Santorum surges into the lead (National poll Santorum 38%, Romney 23%)

Public Policy Polling ^ | 02/11/2012 | Public Policy Polling

[Rational Thought]

Riding a wave of momentum from his trio of victories on Tuesday Rick Santorum has opened up a wide lead in PPP's newest national poll. He's at 38% to 23% for Mitt Romney, 17% for Newt Gingrich, and 13% for Ron Paul.

Part of the reason for Santorum's surge is his own high level of popularity. 64% of voters see him favorably to only 22% with a negative one. But the other, and maybe more important, reason is that Republicans are significantly souring on both Romney and Gingrich. Romney's favorability is barely above water at 44/43, representing a 23 point net decline from our December national poll when he was +24 (55/31). Gingrich has fallen even further. A 44% plurality of GOP voters now hold a negative opinion of him to only 42% with a positive one. That's a 34 point drop from 2 months ago when he was at +32 (60/28).

[musicman]

Don't Be Fooled In 2012!!
Keep Up With The REAL News
Conservatives Need From FR!!
Please Help Keep It Going !!

Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!

[moehoward]

"For those of us who will never support Romney as a nominee, this is great news."

It is indeed. Newt needs to stay in if for no other reason than having a fail-safe. I'm still hoping he'll build up some more steam and win AZ.

If not, I can live with Santo. I figure it'll be like Bush without the Texas twang.

[C. Edmund Wright]

You make some good points, but my calculus was this.

Newt has a lot more talent than Santorum and has the ability off the cuff to actually decisively win arguments and change minds. Santorum simply does not.

Newt’s actual legislative accomplishments are slightly more conservative but WAY MORE significant than Santorum’s.

Santorum’s whole strategy was to niche politic in Iowa and fly under the radar and gain momentum among a tiny swath of voters and then hope it gets magnified in the press. It’s worked, but it’s cynical and there is no way in hell he can mobilize large numbers of people. HIs “four states” were all tiny populations. He “niched” it. That’s all he can do.

He’d be a decent President with the right congress. He’d be a wimpy Mr. Rogers disaster as a nominee though.

[maddog55]

I don’t think America can survive another 4 years of Obama so your rebuilding from ashes would probably be a reality in 2016.

[Tribune7]

I don't want either to drop out. I want a brokered convention with Paul Ryan winding up as the nominee.

Also with two stomachable conservatives in the race it is harder for Mitt and the main streamers to concentrate their fire.

[C. Edmund Wright]

Winners? That’s to be determined. But to say there’s not a fighter in the pack - well - explains why you were attracted to Huntsman perhaps.

[GulfBreeze]

You should REALLY work on taking things in context and trying to actually deal with what is written. Not the If statement leading in...

[cookcounty]

Lesson for Rick:

If you go negative, you will drop like a rock.

[FreeReign]

Santorum isn't a liberal by any stretch. That said Santorum doesn't understand the Constitution.

Santorum:

"The rights within our Constitution, they are not unlimited rights. There is and can be limitations on them...There are limitations to all freedoms. There are not absolute rights."

And he's no Ronald Reagan....

Santorum:

“This whole idea of personal autonomy, well I don’t think most conservatives hold that point of view. Some do. They have this idea that people should be left alone, be able to do whatever they want to do, government should keep our taxes down and keep our regulations low, that we shouldn’t get involved in the bedroom, we shouldn’t get involved in cultural issues. You know, people should do whatever they want. Well, that is not how traditional conservatives view the world and I think most conservatives understand that individuals can’t go it alone.”

Reagan:

"I'm convinced that today the majority of Americans want what those first Americans wanted: A better life for themselves and their children; a minimum of government authority. Very simply, they want to be left alone in peace and safety to take care of the family by earning an honest dollar and putting away some savings. This may not sound too exciting, but there is something magnificent about it. On the farm, on the street corner, in the factory and in the kitchen, millions of us ask nothing more, but certainly nothing less than to live our own lives according to our values — at peace with ourselves, our neighbors and the world.

And Rick's long voting record, voting liberal on a bunch of issues confirms his above philosophy.

You Rick'sters have really screwed it up for all of us.

[Craftmore]

Wow,,,how do you explain Ben Franklin then?

[C. Edmund Wright]

Another flaw I see in your calculus - but I respect your opinion nonetheless - is that you are measuring “negatives” and not balancing them with positives.

Sure, Newt has more negatives than Santorum. He’s been in the public eye much longer and he’s written and spoken way more. He has more good, more bad, more in between. I just don’t think a total negative count is valid unless you measure it against a total positive count. Newt has way more of both, and IMO a better plus to minus ratio.

Then there’s one other thing: Newt, nor his campaign nor any Newt supporter that I’ve met has deigned to claim a mantle as pious and pure as Rick has himself claimed in the debates. It’s just phony. Thus, Rick’s capitulation to political realities is a mark against him because HE CLAIMS HE HAS NEVER DONE SO. It’s just not true.

Newt’s whole approach is more real - warts and all. Rick’s is a facade, a fake, with a good dose of sanctimony to boot. Goody two shoes are nauseating to me, especially when they ain’t that goody when you dig down.

And they rarely are.

[Flint]

Don’t think you need worry, Gingrich won’t take a VP slot and sit idle for four years.

[Rational Thought]

Look, you're contradicting yourself.

No Democrat ran in ‘06 supporting the war, at least none that I can think of. To say that Santorum ran a Democrat Lite campaign is also to say that he ran against the Iraq War.

The two remaining candidates whom I could vote for are both individuals I consider decent representatives of Conservatism. You might feel more strongly about Gingrich, and that's fine. I view Santorum as being more electable.
Regardless, the truly important point of this latest poll (and others) isn't (to me) who's leading, it's who's failing, and I'm referring to Mitt Romney.

One battle at a time.

[C. Edmund Wright]

Sorry, I don’t follow.

[alstewartfan]

Holy CRAP!!!!! What great news to wake up to today. I think that Rick really has a chance. Apparently, I was right about the power of Santorum’s message. I am truly excited that he really has a chance to WIN!!!!! Bob

[erlayman]

There are ‘fighters’ in the lot but the first priority is obviously winning and he was nothing if not a principled conservative that could get things done with 100% chance to get elected.

[GulfBreeze]

Well the coming months will tell. In the meantime, look at my analysis of Romney and use it or internalize it in your stuff to whatever degree you think its useful.

In the meantime Santorum has raised 3 million bucks, Is double Gingrich in the polls, and is calculating his next wins. Gingrich has to stop sliding before he can start rising.

My guess is there will be a brokered convention but things could coalesce anytime around anyone of these four.

[Irish Eyes]

The way this is going Paul will have the next surge.

After a few months there will be a republican convention. Where they will decide to elect Rick Perry as their nominee.

[alstewartfan]

Riii....ght! Mondale’s message: “I am ready to be President!” “I WILL raise your taxes!” Very, very similar to what Rick Santorum is saying today. *cough* Bob

[WPaCon]

He’s not even that good of a conservative, except on a few issues, where he’s very conservative.

How can you justify that statement?

He's extremely socially conservative.

He's conservative on nation defense issues.

He's conservative on gun issues.

He's not extremely conservative on fiscal issues, but he is still conservative. His AFL-CIO career rating is 13%. For comparison, through 2009, Ron Paul's was 19%.

So, yeah, he is a good conservative.