2012 republican presidential nominee III: can romney get santorum out of his hair?

Santorum, yesterday (got it from The New Republic):

"Look at the guys that we voted on when it was their turn. Jerry Ford, it was his turn...let's put up Bob Dole, because it's his turn...let's put up John McCain, because it's his turn. Those moderates who can win. Those moderates who can win -- according to who? According to the national media and according to the experts who don't want a conservative and don't want a Republican. Ladies and gentlemen, we win elections when our people are excited about who to vote for...I remind you, in 1980, when we had another critical election, when we had another Democratic president running the country into the ground...we had a choice in the Republican primary. We had the establishment who the money was behind and the mainstream was behind in the Republican Party and that was George H.W. Bush and he won Iowa. But when New Hampshire people, moderate New Hampshire, moderate to liberal New Hampshire, when they voted, the people here in New Hampshire said, we're going to vote for what America needs, not what we're being told to do by people with money and power in the Republican Party...and you voted for Ronald Reagan. And if it wasn't for New Hampshire, Ronald Reagan would never have been president. Think about what you're doing and the vote that you cast and the message you send out of New Hampshire."

Stepping back and speaking objectively, I've gotta say that's pretty good. If I were voting for Romney today, that would definitely give me pause.

ya but you can't assume people voting for romney are rational actors on any level

He overstates Reagan's peril in 1980 and Bush's popularity with the mainstream GOP.

Time for someone to hit back with an "I knew Ronald Reagan, and you are no Ronald Reagan."

Followed by the Spartacus-like "*I* am Ronald Reagan!" montage.

(xxpost) Probably, but wouldn't Reagan have been in serious trouble if he had lost NH? (Don't know, just asking.)

nothing santorum has ever said tracks with what is real in any way, so i highly doubt his analysis. exactly what went into reagan's win in NH in 1980 i have no idea, but who knows.

acc to him, base excitement exists antagonistically with appeal to 'moderates' and leaning independents, which is kind of a funny admission if you think about it.

hah xp to alfred

Reagan nearly derailed Ford in '76, no small feat against a sitting president. He certainly wasn't the underdog to GHWB in '80.

The lesson I drew from Santorum's little bit of froth quoted above was: winning Iowa is rather meaningless.

I know Reagan was the presumptive favourite, but I think there was some big campaign shake-up after Iowa, and I'm guessing the combination of that and two consecutive losees would have been a problem. (Checking, though, Iowa was close enough to be meaningless--32% to 30% for Bush--so maybe it was something of a non-issue.)

GHWB was the underdog in that scenario. Reagan had been building an organization to run for prez since the 60s.

the facts are both GHWB and Reagan were establishment candidates

no way GHWB would ever have been the nominee in '80 even knowing how history unfolded.

Reagan had more money and (obv) lots more name recognition, iirc.

He definitely crushed Bush in NH (50-23) and SC (55-15). But from Santorum's point of view, I think "And if it wasn't for New Hampshire, Ronald Reagan would never have been president" is a good way to plant doubts in NH voters.

Ladies and gentlemen, we win elections when our people are excited about who to vote for...

Find this pretty funny considering I don't think many Republicans are excited about Santorum. Self-identified conservatives (R & I) I've heard on CSPAN are way more excited by Paul, and the freeper fringe are salivating over unleashing the Newtron bomb on Obama.

(As Hail Marys go, I mean.)

Yeah--Santorum's calculus would be a lot more convincing if he had an ounce of charisma.

unleashing the Newtron bomb on Obama.

too easy to make Goldwater/daisy connection.

Apparently Stephen Colbert is polling better than Jon Huntsman in South Carolina.

ha

"The new Public Policing Polling survey also found that 67 percent of the GOP debate's likely voters think that 'only people are people.'"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IW-ftxIrhBc

The South Carolina primary will be the first truly meaningful moment in this phase of things. If Romney is soundly rejected by the first pack of southern republicans to cast votes, he'll def be wounded. I say chances are good that things will be genuinely chaotic heading into Super Tuesday.

*sigh*

u trying so hard to bleeve in Tinkerbell

The South Carolina primary will be the first truly meaningful moment in this phase of things.

lol come now, Aimless

romney is polling just fine in SC. republicans are coalescing nicely around the frontrunner and this thing is going to be over cleanly. sorry everyone!

This is going to be a boring election, gentlemen: Wonder Boy versus Flim-Flam Man.

oh i don't agree with that at all, it's going to be wisconsin nationwide, candidates notwithstanding.

Obama isn't leading the national equivalent of the anti-Walker forces, I'm afraid.

when's the last time two guys w/ such spotless bios faced off?

that reminds me, I saw eliot spitzer on the street today

If Romney does no worse than a very close second in both SC and Florida, then I agree that we can put 'paid' to the republican nomination. If he's blown out in SC or in Florida, or is pushed down to third place, even by a small amount, then we have a race to giggle about for a while longer.

mitt romney isn't walker, either! i don't think it matters.

nah it's over xp

But goole just pointed out that he's doing quite well in SC.

From a few days ago but you get the idea:

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57354122-503544/romney-surges-in-south-carolina-poll-has-nearly-double-the-support-of-runner-up-santorum/

but you see, if Romney BARELY manages to get second place he may have a shot in the imaginary tea party I am holding in my mind

http://www.disorderlyreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/T-Alice-TeaPartySmall.jpg

This is going to be a boring election, gentlemen: Wonder Boy versus Flim-Flam Man.

OK, I have to be the one to ask who's who?

It doesn't matter.

This is going to be a very entertaining election when y'all are freaking out over the electoral dead heat on Halloween. "For our children's sake, vote for the Detainer!"

OK, I see Nate Silver is calling it like this in South Carolina:

Mitt Romney 32.8%
Newt Gingrich 23.0%
Rick Santorum 22.8%

Which said result would be game over, imo. The remainder of the field would continue to squirm on the hook for a while, but they couldn't expect much longevity without a Mittplosion.

Newt needs Santorum to keep doing Blah things

I don't know if this is sound or not:

http://theamericanscene.com/2012/01/09/win-place-and-show

The thing is, it leaves a number of obvious people--Rubio, Christie, Ryan--out of the equation. (If Romney were to lose against Obama, I would think anybody connected to this whole nomination cycle would be tainted going into 2016.) (Herman Cain included.)

A Big Check From a Billionaire, and Gingrich Gets a Lift
By NICHOLAS CONFESSORE and ERIC LIPTON

A $5 million check from Sheldon Adelson underscores how a Supreme Court ruling has made it possible for a wealthy individual to influence an election.

idk if this is the guy or if they just used their stock tycoon.jpg

http://i1.nyt.com/images/2012/01/10/us/subADELSON/subADELSON-thumbStandard.jpg

http://thepoliticalcarnival.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/monopoly-man.jpg

This is going to be a very entertaining election when y'all are freaking out over the electoral dead heat on Halloween. "For our children's sake, vote for the Detainer!"

as you might say, "which one is that"

also lol Obama is gonna wipe the floor with Romney, if there's a "dead heat" on Halloween I'll eat my hat

really? does Mitt have his own drone arsenal too? xp

It could happen, I suppose. And maybe not.