« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Red State, Blue State, Mitt State, Newt State

More Primaries By The Numbers

How has the popular vote differed in the 2012 GOP primary if you break out the states by their track record in recent presidential elections? It turns out that there are some distinct patterns, patterns that provide both good and bad news for a GOP contemplating a general election behind Mitt Romney.

Let’s start with the 13 “Red” states (i.e., the states won by the GOP in the last 3 presidential elections) to vote so far: SC, MO, AZ, WY, AK, GA, ID, ND, OK, TN, KS, AL & MS. Here’s how the vote breaks down, out of 4,052,212 votes cast:

Newt 30.4% (2 wins)
Romney 30.2% (4 wins)
Santorum 29.1% (7 wins)
Paul 8.5%

If we combine the votes for the 5 conservative and two moderate candidates as explained here*, we get the following:

Conservative bloc: 60.3%
Moderate bloc: 30.4%

Unsurprisingly, Romney has struggled in solidly Republican states, where the conservative vote has outpolled him 2-to-1, but the division in that vote means that he, Newt and Santorum have run almost in a 3-way heat, with Newt actually narrrowly in the lead (Santorum will probably close the gap on Saturday). The good news is, unless the Romney campaign really collapses, he’s likely to win most of these states against Obama anyway. The bad news is, there are a lot of down-ticket GOP officeholders who could suffer if Romney isn’t able to energize voters in these states.

Then we have the 8 Blue states (states won by the Democrats the past 3 elections) to vote so far: MN, ME, MI, WA, MA, VT, HI, & IL, in which 2,460,097 votes have been cast. Unsurprisingly, these states present a diametrically opposite picture:

Romney 47.3% (7 wins)
Santorum 32.4% (1 win)
Paul 11.5%
Newt 7.0%

Moderate bloc: 47.5%
Conservative bloc: 39.9%

Romney’s run much closer to a majority with voters in blue territory, who are accustomed to making a lot of compromises in search of electable candidates; Ron Paul has also run a lot stronger in these states, while Newt has been a complete non-factor with GOP electorates that tend to be mistrustful of the role of Southerners in the party’s leadership. That doesn’t mean there’s no market for conservatives, as the Pennsylvanian Santorum has actually done better in blue states than red ones.

Then there’s the 7 Purple or Swing states, each won by each party at least once in the last 3 elections. Excluding Virginia, which skews the sample because the conservatives were not even on the ballot, that leaves IA, NH, FL, NV, CO, & OH, in which 3,345,072 votes have been cast:

Romney 41.8% (4 wins)
Newt 22.9%
Santorum 22.5% (2 wins)
Paul 9.7%

Conservative bloc: 46.6%
Moderate bloc: 43.5%

These states – most notably Iowa, Florida, and Ohio – have seen some of the most heated campaigning of the race. The bottom line in the swing states may be the same as in the red states (Romney being outvoted by the combined conservative vote, but winning a plurality by the division among his opponents) but he has clearly outdistanced any one of his adversaries, as Newt was largely a non-factor in Iowa, showed poorly in Ohio and was not on the map in New Hampshire, while Santorum ran a distant third in Florida. And the conservative bloc’s lead in these states has been much more modest, with neither commanding a majority of the vote. There’s certainly a plausible argument here that – whether or not he can win over skeptical swing-state swing voters – Romney has at least shown that none of his remaining opponents is a consistent vote-getter in those states. Like most of Romney’s arguments for the nomination, this is more about the weakness of his opponents than his own strengths.

Finally, there’s the vote in the territories (Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and the Northern Mariana Islands), in which 113,014 votes have been cast:

Romney 87.8% (2 wins)
Santorum 8.5%
Newt 2.2%
Paul 1.4% (1 win)

Not much use breaking these out further; Romney’s campaign steamrolled the other candidates in these jurisdictions, but none of them vote in November. In theory, combined with Romney’s vastly improved showing this year among Florida’s Hispanic primary voters, his overwhelming win in Puerto Rico might seem to indicate that despite Romney’s current hardline immigration rhetoric** he may be on a path to do much better with Hispanic voters than I have feared. On the other hand, nothing in the general election polling would seem to support that view; neither Puerto Rican Republicans nor Cuban-American Florida Republicans seem to be all that representative of Hispanic swing voters in places like Colorado and Nevada.

* – After Saturday’s Louisiana primary, the last state voting in March – or perhaps after the first April votes – I’ll do a more complete update of my running tally of the popular vote in the 2012 primaries, see here and here

** – As opposed to his positions on immigration before 2007, when he supported the McCain-Kennedy immigration bill and a path to legalization, see here, here, here and here and here.

COMMENTS

  • Adjoran

    There isn’t a paper’s width of difference the positions of the three candidates. The only argument about who is more “conservative” involveds who has held the positions longests and most consistently.

    By that standard, Reagan could not have been the “conservative” choice.

    Popularity among evangelical Christians does NOT make you more conservative than anyone else just because they are willing to overlook the apostasies on your own record.

    • Adjoran

      Gremlins, probably.

    • General_Confusion

      Romney: Rock Solid Progressive LIBERAL (aka Not conservative at all)
      Santorum: Social Conservative, Big Government Supporter and Spender (Conservative if you only consider the social leg)
      Newt: Part Time Conservative, Easily buys into Leftist cause de jour (Conservative when he wants to be, not so if the liberal line sounds cool)

      Sadly the bottom line is conservatives have been routed at the Presidential level.

      • General_Confusion

        n/t

      • renl57

        In retrospect,
        instead of putting all their chips on Perry, base conservatives should have made it known that they are endorsing NO ONE until after at least 3 debates were held–and that all GOP candidates should come to THEM to beg for their support.

        But over and over, base conservatives kept getting infatuated with one candidate after another before said candidate had been truly vetted: Perry. Bachmann. Cain.

        The Perry thing was tragic. His failure totally discombobulated the GOP base.

  • winning2012

    I’ve heard a lot of conservatives bellyaching about how Romney’s wins in the Blue States aren’t “real wins” because the state usually votes Democrat, but since when does a conservative Republican living in the Northeast not have a say in the political Party they’re a member of? Should we call it the “Dixiecrat Party” and wall off all GOP members outside the Old South? FYI, you can’t be President or control Congress with just the South.

    Where Romney hit a wall was with Evangelicals, who overwhelmingly live in the Old South, it had NOTHING to do with ideology or RomneyCare. I don’t believe for a minute that a Catholic Republican has radically different ideas about public policy than a Evangelical Republican, it came down to Romney’s faith, and even the Exit Polling in the South had about 1 out of 2 voters saying “it’s important a candidate has the same faith as I do” with Evangelicals overwhelmingly voting against Romney (even though Newt has the morals of Caligula and Santorum started his career as a pro-choice Republican)

    The narrative is wrong about Romney’s issue with the “base”, it was primarily about religion. Once you got outside of the Old South in actual primaries, Romney cleaned up because those voters weren’t so focused on his Mormonism.

    The point is, there was no huge debate about the direction of the Republican Party that made it go on this long.

    • renl57

      …when the GOP was a true 50 state party, with a vibrant Northeast contingent.

      Today, the GOP base seems willing to accept the GOP becoming a regional party, dominant in the South and Mountain States and capable of winning just enough other states like OH and FL to eke out a narrow Electoral College majority.

      The issue isn’t Northeast or Pacific Northwest conservatives. There just aren’t enough of those. The issue is whether the GOP base can live with loyal Republicans from the Northeast or Pacific Northwest who are just not as conservative as Southern Republicans, particularly on social issues.

      The furious drive to expel “RINOs” doesn’t give me a warm feeling there. “Expelling RINOs” translates in practice into expelling Northeast Republicans and Pacific Northwest Republicans.

      • General_Confusion

        They are constantly trying to transform the Republican Party into the Democrat party, why not skip a step go straight to their destination.

        What?s the point of a two party system if the Republicans continue on insisting on being the Democrat Echo party?

        • morrigan

          Romney, Santorum and Gingrich each have their flaws, but none of them is an “echo” of the Democratic party. They differ from one another mostly in the degree of vehemence with which they pronounce their fealty to conservative doctrine, and in their public persona.

          • General_Confusion

            I was referring to liberal RINO voters, but since you brought up the point.

            Romney:
            Obamacare Romneycare the blueprint for Obamacare
            More taxes More taxes, but call them fees
            Liberal Judges Liberal Judges
            Gay Marriage Gay Marriage
            Abortion on demand Abortion on demand, I even sent money in support!

            I could go on.

            And BTW I could give a what Mr. Etch A Sketch* is saying, his record is legion.

            Santorum and Newt have their issues as well but at least they have some conservatism in their record unlike Romney.

            * http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2012/03/21/nudge_to_the_right_produces_mitt_s_best_speech_yet_if_he_means_it

            … Is he sounding too conservative? (This is a typical left-wing media question.) Is he too conservative? It could hurt him with the precious moderates!

            Listen to the answer from senior campaign adviser Eric Fehrnstrom…

            FEHRNSTROM: Well, I think you hit a reset button, uh, for the fall campaign. Everything changes. It’s almost like an Etch-A-Sketch. You can kind of shake it up and we start all over again. There is a — a growing recognition within the Republican Party that Mitt Romney is gonna be the nominee, and there’s two reasons for that. The first is people see in him, uh, the capacity, uh… of someone who can lead on the economy. And secondly, they see someone who can defeat Barack Obama.
            .

            Boy won?t Romney supporters be surprised when he lurches to the left in rhetoric and deed in the primary to the *new* center which will be to the left of progressive liberal.

          • General_Confusion

            Romney:

            Obamacare *echo sound effect* Romneycare the blueprint for Obamacare
            More taxes *echo sound effect* More taxes, but call them fees
            Liberal Judges *echo sound effect* Liberal Judges
            Gay Marriage *echo sound effect* Gay Marriage
            Abortion on demand Abortion on demand, I even sent money in support!

          • morrigan

            None of the three principle candidates are an “echo” of the Democratic party. Not is Paul for that matter.

            You may not like them. You may not like Romney. But your not liking somebody does not mean that their positions are those of the Democratic party. Romney is not in fact running on “abortion on demand!” or “Three Cheers for Obamacare” of any of the other positions you attribute to him. He could be lying of course, just as Gingrich – who spent many years arguing for the individual mandate – could be lying about his current opposition to Obamacare. There is always an element of trust in voting for any politician. But there is no Democratic Echo on the Republican ballot.

          • Lynn Otting

            when it comes to who someone can trust. It is obvious that Newt believes and defends his positions based on conservative principles and it is obvious that Romney does not even know how to defend his positions with conservative principles. It is obvious that Newt has a record of conservative accomplishments while in office and it is obvious that Romney has a no such record. However, when average Americans vote for their President, they will vote based on their belief that the person they choose believes in American principles, regardless of party and that candidate better dang well know something…anything other than, I have a business background and I can fix this economy…oh, and you deserve to have me as your President.

          • morrigan

            “It is obvious that Newt believes and defends his positions based on conservative principles”

            I think it’s safe to say that politicians have a habit of adjusting their “beliefs” to fit what they see as the prevailing winds. I could easily give you a list of Newt doing just that in the not too recent past, but I’m sure you already know what I’m talking about.

            Nothing wrong with that, as far as it goes. The politicians I really dislike are the ones who DO have deeply held beliefs – deeply held liberal beliefs.

          • General_Confusion

            That IS Romney?s record! I am not making this stuff up.

            I?ll make this simple, Romney is lying, and his record as Governor shows you that he is lying.

            His own campaign staff keeps reassuring the press that he doesn?t mean what he says. It is ONLY for consumption for the ?rube? conservatives until he clears the Republican primary.

            Romney on Obamacare: Mend it; don?t end it (Hooray another permanent entitlement)
            http://hotair.com/archives/2011/12/17/romney-on-obamacare-in-2010-lets-repeal-the-bad-and-keep-the-good/

            Romney?s record on taxes: More taxes but just call those fees!
            http://money.cnn.com/2012/01/23/news/economy/Romney_tax_record/index.htm

            Romney?s record on judges: The more liberal the better!
            http://www.wnd.com/2012/01/romney-judicial-record-liberals-running-wild/

            Romney on Gay Marriage: Waffled away and paved the way for Gay Marriage today!
            http://www.npr.org/2011/12/12/143590615/romney-stance-on-gay-rights-issues-its-complicated

            Abortion on demand: Here?s some money, do some more!
            http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=3157749&page=1

            If you don?t think Romney is a Democrat echo with his record I don?t know what else to tell you.

        • http://redmerrimack.blogspot.com/ charliebravoNH

          I don’t agree with it but it is fact. Can you name the people who are trying to transform the Republican Party into the Democrat Party? I think we all should know who those people are. We certainly don’t want them around.

          • Lynn Otting

            Romney

    • runner12

      Many people on this blog and who live in the South ( as I do ) and who are quote/unquote “Evangelicals” did not vote for Mittens based on his policies, not his religion. Remember RomneyCare? You know, the policy that was the blue print for ObamaCare? That is a big sticking point for those of us who are Conservatives. Oh and the whole “flip-flopping” act Romney does every time he wants to get elected.

      Pardon me, but I like to know exactly what my candidate’s positions are before I vote for him and I prefer someone who believes in limited government. Mittens does not meet that criteria.

      Additionally, please dispense with the condescending notion that we in the South are all ignorant rubes ( as you implied ) and that our sole focus is on whether or not our candidate is a Mormon. For the record, I would vote for Sen. Mike Lee for President in a heartbeat ( a Mormon ) because he believes in limited government and fiscal sanity. I suspect that many in the South would feel the same as I do.

      If you do not think there is not a war for the direction of the GOP, I do not know what to tell you. But if you are on the side of the establishment GOP, maybe it is just as well that you keep your head in the sand. It will make it that much easier when Conservativea finally take over the party.

      • stumpy

        As a Southerner and Evangelical, I do not like Romney for the same reasons. He is not electable and has no core. He cannot realate to average people, which is the main cause of his lack of electability.

        I know lots of other Evangelical Southerners who don’t like Romney. None of them mention Mormonism as a reason. We largely don’t care.

        I am tried of know-it-alls trying to tell us why we don’t like Romney. You don’t know. Southern Evangelicals tend to be among the most across-the-board conservative Republicans, even more so than Northern Evangelicals. This is why we don’t like Romney, not his religion.

        • stumpy

          .

      • http://www.thestandardcandle.com Justin Spagnolo

        Cause if so I am a Mormon that is a bigoted southern anti-mormon… :D

        • Melody Warbington (rwm52)

          A little geography doesn’t matter if you’ve got your mind right. LOL.

        • runner12

          to be in the South Central area of the United States. Or God’s country, if you forget about Texas ( just kidding to all of the Texans, you know we love you all).

          So I guess that makes us Southern, right?

        • Xasteius

          I was raised there through high school but I always considered the South to start in Arkansas. Then again, that’s just my opinion.

    • SoFiMil

      I’m also getting very tired of your playing the religious card, and wondering if you’re a troll.

      http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2012/03/14/tuesday-nights-story-was-one-of-effective-campaigning-not-personality/#comment-21663

    • SoFiMil

      Hey, you didn’t vote for Santorum Winner2012? Hmmmm….

      I mentioned in the above linked thread. It wasn’t a question, but the fact you didn’t answer indicates you’re premise was faulty.

    • Melody Warbington (rwm52)

      You just keep pushing the same lame argument and smears and see how that works out for you.

  • NeoKong

    Obama will be the one doing that but not in a good way.
    People will crawl over broken glass to vote against him.
    The election will not be Romney vs.Obama.
    It will be America vs. Obama.

  • morrigan

    You seem to define all votes for Gingrich and Santorum as “conservative” and all votes for Romney as “moderate”.

    But in Arizona, one of the states you mention, Romney picked up 41% of self-described “very conservative” voters, compared to 36% for Santorum. In Tennessee a fifth of Gingrich’s support came from self-described “moderates and liberals”.

    The real picture is a lot more complicated than you are making it out to be.

    • General_Confusion

      You know John ?Me hates the Hobbit-zezss?* McCain. I?m thinking some ?Conservative? Arizonians think conservative isn?t what they think it means.
      *http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/176055–mccain-not-sorry-for-tea-party-hobbits-comment

      • aesthete

        Not saying that I agree with my fellow Arizonans about Romney, but they aren’t particularly unconservative compared to other states. I’d stack up AZ’s congressional delegation against any Southern states’ anytime.

        • General_Confusion

          We will need every conservative we can get!

        • http://www.baseballcrank.com Dan McLaughlin

          McCain won in large part because Hayworth is a clown, and possibly a corrupt clown. Which is, you know, the worst kind of clown.

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

            I’m not entirely a fan, but you have to respect that she’s one of the toughest Governors in America when it comes to standing up for her state vs Obama.

          • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

            Lord knows it would improve both states. I’ll even toss Arpaio in at no extra shipping cost.

          • acat

            Give me an excuse to see the Grand Canyon, Death Valley, and much of Route 66….

            Think they’ll be okay in a crate in the back of the pickup while I’m sightseeing?

            Mew

          • http://www.thestandardcandle.com Justin Spagnolo

            No text.

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

            Not sure if Brewer would be better or worse than the person who will be my Governor in a couple weeks: Bob McDonnell.

          • Scope

            n/t

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

            ..

          • Scope

            What part of VA? Hopefully not to NOVA with the libs and the DC crowd. Also, as disappointing as McDonnell has been, he can’t be as bad or worse than Jerry Brown.

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

            If it was good enough for Robert E Lee…

          • Scope

            coming from that neck of the woods.

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

            I’ve checked. I’ll have Democrats in the VA House and Senate, and a Democrat to the US House.

            But I’ll have future Senator Allen and Governor McDonnell. That’ll be nice change from Boxer and Moonbeam.

          • Scope

            is the future Gov. Ken Cuccinelli in 2013.

            If you are interested in a Virginia conservative site to read, Riley is usually pretty on top of what is going on when the legislative session is in. I believe it is on an extended session right now because the Dems. refused to work on the budget unless they got their demands.

            Living among the libs, you will be spared the robo calls from a new group of VA liberal women who are still steaming over the passage of the watered down ultrasound bill. I got a call saying that “my state Senator Bryce Reeves (R) voted for the invasive ultrasound bill, which has made VA the laughingstock of the nation blah blah blah.” LOL

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

            I’m keeping my 951 number. :)

          • aesthete

            The worst kind of clown is the evil clown.

            All joking aside, totally agree about McCain-Hayworth. I’m not too keen on Brewer, though — most of her successes can more reasonably be attributed to a) the fiscal conservatives in the State Senate, and b) the overwhelming pro-border security sentiment. Her proposed budget was seriously unimpressive and raised taxes significantly (it was changed at the bequest of aforementioned fiscal conservatives), and the immigration enforcement bill everybody loves was Russell Pearce’s baby — we didn’t even know where Brewer landed on that one until she signed the bill. She’s not the worst governor ever, but she’s not great or tough, either.

      • morrigan

        South Carolina sends Lindsey Graham to the Senate. Missouri sends Claire McCaskill to the Senate. Half the states on Dan’s list of “conservative states” are not conservative if we apply your rule.

        • acat

          The only reason a Red State has a squish or a Dem in the Senate is lack of a good challenger…

          Mew

  • General_Confusion

    You know John ?Me hates the Hobbit-zezss?* McCain.

    I?m thinking some ?Conservative? Arizonians think conservative isn?t what they think it means.

    *http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/176055–mccain-not-sorry-for-tea-party-hobbits-comment

    • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

      John Shadegg or Jeff Flake into running a primary campaign against him, either would have had a good shot at taking him out.

      And, Arizona is most decidedly not a “conservative” state. We have absorbed a ton of liberal Californians who didn’t leave their failed politics at the border and the rest of the state is largely more libertarian than conservative.

      • aesthete

        AZ is basically VT and NH in the 80s — conservative states that got swamped by demographic trends from their idiotic neighbors. We can fully expect to see it become CA Jr if these trends persist.

        TBH, I think our only hope is Hispanics moving up to the middle class and becoming another “white” group (sort of like the Jews or Slavic groups) with high birth rates, and quickly.

        • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

          Demographic determinism is a progressive lie.

          • acat

            Seems to be getting much more Boston-west…no?

            Not *as bad* as Boston, not yet, but .. rock-ribbed northeastern conservative yankees are a dying breed.

            Mew

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

            I can’t hear you over the sound of our Congressional sweep in NH last time.

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

            Nobody’s saying NH is changing due to the skin color of the residents.

          • acat

            Yes, that Libertarian project in New Hampshire seems to be bearing .. something.

            The “invasive species” asthete mentioned was Californians… so unless you’re counting spray-tan as a color …

            Mew

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

            aesthete claims demographic determinism will shift Arizona.

          • acat

            He’s talking – quite clearly – about the invasion of Californians.

            Mew

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

            I saw the bit about a ‘”white” group’ and I read it differently.

          • acat

            Don’t see how you get there either.

            Mew

          • aesthete

            As in, left-leaning professionals from blue states who get out of their states due to the job prospects or cost, and bring their high-cost ideology with them.

            The counterpoint in southwestern states would be Hispanics making the same progression as the Irish, Poles, etc and adopting “white” values, incomes, and voting patterns, instead of remaining stuck in the poverty trap. (BTW, there is evidence that this is, indeed, occurring.)

            NH (and Vermont to a much lesser extent) has some life left in it, but isn’t where it was at in the 80s.

          • aesthete

            To put it differently, I don’t believe in demographic determinism, and think that the delta wrt social mobility among southwestern hispanics will be in keeping with that of other groups which are today seen as white, but which were at one time seen as “problem” demographics.

          • acat

            Cheshire grin

          • aesthete

            I would like to say that I’m not trying to bring race into this so much as the integration of an ethnic group on the outs, into the fold of the larger American middle class. I really don’t want this to be misunderstood as some Pat Buchanan-like rant about “those blankety-blank ethics”…

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

            I don’t read you as being a Buchananite.

            But I see a lot of non-Buchananites who fall into the trap of thinking that “Hispanics vote Democrat, therefore Demographic trends favor Democrats in the southwest.”

          • http://redmerrimack.blogspot.com/ charliebravoNH

            is much more conservative than the Republican majorities that got swept out in 2006.

          • morrigan

            Tell it to Texas and California.

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

            You mean the one that elected some GOP members to border seats?

            Texas and CA are like day and night.

          • acat

            to keep their new Californian (or Illinoisan or .. etc.) neighbors in line…

            I’ve proposed setting up deprogramming camps …

            Mew

          • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

            And “border hopping Democrats” who lived in NH and worked in Boston were a reality and really changed the landscape of the state. Look up “Meldrum Thompson” who was governor and who was about three shades to the right of Attila the Hun. I doubt he could get elected to anything there today.

            The thing that sort of saved NH from total demographic hell is the fact that the legislature is only allowed to meet for something like 120 days every two years and the reps get paid less than a PFC. Virtually all spending in the state is determined at town meetings, which are absolutely frightening exercises in local democracy.

            The one constant was always if anybody dared to mention a broad based tax of any sort their body was found decaying in a well.

          • http://redmerrimack.blogspot.com/ charliebravoNH

            elected today in NH and that is unfortunate. I disagree with you about the boarder hoppers. The two most Republican Counties in NH are on the MA boarder with the biggest Democrat Cities and Towns on the Vermont boarder.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    Reading Dan’s well made posts on the popular votes this cycle, one might get the idea that there are different blocs of voters, the Conservative bloc and the Moderate bloc, and they’re voting for the candidates in their bloc. So that when Huntsman quit, Romney got his votes. When Perry and Cain quit, Santorum and Gingrich got their votes.

    That’s not true. There’s nothing that says that someone who has a Conservative Bloc candidate as his first choice, can’t have a Moderate Bloc candidate as his second choice.

    We know that at the start of the primaries, Romney was polling 25% nationally. It was something often hit at RS in fact: he had a ceiling. Some people took that to mean that as soon as the field consolidated, Romney would get swamped.

    Obviously, he didn’t. Dan’s numbers show Romney has improved since then, and Huntsman’s 1% didn’t do that alone. That’s because Romney was the leading second choice candidate at the time. So he improved from that 25% core of support, which I’ve repeatedly theorized to be a combination of Mormons, pro-aborts, and people who think a strong business record is important.

    Anyway, the key is, don’t take away from this post the idea that the electorate is split between Romney and not-Romney. It isn’t, and there’s no reason to believe that the exit of Gingrich (or Santorum for some reason) would put Santorum (or Gingrich) over the top.

    Romney would get enough second choice votes to stay ahead.

    • http://www.thestandardcandle.com Justin Spagnolo

      I think you’re correct, however, there were many layers of “2nd choices” that were eliminated by media narratives too early on… so I think Romney was possibly more 3rd ,4th, 5th, and sometimes, default “last” unless everyone else proves uninspiring (i consider myself in the default last category).

      The longer the process has been drawn out, the more likely the front runner builds momentum and support, while enthusiasm is lost for challengers that energize their bloc… bland food sells to more people, the winning strategy so far has been to let people pepper and season their own plate… but the more controversial, and/or talkative a candidate has been… the more their negatives go up. The more the negatives go up, the easier it is to win by carpet bombing media markets with negative ads to solidify the ‘negative’ impressions.

      I’m not saying it’s right… but it’s been effective enough to date for Romney’s campaign.

      • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

        He really was the leading second choice candidate in virtually every poll.

        • http://www.thestandardcandle.com Justin Spagnolo

          although I suppose “when” may make some difference on the question asked “who’s your #2?”…

          I wonder how much support for Romney has been “in the closet”… the candi-bots are out there shouting down anyone that provides even constructive criticism. It seems there is a LOT of perhaps hyperbole and sensational reactions to disappointment in getting a “not-Romney”… I even saw earlier today in Erick’s post that someone was ready to resolve by “the 4th box/catridge” defense if Romney’s the nominee, as if there are some ready to play Armageddon war games over this… as classy as is Erick of course recommended the suicide hotline in seriousness upon the condition of the commenter’s seriousness…

          I think Romney’s campaign seems to think the smoothing of the feathers will go easier than taming the rhetoric… but I’m not so certain… but I worry needlessly about all sorts of stuff. If i didn’t I wouldn’t blog :)

          It just seems if the “conservative base” were that determined to find a “not-Romney”… then why haven’t we consolidated around a “not-Romney”?… and I think the answer may be that the conservative base leadership (as good as it is) is shallow when it comes to inside baseball…in the Republican party… we’ve got to get more conservative leadership at all levels in the Republican Party…

  • Juggernaut

    opponent and will be weaker than Obama who is strong and has the position of money, power and the press. The other candidates could be ahead if the press including fox were not so corrupt and hellbent on nominating someone who meets the weak northeastern ideals of a candidate. We’d have better candidates if the media were professional and honest.