Santorum up by 4 in MI in ARG poll, rising among women nationally in WaPo/ABC; Update: Rasmussen shows Romney up by 6 in MI

posted at 9:50 am on February 24, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

So far, this looks like a good morning for Rick Santorum.  A new poll in Michigan shows him clinging to a narrow four-point lead over native son Mitt Romney, he’s made the ballot in Indiana after a recount, and women are flocking to his side even after a week of the media hype over contraception.  Let’s start with the recount:

The original tally showed he fell eight signatures short in the 7th Congressional District, which is entirely in Marion County. Candidates must collect the signatures of 500 registered voters in each of the nine congressional districts to be on the ballot.

Santorum’s campaign said it thought he had turned in hundreds more than necessary, including in the 7th District.

On Thursday — one day before the Indiana Election Commission was to weigh challenges to ballot access by Santorum and other candidates — the Marion County Board of Voter Registration said Santorum had more than enough signatures for inclusion on the ballot.

“I am very pleased and happy for all citizens of the state of Indiana, many of whom would like to have the chance to vote for Rick Santorum for president,” said state Sen. Mike Delph, a Carmel Republican who is supporting Santorum’s bid for the White House.

Santorum had already failed to qualify in Virginia (along with Newt Gingrich) and didn’t get a full slate of delegates in time for Tennessee’s primary, either.  Both of those happened while Santorum was operating on a shoestring and languishing in the second tier, though, and he mostly got a pass for managing scarce resources.  A failure in Indiana would have been more problematic with the national spotlight on his campaign, likely fueling doubts about his readiness to compete at the highest level.

That may help boost his chances in the Rust Belt state going to the polls on Tuesday, and ARG shows him keeping just ahead of Romney:

Rick Santorum continues to lead the Michigan Republican presidential primary. Santorum leads with 38% and is followed by Mitt Romney with 34%, Ron Paul with 12%, and Newt Gingrich with 7%.

Santorum has gained 1 percentage point since a similar survey conducted February 15-16, 2012, Romney has gained 2 percentage points, and Gingrich has lost 3 percentage points since the last survey.

Santorum leads Romney 40% to 36% among self-identified Republicans, followed by Gingrich and Paul with 7% each. Among self-identified independents and Democrats, Santorum leads with 33%, followed by Romney with 31%, Paul with 21%, and Gingrich with 6%.

Santorum leads Romney 38% to 34% among likely Republican primary voters saying they will definitely vote in the February 28 primary, followed by Paul with 13% and Gingrich with 6%. Romney leads Santorum 36% to 35% among those saying they will probably vote, followed by Gingrich with 10% and Paul with 6%.

Romney leads among women, but only by three points.  Santorum has wiped out the gender gap between the two over the course of the month, and not just in Michigan, the Washington Post reports from its own polling:

Over the past several weeks, Republicans have watched squeamishly as presidential contender Rick Santorum has waded into multiple controversies that risk alienating half the 2012 electorate: women.

But in fact, Santorum has grown more popular among women while talking about his opposition to abortion, his disapproval of birth control and his view that the federal government shouldn’t pay for prenatal screenings. A new Washington Post-ABC News poll shows not only that Santorum is doing better among GOP women than he was a few weeks ago, but also that he is less unpopular — and also less well known — among Democratic and independent women than his Republican rivals Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich. …

The Post-ABC poll, conducted on the heels of a week of scrutiny of Santorum’s conservative views on a variety of women’s health issues, shows that his popularity among GOP women has moved up 13 points since January, with the biggest bump in the past week, so that 57 percent hold a favorable view. Santorum is now within reach of Romney on that score: Sixty-one percent of Republican women view Romney favorably. Romney has higher negative ratings among GOP women than Santorum does — 28 percent to 18 percent — and those negative ratings of Romney have grown over time.

The usual caveats for WaPo/ABC polling apply.  They do not supply the demographic composition of their sampling any longer with their polls, and in this case they don’t even bother to publish the actual numbers for favorability breakouts on gender — the very subject of their story.  Since the poll was taken from February 15-19, the data shouldn’t be all that precious to keep hiding it on February 24th.  Nevertheless, the polling dates coincide with heavy media criticism of the Republican challenge to the HHS mandate that tells religious organizations to give employees free contraception, sterilization, and abortifacients whether their doctrine forbids it or not.

The fact that favorability among women improved in this period for Santorum, who had been the most vocal about the need to protect religious liberty in the face of the mandate, shows two things.  First, the media narrative doesn’t seem to be working very well.  Second, Obama may have badly miscalculated how well this would split women from the GOP.  Both of those aren’t just good news for Santorum, but for all Republicans.

Update: Good news for Santorum … followed by bad news:

The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of Likely Republican Primary Voters in Michigan shows Romney with 40% of the vote and former U.S. Senator Rick Santorum with 34%. The poll was conducted on Thursday night, following the last scheduled debate among the GOP candidates.

Earlier this week, Santorum posted a 38% to 34% lead over the former Massachusetts governor in Michigan. A week before that, it was Santorum 35%, Romney 32%.  Three weeks earlier, shortly after Romney’s big Florida Primary win, he led Santorum 38% to 17%.

Santorum still ekes out a win, however, if the Michigan race were a one-on-one contest, leading Romney 46% to 44%. But he held a 12-point lead in a two-man race a week ago.

Interestingly, Santorum still does better with women than men against Romney, but trails among both, 32/40 and 36/40, respectively.  This poll was conducted yesterday, the first (of which I’m aware) since the debate.  Romney now wins Republicans (42/36) and independents (36/29).  Santorum gets a majority of “very conservative” voters, but Romney gets a near-majority of “somewhat conservative” and moderates.  Romney now also wins Protestant and Catholic demos, the latter by a surprising eight-point margin, while Santorum has a fourteen-point edge among evangelicals.  Romney wins all age demos and most income demos except the middle-class $40K-60K and $60K-75K demos, which Santorum barely wins.

I’d consider this bad news, and perhaps a harbinger of how the Wednesday debate will impact Santorum over the next few days.  Watch the polling over the weekend to see if this trend bears out in multi-day surveys, which will tell the tale of whether the impact will be momentary or lasting.


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 4 5 6

Basilsbest on February 24, 2012 at 3:11 PM

Maybe if Sanctorum gave us a pamphlet that lists all the Rick-Approved® sexual activity that are acceptable, we might just give him a break on his intrusion into our bedroom?//

The guy is a religious zealot and would lose 35 states to Obama in a general election.

csdeven on February 24, 2012 at 3:37 PM

If Romney wins the nomination I have no doubt she’ll support him in any way she can. And if she doesn’t, she will have lost a supporter.

Kataklysmic on February 24, 2012 at 3:37 PM

True, dat.

Lanceman on February 24, 2012 at 3:38 PM

Lanceman on February 24, 2012 at 3:34 PM

What? No more threats of violence on my person? Did I scare you off or did you decide on your own that threatening violence on Hot Air is a stupid thing to do?

csdeven on February 24, 2012 at 3:39 PM

What? No more threats of violence on my person? Did I scare you off or did you decide on your own that threatening violence on Hot Air is a stupid thing to do?

csdeven on February 24, 2012 at 3:39 PM

Whazza mattew, cwying boy? Don’t you have to wun to Ed and Awwah?

BWAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!

Lanceman on February 24, 2012 at 3:41 PM

Anybody see me threaten violence? Anybody?

Lanceman on February 24, 2012 at 3:42 PM

He ain’t getting a billion dollars in contributions. Get over yourself. And TV stations don’t put on endless commercials for free.

Lanceman on February 24, 2012 at 3:19 PM

I take it you don’t watch much television. Good for you, but if you did watch television you would notice a decidely liberal bias to, well, just about everything: network news, sitcoms, drama, talkshows, film, entertainment news, all of it. In response, conservtives have talk radio and Fox–and word is Roger Ailes, chief Fox executive, wants to move more into the mainstream and shed perceptions that Fox is partisan or pro-Republican.

Again: the Democrats have the media, the money, and the inherent power of the incumbency. Against this leviathan, you intend to nominate Rick Santorum, King of the Social Conservatives, a guy seemingly intent upon running on social issues during the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression.

‘Hey, I know! Let’s talk about contraceptives!’ just won’t cut it.

troyriser_gopftw on February 24, 2012 at 3:43 PM

Well I suppose it’s over for Santorum then? Hang in there Newt!

Decoski on February 24, 2012 at 3:48 PM

Anybody see me threaten violence? Anybody?

Lanceman on February 24, 2012 at 3:42 PM

No, but you come across as an Internet Tough Guy who thinks watching action movies qualifies as combat experience.

troyriser_gopftw on February 24, 2012 at 3:49 PM

I wasn’t aware that she endorsed Newt to win NV. And I take her at her word and agree with her that a contested primary is a good thing. Look at the far more aggressive tax plan that Mitt just came out with. Would that have happened had this thing been wrapped up before IA? The fact is Mitt is a good man but need some pulling to the right and that is what is happening.

People may not believe this but I have seen you write some very flattering posts about Palin that I completely agreed with. I don’t think you should let your opinion of her be effected due t the fact that she isn’t completely sold on Romney’s conservatism. Palin is ABO. If Romney wins the nomination I have no doubt she’ll support him in any way she can. And if she doesn’t, she will have lost a supporter.

Kataklysmic on February 24, 2012 at 3:37 PM

I call what she did as an endorsement because she asked the electorate to vote for a specific candidate. A Paul or Santorum win would have accomplished the same goal.

I don’t think Sarah had anything to do with pulling Romney to the right. I believe Santorum’s performance did that.

I appreciate you mentioning that for those who don’t know my history. I wish she could get the support needed to beat Obama because I would support her 100%.

Heck, I’m not sold on Romney as a staunch conservative. He’s a moderate conservative and it appears that he will have to do. If he does what he promises, I’ll be happy. If he continues to evolve as a conservative as the POTUS, we’ll be looking at the next Reagan. But that is a hope and I realize that.

csdeven on February 24, 2012 at 3:49 PM

Don’t you have to wun to Ed and Awwah?

Lanceman on February 24, 2012 at 3:41 PM

Are you afraid I will report your threats of violence against me? If not, I guess you’ll repeat it wont you?

csdeven on February 24, 2012 at 3:51 PM

troyriser_gopftw on February 24, 2012 at 3:43 PM

I do watch television. I watch retro channels, football, and a little bit of FOX. After BOR ranting against the oil companies, I got sick of him.

Look. I don’t know how it is in Texas, but here in Florida it’s bad. People, the ones that matter anyway, aren’t gonna be swayed by the MSM anymore. I know so many young people who now realize their mistake. I know just as many older people.
The thrill of obama is long-gone. He’s becoming more shrill with every appearance.
People are faced with serious hardship, many for the first time in their lives.
We, on the other hand, are going to crawl over broken glass to vote obama out. No matter who the nominee is.
And let’s face it – obama will never win Texas.

Lanceman on February 24, 2012 at 3:51 PM

Anybody see me threaten violence? Anybody?

Lanceman on February 24, 2012 at 3:42 PM

Not since they put that ankle bracelet on and the straight jacket…some posters are just plain nuts, and they create their own little fantasy world.
Maybe he looked at your name and saw lance man, a man who uses lances, therefore we must feel threaten because your name is threatening or something…

right2bright on February 24, 2012 at 3:53 PM

No, but you come across as an Internet Tough Guy who thinks watching action movies qualifies as combat experience.

troyriser_gopftw on February 24, 2012 at 3:49 PM

That was just your perception, my friend. You’ve been around long enough to know who I am. And how I speak. Nobody else ever felt that way.
You wanna talk internet tough guy, may I introduce you to MadCon?

Lanceman on February 24, 2012 at 3:54 PM

I appreciate you mentioning that for those who don’t know my history. I wish she could get the support needed to beat Obama because I would support her 100%.

Heck, I’m not sold on Romney as a staunch conservative. He’s a moderate conservative and it appears that he will have to do. If he does what he promises, I’ll be happy. If he continues to evolve as a conservative as the POTUS, we’ll be looking at the next Reagan. But that is a hope and I realize that.

csdeven on February 24, 2012 at 3:49 PM

Thanks for the thoughtful response. I don’t think everyone here is aware that most of the time you respond in the same tone that you are addressed. That’s fine though. I would be lying if I said I didn’t get a chuckle out of some of your more colorful posts.

Kataklysmic on February 24, 2012 at 3:55 PM

Are you afraid I will report your threats of violence against me? If not, I guess you’ll repeat it wont you?

csdeven on February 24, 2012 at 3:51 PM

You look good in a tank top.

Lanceman on February 24, 2012 at 3:55 PM

No, but you come across as an Internet Tough Guy who thinks watching action movies qualifies as combat experience.

troyriser_gopftw on February 24, 2012 at 3:49 PM

He did say he would like to see me “taking it” in Tiananmen Square.

as the People’s Liberation Army proceeded through the city to Tiananmen Square, using live fire, to clear the square of protestors. The exact number of civilian deaths is not known, and the majority of estimates range from several hundred to thousands.

So yeah, I take it as a threat of violence.

csdeven on February 24, 2012 at 3:55 PM

You wanna talk internet tough guy, may I introduce you to MadCon?

Lanceman on February 24, 2012 at 3:54 PM

Point taken.

troyriser_gopftw on February 24, 2012 at 3:55 PM

And let’s face it – obama will never win Texas.

Lanceman on February 24, 2012 at 3:51 PM

I say it will be a toss-up in even California…not expecting a “Reagan” repeat, but it won’t be far off…
Florida, Texas, NC, Az, Nv, Co, Mi, Wi, Sc, Ga, the list will be almost endless…Ca, Or, Ny, Mass, not much else…

right2bright on February 24, 2012 at 3:56 PM

Are you afraid I will report your threats of violence against me? If not, I guess you’ll repeat it wont you?

csdeven on February 24, 2012 at 3:51 PM

Have you lost weight? That human suit fits a little loose, maybe you just didn’t iron out all of the wrinkles…HAHAHAHA! You know who will never take you as a celestial bride looking like that…

right2bright on February 24, 2012 at 3:58 PM

right2bright on February 24, 2012 at 3:53 PM

No, Lance is my name and the vast majority here know it.

‘Lanceman’ was the only thing I could think of with only a few minutes left way back on that particular OR.

There was a character on a radio station in Missouri many years ago called ‘Danceman’. People called me Lanceman after that.
But I’ve been called everything Kerwin. Parrish. Ito. Armstrong. You name it.

Lanceman on February 24, 2012 at 3:58 PM

Thanks for the thoughtful response. I don’t think everyone here is aware that most of the time you respond in the same tone that you are addressed. That’s fine though. I would be lying if I said I didn’t get a chuckle out of some of your more colorful posts.

Kataklysmic on February 24, 2012 at 3:55 PM

I appreciate it. I do try and always respond in kind.

“Colorful”? hahaha….I do come out of left field at times. That’s what my “spouse” tells me too. ;-)

And I do appreciate your thoughtful comments also. You are one of the few here who I recognize and take the time to read whenever I see a comment.

csdeven on February 24, 2012 at 4:00 PM

I say it will be a toss-up in even California…not expecting a “Reagan” repeat, but it won’t be far off

right2bright on February 24, 2012 at 3:56 PM

Toss up? In CA? I gotta get you some meds. This is the state that just elected Jerry Brown again. It ain’t gonna be won by a Republican ever again unless the R gets a 20 point handicap.

Lanceman on February 24, 2012 at 4:02 PM

Hey Troy, the Liberal MSM really wants your boy, RINO Romney (aka Obama-Lite) because sooo many issues would be taken off the table, like Obama/RomneyCare, amongst others. And by the way, it was Obama, by violating the 1st Amendment, who first brought it up, and the MSM has carried his water since.
MICHIGAN, innoculate yourselves NOW against the dreaded LEMMING disease, MHIT-For-Brains!!! MHIT-For-Brains ROBS you of any semblence of common sense, and makes you vote for faux conservatives (read: LIBERALS) like Willard (from the RAT movie of the same name)!?!?! The RepublicRAT establishment is trying desparately to infect you with MHIT-For-Brains!?!
Arizona, you too have been infected by both Juan McLame and the RepublicRAT establishment with MHIT-For-Brains!!! INOCCULATE yourselves before it’s too late!?! Vote for a REAL CONSERVATIVE!?!

Colatteral Damage on February 24, 2012 at 4:02 PM

So yeah, I take it as a threat of violence.

csdeven on February 24, 2012 at 3:55 PM

Whazza mattew? Poow baby got his pampews in a wad? Twust me, nobody cawes abowt your dewusions.

BWAHAHAHAAAAA!

Lanceman on February 24, 2012 at 4:04 PM

Colatteral Damage on February 24, 2012 at 4:02 PM

Let’s face it – none of the candidates are anything to write home about. But all will beat obama.

Lanceman on February 24, 2012 at 4:07 PM

Bottom line of the polling data analysis is that if Santorum didn’t get the Evangelical woman vote he would be toast. Once the after effects and cooler talk about the debate sink in and the Romney ad assault have an effect Santorum could experience a Gingrich type drop in his poll numbers.

Clearly Santorum is not ready for prime time. The debate showed it. His inability to get on some ballots shows it. His ill-advised pivoting into the morality issue quagmire shows it.

To beat Obama you have to show that you are more presidential, have an actual record of accomplishment, have good, sensible ideas to turn the economy around, and can handle international affairs competently. Showing the American people you can out-Christian the President isn’t going to do it.

MadJayhawk on February 24, 2012 at 4:31 PM

Colatteral Damage on February 24, 2012 at 4:02 PM

Looks like coherence was the collateral damage of your comment.

HumpBot Salvation on February 24, 2012 at 4:34 PM

It is interesting that commentators and Fox News have quit inaccurately calling Michigan Romney’s ‘Home State’. Gone to is the incessant ‘Romney has to win his ‘home state’ or else he is in deep trouble’ BS we have been inundated with.

Could it be that an army of people have correctly pointed out that Gingrich and Santorum both have permanent residences in Virginia and are definitely not going to win their home state because of their incompetence had an effect?

A home state is where your home is. Kansas is not my home state although that is where my heart is.

MadJayhawk on February 24, 2012 at 4:36 PM

Romney never mocked Jesus. Romney never mocked pastors or Christians or Catholic saints and shrines. Romney never called anyone any names at all — except he referred to Barack as “feckless.” Don’t confuse a candidate with half a dozen unhinged supporters on some internet board. That is just ridiculous. Most of the posters on here who post the most inflammatory things are from Barack Obama’s Organizing for America, and they are here to make people react precisely as YOU are reacting. Good grief. Read their plans and pick your candidate. But don’t cry about what Jenny said to Suzy on the playground by the swings, and therefore you simply cannot support so-and-so. That just isn’t adult thinking.

Rational Thought on February 24, 2012 at 12:41 PM

Ahhhh, telling me my thinking isn’t “adult”? Another romney missionary I see. I’m a newbie. I fully intended to support Romney if he were the nominee, until I encountered his shock troops. The people I’m referring to are not Obama supporters. They are Mormons. Every last jack one of them and I would make a small bet that you are too. Everything from their phrasology and syntax to their circular reasoning and total ignorance about other religions.

And sadly his shock troops are a reflection of him. He sees nothing whatsoever wrong with destroying another person—I’m not talking about disagreements on issues here, I’m talking about the millions he spent in vicious, personal attacks. And, yes, the name calling of his paid subordinates count as statements from the boss. We are now hearing him and his shock troops (who, BTW, DID all the mocking of Jesus, pastors, and Catholics I mentioned in my earlier post) trying to destroy a man and his wife—not win an election, mind you–but DESTROY them; make them objects of ridicule. It’s almost breathtaking how cruel, evil the Mormons are about Mrs. Santorum and Mrs. Gingrich.

Romney approves this approach or it wouldn’t be going on. One call to the General Authorities in Salt Lake would remove every Mormon poster from every site on the internet. Believe me, they KNOW and so does Romney and they apparently approve. One thing Mormons do well is control their own.

Portia46 on February 24, 2012 at 4:52 PM

Thanks for the thoughtful response. I don’t think everyone here is aware that most of the time you respond in the same tone that you are addressed. That’s fine though. I would be lying if I said I didn’t get a chuckle out of some of your more colorful posts.

Kataklysmic on February 24, 2012 at 3:55 PM
I appreciate it. I do try and always respond in kind.

“Colorful”? hahaha….I do come out of left field at times. That’s what my “spouse” tells me too. ;-)

And I do appreciate your thoughtful comments also. You are one of the few here who I recognize and take the time to read whenever I see a comment.

csdeven on February 24, 2012 at 4:00 PM

This is a tag-team. “You are here and we can depend on you to knock it out of the park.”

Portia46 on February 24, 2012 at 4:57 PM

This is a tag-team. “You are here and we can depend on you to knock it out of the park.”

Portia46 on February 24, 2012 at 4:57 PM

You are really a piece of work you know that? There are literally years of threads that can be gone through here that show csdeven and I at each other’s throats, me supporting Palin and criticizing Romney, agreeing with right2bright and other Mormon skeptics that Mitt has not been a good representative of the Mormon faith, etc. Take of the tin foil hat for a minute.

Kataklysmic on February 24, 2012 at 5:02 PM

Romney’s speech today before empty seats did not go over well in Detroit when he talked about his wife driving two cadillacs and then tried to tell jokes that no one got. From the account at The Hill Romney gave the Democrats plenty of fodder in the speech.

It is going to be on the nightly news in Detroit and from accounts I keep hearing, it is not going to do Romney any favors. Since this came after the debate, it will overshadow in MI IMHO!

PhiKapMom on February 24, 2012 at 5:16 PM

You are really a piece of work you know that? There are literally years of threads that can be gone through here that show csdeven and I at each other’s throats, me supporting Palin and criticizing Romney, agreeing with right2bright and other Mormon skeptics that Mitt has not been a good representative of the Mormon faith, etc. Take of the tin foil hat for a minute.

Kataklysmic on February 24, 2012 at 5:02 PM

Kataklysmic is a Mormon. So is uneven.

Just calling it for what it is, a tag team.

Portia46 on February 24, 2012 at 5:22 PM

Kataklysmic is a Mormon. So is uneven.

Just calling it for what it is, a tag team.

Portia46 on February 24, 2012 at 5:22 PM

So because I am a Mormon and csdeven most likely is as well we must necessarily be working together? You have mentioned being a big fan of Shadenfreude. Is he also a closeted Mormon as he occasionally has praise for both csdeven and myself? How about akzed or right2bright? Are they on your secret Mormon radar because, despite the fact that they are big critics of Mormonism, they and I occasionally have agreeable converations?

I am a lifelong Mormon and I would be willing to bet you spend a much greater portion of your day with Mormonism on the brain than I do.

Kataklysmic on February 24, 2012 at 5:31 PM

I don’t think everyone here is aware that most of the time you respond in the same tone that you are addressed.
Kataklysmic on February 24, 2012 at 3:55 PM

finally, somebody with a healthy dose of objectivity re: the way people address each other on this forum…

jimver on February 24, 2012 at 6:58 PM

Back from running errands, etc.

Regarding the election, I keep going back to the 2004 election map. What state did Bush win in 2004, that Obama will win in 2012? No matter who our nominee is (except for Paul), I can not think of a Bush state that would go for Obama again in 2012, with his miserable record of failure.

Can anyone think of one? I don’t think he will get GA, FL and VA again. AR? Dunno about CO, not sure how many Kalifornians moved there to turn the state purple. I think a good candidate could carry some of the rustbelt states. IN won’t go for Obama again, OH either.

karenhasfreedom on February 24, 2012 at 7:07 PM

Kataklysmic on February 24, 2012 at 5:31 PM

Now, if only the rest of the Tinfoil Hat Brigade will wise up.

lol

Great comment btw.

csdeven on February 24, 2012 at 7:18 PM

The guy is a religious zealot and would lose 35 states to Obama in a general election.
csdeven on February 24, 2012 at 3:37 PM

.
That’s for those of you who might have missed it, the first thirty times he said it.

listens2glenn on February 24, 2012 at 7:27 PM

What? No more threats of violence on my person?
csdeven on February 24, 2012 at 3:39 PM

I wasn’t going to threaten any violence; just stop making fun of my tin-foil hat. I happen to think it looks nice, and I’m a little sensitive about it.

listens2glenn on February 24, 2012 at 7:33 PM

I happen to think it looks nice, and I’m a little sensitive about it.

listens2glenn on February 24, 2012 at 7:33 PM

Hey! Try it with a propeller!

csdeven on February 24, 2012 at 8:01 PM

I happen to think it looks nice, and I’m a little sensitive about it.
listens2glenn on February 24, 2012 at 7:33 PM

Hey! Try it with a propeller!
csdeven on February 24, 2012 at 8:01 PM

.
I guess it looks okay, but it’s not functional; how could it possibly spin?

listens2glenn on February 24, 2012 at 8:44 PM

It took 3 days for Newt’s horrible debate performance to show in Florida polls.

Well what do you know, 3 more days until election day.

scotash on February 25, 2012 at 4:44 AM

Comment pages: 1 4 5 6