Arizona: Romney’s Insurance State
On Tuesday, the Republicans will conduct primaries in Michigan and Arizona. The Michigan race is a tossup between Rick Santorum and Mitt Romney — all polls from the state indicate a very close contest, with Romney’s numbers improving the last few days.
Arizona, on the other hand, appears likely to be won by Mitt Romney. Romney has led in every poll that has been taken in the state.
Earlier in the week, Santorum appeared to be closing the gap in Arizona, pulling within 3 or 4 points of Romney, but the latest polls show Romney pulling away with a double-digit lead. The debate on Wednesday night in Mesa, Arizona, is unlikely to have helped Santorum in Arizona or Michigan. Santorum came into the debate reeling a bit from a series of controversial statements relating to religion and social issues, made either recently or years back but that only now have come to light. In the debate, he was on the defensive most of the night, having to defend his record on earmarks, the debt ceiling, and his endorsement in 2004 of Arlen Specter over Pat Toomey in the hotly contested GOP Senate primary in Pennsylvania. Specter, of course, switched parties in 2009, and was one of the 60 votes for ObamaCare in the Senate that enabled the Democrats to break a GOP filibuster of the legislation.
Santorum appears to be suffering the fate of politicians who have spent too much time in Washington. Inevitably, they have long records to defend, including many votes that need to be explained that appear to be inconsistent with espoused positions on taxes, spending, and deficits. In 1996, GOP presidential candidate Bob Dole seemed to be talking to D.C insiders in trying to explain his Senate voting record, rather than to the American public.
Romney, who has faced a series of challenges in his second attempt at the nomination, has already weathered the rise of Rick Perry, Herman Cain, and Newt Gingrich twice. Now Santorum has taken the lead in all the national polls, and earlier in the week he seemed a serious threat to consolidate conservative opposition to Romney as Gingrich’s support level dropped off. In essence, with only four candidates left competing for the nomination, Santorum increasingly appeared to be within reach of getting the long-sought one-on-one fight with Romney for the nomination, as he was leading in each of the last 8 national surveys against Romney.
Santorum’s numbers in head-to-head matchups with Obama either nationally or in key battleground states have also begun to match those of Romney, whose argument that he is the most electable Republican has been one of his strongest in the long GOP fight.
But Santorum may have peaked a bit too soon. As the perceived frontrunner, he is getting more scrutiny than when he toiled in obscurity visiting all of Iowa’s 99 counties in the lead-up to the caucuses in that state. While Santorum’s enthusiastic defense of traditional marriage, the family, and the pro-life movement has registered with social conservatives, it has proven to be a lightning rod among some GOP voters who would prefer to talk abut economic issues or national security issues. Every poll now shows a significant gender gap in terms of support for Santorum, suggesting he runs much weaker among women, particularly independent women.
Nate Silver, writing in the New York Times, says Romney will benefit in Arizona from the votes of Mormons, who make up a bit over 10% of the GOP electorate in the state. In 2008, when Senator John McCain won his own state of Arizona by 13% over Romney in the GOP primary, Romney won the Mormon vote by about 10 to 1 over McCain, and McCain won all other votes by about 2 to 1 over Romney. Silver says that if Mormon voters in the state go 10 to 1 for Romney again, that would give Romney a 9-point overall lead, and the two candidates are running roughly even among all other voters. Silver gives Romney a 90% chance to win the primary.
The size of a Romney win in Arizona matters less than that he finishes first. Arizona, like Florida, is a winner-take-all delegate state in the GOP nominating process. Romney would win all 29 delegates with a victory. On the other hand, even if Romney loses Michigan to Santorum, the delegates from that state are likely to be split between the two leaders, and Romney will net the most delegates from the night even with earning just a split of the two contests.
Arizona is an insurance policy for Romney in case Santorum beats him in Michigan. Romney is the son of the former three-time governor of Michigan, George Romney, and grew up there. A loss, if Michigan were the only battle on Tuesday night, would be embarrassing. But if Romney loses narrowly in Michigan, and wins decisively in Arizona, the split result would dull any momentum Santorum needs to carry over to Super Tuesday the following week.
On the other hand, if Romney ekes out a win in Michigan, which would not be a great surprise (Silver rates the race close to 50-50), he could have two wins and momentum going into Super Tuesday. Romney has had the appearance of momentum before — after what seemed to be an 8-vote win in Iowa, a decisive win in New Hampshire, a huge win over Gingrich in Florida, and then a solid win in Nevada. Each time Romney has appeared to be in range of closing out the race he has been thrown back — first by Gingrich in South Carolina and then by Santorum in Minnesota, Colorado, and Missouri.
Romney’s problems run deeper than a possible loss in Michigan. In Thursday’s Rasmussen survey, he trails Obama by 7 points in a head-to-head matchup, and his numbers have deteriorated over the last month. These are blowout numbers on the national level. McCain lost the popular vote to Obama by 7.2% in 2008, and won only 173 Electoral College votes. Rasmussen’s tracking of Santorum versus Obama is only a bit better.
There is growing evidence that the GOP fight has alienated voters, including many independents, and swung the race decisively towards Barack Obama. As the economy shows signs of life, Obama’s greatest vulnerability in his re-election run becomes smaller. Conservative columnist George Will thinks both Romney and Santorum would make very weak general election candidates versus Obama.
The sliding poll numbers versus Obama for all the remaining GOP contenders have continued to keep alive the possibility of a late entrant to the race, or a deadlocked convention in Tampa in August, with a new nominee emerging (take your pick — Chris Christie, Jeb Bush, Paul Ryan, Marco Rubio, Bob McDonnell). Karl Rove says this is fantasy.
Ann Coulter, long a mainstay of the right, has made a strong case for Romney and pointed out the hypocrisy of talk radio hosts who backed him in 2008 versus Giuliani, McCain, and Huckabee, but have bashed him this year as an impure conservative. Among evangelical Christians, there is some evidence of bigotry towards Romney for his Mormon religion.
In any case, even if Romney sweeps both Michigan and Arizona on Tuesday, the nominating fight is likely to continue for some time. Romney and his superPAC backers will need to reload financially for him to maintain his spending advantage, which was very helpful in weakening Gingrich in Iowa and Florida. More important, Romney will need to make a far better case for why voters should support him against Obama.
Beating Gingrich and Santorum is one thing. Beating Obama is a far higher hurdle.
I like the points mentioned about Insurance but may be this link provide you more details http://www.dialabank.com
I believe it will be an easier task for Romney to win the election than the nomination.
If the election is about the economy, rather than social issues, – and it will be if Romney is the nominee – Romney will easily defeat Obama.
Once the Romney Death Star is turned on Obama his numbers will drop significantly.
Obama will win re-election by 5-7 points, if not more over Romney. It doesn’t matter what the issues are.
“He never takes anything at face value; he can argue any side of a question. And sometimes you think he’s like really believing his argument, but he’s not.” — Ann Romney
http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2007/5/22/90847.shtml
I think the establishment is on to something here. Who better to put up against a shameless huckster than a shameless huckster. Brilliant!
$5+ a gallon of gasoline will help any GOP in any race anywhere in the country, but especially Romney. He has definitely painted himself as the economic guy, Santorum the values guy, and Gingrich the professor guy. I like them all but I for one want to focus on the economy because birth control won’t fill up my gas tank. I can’t imagine many independents who want to revisit important social issues while they can’t find jobs, pay their mortgage, or buy gas. I agree with Dick Morris- is gas continues to gauge us, partly because of Obama’s self-righteous green delusions and incompetence, then Obama will lose no matter who the GOP candidate is.
Fantastic grammar.
Keep dreaming. Anyone who saw Romney’s speech in Ford Field has to have some doubts about him taking on Obama.
They don’t want to see the obvious. They think Obama is some rookie stooge. He isn’t. As soon as the presumptive nominee is decided the Obama campaign will unleash a withering one billion dollar carpet bombing operation. One in which the GOP will be knocked right down and will not be able to get back up. They’ve already lost the female vote and that’s a terrific start. The Republicans screwed themselves on that one all on their own.
So much is being made of Romney speaking to a small crowd in a large stadium. The truth is that the initial location was a ballroom that got sold out. Nobody was expecting 65,000 attendees at that speech, and who doesn’t know that? Enough spin already!
Ford field matters because Romney is supposed to have this great staff. One of the first things you learn working on a political campaign is you never want a picture of your candidate in a venue that has empty seats. If you expect 1000 you book a room that seats 900 so the story will be about the standing room only crowd. This event was billed as a major economic speech. All those the empty seats gave reporters that much more reason to a line you never want to see in a story about your candidate’s major speech: “His proposals were greeted with polite applause.”
The speech was run by the Detroit Economic Club. It was scheduled for a venue that sold out 90 minutes after the tickets went on sale. So they decided to go to a larger venue, in the atrium of Ford Field, but the Secret Service nixed the location and they had to hold it on the field itself.
On substance, it was a very good speech.
It was an awful speech. Even conservative commentators are saying so.
The problem isn’t so much the venue, but the vapidity.
Mitt Romney is a political loser. Over and over again.
Why is it so damn important that he be the nominee?
I’ll vote for him in the general, but he offers no contrast to Obama in the weak mind of the undecided voter.
They’ll give the black guy another shot because the news THEY watch will portray him as the victim.
I’d much rather go down swinging with a “controversial” candidate than an unprincipled plastic moderate.
I honestly don’t undertstand the fear that many of you have of Rick Santorum or Newt Gingrich. I don’t particularly like either of them, but they’re what the establishment left us. (And if you don’t believe in the “establishment,” it’s because you actually LIKE the GOP currently. Sorry for you.)
Santorum is right about Romney. If Romney is the nominee the GOP gives up the biggest issue in the 2012 election, Obamacare.
Not true. Romney has consistently said that (1), RomneyCare was for his own state only, and (2), he will sign the repeal of ObamaCare into law. Heck, I don’t care how ObamaCare is repealed, as long as it is, and I do believe Romney when he says he will repeal it. And I fail to see how it is inconsistent to be for something at the state level and against it at the federal level. We do that all the time, such as education. A lot Republicans, including me, believe that education issues belongs entirely at the state level (except when they violate such things as anti-discrimination laws). While I don’t agree with the premise of RomneyCare in MA, I have no problem with it, since I don’t live there. Frankly, I think competition at the state level is good — it helps to illustrate what works and what doesn’t.
A President can’t repeal anything! Congress does it and the President signs or vetoes the legislation. If the Republicans don’t win enough seats in the Senate to get around the obstructionist tactics of Reid, there will be no repeal of Obamacare. We must control the Senate or all a Republican President can do about Obamacare is to try and slow it down. With all of the democrat obstructionists in place at the working levels of the government, that will be difficult to do.
The media is attacking Romney full force and so far he is surviving. What the media did not tell you was how bad the weather was here in Detroit. Rain and snow with miserable driving conditions.
I have no doubt Romney will win the Michigan primary.
An attendance of 1200 people was not bad considering the location. People from the suburbs were just not that thrilled driving to Ford Stadium. Plus gas prices are above average here in Michigan – Obama’s economy.
“One of the reasons why I’m in favor of less government is because when you have more government, business takes it over.” — Milton Friedman
Politicians make promises, but then do different things when we’re not looking. We get the same campaign blather every election cycle, yet little ever seems to change. The reasons why? Big business, big labor, big education, etc., have seized control of our government. How do they do it? Through their smooth-talking K Street lobbyists and consultants.
Highly paid lobbyists/consultants like Newt & Santorum broker deals with government that gain their clients hundreds of millions in taxpayer funds (that some call plunder). In the process, lobbyists/consultants become millionaires while their wealthy clients become billionaires.
When Newt & Santorum were in Congress, they traded favors with big the big boys. Newt & Santorum used their political clout to give the big boys our money through use of earmarks, and the big boys returned the favors by contributing to Newt’s & Santorum’s re-election campaigns.
Capitalism is a tough game. Competition is fierce. The risks of failure are high. The profits are sometimes low. But theft from the government is a much easier game. The risks are low; the rewards are high; and there’s enough for everyone with connections & money to pay for it. The big boys just pay off the Congressman, and stick our money in their pockets. Now, I’m not accusing Newt & Rick of crimes. As Washington insiders, they’ve ensured this sellout is perfectly legal, in the same way they made insider trading illegal for all of us, but not them.
So, smooth talking politicians (BTW, smooth-talk is what makes them lobbyists/consultants extraordinaire) like Newt & Rick “talk the talk,” but when we’re not looking, they’re walkin’ the sellout walk.
The Tea Party needs to send them a message that “we’re mad as hell, and we (and politician/lobbyists/consultants) are not going to take it anymore.”
Romney is a guaranteed loser in the general. I’m already thinking about 2016, as there’s no point in wasting time and money on this year.
There’s a reason the GOP establishment didn’t field better candidates. They are certainly out there. The real good ones didn’t want to run because they see the writing on the wall. 2012 is not a GOP year.
[Yawn] This is the kind of article that comes out by pundits who think they are experts. Romney and Santorum both have had polling numbers very close to Obama and Romney has beaten Obama in polls on a number of occasions. Nine months is an eternity in politics. Once a nominee is chosen months from now people will forget the squabbling and his poll numbers will go up. Jimmy Carter had a double digit lead over Ronald Reagan around this time in the 1980 election campaign and we all know how that turned out.
I wouldn’t worry about the head to head matchup with Obama right now. Carter led Reagan by 24 points at this time in 1980, and Reagan wound up winning 49 states.
Once Romney is the nominee, and money is POURING in to his Super Pacs, and they go after Obama and his record, the 7 point advantage Obama has now will QUICKLY disapear.
You are mixing up 1980 and 1984. The 49-state win was in 1984. Still Reagan did defeat Carter in a landslide and by roughly 10% in the popular vote. BTW, in 1984, it was very close to being a 50-state win. Mondale won his home state of MN by less than 1% of the vote.
– you have to win your “home” state since it could make a difference: Ask Al Gore (and Mitt, like the Bushes, has more than one).
If Romney loses Michigan, whatever happens in Arizona will mean absolutely nothing.
Remember, Arizona is a “winner-take-all” state, Michigan is not. Michigan is also a much more liberal state than Arizona (in spite of Romney spending his youth there). And, current odds are that Romney is going to win both states (search for each state at intrade.com). Romney is steadily improving as he fights for the nomination. I like the new aggressiveness he is showing, and it should help him against Obama.
I’m not sure you have an appreciation just how much the GOP base hates Mitt Romney. The Romney who subscribes to a religion who feels it is OK to baptize Holocaust victims after death, the Romney who can’t make up his mind on abortion, the Romney whose healthcare plan was the model for the ACA, the Romney who profits from destroying jobs, etc., etc. I wouldn’t be surprised if Romney loses both Michigan and Arizona.
Romney has underperformed the polls in states like Michigan that allow independents to vote in the Republican primary. Indeed about the only place he out performed his polls was in Utah.
Once you get outside of the Detroit area Michigan is socially very conservative. Romney’s numerous flip fops on abortion will cost him there. I wouldn’t be surprised to see the Michigan map reverse itself from 2008 when McCain won the more liberal eastern part of Michigan and Romney won the conservative west.
I really have found this entire primary process unsatisfying. In the caucus runs amaturism (relying on volunteers) has led to miscounts eventually leading to premature victories. How much is intentional gamesmanship or how much is incompetence is debatable.
But even worse Michigan best exemplifies the ruse about ‘independents’.
Look at the news coverage about the ‘auto industry’ – which – owing to a narrative that Obama’s handlers have been spoon feeding the echo chamber dating back long before the campaign – GM is suddenly referred to as if this was 1955 -once again top dog owning better than 50% market share.
Like most everything the administration shills – GM’s complete bull – and the candidates did a pretty good job debunking as much this past debate.
Romney’s biggest problem this cycle in Michigan isn’t so much a rival as it is that the same Unions intent on recalling Walker in Wisconsin, fresh off of giving John Kasich in Ohio a bloody nose, are out to break Mitt’s legs in this primary. And the National MSM gives aid, comfort, and cover to pull it off.
Michigan shows how open primaries not only invite in forces outside conservative intersts – THEY ALLOW THE WORST EXTREMISTS TO TRY AND MOUNT MAXIMUM MISCHIEF TO EXACT MAXIMUM DAMAGE.
Consider a more routine side effect. Would Ron Paul really be as big a factor in the primary or the party for that matter were it not for the availiblity of these open primaries? I doubt it. The same goes for the caucus.
These represent a series of ‘handicapps’ that encourage a lot of people to throw in for the biggest brass ring campaign – besides the commonplace motives that have always existed; raise lots of money & raise a brand profile while gainning the valuable experience for a possible next run.
And what is the end result?
The media has [we will know come this Nov just how successfully] elaborated on it’s own premis from day one. Republicans are weak. Their candidates are weak (most often a joke). Their policy positions are weak. They snipe rather than reflect and pose solutions. Weak. Weak. Weak.
One would think Obama celebrated historic congressional & state gains in ’10 rather than us – because the Tea Party is over and we are just so weak.
By remaining winner take all CLOSED to independents – the closest you got here in Arizona to mischief making was the poll that Rich Baehr referred to. And I don’t fault him. That Public Policy poll was the basis for declaring Mitt yet again wounded – NATIONALLY – ONE ITSY BITSY BIASED #$%^&*&^% POLL! – all of which serves the Obama camp and their minions who claim to be all about ‘independence’ as well.
Public Policy polls out here are known pure push/pull bunk – either shilling for Dems or RINO’s who believe McAmnesty is the great hope of a resurgent ‘moderate’ wing in the Republican Party.
Nobody takes them seriously. Yet prior to our debate it was accepted fact that Romney was ‘in trouble’ here as well as Michigan.
Why?
The horse race motivations – the media is always courting eyes and ears not just for ego but for profit – dovetails nicely with Obama’s neediness as a weak candidate. Something our candidates can only try and react to, not control.
But what we have allowed to happen is for the primary process to evolve in a way that doubles the damage – the MSM do their kneecapping from the outside – while we allow thugs like Unionists to do so from the inside.
Irregardless the outcome of this election – we need to clean this up.
I think the smart money would bet that what happened to Santorum in Iowa was dirty tricks.
Mittens is falling flat; I just don’t trust him. Furthermore, since Romney adopted Obama’s OWS rhetoric just reveals him to be the liberal Democrat he is. He’s not fooling anyone–particularly in the Republican primary. Romney can’t break the 25-30% ceiling since the Conservative base does not want Romney.
Soylent green is old people. I actually voted for RWR in 1980. I’ll bet you are one of those young people. Listen to the pretty blonde woman named Ann. Romney was a governor. Dole and McCain were senators. Carter, Reagan, Clinton and Bush 43 were governors. Do you see a patern since WWII!?!? Governors beat senators every time! Bush 41 doesn’t count because he was VP and Nixon/Kennedy was two senators. LBJ doesn’t count for obvuious reasons.
I live in AZ. I voted for Forbes in 96. I have not voted for McCain for the Senate since 1996. I voted Libertarian. I have not voted for Sherrif Arpaio since 1996. He is a camwhore with many ethical dilemas like misappropriation of funds even though it was found to be legal if unethical. The Maricopa County Attorney (Andrew Thomas) who supported McCain and Arpaio will be disbarred soon for vindictive political false prosecutions.
Romney may be smarmy, but I like mormons in general. I grew up around them.
The problem is not so much the numbers as the message.
“This guy failed in his home state.”
Just a funny thought; a prophet is never accepted in his homeland. I think I got that from The Bible. I guess that would apply to Al Gore and Tennessee though. None of the three are homestate favorites. Yes I find this funny. I’m laughfing on the inside.
Can’t read any of the comments there are so many anti Romney people on every blog. I do think they are really democrats who are afraid of Romney and want to make sure they don’t have him to run against obuzo.
Read and learn! Then teach. I am old, but I was a soldier once and young. Ask why must I do this?
You feel the same fear I feel. Four more years of czars and executive orders are my fear as well. I fight as often as I can for a governor to lead. I was a soldier once. I can not be lead by consensus.
We need a CIC with the courage to order Navy Seals to risk death. I was a REMF once and young. I still took the oath and I would have done anything RWR asked of me.
There are many true Republicans who fear Romney. Don’t live in a bubble. Read some Plato. Republican and Democrat are more than just labels. One respects the rights of man and one is mob rule.
Sorry, I’ve been drinking again.
A couple of points on the delegate watch. First, while yes Arizona is winner take all, like Michigan it is subject to the 50% rule which means a relatively paltry 29 delegates will be awarded. 30 in Michigan to be split roughly in half absence a big surprise. Compare this to the 66 in Santorum friendly Ohio the following week along with 58 in Tennessee, 43 in Oklahoma, and 130 in the Western caucus states of Washington, Idaho, North Dakota and Alaska. Sure, Romney will take Massachussets & Vermont & maybe Washington & Idaho with the mormons, & Gingrich Georgia, but March looks to be pretty friendly for Santorum, especially when it becomes more & more apparent that Newt is a dead man walking in the southern states. He’s winning Ohio, Tennesee, & Oklahoma comfortably in the polls I’ve seen. The money advantage Romney has enjoyed is starting to equalize & I doubt Ohio & Tennessee voters will swoon over a double digit win due to the Mormon vote in Arizona or a narrow victory in Michigan. Truthfully, while Romney will likely pick up most of the 49 delegates in Virginia, I wouldn’t be surprised to see Paul get a good chunk of protest votes and turn that primary into a de facto embarassing loss. So, yes, Arizona is more consequential numbers wise than Michigan. But for Romney, those states will look like oases before crossing a desert. Of the nine state caucuses & primaries in March after Super Tuesday, all but Hawaii look favorable to Santorum. What will be really interesting is how many delegates Paul will manage to garner and whether these will go along with their fearless leader’s corrupt bargain at the convention after the first ballot. Paul may even openly encourage his disciples to vote for Romney in states like California with congressional district winner take all rules. Also, will Gingrich pull out & endorse Santorum? My guess is yes but when? Noone has even begun to look at the probable trajectory of these developments but its about time someone did.
Mormons voting for Flip Romney by a 10 to 1 margin. My my, mormon bigotry is exposed.