PPP: Romney with edge in Michigan, crushing lead in Arizona

posted at 8:40 am on February 27, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

For a while after Rick Santorum’s sweep in early February, it appeared that Mitt Romney might be on the ropes in the Republican primary.  Santorum once held a significant lead in Michigan and close to a tie in Arizona, and seemed poised for another multi-state upset.  According to the latest polling from PPP in both states, though, the momentum has swung in the other direction.  In PPP’s poll of Michigan, Romney has begun to edge Santorum one day ahead of their primary, but also with a significant lead in early voting:

Mitt Romney’s taken a small lead over Rick Santorum in PPP’s newest Michigan poll. He’s at 39% to 37% for Santorum, 13% for Ron Paul, and 9% for Newt Gingrich. Compared to a week ago Romney’s gained 6 points, while Santorum’s just stayed in place.

Romney will go into election day with a large lead in the bank. Only 16% of Michigan voters say they’ve already cast their ballots, but Romney has a whooping 62-29 advantage over Santorum with that group. Santorum actually leads Romney 39-34 with those who are planning to cast their votes on Tuesday, but he’d need to win election day voters by even more than that to neutralize the advantage Romney’s built up.

The last week of the campaign in Michigan has seen significant damage to Santorum’s image with GOP voters in the state. His net favorability has declined 29 points from +44 (67/23) to now only +15 (54/39). Negative attacks on Romney meanwhile have had no negative effect with his favorability steady at +20 (57/37). Two weeks ago Santorum’s net favorability in Michigan was 34 points better than Romney’s. Now Romney’s is 5 points better than Santorum’s. Those kinds of wild swings are the story of the GOP race.

One place Santorum may have hurt himself in the last week is an overemphasis on social issues. 69% of voters say they’re generally more concerned with economic issues this year to only 17% who pick social issues. And with the overwhelming majority of voters more concerned about the economy, Romney leads Santorum 45-30. Santorum’s winning those more concerned about social issues 79-12 but it’s just not that big a piece of the pie.

The debate did Santorum no favors in Michigan, although it may have been the aftermath of the debate that did more damage. Instead of focusing on a positive message, Santorum felt the need to go after Romney hard — much like Newt Gingrich did in Florida.  Santorum got his surge by sticking to blue-collar economics and directing his passionate attacks against Barack Obama rather than his Republican competitors; it appears that the mediocre debate performance knocked Santorum off of his previously-successful strategy.

The sample in this case looks pretty solid.  The D/R/I in the sample for Michigan’s open primary is 5/67/28 — a near duplicate of the exit poll from Michigan’s 2008 primary of 7/68/25.  Forty-two percent identified themselves as evangelical Christians, which seems high against the 2008 exit polling, which didn’t ask the question the same way but had 40% Protestants, 29% Catholics, and 19% “other Christians.”  Whatever problems Santorum has in this poll, they’re not related to the sampling.

Arizona would have been a long shot for Santorum under any circumstances, and PPP’s new poll makes it clear that Romney will get an easy ride in the winner-take-all state:

Mitt Romney is headed for an overwhelming victory in Arizona’s primary on Tuesday. He’s at 43% to 26% for Rick Santorum, 18% for Newt Gingrich, and 11% for Ron Paul.

You can make a fair argument that Romney’s already won the Arizona primary. Almost half of those planning to vote have already cast their ballots, and Romney has a 48-25 advantage over Santorum with those folks. That lead makes it nearly impossible for Santorum to make up the difference on election day, and Romney has a 39-27 advantage with those planning to vote on Tuesday anyway.

Romney’s winning basically winning every voter group in Arizona, even those he’s tended to do quite poorly with. He leads Santorum 39-33 with Evangelicals, 39-23 with Tea Party voters (Santorum’s in 3rd, Gingrich is actually 2nd at 30%), and 37-29 with those describing themselves as ‘very conservative.’ We project the Mormon vote at 14%. Romney leads 77-9 with them, but he has a 38-29 advantage with non-Mormons as well. Seniors are a key base of support for him in Arizona as they are everywhere. He leads 53-22 with them.

ARG has it much closer in Arizona at 39/35 Romney in a poll taken Thursday and Friday.  However, they also show a big advantage for Romney among early voters, 50/29, and 48% of their sample had already cast their ballots.

A loss in Arizona won’t matter as much to Santorum as a loss in Michigan will.  A loss in a key Rust Belt state, where Santorum’s draw among blue-collar workers should be felt most, will be seen as a setback after his large polling leads of a week ago.  Santorum needs the momentum from at least one win to help him sail through a tough Super Tuesday next week.  We’ll see what other pollsters say about Michigan today, but with Rasmussen also seeing a Santorum slide to second (by six points rather than two), the PPP poll doesn’t look like an outlier.


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 3


How can you suggest Romney is not a fighter? Romney has shown that he will fight, tooth and nail, with every dirty trick in the book, to destroy anyone who stands in his way.

Yes, this is true if the person standing in Romney’s way is a conservative. With his fellow travellers on the left he is far gentler, as attested by the fact that he endorses Obama’s call for increasing the burdens on the so-called one percent, and rescinding only what is objectionable about ObamaCare, his support for the minimum wage, his strange inability to articulate conservative positions in conservative terms etc., etc.

casuist on February 27, 2012 at 11:02 AM

Romney’s main advantage is that he’s got experience in turning around failing economies. While Gingrich claims to have done the same as Speaker, his record doesn’t bear that out.

Syzygy on February 27, 2012 at 9:39 AM

When did Romney turn around a failing ECONOMY? I’ve seen stupid posts here, but this one takes the cake. Who woke up all the liberals so early today?

riddick on February 27, 2012 at 11:04 AM

They’ll do the absolute least they can do because the talkers care more about their ratings and keeping their street cred with their closet case listeners, than they do about the country.

Limbaugh can put the kittens in their cage, stock his private jet with his concubines and leave the country. The rest of us don’t have that option.

NoDonkey on February 27, 2012 at 10:37 AM

Yup, I agree. Instead of doing everything they can to defeat Obama, they will lash out against Mitt Romney and tell us why he sucks. And if heaved forbid Romney losses, they will go on the radio the next day with a smug, “I told you so” attitude.

I dont really listen to talk radio, but I used to love watching Hannity. Well, after he feels the need to constantly jam Sarah Palin down our throats, I stopped watching him. There are a lot of intelligent people who can give a justification for conservative beliefs. But to ignore them and to put on as simple a mind as conservatives have is a slap in the face imo.

milcus on February 27, 2012 at 11:04 AM

Romney did not “win” Maine.

It was gift wrapped by the Republican Leadership that refused to permit regions supporting Paul to vote, and refusing Paul votes to be tabulated in the results.

To rely on corruption in order to gain the nomination makes evident how an Obamalite Romney administration functions.

maverick muse on February 27, 2012 at 11:06 AM

He needs to will win AZ MI by at least 20 points, to consider it a success.

liberal4life on February 27, 2012 at 8:47 AM

I will!

hanzblinx on February 27, 2012 at 11:06 AM

I believe these results exclude early voters.
Priscilla on February 27, 2012 at 10:54 AM

Technopeasant’s point is, I believe Santorum will be picking up some delegates in MI enough to hurt Romney. Seems like the early voters are an unknown so far. Mitt Romney, unfortunately for all he has spent and the competitors whom he has scorched and now made enemies of for life, will never, ever have the hearts and minds of the number of voters he needs to beat Obama.

gracie on February 27, 2012 at 11:09 AM

riddick on February 27, 2012 at 11:04 AM

Yeah, good chuckle.

Keynesian Economist fails to secure the economy, though some things are secured such as crony capitalism.

I’d avoid generalizing every deceit “liberal” or from the Left, as elitist neoconservatives see themselves the only “right”.

maverick muse on February 27, 2012 at 11:10 AM

Romney may have voters and polls on his side, but Rick has a promise from God that he’ll win…not even a contest between the support bases.

AngusMc on February 27, 2012 at 8:46 AM

Oh, come on. With all the half-truths that Romney has about Santorum in his attack ads, you’ve got to be able to come up with something better than this!

JannyMae on February 27, 2012 at 11:10 AM

I agree with this. This who anti-Romney non-sense has been orchestrated by the conservative media. And I blame people like Limbaugh, Levin, Hannity, Ingraham, etc.. for this non-sense. They riled their listeners/viewers into an anti-Romney position, and the viewers followed.

He was good enough for them in 2008, but not now. And their viewers have blindly followed their positions.

I just hope they have the decency to support Mitt Romney when he is the inevitable nominee. However, I doubt they all will have the class and decency to do it. Critical thinking doesn’t appear to be one of their strengths after all.

milcus on February 27, 2012 at 10:04 AM

How ridiculous to even think any of this. I lived in USSR, I know a progressive liberal when I see one and don’t need any radio host to help me out in this regard, I can give them some pointers on this instead. And Romney is nothing but a progressive liberal, a self admitted one, to boot.

Romney was NOT good enough in 2008, not sure if you noticed, but he lost in 2008, to another liberal as well. Do you even pay attention to what’s going on?

I suggest that you actually follow the news and listen to some radio show hosts, you may learn a bit here and there, although judging by your post it seems all is lost in your case. Ask your doctor for better prescriptions.

riddick on February 27, 2012 at 11:14 AM

But ED has he revealed where the golden tablets are hidden? I’m not voting for him until he does so.

He’s got a snow balls chance in hell (which we may be in currently) of winning the popular. Congrats rinos . Long live Dole!

Fuquay Steve on February 27, 2012 at 11:14 AM

he has scorched and now made enemies of for life, will never, ever have the hearts and minds of the number of voters he needs to beat Obama.

Given the GHWB endorsement of Romney, I’d not be surprised it a CYA move to provide Jeb the ’16 GOP Ticket, anticipating/preparing an Obama re-election.

Memoli, Michael (December 22, 2011). “George H.W. Bush calls Mitt Romney ‘best choice’ for GOP”. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved December 22, 2011.

maverick muse on February 27, 2012 at 11:15 AM

milcus on February 27, 2012 at 10:04 AM

After the carpet bombing the Mittites have done, there is not a chance of unification behind him. I blame him and him alone for the anti-Catholic attacks and the ugliness that you ignore in your post.

Fuquay Steve on February 27, 2012 at 11:17 AM

I am very disappointed in any Republican who votes for or otherwise supports this fraud.

besser tot als rot on February 27, 2012 at 11:21 AM

bluegill on February 27, 2012 at 9:02 AM

Perhaps you don’t know what they did to that State?
Never Mind

~(Ä)~

Karl Magnus on February 27, 2012 at 11:23 AM

After the carpet bombing the Mittites have done, there is not a chance of unification behind him. I blame him and him alone for the anti-Catholic attacks and the ugliness that you ignore in your post.

I suspect most of the damage to Santorum was done by Santorum.
videos of Satan speech,views on birth control,gays, etc etc.
have made even those who agree with him see he can’t win general

gerrym51 on February 27, 2012 at 11:23 AM

Not sure why the Bush’s support Romney. He is disparaging their legacy when he attacks Santorum’s voting record. (I do know why – Romney is a big government, statist, just like them; but generally they have gotten pretty upset when Republicans have said anything other than how wonderful the Bush family legacy is.)

besser tot als rot on February 27, 2012 at 11:24 AM

I suspect most of the damage to Santorum was done by Santorum.
videos of Satan speech,views on birth control,gays, etc etc.
have made even those who agree with him see he can’t win general

gerrym51 on February 27, 2012 at 11:23 AM

I suspect most of the damage was done by the media who overemphasized social issues for no real reason (from what I can tell, Santorum has, generally, only talked about social issues when asked). Because the media wants Romney. That should tell everyone something.

besser tot als rot on February 27, 2012 at 11:26 AM

After the carpet bombing the Mittites have done, there is not a chance of unification behind him. I blame him and him alone for the anti-Catholic attacks and the ugliness that you ignore in your post.
Fuquay Steve on February 27, 2012 at 11:17 AM

Mitt’s corporate raider stripes are showing. Maybe good for business, but not politics. Too many enemies in his wake.

gracie on February 27, 2012 at 11:27 AM

Technopeasant’s point is, I believe Santorum will be picking up some delegates in MI enough to hurt Romney. Seems like the early voters are an unknown so far. Mitt Romney, unfortunately for all he has spent and the competitors whom he has scorched and now made enemies of for life, will never, ever have the hearts and minds of the number of voters he needs to beat Obama.

the new rules award delegates by congressional district. I would not be surprised to see Santorum get as many delegates as Romney even if Romney wins the popular vote.

On the other hand Santorums 3 wins 2 weeks ago actually awarded NO delegates. I would also not be surprised to see Romney and/or Ron Paul get more delegates from these 3 states than Santorum.

gerrym51 on February 27, 2012 at 11:28 AM

I suspect most of the damage to Santorum was done by Santorum.
videos of Satan speech,views on birth control,gays, etc etc.
have made even those who agree with him see he can’t win general

gerrym51 on February 27, 2012 at 11:23 AM

I suspect you haven’t seen them, but are just mouthing what you are being told…
Imagine, a person actually caring about out of wedlock children, the horror of such a person…and of course you are assuming that Mitt does not believe in Satan…well news to you, he believes Satan is the brother of Jesus.
He doesn’t talk about it? You mean he believes something in his heart, but hides it? Why? Because he is embarrassed, or is it because he knows he could lose votes for acknowledging his faith…kind of like running for Gov. and running away from conservatives, or the Republican party, you mean like that honorable policy?

right2bright on February 27, 2012 at 11:29 AM

Good question; deserves an answer:

Well, he finally said it.

GOP Presidential candidate Rick Santorum announced that he rejects the idea that church and state should be separated.

Specifically, responding to John F. Kennedy’s comment that church and state should remain separate, Santorum said that made him “throw up.”

On ABC’s “This Week,” Santorum said:

“I don’t believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute.”

How about the Muslim faith?

If Santorum doesn’ts believe in the absolute separation of church and state, and wants people in government to be people of faith, can we assume that he would be totally cool with having a devout Muslim be President–and make Presidential decisions, in part, on the teachings of his or her faith?

He’s running for President here, and some people still take his candidacy seriously; this is an important issue, so we would appreciate a clarification.

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/santorum-church-state-2012-2#ixzz1nbFP1MXo

mountainaires on February 27, 2012 at 11:29 AM

I suspect most of the damage was done by the media who overemphasized social issues for no real reason (from what I can tell, Santorum has, generally, only talked about social issues when asked). Because the media wants Romney. That should tell everyone something.

The media wants a horserace. Santorum did in Santorum

gerrym51 on February 27, 2012 at 11:29 AM

For a while after Rick Santorum’s sweep in early February, it appeared that Mitt Romney might be on the ropes in the Republican primary.

Nope. Not to me. Anyone who knew anything about Santo knew that he, like Newt and the rest, was no threat. Just another flavor. The nomination is not and never has been in doubt. Not since Perry showed that he wasn’t a contender. I’ve enjoyed the show, even knowing how it all ends.

MJBrutus on February 27, 2012 at 11:30 AM

besser tot als rot on February 27, 2012 at 11:26 AM

So far, in every interview with journalist, Rick has never brought up the “controversial” social issues, it’s been the journalist who are fueling the story.
And of course, the weak minded fall right into line…

right2bright on February 27, 2012 at 11:31 AM

I am very disappointed in any Republican who votes for or otherwise supports this fraud.

besser tot als rot on February 27, 2012 at 11:21 AM

Huge mistake to call them Republicans, they are nothing but…

riddick on February 27, 2012 at 11:32 AM

But ED has he revealed where the golden tablets are hidden? I’m not voting for him until he does so.

He’s got a snow balls chance in hell (which we may be in currently) of winning the popular. Congrats rinos . Long live Dole!

Fuquay Steve on February 27, 2012 at 11:14 AM

You tell ‘em. Can’t have the wrong kind of Christian in office, now can we?
/s

MJBrutus on February 27, 2012 at 11:33 AM

So far, in every interview with journalist, Rick has never brought up the “controversial” social issues, it’s been the journalist who are fueling the story.
And of course, the weak minded fall right into line…

If you mean the GENERAL ELECTORATE you are correct and thats why Santorum can’t win a general election

gerrym51 on February 27, 2012 at 11:34 AM

MJBrutus on February 27, 2012 at 11:30 AM

Aren’t you the smart one – move to the head of the class while we all file out,single file. Not a chance your friend wins. VIVA DOLE!!!!!!!!!

Fuquay Steve on February 27, 2012 at 11:34 AM

The worst his detractors have been able to say about him is that he’s rich and isn’t extreme enough for Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, etc.

bluegill on February 27, 2012 at 8:57 AM

Romneycare. The Father of Obamacare.

fossten on February 27, 2012 at 11:37 AM

Fuquay Steve on February 27, 2012 at 11:34 AM

I’ll be the one laughing as it hits ya where your supposed gawd split ya.

MJBrutus on February 27, 2012 at 11:38 AM

mountainaires on February 27, 2012 at 11:29 AM

And of course you left out the most important parts…the parts where he quotes the founders of saying it would be foolish to keep them separate.
The interview was quoting JFK, it was when he was being attacked for being a Catholic, and JFK did what Mitt did, he ran from his faith.
The fact is, pal, you cannot ever separate the two, unless you are a pure secularist.
And that was Rick’s point…JFK, Obama, Mitt, and you, all think that the only ideas that are worthy to run a country comes from a secularist point of view.
Obama is a secularist, the libs are, and so by your admission of dissing Rick’s statement, you and you hope Mitt is also.
Rick pointed out, to eliminate a large segment of ideas, ideas that have led to some of our greatest achievements, and to no longer embrace them is a travesty, and a road to failure.
….but as usual, you lie by omission…or to more mimick you:
YOU LIE BY OMISSION!!

right2bright on February 27, 2012 at 11:38 AM

Mittens just announced that he has some friends – believe it or not, they own NASCAR race cars (probably not caddies, oh well). But he has a heck of a lot of enemies due to his carpet bombing of people of faith. Couple of wealthy friends vs. people of faith. I wonder who will win that battle. Viva Dole.

Fuquay Steve on February 27, 2012 at 11:38 AM

Aren’t you the smart one – move to the head of the class while we all file out,single file. Not a chance your friend wins. VIVA DOLE!!!!!!!!!

Fuquay Steve on February 27, 2012 at 11:34 AM

The biggest problem with Dole, err, Romney, is that he will drag the rest of the ticket down with him. Coulter and Co. and all the sycophants, idiots they are, better leave USA when this happens.

riddick on February 27, 2012 at 11:39 AM

The worst his detractors have been able to say about him is that he’s rich and isn’t extreme enough for Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, etc.

bluegill on February 27, 2012 at 8:57 AM

Embracing and supporting abortion…supporting cap and trade, supporting TARP, supporting bailouts, supporting gov. takeover of business…RomneyCare, raising taxes/fees…gee we just got started want more disasters from Mitt?

right2bright on February 27, 2012 at 11:40 AM

riddick on February 27, 2012 at 11:39 AM

I agree – I think the house is in danger with him at the top of the ticket. i hope not but it sure feels that way.

Fuquay Steve on February 27, 2012 at 11:42 AM

Fuquay Steve on February 27, 2012 at 11:38 AM

Judging him strictly by his enemies, the man is a prince!

A great part of the Romney administration is that he will have absolutely no debts or obligations to the religious right and other fringe kooks. He’ll be his own man and looking out for the interests of all Americans!

MJBrutus on February 27, 2012 at 11:42 AM

Embracing and supporting abortion…supporting cap and trade, supporting TARP, supporting bailouts, supporting gov. takeover of business…RomneyCare, raising taxes/fees…gee we just got started want more disasters from Mitt?

right2bright on February 27, 2012 at 11:40 AM

Mental disorder: Repeating same thing and expecting different result.

Brainwashing works great!

riddick on February 27, 2012 at 11:43 AM

Coulter and Co. and all the sycophants, idiots they are, better leave USA when this happens.

riddick on February 27, 2012 at 11:39 AM

No, they will blame us for not being good little sheep.

besser tot als rot on February 27, 2012 at 11:43 AM

I have done a search of “Michigan Democrats must vote for Santorum” on the web this a.m. and came up with a plethora of sites. If Santorum does happen to squeak by in Michigan with a win, will he and his supporters credit those democrats that voted for him? I doubt it. Even Hot Air is not even acknowledging this
which tells me exactly who’s side they are on. Mitt Romney is the best man to run against Obama. GO MITT GO !

BabysCatz on February 27, 2012 at 11:44 AM

A great part of the Romney administration is that he will have absolutely no debts or obligations to the religious right and other fringe kooks. He’ll be his own man and looking out for the interests of all Americans!

MJBrutus on February 27, 2012 at 11:42 AM

Just like Obama.

besser tot als rot on February 27, 2012 at 11:45 AM

right2bright on February 27, 2012 at 11:38 AM

I am a Roman Catholic myself. And i believe Rick is correct on a lot of issues(not all). And I will vote for him if he is the nominee.

But my number one goal is to BEAT OBAMA. My opinion is Rick has no chance in the general.

The middle electorate which is malleable will not vote for him

gerrym51 on February 27, 2012 at 11:47 AM

bluegill on February 27, 2012 at 9:10 AM

…well you can’t be that bad then! But why all the gushing for one, and name calling for the others?…it makes me ill! (Hurling chunks..ill!)

KOOLAID2 on February 27, 2012 at 11:47 AM

Even Hot Air is not even acknowledging this
which tells me exactly who’s side they are on. Mitt Romney is the best man to run against Obama. GO MITT GO !

BabysCatz on February 27, 2012 at 11:44 AM

The “best man?” Based on what exactly? I might vote for Santorum, but I’d think he was the worse man to run against Obama. Other than Romney.

besser tot als rot on February 27, 2012 at 11:47 AM

MJBrutus on February 27, 2012 at 11:42 AM

Spoken like a true secularist who does not know the difference between a virtue and a vice. Well, you reap what you sow. Good public school education was not wasted on you. Congrats. I urge you to seek the truth and not some mind dulling current cultural rendition of it. We are blessed to have a heritage that values human dignity, let’s not ruin it in one generation.

Fuquay Steve on February 27, 2012 at 11:48 AM

…and of course you are assuming that Mitt does not believe in Satan…well news to you, he believes Satan is the brother of Jesus.
He doesn’t talk about it? You mean he believes something in his heart, but hides it? Why? Because he is embarrassed, or is it because he knows he could lose votes for acknowledging his faith…kind of like running for Gov. and running away from conservatives, or the Republican party, you mean like that honorable policy?

right2bright on February 27, 2012 at 11:29 AM

Because what someone believes about Satan is important in a politics, and there for, must be discussed, right?

http://votingforsatan.com/

Because we can’t have the wrong kind of Christian in office.

/s

Gunlock Bill on February 27, 2012 at 11:49 AM

But my number one goal is to BEAT OBAMA. My opinion is Rick has no chance in the general.

The middle electorate which is malleable will not vote for him

gerrym51 on February 27, 2012 at 11:47 AM

My number one goal is to defeat Obamacare and reform entitlements. Romney will do neither. Therefore, I will not vote for him or donate money to him (or any Republican if he is the nominee – money is fungible after all).

besser tot als rot on February 27, 2012 at 11:51 AM

No one has told me where the golden tablets are hidden! Darn it.

Fuquay Steve on February 27, 2012 at 11:52 AM

Embracing and supporting abortion…supporting cap and trade, supporting TARP, supporting bailouts, supporting gov. takeover of business…RomneyCare, raising taxes/fees…gee we just got started want more disasters from Mitt?

I’m amazed about the abortion comment.Abortion is legal in this country.

How many abortions performed in YOUR state last year.
How many abortions did YOUR governor stop.
How many abortions did YOU stop.

Romney says he’s pro-life.Santorum says he’s pro-life. you believe Santorum but Not Romney(which is your right)

How many abortions will a President Romney stop. ZERO
How many abortions will a President Santorum stop ZERO

gerrym51 on February 27, 2012 at 11:54 AM

gerrym51 on February 27, 2012 at 11:54 AM

Gerry gotta stop being so darn gloomy. Which one has the best chance of improving human dignity from conception to natural death? I’ve one answer, but I’m sure you’ve got a different one.

Peace brother.

Fuquay Steve on February 27, 2012 at 11:58 AM

My number one goal is to defeat Obamacare and reform entitlements. Romney will do neither. Therefore, I will not vote for him or donate money to him (or any Republican if he is the nominee – money is fungible after all).

besser tot als rot on February 27, 2012 at 11:51 AM

Your logic is impaired.

Not voting/supporting the Republican nominee guaranties Obamacare will be fully implemented.

Gunlock Bill on February 27, 2012 at 11:58 AM

empty stadium. that’s all you need to know about Willard’s chances in MI.

you know i’ve seen this comment several times over the weekend.

the Detroit Economics commision sponsered this(I think its the name). It was supposed to be in one of the upper conference rooms of the stadium that holds 700. However they got 1200 people who wanted to come.So it was moved down to the field. It was never supposed to fill the stadium. Romney haters keep saying differently as if this was a failure.

gerrym51 on February 27, 2012 at 12:02 PM

Fuquay Steve on February 27, 2012 at 11:58 AM

I’m not gloomy. I think Romney can beat OBAMA

gerrym51 on February 27, 2012 at 12:04 PM

Gerry gotta stop being so darn gloomy. Which one has the best chance of improving human dignity from conception to natural death? I’ve one answer, but I’m sure you’ve got a different one.

based on the laws of our country both Santorum and Romney have equal chance

gerrym51 on February 27, 2012 at 12:05 PM

the Detroit Economics commision sponsered this(I think its the name). It was supposed to be in one of the upper conference rooms of the stadium that holds 700. However they got 1200 people who wanted to come.So it was moved down to the field. It was never supposed to fill the stadium. Romney haters keep saying differently as if this was a failure.

gerrym51 on February 27, 2012 at 12:02 PM

Well if wasn’t a success and ties are not allowed, ergo, it was a failure. I’d rather exceed the fire marshall’s seating capacity then have a empty stadium. This is the smartest man running?

Fuquay Steve on February 27, 2012 at 12:06 PM

No one has told me where the golden tablets are hidden! Darn it.

Fuquay Steve on February 27, 2012 at 11:52 AM

Nobody wants to indulge you in your religious prejudice. Imagine that?

MJBrutus on February 27, 2012 at 12:08 PM

His lead in Arizona isn’t surprising. There isn’t nearly the anti-Mormon bigotry there. In places where people live every day with Mormon neighbors, there isn’t going to be the sort of “wheat grinder” phobia we see in Eastern states. I would generally expect Romney to do very well from the Rocky Mountains westward.

Where he is going to have his worst problems are probably in the Southeast where there aren’t so many Mormons and what people “know” about them is mostly spread by “Chinese Whispers”. But since they can’t come right out and say they are scared because he’s a Mormon, they find some other reason by taking half-truths and spinning things into things they aren’t in order to rationalize their opposition to Romney.

Comparing Romney care with Obama care is one of these. There is a huge difference between a STATE government in a STATE that not only WANTED such a law, was DEMANDING IT and a national population who did NOT want it having it shoved down their throats against their will.

A state government does have a constitutional authority to issue an insurance mandate. The federal government does not.

A state government CAN tell you that you must buy something, the federal government can’t.

I think Romney is well aware of the constitutional differences between state and federal government.

crosspatch on February 27, 2012 at 12:11 PM

Well if wasn’t a success and ties are not allowed, ergo, it was a failure. I’d rather exceed the fire marshall’s seating capacity then have a empty stadium. This is the smartest man running?

Exceed the official capacity of fire marshall. ARE YOU SERIOUS

gerrym51 on February 27, 2012 at 12:11 PM

Exceed the official capacity of fire marshall. ARE YOU SERIOUS

gerrym51 on February 27, 2012 at 12:11 PM

I’d rather pay a fine (especially if I had as much money as your buddy Mitty) than have an empty stadium. But that’s just me – an empty stadium worked well for you. Of course the 5 (or is it 4) caddies also look good for you – as he drives a BMW. Image matters – especially in the general election. He can never claim to be a man of the people. Good luck gerry – may your days ahead be full of empty stadiums and caddies!

Fuquay Steve on February 27, 2012 at 12:24 PM

crosspatch on February 27, 2012 at 12:11 PM

I certainly agree that the Feds can’t. I also agree that the states of plenary authority and the Feds are Constitutionally required to legislate only within their enumerated powers.

I’m not so sure about whether a state can force citizens to purchase something. I can’t think of a precedent for it that the SCOTUS has ruled on. I guess it also matters whether the “purchase” is a tax or a government imposition.

As you know, no doubt, aside from the violation of their powers PBHO is trying to say it is not a tax when it’s politically convenient and that it is a tax when arguing to the SCOTUS.

MJBrutus on February 27, 2012 at 12:25 PM

MJBrutus on February 27, 2012 at 12:08 PM

Where were you when catholicism was attacked without mercy from Mittites and O”Bamaites. Do you know anything about the core beliefs of the mormons? The media will go to town on this issue I assure you. They are foaming at the mouth for an opportunity. VIVA Dole – as he will look like a winner if Romney wins the primary.

Fuquay Steve on February 27, 2012 at 12:30 PM

Fuquay Steve on February 27, 2012 at 12:24 PM

since Romneys people were not in charge of the event-I guess we’ll blame Santorum

lol

gerrym51 on February 27, 2012 at 12:30 PM

gerrym51 on February 27, 2012 at 12:30 PM

Says something about Romney if he couldn’t even persuade them to project a more favorable image, doesn’t it? True leadership would have made a decision that would indicate strength and popularity, don’t you think? Ah, but he’s the leader we need to follow. Substance AND style – all for the price of one.

Fuquay Steve on February 27, 2012 at 12:35 PM

what do you get when Mittens crosses the aisle?

a Republican

DHChron on February 27, 2012 at 8:08 AM

hahahaha.

SparkPlug on February 27, 2012 at 12:42 PM

Fuquay Steve on February 27, 2012 at 12:30 PM

Please tell me about the merciless attacks. It sounds fascinating.

And don’t skip the part about criticizing someone for saying they want to make their religion the law as opposed to just ragging on someone’s faith.

MJBrutus on February 27, 2012 at 12:43 PM

How ridiculous to even think any of this. I lived in USSR, I know a progressive liberal when I see one and don’t need any radio host to help me out in this regard, I can give them some pointers on this instead. And Romney is nothing but a progressive liberal, a self admitted one, to boot.

Romney was NOT good enough in 2008, not sure if you noticed, but he lost in 2008, to another liberal as well. Do you even pay attention to what’s going on?

I suggest that you actually follow the news and listen to some radio show hosts, you may learn a bit here and there, although judging by your post it seems all is lost in your case. Ask your doctor for better prescriptions.

riddick on February 27, 2012 at 11:14 AM

First, please stop calling a Republican who doesn’t agree with you on 100% of what you think he needs to in order to be a conservative a “liberal.” Mitt Romney is far from a liberal, and someone who has lived in the Soviet Union, like you said, you should realize that.

Second, spare me what you think I know, and what I don’t. You are fighting an uphill battle if you are going to start questioning my knowledge. However, I sure can question yours if you are referring to Romney as a liberal and citing your knowledge of what a liberal is based on having lived in the former Soviet Union.

milcus on February 27, 2012 at 12:43 PM

Says something about Romney if he couldn’t even persuade them to project a more favorable image, doesn’t it? True leadership would have made a decision that would indicate strength and popularity, don’t you think? Ah, but he’s the leader we need to follow. Substance AND style – all for the price of one.

and he also has those GOLDEN TABLETS. Jealous

LOL

gerrym51 on February 27, 2012 at 12:43 PM

Your logic is impaired.
Not voting/supporting the Republican nominee guaranties Obamacare will be fully implemented.

Gunlock Bill on February 27, 2012 at 11:58 AM

Romney will not repeal it. If he gets the nomination, the only (small) hope to repeal Obamacare will come in 2016. If Romney is running for reelection, we won’t even have that possibility.

besser tot als rot on February 27, 2012 at 12:45 PM

lets talk about Romneys support for no child left behind

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/02/27/mitt_romney_in_2007_i_supported_no_child_left_behind_i_still_do.html

liberal4life on February 27, 2012 at 12:47 PM

and he also has those GOLDEN TABLETS. Jealous

LOL

gerrym51 on February 27, 2012 at 12:43 PM

Well they weren’t golden until Mitt laid his hands on them :-)

MJBrutus on February 27, 2012 at 12:48 PM

First, please stop calling a Republican who doesn’t agree with you on 100% of what you think he needs to in order to be a conservative a “liberal.” Mitt Romney is far from a liberal, and someone who has lived in the Soviet Union, like you said, you should realize that.

Second, spare me what you think I know, and what I don’t. You are fighting an uphill battle if you are going to start questioning my knowledge. However, I sure can question yours if you are referring to Romney as a liberal and citing your knowledge of what a liberal is based on having lived in the former Soviet Union.

milcus on February 27, 2012 at 12:43 PM

Repeat after me:

ROMNEY IS A PROGRESSIVE LIBERAL.

Anyone, absolutely anyone, who does not believe this should take some serious meds. And yes, I stand by my prior post calling out any and all RINOs out there. Like Coulter. Rubio. Rove. And yes, you and many others here on HA.

I’ve seen this movie before, unlike you guys, and unlike you guys I KNOW HOW IT ENDS.

riddick on February 27, 2012 at 12:49 PM

milcus on February 27, 2012 at 10:04 AM

After the carpet bombing the Mittites have done, there is not a chance of unification behind him. I blame him and him alone for the anti-Catholic attacks and the ugliness that you ignore in your post.

Fuquay Steve on February 27, 2012 at 11:17 AM

As I mentioned the other day, politics is a dirty business. Rick Santorum knows that. Newt Gingrich knows that. Mitt Romney knows that. And most importantly, Obama knows that. If Santorum or Newt had money, don’t you think they would be doing the same to Romney? And you do realize that Romney will have this happen to him in the general election.

This happens every 4 years without fail. To pretend this is something new, and to have feelings hurt because of this is really silly.

And again, Santorum is open to attacks, just like everyone else. He knew what he was getting into, and accepts it. Heck, when all is said and done, he will endorse Romney and might be considered for VP. He knows the game he is involved in. It is his supporters that don’t seem to get that and have their feelings hurt. And it is unfortunate, because it can hury turn-out in November.

So, he was the one that opened himself to this by running for president. What is happening to him is not unique. It happens to everyone, and if he doesn’t like it, maybe he can raise some money and fight back. But if you are waiting for an apology, neither you or Santorum is getting one.

milcus on February 27, 2012 at 12:50 PM

riddick on February 27, 2012 at 12:49 PM

I live in mass. Romney is a MODERATE.

gerry-mittbot-moderate

gerrym51 on February 27, 2012 at 12:52 PM

milcus on February 27, 2012 at 12:50 PM

this is the most spot on post in a long time. POLITICS is a business. Campaigns are a business. Every politician knows the rules.But just like all of us at times they get upset and spout off.

Then after theres a nominee-they gather around and support the Nominee -even if they can’t stand his(or her) guts.

Cause-thats the way it is

gerrym51 on February 27, 2012 at 12:56 PM

Repeat after me:

ROMNEY IS A PROGRESSIVE LIBERAL.

Anyone, absolutely anyone, who does not believe this should take some serious meds. And yes, I stand by my prior post calling out any and all RINOs out there. Like Coulter. Rubio. Rove. And yes, you and many others here on HA.

I’ve seen this movie before, unlike you guys, and unlike you guys I KNOW HOW IT ENDS.

riddick on February 27, 2012 at 12:49 PM

If you think Romney is a progressive liberal, I have no response. If you think Coulter and Rubio are RINOs, I am just as dumb-founded.

But, this is not the former Soviet Union. And Romney is no Joseph Stalin or Nikita Kruschev. So, please stop pretending that he is.

milcus on February 27, 2012 at 1:01 PM

gerrym51 on February 27, 2012 at 12:56 PM

Most of the time, the complaints are just political posturing. Santo and Newt have been to a few rodeos. Their cries of foul are simply attempts to put Mitt in a bad light, as the mean guy. That’s fine, and it’s part of the game. I just find it funny the way people who think they have some kind of political savvy buy in to it.

MJBrutus on February 27, 2012 at 1:02 PM

Romney will not repeal it. If he gets the nomination, the only (small) hope to repeal Obamacare will come in 2016. If Romney is running for reelection, we won’t even have that possibility.

besser tot als rot on February 27, 2012 at 12:45 PM

You repeating that falsehood won’t make it true.

Gunlock Bill on February 27, 2012 at 1:02 PM

this is the most spot on post in a long time. POLITICS is a business. Campaigns are a business. Every politician knows the rules.But just like all of us at times they get upset and spout off.

Then after theres a nominee-they gather around and support the Nominee -even if they can’t stand his(or her) guts.

Cause-thats the way it is

gerrym51 on February 27, 2012 at 12:56 PM

Basically.

Just look at Obama and Clinton. They went after each other just as much as Romney and Santorum. But after, Clinton endorsed Obama, he nominated her as Sec. of State, and all was forgiven.

milcus on February 27, 2012 at 1:05 PM

Santorum has yet to win a real primary.

I don’t think he can. We shall see.

stenwin77 on February 27, 2012 at 1:05 PM

Posted this in the wrong thread:

gerrym51 – he says he’s a progressive, can you fault us for believing him? And, sure, he’s a moderate. He’s a center-left, statist moderate. Is that a big enough difference from the far-left, statist radical that is now in the Oval Office? Opinions may differ, but I don’t think so.

besser tot als rot on February 27, 2012 at 1:04 PM

besser tot als rot on February 27, 2012 at 1:07 PM

Yes, this is true if the person standing in Romney’s way is a conservative. With his fellow travellers on the left he is far gentler, as attested by the fact that he endorses Obama’s call for increasing the burdens on the so-called one percent, and rescinding only what is objectionable about ObamaCare, his support for the minimum wage, his strange inability to articulate conservative positions in conservative terms etc., etc.

Just empty talking points, there’s nothing conservative about Rick Santorum. His voting record in the Senate is abysmal. He has very real nanny state tendencies, and simply will not shut up about pointless social issues, the latest being his dumb JFK/church and state comments. He’s a bad debater when he’s being called out and worst of all…out of everything negative I’ve listed the guy is just a whiner and a crybaby.

It’s time to get behind Mitt. He’s showed some real resilience and has basically already defeated two opponents head to head.

Mitt has the intelligence, the cash, and the campaign structure to take down Obama in November, and it will be a tragedy if he loses because the radical right refuses to support him because he isn’t “pure” enough for them.

1984 in real life on February 27, 2012 at 1:07 PM

milcus on February 27, 2012 at 12:50 PM

This is so true, the fact that people use this as a negative against Romney is ridiculous. Obama ran one of the dirtiest campaigns of all time, first against Hillary, then McCain…and it worked.

1984 in real life on February 27, 2012 at 1:11 PM

Study: Over 20 debates, Paul has attacked Romney rivals 39 times but never attacked Romney

interesting. Romulans what say you.

SparkPlug on February 27, 2012 at 1:11 PM

Yea politics is war but you mittites forget that heroic virtue does not entail attacking spouses and their core beliefs. You come across as petty and when the dogs go off the plantation as exhibited by the attacks on Karen, they are out of control. Here Mittens demonstrates he has no leadership and he is not even the lead dog of his own pack. Empty stadiums + empty suits = loser.

Fuquay Steve on February 27, 2012 at 1:13 PM

You repeating that falsehood won’t make it true.

Gunlock Bill on February 27, 2012 at 1:02 PM

He isn’t President, it cannot be proven true or false unless and until he (heaven forbid) wins. It is my opinion based on his record, his calling the mandate “fundamentally conservative,” him saying that he wants to “keep the good,” him praising the “good parts” of Obamacare, his advisors (Pawlenty) saying that Romney won’t repeal it, etc.

besser tot als rot on February 27, 2012 at 1:13 PM

“pure” enough for them.

1984 in real life on February 27, 2012 at 1:07 PM

pure enough? He’s not even in the same species. Empty suit + empty stadium = empty votes. Even if he wins, it means a hollow victory, as his values don’t deviate from the current administration in any significant way. VIVA Dole – write in vote campaign might generate some interest as he can often be confused with Romney, in personality and demeanor.

Fuquay Steve on February 27, 2012 at 1:18 PM

It’s time to get behind Mitt. He’s showed some real resilience and has basically already defeated two opponents head to head.
Mitt has the intelligence, the cash, and the campaign structure to take down Obama in November, and it will be a tragedy if he loses because the radical right refuses to support him because he isn’t “pure” enough for them.

1984 in real life on February 27, 2012 at 1:07 PM

No. I won’t get behind him. It’s not that he’s not “pure” enough; it’s that he’s not conservative at all. He is a center-left statist, with whom I agree with on practically nothing. And even the things that he does say that I like (like his new tax plan), he shows absolutely no conviction in. Watching Romney, it appears that Obama is to his tax commission (Simpson/Bowles) as Romney is to his tax plan.

besser tot als rot on February 27, 2012 at 1:19 PM

If you think Romney is a progressive liberal, I have no response. If you think Coulter and Rubio are RINOs, I am just as dumb-founded.

But, this is not the former Soviet Union. And Romney is no Joseph Stalin or Nikita Kruschev. So, please stop pretending that he is.

milcus on February 27, 2012 at 1:01 PM

Of course there is no response. Coulter? That same Coulter that back in 2008 was so against Romney for all the right reasons? Saem Rubio who went after Newt for negative ads and then somehow forgot to ask same of Romney? Same Rubio, who just like Romney forgets to mention some key things about hus past that led to his election to Senate? Those Coulter and Rubio?

Delusion is a desease, I simply look at facts.

And I really don’t care what Romney was in MA, moderate, whatever. Outside of MA, by ANY, measuring stick that is based on HIS RECORD in POLITICS, he is a progressive liberal. he said so HIMSELF, ON CAMERA. About time you guys start paying attention to ACTIONS, not words.

True, he is not muslim nor communist, as is Obama. But that is where the differences end.

You know very little about Stalin, Khruschiov and others, so please save my time and do not attempt to lecture me. Putin is a “moderate” by current standards, would you like living under is regime?

Romneybots are really delusional, indeed, if they believe anything coming out of his mouth.

riddick on February 27, 2012 at 1:28 PM

He isn’t President, it cannot be proven true or false unless and until he (heaven forbid) wins. It is my opinion based on his record, his calling the mandate “fundamentally conservative,” him saying that he wants to “keep the good,” him praising the “good parts” of Obamacare, his advisors (Pawlenty) saying that Romney won’t repeal it, etc.

besser tot als rot on February 27, 2012 at 1:13 PM

That isn’t all he has said about it.

So, when he makes a pledge to repeal it,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ni6vp7Qgau4

you don’t believe him?

Gunlock Bill on February 27, 2012 at 1:37 PM

Instead of getting behind Mittens, it is time to run away as fast as you can. This guy is struggling in a state his daddy was guv. Oh we all should have such trouble. Got any Grey Poupon?

Fuquay Steve on February 27, 2012 at 1:39 PM

A state government does have a constitutional authority to issue an insurance mandate. The federal government does not.

A state government CAN tell you that you must buy something, the federal government can’t.

I think Romney is well aware of the constitutional differences between state and federal government.

crosspatch on February 27, 2012 at 12:11 PM

To follow your logic, the car companies in MI were/are in trouble. DOes this mean that the State of Michigan can mandate that I purchase a new car from a MI based car company because I live in this state?

Ummm, I don’t think so.

MA called their health insurance penalties a TAX. Congress took extreme care to not call the penalty a tax, until they had to take this to SCOTUS, where they are trying to dance a different tune.

So let’s take what MA did with this health insurance mandate / penalty tax to your conclusion.

Back to the cars thing. Can MI charge me a TAX PENALTY for NOT buying a new car built by a Michigan based car company?

karenhasfreedom on February 27, 2012 at 1:41 PM

That isn’t all he has said about it.

So, when he makes a pledge to repeal it,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ni6vp7Qgau4

you don’t believe him?

Gunlock Bill on February 27, 2012 at 1:37 PM

Remember when Clinton ran on the promise of a middle class tax cut? That was one of the big promises of his campaign. Then he got into office and whined about working “so hard” to do that tax cut but just could not because the government needed the money?

Case closed.

Romney is going to tell us that Obamacare is too far along to unwind it.

karenhasfreedom on February 27, 2012 at 1:45 PM

Karen,

If Romney supporters haven’t understood what Romney and his policies in MA are by now, then we really can’t convince them of the FACTS no matter how we try. I am simply laughing every time they try to tell me they are not RINOs… They are in every sense.

Have no idea how anyone can even fathom claiming that a state has a right to force me to buy anything. But its the Romney supporters, so anything goes.

riddick on February 27, 2012 at 1:46 PM

True, he is not muslim nor communist, as is Obama. But that is where the differences end.

riddick on February 27, 2012 at 1:28 PM

Please stop. It’s so-called “conservatives” like you, who babble about Obama being a Muslim and a communist, that give conservatives a bad name.

And if you don’t think there is a difference between Obama and Romney, there really is not much more to say. That you don’t see the difference is very telling.

milcus on February 27, 2012 at 1:46 PM

I’m very thankful that Republican prospects don’t depend on folks like y’all, because we would be dead in the water.

Please continue railing and flailing against your imaginary foes. The meds cart will be along before you know it.

Adjoran on February 27, 2012 at 1:52 PM

And now to what is going on here on the ground in MI.

Everyone has their panties in a wad over this poll here in MI based on this thread here at HotGas.

First of all, last time I saw a breakdown of the geographical areas in MI, Romney was ahead of Santorum 2 to 1 in the Detroit area. Everywhere else in MI, Santorum is ahead of Romney 2 to 1. Gingrich’s support vaporized between those 2 debates where he didn’t do so well and as the Michiganders realized how the delegates are going to be allocated here in this state.

This is how it works. The overall state wide vote winner only gets TWO delegates for getting the most state wide votes. We have 14 Congressional districts. The highest vote winner of each Congressional District will be allocated 2 delegates. We have 30 delegates total after the 29 vote penalty for being one of the states who “jumped the line”.

There are 9 Congressional districts outside of the Detroit area. Based on this polling that the support for Romney or Santorum is geographically divided, Santorum will get 18 delegates tomorrow. At the most, Romney will get 12, the 5 districts in the Detroit area and the overall statewide vote delegates.

So Romney can “win” the states, yet have 6 fewer delegates than the 2nd place finisher. This is probably the most likely outcome on Tuesday. If it is different than this, I will be surprised.

karenhasfreedom on February 27, 2012 at 1:55 PM

Please stop. It’s so-called “conservatives” like you, who babble about Obama being a Muslim and a communist, that give conservatives a bad name.

And if you don’t think there is a difference between Obama and Romney, there really is not much more to say. That you don’t see the difference is very telling.

milcus on February 27, 2012 at 1:46 PM

Hey, genius. D you know what Artek is? I’ll continue our “conversation” and your education if you do. Otherwise, get lost and do not question my posts since you know so little and have no reference points.

riddick on February 27, 2012 at 2:03 PM

karenhasfreedom on February 27, 2012 at 1:55 PM

I’m a Romney supporter but i totally agree with karens analysis of Michigan.

this is what the new rules have brought.

But conversely Santorum ‘won” 3 primaries/caucauses 2 weeks ago were he actually got zero delegates. It is possible that Romney and/or Paul will get more from these 3 states than he.

That is why this is going to go until june

gerrym51 on February 27, 2012 at 2:03 PM

If Romney supporters haven’t understood what Romney and his policies in MA are by now, then we really can’t convince them of the FACTS no matter how we try. I am simply laughing every time they try to tell me they are not RINOs… They are in every sense.

On the contrary. We understand them PERFECTLY. that is why we are voting for Romney

gerrym51 on February 27, 2012 at 2:05 PM

MA called their health insurance penalties a TAX. Congress took extreme care to not call the penalty a tax, until they had to take this to SCOTUS, where they are trying to dance a different tune.

the difference is time and time again Ma. is its own seperate state and decided to do this.

WE all agree that the federal govenment can;t Force a state to do it.

that is the difference

gerrym51 on February 27, 2012 at 2:09 PM

Remember when Clinton ran on the promise of a middle class tax cut? That was one of the big promises of his campaign.

Yes, I remember when the philandering pervert Democrat made that promise. I didn’t believe the philandering pervert Democrat when he made that promise because he was a philandering pervert Democrat.

Romney is not.

Then he got into office and whined about working “so hard” to do that tax cut but just could not because the government needed the money?

Right, because he was a philandering pervert Democrat.

Romney is not.

Case closed.

No case was presented.

So,

Romney is going to tell us that Obamacare is too far along to unwind it.

karenhasfreedom on February 27, 2012 at 1:45 PM

Your logic is faulty.

The truth is you have every reason to believe that Romney will do what he promises. (Unless you subscribe to the “Mormons lie” mime.)

Gunlock Bill on February 27, 2012 at 3:00 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3