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

He uses the word “conservative/conservatism” excessively.

People are dumb, but not that dumb.

Schadenfreude on February 10, 2012 at 1:12 PM

Schadenfreude on February 10, 2012 at 1:11 PM

The Right Scoop is showing it..:)

Dire Straits on February 10, 2012 at 1:12 PM

Hey elect me, my dad was a Gov!

WisRich on February 10, 2012 at 1:11 PM

And it’s MY TURN damn it!!!

angryed on February 10, 2012 at 1:12 PM

WTF??!!??..:)

Dire Straits on February 10, 2012 at 1:05 PM

It’s beyond lunatic. I’ve never seen such nannyism.

John the Libertarian on February 10, 2012 at 1:12 PM

Hey, did you see csdeven in the audience? :)

Schadenfreude on February 10, 2012 at 1:12 PM

What in the world is a “dominionist”? Is it some sort of cockeyed insulting way of referring to the 75% of the country who are Christians?

kingsjester on February 10, 2012 at 1:08 PM

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

Search engines and wikipedia are your friend. Most people who call themselves “Christian” are NOT dominionists, actually. It is a specific kind of obnoxious douchebag politically active culture warring “Christian” (You know, the ones that don’t act at all like how their good book tells them to. Like Santorum.)

Daikokuco on February 10, 2012 at 1:13 PM

By any reasonable measure Santorum is more electable then Romney.

Yes, the left will tar him as a theocrat, but the leftist attacks on Romney as an evil 1%er firing people for no reason will resonate better with the mushy middle.

And Santorum won 4 out of 5 elections in a blue state. Counting Romney’s chosen successor after he cut and run in 2006, Romney is 1 out of 3.

Of course this all pales next to how much we could expect either man to pursue conservative policies if elected.

Santorum, while not perfect, has been a fairly strong conservative across the board. Romney of course has never advanced conservative ideals, and to this day is still defending things like his health care mandate.

18-1 on February 10, 2012 at 1:13 PM

Hey elect me, my dad was a Gov!

WisRich on February 10, 2012 at 1:11 PM

sounds like Bush’s reason for a second term. Re-eelct me because my dad lost his re-election. seems like the gop elites have daddy issues

unseen on February 10, 2012 at 1:13 PM

It’s beyond lunatic. I’ve never seen such nannyism.

John the Libertarian on February 10, 2012 at 1:12 PM

I agree..I think it is going to get worse if we don’t get rid of Obie..:(

Dire Straits on February 10, 2012 at 1:14 PM

Ricko…!

(bluegill’s alarm just went off)

Seven Percent Solution on February 10, 2012 at 12:55 PM

Maybe when the fish comes on here…we don’t have to wear raincoats now?

What IS frightening…is how bad are our candidates, or how stupid is the public…that, that disastorous dumb direlict ding-a-ling douchebag dingbat d!ck…still has a lead?

KOOLAID2 on February 10, 2012 at 1:14 PM

Look, Rasmussen is usually the most accurate poll, but this is insane. This is PPP insane.

There is literally no chance Santorum is within 4 points of Obama and Mitt is 10 points down (with Obama at 50). Literally, none.

Every other poll shows Santorum being abused by Obama in polls and Romney within the margin or error and/or leading. Even PPP shows that. Yet Rasmussen shows Mitt down by 10 and Santorum within 4. Right..

This has to be either a joke or a typo.

milcus on February 10, 2012 at 1:14 PM

What in the world is a “dominionist”? Is it some sort of cockeyed insulting way of referring to the 75% of the country who are Christians?

Another leftist boogieman. There are fewer “dominionists” then there are national or international socialists. And the scoailists of both stripes are actually influencing policy in political office right now…

18-1 on February 10, 2012 at 1:14 PM

Dude, by Oct. there will be hot war.

The economy will be forgotten, never mind social stuff.

Schadenfreude on February 10, 2012 at 1:15 PM

Hey, did you see csdeven in the audience? :)

Schadenfreude on February 10, 2012 at 1:12 PM

She’s the one sobbing uncontrollably after reading the poll.

angryed on February 10, 2012 at 1:15 PM

Hey Mittbots.

Sounds like Mitt is going for “social con” front runner.

WisRich on February 10, 2012 at 1:16 PM

Romney is speaking at CPAC right now. He still loves America.

Night Owl on February 10, 2012 at 1:07 PM

I’m listening. Giving a Family History lesson, they were always Conservative. From the sound of some other policies that he is now going over, we may have to check his actual record. He was a “severely Conservative” Governor?

bluefox on February 10, 2012 at 1:16 PM

She’s the one sobbing uncontrollably after reading the poll.

angryed on February 10, 2012 at 1:15 PM

He is actually a very good guy, very patriotic, in myriad ways, just very much into Romney.

Schadenfreude on February 10, 2012 at 1:17 PM

The economy will be forgotten, never mind social stuff.

Schadenfreude on February 10, 2012 at 1:15 PM

You let Gas go to $ 5.00/gal and the Economy will be the focal point..:)

Dire Straits on February 10, 2012 at 1:17 PM

Romney is speaking at CPAC right now. He still loves America.

Night Owl on February 10, 2012 at 1:07 PM

I remember my first platic figurine. It was awesome. He looked like ohhhhh so romantic. I’m selling it on ebay

/Betty White

Key West Reader on February 10, 2012 at 1:17 PM

I don’t beleive it Mittens just said he was a, “severe”ly conservative Republican Govenor he just left out who passed the mother of all socialist programs, Romneycare, that was the model for Obamamcare!

CCRWM on February 10, 2012 at 1:17 PM

Platitudes are indignant.

Schadenfreude on February 10, 2012 at 1:17 PM

Meh, if you’d have beaten Kennedy you’d still be in Washington.

Schadenfreude on February 10, 2012 at 1:18 PM

There going to say “he’s too extreme on abortion.. rape, incest!!”

But that’s his religious belief, and won’t impact policy. It will come down to the Supreme Court judges he nominates, not his personal view on abortion.

anotherJoe on February 10, 2012 at 1:18 PM

You let Gas go to $ 5.00/gal and the Economy will be the focal point..:)

Dire Straits on February 10, 2012 at 1:17 PM

Understood, but security always trumps all other. It’s that Maslow thingie.

Schadenfreude on February 10, 2012 at 1:19 PM

Rush just pointed out something that Santorum said:

(on Romney) Why should undecided voters vote for a guy whose party is not excited about his candidacy? That is a pretty good question.

Happy Nomad on February 10, 2012 at 1:19 PM

Can you say poll overkill?

I used to like polls, but now I think they may end up destroying our Republic. The way the media us obsessesing over every single poll and with what everyone is thinking at every moment is making me want to pack up my stuff and go live in the woods for a while.

tkyang99 on February 10, 2012 at 1:20 PM

Dude, by Oct. there will be hot war.

The economy will be forgotten, never mind social stuff.

Schadenfreude on February 10, 2012 at 1:15 PM

This is really possible. In which case Obama will win.

BoxHead1 on February 10, 2012 at 1:20 PM

_______ within _______ of Obama headline interchangeable with identical ones that were already posted for Palin, Bachmann, Perry and Gingrich.

Just more of the same for the not-Romneys. A bump in the road.

Santorum looked and sounded blah today at CPAC. Gingrich will tear it up later. Newt in front of a crowd is his specialty.

Romney is being accepted quite well at CPAC. Bummer for those that hoped he would get booed or something. Fox News doesn’t even carry it live after their shameless cheerleading for Gingrich and Santorum.

Hilarious.

Moesart on February 10, 2012 at 1:20 PM

How come he doesn’t address the Catholic conundrum? He has been conspicuously silent on such a big topic.

Schadenfreude on February 10, 2012 at 1:20 PM

As I wrote on another thread, everything being said about Santorum wanting to create a theocracy and force his views on the American people was said about Ronald Reagan.

The secularists ALWAYS resort to fear mongering and hyperbole when they fear that their ability to take over American society, which they have been doing for the last 20 years, is in jeopardy.

You see, according to secularists, it is only they who should be allowed to force their views on the rest of us.

fight like a girl on February 10, 2012 at 1:08 PM

And they’ve been doing so every step of the way, unfortunately.

Othniel on February 10, 2012 at 1:20 PM

Geez HA is really betting the barn on this one eh? Spin spin spin!

Um, it may be relevant to note that the media has had years to hammer Romney; is it at all possible, just maybe, that Santorum’s gotten easier treatment up till this point given that he’s not going to be the Republican nominee in 2012?

Meh. Come back if these numbers hold a month or two from now, then I’ll be interested.

thirtyandseven on February 10, 2012 at 1:20 PM

Understood, but security always trumps all other. It’s that Maslow thingie.

Schadenfreude on February 10, 2012 at 1:19 PM

I see your point..:)

Dire Straits on February 10, 2012 at 1:20 PM

I don’t beleive it Mittens just said he was a, “severe”ly conservative Republican Govenor he just left out who passed the mother of all socialist programs, Romneycare, that was the model for Obamamcare!

Yes, Romney’s term was a fairly leftwing one. He argues he was constrained by the legislature, which is a rather convenient argument.

So, if you think Scott Brown and the Maine sisters are model conservatives, I guess Romney is too. If you are sane, however, Romney, based on his record, is left of center.

18-1 on February 10, 2012 at 1:20 PM

Every other poll shows Santorum being abused by Obama in polls and Romney within the margin or error and/or leading. Even PPP shows that. Yet Rasmussen shows Mitt down by 10 and Santorum within 4. Right..

milcus on February 10, 2012 at 1:14 PM

Non-Ras Romney/Obama

FOX News 2/6 – 2/9 1110 RV 47 42 Obama +5
Reuters/Ipsos 2/2 – 2/6 881 RV 48 42 Obama +6
ABC News/Wash Post 2/1 – 2/4 879 RV 51 45 Obama +6

5,5,6…10 doesn’t seem that much of a stretch.

What other Santy/Barry polls are you referring to? Fox has O +12. But the last Gallup poll taken 2 weeks ago showed O +8. You have to figure in 2 weeks a lot can change it’s reasonable to think Santy gained 4 on Obama after all the positive news coverage this past week.

But let’s say Ras is off 50%. That means Romney is losing by 5 (instead of 10) and Santorum is losing by 6 (instead of 3). In either case, the idea that Romney is Mr. Electable and nobody else has a chance has just been blown out of the water.

angryed on February 10, 2012 at 1:20 PM

This is really possible. In which case Obama will win.

BoxHead1 on February 10, 2012 at 1:20 PM

All part of the plan. He’ll blame the Jews.

Schadenfreude on February 10, 2012 at 1:20 PM

Rick: earnest.

Mitt: methodical.

WisRich on February 10, 2012 at 1:21 PM

He uses “I” as much as Obama.

Schadenfreude on February 10, 2012 at 1:21 PM

By any reasonable measure Santorum is more electable then Romney.

Yes, the left will tar him as a theocrat, but the leftist attacks on Romney as an evil 1%er firing people for no reason will resonate better with the mushy middle.

And Santorum won 4 out of 5 elections in a blue state. Counting Romney’s chosen successor after he cut and run in 2006, Romney is 1 out of 3.

Of course this all pales next to how much we could expect either man to pursue conservative policies if elected.

Santorum, while not perfect, has been a fairly strong conservative across the board. Romney of course has never advanced conservative ideals, and to this day is still defending things like his health care mandate.

18-1 on February 10, 2012 at 1:13 PM

As a mild Romney guy, I have to say you make a good point. I want to see how the general election polling plays out to see if you are correct. BTW, thanks for a thought full post, it really stands out in the sea of hot air BS.

sheikh of thornton on February 10, 2012 at 1:21 PM

(on Romney) Why should undecided voters vote for a guy whose party is not excited about his candidacy? That is a pretty good question

But that strategy worked so well in 2008, 1996, 1992, and 1976!

18-1 on February 10, 2012 at 1:21 PM

Daikokuco on February 10, 2012 at 1:13 PM

Oh. You mean Conservative American Christians?

…like me?

kingsjester on February 10, 2012 at 1:21 PM

One other very annoying thing about Romney is he is so unauthentic and has stolen so many of Palin’s ideas..i.e. the borrowing money from Cina line just now…

Uh Oh now he just alienated 5 million government workers in this country… some things you just don’t say Mitty…

CCRWM on February 10, 2012 at 1:22 PM

Ricko…!

(bluegill’s alarm just went off)

Seven Percent Solution on February 10, 2012 at 12:55 PM

She’s busy right now. Romney is still speaking. She’ll be here shortly to give an unbiased evaluation./

Night Owl on February 10, 2012 at 1:22 PM

How do you tie public sector pay to private pay. By what measure?

Pander.

WisRich on February 10, 2012 at 1:22 PM

Dude, by Oct. there will be hot war.

The economy will be forgotten, never mind social stuff.

Schadenfreude on February 10, 2012 at 1:15 PM

Speaking of Hot War, I haven’t forgotten that while governor he refused to back President Bush or even comment on the Iraq War. Rather than offend his liberal friends, he acted like a weasel and said it wasn’t his place to comment on war.

Once he wanted to be the Republican nominee he stuck his finger in the air and began to cautiously speak about the War on Terror.

flyfisher on February 10, 2012 at 1:22 PM

In either case, the idea that Romney is Mr. Electable and nobody else has a chance has just been blown out of the water.

Neither of these jokers have a chance.

The GOP is imploding before our eyes. It’s both fascinating and sad to watch.

tkyang99 on February 10, 2012 at 1:23 PM

Once he wanted to be the Republican nominee he stuck his finger in the air and began to cautiously speak about the War on Terror.

Don’t worry, he’ll go to the mat to repeal Obamacare.

Ok, maybe the “Obama” part of it.

18-1 on February 10, 2012 at 1:23 PM

What views are those?

kingsjester on February 10, 2012 at 12:55 PM

Only 10% of Americans believe that abortion should not be allowed if the continuation of the pregnancy would kill the mother.

He dislikes the implications of the 10th amendment on social issues.

http://gop12.thehill.com/2012/02/santorum-psuedo-surge.html

Much of Santorum’s problem is his general demeanor.

Mister Mets on February 10, 2012 at 1:24 PM

Mitt embracess Ryan’s roadmap. That’s something.

WisRich on February 10, 2012 at 1:24 PM

There is literally no chance Santorum is within 4 points of Obama and Mitt is 10 points down (with Obama at 50). Literally, none.

milcus on February 10, 2012 at 1:14 PM

I suspect that you are the one who is wrong. You just have to listen to conservative talk radio to understand that people are excited about Santorum’s surge in ways that they were not when Newt was surging or Romney was leading. This, my friend, is the kind of grassroots effort that is necessary for victory in November.

It is long odds that Santorum will become the nominee but to write polling off with the comment “literally no chance” seems to be more your wishful thinking than reality.

Happy Nomad on February 10, 2012 at 1:25 PM

Oh. You mean Conservative American Christians?

…like me?

kingsjester on February 10, 2012 at 1:21 PM

If you are one of the jerks who wants to make sure every single American citizens dutifully follows your religious edicts about abortion, gay relations, religious artifacts in courtrooms -even the 75 million citizens who aren’t Christian, then yeah. Like you.

Daikokuco on February 10, 2012 at 1:25 PM

Yippie!!!

Schadenfreude on February 10, 2012 at 1:25 PM

BoxHead1 on February 10, 2012 at 1:20 PM
All part of the plan. He’ll blame the Jews.

Schadenfreude on February 10, 2012 at 1:20 PM

It’s a horrible thought; Israel bombing Iran could re-elect Obama.

BoxHead1 on February 10, 2012 at 1:26 PM

That’s all on “religious freedom”? and the big issue of the moment?

Wow, what a letdown!

Schadenfreude on February 10, 2012 at 1:26 PM

Daikokuco on February 10, 2012 at 1:13 PM

Your perception of his “views and demeanor” did not seem to hurt him in Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, or Colorado.

…or this poll from Rasmussen, either.

kingsjester on February 10, 2012 at 1:26 PM

ROFL…yeah Obama changed his position and backtracked because the majority agreed with him….
unseen on February 10, 2012 at 1:08 PM

When

Isserley on February 10, 2012 at 1:26 PM

It’s a horrible thought; Israel bombing Iran could re-elect Obama.

BoxHead1 on February 10, 2012 at 1:26 PM

If they do it ahead of the election, it’s a done deal. One would think that Netanyahu knows this.

Schadenfreude on February 10, 2012 at 1:27 PM

I like Rick a lot, but I don’t see him as a strong electable candidate. Come on, he couldn’t win in Penn as an incumbent, how will he possibly win a national election.

rjoco1 on February 10, 2012 at 12:49 PM
He won in 2000 when Gore carried PA.
He lost in 2006 when anyone with an “R” nationwide was pretty much toast.

You gotta put some context behind his loss.

And if we’re going to play this game, how can Romney win when he lost his 1994 senate race by 18%? And this was 1994, the anti-2006.

angryed on February 10, 2012 at 12:50 PM

Not only that, Ed, people need to know a little history. Nixon lost a governor’s race in his home state of California, yet 6 years later, he won the White House. And, gee, 2006 was 6 years ago. Hmmmm, does history repeat itself??

Bitter Clinger on February 10, 2012 at 1:27 PM

Time to money bomb Rick Santorum.

44Magnum on February 10, 2012 at 1:28 PM

One other very annoying thing about Romney is he is so unauthentic and has stolen so many of Palin’s ideas..i.e. the borrowing money from Cina line just now…

CCRWM on February 10, 2012 at 1:22 PM

Holy crap you Palin cultists never fail to shock with your cultist attitudes and sheer ignorance. You actually think Palin was the first or only political opportunist to invoke China as a boogeyman in reference to deficit spending???

Daikokuco on February 10, 2012 at 1:28 PM

Why does Romney have Secret Service protection but not the rest?

CCRWM on February 10, 2012 at 1:29 PM

2006: 6 Republicans lost, Santorum lost
1994: Every Republican in the country won – except Mittens

And Mittens didn’t even bother running in 2006 because he knew he would lose.

angryed on February 10, 2012 at 1:08 PM

In 1994, only two Democratic Senators were defeated running for reelection: Jim Sasser of Tennessee, and Harris Wofford of Pennslyvania.

Mister Mets on February 10, 2012 at 1:29 PM

Excuse me, that previous comment was for Mister Mets.

If you are one of the jerks who wants to make sure every single American citizens dutifully follows your religious edicts about abortion, gay relations, religious artifacts in courtrooms -even the 75 million citizens who aren’t Christian, then yeah. Like you.

Daikokuco on February 10, 2012 at 1:25 PM

How is the belief system of 75% of Americans keeping you from doing what you want to do?

Have Christians been beheading non-believers, and nobody told me?

kingsjester on February 10, 2012 at 1:30 PM

If 7% had a game for this, and the word was “conservative”, don’t expect to hear from him anytime soon. He’s got to be passed out on the bathroom floor. LOL

Night Owl on February 10, 2012 at 1:30 PM

Your perception of his “views and demeanor” did not seem to hurt him in Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, or Colorado.

This is an important point. I could care less if Santorum would lose by a larger margin in CA or MA then Mitt Romney would. However, I am highly interested that Santorum seems to outperform Romney in swing states like the ones you list above.

18-1 on February 10, 2012 at 1:30 PM

Mitt support Paul Ryan plan LOL LOL,

The same Mitt who said in August of 2011 that if you support Ryan’s plan you want to throw Grandma and Grandpa off the cliff and used Democrat talking point regarding Paul Ryan’s Roadmap.
That is what he used against Rick Perry.

BroncosRock on February 10, 2012 at 1:30 PM

Time to money bomb Rick Santorum.

44Magnum on February 10, 2012 at 1:28 PM

I’m getting closer to opening the checkbook…

CCRWM on February 10, 2012 at 1:30 PM

Neither of these jokers have a chance.

The GOP is imploding before our eyes. It’s both fascinating and sad to watch.

tkyang99 on February 10, 2012 at 1:23 PM

There’s a reason GOP is called the Stupid Party. There are 10 names off the top of my head I can think of that could have beaten Obama. But the RNC/Elite had to stick with the “next in line” strategy. And the result will complete the 1996, 2008, 2012 RINO loss trifecta.

angryed on February 10, 2012 at 1:30 PM

I wasn’t inspired.

I give the edge to Rick.

Full disclosure: Pro Rick.

WisRich on February 10, 2012 at 1:30 PM

In 1994, only two Democratic Senators were defeated running for reelection: Jim Sasser of Tennessee, and Harris Wofford of Pennslyvania.

The latter by none other then Rick Santorum…

18-1 on February 10, 2012 at 1:31 PM

In 1994, only two Democratic Senators were defeated running for reelection: Jim Sasser of Tennessee, and Harris Wofford of Pennslyvania.

Mister Mets on February 10, 2012 at 1:29 PM

You’re right 1994 was a great Democrat year.

angryed on February 10, 2012 at 1:32 PM

The same Mitt who said in August of 2011 that if you support Ryan’s plan you want to throw Grandma and Grandpa off the cliff and used Democrat talking point regarding Paul Ryan’s Roadmap.

One of the things I like about Santorum is that when he attacks the other candidates in the race, he does it from the conservative perspective.

Mitt, and even Newt now, seem to default to using leftwing smears.

18-1 on February 10, 2012 at 1:33 PM

He is actually a very good guy, very patriotic, in myriad ways, just very much into Romney.

Schadenfreude on February 10, 2012 at 1:17 PM

‘It’ is a liar. ‘It’ has misrepresented itself on multiple occasions.
‘it’ is worth less than an AninaCAn.

Lanceman on February 10, 2012 at 1:33 PM

By any reasonable measure Santorum is more electable then Romney.

Yes, the left will tar him as a theocrat, but the leftist attacks on Romney as an evil 1%er firing people for no reason will resonate better with the mushy middle.

And Santorum won 4 out of 5 elections in a blue state. Counting Romney’s chosen successor after he cut and run in 2006, Romney is 1 out of 3.

Of course this all pales next to how much we could expect either man to pursue conservative policies if elected.

Santorum, while not perfect, has been a fairly strong conservative across the board. Romney of course has never advanced conservative ideals, and to this day is still defending things like his health care mandate.

18-1 on February 10, 2012 at 1:13 PM

This!!!

Bitter Clinger on February 10, 2012 at 1:33 PM

This is an important point. I could care less if Santorum would lose by a larger margin in CA or MA then Mitt Romney would. However, I am highly interested that Santorum seems to outperform Romney in swing states like the ones you list above.

18-1 on February 10, 2012 at 1:30 PM

Ca is lost…we had a chance to throw out the Democrats who have flushed our economy down the toilet and they all got overwhelmingly re-elected… so sad…

CCRWM on February 10, 2012 at 1:33 PM

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.

Ohio went Red in 2010. With the economy as bad as it is in Ohio I think either Newt or Santorum stand a good chance. Gov. Kasich has done a great job and he hit the floor running. If Santorum wants to win in Ohio, he better talk jobs!!

Most all Tea Parties in Ohio are against Senator Brown. He does have the Unions behind him however. Ohio lost the SB5 vote due to not getting their message out and allowing the Unions to define the issue.
I wouldn’t be surprised for that issue to come back up. The cities & the municipalities and school districts will have had time to see what that failed vote is costing them.

Senator Jim DeMint is backing Josh Mandel running against Brown:

http://senateconservatives.com/site/endorsements/2012/oh/josh-mandel

bluefox on February 10, 2012 at 1:34 PM

Mitt down by 10?
Electable! Really Electable!! Super Duper Electable!!!

james23 on February 10, 2012 at 1:34 PM

I’m listening. Giving a Family History lesson, they were always Conservative.

bluefox on February 10, 2012 at 1:16 PM

Based on everything I’ve ever read about his mother and father, Mitt learned progressive Rockefeller Republicanism at home, not conservatism. His mother ran as a pro-choice candidate for senate in 1970, before Roe. His father implemented the first state income tax. They opposed Goldwater, etc.

flyfisher on February 10, 2012 at 1:35 PM

Breitbart will speak this afternoon.

Schadenfreude on February 10, 2012 at 1:35 PM

We can throw out 1 liners from every candidate to make them sound like Lenin all day long.

You have to look at the overall body of work so to speak. Santorum has been more conservative than Romney. Is he 100% conservative? No. Did he vote for some anti-conservative thing? Sure did. But if you line up issue by issue with that Santy voted on and what Romney signed into law, there’s no comparing the two.

angryed on February 10, 2012 at 1:36 PM

Schadenfreude on February 10, 2012 at 1:35 PM

So will Newt and Laura Ingraham..:)

Dire Straits on February 10, 2012 at 1:36 PM

But if you line up issue by issue with that Santy voted on and what Romney signed into law, there’s no comparing the two.

And Romney still won’t disavow his “conservative” health care mandates.

The man doesn’t even know what conservativism is, and has no interest in even learning, let alone embracing it…

18-1 on February 10, 2012 at 1:38 PM

His father implemented the first state income tax.

flyfisher on February 10, 2012 at 1:35 PM

Fer realz?

And yet Michigan is supposed to be in love with Willard because his dad?

facepalm worthy

angryed on February 10, 2012 at 1:38 PM

hahahahaha!
Palin, Rick and Newt fans are “true conservatives,”
and Mitt, by his own words, is “severely conservative.”

Severe Conservatives for Willard!

james23 on February 10, 2012 at 1:38 PM

So will Newt and Laura Ingraham..:)

Dire Straits on February 10, 2012 at 1:36 PM

Indeed, and C-Span is covering.

Schadenfreude on February 10, 2012 at 1:38 PM

The man doesn’t even know what conservativism is, and has no interest in even learning, let alone embracing it…

18-1 on February 10, 2012 at 1:38 PM

Succinctly said.

angryed on February 10, 2012 at 1:39 PM

Daikokuco on February 10, 2012 at 1:13 PM

Dominionist, like “Christianist”, is nothing more than an asinine left wing rhetorical term for a political boogeyman.

Daemonocracy on February 10, 2012 at 1:39 PM

Did he actually say severely conservative?

angryed on February 10, 2012 at 1:40 PM

So the Republican base has now settled on Santorum? I know the rightwingers have been wandering in the desert a long time and are desperate for a “win,” but really, Rick Man-on-Dog Santorum?

I’m not sure what the TC’s win with Santorum, but it won’t be the WH. I see Ricky is ‘splaining some remarks he made about women in the military. Political wisdom is that, when you are explaining, you are losing. That’s been the slam against Romney with his gaffes about the poor, firing people, etc.

The Obama campaign would throw everything it’s got against Romney, but I don’t see how they portray him as scary. Boring, yes, but scary? OTOH it will be a cakewalk for them to put abject fear into the country about a Santorum presidency. Mitt may be a robotic technocrat, but Rick is more than a little creepy.

This poll reflects his ascendancy after a recent three-state win. Santorum won’t wear well over the long haul.

And Obama, despite an abysmal first term, will still be the cool black dude.

Four more years. Prepare yourselves.

Meredith on February 10, 2012 at 1:40 PM

Indeed, and C-Span is covering.

Schadenfreude on February 10, 2012 at 1:38 PM

Good Deal..As I have said earlier The Right Scoop is live streaming it also..:)

Dire Straits on February 10, 2012 at 1:40 PM

Apparently Newt to speak in two hours.

The lout will speak at 4:10 EST. He’ll bring the House to its feet, or he’ll implode.

Schadenfreude on February 10, 2012 at 1:41 PM

How come he doesn’t address the Catholic conundrum? He has been conspicuously silent on such a big topic.

Schadenfreude on February 10, 2012 at 1:20 PM

Is that a rhetorical question or are you really wondering?

Maybe it is because of this. And I heard him claim yesterday that he had vetoed the bill, which is true, but he completely lied by omitting that he turned around and reversed himself by issueing an EO. I wouldn’t trust him as far as I could throw my car, and I don’t drive a ‘smart’ car.

In fairness, he did write an oped in the Washington Times, I think. Of course, he left out his role in MA there too.

pannw on February 10, 2012 at 1:41 PM

Did he actually say severely conservative?

angryed on February 10, 2012 at 1:40 PM

If he did, he’s severely deranged.

Schadenfreude on February 10, 2012 at 1:41 PM

And Obama, despite an abysmal first term, will still be the cool black dude.

Four more years. Prepare yourselves.

Meredith on February 10, 2012 at 1:40 PM

Agree. But this will happen regardless of who the GOP nominee turns out to be. With one exception…Gingrich. I think Gingrich could be the guy who has the balls to call out Obama on what he really is. That could work and he could win or it could backfire and he could lose by 20%. We won’t know until we try.

With Willard I know for sure he won’t dare say an unkind word about Obama and he will lose by 5%, guaranteed.

angryed on February 10, 2012 at 1:43 PM

Understood, but security always trumps all other. It’s that Maslow thingie.

Schadenfreude on February 10, 2012 at 1:19 PM

the fact that no election ends up being about what the pros think it will be a year or so out. 20008 was suppose to be about Iraq. Obama made sure it was about the one topic that McCain was the weakest on. Mitt thinks it will be about the economy. Obama will make sure it is about something else then the economy.

unseen on February 10, 2012 at 1:43 PM

bluefox on February 10, 2012 at 1:34 PM

That SB5 vote (ballot initiative Issue 2) still burns me. We sweep the GOP into control, the GOP does what it says its going to do, the unions wail, and suddenly everyone we feels sorry for the unions. I don’t think Ohioans know what they want.

I am looking forward to casting my ballot for Josh Mandel. “Socialist Sherrod” has to go.

Bitter Clinger on February 10, 2012 at 1:43 PM

The Obama campaign would throw everything it’s got against Romney, but I don’t see how they portray him as scary.

They’ll portray Santorum as a theocrat. People will look at their paychecks and say…so?

They’ll portray Romney as the hot shot CEO that just closed half their division, and they will vote against him.

The left has been prepping to run against Romney since 2010. And their demonization will work.

18-1 on February 10, 2012 at 1:43 PM

pannw on February 10, 2012 at 1:41 PM

It’s the issue of the moment, way beyond contraception/abortion. It’s a matter of freedom loss, in a big way, separation of church/state, constitution.

None of the leaders address it at its core. I look forward to what Newt will say on topic. This is as big as a wale, in the oceanic domain of issues.

Too bad the Rs can’t argue and fight on what really matters.

Meh, the callers on C-Span are as sycophant as the commenters.

Schadenfreude on February 10, 2012 at 1:44 PM

Did he actually say severely conservative?

angryed on February 10, 2012 at 1:40 PM
If he did, he’s severely deranged.

Schadenfreude on February 10, 2012 at 1:41 PM

He’s severly desparate.

Bitter Clinger on February 10, 2012 at 1:44 PM

With Willard I know for sure he won’t dare say an unkind word about Obama and he will lose by 5%, guaranteed.

Friends we have nothing to fear from my colleague, President Obama. –guaranteed Mitt Gaffe in late 2012…

18-1 on February 10, 2012 at 1:45 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4