Rasmussen in SC: Romney 27, Santorum 24

posted at 9:20 am on January 6, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

The last we saw of South Carolina polling three weeks ago, Newt Gingrich had a large lead over Mitt Romney, the only two candidates in double digits, and Rick Santorum tied Jon Huntsman for last place.  My, how things have changed over the Christmas holidays.  After their dead-heat finish in Iowa, Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum now lead the latest Rasmussen poll 27/24, respectively, and Gingrich has dropped to 18%:

What a difference a caucus makes. Rick Santorum who two months ago had one percent (1%) support among likely South Carolina Republican Primary voters now is running a close second there with 24% of the vote.

The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey in the Palmetto State finds former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney still in the lead, earning 27% support from likely GOP Primary Voters, up from 23% in early November. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich is in third with 18% of the vote, followed by Texas Congressman Ron Paul at 11%.

Bringing up the rear are Texas Governor Rick Perry with five percent (5%) and former Utah Governor Jon Huntsman at two percent (2%). Another two percent (2%) of these likely primary voters like some other candidate, and 11% remain undecided.

Ron Paul doesn’t appear to have gained a lot of traction in the same period.  The RCP average had Paul at 8.5% for December before today’s Rasmussen poll, but the mid-month Clemson poll had him at 10%.  His surprising drop in Iowa to third place has not hurt him, but he’s not picking up any momentum, either.  Rasmussen’s sample is 74/26 Republicans to independents, so it isn’t as if the survey of 750 likely primary voters (conducted in its entirety yesterday) tried to avoid Paul’s base, either.

Looking at the internals, Santorum competes better in some demos with Romney.  He edges Romney among men, 27/25, but is behind 30/20 with women and almost tied with Gingrich at 19%.  Surprisingly, Romney edges Paul for voters under 40, 25/22, with Santorum in third at 16%.  Santorum tops Romney with 40-64YOs 30/22, but Romney wins seniors by a large margin, 41/25 over Gingrich, with Santorum in third again at 18%.   Romney and Santorum win among Republicans and non-Republicans, 29/25 and 23/21, respectively.  Paul only manages a 19% with independents and just 8% among Republicans.

Romney has a bigger problem with very conservative voters.  He comes in third among this self-identified set, which comprises the plurality in the sample (41%), behind Santorum (36%) and Gingrich (22%).  Santorum has a problem among “somewhat conservative” voters, as Romney wins 38% and Gingrich comes in second at 20% among respondents who accounted for 35% of the sample.  Santorum will have to find a way to increase his appeal beyond the very conservative base, while Romney has to work in the opposite direction.

Santorum may have the edge in making that case.  His favorability rating is 72%, a bit higher than Romney’s 68% and Gingrich’s 59%.  Romney gets a 65% favorability among very conservative voters, but Santorum has a 74% rating with somewhat conservative voters, so he has more potential upside in the demo he needs to target.  Paul’s favorability is only 39%, which beats Jon Huntsman’s 29%.  Rick Perry gets to 50%, but only 9% find him “very favorable,” which portends a very poor showing for the Texas governor in a couple of weeks.

The news has to be encouraging to both Romney and Santorum.  Romney was not expected to do well in South Carolina, but his numbers have improved quite a bit over the last three weeks, and two-thirds of voters in this poll expect him to win the nomination, while 45% believe he’s the strongest candidate to beat Obama in the fall.  Only 16% believe that of Santorum, which means his support outstrips his perceived viability.  A second-place finish in New Hampshire might improve that number and perhaps add more to his support, but that may come at the expense of other conservatives in the race rather than Romney.

 

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 5

When we get past the fluff and stupidity of the primary and look with clear eyes at what we truly want in a president. Folks its Rick Perry, by any measure of a successful conservative governor he is the absolute best. It’s just to bad so many place such a high value on rhetoric. Anyone can say anything at anytime. The last time America picked a president based purely on what he “said” we got Obama. So all you Santorum supporters think long and hard about that. Records matter Romney and Gingrich supporters. Rick Perry has an outstanding record of success. It’s going to take results to beat Obama and his minions in the press. Like it or not Rick Perry is the only successful chief executive who has dlivered the economic results this country so desperately needs in this economy.

Perry 2012…… Experience Integrity Results.

iidvbii on January 6, 2012 at 11:37 AM

Romney has to be very careful now too. Some of his supporters are echoing the hard left in their attacks on Santorum, and if his campaign is tied to that it gives Santorum a real path to the nomination.
Overall though, I think after SC, Santorum, Perry, and Newt need to have a talk and all get together behind one of them.

Right now the most important thing for this country is to deny Romney the nomination – even if he miraculously wins, we all still lose.

18-1 on January 6, 2012 at 10:24 AM

Shhhh. Your right, of course. I saw Sununu on FOX this morning. He was like a freakin’ pit bull trashing Huntsman, Santorum, Gingrich–pretty much anybody who had criticism of Romney. He was VERY off-putting–even for the FOX host. I say Romney’s attack dogs need to keep it up so the whole country can get a good look at his operation. Gee, I wonder when we’ll get the latest hit piece trashing Gingrich and Santorum from Ann Coulter??? Lol.

KickandSwimMom on January 6, 2012 at 11:38 AM

Oh, the irony. It is you who are marginalized. The republican establishment could put forth a flaming bag of crap and you’d vote for it, because you always compromise, always abide. Your useless as you are inconsequential (in much the same way as the Black and Jewish vote are “in the bag” for the Dems).

Stop trying to browbeat those of us with a conscience. It won’t work. Either climb aboard and save America or get out of the way.

noeastern on January 6, 2012 at 11:32 AM

No. I stay involved in the process, which means I matter. I spent 10 years in the Libertarian Party, now that’s marginalization!

Browbeat? Browbeat? Are you serious?

You really need to Google “projection”

CaliforniaRefugee on January 6, 2012 at 11:38 AM

http://www.npr.org/about/press/061024_rove.html

Cindy Munford on January 6, 2012 at 11:33 AM

Snicker :o)

Genius

Key West Reader on January 6, 2012 at 11:38 AM

You’re defending Rove and Bush because they squeaked out two elections against horrible candidates? That about seals it. You’re not a conservative, you just like winning elections.

Bush and Rove DESTROYED the Republican brand and handed the entire Legislative branch back to the Left. They expanded the Welfare State. They expanded the budget. They handed away fiscal issues to the Left.

Karl Rove is one of the worst politicians/Americans of the last 100 years. Pretending to be a conservative, he did more to destroy Reagan conservatism than anyone… because he did it from the inside. The concept is so destroyed, Mitt Romney, author of mandated health insurance, is now supported by supposed “conservatives.”

Please, look at Mitt’s horrible tax plan and tell me if you think it’s “conservative.” It’s a Leftist mess. Try and defend “$200K/yr = the rich”.

mankai on January 6, 2012 at 10:55 AM

God, I’d love to have a beer w/ you.

noeastern on January 6, 2012 at 11:39 AM

guess I would rather be controlled by a Republican then a Democrat./

melle1228 on January 6, 2012 at 10:39 AM
You need to really take stock and consider what you are saying.

noeastern on January 6, 2012 at 11:34 AM

Umm did you notice the snark tag?

melle1228 on January 6, 2012 at 11:40 AM

I won’t need to- the media will do it over and over if Santorum is the nominee.

BettyRuth on January 6, 2012 at 11:36 AM

Then by all means, let’s let the media pick our candidate./

melle1228 on January 6, 2012 at 11:41 AM

You can measure the strength of a Not-Romney, whose time has come, by how well they perform vs. Romney in red states.

Notice Perry and Gingrich were leading Romney by as much as double digits when it was their time to surge.

Santorum can’t even hit parity with Romney.

This shows that his current support is soft and his surge won’t last.

TheRightMan on January 6, 2012 at 11:43 AM

Key West Reader on January 6, 2012 at 11:26 AM

I’ll expect Perry to mention the recent efforts in the NH legislature to repeal the democratic governors veto of right to work legislation pushed by the Speaker of the House republicans in union pockets sided with democrats

He will tie this to Texas Economy as a right to work state…and then he will nail Santorum,Gingrich & Romney for failing to support overturning FDR Labor Laws & being pro-union. Santorum,Gingrich & Romney will have a cow but Perry won’t care…And SC will pay attention to that.

workingclass artist on January 6, 2012 at 11:43 AM

Is the Tea Party still around?

caverduc on January 6, 2012 at 9:38 AM

Not that I can tell.

Burke on January 6, 2012 at 11:43 AM

I won’t need to- the media will do it over and over if Santorum is the nominee.

BettyRuth on January 6, 2012 at 11:36 AM

Furthermore if you don’t think the media will try and destroy Romney as well-you are sadly mistaken. Even if they can’t find anything they will make stuff up, and some voters will buy it. See Sarah Palin-trig is Bristol’s son, and I can see Russia from my house.

melle1228 on January 6, 2012 at 11:45 AM

Let’s check the “conservatism” here.

I already responded to that question when you asked me the last time. I don’t support it, but to be clear he does not want to raise taxes on anyone so it’s a wee bit different from Obama.

You don’t support Romney’s liberal tax plan… but he’s still a conservative.

As for the rest, you are seriously unhinged with your hyperbole and misstatements. We didn’t lose Congress in 2006 because of ‘compassionate conservatism’. We lost because ‘Independents’ voted in the majority for the Dems.

What? Why do you think Independents voted so heavily for the Dems… because Bush had been such a fiscal conservative? They ran against his deficits and against the war. Now, why was the war effort falgging? Because Bush and Rove ran a war that designed not to break anything or kill anybody lest we upset Muslims or the Left.

Bush did not “almost lose” to Kerry, and the prevailing issue was the Iraq War.

If Bush had lost OH, Kerry would have won. Bush got 50.81% of the vote in OH. Republicans overall gained 4 seats in the Senate and 2 in the House. In OH, Voinovich received 64% of the vote.

Moreover, do you have any fracking idea how important the eeevil Karl Rove’s American Crossroads was in the 2010 congressional tsunami? He is absolutely brilliant at what he does. I am grateful for his contributions, but rage on, dude, if it makes you feel better.

Buy Danish on January 6, 2012 at 11:17 AM

Bull. AC was Rove’s attempt to board the TEA Party Express. You can’t argue that nobody could have done anything to stop Dems in 2006 and then try and claim that some 527 organization made 2010 happen. Its board is made up of former RNC and NRSC members. Yeah, real outsiders./

Rove’s an idiot who destroyed the GOP brand.

mankai on January 6, 2012 at 11:46 AM

Is the Tea Party still around?

caverduc on January 6, 2012 at 9:38 AM
Not that I can tell.

Burke on January 6, 2012 at 11:43 AM

That’s the way we like it, Burke.

Key West Reader on January 6, 2012 at 11:46 AM

Wake me when Republicans can be rude to someone other than other Republicans.

Cindy Munford on January 6, 2012 at 11:47 AM

Then by all means, let’s let the media pick our candidate./

melle1228 on January 6, 2012 at 11:41 AM

And you think the media is not already picking our candidates?

The fickleness of the GOP electorate this primary season has really depressed me and, frankly, it tells me that Obama will win easily.

- The media hypes a candidate (Bachmann, Cain, Santorum) and the lemmings go along propelling them to frontrunner status.
- Then the media starts the takedown and they become yesterday’s news.

The only two that rose on their own merits – Perry by his record and Gingrich by his debate performances – were set upon with a ferociousness unparalleled until they dropped.

And of course the lemmings (electorate) followed suit.

I can’t wait for Romney’s takedown. It won’t be pretty.

By September 2012, we will all be acknowledging that Romney is finished and the media will have delivered another election to their messiah, Obama.

TheRightMan on January 6, 2012 at 11:49 AM

Wake me when Republicans can be rude to someone other than other Republicans.

Cindy Munford on January 6, 2012 at 11:47 AM

I don’t see that happening. People are pretty passionate about their candidate-and that is putting it mildly and nicely. Are the hard feelings going to go away after a nominee is selected?

melle1228 on January 6, 2012 at 11:50 AM

As for Santorum’s rise, either he or Newt have to decide who takes one for the team and drops out to endorse the other.
Doughboy on January 6, 2012 at 9:29 AM

You are right. It would be a tough decision for either of them, but I think Santorum has the momentum now. Also, consider that Newt has a lot more negatives, so it would be harder for him to convince Rick Santorum’s (and eventually Rick Perry’s) followers to support him than vice versa.

Unfortunately, Newt appears to think he just has to attack Romney hard enough to stop him. I can understand that sentiment, and I think the upcoming debates will be fascinating to watch, but I also think it is a serious tactical mistake, that will do nothing but deliver candidate Romney (and two-term president Obama).

Captain Obvious on January 6, 2012 at 11:50 AM

By September 2012, we will all be acknowledging that Romney is finished and the media will have delivered another election to their messiah, Obama.

TheRightMan on January 6, 2012 at 11:49 AM

Sadly I also believe that is going to happen. Let’s just hope we take the Senate and keep the House.

melle1228 on January 6, 2012 at 11:51 AM

ROVE: I’m looking at all of these Robert and adding them up. I add up to a Republican Senate and Republican House. You may end up with a different math but you are entitled to your math and I’m entitled to THE math.

-The Architect of the Dem takeover of Congress in 2006

mankai on January 6, 2012 at 11:52 AM

I can see myself in drunk stupor after having voted for Romney, in a long fervent prayer that the Republican Congress will hold his liberal instincts in check.

I cannot vote for Santorum. I am weak, I admit. I am unable to drink THAT much.

Archivarix on January 6, 2012 at 11:52 AM

thuja on January 6, 2012 at 11:06 AM

You are exactly right. Santorum’s neanderthal views would pave the way for a landslide victory for Obama. It’s embarrassing to have someone like him to even be in contention.

BettyRuth on January 6, 2012 at 11:18 AM

And it’s embarrassing for me that the republican party has become people like you. You push your progressive social issues, we’ll push ours.

hawkdriver on January 6, 2012 at 11:53 AM

No sh!t Sherlock. But making both sides evil won’t either, and certainly won’t make your opinion matter to ta’boot.

CaliforniaRefugee on January 6, 2012 at 11:33 AM

Hey genius, both sides have brought us to 17,000,000,000 in debt –

BOTH SIDES

. We need to consider a takeover of one of the sides or look for another side. I won’t insult you with the Einstein quote, actually I will – “The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.”

noeastern on January 6, 2012 at 11:54 AM

I don’t see that happening. People are pretty passionate about their candidate-and that is putting it mildly and nicely. Are the hard feelings going to go away after a nominee is selected?

melle1228 on January 6, 2012 at 11:50 AM

Well McCain did endorse his arch-nemesis Romney.
But then again he is a politician.
Who knows what the regular people will do.

Lily on January 6, 2012 at 11:56 AM

Santorum has never really had the media exposure the other candidates have had thus far. He certainly is far more Conservative and is an incredibly more passionate and caring person than Mr. Plastic.

I made that same distinction in one of the threads yesterday–that Santorum, if nothing else, at leasts projects for passion and conviction for what he believes in than the programmed and dispassionate Romney does.
And my comment was summarily mocked.
I am not necessarily on the Santorum bandwagon, but I agree with you.

Right Mover on January 6, 2012 at 11:58 AM

Fiscal conservatives in the Philly suburbs abandoned Santorum because 1) he was more of a spender than most earmarks 2) he couldn’t go a week without talking about sex

joana on January 6, 2012 at 11:24 AM

Interesting version. Which is harder to prove that the PA GOP and Specter pulling support for him. I’m a Conservative. I make no excuses for it.

hawkdriver on January 6, 2012 at 11:59 AM

Why do I get the feeling that its gonna be pretty hair/crazy eyes 2012? That way, pretty hair shores up the conservative vote. Totus is gonna eat pretty hairs lunch. The only fun would be to watch crazy eyes take out foot-in-the-mouth joe.

tommy71 on January 6, 2012 at 12:00 PM

melle1228 on January 6, 2012 at 11:50 AM

Hard to say, there are still people who claim that Republicans stayed home because of John McCain’s nomination. There is written proof that some high profile Republicans voted for Obama because of the Palin pick, but I believe they were small in number but loud in voice and disdain. In my opinion the historical value of the Democrat’s candidate just could not be overcome. Guilt is a powerful thing. That said the “Nice guy but over his head” campaign tactic is pitiful considering the record of The Won.

Cindy Munford on January 6, 2012 at 12:01 PM

Please, look at Mitt’s horrible tax plan and tell me if you think it’s “conservative.” It’s a Leftist mess. Try and defend “$200K/yr = the rich”.
mankai on January 6, 2012 at 10:55 AM

He’s going after Obama. He just feels obligated to say, “I think he’s a nice guy but…” because for some unfathomable reason the nasty Demagogue-in-Chief’s personal favorable ratings are very high. But believe me, I know how annoying it is.

Buy Danish on January 6, 2012 at 12:01 PM

No. I stay involved in the process, which means I matter. CaliforniaRefugee on January 6, 2012 at 11:38 AM

Staying involved in the process is irrelevant if one is a lemming.

I spent 10 years in the Libertarian Party, now that’s marginalization!

CaliforniaRefugee on January 6, 2012 at 11:38 AM

What you’re telling me is you stopped following your conscience. The qit profits a man uestion is why?

Another favorite quote of mine from Sir Thomas More: “Why Richard, it profits a man nothing to give his soul for the whole world… but for Wales?”

noeastern on January 6, 2012 at 12:02 PM

Notice Perry and Gingrich were leading Romney by as much as double digits when it was their time to surge.

Santorum can’t even hit parity with Romney.

This shows that his current support is soft and his surge won’t last.

TheRightMan on January 6, 2012 at 11:43 AM

The primary schedule an the insane clusterfark of jumbled debates (another 7 scheduled for January) are designed to benefit Romney…And that’s exactly how Big Media likes it.

Keeps the candidates from appealing directly to voters…gathering steam the old fashioned way…pollsters love it,jornolists love it & and it interrupts traditional fundraising.

workingclass artist on January 6, 2012 at 12:02 PM

guess I would rather be controlled by a Republican then a Democrat./

melle1228 on January 6, 2012 at 10:39 AM

You need to really take stock and consider what you are saying.

noeastern on January 6, 2012 at 11:34 AM

Umm did you notice the snark tag?

melle1228 on January 6, 2012 at 11:40 AM

Sorry about that, faulty snark radar.

noeastern on January 6, 2012 at 12:03 PM

I won’t insult you with the Einstein quote, actually I will – “The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.”

noeastern on January 6, 2012 at 11:54 AM

You’re quoting a massive liberal to make your point? You’ve come along way noeastern.

Actually, things have changed a lot in the Republican Party, which is why I decided to get back into it. We are debating how much smaller to make the government, and not “Compationate Concervatism” So no, I don’t see this as the same thing over and over again. I’m also staying involved to see that stays that way.

CaliforniaRefugee on January 6, 2012 at 12:04 PM

than the …

hawkdriver on January 6, 2012 at 12:04 PM

joana on January 6, 2012 at 11:24 AM

Interesting version. Which is harder to prove that than the PA GOP and Specter pulling support for him. I’m a Conservative. I make no excuses for it.

hawkdriver on January 6, 2012 at 11:59 AM

typos abound

hawkdriver on January 6, 2012 at 12:05 PM

Staying involved in the process is irrelevant if one is a lemming.

noeastern on January 6, 2012 at 12:02 PM

Life sure is a lot easier to understand if you believe your opposition doesn’t think for itself, isn’t it?

CaliforniaRefugee on January 6, 2012 at 12:09 PM

I want results…not BS.

That’s why I support Gov. Perry…He delivers!

I’d support Buddy Roemer before I’d support Romney or Santorum…Sheesh!

workingclass artist on January 6, 2012 at 12:09 PM

Just released CNN SC poll:

Romney 37%
Santorum 19%
Gingrich 18%
Paul 12%
Perry 5%
Huntsman 1%

JA on January 6, 2012 at 12:10 PM

Romney will not win SC. He is more liberal than the RINO Lindsay Graham and Lindsay has been censored by the largest Republican Party County Committees in SC. Once Newt starts taking Romney to the woodshed,Santorum will win SC. Ron Paul will not do well in SC. He’s nuttier than a SC Pecan pie.

Santorum will do much better in the face to face politics in SC than the cheshire grinning Robot.

Nikki Haley screwed the pooch with her endorsement of Robot Romney.

they lie on January 6, 2012 at 12:17 PM

You’re quoting a massive liberal to make your point? You’ve come along way noeastern.

CaliforniaRefugee on January 6, 2012 at 12:04 PM

Come on CaliforniaRefugee, you can do better than this. What does his politics have to do with the meaning of this quote? That’s weak, address the point or don’t, but don’t weasel out.

Actually, things have changed a lot in the Republican Party, which is why I decided to get back into it. We are debating how much smaller to make the government, and not “Compationate Concervatism”
CaliforniaRefugee on January 6, 2012 at 12:04 PM

What am I in wonderland? We’re debating putting Romney in the White House. Yes, that Romney.

noeastern on January 6, 2012 at 12:18 PM

thuja on January 6, 2012 at 11:06 AM

I would imagine on what you mean by gay Republican. If sexual orientation is the litmus test by which all candidate have to pass to even get consideration of their ideas on things like the economy, jobs, national secuity, foreign affairs, tax reform…. etc. Then I guess a gay Republican is the same as any other single-issue voter who is so myopic they are willing to see the nation destroyed before they would vote against a candidate clearly destroying this nation. In this gay Republicans have a lot in common with many right-to-lifers and not a few of the current crop of anti-capitalist OWS types.

In other words. If you want to make sexual orientation the only thing that matters, you are not working toward a better America. This is an election of serious economic and strategic issues not one of social issues like gay rights. If gay Republicans are so single-minded with this litmus test then all I can say is that gay Republicans are an intolerant hypocritical lot since the message has always been that sexual orientation should not matter. I guess it does to people like you. Very disappointing.

I would urge you to open your closed mind and listen to what the candidates have to say about the issue now. Society has evolved but apparently gay Republicans have not if they are going to dismiss candidates outright for things they said a decade ago.

Happy Nomad on January 6, 2012 at 12:20 PM

http://www.npr.org/about/press/061024_rove.html

Cindy Munford on January 6, 2012 at 11:33 AM

Thanks Cindy- that was fun!

AZgranny on January 6, 2012 at 12:20 PM

Life sure is a lot easier to understand if you believe your opposition doesn’t think for itself, isn’t it?

CaliforniaRefugee on January 6, 2012 at 12:09 PM

Life is a lot easier when you think your opposition chose that word to describe your mental capabilities.

noeastern on January 6, 2012 at 12:20 PM

And it’s embarrassing for me that the republican party has become people like you. You push your progressive social issues, we’ll push ours.

hawkdriver on January 6, 2012 at 11:53 AM

Couldn’t have said it better. It seems to me that many moderates that voted for BHO have nowhere to turn, so they are trying to hijack the Republican primary.

Norky on January 6, 2012 at 12:22 PM

JA on January 6, 2012 at 12:10 PM

I just saw that one as well. It’s a pretty unstable environment. I think most can agree that Newt is down the cute. The questions remain about the size of Mitt’s lead there.

MJBrutus on January 6, 2012 at 12:27 PM

Actually, things have changed a lot in the Republican Party, which is why I decided to get back into it. We are debating how much smaller to make the government, and not “Compationate Concervatism”
CaliforniaRefugee on January 6, 2012 at 12:04 PM

And what bold, government trimming, initiative is Romney proposing? Why should I feel confident that he is the man to lead us from this fiscal black hole? How the f–k do I explain to my children that I voted for Bush (Medicare part B, No Child Left Behind, debt from 5.7 trillion to 11 trillion), and Romney?

noeastern on January 6, 2012 at 12:28 PM

Stop Insider Trading Dead In Its Tracks

Posted by Gov. Rick Perry (Diary)
Thursday, January 5th at 10:00PM

Earlier this week, the Chicago Tribune ran a little noted editorial on the insider trading scandal plaguing Congress, calling out phony efforts to reform the rules and demanding that we finally put a stop to this outrageous and unethical behavior.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/editorials/ct-edit-markets2-76-lines-jm-20120104,0,3387020.story

If you haven’t read the editorial yet, I recommend you do because while the professional political punditry class is more interested in superfluous items like the political horse race and candidate attire, the reality is that members of both parties in Washington, D.C., are abusing their positions and ordinary Americans have had enough.

As the editorial notes, “’60 Minutes’ reported that Pelosi and her husband participated in an initial public offering from Visa in 2008, just as credit card legislation started moving through the House. The Pelosis bought 5,000 shares at the IPO price of $44 a share. Two days later, the shares traded at $64. The legislation, which was likely to cut credit card company profits, went nowhere that year. It passed two years later.”

It’s not enough members of Congress make $174,000 a year, some are trading on inside information to use their public service to enrich themselves.

The Tribune is right, the Securities and Exchange Commission and Justice Department should be using every available tool to put a stop to this. But they are not. So, Congress needs to pass the STOCK Act as a matter of urgency, to do even more to ensure that this kind of thing is stopped dead in its tracks.

In addition to calling for tough measures to outlaw insider trading by Members of Congress, I’ve called for making Congress part-time, like the Texas legislature, cutting congressional pay in half, and amending FOIA to apply to Congress and the White House.

We have a $15 trillion national debt that is growing by the day, a direct result of establishment, insider politicians who are more interested in constantly increasing their personal power and profit than in reforming the system, bringing spending under control, and doing the work they were elected to do. It’s time to uproot and overhaul Washington. We can start with ensuring insider trading by members of Congress results in prison time, and not unseemly profits.

http://www.redstate.com/governorperry/2012/01/05/stop-insider-trading-dead-in-its-tracks/

Gig Em’
Perry 2012

workingclass artist on January 6, 2012 at 12:28 PM

And it’s embarrassing for me that the republican party has become people like you. You push your progressive social issues, we’ll push ours.

hawkdriver on January 6, 2012 at 11:53 AM

There are areas where some of us who are more socially moderate and those of you who are more socially conservative can find at least some common ground. Abortion is one area.

McDuck on January 6, 2012 at 12:29 PM

“If you haven’t read the editorial yet, I recommend you do because while the professional political punditry class is more interested in superfluous items like the political horse race and candidate attire…”

http://www.redstate.com/governorperry/2012/01/05/stop-insider-trading-dead-in-its-tracks/

Yeah…it’s important why Santorum wears a sweater vest…

workingclass artist on January 6, 2012 at 12:30 PM

You are exactly right. Santorum’s neanderthal views would pave the way for a landslide victory for Obama. It’s embarrassing to have someone like him to even be in contention.

BettyRuth on January 6, 2012 at 11:18 AM

You got that right. I’m tired of having to convince decent people that it’s only the fringe of the GOP that is like that just as the Dems I know are embarrassed by their odd balls.

MJBrutus on January 6, 2012 at 12:30 PM

Romney will be a much better candidate for going through the attacks of Newt at the upcoming debates and coming weeks. He will be better for it in the general because he will defend himself now.

I do not know of any Ads yet that have been lies. Newt does not like hearing the truth about how ridiculus it sounds to be paid 1. 6 Million $s by Freddie MAC as a historian. It seems hypocritical of him to say one thing and do the opposite. (“OK for me but not for thee”) Newt is a very polarizing figure no matter how smart he might be and has personal baggage that many americans do not want in their President (or First Lady)

I prefer Romney (obviously) but supported Pawlenty earlier and would support any Republican candidate with the exception of Ron Paul should they win the nomination. I would do this because I know how important this election is to the USA.

Natebo on January 6, 2012 at 12:31 PM

You can tell a “Fiscal Conservative”. They quote CNN Polls.

kingsjester on January 6, 2012 at 12:33 PM

You got that right. I’m tired of having to convince decent people that it’s only the fringe of the GOP that is like that just as the Dems I know are embarrassed by their odd balls.

MJBrutus on January 6, 2012 at 12:30 PM

MJBrutus, David Brooks and David Frum: The Three Musketeers of True Republicanism.

Good Solid B-Plus on January 6, 2012 at 12:34 PM

The latest polling from CNN/Time shows that Romney has 37% in SC, and on top of that, he is winning in EVERY demographic. Has at least 30% in every demographic.

BTW, this was taken post-Iowa caucus.

ConservativePartyNow on January 6, 2012 at 12:34 PM

“I simply will not have us engage in a this that last August, ten years ago. This is about the here and now and the highly unsual circumstances that we are in because of the of the Republican failed economic policies of President George Bush took us to a financial meltdown, took us into near depression, took us into deep deficits that we still have to deal with! Are they just too tired to come to work? I hope not!” – Nancy Pelosi

http://weaselzippers.us/2012/01/06/pelosi-blames-failed-economic-policies-of-george-bush-for-the-obama-econ

Gov. Perry didn’t fumble the ball…Obama did.

Case closed

Gig Em’
Perry 2012

workingclass artist on January 6, 2012 at 12:36 PM

Inconvenient SC polling day… hahaha

gatorboy on January 6, 2012 at 12:37 PM

So is Debbie Wasserman Shultz fringe or a regular normal Democrat?

Cindy Munford on January 6, 2012 at 12:38 PM

A CNN SC poll just popped up in the site headlines and shows Romney winning by 19pts now. Turn out the lights, this thing is ovah.

Roymunson on January 6, 2012 at 12:40 PM

She’s annoying to anyone/anything who breathes to exist.

Philly on January 6, 2012 at 12:40 PM

And it’s embarrassing for me that the republican party has become people like you. You push your progressive social issues, we’ll push ours.

hawkdriver on January 6, 2012 at 11:53 AM

Do you want a “pure” party or something?

BettyRuth on January 6, 2012 at 12:42 PM

Do you want a “pure” party or something?

BettyRuth on January 6, 2012 at 12:42 PM

Nope. We just want you clowns to stop attempting to redefine Conservatism into Libertarianism, Squishiness, or downright Leftist b.s……..ma’am.

kingsjester on January 6, 2012 at 12:44 PM

You don’t support Romney’s liberal tax plan… but he’s still a conservative.

I’m not a one issue voter and certainly don’t vote for or against a candidate because of one bit of minutiae in a tax plan devised because of political realities on the ground (a plan which would be negotiated with/changed by Congress). His preference is for complete revamping of the tax system, and that is very likely what he would do if we have the majorities needed to get it through. I already said I oppose it, and as I said the first time you asked this question, I understand why he is doing it. Please go back and find that response. I don’t want to waste my time having to repeat myself…

What? Why do you think Independents voted so heavily for the Dems… because Bush had been such a fiscal conservative? They ran against his deficits and against the war. Now, why was the war effort falgging? Because Bush and Rove ran a war that designed not to break anything or kill anybody lest we upset Muslims or the Left.

They blamed the deficits on the war so it was essentially the same issue. As for your comments about the war effort, whatever Bush did or did not do there, I’m not going to get into that with you except to say that I trust he did what he thought was the best strategy to defeat Al Qaeda and their allies based on the recommendations of commanders/generals/sec def and so forth not because Karl Rove advised him based on polling or whatever it is you’re insinuating.

If Bush had lost OH, Kerry would have won. Bush got 50.81% of the vote in OH. Republicans overall gained 4 seats in the Senate and 2 in the House. In OH, Voinovich received 64% of the vote.

What’s your point? Bush won the electoral and popular vote, but Voinovich did not have to worry about Iraq, which I repeat, was the #1 issue.

Bull. AC was Rove’s attempt to board the TEA Party Express.

He raised and spent $43 million smackeroos to help GOP candidates because………hold on for this………..he prefers we have a GOP majority to a Dem majority. Horrors! Indeed, if anything these manufactured Tea Party groups were opportunists who jumped on board what was a grassroots effort and tried to claim they represented the rest of us. Rove would have had his PACs with or without the Tea Party.

You can’t argue that nobody could have done anything to stop Dems in 2006 and then try and claim that some 527 organization made 2010 happen./

I didn’t make that argument. The issues were completely different in 2006 and 2010. And I didn’t say Rove’s PACS “made it happen”, but it is undeniable that they contributed mightily to the effort, so all you raging about how awful he is is, as I said before, “unhinged”.

Rove’s an idiot who destroyed the GOP brand.

Riiight, he’s an “idiot”./ BTW, what was the GOP brand exactly? We’ve had one Ronald Reagan. That’s it…

Buy Danish on January 6, 2012 at 12:45 PM

Romney will be fine, he will hold true to his promises. If we want this economy turned around, we would do well to elect him.

scotash on January 6, 2012 at 12:47 PM

Couldn’t have said it better. It seems to me that many moderates that voted for BHO have nowhere to turn, so they are trying to hijack the Republican primary.

Norky on January 6, 2012 at 12:22 PM

Right. I am a moderate plant that posts at Hotair to try and hijack “true” conservatives for my cause.

BettyRuth on January 6, 2012 at 12:47 PM

Perry needs to drop out, so Newt and Rick can split his 5%.
The Paulbots must empathize with the dedication Perry has from his supporters.

Norky on January 6, 2012 at 12:47 PM

Correction! American Crossroads spent more in the vicinity of $70 million…

Buy Danish on January 6, 2012 at 12:48 PM

For those of you incessantly pushing Perry, I’ve got one question for you. Where exactly does the man stand on the issues? I mean with all the money he has raised and the fact he clearly has supporters, all we get is the same warmed over pap that he has done an awesome job in Texas. Well, much as Texans think otherwise, there is much more to the United States and Presidency than Texas. Your guy had better stop running on his record and start telling us where he stands on the issues?

I don’t care what he did to attract new jobs to Texas. How is he going to put Americans back to work?

I don’t care that he is a border-state governor and, therefore, has foreign relations experience (i.e. the I can see Mexico from my backyard tactic). As President, how is he going to deal with border issues, what is he going to do in the Middle East, the North Korea/Iran nuclear threats, our relations with China?

We know Perry wants to cut government even if he can’t remember which parts. How does that mesh with an overall vision for tax and entitlement reform?

Bottom line, you Perry supporters are demanding we join you simply because he is not Mitt Romney. That isn’t good enough to make the case in a national election.

Happy Nomad on January 6, 2012 at 12:48 PM

Is Harry Reid fringe or a regular Democrat?

Cindy Munford on January 6, 2012 at 12:49 PM

Nope. We just want you clowns to stop attempting to redefine Conservatism into Libertarianism, Squishiness, or downright Leftist b.s……..ma’am.

O.K., now this has just jumped the shark into insanity. Supporting Romney and finding Santorum offensive, makes you a leftist?

BettyRuth on January 6, 2012 at 12:49 PM

Obama will try to take credit for The Texas Economy using it’s numbers to prop up his lies as improving economic stats because Texas is propping up the rest of the national economy. Obama is already saying he only needs 4 more years to turn things around…Only Gov. Perry can fight him on that…not Mitt Romney.

The fact that the GOP can’t see that is fairly alarming.

Obama – The nation’s manufacturing production is improving as part of my plan to undo the failed economic policies of republicans and George W. Bush that led to this disasterous recession.

Romney- Those manufacturing stats are from Texas and don’t reflect Obama’s policies…bla bla bla

Obama – Why didn’t the GOP nominate Gov. Perry based on his record in Texas and why are you here?

workingclass artist on January 6, 2012 at 12:52 PM

Bottom line, you Perry supporters are demanding we join you simply because he is not Mitt Romney. That isn’t good enough to make the case in a national election.

Happy Nomad on January 6, 2012 at 12:48 PM

That would be true if everyone not supporting Gov. Romney was supporting Gov. Perry, but they aren’t. Supporters for different candidates shouldn’t be dissuaded from promoting their candidates. I personally can’t get enough of the Gov. Romney’s folks persuasive comments.

Cindy Munford on January 6, 2012 at 12:53 PM

Romney will be fine, he will hold true to his promises. If we want this economy turned around, we would do well to elect him.

scotash on January 6, 2012 at 12:47 PM

Romney runs way from his governing record…He is a loser & will lose to Obama.

workingclass artist on January 6, 2012 at 12:54 PM

Is Barack Obama fringe or just a normal Democrat?

Cindy Munford on January 6, 2012 at 12:55 PM

I personally can’t get enough of the Gov. Romney’s folks persuasive comments.

Cindy Munford on January 6, 2012 at 12:53 PM

Please show me the persuasive comments, I haven’t seen a one.

Norky on January 6, 2012 at 12:56 PM

Is Mitt Romney fringe or just a normal Democrat?

Norky on January 6, 2012 at 12:57 PM

Norky on January 6, 2012 at 12:47 PM

Perry is not my first choice but I think it is too early for him to step down- despite what the polls say. I want to see how things play out in the next few weeks between Newt, Perry and Santorum. I would gladly support on e of those three.

AZgranny on January 6, 2012 at 12:57 PM

Interesting version. Which is harder to prove that the PA GOP and Specter pulling support for him. I’m a Conservative. I make no excuses for it.

hawkdriver on January 6, 2012 at 11:59 AM

Ok. Let’s just assume your version is correct. (I think it is false.) The PA GOP and Specter pulling support for Santorum caused him to lose in a landslide. Why would you possibly think that similar Republican groups across the country won’t pull their support from Santorum if he were the Republican nominee? How you even begin to suggest there exists a path for victory for Santorum?

thuja on January 6, 2012 at 12:58 PM

Norky on January 6, 2012 at 12:56 PM

LOL! Really?

Cindy Munford on January 6, 2012 at 12:59 PM

All this enmity over a bunch of guys who aren’t really that different from one another. I think passions are running high because everyone knows we aren’t picking a nominee, we’re picking the next president of the United States.

Rational Thought on January 6, 2012 at 1:00 PM

Is retiring Rep. Barny Frank fringe or normal Democrat. Oh wait, he’s from Massachusetts, he has to judge differently.

Cindy Munford on January 6, 2012 at 1:01 PM

Bottom line, you Perry supporters are demanding we join you simply because he is not Mitt Romney. That isn’t good enough to make the case in a national election.

Happy Nomad on January 6, 2012 at 12:48 PM

NO…It’s because Gov. Perry has the best record of results!

While Mitt Romney was Governor of Massachusetts, Massachusetts added just under 46,000 jobs.

Over that same period, just Houston added over 4.5 times that amount — even though Houston’s population was 1.4 million less than Massachusetts.

source: US Census Bureau, US Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-OXo3AYKC930/ToEcltCX8kI/AAAAAAAAAOk/ZpkKUxJvvm4/s1600/houstonmassachu.jpg

http://texanomics.blogspot.com/2011/10/guess-who-added-manufacturing-jobs-from.html#!/2011/10/guess-who

With respect to the last post — I guess it could’ve been worse — ’cause it is.

source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-2vzNY8JY7W4/ToEkGyiqjzI/AAAAAAAAAO0/vqdsAwQH6r0/s1600/txusobama.jpg

workingclass artist on January 6, 2012 at 1:01 PM

Gosh, how could I forget, is Nancy Pelosi fringe or normal Democrat?

Cindy Munford on January 6, 2012 at 1:03 PM

LOL! Really?

Cindy Munford on January 6, 2012 at 12:59 PM

Yes, really. Show persuasive comments please, I want to learn.
It’s very difficult to have any open mind about Romney, but I will try.

Norky on January 6, 2012 at 1:04 PM

Norky on January 6, 2012 at 1:04 PM

I’m just having a little passive aggressive fun with our Romney supporters, it’s very fun but not worth a full blown riot.

Cindy Munford on January 6, 2012 at 1:07 PM

Winning!

“Wow, John McCain is really beginning to show his age (75). After endorsing Mitt Romney on Wednesday, the Arizona Senator embarked on a journey full of gaffes, goofs, insults and all-around misstatements.

While endorsing Mitt Romney, McCain said;

“I am confident, with the leadership and the backing of the American people, President Obama will turn this country around.”

“Lindsey Graham and Jim DeMint have joined with me time and time again to go to the floor of the senate to fight against the earmark, pork barrel corruption that goes on in Washington D.C.. Earmarks are a gateway to corruption. I can tell you that neither Mitt Romney nor Rick Santorum share that view.”

The point he was trying to make is that Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich have supported earmarks. Mitt Romney is against earmarks.

“I guarantee you he (Romney) will not lead from behind like Ronald Reagan. He will lead from in front.”

http://reddogreport.com/2012/01/idiot-of-the-week-john-oops-mccain/

workingclass artist on January 6, 2012 at 1:09 PM

It’s a done deal. I thought it would be over in Florida, but it’s gonna be over in SC. The rest of the candidates proved to be unelectable, and it’s breaking for Romney now. Hence he destroys the field in NH, I bet he gets near 40% in SC. Ovah!

rubberneck on January 6, 2012 at 1:09 PM

rubberneck on January 6, 2012 at 1:09 PM

Ah, but what will he get in November?

Cindy Munford on January 6, 2012 at 1:12 PM

I’m just having a little passive aggressive fun with our Romney supporters, it’s very fun but not worth a full blown riot.

Cindy Munford on January 6, 2012 at 1:07 PM

Can’t I just play along? Why should you have all the fun?

Norky on January 6, 2012 at 1:13 PM

You Mittbots can brag all you want… but winning votes does not amount to accomplishing anything (see: Obama). You’re the same squishes I’ve been fighting in the party since 1988.

mankai on January 6, 2012 at 9:38 AM

How’s that working out for you?

Go RBNY on January 6, 2012 at 1:13 PM

Ah, but what will he get in November?

Cindy Munford on January 6, 2012 at 1:12 PM

Inauguration in January….and I shall be there. It will be my first one. Will enjoy the one in his last chopper ride in marine. Bye!

rubberneck on January 6, 2012 at 1:14 PM

How’s that working out for you?

Go RBNY on January 6, 2012 at 1:13 PM

How is it working for you, any of these moderate been president lately?

Cindy Munford on January 6, 2012 at 1:15 PM

A Rasmussen poll 2 weeks before the S.C. primary in 2008.Fred Thompson 28%Huckabee 22%McCain 18% Giuliani 9% This poll was taken before the last debate before the 2008 S.C. primary.

logman1 on January 6, 2012 at 1:15 PM

Cindy Munford on January 6, 2012 at 1:01 PM

LOL! *passive-aggressive*? ;)

AZgranny on January 6, 2012 at 1:16 PM

It’s pretty much over now. Santorum is a non-entity. He’s not going to win a pie-eating contest. So if he’s running in second place, it’s going to be Mormon Bailout Layoffs Flip-Flopper Romney losing to Obama in November.

Thanks, Iowa.

HitNRun on January 6, 2012 at 1:16 PM

MJBrutus on January 6, 2012 at 12:30 PM

MJBrutus, David Brooks and David Frum: The Three Musketeers of True Republicanism.

Good Solid B-Plus on January 6, 2012 at 12:34 PM

MJBrutus, David Brooks and David Frum: The Three Musketeers Stooges of True Republicanism.

Frobenius on January 6, 2012 at 1:16 PM

rubberneck on January 6, 2012 at 1:14 PM

That’s great, I know the feeling of really really being convinced that a particular politician is the answer. I am hoping that your candidate works out as well for the world as mine did.

Cindy Munford on January 6, 2012 at 1:17 PM

Speaking of polls…!

Akzed on January 6, 2012 at 1:17 PM

AZgranny on January 6, 2012 at 1:16 PM

That’s what I have been told so I am embracing the term.

Cindy Munford on January 6, 2012 at 1:18 PM

“But Mr. Perry does not really know how to lose.

“Setbacks are unknown to him,” said Bill Miller, a veteran Texas lobbyist and consultant. “He has no experience with it. He’s never quit because he’s never lost.”

A longtime Perry spokesman, Mark Miner, clutching a Red Bull in one hand and a cigarette in the other, confirmed the Tweet had come from Mr. Perry and wryly noted, “He never left the race.”

Mr. Perry has exhibited the same grit through an uninterrupted winning streak that began in 1984, when he won a seat in the Texas House of Representatives.

Time and time again, he has won seemingly unwinnable elections. His biggest test came in 1990, when pundits and even many Republicans thought Mr. Perry, a cotton farmer and former Air Force pilot, had no chance to beat Jim Hightower for Texas agriculture commissioner.

But as that November evening wore on, his chief strategist at the time, Karl Rove, told Mr. Perry that he would win in a squeaker.

“He looked at me like I was nuts,” Mr. Rove said in an e-mail.

Mr. Perry had another razor-thin victory, for lieutenant governor in 1998. Then when he announced in 2009 that he was running for an unprecedented third term as governor, polls showed he was 20 points behind the popular Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison.

The governor, honing an anti-Washington message that has since become his political mantra, won by that same margin, engineering a rare 40-point swing.

And in a race that has had as many twists and turns as this one, a Rick Perry comeback, they say, is just as plausible as any other scenario.

This much is sure: As long as there is a dollar in the bank and a shred of hope, those who know Mr. Perry best will not count him out.

“He’s never lost, and I don’t think he or the campaign intend to lose this time,” said Reggie Bashur, a longtime Republican political consultant. “He plays to win. He won’t let up.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/06/us/politics/rick-perry-may-still-be-in-the-presidential-race-even-after-his-iowa-

workingclass artist on January 6, 2012 at 1:18 PM

It’s pretty much over now. Santorum is a non-entity. He’s not going to win a pie-eating contest. So if he’s running in second place, it’s going to be Mormon Bailout Layoffs Flip-Flopper Romney losing to Obama in November.

Thanks, Iowa.

HitNRun on January 6, 2012 at 1:16 PM

Thanks for the update, I knew those polls couldn’t have been accurate.

Norky on January 6, 2012 at 1:18 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5