after the Supreme Court refused to hear the appeal – and crafting person-specific legislation, then “passing” it under the cover of unanimous consent.

You think that a judge favoring a person’s legal guardian is big government on crack???

Dante on December 29, 2011 at 3:21 PM

Majority of Ron Paul voters aren’t going to go to any other Republican. They are mostly liberterians or disenchanted liberals or political neophytes.

Dr. Tesla on December 29, 2011 at 3:21 PM

Look at the PA polls now. Santorum could contest his home state much more than Romney could contest his. At the very least Santorum forces the Dems to spend alot more money and resources in PA. That’s extra money they would prefer go to FLorida and Ohio.

Socons ARE coalescing in Iowa and Santorum actually has potential to win the state if these trends continue.

With the internet and momentum money can come quickly. Like it or not, Santorum has real potential to be the anti-Romney.

Utica681 on December 29, 2011 at 3:24 PM

Majority of Ron Paul voters aren’t going to go to any other Republican. They are mostly liberterians or disenchanted liberals or political neophytes.
Dr. Tesla on December 29, 2011 at 3:21 PM

You forgot disenchanted Republicans that are sick of holding up big government talking points.

aryeung on December 29, 2011 at 3:25 PM

Look at the PA polls now. Santorum could contest his home state much more than Romney could contest his.

Utica681 on December 29, 2011 at 3:24 PM

Problem is, we don’t need MA to win… and Romney polls in PA just as well if not more frequently better than Santorum.

Red Cloud on December 29, 2011 at 3:25 PM

Dante,

Courtes are the less represantative branch of our government. I don’t think they have the right to overrule majority of a family with one exception.

There was no living will, and her husband had married another woman and had two kidss with her.

THere was no moral or medical reason why Schiavo had to to be starved to death. The family was willing to take on the medical costs.

You are the one that has your nose in their personal business. I’m siding with the family over the government.

Dr. Tesla on December 29, 2011 at 3:25 PM

Laws that ban certain sex acts between consenting adults, which Santorum heartily support, place the government as the arbiter of propriety. Do we really want that?

andy85719 on December 29, 2011 at 3:26 PM

Wow, the Santorum surge is really bringing the Paulnuts out today.
Me thinks they’re afraid Mr. Looney toons won’t make the top three.

Norky on December 29, 2011 at 3:26 PM

Santorum leaps up to third place, behind a virtual dead heat between Mitt Romney and Ron Paul:
=================================

And baggage free!!

canopfor on December 29, 2011 at 3:26 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4