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

I can’t wait for Romney to be the official Nominee. Months spent traveling from Southern city to Southern city, all the while yelling out in the worst fake Southern accent ever, “Vote fer me, I’m wanna ya’ll!”

Then he’ll hit the Midwest. I can see him now, circling St. Louis in his Cardinal red pickup truck, rally squirrel strapped to the roof…

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 1:56 PM

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

Steveangell on March 30, 2012 at 1:52 PM

I thought somebody said it was gone today. ??

It’s not an issue for with Firefox. *shrug*

JannyMae on March 30, 2012 at 1:57 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

Or give them partial delegations. Though this is probably not possible.

And no delegates to territories/districts.

Unfortunately an elite group actually choose our nominee for us. Those with a lot of money to spend on the race and can run tons of very decieving ads on TV. Normal votes made out to be evil. Partial statements taken completely our of context. Positions that are far less severe than the Candidate making the charge.

It is called Establishment because the Establishment is a few dozen or so rich people who get together and choose the Nominees for both parties (not saying same group for each party).

We are only given the illusion of a choice.

Steveangell on March 30, 2012 at 2:00 PM

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

Steveangell on March 30, 2012 at 1:52 PM

FireFox?

Bmore on March 30, 2012 at 2:00 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.

That explains why he is winning and by greater margins as the race continues, right?

He’s just not a conservative, at all.

Hah! That statement says more about you than it does about him.

And I just don’t see the point in replacing one bad president with another bad president.

Me neither. That is why I am voting for the Republican nominee.

Some people care more about the party winning an election, than they do supporting conservative ideas and principles.

And some people care more about being stupid, than they do about getting Obama out of the WH.

The TEA Party didn’t arise just to support Republican’s at all costs, it was and is about promoting conservatism as an ideology.

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

No, it was about cutting the size, expense and intrusion of government.

Gunlock Bill on March 30, 2012 at 2:01 PM

JannyMae on March 30, 2012 at 1:57 PM

Still doing it on Chrome. Fire Fox latest updater seemed to remedy it. If not they have a add on blocker.

Bmore on March 30, 2012 at 2:03 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

I am right with you on this argument, and I’ve been ripped up one side and down the other, for making it myself. If it weren’t for concerns about the SCOTUS nominees, I would be making the case that a liberal republican would be worse than Obama, in the long run. It’s very frustrating to be, once again, setting ourselves up to choose “the least awful candidate,” but it’s where we are.

Romney, in some ways, is better than McCain, but that’s not very reassuring.

JannyMae on March 30, 2012 at 2:04 PM

Steveangell on March 30, 2012 at 2:00 PM

Hey, Zippy, we already do that. Delegates are apportioned not only by population, but how often the state goes Republican in national elections. How do you think Georgia got more delegates than Ohio?

And the Republican nomination process is the most open and democratic process in the world. We’re even more democratic than the Democrats since we reserve fewer seats for officeholders and activists, more of ours are awarded by the democratic process.

So did some big elite come and tell you how to vote? Me either. So you’re just an idiot with a big mouth.

Adjoran on March 30, 2012 at 2:07 PM

Gunlock Bill on March 30, 2012 at 2:01 PM

Romney isn’t a conservative. Never was. Pretending otherwise won’t make him one. The government will only get bigger under a president Romney, the deficit will still grow at a record pace, and taxes will still go up. And the government will still try to tell you how to live your life.

Except under a President Romney, you’ll have to support and defend every terrible thing the administration does.

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 2:07 PM

Still doing it on Chrome. Fire Fox latest updater seemed to remedy it. If not they have a add on blocker.

Bmore on March 30, 2012 at 2:03 PM

Yeah, I have firefox and the ad block, and I don’t have the problem.

JannyMae on March 30, 2012 at 2:07 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

I don’t see how an Obama victory advances conservative values and principles…in fact, it achieves quite the opposite. And you have no idea that Romney would be a bad president…we know Obama is, though.

changer1701 on March 30, 2012 at 2:08 PM

Yeah, I have firefox and the ad block, and I don’t have the problem.

JannyMae on March 30, 2012 at 2:07 PM

Me either. Today, at least.

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 2:09 PM

I experience the refresh problem on my iPhone with safari, but not with Firefox. Than again I use Adblock with it, but I don’t think that would change anything.

ArkyDore on March 30, 2012 at 2:11 PM

I don’t see how an Obama victory advances conservative values and principles…in fact, it achieves quite the opposite. And you have no idea that Romney would be a bad president…we know Obama is, though.

changer1701 on March 30, 2012 at 2:08 PM

I have full confidence he’ll be at least as bad a President as he was as governor of MA. Especially after the 2014 midterms give the dems control of congress. Frankly Obama seems pretty neutered right now. Replace Boehner and McConnell and he’d be up a creek. President Romney could get away with a lot of stupid stuff though, and in ’16 we’d be told to vote for him again no matter how terrible a president he proved to be, because “lesser evil and stuff”.

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 2:12 PM

Romney isn’t a conservative.

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 2:07 PM

Like I said, this says more about you than it does about Romney.

Gunlock Bill on March 30, 2012 at 2:14 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

I don’t see how an Obama victory advances conservative values and principles…in fact, it achieves quite the opposite. And you have no idea that Romney would be a bad president…we know Obama is, though.

changer1701 on March 30, 2012 at 2:08 PM

Then you’re really not opening your eyes all the way, and looking at the whole picture. If we have the house and retake the Senate, it will be very difficult for Obama to get any legislation passed, but if we have both houses, and the presidency, and continue on the same path, but just at a lower speed, there will be no Democrats to take the blame. That is what Buckshot Bill and others like myself fear. For good reason.

JannyMae on March 30, 2012 at 2:16 PM

Like I said, this says more about you than it does about Romney.

Gunlock Bill on March 30, 2012 at 2:14 PM

You can say that until you’re blue in the face, but it won’t change what Romney is.

JannyMae on March 30, 2012 at 2:19 PM

Like I said, this says more about you than it does about Romney.

Gunlock Bill on March 30, 2012 at 2:14 PM

I really think you have to show proof that Romney’s a conservative before you can make the argument that I’m wrong when I assert that he’s not.

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 2:20 PM

I have full confidence he’ll be at least as bad a President as he was as governor of MA. Especially after the 2014 midterms give the dems control of congress. Frankly Obama seems pretty neutered right now. Replace Boehner and McConnell and he’d be up a creek. President Romney could get away with a lot of stupid stuff though, and in ’16 we’d be told to vote for him again no matter how terrible a president he proved to be, because “lesser evil and stuff”.

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 2:12 PM

That’s an awfully risky calculation. Look at how Obama has abused executive orders, or ignored Congress when it came to Libya…our God-King does not think Congress is the check on his power it is supposed to be. You’re assuming, basically, a worst-case scenario when it comes to a possible President Romney, but NOT doing so with another Obama term. That makes no sense to me.

Regardless, we’ll see how it shakes out. I think anything other than ABO is misguided, but here’s hoping your vote is canceled out by a lot more people that agree with me. ;)

changer1701 on March 30, 2012 at 2:20 PM

JannyMae on March 30, 2012 at 2:19 PM

And you can keep playing victim, because after all, it’s all about you.

Rusty Allen on March 30, 2012 at 2:22 PM

That’s an awfully risky calculation. Look at how Obama has abused executive orders, or ignored Congress when it came to Libya…our God-King does not think Congress is the check on his power it is supposed to be. You’re assuming, basically, a worst-case scenario when it comes to a possible President Romney, but NOT doing so with another Obama term. That makes no sense to me.

Regardless, we’ll see how it shakes out. I think anything other than ABO is misguided, but here’s hoping your vote is canceled out by a lot more people that agree with me. ;)

changer1701 on March 30, 2012 at 2:20 PM

Well that’s what I’ve been saying: Congress isn’t a check on Obama that it’s supposed to be. It won’t be for Romney either. Not unless we can replace the leadership with someone with real fortitude.

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 2:23 PM

Then you’re really not opening your eyes all the way, and looking at the whole picture. If we have the house and retake the Senate, it will be very difficult for Obama to get any legislation passed, but if we have both houses, and the presidency, and continue on the same path, but just at a lower speed, there will be no Democrats to take the blame. That is what Buckshot Bill and others like myself fear. For good reason.

JannyMae on March 30, 2012 at 2:16 PM

Basically acquiescing power to the opposition simply so they’ll take the blame for things that go wrong is not a viable strategy. That makes it seem as if Republicans don’t want to govern, or are afraid to.

Plus, holding the house and possibly the Senate guarantees the GOP will share in some of the blame, anyway, and you’re ignoring how Obama has shown a propensity to circumvent Congress to get what he wants.

changer1701 on March 30, 2012 at 2:30 PM

Well, I tried but I just can’t seem to get the thread to Page 4. Didn’t take long on the Palin headline earlier though….

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 2:32 PM

I really think you have to show proof that Romney’s a conservative before you can make the argument that I’m wrong when I assert that he’s not.

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 2:20 PM

Vetoed 800 liberal bills,

Balanced the budget 4 years in a row,

Worked with the NRA on gun legislation,

Just to name a few.

Gunlock Bill on March 30, 2012 at 2:37 PM

You can say that until you’re blue in the face, but it won’t change what Romney is.

JannyMae on March 30, 2012 at 2:19 PM

And you can say that he isn’t a conservative until you are blue in the face, but that won’t change what he is either.

Gunlock Bill on March 30, 2012 at 2:38 PM

Well that’s what I’ve been saying: Congress isn’t a check on Obama that it’s supposed to be. It won’t be for Romney either. Not unless we can replace the leadership with someone with real fortitude.

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 2:23 PM

What has Romney EVER done to make you believe he wouldn’t follow the law or keep his promises?

Gunlock Bill on March 30, 2012 at 2:41 PM

Vetoed 800 liberal bills,

Balanced the budget 4 years in a row,

Worked with the NRA on gun legislation,

Just to name a few.

Gunlock Bill on March 30, 2012 at 2:37 PM

Romneycare, super pro-abortion, voted and bragged about gun control, spending increased, taxes (fees) increased, supports corn subsidies, believes in man-caused global warming, against cutting EPA or other agencies, anti-Reagan, believes and argues that Bush saved the economy by bailing out the banks… and it goes on, and on.

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 2:43 PM

What has Romney EVER done to make you believe he wouldn’t follow the law or keep his promises?

Gunlock Bill on March 30, 2012 at 2:41 PM

He believes, wrongly, that the government can force its citizens to buy an overpriced service they don’t want. That’s a violation of basic civil rights. Screaming 10th amendment doesn’t change anything, especially since Romney has repeatedly argued in favor of a federal mandate.

Romney’s promises last about as long as Obama’s do. He didn’t continue to run in ’08, despite saying he would. His own campaign staff have indicated he won’t work to repeal Obamacare, if the SC doesn’t throw it out. Despite his own rhetoric to the contrary.

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 2:48 PM

WI (NBC): Obama 52, Romney 35
WI (NBC): Obama 51, Santorum 38

As if it matters who the nominee will be.

angryed on March 30, 2012 at 2:54 PM

Vetoed 800 liberal bills,

Balanced the budget 4 years in a row,

Worked with the NRA on gun legislation,

Just to name a few.

Gunlock Bill on March 30, 2012 at 2:37 PM

800 bills? LOL. That’s 200 bills a year.If you’re going to lie at least make it a believable lie.

Balanced budgets by increasing taxes by $550M. WOW!!

Worked with leftists to bank “dangerous” assault weapons.

Sorry Billie, no matter how much pepper you put on it the Romney Shit Sandwich still tastes like shit.

angryed on March 30, 2012 at 2:56 PM

Now that Santorum has ran out of free advertising (debates) except for his mulitple daily appearances on Fox News, he should quit the campaign trail and go on a bowling tour.

Mitt’s the man who will rack up 3 more wins on Tuesday, and latter will take Pennsylvania away from Santorum. Santorum isn’t organized enough to even get on all the ballots (not on DC ballot), so how could he get organized enough to win a general election.

Rush Limbaugh is proving to be just an old gas bag that has been wrong all of this last year, and he claims to be accurate 99.7% of the time. He has supported every candidate except for Mitt, while Mitt has prevailed in every case. Shows Limbaugh’s influence resides only in his tiny brain, and that he has little to no control of GOP politics. Also note that Palin is fading fast! Limbaugh and Palin are comparable to a fart in a windstorm!

lhuffman34 on March 30, 2012 at 2:57 PM

In 1994 Ann Romney said they didn’t know a single Republican. Yet the Mitt-tards swear up and down he is a conservative.

Laughable.

angryed on March 30, 2012 at 2:57 PM

WI (NBC): Obama 52, Romney 35
WI (NBC): Obama 51, Santorum 38

As if it matters who the nominee will be.

angryed on March 30, 2012 at 2:54 PM

But, the party breakdown and stuff…eh…polls are meaningless! If a poll shows Romney beating someone, that’s a real poll, but anything else is crap!!!!!! – Every Rombot since Romney’s numbers started to tank a few months ago

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 2:58 PM

angryed on March 30, 2012 at 2:54 PM

…says the lib troll.

changer1701 on March 30, 2012 at 2:59 PM

Basically acquiescing power to the opposition simply so they’ll take the blame for things that go wrong is not a viable strategy. That makes it seem as if Republicans don’t want to govern, or are afraid to.

Plus, holding the house and possibly the Senate guarantees the GOP will share in some of the blame, anyway, and you’re ignoring how Obama has shown a propensity to circumvent Congress to get what he wants.

changer1701 on March 30, 2012 at 2:30 PM

I never talked about “acquiescing power.” If I believed that, then I’d vote for Obama. That’s your term for it. I was just pointing out that it could be negative to the conservative cause to have the Presidency, the House, and the Senate, and not get anything done, because there will be nobody for our delightful MSM to blame but Republicans.

I am not ignoring Obama’s habit of circumventing Congress, either. I am well aware of the damage he’s done through EO’s, and his “czars,” so why don’t you take your condescending attitude elsewhere?

JannyMae on March 30, 2012 at 3:00 PM

lhuffman34 on March 30, 2012 at 2:57 PM

It’s funny how you are still trying fight the primaries, when the General is already over. :)

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 3:00 PM

…says the lib troll.

changer1701 on March 30, 2012 at 2:59 PM

I’ve been here for 4/5 years. If you think I’m a lib given the history of my posting you’re a bigger idiot than I thought.

angryed on March 30, 2012 at 3:01 PM

Buckshot Bill’s moniker should be ‘Bullsh*t Bill’

lhuffman34 on March 30, 2012 at 3:02 PM

Romneycare,

A conservative solution to address the issues caused by the “Reagan Mandate”.

Was Reagan a conservative?

super pro-abortion,

False. Unless you think that a victim of rape should be forced to carry the child of the rapist (like a slave).

voted and bragged about gun control,

Yeah, he bragged about working with the NRA to keep the liberals from passing something worse. Be sure to not only NOT give him and credit for that, but make it sound like a negative. /s

spending increased, taxes (fees) increased,

Oh, the horror, making people pay for the services they get rather than making the taxpayers eat it. Is that not conservative?

Is closing loopholes conservative or liberal? You know, eliminating bennies for specific groups?

supports corn subsidies,

Does he really?

believes in man-caused global warming,

Really? Does he believe man is the only cause? What has he proposed to do about it? Nothing.

against cutting EPA or other agencies,

Really? So you think a cost/waste cutting expert isn’t going to go after them?

anti-Reagan,

LOL!!! You are delusional about that one.

believes and argues that Bush saved the economy by bailing out the banks…

Really? Or did he, at first say that it might be a good idea and then later when the specifics were reveal go against it?

Gunlock Bill on March 30, 2012 at 3:04 PM

lhuffman34 on March 30, 2012 at 3:02 PM

Wow, that’s clever. What’s Bullshot anyway?

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 3:04 PM

Wow, that’s clever. What’s Bullshot anyway?

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 3:04 PM

You misquote. He said ‘Bullsh*t Bill’, which is short for bovine feculance.

Gunlock Bill on March 30, 2012 at 3:06 PM

Gunlock Bill on March 30, 2012 at 3:04 PM

Good lord, you really are in love with this guy aren’t you? Its a pity, you had such a good name too. In another life, we coulda been friends…

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 3:07 PM

Ed or Patrick or someone needs to run a poll asking these specific questions:

Is Romney a conservative, yes or no?

Does Romney remind you more of Ronald Reagan, John Kerry, or John McCain?

If you don’t support Romney, are you anti-Rino or anti-Mormon?

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 3:12 PM

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

It’s almost like pandering to the very conservative evangelicals is a terrible way to win primaries outside the bible belt. Weird.

Cyhort on March 30, 2012 at 3:14 PM

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 3:12 PM

Would that poll make you feel better about yourself?

Rusty Allen on March 30, 2012 at 3:19 PM

Would that poll make you feel better about yourself?

Rusty Allen on March 30, 2012 at 3:19 PM

Couldn’t hurt :)

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 3:21 PM

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

Such reforms would “disenfranchise” Republicans within our own country.

thuja on March 30, 2012 at 3:21 PM

As Wisconsin goes this Fall so falls the nation.

Good luck all.

Schadenfreude on March 30, 2012 at 3:23 PM

Such reforms would “disenfranchise” Republicans within our own country.

thuja on March 30, 2012 at 3:21 PM

Well, if such Republicans would quit picking Rino loser every four years it wouldn’t be a problem ; )

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 3:25 PM

Still doing it on Chrome. Fire Fox latest updater seemed to remedy it. If not they have a add on blocker.

Bmore on March 30, 2012 at 2:03 PM

I usually use the nightly build of Firefox on Linux. I probably should be less daring in terms of software than using the nightly build, because it isn’t loading Hotair at all today. So I am using Chrome and am experiencing for the first time this annoying refresh issue.

thuja on March 30, 2012 at 3:26 PM

Folks complaining about the RNC delegate allocation system really need to read the rules, get out their calculators, and understand that the system already does what they want to the maximum extent that is reasonable. The system is heavily weighted in favor of small states who voted Republican in the last election.

One example: Mississippi gets a 60% delegate bonus. California gets 0%. Thus California, a state with eleven times the population of Mississippi that had six times the number of votes for McCain in 2008, gets only four times the number of delegates.

Another: Ohio has four times the population of Mississippi, and gave three times as many votes to McCain, but only has 1.65 the number of delegates.

If there is a problem with the current system, it is that it penalizes swing states like Ohio, Florida and Virginia just because they voted the wrong way the last time. I am actually very interested in nominating a candidate that appeals to voters in those states.

HTL on March 30, 2012 at 3:27 PM

Your Gov’t lies to you, grossly.

Mitt will fight this? Good luck.

Schadenfreude on March 30, 2012 at 3:27 PM

Well, if such Republicans would quit picking Rino loser every four years it wouldn’t be a problem ; )

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 3:25 PM

If people didn’t want the “RINOS”, so many people wouldn’t be voting for them.

thuja on March 30, 2012 at 3:28 PM

HTL on March 30, 2012 at 3:27 PM

Well, something needs to change, the system we’ve go now keeps picking democrats. And the democrats keep picking commies. And the libertarians keep picking anarchists. Though that fits, actually.

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 3:30 PM

MR. ELECTABLE 2012

Is behind the all caring huggable teddy bear President Obama, by 20 points among women.

Mittbots denial in 5….4…..

PappyD61 on March 30, 2012 at 3:31 PM

If people didn’t want the “RINOS”, so many people wouldn’t be voting for them.

thuja on March 30, 2012 at 3:28 PM

So many people don’t vote for them, that’s the problem. They won’t this November either.

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 3:31 PM

Folks complaining about the RNC delegate allocation system really need to read the rules, get out their calculators, and understand that the system already does what they want to the maximum extent that is reasonable. The system is heavily weighted in favor of small states who voted Republican in the last election.

One example: Mississippi gets a 60% delegate bonus. California gets 0%. Thus California, a state with eleven times the population of Mississippi that had six times the number of votes for McCain in 2008, gets only four times the number of delegates.

Another: Ohio has four times the population of Mississippi, and gave three times as many votes to McCain, but only has 1.65 the number of delegates.

If there is a problem with the current system, it is that it penalizes swing states like Ohio, Florida and Virginia just because they voted the wrong way the last time. I am actually very interested in nominating a candidate that appeals to voters in those states.

HTL on March 30, 2012 at 3:27 PM

I didn’t know that. I had assumed that the delegates would be proportionally to electoral votes. But you are right. It would make sense to give extra delegates to Ohio, Flordia, and Virginia and the swing states. Or better yet, allocate electoral votes proportionally, but have the swing states hold their primaries near the beginning. Perhaps two conservative states and two liberal states should go first so that they can do the initial vetting.

thuja on March 30, 2012 at 3:34 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

“I just don’t see the point in replacing a secret Muslim with a Mormon herp derp herp derp”

You’re either for Romney or for Obama at this point. A protest vote is a vote for Obama.

1984 in real life on March 30, 2012 at 3:35 PM

I never talked about “acquiescing power.” If I believed that, then I’d vote for Obama. That’s your term for it. I was just pointing out that it could be negative to the conservative cause to have the Presidency, the House, and the Senate, and not get anything done, because there will be nobody for our delightful MSM to blame but Republicans.

I am not ignoring Obama’s habit of circumventing Congress, either. I am well aware of the damage he’s done through EO’s, and his “czars,” so why don’t you take your condescending attitude elsewhere?

JannyMae on March 30, 2012 at 3:00 PM

There’s no condescension in pointing out the fallacies in arguing that Obama winning might not be so bad because, hey, at least he’ll get some blame.

I’ve been here for 4/5 years. If you think I’m a lib given the history of my posting you’re a bigger idiot than I thought.

angryed on March 30, 2012 at 3:01 PM

Yes, you’re so conservative that you’re voting for Obama. Interesting ideological hoops you’re jumping through, there.

changer1701 on March 30, 2012 at 3:36 PM

“I just don’t see the point in replacing a secret Muslim with a Mormon herp derp herp derp”

You’re either for Romney or for Obama at this point. A protest vote is a vote for Obama.

1984 in real life on March 30, 2012 at 3:35 PM

Why do you care so much about religion?

Half of my family is JW anyway, I’m used to cultish behavior.

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 3:38 PM

MR. ELECTABLE 2012

Is behind the all caring huggable teddy bear President Obama, by 20 points among women.

Mittbots denial in 5….4…..

PappyD61 on March 30, 2012 at 3:31 PM

Thats why Mittens NEEDS a female VP – who also will be ready to take on the liberal propaganda heat that will be coming to destroy. And I’m sure an obamaphile like you is just waiting to drool over the liberal lies.

FlaMurph on March 30, 2012 at 3:50 PM

It sucks we lost, and as a Tea Party person It doesn’t feel good but it is time to stop this. and not get behind Mitt, but our party’s future, and maybe push them a little more fiscally right while moving to the center on social issues. Thats all we can really do at this point.

Listen to Rubio and Ryan. they sound like they are not excited either but this is important for the country. and you can see that and hear that when they talk.

Its time people.. to realize this is a pointless battle now, and borderline bitter. I dont want Mitt either but its time now.

boogaleesnots on March 30, 2012 at 4:05 PM

HTL on March 30, 2012 at 3:27 PM

Thanks for the informative post. It’s a shame that so many people would rather spend 10 minutes complaining about how “blue states pick our nominee” than take 5 mins to read the allocation rules.

I agree with you regarding swing states. There’s a case to be made that swing states should be over-weighted no matter how they voted in the last presidential election.

EddieC on March 30, 2012 at 4:07 PM

If people didn’t want the “RINOS”, so many people wouldn’t be voting for them.

thuja on March 30, 2012 at 3:28 PM

Yeah, your right, less than 40% is a lot of people…not enough to win, but a lot of people…

right2bright on March 30, 2012 at 4:20 PM

Perhaps it was the president’s contraception mandate — such a ripe invitation for a social conservative response — that did it.

Perhaps it was his embrace of Industrial Policy.

Perhaps it was his rejection of Right to Work.

Perhaps it was his repudiation of the libertarian wing of his party.

Whatever it was, Senator ChurchLady’s economic policies pt him in the economic class of Barack Obama, and even worse than Bill Clinton on economic issues. Maybe he should join the Democratic Party, where his economic philosophy would be right at home.

JohnGalt23 on March 30, 2012 at 4:23 PM

Yeah, your right, less than 40% is a lot of people…not enough to win, but a lot of people…

right2bright on March 30, 2012 at 4:20 PM

And what % is voting for the “true conservative”?

Gunlock Bill on March 30, 2012 at 4:26 PM

Good lord, you really are in love with this guy aren’t you? Its a pity, you had such a good name too. In another life, we coulda been friends…

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 3:07 PM

Ok, I get it.

You have no counter argument so you must resort to the fallacy known as ad hominem.

Carry on.

Gunlock Bill on March 30, 2012 at 4:28 PM

MR. ELECTABLE 2012

Is behind the all caring huggable teddy bear President Obama, by 20 points among women.

Mittbots denial in 5….4…..

PappyD61 on March 30, 2012 at 3:31 PM

If you dont unmderstand polls, please dont comment on one that advances your point as though it is gospel. I read every word of the Pew poll release, which I usually dont do because Pew does not have a very good track record, and there are glaring deficiencies, not least of which is the wording that they used.

For one, this is based on “registered voters,” which is a meaningless poll right off the bat. You use likely voters as measure. Then, we have no clue how Pew phraased the question in their poll, since they give no indication of that in the release. And lastly, there was no breakdown. In a political environment where each side starts with 45%, and Obama only got 53% of the vote, it is near impossible to win by 12% points. To be up by 12, means Obama is at 56, and that is highly, highly unlikely. That means Pew is screwing around with their crosstabs, which I literally could not find after just skimming the release yet again.

Obama is not doing better in this election than he did in 2008 for various reasons that I am not getting into, and he did not win women by 20 points in 2008, and there is little reason to believe that he will this time.

milcus on March 30, 2012 at 4:28 PM

Fake conservative Church Lady Rick is busy fight Satan in cheeseland.

ObamatheMessiah on March 30, 2012 at 4:32 PM

I agree with you regarding swing states. There’s a case to be made that swing states should be over-weighted no matter how they voted in the last presidential election.

EddieC on March 30, 2012 at 4:07 PM

How do you judge what’s a swing state except for how they vote?

thuja on March 30, 2012 at 4:40 PM

thuja on March 30, 2012 at 4:40 PM

By the number of swingers.

Rusty Allen on March 30, 2012 at 4:42 PM

So we can elect Romney, who isn’t conservative and ignores the constitution, or we can elect Obama, who regularly wipes his caramel-brown ass with the constitution. What a choice. We swore up-and-down we weren’t going to be forced to pick the lesser of two evils, and here we are.

/PUKE

gryphon202 on March 30, 2012 at 4:46 PM

“My view is that we don’t know what’s causing climate change on this planet. And the idea of spending trillions and trillions of dollars to try to reduce CO2 emissions is not the right course for us,”

Mitt Romney Oct, 2011.

%$^#$* that sounds scary. /s

Gunlock Bill on March 30, 2012 at 4:47 PM

So we can elect Romney, who . . . ignores the constitution, . . .

gryphon202 on March 30, 2012 at 4:46 PM

I would ask for an example, but I know you can’t provide one.

Gunlock Bill on March 30, 2012 at 4:49 PM

And what % is voting for the “true conservative”?

Gunlock Bill on March 30, 2012 at 4:26 PM

Well the “true conservative” vote won’t fly over to the liberal side as quickly as the moderate/liberal vote will.
BTW, how many conservative “titles” has Mitt won? How many elections has he won? One, that’s it, just a four year stint? Well he must have been prepared for a second term, I mean he was almost breaking the 30% approval rating…
Now tell me, how did he do against McCain?
Now tell me, how many moderate/liberal GOP candidates have won election in the past 40 years? What was that number? None, yep your are correct…NONE!!
And aren’t you the poster who takes a post and changes the words around like some school child? You should try to use your own words to explain what you mean, rather than co-opting someone else’s words…but than you learned that trick from your prophet.

right2bright on March 30, 2012 at 4:49 PM

Ok, I get it.

You have no counter argument so you must resort to the fallacy known as ad hominem.

Carry on.

Gunlock Bill on March 30, 2012 at 4:28 PM

Good for you…normally you call people who don’t support Mitt Obama lovers or bigots…that’s a step in the right direction for you, just a mis use of a definition, but still better…

right2bright on March 30, 2012 at 4:52 PM

And what % is voting for the “true conservative”?

Gunlock Bill on March 30, 2012 at 4:26 PM

BLAH BLAH BLAH.

right2bright on March 30, 2012 at 4:49 PM

So, you can’t answer the question so must post a bunch of irrelevant drivel?

Gunlock Bill on March 30, 2012 at 4:55 PM

So we can elect Romney, who isn’t conservative and ignores the constitution, or we can elect Obama, who regularly wipes his caramel-brown ass with the constitution. What a choice. We swore up-and-down we weren’t going to be forced to pick the lesser of two evils, and here we are.

/PUKE

gryphon202 on March 30, 2012 at 4:46 PM

yep … but republicans must like losing …. they seem to be good at it …
esp. the presidency …. Dole, Ford, McCain, and now Romney …
I doubt folks even get it ….
R2B you nailed it …. I am just shaking my head … Well America … it was a good run …. don’t know how long it will last ….

conservative tarheel on March 30, 2012 at 4:56 PM

Good for you…normally you call people who don’t support Mitt Obama lovers or bigots…that’s a step in the right direction for you, just a mis use of a definition, but still better…

right2bright on March 30, 2012 at 4:52 PM

I am giving him a benefit of a doubt that he is NOT a closed minded MORON BIGOT like you. At least until he proves otherwise as you have done.

Gunlock Bill on March 30, 2012 at 4:57 PM

I doubt folks even get it ….

conservative tarheel on March 30, 2012 at 4:56 PM

Believe me, we get it. We have no recourse, but we get i. I think the best we can do now is to continue to hold Mitt’s feet to the fire in 2012 and beyond so he has to continue to pretend to be conservative.

gryphon202 on March 30, 2012 at 5:00 PM

I am giving him a benefit of a doubt that he is NOT a closed minded MORON BIGOT like you. At least until he proves otherwise as you have done.

Gunlock Bill on March 30, 2012 at 4:57 PM

That, my erstwhile “conservative” friend, is an ad hominem. :)

gryphon202 on March 30, 2012 at 5:00 PM

Wow, Gunlock, you’re a graduate from the Alan Grayson School of Grace and Charm, huh? You are to recruiting voters for Romney as Bill Maher is to comedy.

Where did you used to post before the last Open Registrations? Daily Kos?

kingsjester on March 30, 2012 at 5:01 PM

Romney had an NRA rating of B.

http://www.nrapvf.org/ELECTIONS/State.aspx?y=2002&State=ma#GOVERNOR

Sorry, you must be a member to see it.

As a comparison, when Mike Huckabee ran for the U.S. senate in 1992, he received a B- rating in the Guns & Ammo magazine’s Nov 1992 Voting Guide.

Gunlock Bill on March 30, 2012 at 5:01 PM

Romney had an NRA rating of B.

http://www.nrapvf.org/ELECTIONS/State.aspx?y=2002&State=ma#GOVERNOR

Sorry, you must be a member to see it.

As a comparison, when Mike Huckabee ran for the U.S. senate in 1992, he received a B- rating in the Guns & Ammo magazine’s Nov 1992 Voting Guide.

Gunlock Bill on March 30, 2012 at 5:01 PM

Romney’s NRA rating of “B” wasn’t as good as Stephanie Herseth-Sandlin’s consistent “A” rating. Nevermind the fact that Herseth-Sandlin took loads of money every election cycle from EMILY’s List. What does that have to do with Romney? Not much, except that it takes more for me to consider someone “conservative” than a fairly good NRA rating.

gryphon202 on March 30, 2012 at 5:03 PM

Where did you used to post before the last Open Registrations? Daily Kos?

kingsjester on March 30, 2012 at 5:01 PM

Townhall.com

Gunlock Bill on March 30, 2012 at 5:03 PM

How do you judge what’s a swing state except for how they vote?

thuja on March 30, 2012 at 4:40 PM

Interesting question, and one that I was noodling around with recently. Any criteria would wind up being somewhat subjective, but for example, you could define swing states as ones where the average two-party vote over the last three to four election cycles is closer than 4%, or where the state has actually awarded its electoral votes to both parties over that period.

Using the percentage rules Indiana, Florida, North Carolina and Ohio would all be swing states. Using the split vote system, you could add Nevada, Colorado, and Virginia. So maybe we should do both.

Then the rule could be that swing states get the same bonus that red states do, i.e. 4.5 delegates + 60% of their electoral votes (rounding up). Red states would still carry some additional weight, because they would be likely to get more of the bonuses for governor, senator, majority House delegation, state legislatures, etc. But Ohio, for example, would have received an additional 15 delegates, Florida an extra 22 (well, 11 after the penalty), etc.

Anyway, that would be one way of looking at it.

HTL on March 30, 2012 at 5:04 PM

Townhall.com

Gunlock Bill on March 30, 2012 at 5:03 PM

Really? Are you sure it wasn’t Daily Kos?

kingsjester on March 30, 2012 at 5:05 PM

Wow…that’s a lot closer than I thought it would be.

Jaibones on March 30, 2012 at 5:06 PM

Really? Are you sure it wasn’t Daily Kos?

kingsjester on March 30, 2012 at 5:05 PM

Since you seem determined to prove that he’s a witch, why don’t you just throw him in the water and see if he floats? No wait, he turned you into a newt, didn’t he?

HTL on March 30, 2012 at 5:07 PM

Gunlock Bill on March 30, 2012 at 3:04 PM

Good lord, you really are in love with this guy aren’t you? Its a pity, you had such a good name too. In another life, we coulda been friends…

Buckshot Bill on March 30, 2012 at 3:07 PM

Wow, haven’t seen this many guns since John Kerry Elmer Fudd went to Ohio in 2004. lol

Del Dolemonte on March 30, 2012 at 5:08 PM

Grover Norquist (NRA Board Member)

Guns and Romney. Romney’s position on guns is flawless … I went and worked with the governor back when the D’s were planning on passing a restriction on 50 caliber rifles in Massachusetts. And he committed to me that he would oppose any restrictions. I’m on the 50 caliber association, not the machine gun guys, just the single shot 50 caliber. Although if we set up one of the other associations I’d volunteer, no, its lots of fun and people keep wanting to restrict these things of beauty, but people don’t appreciate art in this country, that’s the problem. So, his position is fine.

Gunlock Bill on March 30, 2012 at 5:09 PM

Grover Norquist (NRA Board Member)

Guns and Romney. Romney’s position on guns is flawless … I went and worked with the governor back when the D’s were planning on passing a restriction on 50 caliber rifles in Massachusetts. And he committed to me that he would oppose any restrictions. I’m on the 50 caliber association, not the machine gun guys, just the single shot 50 caliber. Although if we set up one of the other associations I’d volunteer, no, its lots of fun and people keep wanting to restrict these things of beauty, but people don’t appreciate art in this country, that’s the problem. So, his position is fine.

Gunlock Bill on March 30, 2012 at 5:09 PM

I didn’t realize a “B” grade is “flawless.” How do you think Romney’s “B” stacks up against Stephanie Herseth-Sandlin’s “A”?

gryphon202 on March 30, 2012 at 5:10 PM

HTL on March 30, 2012 at 5:07 PM

Hardly. All other posters can judge by is your writing.

kingsjester on March 30, 2012 at 5:11 PM

Really? Are you sure it wasn’t Daily Kos?

kingsjester on March 30, 2012 at 5:05 PM

As if everyone that is supporting Romney at this point must be a liberal.

Your line of questioning says more about you than it does about me.

Gunlock Bill on March 30, 2012 at 5:12 PM

Gunlock Bill on March 30, 2012 at 5:12 PM

Yep. It says I’m a Conservative.

kingsjester on March 30, 2012 at 5:14 PM

I didn’t realize a “B” grade is “flawless.” How do you think Romney’s “B” stacks up against Stephanie Herseth-Sandlin’s “A”?

gryphon202 on March 30, 2012 at 5:10 PM

I don’t have to defend the NRA ratings nor the statements of NRA Board Members, or any “perceived” inconsistencies between the two.

Gunlock Bill on March 30, 2012 at 5:14 PM

Yep. It says I’m a Conservative.

kingsjester on March 30, 2012 at 5:14 PM

NOPE! It says you aren’t very bright.

Gunlock Bill on March 30, 2012 at 5:15 PM

As if everyone that is supporting Romney at this point must be a liberal.

Your line of questioning says more about you than it does about me.

Gunlock Bill on March 30, 2012 at 5:12 PM

It’s the people that aren’t supporting Romney that are going to keep him honest. If you trust Romney, he has nothing to gain by pandering to you.

gryphon202 on March 30, 2012 at 5:16 PM

HTL on March 30, 2012 at 5:07 PM

Well we did do the nose, and the hat.

Rusty Allen on March 30, 2012 at 5:17 PM

gryphon202 on March 30, 2012 at 5:10 PM

I don’t have to defend the NRA ratings nor the statements of NRA Board Members, or any “perceived” inconsistencies between the two.

Gunlock Bill on March 30, 2012 at 5:14 PM

That’s because you can’t. But it really makes no difference to me. Most of the most diehard hunters and target shooters I know refuse to join the NRA for one reason or another. There are other ways to support gun rights that don’t involve flaunting an interest group’s opinion of oneself for political gain.

gryphon202 on March 30, 2012 at 5:18 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4