« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

The Momentum Finally Shifts, Slightly, To Romney

Resignation

Photobucket

I’ve previously looked in detail at the breakdown of GOP primary votes here, here and here; for purposes of this series, I’ve broken out the votes in three groups – the five conservative candidates (Santorum, Gingrich, Perry, Bachmann and Cain), the two moderate candidates (Romney and Hunstman) and the libertarian (Paul) – for reasons explained in the first post. In my second post, I detailed the signs to look for to see whether and when Romney would start putting the race away with the voters rather than simply plodding through the accumulation of delegates.

After the March 24 vote in Louisiana and Tuesday’s votes in Wisconsin, Maryland and DC, we can see the signs of that momentum shift, but only slightly, with stubborn resistance to Romney still continuing. Not-unrelatedly, we can see the collapse of Newt Gingrich’s campaign to levels even lower than he was getting in February, the last time he went a month without being on the ballot in any Southern state (recall that Newt was not on the Missouri ballot). Let’s start with the month-by-month running tally:

Candidate JANUARY % FEBRUARY % MARCH % APRIL %
Romney 1,071,678 40.5% 741,495 40.6% 2,181,105 37.6% 466,928 45.4%
Santorum 378,995 14.3% 692,296 37.9% 1,748,498 30.1% 358,668 34.9%
Gingrich 817,770 30.9% 160,360 8.8% 1,219,154 21.0% 72,509 7.0%
Paul 278,729 10.5% 215,023 11.8% 578,435 10.0% 111,129 10.8%
Huntsman 50,049 1.9% 2,817 0.2% 15,387 0.3% 6,851 0.7%
Perry 23,592 0.9% 6,293 0.3% 23,581 0.4% 1,041 0.1%
Bachmann 10,856 0.4% 3,480 0.2% 8,688 0.1% 6,054 0.6%
Cain 10,046 0.4% 3,555 0.2% 39 0.0% 0.0%
Rest 4,742 0.2% 1,528 0.1% 29,142 0.5% 5,416 0.5%
Conservatives 1,241,259 46.9% 865,984 47.4% 2,999,960 51.7% 438,272 42.6%
Moderates 1,121,727 42.4% 744,312 40.7% 2,196,492 37.8% 473,779 46.1%
Libertarians 278,729 10.5% 215,023 11.8% 578,435 10.0% 111,129 10.8%
TOTAL 2,646,457 1,826,847 5,804,029 1,028,596

This looks like a significant shift to Romney after the deterioration of his numbers in March, but as with his rough showing in March, you have to bear in mind the calendar: all three primaries on Tuesday were in blue territory (deep blue in the case of Maryland and DC, plus Santorum wasn’t on the ballot in DC, whereas Wisconsin has been much more favorable lately to Republicans, with Tea Party-backed Republicans Ron Johnson and Scott Walker winning statewide in 2010). The real dynamic remains mostly the same, with Romney’s supporters and opponents just not evenly distributed geographically. Let’s update the red/blue/purple numbers, previously broken out here, again excluding Virginia because none of the conservatives were on the ballot:

Candidate RED % PURPLE % BLUE %
Romney 1,273,119 30.0% 1,399,566 41.8% 1,630,401 46.7%
Santorum 1,270,691 30.0% 752,636 22.5% 1,155,130 33.1%
Gingrich 1,260,389 29.7% 764,660 22.9% 244,744 7.0%
Paul 357,218 8.4% 325,541 9.7% 392,965 11.3%
Huntsman 7,706 0.2% 55,362 1.7% 12,036 0.3%
Perry 15,892 0.4% 28,595 0.9% 10,020 0.3%
Bachmann 9,959 0.2% 10,390 0.3% 8,729 0.3%
Cain 8,677 0.2% 3,722 0.1% 1,241 0.0%
Rest 34,938 0.8% 4,600 0.1% 33,427 1.0%
Conservatives 2,565,608 60.5% 1,560,003 46.6% 1,419,864 40.7%
Moderates 1,280,825 30.2% 1,454,928 43.5% 1,642,437 47.1%
Libertarians 357,218 8.4% 325,541 9.7% 392,965 11.3%
TOTAL 4,238,589 3,345,072 3,488,693

As you can see, the vote totals for April are actually slightly more favorable to the conservatives in general, and less favorable to Romney, than the overall blue-state numbers. That’s not to say that Romney underperformed, per se; Santorum had been leading him in Wisconsin until the campaign and its related advertising blitz started there in earnest after Louisiana, and while Romney had won narrow primary victories in Michigan and Ohio, Santorum had previously won caucuses in Minnesota and Iowa. So, Wisconsin was far from a natural gimme for Romney, and his win there – while hardly overwhelming, with he and Huntsman still combining for less than 45% of the vote – can’t be ascribed solely to being on blue turf. Sean Trende went in more demographic detail the day before the vote to explain why Wisconsin could be a sign of momentum shift. On the other hand, Romney was unable to muster a majority in deep-blue Maryland, where John McCain won almost 55% of the vote against Mike Huckabee on February 12, 2008; McCain also won almost 55% a week later in Wisconsin. Thus, the break to Romney is happening at the margins, and is not yet the stampede that McCain was enjoying by mid-February in 2008, when a smaller bloc of social conservative voters were holding out for Mike Huckabee (McCain would go on to win majorities in Texas, Ohio, Vermont and Rhode Island on March 4 before Huckabee dropped out). The sense that Romney is winning over the objections of a majority of the party’s voters will not be dispelled any time soon; the best he can hope for is a determined resignation to put the primary slog out of its misery and move on to the general election.

The collapse of the Newt campaign may also be overstated somewhat here (he’s been getting clobbered in the blue states all year), but there really seems to be no life left in Newt’s cash-strapped operation besides protest votes (full disclosure: I cast a vote yesterday for Newt by absentee for New York’s April 24 primary, purely as a protest; I might have voted for Perry if he’d been on the ballot). Amusing, neither-here-nor-there detail: with Perry and Cain not on the ballot, Michele Bachmann actually drew more votes in Wisconsin than she has in any other state, 8 more than she got in Iowa.

Finally, let’s update the state-by-state tally – Virginia and DC are marked with asterisks because of the absence of major candidates from the ballot, Guam and American Samoa are excluded because I couldn’t find popular vote totals:

STATE (Date) Category Type Conservatives Moderates Libertarians
GA 3/6 RED Primary 67.1% 26.1% 6.6%
KS 3/10 RED Caucus 65.9% 21.1% 12.6%
LA 3/24 RED Primary 65.7% 26.8% 6.1%
MS 3/13 RED Primary 65.0% 30.5% 4.4%
AL 3/13 RED Primary 64.4% 29.2% 5.0%
OK 3/6 RED Primary 62.1% 28.3% 9.6%
TN 3/6 RED Primary 61.8% 28.3% 9.0%
SC 1/21 RED Primary 58.9% 28.0% 13.0%
MO 2/7 RED Primary* 57.7% 25.8% 12.2%
MN 2/7 BLUE Caucus 55.7% 16.9% 27.2%
IA 1/3 PURPLE Caucus 53.2% 25.1% 21.4%
CO 2/7 PURPLE Caucus 53.2% 34.9% 11.8%
OH 3/6 PURPLE Primary 52.3% 38.5% 9.2%
ND 3/6 RED Caucus 48.2% 23.7% 28.1%
FL 1/31 PURPLE Primary 46.1% 46.8% 7.0%
MI 2/28 BLUE Primary 44.9% 41.3% 11.6%
IL 3/20 BLUE Primary 43.6% 46.7% 9.3%
WI 4/3 BLUE Primary 43.5% 44.8% 11.2%
AK 3/6 RED Caucus 43.4% 32.5% 24.1%
AZ 2/28 RED Primary 43.2% 47.3% 8.4%
MD 4/3 BLUE Primary 40.2% 49.8% 9.5%
WY 2/29 RED Caucus 39.9% 39.2% 20.9%
HI 3/13 BLUE Caucus 36.3% 45.4% 18.3%
WA 3/3 BLUE Caucus 34.1% 37.6% 24.8%
VT 3/6 BLUE Primary 32.8% 41.7% 25.5%
NV 2/4 PURPLE Caucus 31.1% 50.1% 18.8%
ME 2/11 BLUE Caucus 24.7% 38.0% 36.1%
ID 3/6 RED Caucus 20.3% 61.6% 18.1%
NH 1/10 PURPLE Primary 19.8% 56.1% 22.9%
MA 3/6 BLUE Primary 17.3% 73.1% 9.6%
DC 4/3 BLUE Primary* 10.7% 77.2% 12.0%
PR 3/18 Terr Primary 10.7% 88.0% 1.3%
USVI 3/10 Terr Caucus 10.7% 26.3% 29.2%
NMI 3/10 Terr Caucus 9.6% 87.3% 3.2%
VA 3/6 PURPLE Primary* 0.0% 59.5% 40.5%

It’s nearly three weeks until the next set of primaries on April 24, all in the deep-blue Northeast (New York, Connecticut, Rhode Island and Delaware) except for blue Northeast/Midwest hybrid Pennsylvania, where Santorum – as the hometown favorite son – looks to make his last stand. Santorum trails badly in the polls in all of them besides Pennsylvania, where the polls are moving against him. The others should be be easy wins for Romney even without a momentum shift, but if Santorum loses Pennsylvania, it should convince Santorum – and Gingrich, who should have already – to throw in the towel and admit that, whether the voters like it or not, Mitt Romney is the 2012 GOP presidential nominee.

COMMENTS

  • Ender

    to say that momentum shifts only slightly to Romney, based on the statistics, but not accounting for the perceived significance of recent Romney wins (i.e. Tuesday’s wins pretty much clinching the deal in the minds of most Republicans) is just “slightly” off in my mind.

    The reason why the perceived significance of those wins is so out of steps with the meticulous statistical evidence you’ve presented, is because due to the states that voted, and states that are yet to vote it’s is rationally impossible for Rick Santorum to prevent Romney from gaining the necessary delegates. That alone leads to many republicans making the calculation that the only reason for Rick to stay in the race is to play a spoiler and to disrupt the eventual nominee.

    Because you can’t tell me that Rick will gain the 80% delegates he needs from now on in California and NY (he is down in both by over 20%+) – that is the true momentum killer and the main reason why it’s over and the fat lady is singing.

    • Ender

      we don’t need PA to convince Santorum and Gingrich, but Santorum is acting like a spoiled child. Especially with his “secret meeting” with “conservative leaders” today.

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

      I’m looking at the popular vote momentum., which shows that even as it has become effectively inevitable that Romney will be the nominee, he’s only enjoying a slight decrease in the number of people showing up to vote against him.

      • Ender

        by the slight momentum shift, then my apologies :) The slight momentum shift in popular vote translated into huge momentum shift in delegate math and perceptions.

  • morrigan

    >”the five conservative candidates (Santorum, Gingrich, Perry, Bachmann and Cain), the two moderate candidates (Romney and Hunstman)”

    Policy wise, there isn’t an iota of difference between Santroum, Gingrich, and Romney.

    You also don’t mention the fact that, as in other states with an open primary, “conservative” Rick Santorum clobbered “moderate” Mitt Romney among Democrats.

    Eleven percent of the voters in the Wisconsin primary were Democrats, and they went big for Santorum.

    Among Republicans, Romney won by by fourteen points. Among Democrats, Santorum won by twenty points. That’s something to consider in talking about the people who show up to vote against Romney.

    • zachv

      The Democrats voting in out state Wisconsin for Santorum? I’d believe that those people are voting for the candidate they support.

      My neighbors in downtown Madison who were going 80% for the anti-Walker candidates and 90% for Rick Santorum? Dishonest votes to harm the Republicans by prolonging the race and pushing support towards (who they believe) is a joke of a candidate.

      • jon11

        …and his defenders always pretend its ‘reagan democrats’ he’s getting.

        Thats annoyed me a great deal but its all behind us now.

        I wouldn’t split hairs too much with dan over his characterization of the candidates as conservative/moderate except to say that Santorum is purely a social/religious conservative.

        He is no way a fiscal or small government conservative.

        He is not against expansive government. He is not against big spending. Not at all, not even remotely. He’s a culture warrior and for some people thats enough.

        I take a slightly different view. Im very much a believer and probably believe 97% of what Rick does theologically, but i couldn’t disagree more with religious conservatives push to in some way ‘codify’ Christian morality.

        Forget the fact that to do so flies in the face of Jefferson’s ‘wall of separation’

        What’s truly irksome about it is that it isnt what Christ did…nor did he mean to do it.

        He didn’t lobby Caesar to try to have his teachings made law. He said his kingdom was not of this world.

        He never had a political program and he never tried to force anyone to do good. Paul said “And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet.”

        There is no coersion in Christianity. None by design, anyway.

        Much of what santorum says about the family and societal problems that result from the deterioration of it are spot on.

        But thats not a political problem. Not fundamentally. Some programs, like welfare, may exacerbate it but they didn’t create it nor can they fix it.. Its a morality problem. That can’t be legislated by govt. from the top down. Well, i suppose it CAN be. They do it Iran and Saudi Arabia. But i hope we never attempt to do it here.

        Santorum thinks this country needs a revival.

        I happen to agree.

        Where we disagree is that he seems to think it should be led by the president of the United States and i think it can only be led, from the ground up, by the church…by the body of Christ.

        A strict separation of church and state is not only good policy, its what Christ himself advocated throughout the NT.

        We don’t hide who we are, nor do we apologize for it. But we don’t try to force it on people either.

        All will give an account, in the end.

        God’s justice is what the wicked have to fear…not Caesar’s.

        • naraht

          Which of the following do you disagree with as Codifying Christian morality?

          1) Restricting Marriage to one man and one woman?
          2) Limiting access to birth control? (by age or by marital status)?
          3) Banning Abortion?
          4) Either banning the Death Penalty or ensure it is used *more* often?

          • JSobieski

            I support 2 with respect to minors, but not with respect to marital status.

            I support 3 100%, although I think criminal laws should be at the state level.

            With respect to 4, neither.

            More importantly, I think it is far more important and interesting to acknowledge that:
            (1) A laws must be grounded in morality or a basic need for some order (traffic laws)
            (2) We should not codify ALL morality. For example forcing charitable donations, making divorce illegal, making premarital sex illegal, etc.

            The interesting question is how to decide what morality to codify, and what morality to leave to the broader culture to reinforce.

            Drinking excessively is bad, but most of us would oppose a law that limited what an adult can drink in their own home.

            How do we draw the line is the $100,000,000 question!!!!!!

    • elayman

      Romney, Gingrich, Santorum are moderates either socially or fiscally or both and the rest were/are conservative by any reasonable standard.

      • xymbaline

        Contrast “The Contract with America” to anything achieved by Romney or Santorum.

        Ask yourself how different the last two years would have been if Newt Gingrich had been Speaker of the House instead of John Boehner.

        • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

          You seem to forget that after his initial success. Newt got rolled repeatedly by Bill Clinton, and managed to anger and estrange nearly every other Republican in the congress.

  • aleena

    I think it’s over for Rick Santorum. I’m not happy with Romney, but we have to beat President Obama this fall. If I had my way, Rick Perry would be our next president, but I know that’s not going to happen now. We need to work to get Conservatives in the House and Senate, and also to let Mr. Romney know how we feel about issues. If he really ignores Conservative values, there is always 2016. Unlike President Obama, Mr. Romney is not a tone deaf, ideologue. He is very sensitive to public opinion, and if he becomes president, he will want people to view him as a success. It will be up to us to let him know what success is.

    • http://www.unifiedpatriots.com/ pilgrim

      I agree Mitt is not a tone deaf ideologue. He is a tone deaf technocrat who will manage as he sees fit. If people view him in 2016 the way they viewed him in 2006 in MA, then he will not run for reelection. He’ll look for another assignment. That has been his MO in the past.

  • driveinkid

    The race is over and you are no proclaiming a “slight” shift in momentum? Romney is running away with this thing. Time to focus on beating Obama and stop beating up each other.

    • xymbaline

      are the fake ‘conservatives’ who run to the shelter of the GOP Establishment instead of fighting for what they believe.

      Pardon me, but exactly when did Romney achieve 1,144 delegates?

      Sorry, didn’t hear you. When did the Hitman win the nomination?

      Oh, the race is only just over halftime and you want to proclaim ‘victory’?

      Oh course you do .. the idea of winning honestly in an open convention horrifies you.

      Typical Romneybot.

      • gekster

        how anyone else can win.
        Can you give backup for your answer.

        And when one sees the inevitable, why does that make them a “bot”.

        • xymbaline

          “Inevitable” is only a propaganda phrase. Nothing has been won yet. The Hitman barely has 1/2 the delegates needed to win.

          If you need someone to explain what an open convention is and what happens there, you might try Google. It’s good for getting information you don’t currently have.

          For example:

          http://www.openconvention.org/what-is-an-openconvention/

          Actually, you might just be young and never knew there was such a thing. I’m old enough to have watched several conventions, both D and R, where no candidate had enough delegates to win on the first ballot. The result is a truly American spectacle, with backroom negotiating, multiple ballots, lots of balloons and spin everywhere.

          Many Romney supporters quite plainly want to avoid an open convention. That would negate Mitt’s ability to buy millions of dollars of negative ads, and would force him to compete fairly and in front of the world.

          And so, you’re a ‘bot’ if you’ve done no investigation into what primaries and conventions really do, and you simply parrot the talking points.

          Clear?

  • Pingback: Rhett Codispot

  • Pingback: Leola Kresha