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

Skip to comments.

Romney up big in Illinois (PPP- Rom 45 San 30 NEWT 12)
PPP ^ | 3-18-12 | PPP

Posted on 03/18/2012 10:14:19 PM PDT by VinL

Mitt Romney is headed for a blowout victory in Illinois on Tuesday. He leads with 45% to 30% for Rick Santorum, 12% for Newt Gingrich, and 10% for Ron Paul.

Romney's particularly strong among voters who live in suburban areas (50-29) and with those who live in urban areas (46-23). But he's even running slightly ahead of Santorum, 38-36, with folks who identify as living in rural parts and that strength with a group of voters he hasn't tended to do that well with is why he's looking at such a lopsided margin of victory.

Romney tends to win moderates in most states and Santorum usually win voters describing themselves as 'very conservative.' The swing group in the Republican electorate is those identifying as just 'somewhat conservative.' Romney is winning those folks by a whooping 60-20 margin in Illinois. Romney's also benefiting from a 52-28 advantage with seniors. We've tended to find Santorum a lot more popular with voters even in states that Romney has won over the last six weeks, but that's not the case in Illinois. Romney's favorability is 57/34, about par for the course of where we've found him this year. Santorum's at only 55/36, much worse numbers than we've seen for him most places in the last couple months, and suggesting that GOP voters are starting to sour on him a little bit.

Santorum's winning the group he tends to do well with- Tea Partiers, Evangelicals, and those describing themselves as 'very conservative.' But he's not winning them by the kinds of wide margins he would need to take an overall victory- he's up only 8 with Tea Party voters and 10 with Evangelicals, groups he needs to win by more like 25 points with to hope to win in a northern state. Santorum can't blame Gingrich for his troubles in Illinois either. If Newt was out Romney would still have an 11 point advantage on Santorum, 45-34.


TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events; US: Illinois
KEYWORDS: gingrich; il2012; illinois; santorum
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-144 next last
To: gunsequalfreedom
Not only are we going to be stuck with Romney, we are going to be stuck with Obama.

Yes, but the concession speech will be very graceful. Romney is already talking about how much better the economy is doing. I'm not sure why he's even bothering to run.

A disaster all-around.
101 posted on 03/19/2012 9:43:09 AM PDT by Deo volente (God willing, America will survive this Obamination.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: citizen

I agree. I would like to see a Tea Party backed candidate as v-p. You set up an interesting scenario—a one term Repub prez to do the “dirty work” that needs to be done. It requires getting more Tea Party backed Senators and Reps elected to push him in that direction.


102 posted on 03/19/2012 9:47:08 AM PDT by Fu-fu2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: JediJones

Regardless of who pulled what issue off his website it’s HIS responsibility to direct the conversation. He had a national audience, free publicity...NATIONAL free publicity. He could have said something that acknowledged the importance of morality and enforcing the law, then added BUT right now the American people are hurting, etc. It’s not that I or anyone else thinks morality isn’t important but he had a chance to talk to the American people about what he’s going to do turn the economy around. Of course we expect him to enforce the laws on the books. The problem is, someone who wants to be president has to know how to control a conversation and talk about 1st priorities. How I feel or how you feel about porn is NOT the issue. Even if a majority of the country agrees with Santorum about pornography, the family whose house is underwater, struggling to buy gas to get back and forth to work isn’t going to think, “Whew! Glad he’s going to do that!” They’re thinking, “but what is he going to do about lowering gas prices?”. Yes, he was asked about it, but he’s got to be smart enough to not get sucked in. THAT’S the point. I understand it’s at the bottom of his website but most of America doesn’t know that and doesn’t know much about Santorum (remember we’re political junkies). He could have been that candidate “with the strong moral compass who has great ideas for turning the country around”. Instead he’s the guy that wants to ban porn. Either he frames the message or the press will do it for him. As long as he’s been in public life he should know this by now.

Cindie


103 posted on 03/19/2012 9:53:06 AM PDT by gardencatz (I'm lucky enough to live, walk & breathe among heroes! I am the mother of a US Marine!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Deo volente

Obmitt Robama


104 posted on 03/19/2012 9:53:39 AM PDT by gunsequalfreedom (Conservative is not a label of convenience. It is a guide to your actions.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator; Jim Robinson

Newt’s people are against Santorum winning. That’s cool, they beleive in Newt, and are loyal to his campaign. And truth be told, Santorum isn’t that great a candidate or likely to be the type of hellraiser we really need to gut the beast, though he is light years ahead of Romney.

On top of that Newt has access to internals which may show his people breaking for Romney, so by staying in maybe he helps Santorum. (Newt may be getting a lot of support from a bloc which want’s an “electable” candidate. If he drops, they may go to Romney, because they think he will do better than Santorum against 0bama.)

All of that is fine so far, but we are coming to a point (if it hasn’t passed already) where Santorum will not be able to win.

At that point, Newt’s people need to vote for Santorum to keep Romney below 1140 delegates, and send this to the convention. We need to make clear that at that point, a vote for Santorum becomes a vote for “Neither Santorum or Romney.”

Our nation has one last hope in this election cycle. If we send it to the convention, we have a chance at the delegates selecting a highly electable Conservative of some sort.

I think God has shown us that when our nation hangs in the balance, He is not averse to diving in, and gving us the bump we need to make good things happen. We need to give Him a chance here.

Gingrich has said he won’t win outright now. That means if we don’t send it to the convention we will have Santorum or Romney.

The problem is we can’t wait too long for Newt’s people (and those unhappy with Romney) to join with the Santorum vote to keep Romney from 1140. There will be a sweet spot when we can act and still have an effect, and it will be passed quickly.


105 posted on 03/19/2012 10:07:34 AM PDT by AnonymousConservative (Why did Liberals evolve within our species? www.anonymousconservative.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: syriacus

Once again, Rino Romney wins a primary in a state which will go for Obama in Nov.

This is what is so important to understand. Romney is doing well where Obama did well in ‘08. Now who do you think will get those votes this time? (I don’t know. am asking what y’all think).


106 posted on 03/19/2012 10:46:29 AM PDT by Mountain Mary ("This is OUR country and WE will decide"... Mark Levin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: citizen

“have Romney do the very hard things that must necessarily be done”

Apparently you’ve been drinking the Romnuts kool-aid, citizen.
Don’t count on the Massachusetts Moderate to do anything even faintly resembling Conservative reform.
He’s an appeaser, McCain II, Obama Light, who would “reach across the aisle” and not give Tea Partiers any more time or attention than he gave his dog.

And look at Biden to know how much influence a Veep has. Biden’s only job right now is to attack Republicans so Bam doesn’t have to get his hands dirty.

The Massachusetts Moderate and his Ego would be in it for the long haul... and in 2020, who knows what the political landscape will look like? Could be a Rat’s dream if they have a majority in either the House and Senate or both.


107 posted on 03/19/2012 11:03:40 AM PDT by Mountain Mary ("This is OUR country and WE will decide"... Mark Levin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Magic Fingers
But what’s “morally right” has a wide variety of definitions by people of all political stripes. I think “wedge” issues could arguably be seen as costing Santorum as many or more votes than he gains...particularly by those who are bothered, rightly or wrongly, by the perception that he wants to legislate his particular definition of morality.

I could just as well argue that we should push for more big government socialist programs in our campaign because we don't want to lose the votes of people who are afraid we'll cut off their welfare bennies. Why you or me should argue against promoting conservative principles in order to get votes is a mystery to me. And you're darn tootin' the Republican party should be in the business of legislating morality. We want Roe vs. Wade overturned and we want a federal definition of marriage amendment for two things. We're not libertarians, thank God. Nor are we liberals. The desire of too many RINOs to saw off the social conservatism plank of the Republican party all of a sudden is insidious and dangerous and must be rejected if either the country or the party is to survive.

108 posted on 03/19/2012 11:16:26 AM PDT by JediJones (The Divided States of Obama's Declaration of Dependence: Death, Taxes and the Pursuit of Crappiness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: JediJones

I’ll vote for Santorum if he’s our nominee (although I find his pompous demeanor irritating), but if he makes his moral prescription for the country a centerpiece of his platform I think his chances of prevailing are non-existent.


109 posted on 03/19/2012 11:31:52 AM PDT by Magic Fingers (Political correctness mutates in order to remain virulent.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: VinL

Santorum outperforms the polling, ROmney underperforms a bit and Newt couldn’t get elected dogcatcher in a national election. Those are the cold, hard and cruel facts. And here’s another one, Romney is gonna be the nominee. I’m sure I’ll throw up a little in my mouth when I vote for him in the race against Obama but vote for him I will for all the usual reasons, number one being that there may still be time for the nation to recover though that’s a big “may”.


110 posted on 03/19/2012 11:38:34 AM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kennard
Mitt is doing to Rick in Illinois what he did to Newt in Florida: negative ads

They're such stupid ads that their success speaks ill of the average Illinois Republican. Knocking Santorum for voting for some bills that included Planned Barrenhood funding - while all Mittens did was run against Ted Kennedy with a pledge to be the most pro-choice senator in state history.

111 posted on 03/19/2012 11:54:56 AM PDT by JustSayNoToNannies (A free society's default policy: it's none of government's business.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: VinL

Newt get out now! Oh wait...that means Romney wins 51-36.


112 posted on 03/19/2012 1:00:05 PM PDT by trappedincanuckistan (livefreeordietryin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator

naps I hate to point out that Rick blew big leads in both Michigan and Ohio, and Newt withdrawing from Illinois would mean that Romney would win 51-36.


113 posted on 03/19/2012 1:02:55 PM PDT by trappedincanuckistan (livefreeordietryin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Catsrus
Good assessment. He're the reality:

Current Delegate Tracking

1144 needed to clinch, 1324 remaining

Candidate, Won, percent of remainder needed

  1. Romney, 521, 47.1%
  2. Santorum, 253, 67.3%
  3. Gingrich, 136, 76.1%
  4. Paul, 50, 82.6%

    If Romney is awarded all of Puerto Rico (23) and Santorum all of Missouri (52) under standard rule of winner take all if absolute majority is won, then the numbers are:

      Romney, 544, 48.0%
    1. Santorum, 305, 67.2%
    2. Gingrich, 136, 80.7%
    3. Paul, 50, 87.6%

      IOW, the trend is our friend. But the gap isn't closing fast enough. Yet.

      Things get even more bleak, however, if you add the 69 delegates of Illinois to the Romney column:

        Romney, 613, 45.0%
      1. Santorum, 305, 71.1%
      2. Gingrich, 136, 85.4%
      3. Paul, 50, 92.7%

      Santorum really needs to eat into Romney's total in Illinois to peel off at least a few delegates. Once you pass needing 70% of the remaining delegates needed, you are generally past the point of no return. Since some of the Illinois delegates are elected by congressional district, I believe Santorum still has some hope. But he needs to win at least 14 of the 69 delegates to stay under that 70% point of no return.

    Sure, it is mathematically possible for any of them to still win. Even if they hadn't won a single delegate, it would be possible to win by getting only 97% of the remaining delegates to be awarded. But what is possible isn't what is likely. The window of opportunity for Newt to put his ego on the shelf is rapidly closing.


114 posted on 03/19/2012 1:40:49 PM PDT by Vigilanteman (Obama: Fake black man. Fake Messiah. Fake American. How many fakes can you fit in one Zer0?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: jacknhoo
You forgot to mention that he opposed the Right to Work Act. The act that allows people to work without joining a union. The act that unions also oppose because it would dilute their strength. You forgot that he voted against a 10% cut in the waste going to the NEA, in fact he voted for taxpayer funding of the NEA.
Santorum may be a social conservative, but he is not a fiscal conservative. Right now I prefer a fiscal conservative.
115 posted on 03/19/2012 1:45:11 PM PDT by John D
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: PhilCollins
I read that, according to a few polls, if Gingrich quits, 60% of his supporters would support Santorum, and 40% would support Romney.

And that would put Mitt over the top. I am sure the same split would happen if Santorum got out. I guess the best thing is to keep everyone in, (even the surrender monkey) and hope for a brokered convention.
116 posted on 03/19/2012 1:54:45 PM PDT by John D
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: Lady Lucky
I think you missed my point. The point being is people like Donald Trump are running around saying how "Santorum was thrown out of his own seat, he can't win."

Well 2006 many Repubs were thrown out giving us the worst Speaker of the House in history.

Yes, Lincoln won because the Democrat party was split due to the Southern States, however most of New England which was where the majority of the population was voted for Lincoln.

117 posted on 03/19/2012 2:23:01 PM PDT by Dengar01 (Go Bulls!!! Go Blackhawks!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: John D

I agree that we should hope for a brokered convention. If that happens, the convention would be more suspenseful and exciting, causing more people to watch and hear the great republican ideas.


118 posted on 03/19/2012 2:52:02 PM PDT by PhilCollins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: AmericanInTokyo; napscoordinator
Romney's at 45. Santorum + Newt is at 42.

The result of what you advocate could be Romney at 49-51% and Santorum at 36-38% in Illinois based on multi-state polling which asked about a three-way race with Romney-Santorum-Paul only.

North Carolina is 31-27-20 (M-S-N), if Newt got out the most favorable expected split puts Mitt at 40, Santorum at 38. Santorum loses.

Alabama? Santorum is third, 34-28-33 (M-S-N), no Newt? Santorum loses 48-46.

If he's not within 2-3% of Romney on his own, he would lose even assuming the highest polled percentage, 57%, broke his way.

The way to stop Romney, if that's your aim, is for everyone to stay in and block him from an outright win.

119 posted on 03/19/2012 2:54:22 PM PDT by newzjunkey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: newzjunkey

If Newt endorsed Santorum, campaigned with him, and was announced as Santorum’s V.P., Santorum would get most of his votes. Also, the way the IL polling looks, Santorum could end up losing conservative districts in the South by a few points that could have been made up with votes from the Newtster. These guys are going to have to team up at the convention with their delegates anyway to win anything. Why don’t they team up now and form a ticket that might be attractive to more voters than they are separately?


120 posted on 03/19/2012 2:58:17 PM PDT by JediJones (The Divided States of Obama's Declaration of Dependence: Death, Taxes and the Pursuit of Crappiness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | 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