Tag Archives: Rick Santorum

New Hampshire Debate: One More Enters

At the Republican presidential candidate debate last night in Manchester, N.H., Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN-6) made it known that she will become an official presidential candidate. Previously, she was only in the exploratory stage. She joins a field that now includes Massachusetts ex-Gov. Mitt Romney, former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, ex-House Speaker Newt Gingrich, Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX-14), ex-Sen. Rick Santorum (PA), and businessman Herman Cain. Former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson is also a candidate, but was not invited to participate in the New Hampshire debate sponsored by CNN and the Manchester Union Leader newspaper.

Notable about this particular debate, which broke no new campaign ground with the exception of the Bachmann announcement, was who didn’t attend. The biggest potential name still not yet in the race is, of course, former vice-presidential nominee Sarah Palin. Also, don’t forget former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani who could become a factor later in the race. A new poll already places him second in New Hampshire, though about 30 points behind Romney. Texas Gov. Rick Perry is another potential late entrant who may have the ability to catch fire and vault into the top tier. And, former Obama Ambassador to China and Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman is also likely to become a candidate but chose not to participate in the New Hampshire debate.

All totaled, the entire field could soon expand to 12 if all of the aforementioned individuals actually become candidates. Though this national political race has been slow to begin, the action will soon become hot and heavy.
___________________________________________________
For further detailed insights, to sign up for my daily email updates, or to sign up to track specific issues or industries, please contact me at PRIsm@performanceandresults.com

Campaign 2012 Officially Begins

Fox News and the South Carolina Republican Party co-hosted a candidates’ debate last night at the Peace Center in Greenville, S.C., that surprisingly served as the official kick-off event for the 2012 presidential campaign. Though it was somewhat of a non-event because the candidates most pundits would describe as being first-tier were not in attendance, the so-called second-tier group did nothing to discourage their supporters and actually managed to motivate the audience on several occasions.

Of the five participants, Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX-14) repeatedly brought the crowd to cheers, particularly so when he answered a question about heroine legalization by saying ” … how many people here would do heroin if it was legal? I bet no one would, so why do we need the government to protect us?” The others who participated in the debate were businessman Herman Cain, former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, ex-U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA) and former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson.

No one bungled a question but none of the participants particularly distinguished themselves either, with the exception of Dr. Paul on several questions and Mr. Cain in the final minutes of the debate. It is also probable that the eventual Republican presidential nominee was not part of this forum, but it is difficult to project just who that Republican winner will actually be, since all of the candidates are closely bunched. Polling shows no clear front-runner or individual capturing more than 20 percent support. Therefore, this may be the most wide-open campaign we have seen in the modern campaign era.

All of the contenders seemed to understand the key fundamental in contrasting themselves with Pres. Barack Obama, especially in light of the Osama bin Laden assassination. All of the candidates gave Obama due praise for his handling of the bin Laden mission, but then quickly pivoted to what they believe are the president’s shortcomings in his managing of the domestic agenda.

Though it is clear Mr. Obama has scored major political points for his action overseas and probably wouldn’t be defeated by anyone if the election were tomorrow, we don’t have to go too far back in history to prompt our memories and recall that foreign affairs victories are often short-lived and quickly crumble in significance when compared to the state of the domestic economy.

Two clear examples of this phenomenon occurred in 1945 and 1992:
• Winston Churchill, whose British Conservative Party was turned out of office in landslide proportions after successfully declaring a clear and stunning victory in World War II just a scant two months earlier.
• George H.W. Bush, who enjoyed 90% approval ratings after successfully guiding America in the Gulf War, only to lose his re-election just 10 months later, capturing a mere 37.5 percent of the national popular vote.

These results clearly show us that economics fundamentally trump foreign affairs.

For the Republicans to get back into the game against the president they will have to focus on the economy as the sole issue of the campaign and drive home their messages about the national deficit and debt, high food and gas prices, and the lack of job creation. It appeared that the five Republicans participating in last night’s debate fully understood this principle, but they and the other candidates have a very long way to go in a short time if the 2012 election is to become legitimately competitive anytime soon.
___________________________________________________
For further detailed insights, to sign up for my daily email updates, or to sign up to track specific issues or industries, please contact me at PRIsm@performanceandresults.com.

Democratic Senators in Michigan, Pennsylvania, Looking Good

Democrats got two pieces of good news in the past few days from states where they fared poorly in 2010. In Michigan, former Rep. Peter Hoekstra (R-MI-2) closed the door on a potential Senate bid against two-term incumbent Debbie Stabenow (D) by saying he will not run statewide next year. Hoekstra left the House in 2010 to seek the governor’s office, but lost the primary to eventual general election winner Rick Snyder. Stabenow is perceived to be vulnerable in 2012, but so far no strong potential opponent has yet stepped forward to challenge her.

In Pennsylvania, Public Policy Polling (April 7-10; 493 registered Pennsylvania voters) just released a new statewide poll that shows Sen. Bob Casey, Jr. (D) doing very well against all name Republican potential candidates. The person faring best, though giving no indication that he will run again, is former Sen. Rick Santorum (R) who Casey defeated 59-41 percent in 2006. But, even this match-up isn’t particularly close. According to PPP, Casey leads Santorum 49-37 percent. Though he fares well on the ballot test questions, the senator has some potential vulnerabilities. Casey’s job approval index tallies just 39:35 percent, and among Democrats is only 55:22 percent. A long time remains between now and the candidate filing deadline, so expect the action to soon pick up in both of these states.
___________________________________________________
For further detailed insights, to sign up for my daily email updates, or to sign up to track specific issues or industries, please contact me at PRIsm@performanceandresults.com.

Suspect PA Senate Numbers

Public Policy Polling just released new data from their most recent Pennsylvania Senate poll (1/3-5; 547 registered PA voters), but the small size of the sampling universe leads us to question the validity of the results.

The survey shows Sen. Bob Casey, Jr. (D) easily defeating all potential opponents including former Sen. Rick Santorum (R), the man he ousted from the seat in 2006. Though Santorum has made no overt move to seek a re-match, he actually polls the best in the field of potential Republican candidates. Mr. Santorum, however, is the only person in the Republican field who has significant statewide name identification.

What makes the poll suspect, however, is not that it shows Sen. Casey to be performing well — that’s believable, since Pennsylvania still favors Democrats in statewide races (the election of 2010 notwithstanding), and he has not been the focal point of any controversy or scandal during his first term in office. Rather, it is his potential opponents’ favorability scores that seem wildly out of whack.

According to the PPP poll, Casey would defeat Rep. Charlie Dent (R-PA-15) 51-31%; Rep. Jim Gerlach (R-PA-6) 49-33%; Santorum 48-41%; former Lt. Gov. Mark Schweiker 47-34%; and unknown attorney Mark Scaringi, the only announced Republican candidate, 50-27%. For an incumbent re-election race, especially in a situation where the senator is a member of the state’s majority party, these seem to be credible numbers. But, the depicted views of his opponents are not.

In our opinion, the poll’s accuracy factor seriously deteriorates when looking at the potential Casey opponents. Both Republican congressmen, Dent and Gerlach, score very poorly within this sampling universe. Dent gets an incredibly low 6:18% favorability rating, and Gerlach is only slightly better at 9:17%. The fact that 3/4 of the respondents haven’t heard of them is believable, but what could each have done to make them so unpopular?

The answer is nothing, hence, these numbers make little sense. The likely reason for the faulty results is that only 136 members of the polling universe could even identify them. In raw number terms, it is likely that only eight people said something positive about Dent versus just 24 who viewed him unfavorably. These are far below the minimum cell size to accurately forecast a result, especially in a state the size of Pennsylvania. Thus, the poll is trying to suggest that the opinions of 32 people are accurately depicting the feelings of an electorate of almost nine million voters.

Small-sample polling can be tricky because it bases conclusions upon very small pools of data. Though the Casey ballot test numbers certainly are in the realm of the possible, it is unlikely that all of the potential Republican candidates are viewed so negatively, especially when name ID is exceedingly low and their party just scored a big victory. More Pennsylvania polls will have to be taken before an accurate picture of Sen. Casey’s political health can be determined.