Gallup shows Romney, Santorum within MOE of Obama

posted at 11:00 am on February 23, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

At least so far, Gallup keeps giving Rick Santorum good news on the electability issue.  In their latest poll, both Santorum and Mitt Romney fall within the margin of error against Barack Obama, and Romney actually bests Obama slightly [see update]:

U.S. registered voters are closely divided in their 2012 presidential election preferences between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney, and between Obama and Rick Santorum. Romney is slightly ahead of Obama, 50% to 46%, while Obama edges Santorum, 49% to 48%, but neither of these differences is statistically significant.

Santorum and Romney are the current leaders in the volatile Republican primary race. In Gallup Daily tracking conducted Feb. 17-21, 35% of Republican voters nationwide support Santorum, compared with 27% for Romney, 15% for Newt Gingrich, and 10% for Ron Paul.

Santorum’s competitive position against Obama in the Feb. 16-19 data represents an improvement compared with interviewing conducted Jan. 27-28, when Obama led Santorum by eight percentage points, 51% to 43%. At that time, Santorum was still trailing both Romney and Gingrich in Gallup’s tracking of Republican preferences for their party’s nomination. After his Feb. 7 wins in Minnesota, Colorado, and Missouri, Santorum surged to a 10-point lead over Romney. He continues to lead the race among Republicans nationally, and may now be more competitive with Obama among all U.S. voters as a result.

Santorum’s numbers are moving up, while Romney’s remain relatively stable.  That is good news for both Republicans, but bad news for Obama.  While Republicans fight each other, Obama’s stature should give him more of a lead over the GOP pack.  Instead, Obama can’t get to 50% against a split field, which portends a very tough re-election campaign once Republicans settle on the nominee.

Santorum got more good news out of Michigan today, albeit qualified.  The new Detroit Free Press-WXYZ poll in the state shows Santorum with a narrow three-point lead over Romney, but that’s a decline from earlier polls in Michigan:

A week of personal appearances, newspaper op-eds, robocalls and television ads has brought Mitt Romney back within striking distance of national frontrunner Rick Santorum in Michigan’s Republican presidential primary, but with six days to go Santorum’s upstart campaign remains on the verge of what could be a defining victory in Romney’s birth state, a Detroit Free Press-WXYZ-TV poll shows. …

Santorum continues to show strength, as the conservative base rallies around him: Among self-described conservatives, he leads Romney 46% to 27% (Romney leads among the much-smaller bloc of moderate voters 51% to 17%.) Men favor Santorum 41% to 29% for Romney, and Santorum has built up double-digit leads over Romney in the western and central parts of the state.

Romney has a double-digit lead in Detroit, which is something to watch on Tuesday night when returns start to come in.  If the race remains this close, though, it may not matter as much as one would think.  Michigan allocates its 30 delegates on a proportional basis, 28 on how their Congressional districts vote.  It may be possible for one of the candidates to win more delegates even if they narrowly lose the overall popular vote, or to break even on delegates.  The psychological impact of the win on the following Super Tuesday races is what will be most important, but Santorum might end up benefiting from a split decision.

Arizona, however, is winner-take-all.  So far, Romney seems in control of the Arizona primary, and it may be that a split decision in Michigan will make the Arizona contest that much more meaningful on Super Tuesday.

Update: I misread the Gallup results of the head-to-head between Romney and Obama.  Romney’s ahead by 4 (still within the MOE).  I’ve corrected the opening paragraph and apologize for the error.  Thanks to Jon A for pointing it out to me.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

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

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

but, we have to take the MOE+ACORN MOE in order to win, Ed…right?

ted c on February 23, 2012 at 11:05 AM

Let’s see what it looks like post debate

cmsinaz on February 23, 2012 at 11:05 AM

well there goes the electability argument for Willard

liberal4life on February 23, 2012 at 11:07 AM

Like I said in the debate thread, the most important thing I took out of last night is that both Mittens and Santorum will do fine against Barry.

Doughboy on February 23, 2012 at 11:07 AM

But…but…I thought that 2008 video was supposed to destroy Santorum?

The nation must be 78% Christian, or something.

The Devil you say.

LOL.

Mr. Inevitable isn’t so inevitable, after all.

kingsjester on February 23, 2012 at 11:07 AM

Oh gosh.

From a Ham sandwich beating Obama to MOE dreaming.

How the mighty have fallen.

Maybe soon the myth of the tea party will sink in and ‘truCons’ will rejoin reality.

freshface on February 23, 2012 at 11:07 AM

That there is even a MOE, tells us how stupid people are!

KOOLAID2 on February 23, 2012 at 11:08 AM

Atheist update?

Eph on February 23, 2012 at 11:09 AM

Poll after poll after poll after poll continue to show Rick Santorum competitive with Obama in a head-to-head matchup, and also continue to show Romney at the same level of competitiveness.

But Santorum is toxic, extreme, and completely unelectable; while Romney is capable of dispatching Obama in his sleep.

Sure…

Shump on February 23, 2012 at 11:09 AM

Michigan is all-important. Even if Romney wins Arizona smashingly, the MSM will kill him if he doesn’t win a majority of delegates AND the popular vote in Michigan.

rockmom on February 23, 2012 at 11:10 AM

well there goes the electability argument for Willard

liberal4life on February 23, 2012 at 11:07 AM

Heh.
Almost rates a BWHAHA or two.

Lanceman on February 23, 2012 at 11:11 AM

freshface on February 23, 2012 at 11:07 AM

Clearly, you don’t understand how difficult it is to rid the world of thieves – they keep popping new ones out.

OldEnglish on February 23, 2012 at 11:11 AM

These are so pointless right now. It makes Santorum supporters think it is even remotely prudent to vote for him, when it isn’t.

Hopefully post debate he starts sinking and we can be done with this primary and start to focus on beating Obama.

milcus on February 23, 2012 at 11:12 AM

well there goes the electability argument for Willard

liberal4life on February 23, 2012 at 11:07 AM

People are getting back to work and unemployment keeps dropping.

America is on the right track. Unfortunately for some people these facts get in the way of their political bias

liberal4life on February 22, 2012 at 7:22 PM

Del Dolemonte on February 23, 2012 at 11:12 AM

You know, the press has pounced on the birth control issue to draw attention away from the real issue, which is this, right here. Americans are waking up to the reality of the abortion “choice” fallacy.

We all know where the GOP candidates stand and we all know where Obama stands.

bloggless on February 23, 2012 at 11:13 AM

Romney has a double-digit lead in Detroit

Detroit? Detroit??!! There isn’t a Republican voter within 10 miles of that city. Detroit?! You have got to be kidding me.

Rational Thought on February 23, 2012 at 11:13 AM

Ed said:

. In their latest poll, both Santorum and Mitt Romney fall within the margin of error against Barack Obama, and Santorum actually performs slightly better:

No he doesn’t. From the results you posted: “Romney is slightly ahead of Obama, 50% to 46%, while Obama edges Santorum, 49% to 48%, but neither of these differences is statistically significant.”

Jon0815 on February 23, 2012 at 11:16 AM

Detroit? Detroit??!! There isn’t a Republican voter within 10 miles of that city. Detroit?! You have got to be kidding me.

Rational Thought on February 23, 2012 at 11:13 AM

Precisely.

kingsjester on February 23, 2012 at 11:16 AM

These are so pointless right now. It makes Santorum supporters think it is even remotely prudent to vote for him, when it isn’t.

Hopefully post debate he starts sinking and we can be done with this primary and start to focus on beating Obama.

milcus on February 23, 2012 at 11:12 AM

Oh come on…I’m not a Santorum supporter but this is a ridiculous notion. You make this generalization that is isn’t prudent to vote for him, and don’t even try to back it up with anything.

You have to be trolling for a fight…and if you are you will get it haha

dernst2 on February 23, 2012 at 11:16 AM

and sadly lots of real Republicans like myself will stay home if one of these RINOS is my choice……

JihadKiller1s1k on February 23, 2012 at 11:16 AM

well its encouraging that both are competitive in this poll of registered voters. What do you think finally having the nominee and rallying around him is worth, 3 percentage points?

Donald Draper on February 23, 2012 at 11:17 AM

I think Santorum does pretty well with the “bitter clingers,” or Reagan Democrats. He would do far better with these voters than Romney.

As for Obama – maybe gas prices are catching up to him?

TarheelBen on February 23, 2012 at 11:17 AM

Like I said in the debate thread, the most important thing I took out of last night is that both Mittens and Santorum will do fine against Barry.

Doughboy on February 23, 2012 at 11:07 AM

And Newt, too. I think any of the three would be competitive against Obama. Very competitive. And I also think the protracted primary has kept Obama’s team off balance, freaked out, not knowing which way to turn, which phony story to push. “Looks like Santorum. Should we do the birth control thing? Oh, crap. It’s Romney. Let’s do the 1% thing. Oh, crap. It’s Newt. Let’s do the ‘Obama is just like Reagan thing.’ Oh, crap. Santorum again? ‘Satan!’ What? Romney? Let’s go with the dog story. Gingrich? Let’s show how happily married Barack and Michelle are.”

They’re just spinning all over the place and Obama’s numbers are hurting because of it.

Rational Thought on February 23, 2012 at 11:17 AM

Romney has a double-digit lead in Detroit

Obama has triple digit lead in Detroit as well. He beats Romney 3 to 1 there head-to-head

liberal4life on February 23, 2012 at 11:18 AM

Let’s see what it looks like post debate

cmsinaz on February 23, 2012 at 11:05 AM

Romney is probably further behind.

Norwegian on February 23, 2012 at 11:18 AM

Jon0815 on February 23, 2012 at 11:16 AM

Yes, we know you’re prolly a Mittbot.
But the point is, obama, in this particular poll, can’t break 50% against Santorium. He does against O’Romney.

Lanceman on February 23, 2012 at 11:20 AM

Obama has triple digit lead in Detroit as well. He beats Romney 3 to 1 there head-to-head

liberal4life on February 23, 2012 at 11:18 AM

Hold it. First you say something intelligent and now this. How is 75% to 25% a triple digit lead?

Lanceman on February 23, 2012 at 11:22 AM

Obama’s stature should give him more of a lead over the GOP pack.

MackDaddy has “stature?” Woe is us.

davidk on February 23, 2012 at 11:23 AM

Detroit? Detroit??!! There isn’t a Republican voter within 10 miles of that city. Detroit?! You have got to be kidding me.

Rational Thought on February 23, 2012 at 11:13 AM

.
*** SNORT ***

ExpressoBold on February 23, 2012 at 11:23 AM

Anybody But Obama

kirkill on February 23, 2012 at 11:24 AM

Hold it. First you say something intelligent and now this. How is 75% to 25% a triple digit lead?

Lanceman on February 23, 2012 at 11:22 AM

…it’s like 3000% percent or something…./

ted c on February 23, 2012 at 11:24 AM

Hold it. First you say something intelligent and now this. How is 75% to 25% a triple digit lead?

Lanceman on February 23, 2012 at 11:22 AM

Basic Math 101

25 x 3 = 75

liberal4life on February 23, 2012 at 11:25 AM

At least so far, Gallup keeps giving Rick Santorum good news on the electability issue.

Too bad Rick Santorum can’t give himself good news on the electability issue. The dates on the poll are Feb 16-19. This poll is what’s known as a high water mark. Something for Santorum to tell his grandkids about in his dotage.

Mr. Arkadin on February 23, 2012 at 11:25 AM

Romney has a double-digit lead in Detroit

Obama has triple digit lead in Detroit as well. He beats Romney 3 to 1 there head-to-head

liberal4life on February 23, 2012 at 11:18 AM

Detroit is the Model Liberal city in America. I bet you can’t wait for the rest of Amerikkka to look like that dung heap.

kirkill on February 23, 2012 at 11:25 AM

But the point is, obama, in this particular poll, can’t break 50% against Santorium. He does against O’Romney.

Lanceman on February 23, 2012 at 11:20 AM

No he doesn’t. This poll has Obama at 46% and Romney at 50%. Ed got it backwards and you did too.

Jon0815 on February 23, 2012 at 11:26 AM

Obama has triple digit lead in Detroit as well. He beats Romney 3 to 1 there head-to-head

liberal4life on February 23, 2012 at 11:18 AM

Hold it. First you say something intelligent and now this. How is 75% to 25% a triple digit lead?

Lanceman on February 23, 2012 at 11:22 AM

New Math?

Del Dolemonte on February 23, 2012 at 11:26 AM

And not only that, Libtoad4life, in a city that’s for all intents and purposes 100% black, I consider garnering 25% of said vote pretty good.

Lanceman on February 23, 2012 at 11:26 AM

But the point is, obama, in this particular poll, can’t break 50% against Santorium. He does against O’Romney.

Reading comprehension isn’t your strong suit, is it? (To be fair, it isn’t Ed’s either…but he’s so deep into the spin tank for Santorum he misrepresents the topline findings in the hopes his Hot Air followers won’t read the text.)

To restate the ACTUAL POLL FINDINGS:

Romney 50%
Obama 46%

Obama 49%
Santorum 48%

So not only does Romney do significantly better than Santorum in this matchup vs. Obama, he LEADS BHO by four percent and breaks 50% whereas Santorum still trails.

Esoteric on February 23, 2012 at 11:28 AM

Obama has triple digit lead in Detroit as well. He beats Romney 3 to 1 there head-to-head

liberal4life on February 23, 2012 at 11:18 AM

Only three people live in Detroit. One works, one’s on welfare and the last one is the mayor.

darwin on February 23, 2012 at 11:28 AM

Hold it. First you say something intelligent and now this. How is 75% to 25% a triple digit lead?

Lanceman on February 23, 2012 at 11:22 AM

Basic Math 101

25 x 3 = 75

liberal4life on February 23, 2012 at 11:25 AM

Valiant Spin Attempt Noted.

Del Dolemonte on February 23, 2012 at 11:28 AM

Basic Math 101

25 x 3 = 75

liberal4life on February 23, 2012 at 11:25 AM

Heh. I can see why you’re a liberal. You ain’t all that intelligent. Tell me, do you smoke cigarettes and have tattoos too?

Jon0815 on February 23, 2012 at 11:26 AM

My bad

Lanceman on February 23, 2012 at 11:29 AM

And Newt, too. I think any of the three would be competitive against Obama. Very competitive. And I also think the protracted primary has kept Obama’s team off balance, freaked out, not knowing which way to turn, which phony story to push. “Looks like Santorum. Should we do the birth control thing? Oh, crap. It’s Romney. Let’s do the 1% thing. Oh, crap. It’s Newt. Let’s do the ‘Obama is just like Reagan thing.’ Oh, crap. Santorum again? ‘Satan!’ What? Romney? Let’s go with the dog story. Gingrich? Let’s show how happily married Barack and Michelle are.”

They’re just spinning all over the place and Obama’s numbers are hurting because of it.

Rational Thought on February 23, 2012 at 11:17 AM

I’m still not sold on Newt. Don’t get me wrong. He did fine last night, and he’d crush Obama in the 3 Presidential debates. But I think after his 2 meltdowns following Iowa and Florida that he’s too volatile when things aren’t going his way(which let’s face it, will often be the case with Obama’s billion dollar warchest and a sycophantic media).

Plus that personal baggage may simply be too much to overcome. Santorum can go out there and make peace with women voters by pledging he’s in favor of contraception being readily available to everyone(which given his Title X vote, shouldn’t be too tough a sell). But how does Newt spin his 3 marriages and the fact that his own party seems to despise him?

Doughboy on February 23, 2012 at 11:29 AM

Seriously, Ed is going to need to rewrite this entire post once he realizes his error. It not only affects his topic sentence, but his later ‘analysis’ as well.

Oops.

Esoteric on February 23, 2012 at 11:29 AM

To restate the ACTUAL POLL FINDINGS:

Romney 50%
Obama 46%

Obama 49%
Santorum 48%

So not only does Romney do significantly better than Santorum in this matchup vs. Obama, he LEADS BHO by four percent and breaks 50% whereas Santorum still trails.

Esoteric on February 23, 2012 at 11:28 AM

Yeah, I think Romney breaking the 50% point is pretty impressive. And it isn’t 50-49, it’s 50-46. Obama is in deep, deep trouble.

Rational Thought on February 23, 2012 at 11:30 AM

Basic Math 101

25 x 3 = 75

liberal4life on February 23, 2012 at 11:25 AM

You don’t seem to understand the meaning of “triple digit”. Triple digit would be 100%.

Voter from WA State on February 23, 2012 at 11:27 AM

Did you ever take Math in school?

When I say triple I’m speaking in terms of RATIO

75 : 25 = 3 : 1

liberal4life on February 23, 2012 at 11:30 AM

I bet Obama leads Mitt 80% to 20% in DC. A QUADRUPLE DIGIT LEAD!!!

Kataklysmic on February 23, 2012 at 11:33 AM

To restate the ACTUAL POLL FINDINGS:

Romney 50%
Obama 46%

Obama 49%
Santorum 48%

So not only does Romney do significantly better than Santorum in this matchup vs. Obama, he LEADS BHO by four percent and breaks 50% whereas Santorum still trails.

Esoteric on February 23, 2012 at 11:28 AM

I’m thinking that if Romney & Santorum’s numbers were reversed we would have seen a different headline. But who knows?

rhombus on February 23, 2012 at 11:34 AM

Obama has triple digit lead in Detroit as well. He beats Romney 3 to 1 there head-to-head

liberal4life on February 23, 2012 at 11:18 AM

Basic Math 101

25 x 3 = 75

liberal4life on February 23, 2012 at 11:25 AM

Like I asked on another thread. How does it feel to be the dumbest commenter on EVERY thread?

HumpBot Salvation on February 23, 2012 at 11:34 AM

Romney has a double-digit lead in Detroit

Detroit? Detroit??!! There isn’t a Republican voter within 10 miles of that city. Detroit?! You have got to be kidding me.

Rational Thought on February 23, 2012 at 11:13 AM

Vote scenario in Detroit:

Romney 4 votes (57%)
Santorum 3 votes (43%)

Mittbot Reaction: Romney wins Detroit by double-digits!! Woo-hoo!!

Norwegian on February 23, 2012 at 11:34 AM

Did you ever take Math in school?

When I say triple I’m speaking in terms of RATIO

75 : 25 = 3 : 1

liberal4life on February 23, 2012 at 11:30 AM

Obama has triple digit lead

liberal4life on February 23, 2012 at 11:18 AM

Now that your mistake was pointed out by at least 3 other people, you change it to ratio.
I give you credit for a weak try.
Just laugh, Libtoad. It ain’t the end of your world.

Lanceman on February 23, 2012 at 11:34 AM

Rule number 1 about Michigan newspapers.

Never trust anything political that comes from the Detroit Free Press.Past political endoresements include such luminaries as…

Kwame Kilpatrick
John Conyers
Monica Conyers

booter on February 23, 2012 at 11:34 AM

How is 75% to 25% a triple digit lead?

Lanceman on February 23, 2012 at 11:22 AM

You seem to be forgetting that Detroit is no better than Chicago when it comes to corruption. Given the number of serial voters and the civic mindedness of the dead, it could well be that Obama has a triple digit lead in that worthless cess pool.

Happy Nomad on February 23, 2012 at 11:35 AM

Kataklysmic on February 23, 2012 at 11:33 AM

I’ve been away from math classes for a long time. But, doesn’t a triple-digit lead mean a triple-digit lead?

Liberalism’s easy. Math is hard.

kingsjester on February 23, 2012 at 11:36 AM

Past political endoresements include such luminaries as…

Kwame Kilpatrick
John Conyers
Monica Conyers

booter on February 23, 2012 at 11:34 AM

aren’t two of those folks in jail and the other should be?????

ted c on February 23, 2012 at 11:37 AM

I’m still not sold on Newt. Don’t get me wrong. He did fine last night, and he’d crush Obama in the 3 Presidential debates. But I think after his 2 meltdowns following Iowa and Florida that he’s too volatile when things aren’t going his way(which let’s face it, will often be the case with Obama’s billion dollar warchest and a sycophantic media).

Plus that personal baggage may simply be too much to overcome. Santorum can go out there and make peace with women voters by pledging he’s in favor of contraception being readily available to everyone(which given his Title X vote, shouldn’t be too tough a sell). But how does Newt spin his 3 marriages and the fact that his own party seems to despise him?

Doughboy on February 23, 2012 at 11:29 AM

Anyone who can make Obama look dumb in a debate can win. Obama’s “smartest president in human history” narrative is really, really important to his campaign. It is largely why he won in 2008, even in a year when his win should have been a cakewalk. His team and the media convinced 51% of voters that Obama is a terrifically intelligent, well-read, cerebral guy. He isn’t. Not even close. I know smart people. Obama isn’t one of them. I’ve seen his kind my whole life, pseudo-intellectuals. They manage to sell arrogance as intellect — for awhile. If Gingrich doesn’t fall apart, he would be able to expose Obama’s intellectual short-comings, which would in turn serve as a handy explanation for voters for why he has failed so miserably — he’s just…not so smart. And in doing so, Gingrich will make Obama freak out. He is thin-skinned, and like all phonies, terribly afraid all the time that he’ll be found out. Gingrich can do that to him. So can Romney.

On the marriages, I think his “I have asked for forgiveness” thing and the strong support of his daughters goes a long way to mitigating that.

Rational Thought on February 23, 2012 at 11:38 AM

When I say triple I’m speaking in terms of RATIO

75 : 25 = 3 : 1

liberal4life on February 23, 2012 at 11:30 AM

3 is a single digit, you were not speaking in terms of ratio until you got caught in a mis-statement. It’s perfectly fine to admit you made a mistake and move on instead of doubling down on stupid and make the claim that 3 is a triple digit figure.

Happy Nomad on February 23, 2012 at 11:38 AM

I’ve been away from math classes for a long time. But, doesn’t a triple-digit lead mean a triple-digit lead?

Liberalism’s easy. Math is hard.

kingsjester on February 23, 2012 at 11:36 AM

I’m not sure but I’m eager to see if Obama can get his lead over Mitt to 75-15 in the SF Bay Area. Go for that quintuple digit lead baby!!!

Kataklysmic on February 23, 2012 at 11:39 AM

Kataklysmic on February 23, 2012 at 11:39 AM

Now, all we need is csdeven/bluegill to tell us how many times a broken clock is right per day. He/she/it said “one”.

kingsjester on February 23, 2012 at 11:41 AM

It’s got to be devastating to the mormon bigots in here that Rubio was a baptized member of the church. The only reason he left was because of his family it seems.

rubberneck on February 23, 2012 at 11:41 AM

How about these brand new polls today from that left-leaning Rasmussen reports, Ed?

In a potential Election 2012 matchups, the president leads Rick Santorum 48% to 41%. If Mitt Romney is the Republican nominee, the president leads 49% to 39%.

If Obama keeps leading these GOP candidates while all the enthusiasm and attention is on the GOP side because of the primary, how are they suppose to defeat Obama when the rest of the country (Democrats and most of the independents)start paying attention?

Salahuddin on February 23, 2012 at 11:44 AM

Lanceman on February 23, 2012 at 11:22 AM

kingsjester on February 23, 2012 at 11:36 AM

Kataklysmic on February 23, 2012 at 11:39 AM

liberal4life on February 23, 2012 at 11:30 AM

Thanks to all of you! The “triple digit” exchange has been one of the funniest I’ve seen in a long time. And with the prospect of a Romney nomination, I need something to cheer me up. :-)

Just Sayin on February 23, 2012 at 11:46 AM

Now, all we need is csdeven/bluegill to tell us how many times a broken clock is right per day. He/she/it said “one”.

kingsjester on February 23, 2012 at 11:41 AM

Hmmmm. He could be referring to this.

Kataklysmic on February 23, 2012 at 11:48 AM

Gingrich will make Obama freak out.
Rational Thought on February 23, 2012 at 11:38 AM

You believe that? You seriously think that the MSM will set up a debate to Newt’s advatage? Newt was the guy who said he was speechless in the face of Romney’ “lies”. That was the best he could do? Call someone a liar and say he had no response because he was so stunned? Newt came off like Captain Queeg looking for his strawberries or Ahab riding the Great White Romney Whale into the depths. Anger and snide remarks only gets you so far. Seriously, if Newt were our candidate I couldn’t stand all the drinks I’ll have to take every time Newt says “fundamentally” or “dramatically”. I sure like Newt’s zingers too and he does make some good points but I just don’t think the 2 or 3 debates Obama will have with Newt will come off quite as well as you hope. But heck yes, I’d love to see what you described.

rhombus on February 23, 2012 at 11:51 AM

We’ll have to win by 10% to overcome the guaranteed shenanigans.

SouthernGent on February 23, 2012 at 11:51 AM

I’ve been away from math classes for a long time. But, doesn’t a triple-digit lead mean a triple-digit lead?

Liberalism’s easy. Math is hard.

kingsjester on February 23, 2012 at 11:36 AM

.
Consider the following valid statement: Candidate A leads Candidate B by 60% to 40% for a double-digit lead of 20%. That is a true double-digit lead.
.
For liberal4life’s assertion of a triple-digit lead to be valid, she would have had to phrase it as “Øblama leads the nearest Republican competitor by 3 to 1, a triple-digit lead on a comparative percent basis” ((3/1)*100). It’s kind of a dumb statement where percentages are concerned, actually, since percentages measure the portion of an entirety that a particular sample occupies. An entirety is always 100%.

ExpressoBold on February 23, 2012 at 11:52 AM

Hmmmm. He could be referring to this.

Kataklysmic on February 23, 2012 at 11:48 AM

I saw that exchange regarding busted clocks. When that puke cdseven was caught in stupid, he, like libtoad, tried to change the statement.

Lanceman on February 23, 2012 at 11:52 AM

Rick Santorum’s Sanctimonious Hypocrisy:

POLITICS

Rick Santorum’s Homeschooling Cost The PA Tax Payers $100K

The former Senator may have homeschooled his children, but taxpayers fitted the bill.

Posted Feb 23, 2012 10:29am EST

Republican Presidential candidate Rick Santorum is an avid supporter of returning school administration to local authorities. The former Pennsylvania Senator often talks about going back to the “one room school house,” and even advocates home schooling citing the “weird socialization” children receive in public school. But Santorum’s home schooling of his own children wasn’t as laissez-faire as you might expect.

Santorum campaigned successfully against his opponent in his 1990 election to Congress by saying he was out of touch because he lived outside the district in Virginia. Santorum, however, would move his own family to Virginia during his tenure in the Senate. Santorum’s children, while living in Virginia between 2001 and 2004 attended a Pennsylvania online charter school at the cost of the Pennsylvania taxpayer.

Pennsylvania state law requires any school district to pay for the education of children who live within their district, but attend cyber schools. Santorum, although living in Leesburg, Virginia with his family, claimed residency in Penn Hills, Pennsylvania. The cost of the educating Santorum’s children in Virginia ran the Penn Hills School District a bill just over $100,000.

Santorum defended the move during his 2006 campaign. He did in fact own a home, next to his wife Karen’s parent’s home in Penn Hills, and did pay taxes on the house. When repeatedly pressed on the issue during his failed 2006 reelection bid, Santorum would reply, “I pay taxes” and “my tax dollars at work.”

Okay, so Rick Santorum paid taxes on his PA property; so did many others. But how many other PA residents got a free $100,000 pass from their school district? He took money out of state revenues, knowingly, deliberately, and fraudulently and with malice aforethought. Santorum COST Pennsylvanians $100,000. He has refused to reimburse the state for that money. I think that shows a willful and reckless disregard for the taxpayers of Pennsylvania, not to mention the laws of that state.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/rick-santorums-homeschooling-cost-the-pa-tax-paye

mountainaires on February 23, 2012 at 11:54 AM

You people are forgetting that our Lord and Savior Obama is a magic man who can lower sea levels with just his awesomeness. If this beautiful man wants a triple digit lead over Mittens, then by God I say we give it to him!!!

Kataklysmic on February 23, 2012 at 11:57 AM

rhombus on February 23, 2012 at 11:51 AM

Well of course the Obamamedia will try to set up the debates to favor only Obama, but the GOP candidates know that. It will be on them to move the discussion to Obama’s weak areas. I think any of the three can do that. Let’s face it. There are a lot of weak areas in Obama’s record to mine from. Believe me when I tell you that Obama’s team knows that quite well, too. They will be pulling so much sh*t with the debates because they will be terrified about what might come up. They’ll be starting with the hopes of avoiding debates completely, and then moving from there.

Rational Thought on February 23, 2012 at 11:59 AM

Candidates’ platform, as presented by Christine O’Donnell:

Santorum: Burn the witches!
Romney: Tax the witches!
Gingrich: Cheat with the witches!
Ron Paul: What witches?

Archivarix on February 23, 2012 at 11:59 AM

Geezus, Ed. You’re getting pathetic.

“Within the margin of error” now is it?

4% points difference may be “within the margin of error” but it’s a huge spread in this case.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/152918/Romney-Santorum-Closely-Matched-Against-Obama-Nationally.aspx

To restate the ACTUAL POLL FINDINGS:

Romney 50%
Obama 46%

Obama 49%
Santorum 48%

So not only does Romney do significantly better than Santorum in this matchup vs. Obama, he LEADS BHO by four percent and breaks 50% whereas Santorum still trails.

Thanks for pointing this out. It’s huge.

Geezus, Ed, please get a grip. Stop listening to that idiot Matt Lewis.

mountainaires on February 23, 2012 at 12:01 PM

mountainaires on February 23, 2012 at 11:54 AM

Hold it one second.

Are you seriously gonna try to con me with this ‘homeschooling cost $100,000′ bullsh!t?

Cyber classes or not, I assure you it did not cost the state that kind of money. Those classes would have been there, costing whatever they do, Santorum kids or no Santorum kids.
I know many who homeschool and I can assure you they don’t make $100,000 in four years. I suppose they’re stealing too?
Use a little logic when believing stuff you hear or see.

Lanceman on February 23, 2012 at 12:01 PM

Romney has a double-digit lead in Detroit, which is something to watch on Tuesday night when returns start to come in.

Liberals usually do better in large cities.

Just sayin’

tom on February 23, 2012 at 12:01 PM

If this beautiful man wants a triple digit lead over Mittens, then by God I say we give it to him!!!

Kataklysmic on February 23, 2012 at 11:57 AM

.
That’s just blasphemy! I threw up when I read your comment, so disgusting was it. Had you written “If this beautiful man wants a triple digit lead over Mittens, then by God Barack I say we give it to him!!!” then you would have been perfectly correct.
.
I demand that you report yourself to Truth Watch Attack Team!

ExpressoBold on February 23, 2012 at 12:05 PM

Romney has a double-digit lead in Detroit, which is something to watch on Tuesday night when returns start to come in.

Liberals usually do better in large cities.

Just sayin’

tom on February 23, 2012 at 12:01 PM

That doesn’t really make sense, either.

According to libtoad, and I suspect he’s right on this economy or not, the inhabitants of Detroit are 3 to 1 in favor of obama.

Now for Romney to have a double digit lead over obama in Detroit, the blacks would be ostensibly voting for Romney over obama at least 605 to 40%.

Somehow, I don’t believe those numbers.

Lanceman on February 23, 2012 at 12:07 PM

I think that shows a willful and reckless disregard for the taxpayers of Pennsylvania, not to mention the laws of that state.

mountainaires on February 23, 2012 at 11:54 AM

I think that the teachers’ unions have been far more willful and have shown a far more reckless disregard for the taxpayers and laws of Pennsylvania.

You hate Santorum and clearly Christians but Santorum really is in a no-win situation with brainless haters like you. He was a Senator from Pennsylvania but had he enrolled his kids in Virginia you would be among the first to claim that he wasn’t a legal resident of the state. Would you rather he keep be separated from his family for six years? And more importantly, you make the claim that Santorum defrauded the school district. That is a claim of criminal activity that you can’t prove in your moral outrage and misguided hatred of anybody but whatever candidate you support.

Happy Nomad on February 23, 2012 at 12:07 PM

Archivarix on February 23, 2012 at 11:59 AM

.
Funny!

ExpressoBold on February 23, 2012 at 12:08 PM

Lanceman on February 23, 2012 at 11:20 AM

What? Where did you get that from?

csdeven on February 23, 2012 at 12:08 PM

60% to 40%

Lanceman on February 23, 2012 at 12:09 PM

These are so pointless right now. It makes Santorum supporters think it is even remotely prudent to vote for him, when it isn’t.

Hopefully post debate he starts sinking and we can be done with this primary and start to focus on beating Obama.

milcus on February 23, 2012 at 11:12 AM

Santorum is the only hope!!

Tasha on February 23, 2012 at 12:12 PM

It not only affects his topic sentence, but his later ‘analysis’ as well.

Oops.

Esoteric on February 23, 2012 at 11:29 AM

Ed is in the tank for Santorum. As long as we take that into account when reading his analysis, it isn’t so bothersome.

The great thing about Ed is that he hasn’t whored himself out to every candidate and then settled on Santorum like these self described “real conservatives” have here at Hot Air. He was very balanced until he made his endorsement. I don’t blame him for being biased and I respect him for being honest about it.

csdeven on February 23, 2012 at 12:14 PM

Oh come on…I’m not a Santorum supporter but this is a ridiculous notion. You make this generalization that is isn’t prudent to vote for him, and don’t even try to back it up with anything.

You have to be trolling for a fight…and if you are you will get it haha

dernst2 on February 23, 2012 at 11:16 AM

I have gone over the argument countless times. But it comes down to Santorum would cause the election to be about him instead of Obama. With Romney, the focus stays on Obama. As a result, after negative ad’s, debates, etc.., Romney would probably win, or at worst lose a very close election while allowing Republicans to keep the House and win the Senate.

After the media and Obama destroy Santorum’s record and make him seem like a fringe lunatic (which he is not) for months (and lets be real, he wont get nearly as much money as Romney will to fight back), after he loses independents, and loses by 8 points or more, he will prevent us from winning the Senate and might even lose Republicans the House. Which would clearly be a nightmare scenario.

milcus on February 23, 2012 at 12:17 PM

Now, all we need is csdeven/bluegill to tell us how many times a broken clock is right per day. He/she/it said “one”.

kingsjester on February 23, 2012 at 11:41 AM

Do you encourage your grandson to obsess over the meanies on the playground or do you allow his parents to lead him to deal with those who disagree with him in a responsible manner?

Really dude. Your 24/7/365 obsession with anonymous people on the interwebs is embarrassing yourself.

csdeven on February 23, 2012 at 12:17 PM

milcus on February 23, 2012 at 12:17 PM

Wow! +1000!

The best case for Romney I has seen in a few days! Great job!

csdeven on February 23, 2012 at 12:18 PM

Santorum is the only hope!!

Tasha on February 23, 2012 at 12:12 PM

Is this like jeopardy where I have to guess the question? Because the question to that answer is certainly not, “who has the best chance to beat Obama?”

If I had to guess the question, it would be, “who has the best chance to make sweater vests even remotely popular?”

milcus on February 23, 2012 at 12:20 PM

Wow! +1000!

The best case for Romney I has seen in a few days! Great job!

csdeven on February 23, 2012 at 12:18 PM

Lol, thanks. I can actually make a better case for Romney than his handlers have done (although to be honest, looking at the campaigns being run by Romney, Santorum, Newt, and Obama, it is amateur hour all around), but that falls on deaf ears on here when so many of my fellow conservatives so blindly dislike him despite not understanding why his record is what it is.

milcus on February 23, 2012 at 12:23 PM

Romney up by 4 against Obama. But teh Rinozz!

therightwinger on February 23, 2012 at 12:29 PM

Let’s see what it looks like post debate

cmsinaz on February 23, 2012 at 11:05 AM

Yes, because we all know that debates are the most important criteria for selecting a President. s/

God, have mercy on us.

fight like a girl on February 23, 2012 at 12:31 PM

Regarding that Romney-Paul “tag team”

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) on Wednesday left the door wide open to consider accepting a nomination for vice president on a Mitt Romney ticket

J_Crater on February 23, 2012 at 12:36 PM

mountainaires on February 23, 2012 at 11:54 AM

So how much are you being paid to spam? We all want to know.

fight like a girl on February 23, 2012 at 12:37 PM

I can actually make a better case for Romney than his handlers have done….

milcus on February 23, 2012 at 12:23 PM

I agree!

csdeven on February 23, 2012 at 12:37 PM

J_Crater on February 23, 2012 at 12:36 PM

Did you see the context?

At a speech in Louisville, Ky., Paul was asked directly how he would respond if Romney received the nomination and offered him the VP spot.

I don’t know if I can answer that question, but I can say it would be an honor to be considered,” he said.

csdeven on February 23, 2012 at 12:40 PM

Santorum’s numbers are meaningless. He’s not been vetted on a national scale. Once it’s understood that Santorum thinks it’s the government’s business what we do in the privacy of our bedrooms, his numbers will plummet among the rational.

Basilsbest on February 23, 2012 at 12:41 PM

Michigan is all-important. Even if Romney wins Arizona smashingly, the MSM will kill him if he doesn’t win a majority of delegates AND the popular vote in Michigan.
rockmom on February 23, 2012 at 11:10 AM

Another false narrative by the opponents of the most qualified person to run for the Presidency in 200 years. Mitt hasn’t lived in Michigan in 47 years. He needs to be perfect just to be acceptable in the Party of Stupid. The others just average, especially if they can get off a good shot against Obama and the media as Newt did yesterday.

Basilsbest on February 23, 2012 at 12:48 PM

Sad that we all have to ignore Ed and Tina for the remainder of this primary. Romney up 4 over Obama, Santorum down 1 = “Tie for both” in Ed’s world.

However, we all know that if it had been Santorum up 4 and Romney down 1, Ed’s headline would have been a breathless: “Gallup shows Santorum would defeat Obama while Romney would lose”

AngusMc on February 23, 2012 at 1:00 PM

He needs to be perfect just to be acceptable in the Party of Stupid. The others just average, especially if they can get off a good shot against Obama and the media as Newt did yesterday.

Basilsbest on February 23, 2012 at 12:48 PM

Yep. Those who value what Neutron Newt’s schtick is are just like little kids on the playground who think the toughest kid is the one with the biggest potty mouth. Elections are never won with a potty mouth campaign. They are won with measured statesmanship behavior.

csdeven on February 23, 2012 at 1:03 PM

Comment pages: 1 2