Santorum in trouble in Pennsylvania?

Abandoned by GOP voters: Only 36% think Santorum has a realistic chance against Obama compared to 54% who don’t

Rick Santorum has been tying the fate of his presidential campaign to his viability in the upcoming primary in his home state of Pennsylvania. But it appears  those who know him best are not so convinced. In 2006 Santorum actually lost his senate reelection bid by a whopping 18-points.

Public Policy Polling released a new survey of Pennsylvania Republicans last night that shows the state’s former senator trailing Mitt Romney 42 percent to 37 percent.

“The numbers represent a dramatic turnaround from PPP’s polling in the state a month ago. Romney’s gained 17 points, going from 25 percent to 42 percent,” according to the survey. “Meanwhile Santorum’s dropped 6-points from 43 percent to 37 percent, for an overall swing of 23-points in the last four weeks.”  Full poll results can be seen here.

Pennsylvania Republicans — more than virtually any others — are intimately familiar with his iffy politics and preachy campaigning style. Only 24 percent of his native state’s Republican respondents thought their former senator would “provide their best chance for a victory” against President Barack Obama. Many have not forgotten his passionate support of liberal, pro-abortion Democrat Arlen Specter (watch Specter ad) over conservative Pat Toomey.

Romney is also benefiting from a huge surge with the groups that have previously fueled Santorum’s success. What was a 37-point lead for Santorum with Evangelicals has now slipped to a mere 10-points at 44-34. What was a 32-point advantage for him with Tea Party voters is now only 6 points at 41-35. The greatest sign that conservatives are starting to really around Romney is evident in what was previously a 51-point deficit for him with ‘very conservative’ voters is now only 11-points at 44-33.

9 Responses to Santorum in trouble in Pennsylvania?

  1. Saguaro Sam says:

    From the dailycaller.com today, “Former President George W. Bush will deliver a speech in Pennsylvania on the day of the state’s GOP presidential primary. Bush is the only prominent politician in his family that has not made an endorsement in the 2012 presidential race.

    Bush will give the keynote address at the Plumstead Christian School’s annual “Founders Forum” on the Calvary Church’s campus in Souderton, according to the school’s official website.

    His father, former President George H. W. Bush is the most recent member of the Bush family to endorse former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney for president.

    Bush reportedly asked Romney if his son had endorsed him for president yet.

    “I haven’t met with President George W. Bush,” Romney said. “We speak from time to time.”

    Barbara Bush, his wife, replied, “We’ll talk about that.”

    The former first lady endorsed Romney before the Super Tuesday primaries.
    ——————————————-

  2. Tea Partier says:

    Here is Santorum talking about his “real concerns” about the Tea Party “movement“ to “refashion conservatism.” I wonder how many Tea Party supporters of Santorum are aware of his view of them? I’ve sent this link out to all of my TP friends who are onboard with this goofball.

  3. Fed Up says:

    Let’s face facts. Santorum’s a go-along to get-along type who sold out his supposedly strong moral values to endorse a pro-abort when George Bush convinced him they needed Specter. In my opinion, both sellouts stink.

    I’m sure Santorum thought he’d get a pass for this, but judging by the wide margin he was tossed out of the senate by his own PA voters, he seemed oblivious to the fact that Republicans are represented by the elephant symbol. And like elephants, we never forget, especially when it comes to getting stabbed in the back by one who professes to be conservative. Santorums’ brand of conservatism is trying to shove his religion down everyone’s throat. He is no longer a player and needs to get out of the way.

  4. JenniSan says:

    Santorum’s “support” is one factor : anti-Mormon sentiment from Evangelicals. He just happened to be the last man against Romney.

    He’s a joke, 3rd tier candidate, and he should have left a long time ago. it would actually be nice to watch him get stomped in his home state, but my guess is he’ll pull the rip cord a lot sooner.

  5. Maggie says:

    Santorum is too often determined to get the upper hand in disputes that he probably shouldn’t be having in the first place. His pious arrogance is his own worst enemy.

  6. ZOO says:

    Today Russell Pearce endorsed Romney, saying their views of illegal immigration were identical. John McCain was asked to respond to that and Romney’s stance of “self deportation” by KPNX 12. McCain stated that Romney doesn’t really believe that forcing self deportation is the right approach, and after elected would show his “humane side.” He also threw out a slur stating that Romney would never take advise from Russell Pearce.

    So McCain is calling Romney a liar – Romney publicly says self-deportion will be his approach, but doesn’t really mean it. We are headed down the same old path and are poised to put yet another Bushite McCainite Grahamite right back in the driver’s seat. If Romney is going allow John Amnesty McCain to speak for him and considers Russell Pearce a “hardliner”, that is a preview of another RINO that will allow the country to continue to fester with the growing Mexican invasion and occupation madness.

    I don’t believe a thing Romney has said about illegal immigration and McCain obviously knows it is a ruse. If my only choice is a Romney amnesty or a Obama amnesty – it’s going to be Obama. The GOP can shove it.

    • Dennis O'Brien says:

      Oh, come on, ZOO. Do you actually believe there’s no difference between Obama and Romney? Who do you trust more when it comes to filling the Supreme Court vacancies that are bound to come up during the next term? Obama will continue his pattern of appointing Socialist-leaning justices who will radically change the United States in ways that will make it unrecognizable for my children. I am disheartened that you would even contemplate such lunacy, let along articulate it here and God knows where else? I sincerely hope your sphere of influence is minuscule. I’ve read your comments for some time and they often made me think. Not so with this one. I’m thinking, alright. I’m thinking you’ve gone off the deep end.

      None of the candidates are perfect. They never have been. Some (Reagan, as an example) are far superior, although even he had flaws. Jimmy Carter was on the other end of the spectrum as among the worst during his presidency and even in retirement.

      But in the end, they were survivable. The damage that can be done by an unrestrained Obama, who will not have to worry about being re-elected, is unfathomable. I sincerely fear for the future of this freedom loving nation and our citizens.

  7. ZOO says:

    “…Socialist-leaning justices who will radically change the United States in ways that will make it unrecognizable for my children…”

    I say: an America ravaged by tens of millions of invaders from Mexico who will radically change the United States in ways that will make it unrecognizable for my children.

    Can you not understand what I wrote? McCain has publicly said that Romney is lying about his “tough” stance on illegal immigration, and will be peddling his “humane side” [amnesty] just like Obama if elected.

    Is that O.K. with you because you’ve got your eye on a certain Supreme Court nominee? I’ll go a step further – I think McCain’s remarks today will cost Romney (if nominated) the election; and the checked-pants country club boys are worried about the Hispanic vote – ha! All you brilliant Arizonans who re-elected McCain can now watch him bring down a second presidential campaign – in a row.

  8. Jane says:

    ZOO, you’re brilliant! Just brilliant.