Poll: Romney leads Santorum by seven in Wisconsin

posted at 11:10 am on March 30, 2012 by Tina Korbe

Mitt Romney remains favored to win next Tuesday’s Wisconsin primary, which is arguably Rick Santorum’s last chance to prove he’s competitive. A new NBC-Marist poll shows Romney with 40 percent support, Rick Santorum with 33 percent, Ron Paul with 11 percent and Newt Gingrich with just 8 percent.

It appears there just aren’t enough very conservative evangelical voters in Wisconsin to give Rick Santorum the advantage:

The Wisconsin race follows a familiar pattern: Romney holds the advantage over Santorum among liberal and moderate Republicans (43 percent to 24 percent), conservatives (42 percent to 33 percent), non-Tea Party supporters (42 percent to 31 percent), and those who earn $75,000 or more annually (47 percent to 32 percent).

Meanwhile, Santorum leads among very conservative primary voters (42 percent to 33 percent), strong Tea Party supporters (40 percent to 32 percent), and evangelical Christians (40 percent to 29 percent).

So far in all the GOP contests where there has been exit polling, Romney has won in every contest where evangelical voters have accounted for less than 50 percent of the electorate. And he has lost in every contest where that number has been higher than 50 percent.

The evangelical percentage among likely Wisconsin GOP primary voters, according to the NBC/Marist poll: 41 percent.

The phrasing in that excerpt serves to reinforce the idea that Rick Santorum wins evangelicals generally and that Mitt Romney continues to have some kind of “evangelical problem,” but, if what we’ve learned in recent exit polling holds true for Wisconsin, that’s not quite right. My introductory sentence is more accurate: It’s not that there aren’t enough evangelicals to give Santorum an advantage. It’s that there aren’t enough very conservative evangelicals to throw the primary to the former Pennsylvania senator. Ronald Brownstein explains:

In response to a National Journal request, Langer analyzed the cumulative results of the 18 state exit polls conducted so far to more precisely track the trends in the GOP race. In the exercise, he segmented both evangelicals and non-evangelicals based on whether they considered themselves very or somewhat conservative, moderate or liberal, and then analyzed the support in each group for Romney, Santorum, Gingrich and Ron Paul.

Among evangelical Christians who consider themselves very conservative, Santorum held a commanding 41 percent to 23 percent advantage over Romney, the analysis found. (Gingrich has also carried 29 percent of this group.) That’s a powerful asset for Santorum because evangelicals have cast a 53 percent majority of all votes in the exit polls so far, and fully 45 percent of them identify as very conservative.

But among every other segment of evangelicals, Romney led Santorum. Romney led Santorum by 36 percent to 29 percent among evangelicals who identify as somewhat conservative, and by 39 percent to 29 percent among evangelicals who identify as moderates. Romney also held a 10-percentage point edge among self-identified liberal evangelicals (a small group).

When I spoke to Rick Santorum early this year, he emphasized that he planned to reassemble the Reagan coalition. At the time, much of his messaging had as its target audience “the working man,” blue-collar workers who might or might not be socially conservative. Like the rest of the candidates, Santorum primarily talked about the economy, but his strong foreign and social policy stances convinced him that he was the only true three-legs-of-the-stool conservative in the race. Somewhere along the way, though, he was rebranded the social-issues-only guy. Perhaps it was the president’s contraception mandate — such a ripe invitation for a social conservative response — that did it. Whatever it was, it crippled Santorum and narrowed his slice of the GOP electorate. Whether it’s possible for him to broaden his base now is a matter of speculation, but he’ll have to if he wants to be able to make a case for himself at a contested convention, which is itself looking increasingly unlikely.


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 4

hawkdriver on March 30, 2012 at 11:56 AM

Then you would be wrong. Mentioning an event that occurred and is being questioned by many does not make you a politcal hack.
Do I think he was going to say the word? I honestly do not know? I find it hard to believe but he has had this type of problem before. Remember the “blaa on welfare” incident? Look even the The Blaze is talking about it.

tbrickert on March 30, 2012 at 12:03 PM

Non-Romneys of Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, UNITE!

Brokered convention or bust!

ITguy on March 30, 2012 at 12:07 PM

That’s the point. Mitt Romney was even more Conservative than McCain last time but McCain was ordained. I think Mitt had at least a better chance.

hawkdriver on March 30, 2012 at 12:00 PM

…I was SO FOR Mitt in the last election by the time he pulled out…that he’s been last on my list for this election.
(…except for Eyebrows and Huntswoman).

KOOLAID2 on March 30, 2012 at 12:07 PM

He stands for an America that is full of Americans that stand for an America full of Americans.

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 12:00 PM

I never have doubted his patriotism, it’s his policies I question,ie.. gay marriage, gun rights, health care, just to mention a few.

DDay on March 30, 2012 at 12:08 PM

Is this a sarcastic post?
He was a 12 year senator, handled federal budgets (Mitt never has), was an A grade for fiscal voting, the only Senator those 12 years to receive an A each year…and you say no fiscal experience?
Thomas Sowell has more faith in him than in Mitt…I think I trust Sowell more than you, no offense.
And where does selling short term assets, and creating long term liabilities as a “consultant” make for a good fiscal leader in the government?
Here are the great businessmen…Perot, Forbes, Rockefeller, Carter, Edwards, Kennedy…get it? Now show me a great political leader, who was a great businessman…now do you get it?
That’s like saying you have to be able to make a lot of money to be a great general…good grief…

right2bright on March 30, 2012 at 11:46 AM

Handled federal budgets? What does this even mean? He was one inconsequential Senator, out of 100, who contributed to the largest fiscal mess that this government has ever created.

He did not draft budgets, like Paul Ryan has. He did not oversee anything. He was simply there (which basically describes his career).

He has never had to actually propose a budget. He has never had to balance a budget. He has never had to deal with a corporate balance sheet. Hence, he has no fiscal experience.

As for Thomas Sowell, that is terrific. To me, that means very little. There are a countless numbers of smart business people who prefer Romney over Santorum, and for obvious reasons.

And your analysis of what Mitt Romney did is so painfully inaccurate that it doesn’t even warrant a response, and I am not going to even try to explain what Mitt ROmney did to you.

And of the list you mentioned, how many were Governors? Which, as has been said often on here, but has been the key for winning for Republicans since 1960 (when lets face it, Nixon probably should have been president).

milcus on March 30, 2012 at 12:08 PM

hawkdriver on March 30, 2012 at 11:56 AM

Then you would be wrong. Mentioning an event that occurred and is being questioned by many does not make you a politcal hack.
Do I think he was going to say the word? I honestly do not know? I find it hard to believe but he has had this type of problem before. Remember the “blaa on welfare” incident? Look even the The Blaze is talking about it.

tbrickert on March 30, 2012 at 12:03 PM

And you’re pushing it here. Nice astroturf. It’s what political hacks do.

hawkdriver on March 30, 2012 at 12:09 PM

I don’t like Santorum, but he does have good ideas about foreign policy. We should be careful to avoid going overboard in attacking Santorum.

thuja on March 30, 2012 at 11:58 AM

His ideas are no different than any other Republicans. Most Republicans, want:

1. No nuclear Iran.
2. Protect Israel.
3. Control North Korea.
4. Support Iranian insurgents.

There is really almost no difference between any of the top 3. So, because of that, you look at leadership abilities to see who can lead and make tough decisions. And between Romney and Santorum, only one has a proven record of leadership.

milcus on March 30, 2012 at 12:10 PM

That’s the point. Mitt Romney was even more Conservative than McCain last time but McCain was ordained. I think Mitt had at least a better chance.

hawkdriver on March 30, 2012 at 12:00 PM

You’re giving way too much credit to those that are allegedly “ordaining” these candidates. McCain’s campaign was on life support the summer of ’07, and a strong enough conservative contender could’ve taken him out. But, none emerged. There’s no wizard behind the curtain selecting the nominee.

changer1701 on March 30, 2012 at 12:11 PM

I never have doubted his patriotism, it’s his policies I question,ie.. gay marriage, gun rights, health care, just to mention a few.

DDay on March 30, 2012 at 12:08 PM

I seriously read that as “parasitism”.

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 12:14 PM

…but his strong foreign and social policy stances convinced him that he was the only true three-legs-of-the-stool conservative in the race. Somewhere along the way, though, he was rebranded the social-issues-only guy. Perhaps it was the president’s contraception mandate — such a ripe invitation for a social conservative response — that did it. Whatever it was, it crippled Santorum and narrowed his slice of the GOP electorate.Whether it’s possible for him to broaden his base…

Poor Rick. He got branded, fell off a stool, and now he’s limping around starving!

EricW on March 30, 2012 at 12:14 PM

hawkdriver on March 30, 2012 at 12:09 PM

And here I thought this was a discussion forum.

Enough of my time wasted with you.

tbrickert on March 30, 2012 at 12:14 PM

US government issues $207 million in debt every hour

Oil Can on March 30, 2012 at 12:15 PM

A Vote for Rick Santorum in the Primary = A Vote for Barack’s Obama’s Reelection

bluegill on March 30, 2012 at 11:23 AM

No brain!
a tape plays
where brain
should be,
repeating
the SOS
every day!
Drone!

KOOLAID2 on March 30, 2012 at 12:15 PM

Wow. Complete total moronic BS. Right here on HotGas.

platypus on March 30, 2012 at 11:33 AM

Many of them are saying the exact same thing. Get used to it.

JannyMae on March 30, 2012 at 12:16 PM

hawkdriver on March 30, 2012 at 12:09 PM

And here I thought this was a discussion forum.

Enough of my time wasted with you.

tbrickert on March 30, 2012 at 12:14 PM

It is. You’re free to post anything. Even if it’s vile astroturf mean to ruin a man’s life. I’m free to comment on how utterly repulsed I am that someone would stoop that low, for a candidate you all are saying doesn’t have a chance anyway. My hope would be that folks see it for what it is and not waste much time on your links either.

I’ll just say again. Mitt Romney is looking more and more like a given. Is what you’re doing worth it?

hawkdriver on March 30, 2012 at 12:18 PM

There’s no wizard behind the curtain selecting the nominee.

changer1701 on March 30, 2012 at 12:11 PM

I’ve worked with GOP campaign offices in my dwell time over the years. There certainly is.

hawkdriver on March 30, 2012 at 12:20 PM

I’ll just say again. Mitt Romney is looking more and more like a given. Is what you’re doing worth it?

hawkdriver on March 30, 2012 at 12:18 PM

Their just worried that Santy will be either the Veep choice or the “next in line” come ’16. So better to destroy him now.

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 12:21 PM

And here I thought this was a discussion forum.
tbrickert on March 30, 2012 at 12:14 PM

It used to be.

Now it’s a vampire movie. The plot is simple: the bloodsucking villain, Willard, Lord Romney causes mayhem in the small villages in the midwest, but eventually the noble townspeople rise up and drive a figurative wooden stake through his heart–ending his candidacy, and the movie.

Willard 2012: Because He Looks Like the Guy Who Laid You Off

Emperor Norton on March 30, 2012 at 12:21 PM

Brad is always almost begging folks to talk with him. Why doesn’t he want to talk about the HAMS BB 55?

smoothsailing on March 30, 2012 at 12:22 PM

KOOLAID2 on March 30, 2012 at 12:15 PM

Funny. Reading posts is fun especially when you and Hawkdriver and JannyMae are around. Plus many others.

SparkPlug on March 30, 2012 at 12:22 PM

hawkdriver on March 30, 2012 at 12:18 PM

Their just worried that Santy will be either the Veep choice or the “next in line” come ’16. So better to destroy him now.

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 12:21 PM

Is that what the GOP does?

hawkdriver on March 30, 2012 at 12:23 PM

smoothsailing on March 30, 2012 at 12:22 PM

What does the acronym stand for?

Bradky on March 30, 2012 at 12:23 PM

Sorry, but the handful of thumb-sucking, foot-stomping crybabies overestimate their numbers and significance. Republican voters, independents and some Democrats will vote to successfully remove Obama from office and elect President Romney, while the hapless HotAir ABRtard Dozen will be writing in their hero Sarah Palin’s name on the ballot, thinking they’re sending shockwaves back to their imaginary establishment boogeymen.

bluegill on March 30, 2012 at 11:41 AM

None of this really matters since Willard will get the nomination and proceed to a 10 point loss to Hussein. You will be nowhere to be seen the day after the election but console yourself in advance with the fact that the only worse outcome for the GOP would have been a SaintOraProNobis nomination which would have guaranteed all three branched deep blue.

After The One’s second term both Canada and France will seem like conservative paradises. Perhaps Willard could return to France and do more missionary work in the Paris St-Denis suburb.

Annar on March 30, 2012 at 12:24 PM

It used to be.

Now it’s a vampire movie. The plot is simple: the bloodsucking villain, Willard, Lord Romney causes mayhem in the small villages in the midwest, but eventually the noble townspeople rise up and drive a figurative wooden stake through his heart–ending his candidacy, and the movie.

Willard 2012: Because He Looks Like the Guy Who Laid You Off

Emperor Norton on March 30, 2012 at 12:21 PM

I wish he was that interesting, this just looks like a bad remake of McCain 2008: Because Its My Turn Dammit!

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 12:25 PM

Somewhere along the way, though, he [Santorum] was rebranded the social-issues-only guy.

I’m sorry, rebranded the social-issues-only guy? Prior to the primaries, I wasn’t aware Santorum was known for anything nationally except for his strong, highly vocal and visible stands on various social issues. Just as Ryan is known for being a budgetary policy wonk, so was Rick Santorum was known as THE social conservative in the Senate. He’s carried that brand proudly for years. His outspoken assertion of the importance of these issues gave him national attention, some good and a lot of it bad, particularly when viewed through the lens of the MSM.

I’m not saying Santorum was pandering or cynically cultivating a powerbase. Clearly, Santorum’s advocacy points are and were based upon deeply principles and personal convictions. But he’s no babe in the woods, either. Santorum knew (and knows) social issues are what he’s known for. To pretend otherwise is disingenuous.

troyriser_gopftw on March 30, 2012 at 12:25 PM

smoothsailing on March 30, 2012 at 12:22 PM

What does the acronym stand for?

Bradky on March 30, 2012 at 12:23 PM

This is awkward. It’s your organization. You don’t know what it stands for?

smoothsailing on March 30, 2012 at 12:26 PM

go back to your porn sites and use you hand in a practical way to release yourself

nparga23 on March 30, 2012 at 11:53 AM

This says a lot about you than it does about me

liberal4life on March 30, 2012 at 11:54 AM

I think it’s funny to see these commenters attack liberal4life, who doesn’t seem to post anything too outrageous or inflammatory.

I think that liberal commenter must have gotten used to the abuse on here. The guy supports Obama. So what?

It’s kind of embarrassing to see you clowns one minute go off on a liberal commenter for posting a fairly standard partisan comment, then the next minute talk about people like the Krazy KosKids and Occupiers.

I used to think the liberal blogs had a near lock on the clownish, immature, nasty behavior online, but after seeing the cesspool of idiotic comments from some of these HotAir readers (especially from the Romney-hating nutballs who call everyone a socialist and who often spew religious bigotry), it’s clear that our side isn’t exactly a bunch of angels.

bluegill on March 30, 2012 at 12:28 PM

It’s kind of embarrassing to see you clowns one minute go off on a liberal commenter for posting a fairly standard partisan comment, then the next minute talk about people like the Krazy KosKids and Occupiers.

bluegill on March 30, 2012 at 12:28 PM

Should I stop countering her anti-Mormon bigotry then? I would hate to embarrass you.

hawkdriver on March 30, 2012 at 12:32 PM

hawkdriver on March 30, 2012 at 12:18 PM

You would be right, IF it was a topic not being discussed all over the internet.

tbrickert on March 30, 2012 at 12:34 PM

hawkdriver on March 30, 2012 at 12:32 PM

Maybe I haven’t seen every single thing they’ve posted. I’m not vouching for everything they post. Of course it would be unacceptable if they were doing that.

By the way, I don’t recall you saying anything about the anti-Mormon bigotry from the ABRtard crowd.

bluegill on March 30, 2012 at 12:36 PM

bluegill on March 30, 2012 at 12:28 PM

You do realize l4l is just AP slumming it, don’t you? We like razzing him.

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 12:36 PM

TheirThey are just worried that Santy will be either the Veep choice or the “next in line” come ’16. So better to destroy him now.

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 12:21 PM

Fixed it for you.

You are welcome.

Who are the mysterious “They”?

Gunlock Bill on March 30, 2012 at 12:36 PM

None of this really matters since Willard will get the nomination and proceed to a 10 point loss to Hussein.

Annar on March 30, 2012 at 12:24 PM

Wish casting?

Gunlock Bill on March 30, 2012 at 12:38 PM

You would be right, IF it was a topic not being discussed all over the internet.

tbrickert on March 30, 2012 at 12:34 PM

Discussed with an obvious intent to smear Santorum with it, like on your little blog that you link to, where your first post is the clip?

You’re too funny!

JannyMae on March 30, 2012 at 12:39 PM

There’s that stench again.

Bmore on March 30, 2012 at 12:39 PM

Who are the mysterious “They”?

Gunlock Bill on March 30, 2012 at 12:36 PM

Mittbots obviously, who else wouldn’t want Santy to be Veep?

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 12:39 PM

hawkdriver on March 30, 2012 at 12:32 PM

Maybe I haven’t seen every single thing they’ve posted. I’m not vouching for everything they post. Of course it would be unacceptable if they were doing that.

By the way, I don’t recall you saying anything about the anti-Mormon bigotry from the ABRtard crowd.

bluegill on March 30, 2012 at 12:36 PM

You haven’t seen everything that’s posted, remember?

hawkdriver on March 30, 2012 at 12:39 PM

go back to your porn sites and use you hand in a practical way to release yourself

nparga23 on March 30, 2012 at 11:53 AM

Ed, Tina, Allah?? Do you want this type of low-class individual posting here?? I have never read anything constructive from this low-life.

KickandSwimMom on March 30, 2012 at 12:39 PM

bluegill on March 30, 2012 at 12:28 PM

LOL..the irony of your comment is hilarious.

You’ve done more to hurt Romney’s cause on Hot Air than any of Idiot4lifes pathetic attempts. Most folks just see I4L as the bigoted libtard she is.

And that is coming from someone who plans on holding his nose and voting for Romney in the general. YOU make me reconsider that with almost every one of your idiotic comments…but fortunately for you angryed or danielvito shows up..to make you look slightly less insane.

You might try reading the book “How to Win Friends and Influence People”.

HumpBot Salvation on March 30, 2012 at 12:40 PM

Brad is doing a websearch for HAMS BB 55 as we speak. I hope I didn’t put him in a spot. Brad, never mind. It ain’t important.

smoothsailing on March 30, 2012 at 12:41 PM

You would be right, IF it was a topic not being discussed all over the internet.

tbrickert on March 30, 2012 at 12:34 PM

I’m not going to argue with a rank shill from a rank shill web site. You were dismissing me earlier anyway.

hawkdriver on March 30, 2012 at 12:41 PM

Mittbots obviously, who else wouldn’t want Santy to be Veep?

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 12:39 PM

About 85% of the GOP!

Gunlock Bill on March 30, 2012 at 12:41 PM

go back to your porn sites and use you hand in a practical way to release yourself

nparga23 on March 30, 2012 at 11:53 AM

Ed, Tina, Allah?? Do you want this type of low-class individual posting here?? I have never read anything constructive from this low-life.

KickandSwimMom on March 30, 2012 at 12:39 PM

Plus his grammar is worse than the Nigerian Prince looking for money spam I get in my hotmail account.

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 12:42 PM

I have no illusions that any of the other candidates will beat out Santorum, nor do I have any hopes of a brokered convention accomplishing anything. However, the longer this primary gets drawn out, and the more Mitt is forced to tack right, the better able we will be to hold him accountable in the event he actually does beat Obama.

Work on your senators and representatives. Try and elect conservatives wherever you can. We need them in the senate and the house, regardless of who is president.

JannyMae on March 30, 2012 at 12:42 PM

KickandSwimMom on March 30, 2012 at 12:39 PM

I believe Ed is out on vacation, Tina is not allowed to use the glorious hammer, and Allah is probably napping.

Bmore on March 30, 2012 at 12:44 PM

ABRtards,

Barney Frank has some new attacks on Romney for you to mimic.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/03/30/barney_frank_on_mitt_romney_there_is_a_meanness_at_his_core.html

Gunlock Bill on March 30, 2012 at 12:44 PM

smoothsailing on March 30, 2012 at 12:41 PM

Woof!

Brad pats smooth on the head “Good Boy!!”

Bradky on March 30, 2012 at 12:45 PM

I think it’s funny to see these commenters attack liberal4life, who doesn’t seem to post anything too outrageous or inflammatory.

bluegill on March 30, 2012 at 12:28 PM

Guess you must have a high pain threshold.

arnold ziffel on March 30, 2012 at 12:45 PM

KickandSwimMom on March 30, 2012 at 12:39 PM

Oh, and you might ask them to do something about that stench if you have a chance. ; )

Bmore on March 30, 2012 at 12:45 PM

I have no illusions that any of the other candidates will beat out Santorum, nor do I have any hopes of a brokered convention accomplishing anything. However, the longer this primary gets drawn out, and the more Mitt is forced to tack right, the better able we will be to hold him accountable in the event he actually does beat Obama.

Work on your senators and representatives. Try and elect conservatives wherever you can. We need them in the senate and the house, regardless of who is president.

JannyMae on March 30, 2012 at 12:42 PM

Mittens will still tack left in the Gen. It’s what Rinos do. Its also why Rinos lose. President Mittens would just push for a carbon-tax or tack on a vat-tax anyway.

I’ll vote for senate, but the presidency is getting the ol’ write in she-who-must-not-be-named. I just found out both of my parents are in the same mindset, as well. And they always vote Republican.

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 12:47 PM

You’ve done more to hurt Romney’s cause on Hot Air than any of Idiot4lifes pathetic attempts. Most folks just see I4L as the bigoted libtard she is.

HumpBot Salvation on March 30, 2012 at 12:40 PM

You are that stupid, right? The guy is paid to do what he does, and he’s quite successful.

Archivarix on March 30, 2012 at 12:47 PM

Barney Frank has some new attacks on Romney for you to mimic.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/03/30/barney_frank_on_mitt_romney_there_is_a_meanness_at_his_core.html

Gunlock Bill on March 30, 2012 at 12:44 PM

Barney and Bashir should get together and have a sword fight.

arnold ziffel on March 30, 2012 at 12:47 PM

However, the longer this primary gets drawn out, and the more Mitt is forced to tack right, the better able we will be to hold him accountable in the event he actually does beat Obama. and the more GOP resources that are expended fighting the inevitable, the better able Obama is to win in the general.

JannyMae on March 30, 2012 at 12:42 PM

Fixed if for you.

You are welcome.

Gunlock Bill on March 30, 2012 at 12:48 PM

Woof!

Brad pats smooth on the head “Good Boy!!”

Bradky on March 30, 2012 at 12:45 PM

Oh, you’re back. Did you find it?

smoothsailing on March 30, 2012 at 12:49 PM

Mittens will still tack left in the Gen. It’s what Rinos do. Its also why Rinos lose. President Mittens would just push for a carbon-tax or tack on a vat-tax anyway.

I’ll vote for senate, but the presidency is getting the ol’ write in she-who-must-not-be-named. I just found out both of my parents are in the same mindset, as well. And they always vote Republican.

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 12:47 PM

Oh, I know he will tack left in the general. What I was referring to was getting him to tack right in primary, so we can hold his feet to the fire after he’s elected. If he pisses off too many Republicans by tacking too far left, he could lose reelection, or even get primaried. That’s a long way off, though, of course.

JannyMae on March 30, 2012 at 12:50 PM

ABRtards,

Barney Frank has some new attacks on Romney for you to mimic.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/03/30/barney_frank_on_mitt_romney_there_is_a_meanness_at_his_core.html

Gunlock Bill on March 30, 2012 at 12:44 PM

LOL, oh that Barney Frank! :) Everyone knows Romney doesn’t have a core! Haha ha ha ha!

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 12:50 PM

Archivarix on March 30, 2012 at 12:47 PM

If I may Archivarix, foreigner, female, as for the last part, paid?

Bmore on March 30, 2012 at 12:50 PM

You are that stupid, right? The guy is paid to do what he does, and he’s quite successful.

Archivarix on March 30, 2012 at 12:47 PM

Look, I’m a Romney supporter and Bluegill’s shrill advocacy grates on my nerves, so I guess you’ll have to redefine successful.

troyriser_gopftw on March 30, 2012 at 12:52 PM

Geez, the freaking FIFY crap is so childish. Can we knock that off?

hawkdriver on March 30, 2012 at 12:52 PM

hawkdriver on March 30, 2012 at 12:52 PM

Lazy like water?

Bmore on March 30, 2012 at 12:53 PM

HumpBot Salvation on March 30, 2012 at 12:40 PM

If you say no-name anonymous people can force you to vote against someone, then you may want to rethink your life a little.

The reverse must be true as well too, celebrity endorsements must have a HUGE effect with you.

scotash on March 30, 2012 at 12:56 PM

Geez, the freaking FIFY crap is so childish. Can we knock that off?

hawkdriver on March 30, 2012 at 12:52 PM

I don’t know, sometimes it is actually pretty funny. Sometimes it gets old. Same as anything else, I guess.

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 12:57 PM

None of this really matters since Willard will get the nomination and proceed to a 10 point loss to Hussein.

Annar on March 30, 2012 at 12:24 PM

Wish casting?

Gunlock Bill on March 30, 2012 at 12:38 PM

Obviously, these things are impossible to predict with precision but, at present the Obambi re-elect is running near 60% on Intrade and Willard is at near 37%. These numbers may get a little closer around convention time but when the Chicago attack machine really gets going I think a 10% margin is about right. The negative attacks used in the primaries won’t work as well against those who are true professionals at the art and will have better organization and a lot more money.

I’ll hold my nose and vote for this guy but he has no chance at all of winning.

Annar on March 30, 2012 at 12:58 PM

Fixed if for you.

You are welcome.

Gunlock Bill on March 30, 2012 at 12:48 PM

Why didn’t you just come out and say, “Support Mitt now, or you’re supporting Obama?” That’s what you meant. You’ve said it repeatedly, and you keep “high-fiving” everyone else when they say it.

I already voted for Santorum in my primary. I had a choice this time, unlike in ’08, when McCain had already secured the nomination. I think every Republican should be able to cast a vote to determine our nominee. I’m sorry you have a problem with people exercising their right to vote for whomever they choose, but I don’t have a problem with it.

Most of us he don’t prefer Romney have stated we will pull the lever for Romney AGAINST Obama. That’s not good enough for you. Even if we vote for Romney, you geniuses will still blame us if he loses. You’re deliberately setting yourselves up to blame anybody but Romney and yourselves if he doesn’t win. Convenient, isn’t it?

The primary isn’t over yet. Romney does not have the required number of delegates to secure the nomination. There are still states that haven’t voted. Get over yourself, and accept that you can’t force people to support a candidate that they don’t like, just because you’re afraid he’s too lousy to beat Obama.

JannyMae on March 30, 2012 at 12:58 PM

If I may Archivarix, foreigner, female, as for the last part, paid?

Bmore on March 30, 2012 at 12:50 PM

I am convinced that spawnbots like “angryed” and “bluegill” have the explicit purpose of alienating the opposed Republican blocs during the primaries. “Angryed” partly confirmed my theory when, responding to me, argued that “people like you follow certain talk show hosts”, clearly referring to Rush and/or Fox News (whom I never watch or listen to, by the way). That was doubly unusual from the alleged supporter of a conservative candidate, and as clear a trademark of a liberal troll as it can be.

PS: I am not a female, and only partly foreigner (have three citizenships, including American).

Archivarix on March 30, 2012 at 12:59 PM

Look, I’m a Romney supporter and Bluegill’s shrill advocacy grates on my nerves, so I guess you’ll have to redefine successful.

troyriser_gopftw on March 30, 2012 at 12:52 PM

He is very successful in alienating the opposite side.

Archivarix on March 30, 2012 at 1:00 PM

Most of us he don’t prefer Romney have stated we will pull the lever for Romney AGAINST Obama. That’s not good enough for you. Even if we vote for Romney, you geniuses will still blame us if he loses. You’re deliberately setting yourselves up to blame anybody but Romney and yourselves if he doesn’t win. Convenient, isn’t it?

The primary isn’t over yet. Romney does not have the required number of delegates to secure the nomination. There are still states that haven’t voted. Get over yourself, and accept that you can’t force people to support a candidate that they don’t like, just because you’re afraid he’s too lousy to beat Obama.

JannyMae on March 30, 2012 at 12:58 PM

The people that hold their nose and vote for Romney won’t be blamed, but those like Buckshot Bill who intend on not voting for President at all, or like angryed who will actually vote for Obama? Yes, you bet they’ll share in the blame.

changer1701 on March 30, 2012 at 1:03 PM

Why didn’t you just come out and say, “Support Mitt now, or you’re supporting Obama?”

JannyMae on March 30, 2012 at 12:58 PM

“And if Mittens loses, we’ll call all of you anti-mormon bigots, so you had better hope he wins!”

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 1:03 PM

Whether it’s possible for him to broaden his base now is a matter of speculation, but he’ll have to if he wants to be able to make a case for himself at a contested convention, which is itself looking increasingly unlikely.

Let us pray.

Buy Danish on March 30, 2012 at 1:04 PM

For the record, bluegill. Lots of us have defended Mitt Romney and the Mormon faith to most all who go there. I don’t see you doing anything but slinging it yourself. Why we’d need to prove it to you is beyond me. But here you go, you know, just for the record. We pragmatists like to refer to it as getting kicked in the teeth by both sides.

Of course you do. You also believe that “All Christian faiths accept Jesus as their Savior.” According to you, Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses and Catholics worship the same god and are Christian.
apocalypse on March 10, 2012 at 3:41 PM

Correct. I do.

hawkdriver on March 11, 2012 at 10:49 AM

Yeah, I knew you were Scripturally confused. That’s your problem. You’re not sound in doctrine. What you believe isn’t taught in the Bible. Your answer is the typical response of phony christians.

apocalypse on March 11, 2012 at 5:24 PM

I’m not sure what you willing to comment to people in the spirit of fairness. And BTW, my comments to libfreeoedieforlife about Mormons, those are pretty easy to find yourself.

hawkdriver on March 30, 2012 at 1:05 PM

Brad, I’m confused by you continuing to disappear if you remember your group or not. I’ll just leave an answer in case you were honestly asking.

HAMS BB 55 is Hot Air Members Stalked by Brady. 35 that got web searched to see if they were going to vote for Obama and 20 approximately that were followed to different social sites to figure out who they were.

smoothsailing on March 30, 2012 at 1:05 PM

Archivarix on March 30, 2012 at 12:59 PM

Actually, Angryed was probably talking about Michael Savage. Not Rush. Though he probably should have been more clear about it.

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 1:06 PM

go back to your porn sites and use you hand in a practical way to release yourself nparga23 on March 30, 2012 at 11:53 AM

Ed, Tina, Allah?? Do you want this type of low-class individual posting here?? I have never read anything constructive from this low-life. KickandSwimMom on March 30, 2012 at 12:39 PM

Given that he’s made numerous comments much worse than this have you also asked for danielvito to be banned?

Basilsbest on March 30, 2012 at 1:06 PM

The people that hold their nose and vote for Romney won’t be blamed, but those like Buckshot Bill who intend on not voting for President at all, or like angryed who will actually vote for Obama? Yes, you bet they’ll share in the blame.

changer1701 on March 30, 2012 at 1:03 PM

I am voting for president, I’m voting against Obama. I’m just not voting for Romney. Cause I don’t vote for democrats. McCain was the last time.

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 1:08 PM

Actually, Angryed was probably talking about Michael Savage. Not Rush. Though he probably should have been more clear about it.

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 1:06 PM

Oh. From the context, I’d swear he referred to Rush. Makes no difference to me anyway, as I listen to neither. I only use Hot Air comments and Stormfront newsletters to make my mind up. :)

Archivarix on March 30, 2012 at 1:11 PM

The people that hold their nose and vote for Romney won’t be blamed, but those like Buckshot Bill who intend on not voting for President at all, or like angryed who will actually vote for Obama? Yes, you bet they’ll share in the blame.

changer1701 on March 30, 2012 at 1:03 PM

Oh, so then the “support Romney now or you’re supporting Obama” meme will not be invoked by some here, if Romney doesn’t win? I don’t like to lump everyone into the same category, but this is a very strong “mittbot” characteristic. I would be willing to bet that if Santorum dropped out five minutes from now, the screeching would immediately commence about how he should have done it sooner, and gotten behind Romney, and if Romney doesn’t win it will be his fault.

JannyMae on March 30, 2012 at 1:11 PM

I already voted for Santorum in my primary.

JannyMae on March 30, 2012 at 12:58 PM

Ok, so you have already had your voice heard and therefore have no room to complain that your candidate lost and will continue to lose.

Why didn’t you just come out and say, “Support Mitt now, or you’re supporting Obama?”

Because I wanted to add some meat to that statement.

Gunlock Bill on March 30, 2012 at 1:12 PM

I am voting for president, I’m voting against Obama. I’m just not voting for Romney. Cause I don’t vote for democrats. McCain was the last time.

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 1:08 PM

Well, I’m sure Obama will appreciate all the support you’ll throw the Constitution Party’s way, or whatever third party/write-in won’t be going to beat him.

changer1701 on March 30, 2012 at 1:12 PM

HAMS BB 55 is Hot Air Members Stalked by Brady. 35 that got web searched to see if they were going to vote for Obama and 20 approximately that were followed to different social sites to figure out who they were.

smoothsailing on March 30, 2012 at 1:05 PM

Do I count? I got websearched on a QOTD a few days back. But not by Brady, someone else trying to defend bluegill actually. Called me a Romney hater or something.

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 1:12 PM

He is very successful in alienating the opposite side.

Archivarix on March 30, 2012 at 1:00 PM

I just ignore him, now, and I think most people do. People who don’t read or comment a lot here are very put off by him, though. That’s true.

JannyMae on March 30, 2012 at 1:13 PM

hawkdriver on March 30, 2012 at 12:52 PM

Lazy like water?

Bmore on March 30, 2012 at 12:53 PM

That’s a Southern saying. Not sure why you told me though Bmore?

hawkdriver on March 30, 2012 at 1:13 PM

PS: I am not a female, and only partly foreigner (have three citizenships, including American).

Archivarix on March 30, 2012 at 12:59 PM

LOL! Sorry Archivarix, I wasn’t referring to you. I was referring to liberal4life. Otherwise I’m in agreement with you. Funny. ; )

Bmore on March 30, 2012 at 1:18 PM

I’m not sure what you willing to comment to people in the spirit of fairness. And BTW, my comments to libfreeoedieforlife about Mormons, those are pretty easy to find yourself.

hawkdriver on March 30, 2012 at 1:05 PM

Isn’t it lib4life who keeps repeating “Mormons aren’t Christians, and Christians won’t vote for a Mormon?” I don’t recall libfreeordie’s comments. Maybe I just missed them.

Mitt’s Mormonism should not be a problem. It wasn’t a problem in Massachusetts, when he was elected governor, but we do all know that Obama has an army of attack dogs sitting in his war room right now digging up things on Mormonism with which to attack Romney. Now, I don’t think a full frontal assault will have any effect, and they will have to be subtle about it, but anyone who thinks Obama will not TRY to exploit Romney’s religion are dreaming.

Will they be able to influence enough people to throw the election toward Obama? I really don’t think so, but I also didn’t think enough people would be stupid enough to vote for Obama in the first place.

JannyMae on March 30, 2012 at 1:19 PM

Oh, so then the “support Romney now or you’re supporting Obama” meme will not be invoked by some here, if Romney doesn’t win? I don’t like to lump everyone into the same category, but this is a very strong “mittbot” characteristic. I would be willing to bet that if Santorum dropped out five minutes from now, the screeching would immediately commence about how he should have done it sooner, and gotten behind Romney, and if Romney doesn’t win it will be his fault.

JannyMae on March 30, 2012 at 1:11 PM

Its also the kind of argument losers tend to make. I can’t remember people saying this kind of thing in ’04, but I do remember when Dole supports said exactly this in ’96. Its a sign of Romney’s weakness as a candidate that his supporters are always looking for an excuse for his loss. When he loses SC, its because SC are anti-Mormon. When he loses the Gen, its because totally irrelevant conservatives like me didn’t vote for Mittens.

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 1:19 PM

That’s a Southern saying. Not sure why you told me though Bmore?

hawkdriver on March 30, 2012 at 1:13 PM

LOL! Its why they FIFY, they don’t have to type. Just take the easiest path of resistance. But you know that, so why am I explaining it? Your a Southern boy anyway or a transplant, one. ; )

Bmore on March 30, 2012 at 1:21 PM

Bmore on March 30, 2012 at 1:21 PM

Hold on let me clarify, Southern Man.

Bmore on March 30, 2012 at 1:23 PM

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 1:12 PM

Sir, that’s something you need to ask Bradky. He’s the one keeping track.

He’s following you. Just not on twitter.

smoothsailing on March 30, 2012 at 1:24 PM

If you say no-name anonymous people can force you to vote against someone, then you may want to rethink your life a little.

The reverse must be true as well too, celebrity endorsements must have a HUGE effect with you.

scotash on March 30, 2012 at 12:56 PM

Do you have reading comprehension issues? You might need to rethink your schooling a little.

Maybe, I should have put a sarc tag on it for ya?

ALL of the insane ranters on here from both the so called hardcore MITTBOTS and the ABRLOONS pretty much have ZERO effect on how I plan to vote and I suspect for the most part..will have the same effect on most of the reasonably sane commenters here.

The feces throwing monkey show tends to get a bit tedious.

The end game is getting rid of Obama. The tribal warfare is just counter-productive. And before anyone calls me a squish or a fascist trying to stifle debate…do you really think we haven’t heard anything from bluegill or angryed that we haven’t already heard ten thousand times?

You are that stupid, right? The guy is paid to do what he does, and he’s quite successful.

Archivarix on March 30, 2012 at 12:47 PM

No dude..I’m not stupid. Was just pointing out the irony of the idiotic comment from bluegill. Seriously doubt it is a true Romney supporter. If it is..maybe it will gain some self-awareness. If not, it will continue doing the same old routine.

HumpBot Salvation on March 30, 2012 at 1:25 PM

Bmore on March 30, 2012 at 1:21 PM

Transplant, check.
Southern Man, check.
I was officially adopted by NC many moons ago.

(I know because they said I could vote here this time if I keep paying my taxes)

hawkdriver on March 30, 2012 at 1:26 PM

He’s following you. Just not on twitter.

smoothsailing on March 30, 2012 at 1:24 PM

Great tagline for a bad horror movie.

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 1:26 PM

Oh, so then the “support Romney now or you’re supporting Obama” meme will not be invoked by some here, if Romney doesn’t win? I don’t like to lump everyone into the same category, but this is a very strong “mittbot” characteristic. I would be willing to bet that if Santorum dropped out five minutes from now, the screeching would immediately commence about how he should have done it sooner, and gotten behind Romney, and if Romney doesn’t win it will be his fault.

JannyMae on March 30, 2012 at 1:11 PM

I’m sure it will be invoked by some here. And frankly, there is a case to be made that the drawn-out process has weakened Romney (look at his negatives, and how they’ve risen throughout). A lot of factors will be at play, win or lose.

But, for this particular Mittbot, it is those that decide not to vote for Romney in the general that will, indeed, share the blame should he lose. At the end of the day this is about retaining Obama or not.

changer1701 on March 30, 2012 at 1:29 PM

hawkdriver on March 30, 2012 at 1:26 PM

A simply beautiful State for many reasons. One of which is not because it is blue. Fingers crossed.

Bmore on March 30, 2012 at 1:31 PM

Will they be able to influence enough people to throw the election toward Obama? I really don’t think so, but I also didn’t think enough people would be stupid enough to vote for Obama in the first place.

JannyMae on March 30, 2012 at 1:19 PM

Don’t fret none hun !

Team Maobama would not want to allow the Rev. Wright discussion re-surface- as it would – if Mormon religious questions on candidate Mitt becomes vogue for them.

20 yrs of God Damn America !! said it all back then – and still does today. Democrites and their SCUM ( So-Called Unbiased Media)want to stay as far away from Rev Wright as possible. The puzzle pcs are fitting together to nicely.

FlaMurph on March 30, 2012 at 1:37 PM

I’m sure it will be invoked by some here. And frankly, there is a case to be made that the drawn-out process has weakened Romney (look at his negatives, and how they’ve risen throughout). A lot of factors will be at play, win or lose.

changer1701 on March 30, 2012 at 1:29 PM

I really think as voters have come to see and learn more about Romney’s many, many positions they have moved farther away from him. He’s just not a conservative, at all. And most republicans (and former republicans) aren’t pro-abortion, or anti-gun, or pro-tax hikes even for the rich, or think that Bush saved the economy by bailing out the banks, or so many other things that Romney believes.

But, for this particular Mittbot, it is those that decide not to vote for Romney in the general that will, indeed, share the blame should he lose. At the end of the day this is about retaining Obama or not.

changer1701 on March 30, 2012 at 1:29 PM

And I just don’t see the point in replacing one bad president with another bad president. Some people care more about the party winning an election, than they do supporting conservative ideas and principles. The TEA Party didn’t arise just to support Republican’s at all costs, it was and is about promoting conservatism as an ideology. There just isn’t much enthusiasm for the party system anymore. There isn’t enough difference between either party to justify that kind of emotional response. And there is no logical reason to expend a tremendous amount of time and energy just to elect another person who has no desire to push for reform.

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 1:40 PM

The number of delegates assigned to a state by the Republican Party for the nominating convention should be assigned proportionally based on the number of votes which the state cast for the Republican nominee in the previous presidential election.

The Republican nomination process is currently designed to nominate the most liberal candidate running for the nomination. Just look at the past results- in my lifetime (I was born in 1968) only one conservative, President Reagan, has ever been nominated. All of the rest were moderates with very mixed results. While President Bush 1988, President Bush 2000 and President Bush 2004 were good, but not great, Nixon, Ford, Dole, Bush 1992 and McCain were all failures of varying degrees. Obviously, nominating moderates is not a winning formula for the purportedly conservative party.

Romney is currently ahead in the delegate count. However, look at the map of the states which Romney has won and compare it to the map of states which President Obama won in the 2008 General Election. Most of the states which Romney has won – New Hampshire, Florida, Nevada, Colorado, Maine, Washington, Massachusetts, Ohio, Virginia, Hawaii and Illinois all have one thing in common – they all went to President Obama in the 2008 General Election. Many of these states the Republicans have absolutely no hope of winning in this election. Yet, they are given population based proportional weight in determining the G.O.P. nominee.

Also, the contests in many states are open primaries where the Democrats and liberals are allowed to skew our nominating process to their liking.

Not only that, but most of the big liberal states are winner-take-all primaries (like California) whereas most of the big conservative states are proportionally based primaries (like Texas). Thus, when Romney wins California on June 5th, he will receive all 172 of the delegates, but when Santorum wins Texas on May 29th, he will have to split the delegates proportionally.

The system is set up in every way possible to give extra weight to liberal states which we cannot win (with the winner-take-all primaries), to the liberal voters (with the open primaries) and we are shooting ourselves in the foot by basing the delegate count on population.

The only way that conservatives can ever hope to have a real voice in this nominating process, the following changes must be made:

1.) Base the delegate count off the number of votes cast, not the population. Give 2 delegates to each state for the Senators and then give each state 1 delegate for each 50,000 votes cast for the Republican in the previous presidential election. This would properly weigh the states representation at the convention. California should not be given more weight at the Republican National Convention simply because they have an extra twenty million Democrats living in the state. In 2008, both Texas and California had approximately 4.5 million votes for McCain. Under this system, both states would receive 92 delegates. This would also encourage Republicans to vote even if their state would normally have no hope of going G.O.P.

2.) All states need to be either winner-take-all or proportional. (My preference if proportional). Otherwise, those that voluntarily distribute delegates proportionally are simply hamstringing their effect on the process.

3.) The primaries need to all be closed. Allowing non-Republicans to help choose our nominee dilutes skews and taints the process. It allows for far too many shenanigans and it only helps to guarantee that our nominee will not be who we want, but who the Democrats want.

Until these reforms can be made, we conservatives will forever be disenfranchised within our own party.

Theophile on March 30, 2012 at 1:44 PM

nparga23 on March 30, 2012 at 11:42 AM

Wait, Timothy Dalton is coming back?

Rusty Allen on March 30, 2012 at 1:48 PM

Theophile on March 30, 2012 at 1:44 PM

I’ve been saying this for months, years actually. We shouldn’t give blue-states equal opportunity to pick our nominee, especially since most blue-states are large population states as well they tend to get more power to choose the nominee.

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 1:49 PM

JannyMae on March 30, 2012 at 1:19 PM

Your post sounded like what you want Obama to do to Romney. Also, it’s okay to call people stupid who vote for a particular candidate now? Who knew?

Rusty Allen on March 30, 2012 at 1:51 PM

Hate this d*&^ Page refresh. Typing an post them bam gone. WTF.

Steveangell on March 30, 2012 at 1:52 PM

Team Maobama would not want to allow the Rev. Wright discussion re-surface- as it would – if Mormon religious questions on candidate Mitt becomes vogue for them.

20 yrs of God Damn America !! said it all back then – and still does today. Democrites and their SCUM ( So-Called Unbiased Media)want to stay as far away from Rev Wright as possible. The puzzle pcs are fitting together to nicely.

FlaMurph on March 30, 2012 at 1:37 PM

I agree with you, but will the Romney campaign even bring up those inconvenient facts? McCain didn’t. That’s what I mean when I say that Romney will lose if he doesn’t take the fight to Obama. I don’t put much stock in polls, as they are being increasingly used to shape opinion, rather than evaluate it, but I do think the polls showing a fairly large number of people who are stupid enough to still be blaming Bush for a lot of the problems have some validity.

We know there is a cadre of loyal libbies who will vote for Obama no matter what. I believe that group has shrunk in numbers, but how much? Who knows? I guess we will find out.

JannyMae on March 30, 2012 at 1:54 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4