Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Numbers Suggest Santorum Could Be Romney's Worst Nightmare
Townhall.com ^ | February 17, 2012 | Scott Rassmussen

Posted on 02/17/2012 5:48:02 AM PST by Kaslin

In a campaign defined by Republican reluctance to embrace Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum has emerged as the latest not-Romney candidate to surge ahead. While it's impossible to predict what will happen in this volatile election season, the data suggests that Santorum might be more of a challenge for Romney than earlier flavors of the month.

The latest Rasmussen Reports poll of the GOP race shows that Rick Santorum leads Mitt Romney by 12 points, 39 percent to 27 percent. Newt Gingrich and Ron Paul are far behind. In and of itself, that's nothing new. The man from Massachusetts has at times trailed Michele Bachmann, Donald Trump, Chris Christie, Rick Perry, Herman Cain and Newt Gingrich in the polls.

What is new are the numbers from a head-to-head matchup with no other candidates in the race. Santorum leads Romney 55 percent to 34 percent. None of the earlier Romney alternatives could manage better than a toss-up in such a contest.

Those numbers show that Santorum picks up 16 points when other candidates drop out. Romney adds just 7 to his column. Santorum makes huge gains among conservative voters when others drop out of the race. Among non-conservatives, Santorum and Romney gain roughly equal amounts. For the first time, the numbers show that if one of Romney's challengers drops out, the other challenger will overwhelmingly benefit. Gingrich supporters, by a three-to-one margin, would vote for Santorum over Romney if that was the final choice.

Both Romney and Santorum are well-liked by Republican Primary voters, but Santorum has a slight advantage on this pointm as well. Seventy-five percent offer a favorable opinion of Santorum, while 66 percent say the same of Romney.

There is a huge passion gap favoring Santorum, though. Forty percent of Republican primary voters have a very favorable opinion of Santorum. Just 18 percent are that enthusiastic about Romney.

The one thing keeping Romney afloat is that he is still perceived as the strongest general election candidate. For some Republicans, that's enough. But to survive the Santorum challenge, Romney needs to give primary voters something more, something positive. GOP voters want a reason to vote for him beyond the fact that he has the most money and the best organization.

Team Romney needs to acknowledge that Republican voters are not only strongly opposed to President Obama's agenda but that they don't think much of Washington Republicans, either. They want a president who would shake up the good old boys network in Washington rather than join it. To date, Romney's attitude signals that he'd be more comfortable leading the club than challenging it.

Santorum has a very different challenge. First, he must survive the onslaught of ads coming from the Romney campaign. Then, he must convince Republican voters that he can win the general election in November. Electability is still the most important factor for Republican voters. If Santorum can neutralize the electability argument, he could become Romney's worst nightmare.

The next primary competitions are slated for Feb. 28 in Arizona and Michigan. If Romney wins both states, the race will probably be over. However, if Santorum can pull off a victory that day, he will be far more than the latest flavor of the month.


TOPICS: Breaking News; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2012polls; freeperheadsexplode; prolifelikebush; prolifesantorum; rassmussen; santorum; santorumbush3; santorumprolife
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-144 next last
To: caww; P-Marlowe; wmfights
“hair trigger volatility”,... “cruel”,... “extremely arrogant”, ...“dismissive”,... “massive ego”,.... lack of character,... poor temperament, ...“unfit”, ...“He treats people really badly with arrogance and contempt”, ...multiple personas,.. vindictive,... nasty,... “a disaster”,... “abrasive”, ...“absurd”,... “phony”,... “rigid”,... “divisive”,.... “a sure victory for Obama”.

Every bit of your info is Romney Slime Machine opposition research that is totally unable to be verified.

Think about it: "arrogant"? I've met the man, and I disagree. Not even close.

How do you defend yourself against that kind of slime?

Earmarks I simply don't care about. I want as much of my tax money as possible back in my own district.

You have him being both "compliant" and "bucking the leadership". He backs Specter for the team, because Bush asks him to, and he's bad for that. He backs an increased debt limit because Bush asks it, and he's bad for that. He backs the Bush medicare prescription stuff, and he's bad because he does that.

No one can win against the Romney Slime Machine, and Romney is far more liberal. But, he knows all he has to do is introduce to conservatives a bit of "impurity" in perceived conservatism, and the conservatives will eat their own guy on Romney's behalf.

It's amazing how gullible conservatives are.

101 posted on 02/17/2012 8:35:12 PM PST by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Pray Continued Victory for our Troops Still in Afghan!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: CainConservative

I’ve supported Santorum since before Iowa.

I feel compelled to say it...he looks like Jerry Seinfeld.

Oh well, maybe Kramer would make a good Secretary of Interior or something.


102 posted on 02/17/2012 9:20:03 PM PST by Kevmo (If you can define a man by the depravity of his enemies, Rick Santorum must be a noble soul indeed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: xzins
LOL...Never thought I'd see a Freeper playing the "Blame Bush Game" for Santorums decisions. That is just too funny...really. Doesn't warrent even going there as I don't play the "Blame Bush" game. Every bit of your info is Romney Slime Machine opposition research that is totally unable to be verified.

First, it's definately NOT a Romeny link. Pennsylvanian's don't need Romney to show what we've known for sometime concerning Rickie...Here again is the link....shall I post other links as well just so you know? How many will satisfy you? Understand I live in Pa. Rick is no stranger to us....nor can he pull the wool over our eyes.

Read more http://hillbuzz.org/why-rick-santorums-pennsylvania-residency-scam-and-school-tuition-fraud-still-matters-and-why-he-cant-be-the-nominee-because-of-it-95754

Additionallly Santorum loves to sponser "spending" bills, in fact he won the prize for doing just that as follows:

In the 2003-2004 session of Congress, Santorum sponsored or cosponsored 51 bills to increase spending,... and failed to sponsor or co-sponsor even one spending cut proposal.

In his last Congress (2005-2006), he had one of the biggest spending agendas of any Republican -- sponsoring more spending increases than Republicans Lisa Murkowski, Lincoln Chafee and Thad Cochran or Democrats Herb Kohl, Evan Bayh and Ron Wyden.

Santorum also supported raising congressional pay at least three times, in 2001, 2002, and 2003.

In the years that followed his controversial support of Specter, Santorum has offered a series of revisionist explanations. Those explanations have changed several times, and none of them are consistent with what he said during the 2004 campaign.

..... The only explanation that is consistent is political expediency. .... Santorum was willing to jettison conservative principles when it suited him in 2004, and he wants to try to explain it away when it no longer suits him on the 2012 presidential campaign trail.

103 posted on 02/17/2012 10:28:35 PM PST by caww
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: Lazlo in PA

that would be me.


104 posted on 02/17/2012 11:20:33 PM PST by Segovia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: bassmaner
“With that said, the ‘issues’ link at his campaign site is a little troubling ... the first issue listed is not Obamacare, not energy independence, not even abortion, but ... pornography? Really?”

I thought you were kidding. Not the economy, not gas prices, not the violations of our civil liberties, but... pornography causes brain damage. Anyone who thinks the libs won't make hash out of idiocy like that is crazy. People are already mad at Obama for wanting to tell people what to read and download. That crazy crap will make Santorum look like the Ayatollah, and it's right there on his website.

105 posted on 02/17/2012 11:59:33 PM PST by Luke21
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Luke21

How many people are really going to get their back all arched over porn? People that weren’t already bent on voting for a second term of Obama no matter what?


106 posted on 02/18/2012 12:00:47 AM PST by HiTech RedNeck (Sometimes progressives find their scripture in the penumbra of sacred bathroom stall writings (Tzar))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: Luke21

Maybe porn damages brains and maybe it doesn’t, but its usage can damage minds, hearts, souls, and families. Something need not be banned to be warned about.


107 posted on 02/18/2012 12:02:32 AM PST by HiTech RedNeck (Sometimes progressives find their scripture in the penumbra of sacred bathroom stall writings (Tzar))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck

That’s his priority. It is the very stereotype of conservatives, a bunch of meddlers in people’s private business. We have lost election after election because of it. I couldn’t believe that’s his top priority with the whole country a craven mess.


108 posted on 02/18/2012 12:03:25 AM PST by Luke21
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck
That statement by Santorum’s campaign is idiotic. His campaign said it damages brains. That's flat goofy. I'm sure there's plenty more where that came from. The poster who pointed it out said it is disturbing for a crusade against porn to be the issue leading the campaign page. I concur. Your gas pump price tomorrow is far more important. Santorum is a minor leaguer and he will be an easy parody for Obama.

I'm pretty ambivalent here. I detest Romney, think Santorum is a loser, and reluctantly support Gingrich because that's all there is.

109 posted on 02/18/2012 12:09:06 AM PST by Luke21
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: RasterMaster

And your spamming is to promote a LIAR who is against a conservative with PRO AMERICAN accomplishments. Rick is a play tool of mitt, the one he campaigned for in 08. ONLY the dumbest of the dumb would fall for the liar/deceiver - slick Rick.

Slick lawyer politicians fooling voters - how novel. And voters falling for it - how novel. Nothing is new under the sun.


110 posted on 02/18/2012 1:17:57 AM PST by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: pgkdan

That’s a compliment coming from one who embraces evil - in fact, it’s to be expected for they HATE the TRUTH to be spoken. And it shows why you are drawn to the liar lawyer slick rick.


111 posted on 02/18/2012 1:23:04 AM PST by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: Luke21

Santorum is green and could stand to focus-group better.

That said I’m not sure he’s got bad advice on how to list issues. People who read a list of issues (or of anything) actually remember the last things on that list the best, the first things next best, and the things in the middle the least well. Of course it defeats that purpose if people go to his website, say eww this guy has an obsession with porn (even though not true) and read nothing more on the list.


112 posted on 02/18/2012 1:44:47 AM PST by HiTech RedNeck (Sometimes progressives find their scripture in the penumbra of sacred bathroom stall writings (Tzar))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck

>> Santorum is green and could stand to focus-group better.

He is indeed green. Maybe in 2020.

He’s gotta ditch the look of disbelief, or at least utter a WTF here and there. Sarah’s got that all figured out.


113 posted on 02/18/2012 2:02:30 AM PST by Gene Eric (Save a pretzel for the gas jet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Before you make that choice, study up on Santorum.


114 posted on 02/18/2012 3:23:09 AM PST by newzjunkey (Santorum has baggage too! Demand an inspection!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ari-freedom

Rick is mitt’s little side kick, both liars because they have no accomplishments. And will betray anyone when it’s for their agenda. He betrayed PA and they gave him the boot!
And now he’s betraying the country.


115 posted on 02/18/2012 8:29:32 AM PST by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: ari-freedom

Rick is mitt’s little side kick, both liars because they have no accomplishments. And will betray anyone when it’s for their agenda. He betrayed PA and they gave him the boot!
Leopards and liars don’t change.


116 posted on 02/18/2012 8:31:15 AM PST by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: presently no screen name

Newt is very Romney-esque when he claims that the “contract with America” was anything but cover for government to grow exponentially...which it did under his “leadership”. He even admitted it was a failure. Keep it up...the more people learn about Nootered Noot’s REAL record the better.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2813320/posts

http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=FlFxh2JychU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&v=eyeB36ctO5I&NR=1


117 posted on 02/18/2012 9:13:48 AM PST by RasterMaster ("Towering genius disdains a beaten path." - Abraham Lincoln)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: caww

I was one of the Bush-bots on FR during his entire 2 terms. He did ask for support in those things, and he did get it.

Except for Dubai Ports, whasername for the Scotus appointment, amnesty, and his unfathomable decision never to defend his war on substance rather than excuse, Bush got what he wanted from his compatriots in terms of budget and spending.

That’s why every bit of this navel-inspecting is simply Romney going after “conservative purity” because he knows it will have conservatives fight each other and give him a leg up. He’s used it throughout this campaign, and apparently, it’s still working.

You’re not going to find a “Romney Link” as you say to Time Magazine, but it’s no accident they suddenly came up with an out-of-context “dangers of contraception” quote from Santorum.

The coffee is on and the fragrace wafts through the house. The alarm clock is now ringing.


118 posted on 02/18/2012 9:47:34 AM PST by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Pray Continued Victory for our Troops Still in Afghan!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: PSYCHO-FREEP

Santorum is not perfect, but there is no doubt in my mind he was a strong Reagan supporter in his youth and if elected he’d probably govern very closely to the way RR did. As an aside, I believe he is the only candidate who would make positive steps to reverse the homosexualization and feminization of the military, which I would strongly support.


119 posted on 02/18/2012 12:02:28 PM PST by MSF BU
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: PSYCHO-FREEP

Santorum is not perfect, but there is no doubt in my mind he was a strong Reagan supporter in his youth and if elected he’d probably govern very closely to the way RR did. As an aside, I believe he is the only candidate who would make positive steps to reverse the homosexualization and feminization of the military, which I would strongly support.


120 posted on 02/18/2012 12:02:46 PM PST by MSF BU
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-144 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson