PPP: Romney heading for an Illinois blowout

posted at 9:50 am on March 19, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Illinois gets its turn tomorrow on the GOP merry-go-round, in a rare meaningful primary for the state.  Only Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum have seriously campaigned in the Land of Lincoln, but a new PPP poll shows that it may wind up being a one-man race:

Mitt Romney is headed for a blowout victory in Illinois on Tuesday. He leads with 45% to 30% for Rick Santorum, 12% for Newt Gingrich, and 10% for Ron Paul.

Romney’s particularly strong among voters who live in suburban areas (50-29) and with those who live in urban areas (46-23). But he’s even running slightly ahead of Santorum, 38-36, with folks who identify as living in rural parts and that strength with a group of voters he hasn’t tended to do that well with is why he’s looking at such a lopsided margin of victory.

Romney tends to win moderates in most states and Santorum usually win voters describing themselves as ‘very conservative.’ The swing group in the Republican electorate is those identifying as just ‘somewhat conservative.’ Romney is winning those folks by a whooping 60-20 margin in Illinois. Romney’s also benefiting from a 52-28 advantage with seniors.

More than a quarter of voters polled over the weekend say they could still change their minds (28%), so there is some possibility of a surprise.  Santorum has outperformed the polls in Alabama and Mississippi, and could be lurking for a surprise victory in Illinois, too.  However, if PPP’s numbers hold up, there isn’t much in the poll that would show late-deciding voters to break his way.  Favorability numbers are almost a wash, with Romney at 57/34 and Santorum at 55/36, for instance.  Slightly more voters identify as “somewhat conservative” (39%) than “very conservative (35%), and only 36% of voters are evangelical Christians.

Of course, this is also a pollster that self-identifies as a Democratic Party polling firm, and that’s evident from some of the stupid questions asked later in this survey.  Among them are such narrative-builders as Do you think that interracial marriage should be legal or illegal?, Do you believe in evolution, or not?, and Do you think Barack Obama is a Christian or a Muslim, or are you not sure?  I first noticed these questions from PPP in its Southern-state polling, but they apparently want to make a national case for ridiculing Republican voters.  Feel free to judge credibility on that basis.

Back on topic, Romney’s team rolled out an ad today showing their biggest endorsement yet … even though it’s from 2008:

Santorum has already explained this as his choice of the most conservative candidate in that cycle. I agree with him; I caucused for Romney in 2008 for the same reason, and I will caucus for Santorum on Saturday on that basis in this cycle. Still, it’s a clever point that Romney is making, and it will be an object lesson to politicians with ambitions for higher office about the risks of endorsements.


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

Romney will put Rubio on the ticket. Which will force evangelicals to stay home. They will not be voting for a Mormon/former Mormon ticket. Thats just a slap in the face

liberal4life on March 19, 2012 at 10:19 AM

When I read this, I thought, “this is one of the dumbest things I have seen written here.” Then I saw who posted it.

hoosierma on March 19, 2012 at 12:34 PM

If Rubio accepts as VP to Romney . . .his future political career as a Republican is DEAD….Romney/Rubio will lose to Obama and Rubio’s credibility will have been irreparably damaged for such poor judgment.

Perry/West

Palin for Secretary of Energy

If not, Santorum or Gingrinch

DUMP MITT NOW!

Pragmatic on March 19, 2012 at 12:42 PM

Romney heading for an Illinois blowout

That’s OK, Santorum’s cronies can hijack the caucus and steal the delegates like they did in St. Charles County, Missouri.

http://www.dailypaul.com/221455/st-charles-caucus-hijacked-bryces-report

FloatingRock on March 19, 2012 at 12:46 PM

Is Romney tone-deaf? I don’t think his ad is clever at all. Santo was nice enough to “play ball” and endorse him 4 years ago, and Romney’s going to pretend it means something now?? It’s bizarre the tactics he uses. It makes him unlikable, and the more he keeps piling up on this “savant” behavior, the less likely I’ll be to defend him come Fall. Just leave it to the Mittbotts to do their thing.
Romney is a weird guy.
shannon76 on March 19, 2012 at 10:07 AM

Oh, Lord… For crying out loud… Could we all stop with this “fake” outrage with campaign strategies, “tactics”, attack ads, and so forth as if they were something new happening this year for the first time? Regardless of what candidate you support or dislike, at least be intellectually honest about one thing: during a campaign for the nomination, whether between D’s or R’s, all gloves are off and it is not a team sport. It becomes a team sport once there is one candidate left but, until then, it’s every candidate for itself. Go back 4 years, or 8, 20, 50, even 120, and you will find the same. And in every cycle some people or candidate is outraged at the “negative campaigning” or the “tactics” from the candidate they don’t like.

Besides, whether that was Santorum endorsing Romney, Gringich endorsing Paul, Romney endorsing Gringich, or Paul Santorum ( or any other combination) in that video, the issue is not questioning the person using the video but the content. If there was an endorsement 4 years ago, what changed? The fact that he is a candidate now, in which case either the endorsement or the rethoric in the present is disingenuous (and in the case of the latter, read the first paragraph), or was he “playing ball” in which case none of them could claim to “be at odds” with the party or being “mavericks” because they simply leave their principles out the door and follow blindly when it comes to the party? Considering that there is no need for every current elected official to come out with a public, official endorsement behind his party’s candidate, much less former officials, there is more significance.

But, in the end, regardless of what candidate we end up putting in the ticket, if you are outraged now about this “tactic” (with an ad that, content-wise, is positive), just wait till the D’s start rolling out their “tactics” and attack ads. Your head will explode.

ptcamn on March 19, 2012 at 12:47 PM

Pragmatic on March 19, 2012 at 12:42 PM

I think you need to change your user name. Every time Perry opens his mouth he inserts his cowboy boot. I like the guy but he could never go up against Nobama. West is a great choice. Period. I would be fine with him or Rubio or even better Rice. Rubio is a fine man and his credibility will always be rock solid.

leftophobe on March 19, 2012 at 12:50 PM

The auto-reload sucks.

Lightswitch on March 19, 2012 at 12:53 PM

The auto-reload sucks.

Lightswitch on March 19, 2012 at 12:53 PM

Amen to that!!

Bitter Clinger on March 19, 2012 at 1:01 PM

It’s a devastating ad, Santorum’s entire campaign is “Romney’s not a conservative” and here he is placing his “good name” on Romney’s credentials as a conservative.

This ad means Santorum is a liar either now or 4 years ago.

BradTank on March 19, 2012 at 1:01 PM

If Rubio accepts as VP to Romney . . .his future political career as a Republican is DEAD….Romney/Rubio will lose to Obama and Rubio’s credibility will have been irreparably damaged for such poor judgment.

….

Palin for Secretary of Energy

Pragmatic on March 19, 2012 at 12:42 PM

Heh! This made me chuckle.

DarkCurrent on March 19, 2012 at 1:03 PM

t’s a devastating ad, Santorum’s entire campaign is “Romney’s not a conservative” and here he is placing his “good name” on Romney’s credentials as a conservative.

This ad means Santorum is a liar either now or 4 years ago.

BradTank on March 19, 2012 at 1:01 PM

I agree completely. I also thought it was a pretty darn funny ad.

leftophobe on March 19, 2012 at 1:07 PM

Another deep blue state won by Romney. The funny thing is Rombots actually think Democrats in Chicago will vote for Romney over Obama.

Mittbots are funny.

angryed on March 19, 2012 at 10:28 AM

Illinois went for Pappy Bush in 2008. Now that another Northeastern Rockefeller Republican is stepping up to the plate…

Mr. Arkadin on March 19, 2012 at 1:36 PM

…Do you believe in evolution, or not?, and Do you think Barack Obama is a Christian or a Muslim, or are you not sure?

Maybe, this explains it:

President Barack Obama blamed Fox News for his political woes in a private meeting with labor leaders in 2010, saying he was “losing white males” who tune into the cable outlet and “hear Obama is a Muslim 24/7,” according to journalist David Corn’s new book, “Showdown.”

Fallon on March 19, 2012 at 1:49 PM

ARG just released their own Illinois poll, and their numbers are almost identical to PPP’s.

Romney 44%
Santorum 30%
Gingrich 13%
Paul 8%
Undecided 4%

Full poll can be found at the following URL.

http://americanresearchgroup.com/pres2012/primary/rep/il/

As for PPP, in most states they actually ended up underestimating Romney. Of the states they overestimated Romney, two were Caucus states, and the other two were Mississippi and Alabama, and every pollster got those states wrong.

While you cannot trust a lot of PPP’s polling, they cannot really be dismissed either, particular when other pollsters back them up.

WolvenOne on March 19, 2012 at 1:58 PM

If Rubio accepts as VP to Romney . . .his future political career as a Republican is DEAD….Romney/Rubio will lose to Obama and Rubio’s credibility will have been irreparably damaged for such poor judgment.

Perry/West

Palin for Secretary of Energy

If not, Santorum or Gingrinch

DUMP MITT NOW!

Pragmaticliberal4life on March 19, 2012 at 12:42 PM

You seriously need some new material. Obama’s approval rating sits underwater, his Pac can’t raise any money, Gas is nearly $5.00 already here in CA, and high throughout the country. Obama has Carter-ized himself, he’s going to lose badly and Romney will be the next Prez no matter how much social cons cry about it.

1984 in real life on March 19, 2012 at 2:36 PM

I’m a Mitt fan but I don’t believe this poll. Mitt will win but it will be much closer

gerrym51 on March 19, 2012 at 2:40 PM

Romney will put Rubio on the ticket. Which will force evangelicals to stay home. They will not be voting for a Mormon/former Mormon ticket. Thats just a slap in the face

libtard4life on March 19, 2012 at 10:19 AM

Unless I’m mistaken, a person’s religion is determined by a person’s religious beliefs. Thus, I don’t think Rubio can be considered a Mormon since he doesn’t ascribe to Mormon beliefs or identify as such. He does, however, publicly claim to be a Catholic and attends a Catholic church. Hence, not a Mormon.

And about that ‘natural born citizen’ business: drop it. A ‘natural born citizen’ is defined by US law (8 U.S.C. § 1401)
as “a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof…”.

Insofar as the VP slot on a Romney (or Santorum) ticket is concerned, Rubio has expressed no interest in the job. He may be persuaded to take the VP nomination out of a sense of public service, but I think he’s leery of the position. Who wouldn’t be?

troyriser_gopftw on March 19, 2012 at 2:43 PM

ED> ED> ED.

MIssouri saturday.MIssouri saturday. Missouri saturday.

much bigger story

gerrym51 on March 19, 2012 at 2:57 PM

The people of the commie state of Chicago (formerly Illinois) should be ashamed of themselves. The only reason RINO Romney is where he is in the polls, is because Willard (from the RAT movie of the same name) LIED, and LIED, and LIED all over Florida and Iowa before that about Gingrich (see What REALLY Happened to the Gingrich Ethics Case? by Byron York, Townhall.com 2/6/2012)!!!!! Apparently the people in this state have come down with the dreaded LEMMING disease, MHIT-For-Brains!?! I used to think that most of the folks in this state were basically STUPID because of their perversion with the DummycRAT party, but I was wrong!?! There are a ton of really, really STUPID people here on the right as well!?! I guess that’s why they call it the STUPID Party!?! Thanks a LOT, RepublicRAT establishment!?!

Colatteral Damage on March 19, 2012 at 3:36 PM

That’s OK, Santorum’s cronies can hijack the caucus and steal the delegates like they did in St. Charles County, Missouri.

http://www.dailypaul.com/221455/st-charles-caucus-hijacked-bryces-report

FloatingRock on March 19, 2012 at 12:46 PM

I saw that. Disgusting. My county’s GOP leadership was pretty hostile to Ron Paul as well. But I was chosen as a delegate!

iwasbornwithit on March 19, 2012 at 3:51 PM

Romney will not win against his twin Obama. Liberals and moderates will vote for the real socialist, not socilaist lite. Take it to the bank. Whe was the last time a socialist lite Pub. was elected with the all mighty sucking air moderate vote. Ford? Dole? McCain?

they lie on March 19, 2012 at 4:02 PM

Romney will not win against his twin Obama. Liberals and moderates will vote for the real socialist, not socilaist [sic] lite. Take it to the bank. Whe[n] was the last time a socialist lite Pub. was elected with the all mighty sucking air moderate vote. Ford? Dole? McCain?

they lie on March 19, 2012 at 4:02 PM

..they lie == he’s wrong.

The War Planner on March 19, 2012 at 4:15 PM

How about an article on how all these polls actually perform?

PPP , Marist, Quinnipiac, Rasmussen, etc.

PappyD61 on March 19, 2012 at 4:19 PM

There is no better desciption of an act of futility than an Illinois Republican casting a vote. LOL

try being a Massachusetts Republican

lol

gerry-mittbot

gerrym51 on March 19, 2012 at 4:45 PM

PappyD61 on March 19, 2012 at 4:19 PM

Google American Research Group pertaining to the present primary.

They keep talkin’ about an independent review of polls but it dies every time.

I don’t believe that the networks and newspapers even have anyone consistently accountable.

Belligerent power brokers call them sometimes and can’t get anyone.

Oh I didn’t say that.

IlikedAUH2O on March 19, 2012 at 4:57 PM

I think Illinois should be penalized in the delegate count for giving us Obama in the first place.

Happy Nomad on March 19, 2012 at 10:03 AM

Actually, according to RNC rules, they are. IL loses a substantial number of potential delegates because they voted for Obama in 2008. If they had voted for McCain, they would have gotten an additional 16 delegates to add to their current total of 69.

HTL on March 19, 2012 at 5:06 PM

Santorum has already explained this as his choice of the most conservative candidate in that cycle.

Ed,

If you had provided a sane reason for supporting Santo, I would respect that. However, I find this standard of yours, “the most conervativest” to be an unconscionably shabby rationale. I rarely see you outsource your opinions to others in most respects, so why in Sam Hill have you chosen to do that here?

Who do you rely on to tell you what this conservativest benchmark is comprised of? Who do you rely on to tell you what this infallible guiding star that by definition is the best thing in every way for America? And what makes you put such faith in the omniscience of these grand muftis of conservatism?

MJBrutus on March 19, 2012 at 5:50 PM

“The issue in this race is not the economy.” – Rick Santorum, 3/19/12

“I don’t care what the unemployment rate is going to be. It doesn’t matter to me.” – Rick Santorum, 3/19/12

WINNING!!!!
(Just like Charlie Sheen).

LOL!!!!

Gunlock Bill on March 19, 2012 at 5:50 PM

Gunlock Bill on March 19, 2012 at 5:50 PM

LOL! That’s right Rick. The race is all about the pill, porn and what language they speak in PR. Keep up the good work.

/s

MJBrutus on March 19, 2012 at 5:54 PM

“I don’t care what the unemployment rate is going to be. It doesn’t matter to me.” – Rick Santorum, 3/19/12

“If I don’t get the nomination, I’ll get my job back on Fox News, and maybe write a book.”

Priscilla on March 19, 2012 at 6:11 PM

Santorum today:

We need a candidate who’s going to be a fighter for freedom. Who’s going to get up and make that the central theme in this race because it is the central theme in this race. I don’t care what the unemployment rate’s going to be. Doesn’t matter to me. My campaign doesn’t hinge on unemployment rates and growth rates. It’s something more foundational that’s going on. We have one nominee who says he wants to run the economy. What kind of conservative says that the president runs the economy? What conservative says I’m the guy, because of my economic experience, that can create jobs? I don’t know. We conservatives generally think that government doesn’t create jobs. That what government does is create an atmosphere for jobs to be created in the private sector.

Ed and Tina are all in.

rubberneck on March 19, 2012 at 6:25 PM

Judge Robert Bork is heading Romney’s judicial selection panel.

Romney will pick a solid conservative/Tea Party conservative to shore up his right flank.

The point is to position Romney well for the general so that he can secure the votes of independents and discerning Democrats.

Romney MUST govern as a conservative or he will face a fatal primary challenge in 2016.

Another huge point that skeptics are overlooking: Romney has no choice but to be bold on economic policy in 2013-2014, enacting the essentials of the Ryan budget, including entitlement reform. The reason? It is in Romney political SELF-INTEREST. The status quo anemic recovery will not take us where we need to get, nor will it avert a debt catastrophy. 2013 is the ball game for an economic course correction, or we are headed for the cliff. Romney and the GOP House/Senate truly have no choice but to be bold.

matthew8787 on March 19, 2012 at 10:21 AM

Matthew. Your post is entirely too rational for the ABRs on this site.

Basilsbest on March 19, 2012 at 6:27 PM

Rick Sanctimonious has sure earned his title of “GOP Whiner” today in his excuses for getting blown out in Puerto Rico. If he were President, he would be just as bad as Obama. Time for him to go away.

lhuffman34 on March 19, 2012 at 6:31 PM

All hat and no cattle, as they say down Texas way.

ebrown2 on March 19, 2012 at 11:01 AM

They may say it here, but it doesn’t apply to the governor.

jazzuscounty on March 19, 2012 at 7:10 PM

Illinois went for Pappy Bush in 2008. Now that another Northeastern Rockefeller Republican is stepping up to the plate…

Mr. Arkadin on March 19, 2012 at 1:36 PM

Gee, I thought George H.W. Bush was elected in 1988. Silly me! I also forgot that Michael Dukakis, whom he ran against, was a senator from the state of Illinois prior to the election. I thought he was governor of the same state as Romney, Massachusetts.

Where would I be without these political geniuses to set me straight?

JannyMae on March 19, 2012 at 8:30 PM

It’s strange that Ed had no problem with the PPP poll when they were high for Rick in different states but when it’s high for Romney suddenly it’s not credible because it’s a democratic poll. I have never paid much attention to any of these polls as they are all run by democrats. Gallop, Rasmussen, abc, nbc, cbs, etc. So what difference does it make about PPP. The fact is Romney is ahead in Illinois and everyone knows it. It’s not a right wing christian stronghold like Ala, and Miss. I hope Romney does have a blow out and Santorum has even more egg on his face.

ihavehadit on March 19, 2012 at 8:35 PM

Gunlock Bill on March 19, 2012 at 5:50 PM

Oh, my! Aren’t we dishonest?!

“The issue in this race is not the economy,” he said.

“The reason the economy is an issue in this race is because we have a government that is oppressing its people and taking away their freedom, and the economy is suffering as a result,” Santorum said.

“I don’t care what the unemployment rate is going to be. It doesn’t matter to me. My campaign doesn’t hinge on unemployment rates and growth rates,” Santorum said during a campaign appearance in Illinois, which on Tuesday holds the next contest in the state-by-state battle for the Republican presidential nomination.

Santorum, a former senator from Pennsylvania known mainly for a strong religious conservatism, is battling Mitt Romney, a former Massachusetts governor and the frontrunner in the race to oppose President Barack Obama in the November election.

Santorum used his economic comments to attack Romney as not being a true conservative.

“We have one nominee who says he wants to run the economy. What kind of conservative says the president runs the economy? What kind of conservative says, ‘I’m the guy because of my economic experience that can create jobs?’ I don’t know. We conservatives generally think government doesn’t create jobs,” Santorum said.

I can cherry-pick several of Romney’s comments this way. You want to try again, and be honest this time?

JannyMae on March 19, 2012 at 8:40 PM

Oops! Messed up the formatting on this one. Let’s try again.

Gunlock Bill on March 19, 2012 at 5:50 PM

Oh, my! Aren’t we dishonest?!

“The issue in this race is not the economy,” he said.

“The reason the economy is an issue in this race is because we have a government that is oppressing its people and taking away their freedom, and the economy is suffering as a result,” Santorum said.

“I don’t care what the unemployment rate is going to be. It doesn’t matter to me. My campaign doesn’t hinge on unemployment rates and growth rates,” Santorum said during a campaign appearance in Illinois, which on Tuesday holds the next contest in the state-by-state battle for the Republican presidential nomination.

Santorum, a former senator from Pennsylvania known mainly for a strong religious conservatism, is battling Mitt Romney, a former Massachusetts governor and the frontrunner in the race to oppose President Barack Obama in the November election.

Santorum used his economic comments to attack Romney as not being a true conservative.

“We have one nominee who says he wants to run the economy. What kind of conservative says the president runs the economy? What kind of conservative says, ‘I’m the guy because of my economic experience that can create jobs?’ I don’t know. We conservatives generally think government doesn’t create jobs,” Santorum said.

I can cherry-pick several of Romney’s comments this way. You want to try again, and be honest this time?

JannyMae on March 19, 2012 at 8:41 PM

I can cherry-pick several of Romney’s comments this way. You want to try again, and be honest this time?

candidates words get cherry picked all the time. Mitts had his cherry picked too. Remember “I like to fire people”

LOL

gerry-mittbot

gerrym51 on March 19, 2012 at 8:51 PM

Ed and Tina are all in.

Ain’t that the truth”Rick Santorums Hot Air Emporium”

LOL

gerrym51 on March 19, 2012 at 8:54 PM

You won’t find a political commercial much better than this one. Romney’s proven he’s got the cojones to go toe to toe with Obama and his flunkies.

jan3 on March 19, 2012 at 9:08 PM

Wow – proof that “Hot Gas” has an obvious bias towards Santorum – not a word about his gaffe on “not caring what the unemployment rate is” and nothing about the bigoted preacher who introduced him.
You know darn well if these were about Romney, there would be several posts about it Shame on you, Hot Gas……
http://www.politico.com/blogs/burns-haberman/2012/03/santorum-steps-in-it-on-unemployment-117934.html

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/pastor-dennis-terry-introduces-rick-santorum-tells-non-christians-to-get-out/

BabysCatz on March 19, 2012 at 9:41 PM

Sorry “Hot Gas” – your post for RS unemployment gaffe just popped up. My apologies for this example but I still maintain this seems to be ABR Central…..

BabysCatz on March 19, 2012 at 9:44 PM

What’s the point in voting…when hotair tells you who is going to win.

I’ll tell you the point…
I LIVE IN ILLINOIS AND I JUST VOTED FOR SANTORUM!!!

balkanmom on March 20, 2012 at 10:20 AM

Comment pages: 1 2