Romney would do worse than Santorum in a General Election - [Vanity]

Vanity ^ | 1/11/2012 | Self

[PieterCasparzen]

Interesting map at electoral-vote.com as it pertains to Mittens and Santorum.

If things played out according to the map and NO "Strong Dem" states went Repub, a Republican would have to win the following "Barely Dem" states:

MT = 3 MO = 10 IN = 11 OH = 18 NC = 15 FL = 29

And then they'd need 17 electoral votes out of 4 states that are "weak Democrat":

NH = 4 CO = 9 IA = 6 VA = 13

Mittens would win NH, but that only buys 4.

Santorum was strong in IA, would stand a good chance there.

They have an advantage over other Repubs because Romney and Santorum both have home states that are strong Democrat.

However, PA has 20 electoral votes and MA just 11.

It's fairly safe to assume that they would both win in their home states.

So if things played out according to that map, Santorum would not need the 17 "Weak Dem" electoral votes if he already had 20 from winning PA.

Mittens, however, would have 11 from MA and 4 from NH, so he would need 2 more, meaning he would have to beat Obama in either CO, IA or VA.

Of course, I'm assuming that all the Repub states on the map go Repub against Obama, which for Mittens may be a tall order, considering the states are:

AZ = 11 ND = 3 SD = 3 GA = 16 SC = 9

So SC may well be a bellweather as to how well Mittens might fare if he somehow makes it past conservatives in the Repub primary.

FL may choose Mitt over Santorum in the Primary, but in the General election, IMHO, both would have a good chance of beating Obama there.

[PieterCasparzen]

Santorum would do better than Mittens against the current occupant in a general election, IMHO.

[DallasSun]

You make some good points but Santorum has said too many crazy things that are so far removed from main stream society, there is no way the average voter could ever vote for him. There was another article in today’s paper here in San Antonio this morning quoting some of these quotes.

[Astronaut]

No he wouldn’t. Romney will attract independents and undecideds who are tired of a Marxist and want a businessman in office. Santorum appeals to evangelicals and thats it. Social issues aren’t the hot button this year, the economy is. Santorum collapsed after Iowa because he only had religious support in IA. He’s not our path to victory over the Muslim Marxist, although I’m sure he’s a good man.

[Grunthor]

“appeals to evangelicals and thats it.”

Really? He’d lose Catholics to Obama?

[ilgipper]

I am not a Santorum supporter, but that just doesn’t play out in real life voting. Santorum is not a single issue guy who only appeals to ‘Evangelicals’. He’s a solid conservative on foreign issues and fiscal, too.

Additionally, a moderate Romney does little more to bring moderates to our side than McCain did 4 years ago. Those hugging the middle hardly ever pull in votes...it is those that present a clear alternative. Both Mitt and Santorum could easily beat Obama if they articulate a conservative alternative. The only difference is whether Romney would really mean it.

[Happy Valley Dude]

Really? He’d lose Catholics to Obama?

Obama won the Catholic vote in 2008: http://www.cathnews.com/article.aspx?aeid=9996

Santorum lost the Catholic vote in PA in his landslide 2006 loss: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/132228/pa-senate-race/kate-obeirne

Past performance does not point to Santorum being a sure thing with Catholic voters.

[PieterCasparzen]

You make some good points but Santorum has said too many crazy things that are so far removed from main stream society, there is no way the average voter could ever vote for him.

Absolutely not - this is the idea that the Republican establishment markets so that Republicans will nominate their guy, Romney.

In the general elections I describe, when independents saw this choice:

A) Obama

B) Santorum

Most would choose to vote against 4 more years of Obama.

Approximately 75% of Americans self-identify as Christians.

For a Christian to vote against a Christian candidate because they are "too Christian", and instead vote for a candidate who is a far-left idealogue, muslim sympathizer, anti-semite and who is bankrupting the country would require them to buy into leftist propaganda rather completely.

I doubt Obama would get more than 20% of the Christian vote.

[Utmost Certainty]

Santorum would lose handily IMO (though would make a decent VP).

Like it or not, his schtick is social issues. He’s cast himself into the role of a statist culture warrior. And while that may reverberate strongly with SoCons, it doesn’t independents. Plus, FiCons don’t care for Santorum’s record on fiscal matters.

[DallasSun]

That was not the idea of the “republican establishment”...that came from me. A voter...and a Christian. It is not a matter of his being “too Christian”.it is a matter of his being whacky. More whacky does not constitute being “more Christian.” Thank goodness

[PieterCasparzen]

He was not running against a White House occupant who demonstrates these ideas or agendas:

anti-semitism
anti-Christian
pro-muslim
anti-American
disrespect for the U.S. military

so Obama’s support for the homo agenda and abortion, part of standard Democrat fare that he has face before, is just icing on the cake.

Only the far left fringe of Christians will vote for Obama.

Even evangelicals are voting for Santorum.

(the news media has no clue of Christian denominations, their Christophobia makes all of Christianity seem like a blur to them).

Running against Obama, for someone with conservative credentials that are reasonabley reliable, would be like running against chairman mao and an ayatola all rolled into one.

[An American!]

Santorum has said too many crazy things
How about good ol' Mitt: "I purchased a gun when I was a young man. I've been a hunter pretty much all my life." (Romney's campaign later said he'd been hunting twice, once when he was 15, and once in 2006 at a Republican fundraiser
“I don’t speak for the scientific community, of course, but I believe the world’s getting warmer. I can’t prove that, but I believe based on what I read that the world is getting warmer. And number two, I believe that humans contribute to that. I don’t know how much our contribution is to that, because I know that there have been periods of greater heat and warmth in the past but I believe we contribute to that. And so I think it’s important for us to reduce our emissions of pollutants and greenhouse gases that may well be significant contributors to the climate change and the global warming that you’re seeing.” ~Mitt Romney, his view about global warming during a campaign stop in New Hampshire, June 2011

And the crazy flip flop:

”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, about his views on global warming during a campaign stop in Pittsburgh, October 28, 2011

“Don’t try to stop the foreclosure process. Let it run its course and hit the bottom.” ~Mitt Romney, defending banks and kicking people out of their homes.

“Corporations are people, my friends.” ~Mitt Romney, declaring that corporations are people in front of a crowd of real people in Iowa.

[DallasSun]

Absolutely. Mitt outdoes everyone when it comes to past whacky comments...Mitt’s main problem is his lying in my opinion. He is way too slick...slimey...smarmy.

[DallasSun]

And 20 per cent of the Christian vote? You cannot be serious. You are saying 80 per cent of the Christian democrats are not going to vote for Obama? You know that is not true.

[winkadink]

Romney received thousands of delegates in NH evidently. I’m hearing everywhere that he is the WINNER and ELECTED.

I am tired of NH deciding who will be the Republican nominee. We need to divide it into at least 5 states so people elsewhere can vote. (like Texas, Oklahoma,Nebraska, Colorado, etc.)

[Guenevere]

Perhaps you could source and reference these 'crazy things'......

..or is it more slander from the MSM?

[FreedomProtector]

Slick Mitt would set the conservative movement back for at least a decade.

[PieterCasparzen]

I may be wrong, he may get 30% - but anywhere near half of Christian voters voting for Obama is a pipe dream, IMHO.

Obama doesn’t even want the job, everybody but Axelrod and Jarrett is abandoning him.

[FreedomProtector]

This election cycle, Santorum would absolutely crush Obama in Pennsylvania and Ohio.

[DallasSun]

Has nothing to do with the MSM....He is on video saying these things...over and over...It is not difficult to research. Unfortunately. His comments are readily available for anyone who is interested in finding them.

[DallasSun]

Has nothing to do with the MSM....He is on video saying these things...over and over...It is not difficult to research. Unfortunately. His comments are readily available for anyone who is interested in finding them.