Santorum loses big in one on one with Romney

[Lincoln Republican]

Illinois was for all intents and purposes a one on one between Romney and Santorum.

Paul and Gingrich had no real camaign there.

Paul and Gingrich were not a factor.

And in this one on one, Romney thumped Santorum.  There is no other way to put it.

[RI]

I dub thee Sir Spam-a-lot.

[Negusa Nagast 🚀]

Romney's been running for President for 6 years and still can't secure a majority of the vote in most contests.  Worst frontrunner, ever.

[Old Man Willow]

Romney's been running for President and still can't secure a majority of the vote in most contests.  Worst frontrunner, ever.

More intellectual dishonesty from the hate Romney club, just like that absurd 'anybody but Romney' map. Anything with a reasonable amount of intelligence knows that the Ron Paul vote is the Ron Paul vote, and would not go to anyone else, his supporters certainly aren't going to vote for any of the other major candidates. It is a protest, isolated vote. Therefore, discounting the Paul vote, Romney gets a majority in Florida, Illinois, Arizona, and New Hampshire.

[Keystone Phil]

Let's hear the excuses after Mitt loses a one-on-one this weekend (especially after supposedly "ending" the race)...

[Negusa Nagast 🚀]

Romney's been running for President and still can't secure a majority of the vote in most contests.  Worst frontrunner, ever.

More intellectual dishonesty from the hate Romney club, just like that absurd 'anybody but Romney' map. Anything with a reasonable amount of intelligence knows that the Ron Paul vote is the Ron Paul vote, and would not go to anyone else, his supporters certainly aren't going to vote for any of the other major candidates. It is a protest, isolated vote. Therefore, discounting the Paul vote, Romney gets a majority in Florida, Illinois, Arizona, and New Hampshire.

More intellectual dishonesty by generalizing and then discounting the entire Paul vote I see. We have users on this very forum that supported Paul but would have supported other candidates in the primaries if he wasn't present, and no doubt hundreds of thousands exist across America outside of Atlas. Anyone with a reasonable amount of intelligence would realize that while Paul may have brought voters that only support him into the fold, but they are no means an entirety.

[Lincoln Republican]

Let's hear the excuses after Mitt loses a one-on-one this weekend (especially after supposedly "ending" the race)...

Oh, I won't be making any excuses.  I fully expect Santorum to win Louisiana.

Just as long as Mitt gets some delegates out of it I'll be happy. 

Congrats Phil!

[J. J.]

Santorum has some problems:

1.  The exit poll showed that a large number of people what the nomination process to be over.  The will support the person who is most likely to do that, not the guy trailing by more than 300 delegates.

2.  He advertized his strength as appealing to working class voters in the "rust belt."  So far, he's not winning them and he has lost three rust belt states in a row, MI, OH, and now IL.

3.  While Santorum won ND, KS, AL, MS (arguably), OK and TN, he only netted 54 delegates.  On his best day, Santorum only brke even with Romney.

[Eraserhead]

Santorum has some problems:

1.  The exit poll showed that a large number of people what the nomination process to be over.  The will support the person who is most likely to do that, not the guy trailing by more than 300 delegates.

2.  He advertized his strength as appealing to working class voters in the "rust belt."  So far, he's not winning them and he has lost three rust belt states in a row, MI, OH, and now IL.

3.  While Santorum won ND, KS, AL, MS (arguably), OK and TN, he only netted 54 delegates.  On his best day, Santorum only brke even with Romney.

His MS win was "arguable"?

[Wisconsin+17]

The only time they've ran against each other without Newt - Missouri.

And Santorum won a mandate there.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Forgetting MN, CO and MO apparently.

I can see why. After that drubbing it sort of spoils the narrative.

[Eraserhead]

The only time they've ran against each other without Newt - Missouri.

And Santorum won a mandate there.

Give Santorum 100% of Newt's vote in IL and he still loses.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And put it one on one, 'not Romney' defeats 'Romney' once again.

[J. J.]

Santorum has some problems:

1.  The exit poll showed that a large number of people what the nomination process to be over.  The will support the person who is most likely to do that, not the guy trailing by more than 300 delegates.

2.  He advertized his strength as appealing to working class voters in the "rust belt."  So far, he's not winning them and he has lost three rust belt states in a row, MI, OH, and now IL.

3.  While Santorum won ND, KS, AL, MS (arguably), OK and TN, he only netted 54 delegates.  On his best day, Santorum only brke even with Romney.

His MS win was "arguable"?

It was, on election day 1 delegate, 13, 12 and 12.  AP is now showing Romney with 14 (presumably RNC delegates).  Greenpages is showing Mitt and Rick each with 13 (RNC delegate).  Certainly, in terms of delegates, it wasn't victory.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

[Landslide Lyndon]

Santorum has some problems:

1.  The exit poll showed that a large number of people what the nomination process to be over.  The will support the person who is most likely to do that, not the guy trailing by more than 300 delegates.

2.  He advertized his strength as appealing to working class voters in the "rust belt."  So far, he's not winning them and he has lost three rust belt states in a row, MI, OH, and now IL.

3.  While Santorum won ND, KS, AL, MS (arguably), OK and TN, he only netted 54 delegates.  On his best day, Santorum only brke even with Romney.

His MS win was "arguable"?

It was, on election day 1 delegate, 13, 12 and 12.  AP is now showing Romney with 14 (presumably RNC delegates).  Greenpages is showing Mitt and Rick each with 13 (RNC delegate).  Certainly, in terms of delegates, it wasn't victory.

LOL, you're such a tool.

[J. J.]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Forgetting MN, CO and MO apparently.

I can see why. After that drubbing it sort of spoils the narrative.

MN and CO were in February, not March; So was MO, and that netted Risk no delegates.  I didn't cite Romney's FL, NH, or NV wins either, or even SC where where Romney had 2 and Santorum had 0.  I also hadn't factored in WY, where Romney expanded his lead.

The last day when Santorum actually gained on Romney in terms of delegates was February 7, six weeks ago.  He will possibly get a second one on 3/24, but even that will likely be in single digits.

[J. J.]

Santorum has some problems:

1.  The exit poll showed that a large number of people what the nomination process to be over.  The will support the person who is most likely to do that, not the guy trailing by more than 300 delegates.

2.  He advertized his strength as appealing to working class voters in the "rust belt."  So far, he's not winning them and he has lost three rust belt states in a row, MI, OH, and now IL.

3.  While Santorum won ND, KS, AL, MS (arguably), OK and TN, he only netted 54 delegates.  On his best day, Santorum only brke even with Romney.

His MS win was "arguable"?

It was, on election day 1 delegate, 13, 12 and 12.  AP is now showing Romney with 14 (presumably RNC delegates).  Greenpages is showing Mitt and Rick each with 13 (RNC delegate).  Certainly, in terms of delegates, it wasn't victory.

LOL, you're such a tool.

No, I can do simple math.  I'll try to explain this to this way.  13 = 13.  14 > 13.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So it's a 'heads I win, tails you lose situation? Glad to see only Mitts delegates count.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Are we talking MI here?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So Santorum actually won. Thanks winfield, glad you could admit this.

[J. J.]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Are we talking MI here?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

MS

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes, that is why I said Santorum "arguably" won MS.  Santorum does not get, as of yet at least, a plurality out of MS.  AP shows Romney getting 14 to Santorum's 13 and Greenpages shows it 13/13.  That is due to the RNC members, but they have a vote at the convention.

It's the same reason Romney has 22 delegates out of PR instead of 23.  One RNC member supports Gingrich.

In terms of the delegates, the best thing that could happen to Santorum would be for Gingrich to get out of the race (preferably by Friday) and endorse Santorum.  He'd pick up the bulk of Newt's delegates.  Some, like that PR RNC member, that are unpledged, may shift to Romney, but Rick could have a net gain 120-155 delegates.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So, Santorum did win the delegates that were available in the MS primary, despite polls showing Mitt up 7. Thanks again winfield.

Double counting supers isn't going to change that. Supers aren't bound and won't be decided till the convention.

[J. J.]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So, Santorum did win the delegates that were available in the MS primary, despite polls showing Mitt up 7. Thanks again winfield.

Yes Phil, Santorum won delegates in MS as did, Gingrich and Romney.  In terms of delegates out of MS, Santorum has 13, and Romney has 13 or 14.  13 = 13 13 <14  What part don't you understand?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No double counting and those, as noted, are now pledge (though they can change their minds).  Ah, so can the entire PA delegation, so I'm wondering why Santorum is putting so much emphasis on it.

[Keystone Phil]

J.J., I know you make quite a few errors in each post but don't refer to Ben as "Phil."