>> You miss one big...no, one HUGE HUGE factor. Turn out and intensity <<
Thanks again! And my apology. Don’t want to leave out anything you or some other well-informed observer might think is critically important. Simply trying to do “cold-blooded” and non-emotional analysis without respect to personal preferences.
So just give me your numerical estimates for turnout and/or intensity, and tell me how to fit those data into a model. I’d very much like to work thru the implications!
(But might not have time for a few days, due to an upcoming trip.)
I think it’s very hard to project intensity. There are too many factors. My point is simply this: Newt is the only one to demonstrate any ability to motivate turn out. He has also shown the ability to shoot himself in the foot.
Meanwhile, Mitt has demonstrated only the ability to depress turn out.
Santorum has only demonstrated the ability to win when there’s a hugely depressed turn out within the confines of a tiny voting population. The total votes cast in his “four states” equal far less than the total votes cast in South Carolina alone and those four totaled up equal about a fourth of the total vote in Florida alone.
The only way for the GOP to win is to motivate large turn out. Only Newt has that ability in my opinion. He also has the ability to mess it up too.
FTR, SC was up 35%. The campaign was liberal v conservative thanks to Newt in the debates. THATS THE KEY: make this about Obama and liberals, not about each other. But the ego’s will not let that happen.
That includes Santorum’s ego, something his supporters will not admit exists...