« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

South Carolina: Huntsman up, but not Romney?

By: Neil Stevens (Diary)  |  January 12th, 2012 at 01:00 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

Gingrich Romney

InsiderAdvantage appears to be the first out of the gate in South Carolina after Tuesday’s New Hampshire primary. As expected, South Carolina is showing movement from New Hampshire, the way New Hampshire and South Carolina showed movement from Iowa.

At least, Rick Santorum is down and Jon Huntsman is up. Sticking out though is the lack of any gain for Mitt Romney.

In fact, it looks like Romney’s lost ground. The three polls before New Hampshire had Romney at 27, 30, and 37, with 18, 9, and 7 point leads over Newt Gingrich (though one had Rick Santorum in second). But now he’s down to a tiny 23-21 lead.

In fact with the sample of 726 primary LVs, we can estimate the Margin of Error at 3.6, and my calculation estimates a 40% chance Newt Gingrich is even in the lead at this point.

Jon Huntsman seems to have gotten a bounce. His 7% is by far the highest he’s ever polled in the state. It’s almost double his previous high of 4, in fact. And yet, I think in a normal year he’d have gotten a bigger bounce than that from his New Hampshire finish.

The reason he didn’t is Ron Paul. Sean Trende made a point recently on the Twitters: he suggested that that Ron Paul is crowding out Mitt Romney’s competitors in this race. Paul shows no chance of winning for reasons I’ve mentioned previously, and also because he of all people must win this race with Gold, not Silver or Bronze, but his third place finish in Iowa and his second place finish in New Hampshire are muting the impact of the other finishes. Both of Paul’s finishes were gained by winning crossover and independent vote, but he gets the headlines anyway.

I’d like to see more polling of this race obviously. It’s possible this was just a bad one-off result for Romney. But even if Romney seems to have no momentum, no other candidate is shooting up to knock him off, either. Romney as frontrunner won’t go away. Somebody has to put him away, or he’ll simply cruise to victory.

Crossposted from Unlikely Voter

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
Get Alerts

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • loneranger2012

    Should be in the lead not Romney! Romney is Mr. Liberal. I would like to see Santorum win this thing because he is a Reagan Republican and the only one in the race.

    Gingrich would be ok I just don’t think he can win in November.

    I know that Romney will lost big in November.

    GO Rick GO!

  • dpmapper

    who is most likely to pick up his voters?

    We can look at crosstabs to get a guess:
    http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_NH_108.pdf

    page 18-19:
    Paul voters are 32-62 favorable-unfavorable on Romney.
    36-54 on Santorum.
    14-74 on Perry.
    26-67 on Gingrich.
    48-33 on Huntsman.

    Paul is hurting Huntsman the most, first by denying Huntsman 2nd place in NH, and secondly this.

  • languedoctor

    If he had never entered the race, he might not have sucked all the oxygen out from other candidates like Huntsman who could have pressed Romney.

    But I get the feeling that even if Paul were to leave the race (and he won’t, so the issue is moot), his supporters would be more likely to pick up their ball and go home than to look at the remaining candidates.

    The conventional wisdom isn’t wrong. Divided social conservatives are creating an opening for Romney.

    Here’s an interesting thought: by hammering away at Paul as a cult figure who lacks credibility, have conservatives actually given Romney another assist?

    It’s hard to imagine a candidate just brushing aside a second place finisher the way that Romney brushes aside Paul . . .

    None of this is an endorsement for Ron Paul in 2012 — I’m just trying to see all the angles.

  • dpmapper

    He won’t leave before the convention and most of his supporters won’t leave him. No doubt there.

    But this might be useful for assessing what might happen in the general election, too – who can pick up Paul voters, rather than just leave them at home.

  • lineholder

    not named either Mitt Romney or Ron Paul will come on strong in SC (and beyond) by putting emphasis on the need for fiscally Conservative leadership at the national level, Neil.

    Without it, they leave an opening for Romney’s brand of being fiscally moderate/liberal to succeed, and they also leave an opening for Ron Paul’s extremist views to win over voters they’re not fighting to gain.

  • redcal

    There’s no question that, with proportional delegate voting and his strength in caucuses, that he’ll end up with 15-20% of the delegates by convention time, which is pretty strong. What is he going to do with that? I don’t see him settling for VP (he’d never get picked by any of these particular candidates) or a speaking slot. The only plausible story is some kind of quid pro quo for Rand Paul’s political future, but what specifically?

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

    He’s irrelevant to the conversation of the Republican candidates.

  • lineholder

    I don’t have any illusions about the fact that all of our candidates have bits and pieces (some more than others) of big-gov’t fiscally moderate/liberal policy positions hanging in their closets. Sad, but true, unfortunately.

    I just find it stunning at this point that they aren’t focusing more on this issue, Neil. It could easily be a winning issue that sets them apart from Obama.

  • znjs

    It is strange he isn’t getting a boost out of NH as people like voting for “winners”. I’ve been defending Mitt’s actions with Bain, but if the attack is working with Republicans it does make it hard to believe it won’t work with independents. Are we seeing any shift in Romney’s favorable/unfavorable ratings? That would seem to be the ultimate proof the attacks are working.

  • http://www.timothy-bladel.com/ center77

    none of them would limit the power of their own office to advance the cause of conservatism and the cause of the country. I see the only way we beat Obama is through executive experience, because that is Obama great weakness. Romney or Newt cannot really talk about the mandate; both supported it before, Newt on the federal level. Santorum has a long history of appeasing Democrats, and do not see him as a Reagan Republican at all, Santorum has not executive experience, and he left office and did the same thing Newt did, used his influence to make a million plus dollars, I have an extreme distrust of Washington influence peddlers.

    This leaves only Huntsman and Perry as the people who have conservative records, but Huntsman is loved by liberal too much for me to believe he is a true conservative. Only one talk about the tenth amendment and allowing the states to do their thing, and that is Perry. Send Congress home, cut their pay in half, and limit the terms of federal judges, at least make them get elected, these would stop the legislating from the bench.

    It is shocking that much of this primary season has become a contest of who sounds the best, or tells the best lies. Not who has a proven record, and has shown a lifetime of character choices. Then again, we wonder how we got to where we are, that should not come as any surprise, look how people vote.

  • http://www.timothy-bladel.com/ center77

    but we do, we do indeed.

  • znjs

    Something to make it more open/transparent in the hope that doing so would destroy it. But that’s just wild speculation.

  • mccoypauley

    Disagrees with this premise.

  • irishgirl

    And not only is it shocking, it’s downright depressing.

  • youngconstitutionalist

    As a former Paul supporter, as has been mentioned, there are several types of Paul supporters:

    (1) Liberal crossovers operating a la operation chaos. This group will either break for Obama or the Green Party in the GE.

    (2) Small government conservatives with a libertarian bent, which further breaks down into two groups:

    (a) Secular libertarian types. These are the typical libertarians who don’t like taxes, aren’t particularly religious, and don’t like government interference in anything they consider “private.” These voters will likely break for the GOP in any event that doesn’t involve a Rick Santorum nomination.

    (b) Evangelical/other conservative Christian-types with small government and anti-war leanings. This explains Santorum’s numbers with Paul supporters. This group will only break for the GOP in the event someone they fell comfortable with gets nominated, which would include Rick Perry. Perry’s numbers are underrepresented there because the gardasil thing is still keeping him down amongst this type of Paul supporters, but that would soon fade when they are faced with the option of voting for him or facing an Obama second term. They’d break for Gingrich, but probably less than Santorum or Perry. Romney will absolutely never, ever get these voters to break for him.

    (3) Drug-addled wastoids. This group might not be able to find their ways to the polls on election day, so they are practically irrelevant.

  • youngconstitutionalist

    This is exactly what he would demand if he has the votes. I guarantee it.

  • dpmapper

    Judge on their record and policies. If liberals said their favorite president was Lincoln, would you downgrade Lincoln? Now, if you don’t like Huntsman’s record, that’s a different argument.

    Just because someone can attract non-conservative voters doesn’t mean he isn’t conservative. It means he can win moderate voters and would be a strong candidate in the general. Do you want someone who can get those voters and might potentially win with 57% in November, or someone who can’t get those voters and has a ceiling of 51%

  • bob08034

    There are a few really interesting things. First, although there are very few blacks in the poll, Romney got under 2% of them, and Newt got over 50%. If that’s not a quirk it’s pretty important.

    Second thing is Newt has the greatest level of support in the under 30 category. Not what I would have expected. He’s even beating Ron Paul in that group, which is supposed to be Paul’s greatest strength. Romney’s edge over Newt is in the 30-44 category.

    Last night the TV was 100% political advertising. Newt’s main ad is one that says even after Romney became pro-life he did “pro-abortion” stuff. It’s footnoted too, btw. Seems like an odd way to win.

    All of the Bain stuff I’ve heard on the news has been relatively benign, except for one excerpt about a plant in Gaffney being shut down.

    Final point of note: 15% still with no opinion. Add that 15% to any of the top four and you have a landslide.

  • youngconstitutionalist

    This is just insulting to Ron Paul supporters and not helpful for the future of the party. Ron Paul supporters are not “idiots.” They are, however, generally the type of smart guy who is so caught up in their wonderful little theories that they never quite get back down to earth. That’s why they’re overwhelmingly young and there is steep fall-off of support for him in each age bracket. Young Paul supporters are too idealistic for their own good.

    Irving Kristol said that a neoconservative was a liberal that had been mugged by reality. I will assert that a small government conservative is a libertarian who has been mugged by reality. The young Paul supporters are just small government conservative who have yet to have been mugged by reality. They aren’t stupid or idiotic. They’re just a young band of idealistic libertarians who haven’t been exposed to the real world.

    That is, of course, except for the drug-addled wastoids, who will either come around eventually, or just wind up brain dead.

  • dpmapper

    I agree groups 1 and 3 are irrelevant. Huntsman does pretty good with both 2a and 2b groups as well. Probably more so than Perry with 2b; Perry kind of gaffed when he flatly stated he’d send troops back into Iraq.

    In addition, Huntsman has the only proposal that goes after Too-Big-To-Fail.

  • gekster

    Thanks for the laugh.
    You paulbots crack me up.

  • bob08034

    Male/Female–

    Gingrich: 26/17
    Santorum: 8/17
    All other choices within a few points.

    Democrats–
    Paul/Gingrich/Romney: 35/28/17

    Independents–
    Paul/Gringrich/Romney: 29/20/19

  • Tbone

    and get 50.9% for Newt?

  • lineholder

    You and the other mods probably have a better idea of this than I do, but are any of our candidates strongly pursuing a very simple “kitchen table economics” type of narrative? How well do you think this would resonate with Main Street voters?

    And after thinking through Huntsman’s comments in the last debate, it may very well be that his positions on reviving the manufacturing sector is what has drawn the attention of the people in SC.

  • youngconstitutionalist

    I really couldn’t tell you about how Huntsman would do, since I have avoided talking politics as of late with the Ron Paul supporters I remain friends with, and Huntsman was irrelevant when I did talk politics with them. However, as far as 2b goes, Mormonism will be an issue. Among many Evangelicals that is not the case, but amongst the Evangelicals that vote Paul it would be an issue. I don’t know how much that would effect Huntsman, but I have a feeling that the vote for him would play out similar to Romney with a boost for not having sponsored any Romneycare legislation.

    Perry did hurt himself with that comment, but as long as he doesn’t campaign on it and Congress would remain unwilling to fund the effort, I don’t think that would hurt him too much in the GE. I really don’t think Perry could muster enough support for that kind of venture even with a solidly GOP House and Senate, and he is almost certain to not get 60 votes in the Senate for it, and I think most Paul supporters know that.

  • Bill S

    They are idiots.

    And THEY are not helpful for the future of the party. Anyone who is taken in by someone who is such an obvious lunatic needs help.

    Maybe if I get in front of a mic and repeat the word LIBERTY a few dozen times, I can get a few thousand Iowans to vote for me, too. But in my case, I won’t wander off the reservation and start blathering about GOLD and how the Iranians are our BFFs.

  • youngconstitutionalist

    I’m not a Paulbot. I don’t support Ron Paul, so I don’t know how I can be a “Paulbot.” I was just suggesting that it might behoove Redstaters to not insult about 10-15% of the GOP primary electorate for no good reason. If it makes me a “Paulbot” to suggest that Paul supporters are too wrapped up in the minutiae of libertarian theory, then I suppose I am, but I wouldn’t consider that too complimentary to Ron Paul supporters.

  • jakeofalltrades

    Such morons are the exact type of people that helped produce the greatest atrocity to ever happen in Europe.

  • youngconstitutionalist

    Wonderful attitude you have going on there. What a way to win friends and influence people! Let’s just call them idiots, liberals, and Democrats, and not try to convince them of the flaws in their way of thinking. That will win them over for sure. I’ll admit Paul himself is a looney tune whose place should be that of internet forum gadfly, but to insult a large group of young sophomoric college students and recent grads as a bunch idiotic drug-addled wastoids isn’t helpful. Haven’t you ever been young and naive, or were you too good for that? Paul’s supporters are young and naive, not stupid.

  • loneranger2012

    a real conservative movement. Reagan wanted us to be a movement. To help people by make Government smaller and removing Government from the job of giving us money and tell us what we can do with it!

    Real Conservative want to empower the people not fire the people and Real Conservative want us to be able to make a better life than we have now.

    Romney will never win my vote or my time. He will never beat Obama with his brand of Liberalism!

    We need a real conservative like SANTORUM!

  • youngconstitutionalist

    You know they would argue with that if given the chance. Whether he is or not, I don’t know, nor do I really care. His supporters would never consciously admit that and then support him anyway. The human mind has tremendous power to suppress evidence that would go against one’s own preconceived notions, and that is probably the case when Paul’s supporters simply will not admit that Ron Paul is at least ultimately responsible for the racist material published under his name, whether or not he wrote himself or not.

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

    Well then, pick one:

    *Racists.
    *Anti-semites.
    *Troofers.
    *Birfers.
    *Alex Jones conspiracy theorists.
    *Stoners.
    *Anti-military far left loons.
    *Ignorant.
    *Stupid.

    There are no other choices.

  • dpmapper

    I admire your spirit. I agree with you that snarky name-calling is not helpful and doesn’t convince anyone of anything. Sometimes you just have to give up, but don’t let it get you down.

  • Death_of_the_Donkey

    How about gold standard supporters (which I guess fits into the last category)?

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

    Hopefully we’ll censor his delegates again like last time.

  • youngconstitutionalist

    Have you ever heard of naivety?

    Tact is the art of being able to make a point without making an enemy. Right now, I’m a Ron Paul supporter, and I do not think I was an idiot when I was a Ron Paul supporter. Perhaps young and naive about the full consequences of some of Ron Paul’s campaign planks, fundamental philosophical beliefs, and his misrepresentation of Christian Just War Theory.

    Right now, some of you seem bent on making enemies with people for no good reason. I’ve joined back up with the conservative team, and yet I’m being attacked as a Paulbot for suggesting that eventually some others might do the same. Yes, there are some nuts, idiots, and fools in the Ron Paul camp. I’m not denying that. However, just because there are some nuts in the Ron Paul camp does not mean that every person in the Ron Paul camp is a nut.

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

    Idiot.

  • youngconstitutionalist

    I meant to say former Paul supporter.

  • pttx333

    don’t you? Now, you say you are not a nut … okay, if that is true, why on God’s green earth would you support one then????

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

    You typoed yourself into a tempban there. :)

    I’m going to assume you meant you are NOT a Ron Paul supporter.

    But hold your defenses of Paultards. Their opinions will count when they grow up and start taking their medication.

  • dpmapper

    First off, his statement ‘Right now, I?m a Ron Paul supporter’ is a typo. He meant to say *not* a Ron Paul supporter, as his previous comments make clear.

    http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2012/01/12/south-carolina-huntsman-up-but-not-romney/#comment-20575
    www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2012/01/12/south-carolina-huntsman-up-but-not-romney/#comment-20563

    Secondly, he’s not defending Ron Paul. He’s defending Ron Paul’s supporters from being called idiots, saying they should be called naive instead, so that we might win them over once they get over their youthful naivete. Disagree with that if you like, but I’ve appreciated his point of view. It hasn’t been disrespectful or bot-ish.

    If conservatives don’t try to understand (which is not the same thing as agree with) the motivations of a large group of voters, they’re backing themselves into a corner.

  • acat

    (Cheshire grin)

  • lineholder

    It just means that there were maybe 45 black voters included in the poll, and Newt got support from 22 of them.

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

    As this guy is doing.

  • maturin

    I don’t think Santorum is the man you think he is.

    You say Reagan wanted to make government smaller. That is true. But I’ve never heard Santorum say such a thing. I’ve only ever heard him say that government SHOULD be more involved in our lives. I think he has a bit of contempt for the idea of personal freedom. Aside from his stance on social issues there isn’t much that differentiates him from Democrats.

    You like him, more power to you. But I will not, and cannot, vote for Santorum. Even if he expands government reach in the name of social conservative values, he has still increased government power. And as much as we might not like it, conservatives won’t always be in control. In the end all he will have done is given more power to liberal interests when they have their turn at the top.

    I know, I know, not voting for Santorum is a vote for Obama. I understand. But I cannot vote for someone who openly talks about expanding the government’s role in our personal lives. I’d rather fight liberalism in the open with a conservative ideology that is clearly distinguishable from a liberal one.

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

    With a sample of 22, the MoE is 21.

  • Bill S

    I have heard of naivet?, though.

    And that’s not what I would call the affliction that Paul supporters have. It really doesn’t take a lot of intellect to listen to Ron Paul and know that the guy is nuts. He shows it in every debate, in every interview and in every article. The information on the guy is out there far and wide. Hell, even the idiots on the left can tell that his foreign policy is so unhinged as to be patently dangerous.

    So, it’s one of two things – either stupidity or willful ignorance.

    But it sure ain’t naivet

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

    I think it’s safe to guess IA is doing some postweighting.

  • lineholder

    Oh, and I stand corrected, thank you!

    How can you tell it has been post-weighted? What purpose does this serve?

  • dpmapper

    Understanding where they are coming from is one step towards figuring out how to help them grow up. Calling them idiots, as much satisfaction as it might give people, is not. They’re not easy to reason with at the moment, but I think YC’s point is that in time, some of them might be.

    Fair enough?

  • youngconstitutionalist

    Also, thanks to Neil Stevens for listening and lifting my ban. I shall refrain from commenting about Ron Paul and his band of merry band of fellow travelers from now on.

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

    There’s no way to divide a whole number by 22 and get 50.9%. So you know that number isn’t just the raw data.

    Postweighting is when you use census and other data to tweak the results you get, to adjust for known demographic figures.

    An extreme example of postweighting is what you see in an exit poll, when they take the results and shift them to match what the actual election returns are.

  • lineholder

    ,

  • mikeymike143

    actually, i can think of several good ones. but it all starts with their anti semitic moronic cult leader. and the fact that paulbots are code pink loving, anti war leftists. they have no place on a conservative republican site

  • ww2nd95

    With Romney, everyone who has said Bain will be the bane of Romney’s existence in this election is right. It doesn’t matter how many jobs he saved in reality, it doesn’t matter how profitable he made other corporations he invested, all that matters is how the public perceives the guy in the baseball cap, saying that Romney cost him his job, along with 1000s of his friends, and how he’s struggling now, all because Mitt Romney invested in his company. Sure it’s BS. People get laid off, companies get shut down all the time by many interests, but Romney is by far the weakest candidate to run against Obama, where I think Huntsman truly is the strongest.

    Think about it, during a debate, what exactly is Obama going to hit him with? Huntsman is a true conservative if anyone researches him, so I don’t think the Obama Lite term applies to him. He had a great career in a very conservative state, he has appeal to independents and disappointed Obama supporters. Some say that the Boston Globe endorsement is a negative, where as I see it as a positive in the general election. All Obama will have on him is their ideological differences, which he will have with every Republican. Only with Huntsman, he won’t have the baggage to nail him with, he won’t have Bain, he won’t have Romneycare to hit him with. Huntsman doesn’t have a true weakness to exploit, like everyone else.

    I just do not understand why Romney is the nominee based on electability, when Huntsman has the same kind of electability, if not more so, along with the Government, and successful business experience. In my opinion, he beats Romney in every category.

  • Common_Cents

    or Hemp Uses Czar

  • mikeymike143

    that gives you the numbers to stop romney.

  • Common_Cents

    Talkin turkey to the American people.

  • jakeofalltrades

    I see what you’re going for there… you’re trying to get him back in the alien ship so you can deport his Jew-hating butt back to whatever planet he came from. Nice!

  • jakeofalltrades

    sheesh

  • docnick

    I don’t really care what the ‘polls’ and others say- Until Newt say I quit I will keep sending him a check every week….

    Romney can bet Obama…? Did everyone come to this election on the watermelon wagon?

    Romney is being sold to the public. This man is not a winner….Package him any way you want but he cannot win… (Neither can Ron Paul….)

    Gingrich has experience, ego (equal to Obama) and congressional experience….

    This election is not simply about who will be president but the life of the nation is on the line…

    docnick

  • lineholder

    I’ve been thinking about the way things have been shaping up so far, and it’s relatively obvious at this point that the Dems are wanting to turn this into a Wall Street vs. Main Street type of contest portraying themselves as supporting Main Street.

    Our candidates could easily combat that with a simple “kitchen table economics” narrative, i.e. when times are good, consumers may have the expendable income that allows them to be a bit self-indulgent or generous; but when times are tough, it calls for prioritizing, fiscal prudence, self-discipline, etc.

    Repubs have the advantage in that one, not the Dems. Dems can only spout “fair and equal”, to support their legislative agenda of increasing taxes, redistribution of wealth, and increased governmental spending.

    Repubs can counter with “tightening the governmental belt, just like any member of Main Street would do during tough times”.

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

    Your post is the height of ignorance and naivety. And to be clear, I have absolutely no interest in making friends with you.

    You used to be a Ron Paul supporter. OK. So you used to be an enabler of racism, anti-Semitism, troofer & birferism, absolutely gross stupidity in foreign affairs and total ignorance in reference to domestic affairs.

    Ron Paul is absolutely does not hold “fundamental philosophical beliefs” about anything but sucking cash out of his ilk. You appear to understand that he is clueless about “just war theory”, he is just as clueless about everything else.

    Just so we’re clear, I’d personally like to see his “followers” made pariahs in the party. Paul should be barred from the convention and when the House reconvenes, he should be tossed out of the Republican caucus as the first order of business. There is no room in the Republican Party, or in civil society, for racists, etc and their enablers.

    Every person in the “Ron Paul camp” is either a nut, a racist or just plain stupid. Not one of them deserves an ounce of empathy or attention unless they are willing to walk away and admit their error. If I found Ron Paul or one of his ilk on fire and it looked like rain, I’d run off and buy an umbrella.

    Hope that clears things up for you.

  • WillWong

    Speaker Gingrich and Bachmann were the recepients of my first 2012 campaign contributions!

  • becky5

    it would throw the general election to Odumdum. The GOP would get none of Paul’s voters if they censor Paul’s delegates.

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

    oh wait.

  • http://www.timothy-bladel.com/ center77

    this is going to be a huge mistake in this party. It should have been a huntsman and Perry race from the get go. I am still hopin gone of these two gain the upper hand, if not then I will just fall in line and hope that Romney wins against Obama. I see no other choice in the real choice outside of this.

  • acat

    (awkward silence)

  • aj_0000

    There is still a chance. And it is the only chance, to stop Romney. Newt had huge leads in both SC and FL before he dipped in Iowa. If he wins SC, and if Perry and/or Santorum drop out, he could have a huge win in FL and go into Super Tuesday as the frontrunner. It is a realistic possibility. But Newt must win SC. Otherwise Romney is the nominee.

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

    It’s about how much meaningless a threat from Ronulans is.

  • satchman3

    I work in engineering and Ron Paul appeals to a number of my colleagues. These are generally folks with advanced degrees (MS and Ph D) in engineering who are not really politically knowledgeable but understand some economics and find a lot of appeal in Ron Paul’s message.

    I’m on the Romney train FWIW and advocate that folks move from Paul to Romney.

    If you think of the two-dimensional spectrum of political positions (fiscal/social and conservative/progressive) and put the various candidates on the graph you would probably find that Ron Paul has got a lot of whitespace around him. I think that’s how he attracts the numbers he gets. If there were a better messenger who advocated the fiscal restraint that Paul does I would think that candidate could find a lot of support.

  • mccoypauley

    That’s ridiculous.

    His campaign advisors have been Jewish )Block, Rothbard, Blumert). His intellectual hero is Jewish. He refused to censor Israel for attacking Iraq in the 80s when pretty much everyone else did.

    Look, disagree with his looks, his policies, his votes.

    But calling someone an anti-semite, which is basically calling them a racist, is a tactic of the left. Be better than that.

    The discussion here sometimes is loaded with terms like moron and idiot, kook and crazy. None of these words have value as facts. They are opinion labels. If you dislike someone or something, find a way to reason why that is so. If your facts are good, you will be right, and you won’t have had to dirty yourself up with namecalling and insults.

  • marktx

    With Gingrich only 2% points behind Romney in SC, it’s clear that he has a real opportunity to win that state. Gingrich’s problem in SC, as in Iowa, is Santorum. And I have a strong feeling that Santorum is Romney’s stalking horse.

    Conservatives continue to complain that the establishment picks the nominee each election cycle. Maybe that’s true, maybe not. But in South Carolina conservatives have a real opportunity to defeat Romney if voters use their brains instead of their emotions. That means supporting one anti-Romney…in this case Gingrich, as polls show he is the strongest anti-Romney candidate.

  • haumea

    I strongly resent the GOP establishment putting its thumbs on the scale and picking our candidate for us. That means you, Krauthammer, Coulter, Rove, Will et al.

    I think Romney is a weak general election candidate. He is indeed timid, afraid to fight and too politically correct. He is a preserver of the status quo narrative as opposed to a challenger of it like Newt. Some people interpret this as Newt’s “wild ideas” or whatever, but timidity will not beat Obama.

    I think Romney would be an alright president but he’s the wrong man for the times. It’s going to take a bold leader and a fighter to save America, not a secretive, calculated and cautious technocrat. He would be fine managing the decline, but I was someone with the audacity and the brains to reverse the decline, right the ship and give conservatives the ability to entrench themselves in the system to allow a new era of freedom and prosperity to emerge.

  • marktx

    ….for people to ask RP to quit the race. Afterall, RP is doing better than every in the field except for Romney. And a sizable percentage of RP supporters aren’t even republicans.

    If conservatives really want to stop Romney, the only way would be for two of the three,ie, Santorum, Perry, Gingrich, to leave the race. Since Perry and Santorum are unelectable, and since Romney fears neither one of them, they should do what is in the best interests of the country and the party – which is to quit the race BEFORE the voting starts in SC.

    Fat chance that will happen, so prepare for Romney to be the nominee unless Gingrich can pull off the biggest win of his career.

  • haumea

    NT

  • Scope

    a fringe kook who is supported by Stromfron, the KKK, David Duke, the skinheads and, don’t forget the Las Vegas Bunny Ranch whore house. He believes that America has brought every ill on itself, because we are jusy busy bodies. He has been against any mandated vaccinations, even those that have eradicated disease in the world. He supports the creation of drug addicts, that are even hooked on heroin. Hey, it’s their choice if they want to kill themselves. Just step over them while they lay dying in the gutter. They weren’t responsible enough to buy health insurance, and as his supporters said in a debate, let them die. That is if they are not nuked by Iran first.

    Yup, that is just what I’m looking for in the president of the US, just bring all our troops home from around the world, we can protect the US with just a few good submarines.

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

    along with a personal note about being stupid enough to actually believe the crap you wrote.

  • jakeofalltrades

    arguing against you pieces of racist crap. We have plenty of experience with your ilk here. If you yourself are not racist, then you should seriously consider abandoning Adolf Hitler Ron Paul.

  • acat

    (nothing further)

  • Scope

    military should be. The old coot has never been known to advance any of his thought processes.

  • Scope

    his tirades against the fleet footed blacks that stopped protesting when they went to collect their welfare checks?

  • jakeofalltrades

    Let us be generous and give him our contempt anyway :D .

  • Scope

    and went with Romney, was called out appropriately today by the leftist Candy Crowley. Je jumped ship because he has to get on the bandwagon of what many believe is the inevitable winner, Romney. Obviously he got on Perry’s bandwagon when Perry was riding high in the polls, and only jumped ship because he doesn’t have any real loyalty to the candidate, but rather has to be on the presumed winner’s side. Crowley described him as being a big time DeMint supporter. DeMint says that it looks like Romney will be the nominee, the guy takes his orders. Good riddance poll backer.

  • superpatriot

    Evening guys.

    Who do you guys think will be outta the race after South Carolina???

  • superpatriot

    Please listen S. Carolina republicans.

    Gingrich must win S. Carolina.

    Otherwise we are left with a former independent, moderate from Mass. who claims to be conservative. Ouch.

  • jakeofalltrades

    Everyone else stays.

  • superpatriot

    Perry??

  • tercel

    As I’m thinking about each candidate a why or why not I’m for or against them, I was thinking about Santorum. Great on the social issues. Seems like a really great guy. Passionate of the issue of Life.

    Then it dawns on me…this man is running as the family values candidate. He wants to be the crusader for the family. Then what business does a father of 7 children, one of them severely handicapped, and home schoolers to boot have running for POTUS!

    POTUS is a fully involved 24/7 all consuming job. He can’t possibly raise that family, home school his children and be a help mate to his wife and be POTUS. It is not humanly possible.

    I think he would possibly make a great president but at this point in his life, he already has a mission. And unless he plans on being hypocrite in chief, he better be the family man he is crusading for.

  • tonotisto

    I’ll be out cold, tequila bottle in hand. And I don’t even drink.

  • jakeofalltrades

    with Muslim eschatology about the murder of all the Jews in the world.

  • laura211

    Good riddance to former Perry supporter/donor Barry Wynn…I personally think you dont jump ship just because your guy is down in the polls.

    I’ve worked for many candidates and if you are really loyal to them, you will stand by them until the end.

    As for Sen. DeMint, I hope he will vote his conviction and support the candidate that fits in line with his view of small government and not fall in line with his Governor who is now in trouble with the Tea Party for supporting Romney.

  • jakeofalltrades

    And he is far outside what any decent person should be able to support.

    So, not idiots… just recklessly ignorant. I ask you – what is the difference?

  • septembergurl

    Austin last August to try to convince Perry to enter the race, promising to support him, etc.

    Nice.

  • pttx333

    scheme of things. Your remark that your colleagues are “not really politically knowledgeable” speaks volumes. Therefore, mere snippets of information can be construed to whatever message you wish to hear.

    The only thing that is going to get anyone up-to-speed in politics is to educate oneself – read and listen to all of the rhetoric, study each candidate’s record, etc. Otherwise, you might as well do a blind-folded dart toss to make a choice for President.

    Everyone would do well to take the “whole” of Ron Paul. He is a certifiable lunatic with a couple of lucid sound bytes that may pass for sanity.

  • septembergurl

    nt

  • jakeofalltrades

    and you get the most biased opinion of all. I’m probably tied with Perry’s mom. I truly *believe* he can win it. There are people praying and fasting for him to win, so there is a lot of faith being poured in to this.

    I do not think Perry’s strategy is to drop out after SC or Florida. His path to the nomination is a long game – he has no short path. If he runs out of cash, he will of course have to drop out. But until then, there is simply no reason for him to. The delegates he will get from Texas on Super Tuesday will dwarf all the contests that happened before it – combined.

  • usedtobelib

    What the heck would you call Gingrich?

    He’s a man who will always want greater and greater power.

    The man is indeed a narcissist. I don’t use that in the layman’s sense. Check out the net; check out all the psychological literature. Hell, ask anyone in practice. Gingrich is a narcissist with characteristic delusions of grandeur.

  • jakeofalltrades

    I thought Texas was on Super Tuesday, and it wouldn’t dward – I underestimated delegate counts for some states.

  • clintonformccain

    Being a political junkie and having such a weak field in a Republican nomination battle that the topic of debate is the lunatic Ron Frickin’ Paul. Just shoot me now.

  • mikeymike143

    yes, ron paul supporters may have advanced degrees, but they also lack any type of real life common sense. they are scared of authority figures and that makes them see ”conspiracies” everywhere.

    and i can repost an article about these ”overeducated” paulbots spraying vinegar up at the sky to kill chemtrails if you want. and i dont care what type of degree you have, if you think spraying vinegar in the air will kill chemtrails before they get a chance to poison you, then you are a straight up loon.

  • katem

    then everyone (except Ron Paul) will be out and the race will be over. Paul will stay on and pick up delegates in the states where they are awarded pro rata but his only hope will be to influence the GOP platform, speak at the convention, etc. To slow down Romney, someone other than Romney and Paul must win SC.

  • joshdunn

    And he can’t beat Obama.

    A vote for Gingrich is a vote for Obama.

  • loneranger2012

    I agree

    A real ticket can win.

    Santorum/Gingrich I like it!

  • Juggernaut

    gets one mention and sets off a firestorm. The old man has divided the vote and idiot writers online are saying RP should be allowed to speak at the RNC convention. I’d don’t think they should open a hemp section.

  • znjs

    If he was going to do that he would’ve done it a long time ago. He did it because of the Bain attacks.

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

    I think Romney + the top two (not counting Ron Paul) in SC should be all that’s left after SC.

    More than that will probably stay in, though.

  • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

    I agree with you on the top 3 test, but when the campaign gets to Florida, will it even matter. Because even if Newt were to win SC, don’t you think that its VERY likely that Newt can’t win the nomination? I do. Therefore, the Romney big lead in Florida is much more significant.

  • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

    Towards Gomorrah, the 20+% of voters that choose Paul and vote for Paul helps confirm my worst fears about our nation’s prospects.

  • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

    Its over and has been for a long time. Huntsman? tied with Perry in SC? wow

  • Justin Spagnolo (standardcandle)

    I practically devoured it like scripture and marked it up with red ink… I think that and “Tempting of America” both ‘fixed’ this standardcandle in the universe of politics and conservatism.

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

    I think if Mittens wins SC it’s basically over.

  • Justin Spagnolo (standardcandle)

    I’m curious what your crystal ball might be telling us… my anecdotal gut check is that neither S.C or Florida will provide the nail in the coffin… even if Mitt wins both…

    it may be “over”… but I think its possible for both Newt, Perry, and Huntsman to raise money to continue on… whether or not they *should* may be another story… but hopefully S.C. provides the catalyst to a consolidation effort by conservatives…

  • pj2012

    one is ARG for SC taken Jan 11-12 and Perry at 9% up 7 points in forth place. Santorum in fifth place at 7% down 17 points from 24%.

    “Newt Gingrich is close behind the former Massachusetts governor, while Ron Paul and Rick Perry have posted impressive gains over the past week, according to an American Research Group poll released on Friday.” http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/polls/204019-poll-south-carolina-getting-tight and the actual ARG SC poll is here http://americanresearchgroup.com/pres2012/primary/rep/sc/

    And this one is a national poll (CNN/Opinion Research) taken Jan 11-12 and Perry’s up 2 points (9%) http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2012/images/01/13/rel1a.pdf

    Both Rasmussen and the PPP national polls have Perry up 1 point in each. Santorum is going down, Perry is going up in all the latest polls. Perry is moving in the right direction we shall see if this is a trend for them or not.

  • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

    I have bought Slouching 6 times because I gave away marked up copies like a religious tract…you are a wise man Charlie Brown

  • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

    I guess what surprises me the most is that given Perry’s woeful campaign performances, debates, poor showings in Iowa and NH, and poor polling in SC coupled with his Bain screed, that more Perry supporters haven’t coalesced around Santorum.. Is Perry so singularly superior than all the rest? Post-Bain vulture attacks, no way.

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

    Each result shifts the polling in future states.

  • snowshooze

    Is the MSM Perry blackout really working?
    They absolutely refuse to even do so much as mention his name.
    Ignore your troubles away…
    Well, it could work. According to the polls, it IS working.
    But I prefer to continue to support Perry, and wait to be shown different.
    In Alaska, I am a Super Tuesday State.
    After that, I will take a harder look.
    Maybe.

  • http://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress.com nathanalbright

    But I agree with you that Huntsman trumps Romney in just about every category you could think of, including that mysterious ‘electability.’ Now, if only he could send out some communication that his whole move to the moderates was simply some early fence mending and that he really was a conservative all along, and then he might get some support there.

  • http://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress.com nathanalbright

    …it doesn’t make sense to me either.

  • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

    I agree that a history of reliable conservativism matters most, it cannot trump failure on the former and we tea partier conservatives need to learn that lesson, accept it and do our best in the future to groom more of our own that have both, rather than demonize voters.

  • pj2012

    Perry is vastly more qualified than Santorum, and all the others. His debate performances have improved tremendously.

    As for Iowa, Santorum bought his Iowa surge from evangelical leader Bob Vander Plaats … and now it’s going…. going… almost gone.

    Yes… Perry is singularly superior to all the rest. Longest standing Governor of a state with an economy that ranks 13th largest in the world, as large as Canada’s.

    As for the “Post-Bain vulture attacks” that’s not going to hurt Perry, he was talking about the 2 companies in SC. Mitt needs to prove he created the 100,000+ jobs he claims and show documentation. And while he’s at it show us his tax returns like Perry has… what is Mitt hiding? Mitt’s a hypocrite attacking Perry on immigration, he couldn’t even get Joe Arpaio to endorse him, he endorsed Perry.

  • WillWong

    WoUld you rather have him than someone who help orchestrated the first takeover of the House in 40 years, balanced the budget 4 years in a row and singlehandedly, through masterful denate performances pulled his campaign back into contention with minimal funds?

  • Juggernaut

    and book too so I hear. Will have to buy a copy after reading a review.