How in the world is Romney going to defeat Santorum?

[micrometers]

Once the nutter states are done with the primaries Romney will start extending his lead. No matter though, unless the economy tanks, Obama's going to roll whatever the R's can come up with.

But the Republican party on a whole is nutter, no matter the state. These are the same idiots who wanted to default on the US debt.

 

[Farang]

Nah, Romney wins no matter what.

Romney has always been well short of a plurality of voters. The split of the conservative vote explains his lead.

 

[nageov3t]

Romney has always been well short of a plurality of voters. The split of the conservative vote explains his lead.

isn't that really the case in any multi-candidate election?

 

[Jaskalas]

How in the world is Romney going to defeat Santorum?

1. He's rich.
2. Conservatives have split the vote 3 ways.
3. The GOP doesn't believe in runoff elections.

So the majority that opposes Romney is thus far silenced by the GOP.

 

[fskimospy]

Romney has always been well short of a plurality of voters. The split of the conservative vote explains his lead.

As previously mentioned, I am taking all bets from people who think Santorum will win the nomination.

 

[cybrsage]

As previously mentioned, I am taking all bets from people who think Santorum will win the nomination.

I will take that bet. If Santorum wins, you can leave the forum. If he loses, I will leave.

Deal?


(I like to bet in ways I win even when I lose. )

 

[fskimospy]

I will take that bet. If Santorum wins, you can leave the forum. If he loses, I will leave.

Deal?


(I like to bet in ways I win even when I lose. )

So that I understand you, you want to bet that if Rick Santorum does not secure the Republican nomination you will stop posting here entirely and if he wins I will stop posting here?

Deal

 

[MotF Bane]

I will take that bet. If Santorum wins, you can leave the forum. If he loses, I will leave.

Deal?


(I like to bet in ways I win even when I lose. )

So that I understand you, you want to bet that if Rick Santorum does not secure the Republican nomination you will stop posting here entirely and if he wins I will stop posting here?

Deal

Bye cybrsage.

 

[CallMeJoe]

I will take that bet. If Santorum wins, you can leave the forum. If he loses, I will leave.
Deal?
(I like to bet in ways I win even when I lose. )

If you lose this bet, we all win!

 

[soundforbjt]

If you lose this bet, we all win!

He probably has an alt account already set up. :sneaky:

 

[fskimospy]

He probably has an alt account already set up. :sneaky:

Yeah, I have sincere doubts as to his ability to actually follow through, but it's worth a shot.

 

[Farang]

isn't that really the case in any multi-candidate election?

No.

For example in 2008, Edwards had a sizable chunk of the vote but his candidacy wasn't really helping or hurting either Clinton or Obama. Some said he took a good chunk of the "not Clinton" vote, but you can see after he dropped out that wasn't really the case as his supporters ended up about evenly split.

In 2012, Romney has proven himself to have a ceiling. It seems a majority of Republican voters want someone else, and as a known quantity Romney doesn't have the ability to change that. During the race we've seen the "not Romney" vote stay fairly consistent, with its focus swinging wildly on various candidates over the course of last year. Now it is just Gingrich and Santorum left (I leave Paul with his own faction). Gingrich and Santorum are both positioned as the "true" conservative choice versus Romney, who isn't trusted by conservatives. I think it is fair to say if either dropped out, a substantial majority would go to whatever "not Romney" candidate is left, thus giving that person a plurality (I think Santorum is more strongly positioned to do this).

2008 doesn't prove me wrong either because Edwards wasn't running to the right or left of anyone. He was just there.

 

[nageov3t]

No.

For example in 2008, Edwards had a sizable chunk of the vote but his candidacy wasn't really helping or hurting either Clinton or Obama. Some said he took a good chunk of the "not Clinton" vote, but you can see after he dropped out that wasn't really the case as his supporters ended up about evenly split.

In 2012, Romney has proven himself to have a ceiling. It seems a majority of Republican voters want someone else, and as a known quantity Romney doesn't have the ability to change that. During the race we've seen the "not Romney" vote stay fairly consistent, with its focus swinging wildly on various candidates over the course of last year. Now it is just Gingrich and Santorum left (I leave Paul with his own faction). Gingrich and Santorum are both positioned as the "true" conservative choice versus Romney, who isn't trusted by conservatives. I think it is fair to say if either dropped out, a substantial majority would go to whatever "not Romney" candidate is left, thus giving that person a plurality (I think Santorum is more strongly positioned to do this).

2008 doesn't prove me wrong either because Edwards wasn't running to the right or left of anyone. He was just there.

I had Bill Clinton in mind.

he was elected president twice, but never reached the 50% line.

 

[Farang]

I had Bill Clinton in mind.

he was elected president twice, but never reached the 50% line.

I'm not saying Romney won't win. I'm saying he is only winning because the conservative vote is split, and if Gingrich drops out I think Romney is in big trouble given his ceiling.

Much like I'd say Clinton would be in big trouble in '92 without Perot taking the tea party types from the establishment Bush.

 

[fskimospy]

I'm not saying Romney won't win. I'm saying he is only winning because the conservative vote is split, and if Gingrich drops out I think Romney is in big trouble given his ceiling.

Much like I'd say Clinton would be in big trouble in '92 without Perot taking the tea party types from the establishment Bush.

Romney does not have a ceiling, or at least his ceiling is much higher than people think. His support has been increasing at a fairly steady pace since the primaries began. He used to poll down in the low to mid 20's, now he polls in the low-mid 30's.

 

[cybrsage]

So that I understand you, you want to bet that if Rick Santorum does not secure the Republican nomination you will stop posting here entirely and if he wins I will stop posting here?

Deal

You read it wrong:

If Santorum wins, you can leave the forum. If he loses, I will leave.

We both leave. I fully expect you to not take the bet.

 

[cybrsage]

He probably has an alt account already set up. :sneaky:

Why won't someone ban soundforbjt already? He is a ProJo alt account.

 

[fskimospy]

You read it wrong:

If Santorum wins, you can leave the forum. If he loses, I will leave.

We both leave. I fully expect you to not take the bet.

That's not what your post said by any rational understanding of the English language.

That being said, I'll take your bet. When is your last day?

 

[cybrsage]

Lets try this again, but instead of using two small sentences, I will use one.

If Santorum wins, you can leave the forum

If Santorum wins, what does this sentence mean?

If you still take the bet, my last day will be an hour after I ensure you have canceled your account.

 

[fskimospy]

Lets try this again, but instead of using two small sentences, I will use one.

If Santorum wins, you can leave the forum

If Santorum wins, what does this sentence mean?

If you still take the bet, my last day will be an hour after I ensure you have canceled your account.

I don't think there is such thing as a canceled account here. If that's the case though, why wait? I'll stop posting starting today.

 

[MotF Bane]

I concur with eskimospy's interpretation, and have no idea what the hell you are trying to say, cybrsage.

 

[piasabird]

It takes a lot of money to make it to the end of the primary and get nominated to be the party nominee for president. Many people just run out of money.

 

[fskimospy]

Lets try this again, but instead of using two small sentences, I will use one.

If Santorum wins, you can leave the forum

If Santorum wins, what does this sentence mean?

If you still take the bet, my last day will be an hour after I ensure you have canceled your account.

I want to reiterate my previous point. Let me know what standard of verification is to your liking and today will be my last day on this forum. I expect you to follow suit, and be honest enough not to re-register with a new account.

I'm excited to be a part of this, let's do it!

 

[CallMeJoe]

I will take that bet. If Santorum wins, you can leave the forum. If he loses, I will leave.

Deal?


(I like to bet in ways I win even when I lose. )

I concur with eskimospy's interpretation, and have no idea what the hell you are trying to say, cybrsage.

I believe cybrstooge is employing an ambiguous "he" in his challenge. While the natural assumption is that "he" refers to Senator Santorum, cybrstooge is actually referring to eskimospy instead, thereby agreeing to leave only if eskimospy also departs the board.
It fits with the petty semantic games that he so frequently substitutes for reasoning, and that he somehow imagines are cute and clever.

 

[WHAMPOM]

the problem for Romney is that Santorum can only really be attacked from the left. He's best known for his religious extremism, the "man on dog" bit, and other social right stances.

But in the Republican primary there really is no attacking anyone from the left. It is all someone trying to figure out some way to signal that they're further to the right than the next guy.

In retrospect, Gingrich was easy to take down. He had a myriad of negative baggage. But Santorum not so much. He has a good marriage. Doesn't really have any character issues. Is a good debater who is actually one of the most logical in the field.

So how in the world is Romney going to beat Santorum? The only way is to find moderates in the GOP primary, which is silly in many ways.

Are you kidding me? How does anything you mentioned trump Romney's ability to outspend Santorum twenty to one?