Rasmussen: SHOCK ! Santorum almost ties Romney nationally

[Tender Branson]

29% Romney
21% Santorum
16% Gingrich
12% Paul
  4% Perry
  4% Huntsman

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2012/election_2012_presidential_election/election_2012_republican_presidential_primary

[Tender Branson]

Let's see if Gallup's rolling average moves into the 12-15% support range for Santorum today, to see if this is a true poll.

[Oakvale]

Congratulations Phil!

[Mehmentum]

Perry has the same support as Huntsman.  Drop out already!

[© tweed]

I'm not sure how 'almost' that is

[Insula Dei]

Santorum+Gingrich+Perry= 41%

Take those rabid evangelicals that wouldn't vote for Santorum because he's too catholic* out, and you'd still have a 38-40% voterbase most of which Santorum could be able to acces within the next 2-3 weeks if everything goes his way. Could still get interesting, given the fact that we've never yet has a poll showing Romney well above 30%.

*: And who would they vote for? Perry? Most likely just wouldn't turn up.

[Badger]

While it stands t reason former bachmann and perry supporters would largely gravitate towards santorum (and very few to romney over paul at any rate), I'm not sure gingrich supporterd would be nearly so uniform in choosing rick over mitt. A majority i'd guess, but I question how large of one.

Don't forget huntsman' s support will largely gravitate towards mitt when he dropps out after nh. It's not much, but at least comperable to perry or bachmann at this point.

[cavalcade]

Santorum is almost certainly leading in SC then.

[Keystone Phil]

We are not a footnote.

[Lief 🗽]

Goddamnit Rasmussen, why can't you be a real pollster!

[TheGlobalizer]

We are not even a footnote.

Fixed.

[Keystone Phil]

We are not even a footnote.

Fixed.

No, I refuse to believe that you're so toolish to believe that Santorum has considerable, real support now.

[TheGlobalizer]

We are not even a footnote.

Fixed.

No, I refuse to believe that you're so toolish to believe that Santorum has considerable, real support now.

Sure he does.  Just like Gingrich did, and Perry did, and Bachmann did.

[argentarius]

We are not even a footnote.

Fixed.

No, I refuse to believe that you're so toolish to believe that Santorum has considerable, real support now.

Sure he does.  Just like Gingrich did, and Perry did, and Bachmann did.

Rick's not a guy you'd get buyer's remorse with, unless you don't read his policies. Unlike Gingrich, Cain and Perry he seems to be a genuine guy. I suspect however that Rasmussen skewed this poll to create some Santorum momentum, which I don't really mind considering all the tricks Romney gets up to.

[© tweed]

We are not a footnote.

quite a campaign slogan there bro.  makes me almost want to use my minimal graphic design skills to edit a Santorum sign, putting that right below his name.  such that it is a footnote.  maybe even put a (1) next to Santorum's name so it is in scholarly footnote style.

[TheGlobalizer]

Rick's not a guy you'd get buyer's remorse with, unless you don't read his policies. Unlike Gingrich, Cain and Perry he seems to be a genuine guy. I suspect however that Rasmussen skewed this poll to create some Santorum momentum, which I don't really mind considering all the tricks Romney gets up to.

He's genuine - genuinely batsh** insane.  You get buyer's remorse when you look deeper than "he's the leading socially conservative candidate" and see the detail.  He's just the current toolshed on the socon pedestal.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

We are not a footnote.

Obviously, you're Santorum-biased, but you were right anyway.

[Eraserhead]

I'm not sure how 'almost' that is

Exactly what I thought. That's basically like saying McCain almost tied Obama in the popular vote in 2008.

Cool nonetheless. Maybe he's leading in SC.

[memphis]

Seems to me the real question is what skeltons does Rick harbor that could be used in an attack ad. Losing by nearly 20 points in a swing state doesn't look good, but it's a little too astute of a point for a tv ad. The man was in Congress for a long time. Surely he has some votes that can be miscontrued.

[Antonio the Sixth]

YAY !

[Niemeyerite]

YAY !

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Seems to me the real question is what skeltons does Rick harbor that could be used in an attack ad. Losing by nearly 20 points in a swing state doesn't look good, but it's a little too astute of a point for a tv ad. The man was in Congress for a long time. Surely he has some votes that can be miscontrued.

Santorum tipped off John Ensign about his scandal at one point, but I honestly don't think that that's, relatively speaking, that bad, since if I was in a situation where I had a close friend who was in deep sh**t I'd probably feel some conflicting moral imperatives too.

[The_Texas_Libertarian]

Santorum tipped off John Ensign about his scandal at one point, but I honestly don't think that that's, relatively speaking, that bad, since if I was in a situation where I had a close friend who was in deep sh**t I'd probably feel some conflicting moral imperatives too.

Also the Ensign scandal wasn't that big compared to others.  The Anthony Weiner scandal did receive a lot more media coverage for something that was a lesser offense.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

If these numbers are true, I would be surprised if he wasn't leading in SC.

No candidate since 1980 received Republican nomination without winning SC. Not sure if this will repeat, but winning down there would certainly give Sanny a great momentum.

[Small Business Owner of Any Repute]

Why is this a shock? Santorum did well in Iowa, got a lot of free press, and will naturally pick up a lot of not-Romney support. This should be pretty short lived -- Santorum's own personal problems will take him down, just like all the other "flavors" got taken down.