Rasmussen tracking poll shows Santorum within four of Obama

posted at 12:45 pm on February 10, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Remember the “electability” argument?  Conservatives need Mitt Romney, the argument goes, in order to compete against Barack Obama in the general election.  However, the latest Rasmussen tracking poll on head-to-head results shows Romney trailing Obama by ten points — while Rick Santorum comes within four:

In a potential Election 2012 matchup, the president attracts 50% of the vote and former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney 40% (see tracking history). This is the largest lead the president has enjoyed against Romney in regular polling going back more than a year. It’s also the first time that the president has reached the 50% level of support against Romney.

Rick Santorum now trails the president by four percentage points, 46% to 42%. Rasmussen Reports will now be tracking the Obama-Santorum race on a daily basis. Matchup results are updated daily at 9:30 a.m. Eastern (sign up for free daily e-mail update). Last week, Santorum had a one-point advantage over Obama. However, like Rick Perry, Herman Cain and Newt Gingrich before him, Santorum was unable to sustain that advantage beyond a single poll.

In the crucial swing state of Ohio, Santorum is now even with the president. Romney trails by four. Democrat Sherrod Brown has a modest lead in the Ohio Senate race. Rasmussen Reports will release new data on the race for president in Florida at noon Eastern today.

Scott Rasmussen’s weekly column looks at the political impact of Obama’s decision to impose a health-insurance mandate on religious organizations, and concludes that Obama’s electability might be a moot point anyway:

The Obama administration recently ruled that all insurance policies must offer contraceptive services with no co-payments required. In and of itself, that decision is neither positive nor negative. Forty-three percent of voters favor it, while 46 percent are opposed.

That mandate violates the beliefs of some churches. Normally, religious exemptions are granted in such cases, but not this time. Thirty-nine percent support the administration on this point, while 50 percent are opposed. Even worse for the White House, support for the ruling comes primarily from people who rarely attend church. That’s a group that voted strongly for Obama in 2008 and continues to support him today. In other words, no upside.

But, among Catholics, only 28 percent believe religious organizations should be required to implement rules that conflict with church doctrine. Sixty-five percent are opposed. This is true even though many Catholics disagree with church teachings on birth control.

The impact is stunning since 54 percent of Catholics voted for President Obama in 2008. Today, just 39 percent of Catholic voters approve of the way he’s doing his job.

Perhaps some strategists thought that Catholics would welcome government help in battling the church on birth control. But Catholics who disagree with the church deal with the situation in the privacy of their own bedroom. They don’t need federal help. In fact, it is hard to imagine any person of faith wanting the federal government to have any say in church doctrine and how Holy Scripture should be applied.

The last couple of weeks have been a near-perfect storm for Santorum, who has tried to campaign primarily on economic and national-security issues.  Now, suddenly, Barack Obama has validated the culture war with his attack on religious conscience, and Santorum has the best position from which to lead a counter-attack.  He speaks the language much more fluently and with more passion than Romney, and Republicans looking for a champion in this fight will start naturally looking for Santorum.

The Ohio results should be even more concerning for Obama and Romney.  Santorum is speaking to the voters that Obama lost in the 2008 primaries but won in the 2008 election as a supposedly reasonable moderate.  Ohio will be a tough state for Republicans to carry in the general election this year, but it will be absolutely critical to their White House hopes.  If Santorum maintains this momentum, it’s quite possible that the electability argument will begin to favor Santorum rather than Romney, especially if the Obama administration fails to retreat on the HHS mandate.

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’d vote for the following over Romney:

Wasserman Shultz
Nancy Pelosi
Cynthia McKinney
Barney Frank
John Conyers
Al Sharpton

At least they are I’M honest about their MY liberal big government ideology which is more than can be said about Mittens…

they lie on February 10, 2012 at 1:54 PM

Fixed it for you liberal and so what, like you stand for anything.
You’ve never voted R in your life if you’re even old enough to have voted. Now run along and sprinkle some glitter about.

Buttercup on February 10, 2012 at 2:36 PM

bluefox on February 10, 2012 at 2:35 PM

I dont think you are going to see an overt attack from Team Romney on Santo like you did with Gingrich. I think Romneys people realize that while they have to point out areas of weakness in Santos record, that they really need to focus on selling themselves and making the case FOR Romney, not just against Santo. What Gingrich does, what the media does, will be telling. We just have to wait and see. Im not going to try to predict this thing, I dont think anyone can.

nswider on February 10, 2012 at 2:38 PM

Heh. I’m severely depressed that this once great country will be indistinguishable from France in 10 years.

angryed on February 10, 2012 at 1:45 PM

Heh. I actually HOPE we look like France in ten years. What scares me is that we’ll look like post-collapse Argentina in a few years!

Doomberg on February 10, 2012 at 2:41 PM

Alright guys its been fun, havent done this in a while, kiddo up from nap though. Its an exciting race, curious to see what happens next!

nswider on February 10, 2012 at 2:42 PM

Those who fought for traditional marriage in Massachusetts do not believe he fought the liberals. They will give you an earful on what the great conservative man of faith and family did for marriage in Massachusetts.

flyfisher on February 10, 2012 at 2:29 PM

I don’t vote based on social issues in national elections. Period. I care more about a candidate not having created a universal health insurance plan, and not having supported the bailouts, than I care about gay marriage or abortion. That’s how I’ve reconciled myself to Santorum. None of these guys are small-government conservatives, but Santorum clearly is the most conservative of the remaining lot, and I think he is a man of far greater integrity than Newt or Mitt. He sticks to his guns, and I can respect that.

But if social issues are what floats your boat, then I’m sure you will find Santorum to be sufficiently conservative in that department.

Lawdawg86 on February 10, 2012 at 2:42 PM

Insurers will be required, however, to offer complete coverage free of charge to any women who work at such institutions.
unseen on February 10, 2012 at 1:48 PM

It’s still a First Amendment issue, no matter who the mandate concerns.
This isn’t a solution at all, just a distraction.

bluefox on February 10, 2012 at 2:44 PM

Mitt Romney: Corporal Conservative

Lawdawg86 on February 10, 2012 at 2:45 PM

I dont think you are going to see an overt attack from Team Romney on Santo like you did with Gingrich. I think Romneys people realize that while they have to point out areas of weakness in Santos record, that they really need to focus on selling themselves and making the case FOR Romney, not just against Santo. What Gingrich does, what the media does, will be telling. We just have to wait and see. Im not going to try to predict this thing, I dont think anyone can.

nswider on February 10, 2012 at 2:38 PM

I believe you are totally right. Besides, most of the so called attack on Newt was just Romney campaign pushing a few of Newt button, the rest was actually Newt going off the rails and having a meltdown/self-implosion…of course he will not use the same tactics with Santorum, since he is a different kind of crazy than Gingrich…

jimver on February 10, 2012 at 2:51 PM

Just so sick of this whole thing. Worst president in US history and “my side” is going to do their best to re-elect him.

V7_Sport on February 10, 2012 at 2:52 PM

Heh. I’m severely depressed that this once great country will be indistinguishable from France in 10 years.

angryed on February 10, 2012 at 1:45 PM

you wish…more like Zimbabwe…

jimver on February 10, 2012 at 2:53 PM

Just so sick of this whole thing. Worst president in US history and “my side” is going to do their best to re-elect him.

V7_Sport on February 10, 2012 at 2:52 PM

you can’t fix stupid…

jimver on February 10, 2012 at 2:53 PM

Daikokuco on February 10, 2012 at 1:51 PM

Projecting on Christians your opinions doesn’t make it so, nor true. You are stating what YOU think. Your comments have shown that you most likely don’t know Christians.

We want the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights followed. If that was followed, we wouldn’t have this division of the citizens and newly found “right” for various groups of people.

After all, the Government’s duty is to protect the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights and respect the 10th Amendment.

bluefox on February 10, 2012 at 2:54 PM

When a candidate is creepy enough to already be widely referred to as “Man on Dog” and “The Bedroom Snooper”, you know he is never going to be elected president.

Santorum = Four more years

JA on February 10, 2012 at 1:54 PM

you forgot this…type his name and this is the site that pops up: http://spreadingsantorum.com

jimver on February 10, 2012 at 2:56 PM

you forgot this…type his name and this is the site that pops up: http://spreadingsantorum.com

jimver on February 10, 2012 at 2:56 PM

Mitt’s team must be working overtime…

right2bright on February 10, 2012 at 3:01 PM

BTW, I think that Palin could have run away with this nomination.

fight like a girl on February 10, 2012 at 2:12 PM

Wow, you’ve surely changed your tune on Palin & Newt haven’t you? Not very consistant in my opinion.

bluefox on February 10, 2012 at 3:03 PM

It’s still a First Amendment issue, no matter who the mandate concerns.
This isn’t a solution at all, just a distraction.

bluefox on February 10, 2012 at 2:44 PM

You are 100% correct..:)

PS..Channeling ElRushbo??..:)

Dire Straits on February 10, 2012 at 3:06 PM

I’m sorry, Ed, but all you and the anti-Rpmney crowd are doing is effectively destroying Romney’s electability.

That’s not the same thing as making Santorum electable.

The fact is… the more is made of Santorum’s social conservatism – that is deeply unpopular even with most fiscal and national security conservatives – his general election approval ratings will drop like a stone.

I don’t doubt Romney will win the nomination; he’s the only man with any real organization. I just hope the people that irrationally hate him more than they do Obama don’t damage his prospects in the general election beyond repair. If they do – 5 more years of Obama are on THEIR heads.

CoolCzech on February 10, 2012 at 3:06 PM

I don’t mind Santorum as he is a likable chap but his social views would have him killed in the general.

Obama by 20 (60-40) in the general as Independents and Libertarians flee his social views among other things.

Zybalto on February 10, 2012 at 3:09 PM

I don’t doubt Romney will win the nomination; he’s the only man with any real organization. I just hope the people that irrationally hate him more than they do Obama don’t damage his prospects in the general election beyond repair. If they do – 5 more years of Obama are on THEIR heads.

CoolCzech on February 10, 2012 at 3:06 PM

agreed and agreed, you have spoken like a truly cool czech :-)…

jimver on February 10, 2012 at 3:10 PM

Just how is Santorum going to explain that it isn’t alright for Obama to impose birth control on those who believe against it, yet think it is okay for states to impose a ban on birth control?

Seems these two positions are opposite sides of the same coin.

Tater Salad on February 10, 2012 at 3:10 PM

So what happens when Santorum becomes the target of the sort of vitriol that Romney has been subjected to? I Want To Believe, but right now Santorum is Generic Republican in the eyes of low-info voters. The electibility argument didn’t disappear on the basis of two Rasmussen polls.

ConservativeLA on February 10, 2012 at 3:12 PM

FYI Sidenote:..Col. Allen West speaks right ahead of Newt..So the crowd will be jazzed to say the least!!..:)

Dire Straits on February 10, 2012 at 2:23 PM

You betcha:-)

bluefox on February 10, 2012 at 3:15 PM

Mitt’s team must be working overtime…

right2bright on February 10, 2012 at 3:01 PM

if you ever informed yourself on anything, you’d know that this dates back to 2003 and it has nothing to do with Romney, but with Dan Savage’s response to Santorum’s bigoted comments and his campaign to make santorum a dictionary word…

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campaign_for_%22santorum%22_neologism

jimver on February 10, 2012 at 3:15 PM

I do not know if anyone else has posted the numbers from todays release of the Fox News poll of registered voters, but here they are:

Obama edges Republican Mitt Romney by 5 percentage points (47-42 percent) in a hypothetical matchup today. In January, the president had a narrow one-point edge (46-45 percent). Both leads are within the polls’ margins of sampling error.

The president’s advantage widens against the other GOP contenders. Obama leads Ron Paul by 10 percentage points (48-38 percent), Rick Santorum by 12 points (50-38 percent) and Newt Gingrich by 13 points (51-38 percent).

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/02/10/fox-news-poll-obama-holds-edge-over-republicans-in-matchups/#ixzz1m0obX3pn

HTL on February 10, 2012 at 3:20 PM

jimver on February 10, 2012 at 3:15 PM

I guess sarcasm and humor is above your pay grade…

right2bright on February 10, 2012 at 3:22 PM

Allen West is on!! RightScoop is carrying CPAC.

bluefox on February 10, 2012 at 3:23 PM

I guess sarcasm and humor is above your pay grade…

right2bright on February 10, 2012 at 3:22 PM

I guess sarcasm is not your strong suit…

jimver on February 10, 2012 at 3:24 PM

nswider on February 10, 2012 at 2:38 PM

I think you are right about Romney not attacking Santorum with negative ads. I heard most of his CPAC speech and don’t recall hearing any.

bluefox on February 10, 2012 at 3:26 PM

Just how is Santorum going to explain that it isn’t alright for Obama to impose birth control on those who believe against it, yet think it is okay for states to impose a ban on birth control?

Seems these two positions are opposite sides of the same coin.

Tater Salad on February 10, 2012 at 3:10 PM

you’d think they see the irony of that? nooo, they much rather close their eyes, come up with a new rationalization, and keep on marching to the drums of their newly found hero…

jimver on February 10, 2012 at 3:28 PM

bluefox on February 10, 2012 at 2:44 PM
You are 100% correct..:)

PS..Channeling ElRushbo??..:)

Dire Straits on February 10, 2012 at 3:06 PM

Actually, I’ve had CPAC on all day. First time my radio hasn’t been on Rush tho, LOL I feel sort of disloyal:-)

Did Rush say something similar?

bluefox on February 10, 2012 at 3:29 PM

Did Rush say something similar?

bluefox on February 10, 2012 at 3:29 PM

Yes he did..The Right scoop has it up on the home page..You will not be disappionted!..:)

Dire Straits on February 10, 2012 at 3:32 PM

if you ever informed yourself on anything, you’d know that this dates back to 2003 and it has nothing to do with Romney, but with Dan Savage’s response to Santorum’s bigoted comments and his campaign to make santorum a dictionary word…

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campaign_for_%22santorum%22_neologism

jimver on February 10, 2012 at 3:15 PM

Yeah, I’ve heard that story. And most people in this country think that sort of smearing of some man’s name is incredibly disgusting and supremely unfunny. The fact that the anti-Santorum folks keep joking about it and repeating it means they don’t get that a majority of people think it’s petty and disgusting. Anyone bringing up the “frothy” garbage tells me more about themselves than about Santorum. But keep thinking it’s cute, I want to know what kind of person I’m dealing with.

BakerAllie on February 10, 2012 at 3:33 PM

The new code word for Mitt, tried and tested by his “advisors” is severely conservative. Can anyone tell me what the hell that means? I hate panderers. And Mittens is the poster child.

they lie on February 10, 2012 at 3:35 PM

I don’t doubt Romney will win the nomination; he’s the only man with any real organization. I just hope the people that irrationally hate him more than they do Obama don’t damage his prospects in the general election beyond repair. If they do – 5 more years of Obama are on THEIR heads.

CoolCzech on February 10, 2012 at 3:06 PM

Here here! I disagree with the majority here who just refuse to accept Mitt as the best possible nominee for the job. But can we all at least agree to give the Democrats the gift of vicious and irrational bashing and infighting? Mitt and Santorum are both decent human beings, and would make far better presidents than Obama, so let’s pursue this contest in a way that minimizes the damage to the eventual winner. And let’s especially do away right away with the anti-establishment rhetoric with regard to GOP insiders. There are legitimate criticism of the so-called establishment, but to suppose them a secret cadre of elites who are controlling the party for their own ends is to employ the same sort of paranoia and fallacy that nurses the fever dreams of the Occupy crowd. Stop it now.

EricW on February 10, 2012 at 3:37 PM

Col. Allen West just hit it out of the park!!..:)

Dire Straits on February 10, 2012 at 3:37 PM

OT:..Kate Obenshain and S E Cupp are hot..:)

Dire Straits on February 10, 2012 at 3:40 PM

but really, Rick Man-on-Dog Santorum?

Meredith on February 10, 2012 at 1:40 PM

If the only other viable non-Obama alternative is Mitt “LAUNCH That Dog!!!” Romney, you mean?

Oh, hell yeah.

Kent18 on February 10, 2012 at 3:43 PM

bluefox on February 10, 2012 at 3:29 PM
Yes he did..The Right scoop has it up on the home page..You will not be disappionted!..:)

Dire Straits on February 10, 2012 at 3:32 PM

Thanks for sticking around to answer me. You raised my curiosity:-) Will check RS. Allen West certainly ended his speech in typical fashion; I couldn’t tell, but think he got a S.O.

Taking time out for a snack, LOL Between 2 PC’s, C-span on TV and HA, I’m needing fuel:-)

bluefox on February 10, 2012 at 3:43 PM

– 5 more years of Obama are on THEIR heads.

CoolCzech on February 10, 2012 at 3:06 PM

So, those who don’t bend over and say get the KY Jelly out, are the one’s to blame? LOL. We could just as easily say those of you who didn’t vote for and support Perry, Gingrich, Santorum, Bachman, Huntsman, Pawlenty, etc. are to blame. If Mittens can’t get the conservative vote and loses because of it, that’s his problem. Not mine. And if I happen to vote for Obama because Mittens is just as bad, that’s also his problem. Not mine. Conservatives should not fall for this crap from you Mittbots. It’s the same as playing the race card. I’m immune to it. Just as I’m immune to the “it’s your fault if Obama wins because you wouldn’t eat our crap Romney sammich”.

ABMittens

they lie on February 10, 2012 at 3:44 PM

CoolCzech on February 10, 2012 at 3:06 PM

Does that include Romney’s CPAC comments” I made sure Mass didn’t become the Las Vegas of gay marriage”

He is so pathetic and desperate – I actually feel sorry for the billionaire.

And thats hard.

Odie1941 on February 10, 2012 at 3:45 PM

To recap the Romney position:

I have a lot of money
If you don’t go with me, Obama gets reelected.

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

Odie1941 on February 10, 2012 at 3:47 PM

If they do – 5 more years of Obama are on THEIR heads.

CoolCzech on February 10, 2012 at 3:06 PM

My vote in any national election comes so cheaply, I’m almost embarrassed to mention it publicly.

I can be bought, thusly: RUN A CONSERVATIVE CANDIDATE.

That’s it. That’s all.

Your party doesn’t care enough about securing my vote to meet even those laughably minimalist standards…? Fine. Totally their call, absolutely.

Just don’t get all blubbery and sniffly — either right now, or come November — about how terribly, awfully much you really really really NEEDED it.

Kent18 on February 10, 2012 at 3:52 PM

OT:..Kate Obenshain and S E Cupp are hot..:)

Dire Straits on February 10, 2012 at 3:40 PM

Good thing West was on before they were. You may have not been able to concentrate, LOL

bluefox on February 10, 2012 at 3:54 PM

Heh. I’m severely depressed that this once great country will be indistinguishable from France in 10 years.

angryed on February 10, 2012 at 1:45 PM
you wish…more like Zimbabwe…

jimver on February 10, 2012 at 2:53 PM

Close, but the wrong country. jug ears wandering sperm donor “dad” was from kenya, not zimbabwe. I know they both are festering hell holes of human flotsam but feel it’s important to be accurate when describing our goals.

acyl72 on February 10, 2012 at 4:00 PM

bluefox on February 10, 2012 at 3:54 PM

LoLz..Col. West was awesome as per usual..:)

PS..This Ladies panel is pretty interesting..They are all doing a good job..:)

Dire Straits on February 10, 2012 at 4:01 PM

Newt is next!!..:)

Dire Straits on February 10, 2012 at 4:11 PM

Newt is next!!..:)

Dire Straits on February 10, 2012 at 4:11 PM

Watching now. I have no doubt that Newt will do exactly as he is saying.
And the Establishment Republicans & the W.H. & the Administration knows it too.

bluefox on February 10, 2012 at 4:29 PM

I think Newt is upping the ante:-) Whether he will win the Nomination or not, there must be a position for him in a Republican Administration. He has the knowledge and the will to put many of these plans in place.

bluefox on February 10, 2012 at 4:37 PM

I’m sorry, Ed, but all you and the anti-Rpmney crowd are doing is effectively destroying Romney’s electability.

That’s not the same thing as making Santorum electable.

The fact is… the more is made of Santorum’s social conservatism – that is deeply unpopular even with most fiscal and national security conservatives – his general election approval ratings will drop like a stone.

I don’t doubt Romney will win the nomination; he’s the only man with any real organization. I just hope the people that irrationally hate him more than they do Obama don’t damage his prospects in the general election beyond repair. If they do – 5 more years of Obama are on THEIR heads.

Well said, this anti-Romney non-sense is getting old. It’s one thing to prefer someone else, but some people actually seem like they hate him and prefer Obama over him. That to me is inexcusable. The worst Republican is always better than the best Democrat. And this attempt to tear Romney down to get either Santorum or Newt to be the nominee is doing nothing but hurting Republicans in the eyes of independents.

It would be one thing if Romney’s main competitor was a legit candidate that could excite the masses. His main competitor now is a guy that got destroyed in PA in 2008.

It’s almost like some people will be happy with a moral victory instead of an actual victory by the best candidate we have. And for people who think that is far off, let me ask you a question, how are Senator O’Donnell and Senator Angle doing for the constituents of Delaware and Nevada? Pretty well, huh? But hey, a Democrat is better than what some people perceive to be a RINO.

milcus on February 10, 2012 at 4:42 PM

There are legitimate criticism of the so-called establishment, but to suppose them a secret cadre of elites who are controlling the party for their own ends is to employ the same sort of paranoia and fallacy that nurses the fever dreams of the Occupy crowd. Stop it now.

EricW on February 10, 2012 at 3:37 PM

you are way too rational for this thread…(sadly enough)

jimver on February 10, 2012 at 4:44 PM

Here here! I disagree with the majority here who just refuse to accept Mitt as the best possible nominee for the job. But can we all at least agree to give the Democrats the gift of vicious and irrational bashing and infighting? Mitt and Santorum are both decent human beings, and would make far better presidents than Obama, so let’s pursue this contest in a way that minimizes the damage to the eventual winner. And let’s especially do away right away with the anti-establishment rhetoric with regard to GOP insiders. There are legitimate criticism of the so-called establishment, but to suppose them a secret cadre of elites who are controlling the party for their own ends is to employ the same sort of paranoia and fallacy that nurses the fever dreams of the Occupy crowd. Stop it now.

EricW on February 10, 2012 at 3:37 PM

Wow, a reasonable, intelligent thought from a hot air commenter. How can that be?

sheikh of thornton on February 10, 2012 at 4:45 PM

As a conservative, I don’t consider Santorum anywhere near a conservative, because he sees government as the answer. Whether it be on imposing his social views or using the government to seek outcomes in the business and labor arena, a REAL conservative wouldn’t want government in either.

Tater Salad on February 10, 2012 at 2:27 PM

We have a flip floppin’ progressive, trying to play the part of a conservative, a guy with a huge ego that wants to go to mars and point space mirrors at our roads, for street lights, uncle crazy pants and Rick Santorum. Santorum isn’t the conservative that I’d like him to be, but he is by far the most conservative and level headed of the bunch. He also comes across as the most genuine person in the bunch. And the dems hate him more than any of the others, that in itself is a major determining factor.

Norky on February 10, 2012 at 4:55 PM

Brietbart nailed it!! Awesome speech!! If any Citizens were still sleeping and that didn’t wake them up, they are dead.

bluefox on February 10, 2012 at 5:19 PM

I love this country with all mt heart and soul.Newt is my 1st choses,Santorum my second and Romney my third.But to save this great country i will vote for any of them over Obama.yes even Ron Paul over Obama. I hope and pray any true conservative would do the same.I know we all including myself say thing during the campaign that we regret.All of our candidates are people who love this country and i believe with all my heart none of these men would do anything intentionally to harm this great country.

logman1 on February 10, 2012 at 5:21 PM

I love this country with all mt heart and soul.Newt is my 1st choses,Santorum my second and Romney my third.But to save this great country i will vote for any of them over Obama.yes even Ron Paul over Obama. I hope and pray any true conservative would do the same.I know we all including myself say thing during the campaign that we regret.All of our candidates are people who love this country and i believe with all my heart none of these men would do anything intentionally to harm this great country.

logman1 on February 10, 2012 at 5:21 PM

Thank you, me also.

sheikh of thornton on February 10, 2012 at 5:23 PM

Obama is a fascist. In America he shouldn’t even be polling 10%. How is it possible that a majority of Americans have become fascists?

VorDaj on February 10, 2012 at 5:31 PM

logman1 on February 10, 2012 at 5:21 PM

Nicely stated. Every American must vote against B.O. no matter who the Nominee is. Our Military sacrifice with their life everyday. They do the greatest, we can do the least and vote.

bluefox on February 10, 2012 at 5:34 PM

Obama is a fascist. In America he shouldn’t even be polling 10%. How is it possible that a majority of Americans have become fascists?

VorDaj on February 10, 2012 at 5:31 PM

I don’t believe those polls anyway. Those that still would vote for him, fall into two camps. Those that are like minded and those that watch the MSM and still think Dems are the same as they used to be years ago.
In other words, uninformed voters. That’s my opinion.

bluefox on February 10, 2012 at 5:37 PM

When a candidate is creepy enough to already be widely referred to as “Man on Dog” and “The Bedroom Snooper”, you know he is never going to be elected president.

Santorum = Four more years

JA

So, basically, what you’re saying is we shouldn’t go with someone so despised by the left. Instead, we should go with someone the left approves of. Ummmmmm……no thank you. If the left hates Santorum this much, that tells me he’s probably the right guy for the job.

xblade on February 10, 2012 at 6:23 PM

but really, Rick Man-on-Dog Santorum?
Meredith on February 10, 2012 at 1:40 PM

When a candidate is creepy enough to already be widely referred to as “Man on Dog” and “The Bedroom Snooper”, you know he is never going to be elected president.
Santorum = Four more years
JA on February 10, 2012 at 1:54 PM

Insulting ‘nicknames’ being applied to any person, and then being spread by a FEW other people on the internet, doesn’t qualify the first person as being “widely referred to as (insert your nickname of choice, HERE).”

listens2glenn on February 10, 2012 at 7:37 PM

One day blip…new Fox poll tonight shows Santorum 38 Obama 51.

“Looking ahead to November, Obama edges Republican Mitt Romney by 5 percentage points (47-42 percent) in a hypothetical matchup today. In January, the president had a narrow one-point edge (46-45 percent). Both leads are within the polls’ margins of sampling error.

The president’s advantage widens against the other GOP contenders. Obama leads Ron Paul by 10 percentage points (48-38 percent), Rick Santorum by 12 points (50-38 percent) and Newt Gingrich by 13 points (51-38 percent).

Among independents, Romney tops Obama by 9 points. Last month, independents also broke for Romney (by 5 points).”

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/02/10/fox-news-poll-obama-holds-edge-over-republicans-in-matchups/#ixzz1m25fND2o

camaraderie on February 10, 2012 at 8:32 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4