By The Right Scoop


The so-called ‘core four’ states are NC, FL, OH, and VA, and Santorum is leading Obama in each of those states, where as Romney is not:

RASMUSSEN – President Obama now trails former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum by four points in a hypothetical 2012 matchup in combined polling of key swing states Florida, North Carolina, Ohio and Virginia. The president continues to hold a modest lead in those states.

Santorum leads the president 48% to 44% in the so-called Core Four states. Five percent (5%) prefer some other candidate in this matchup, and two percent (2%) are undecided. This marks a shift from last week, when the president was slightly ahead of Santorum.

Obama remains ahead of Romney 46% to 42%, showing no change from last week. Six percent (6%) prefer some other candidate in this matchup, and six percent (6%) are undecided.

The survey of 500 Likely Voters in Florida, Ohio, North Carolina and Virginia was conducted on March 10-15, 2012 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 4.5 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.

About 

Blogger extraordinaire since 2009 and the owner and Chief Blogging Officer of the most wonderful and super fantastic blog in the known and unknown universe: The Right Scoop


Comment Policy: Please read our new comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.


NOTE: If the comments don't load properly or they are difficult to read because they are on the blue background, please use the button below to RELOAD DISQUS.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Steven-Valdez/1806887704 Steven Valdez

    If Santorum is winning the early swing votes from Obama. What the hell do we need Romney for then? DROP OUT MITT!!

    • marketcomp

      DITTO!

    • Susanna958

      I posted the same thing before I saw yours.

      • K-Bob

        It bears repeating.

    • stage9

      Hear! Hear! Why nominate a liberal when w can win with a Conservative?

    • http://twitter.com/nestroyat64 Johann Streit

      Santorum will not beat Obama, not even in a mud-wrestling match! Again and again he has failed to raise the level his campaign rhetoric to the degree abstraction that would get him out of the contraception corner. We are looking for someone with a platform.

      • stage9

        Maybe your reading comprehension inhibits you:

        http://www.ricksantorum.com/issues

        • http://twitter.com/nestroyat64 Johann Streit

          He hasn’t been able to pull himslef up beyond a single question put to him by the media people and hit back on a level where it matters. They always frame and cage him. The shopping list you posted doesn’t change that.

          • keyesforpres

            LOL, at least Santorum is willing to go before the media. Romney avoids questions like the plague. He very rarely allows the average Joe to ask him questions at his rallies.

            • http://twitter.com/nestroyat64 Johann Streit

              So that’s what’s behind the Romney the Distant myth. A candidate for the presidency doesn’t have to go around the country like the Dear Leader and comment on every trifle. He should show some restraint and make it count where it matters before he gets outclassed beyond boredom.

            • http://twitter.com/nestroyat64 Johann Streit

              So that’s what’s behind the Romney the Distant myth. A candidate for the presidency doesn’t have to go around the country like the Dear Leader and comment on every trifle. He should show some restraint and make it count where it matters before he gets outclassed beyond boredom.

              • keyesforpres

                Oh so you think allowing everyday folks to ask a candidate direct questions is “every trifle”. Your candidate is as big of a snob as O.

                • http://twitter.com/nestroyat64 Johann Streit

                  The questions is one thing and the answers is another. It is the latter that bother me.

                • keyesforpres

                  LOL, so it’s ok for Romney to refuse questions. Then you say the questions are fine (I guess you mean for Santorum), but you don’t like Santo’s answeres. You make no sense. At least we know where Santorum stands. Mr. Good Hair? Not so much.

                • http://twitter.com/nestroyat64 Johann Streit

                  No, you make no sense arguing against your own strawmen. Call Fluke and get yourself a good dose of contra-misconception.

      • hbnolikeee

        is level of campaign rhetoric the same as how well he bullshits? Personally, I prefer less bull.

        • http://twitter.com/nestroyat64 Johann Streit

          Compared to 2,50 a gallon, everything is bullshit.

          • hbnolikeee

            Considering we have the most oil on the planet, and if it wasnt’ for the tree huggers that have stopped drilling we not only would have 2.50 (notice we use a period not a comma for decimals in the US), we could tell the towel heads in the middle east to go pound sand.

            The day we open drilling and exploration, the gas prices will plumet. Not three years later as the “pundits” suggest. The current suppliers will see the handwriting on the wall and if they don’t want to “pound sand” they’ll cut their prices immediately.

            And my two year old niece could beat that turd in a fair fight. And Rasmussen has Rick beating Duh Bumbler in some of his most recent polls. So wake up to the fact that this loser is packing his bags as we speak.

            • http://twitter.com/nestroyat64 Johann Streit

              The truth is, people will pay five dollars plus for their gas before they submit to Shantorum Law.

              • keyesforpres

                You are truly uninformed about Christianity if you think it is even remotely similiar to sharia. By your thought process, our Founders were radical Christian extremist!! You sound so ridiculous.

                • http://twitter.com/nestroyat64 Johann Streit

                  How many Catholics among the Founders? Give me a round number.

                • keyesforpres

                  Oh, so you fear Catholics? You think it is similar to Islam? Good grief.
                  Yeah, you’re right, none of our founders were Catholic. Don’t think we’d had any Catholic immigration at that time. I don’t fear Catholics. Apparently you do.
                  I suggest you fear Islam. Of course, Romney said Islam is one of the world’s noble religions and jihad has nothing to do with Islam. But hey, watch out for those Catholics!

                • http://twitter.com/nestroyat64 Johann Streit

                  It’s a close call. Look at European history. Far from fearing the Catholics per se, I fear the way Santorum tends to revert to dogma when push comes to shove, which makes him in a way Obama-like, who balks at making good policy decisions because he can’t jump over his own shadow.

                • keyesforpres

                  It sounds like you are as ignorant on Islam as your candidate.

                • http://twitter.com/nestroyat64 Johann Streit

                  So what’s your rationale for the founding of America?

                • keyesforpres

                  Well, the New England Charter said their founding was to advance the kingdom of Jesus Christ. Our Founding Fathers envisioned a Judeo-Christian society. Our Consitution would only work for moral and religious ppl. That is what John Adams said. Muslims don’t believe in our Constitution. They can only swear allegiance to the Koran. It is dumb to allow ppl to immigrate here who want to overturn our Constitution.

                • http://twitter.com/nestroyat64 Johann Streit

                  That has been the endeavor through the ages, but people and peoples mess up. In more recent history, Europe has messed up big time. But to cut it short, I think we should go for a candidate that is more firmly grounded in the American tradition. The Santorums are newcomers from an old world in this respect and can wait their turn. That’s my humble opinion.
                  The Constitution, by the way, has been overturned by the Supreme Court, without any Moslems.

                • keyesforpres

                  Turn? Sorry, we need someone to overturn Obamacare immediately. Romney is not going to do it. I’d like to remind you that Romney’s dad grew up in Mexico. Santorum’s father was raised here. So the argument could be that Romney’s line hasn’t been here that long.

              • hbnolikeee

                People, which people? Are they the crazy Marxists or are they the moronic Socialists? It’s hard to tell with all the goose stepping going on.

                • http://twitter.com/nestroyat64 Johann Streit

                  Santorum is the closest thing to a Taliban you are going to see in an American election. This goose won’t be stepping over the Marxists and Socialst without losing both legs.

      • K-Bob

        Abstraction? Seriously?

        You aren’t looking for a platform, you’re looking for a hook to keep from floating away.

        • http://twitter.com/nestroyat64 Johann Streit

          For you I call it a lack of perspective.

          • K-Bob

            Like ignoring the terrible shape Obama put the country in, in order to claim Santorum would lose? Obama has to run against Obama. That’s a bad, bad thing form him.

            This is why Romney cant’ win. He has to make Obama look good, just so he can avoid repudiating Romneycare.

            Newt, Santorum, and Paul wold beat Obama. So we need to pick one of those three. Paul is bad for the country, so it’s between Newt and Santorum.

            Either one is fine by me.

            • http://twitter.com/nestroyat64 Johann Streit

              Since only one will be nominee, we need to pick a winner with a cause and the ability to follow through. But I do think, Newt needs to bond with Paul Ryan. He gave away a strategic opportunity with his social engineering slight.

      • keyesforpres

        Well Waaaahhhhhmney ain’t got no platform. Well, if you call lying about your opponents a platform, well then, he’s got a platform!

        • http://twitter.com/nestroyat64 Johann Streit

          He is well on the way of getting one together, though. More importantly, when Romney speaks out and speaks from his gut, he is right on the money.

          • keyesforpres

            Getting one together? He should have had one before he ran. He’s been running since 2006. When I saw him in person he was lame. Said Obama is a good man, that he was just in over his head and he was going for European style socialism. Um no, he’s doing this on purpose and he’s going for a dictatorship. We need someone to say that. Not the lame comments Romney says.

  • xam3991

    Rick Santorum FTW!

    • http://twitter.com/nestroyat64 Johann Streit

      Rick Santorum, Find The Way!
      Or, as some European magazine headlined recently, “Who the F**k is Rick Santorum?”

  • wodiej

    Real Clear Politics has these numbers from Rasmussen as of today:

    Obama 49
    Romney 43

    Obama 51
    Santorum 41

    The numbers RS reports above are from Rasmussen as well but they are from yesterday. I don’t know how in the world the polling could swing 7 points in one day.

    • K-Bob

      Spasms?

  • http://twitter.com/PuritanD71 PuritanD71

    Momentum!!!!

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_E4C65QOIQ4XH67F6MEHWTXGODY Alan

    I’m a little suspect of the polling but I always feel that any poll is not scientific.

    The only polling that really matters is the one before the election.

    • wodiej

      Fox, Pew, PPP, Bloomberg, Reuters and Quinnipac all have Obama up by 10 points or more. These polls are useless until we have a nominee.

    • Nukeman60

      The only polls I trust are the ones after the election. They seem to be the most accurate.

      • BMinPA

        Are they?

        • hbnolikeee

          well if you take into account all the dead voters, cartoon character and illegal aliens, then yes.

      • Mtncougar

        Santorum has been attacked and fire-bombed by the MSM. Some might remember when the media went after Santorum’s family memorial for the baby that didn’t live. They started way back then. Now of course it’s the twisting of contraception as an “issue.” The MSM mocked Bachmann (Newsweek cover etc), they destroyed Cain (unsubstantiated allegations) and attacked Newt (ABC interview with ex-wife).

        We’re not talking about other candidates – but the liberal press.

        They haven’t attacked Romney hardly at all. They’ve treated him with kid gloves.

        Think about it.

        So the polls that show Romney doing well – they are not accurate. Romney hasn’t been fully attacked yet. Wait until then. And of course they will crush him over Bain (for those who haven’t seen it, here’s an interview with a Reagan conservative venture capitalist who explains why Bain is a “job killer.”) Bain is Romney’s sole claim to economic prowess.

        Santorum’s poll numbers are far more accurate because he’s being attacked by the MSM and the numbers reflect people’s opinions of Santorum in spite of that. Romney’s poll numbers are inaccurate because the MSM destruction machine hasn’t targeted him yet.

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/VNYSALCJWXWHB4TV2AXW5VFYBU TJ

      The polling closest to the elections in AL and MS showed Santorum behind.

    • veek46

      You mean after the election.

    • Jimmie Smith

      no…after the election…

  • 911Infidel

    Eff the polls. Take a look at gas prices. No one is ignoring those. There’s your real poll data.

    • Sober_Thinking

      Spot on!

      • 911Infidel

        People have a tendency to vote according to the status of their pocketbooks. High prices, high interest rates and gas lines killed Carter’s re-election bid. If anything busts up Obama’s re-election bid it will be the price of gas and the effect it has had on the price of everything else. If this keeps up an empty tuna can has a better than 50-50 shot of beating Obama in the fall.

  • StrangernFiction

    The GOPE would rather have Obama as president than a conservative.

    • sDee

      ’tis true

    • Siobhan7

      Very sad, but true!

  • http://twitter.com/HOUSTONPETITION Stop the Magnet

    Pray for Santorum.

    • sDee

      and send money! :)

    • cabensg

      • keyesforpres

        How funny. Santorum’s spending grade was a 3.66. Most senator’s were much lower. Santorum’s support of Spector is not as bad as Newt’s support for Scazz..(can’t remember the spelling)in NY. She was an obvious dem and Newt’s endorsement of her cost us that seat. He refused to endorse the true conservative.

        • Mtncougar

          “Asked why he chose to back Scozzafava, who supports abortion rights, same sex marriage and has ties with local labor leaders, Gingrich responded, “Let’s just start with she is the nominee of the local party. My bias is to be for the nominee of the local party, and I don’t second guess the local party.”

          The former Georgia congressman then rattled off a list of Scozzafava’s conservative credentials.

          “She has signed a no tax increase pledge. She is endorsed by the National Rifle Association. She has come out against cap and trade…She is opposed to the Obama health care plan. She will vote for John Boehner instead of Nancy Pelosi,” Gingrich said. “All of those things together make her – it seems to me – a legitimate, authentic, Republican nominee.”

          Gingrich also argued that Scozzafava, a state assemblywoman, stands a better chance of winning the seat over Hoffman, who is trailing in public polls.

          “In the last poll that came out yesterday, she is well ahead,” he said. “And she is much more likely to beat the Democrat than Hoffman because Hoffman doesn’t live in the district.”

          “He’s never won an election in the district,” Gingrich said of Hoffman, “[Scozzafava] represents the biggest county in the district. She actually knows the local issues, and Hoffman has says publicly he doesn’t know the local issues.”

          http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1009/28730.html

          • keyesforpres

            Actually, Hoffman was leading before Gingrich endorsed her.

            Yes, Gingrich is just like the elite, putting party before principle. I posted a video Friday of Gingrich saying just that. That woman had a clearly liberal record. It is my understanding she actully supported cap and tax. She then turned around and endorsed the dem. Nuff said.

            • Mtncougar

              Actually, Hoffman wasn’t leading before Gingrich endorsed her. And Newt has always (from way back in the 1990’s) espoused going for the best possible conservative, not losing “the best possible” in favor of “the ideal” who loses. You can argue with his strategy but not his reasons/motives.

              • keyesforpres

                He was leading…there was nothing conservative about the gal he endorsed. In fact she was so “conservative” she turned around and endorsed the dem in the general.

      • Mtncougar

        cabensg – that’s a great video! thanks

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/TBMRE5AH3RPJI62TGPHZEN7R7Q Crystal

    I don’t understand the establishment. President Obama obviously not a moderate democrat and yet the establishment believes someone who is moderate republican can win more support. The GOP needs to nominate someone who is the complete opposite of President Obama. Just like Ronald Regan was the complete opposite of Jimmy Carter, who of course wasn’t a moderate democrat either. With the sluggish economy and high gas prices, Rick Santorum has a good chance of winning.

    • sDee

      The GOP establishment was never behind Reagan. The people were.

      Going into the August 1976 Republican National Convention Ford had a lead but not the 1130 delegates needed to win. So, Reagan and Ford competed for the individual delegates and the state delegates. Some say Reagan made a big mistake by picking a moderate Senator (Schweiker) to win some of the northern states. A few moderates went to Reagan, but many conservative delegates left him.

      In 1980 the GOP establishment put its weight behind Progressive Bush1, not Reagan.

      The GOP establishment, feigns conservatism but thrives on big government – it feeds them and grows their power.

      • c4pfan

        Exactly! They use it for elections, but that’s it!

    • Sober_Thinking

      Crystal, that was an excellent point! Thanks.

    • ApplePie101

      The establishment republicans must have taken a vow to never, ever let anyone like Ronald Reagan get into the White House again. They fought him tooth and nail when he tried to shut down the department of education, and they’re again demonstrating that they want to continue government bloat and waste. Romney is the Anti-Reagan. That’s why the establishment supports him.

  • marketcomp

    I wonder if this will be plastered on the Drudge Report! NOT!

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/NH4WP4T7D7OZK25QPOLATPPS54 Nathaniel w. Stone

      Nope – today on Drudge, Romney is a mega-hero for leading a search in NYC for a runaway teenager.

      • marketcomp

        What? Is that a campaign strategy?

      • K-Bob

        Yeah, in 1996.

        Did the story mention that John McCain was a war hero? Because he really was.

        It didn’t make McCain a good candidate for President, though.

  • Susanna958

    Why doesn’t Romney drop out already?

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/VNYSALCJWXWHB4TV2AXW5VFYBU TJ

      Likely because he has invested so much time, money and energy along with pride and still thinks he is going to win. It would be wonderful if he did though.

    • wodiej

      he’s still got money.

    • Sober_Thinking

      He needs the money to pay the bills on his hair products.

    • FreeManWalking

      This is his Last chance at the White Horse. opps did I say horse when I meant house?

      Willard has been running for president since 06.

      He knows if he can’t get the nomination this year, there would be NO CHANCE is 2016 because he would be another Ron Paul, so it is DO-or-DIE.

      With all the millions he has spent publicizing his character and lack of ideas touting what a great leader he will be, 70% of the republican party still says NO, get on your horse and ride the other way.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Randall-Pickard/100003011397298 Randall Pickard

    Go Rick. Game On!

    • cabensg

      There is no Rick, game on.

      Under qualified, un-vetted, over rated, big government advocate, big spender, anti- tea party, union backed, approves Fed meddling.

      There is no way anyone who is a conservative could look at this guys record and pronouncements and consider that he would represent conservatives as president. Just like Romney he’s had to change everything he’s done and head to the right as fast as he could to even seem viable to voters. This is so disingenuous because in his own words Republicans have moved so far to the right and the left so far to the left they now meet. Does this represent how we feel about conservatism, that we’ve moved to far right? The only way a conservative can support Santorum is to ignore his words and record.

      Not one thing I wrote in that first sentence is an exaggeration of his actions and words and I would surmise from that his beliefs. If those are not his beliefs he certainly had time to change them while he was a Senator. The things he supported have only now become unsupportable because he’s running for the office of president. Show me where he is better than Romney if the only reason he’s now disavowed everything he believed is so he can appeal to voters.

      Gingrich/2012

      • keyesforpres

        Gawd you are desperate.

        • Mtncougar

          Not at all. Smart and clear.

          • keyesforpres

            Nope, desperate…

  • Nukeman60

    If any of the candidates were smart, they would all get a copy of Col West’s ‘Fact Card’ and pull it out for every speech, interview and ad. They would all be 10 points ahead of Obama.

    Newt does it some in his presentations, but he doesn’t get the airtime right now that the others get.

  • stevenbiot

    Romney, time to kick rocks!

  • K-Bob

    Anyone who can beat Romney has to be supported in this race. I don’t remember which polling company posted it, but I saw some mention that a lot of Newt supporters evidently would go to Romney if Newt dropped out.

    I’ll see if I can find it.

    But the folks who keep demanding Newt drop out, like Eric “PDS” Ericsson and Quinn “PDS” Hillyer are just not thinking clearly on this. We need both Newt’s ideas in this race, and Santorum’s basic decency–and his fealty to conservative values–to erase the damage Romney’s candidacy would do to this nation (if he wins the nomination).

    • wodiej
      • K-Bob

        Thanks, wodiej!

        • wodiej

          yw

      • cabensg

        This only confirms what I’ve thought all along and is probably what Newt’s tactics are based on.

        Any vote for Gingrich is a vote against Romney just as much as a Vote for Santorum. The vote in Alabama and Mississippi proved that. Romney came in third.

        • keyesforpres

          Except when Newt wasn’t on the ballot in Missouri (I believe) Santorum beat Romney handily.

      • keyesforpres

        Again, makes no sense. You Newt supporters tell us he’s the most conservative and yet this tells us that half would go to the most liberal candidate if Newt weren’t in the race. How can Newt be the most conservative if half his supporters are Rinos?

        • Mtncougar

          welll…. (drum roll) we/they don’t see Santorum as being conservative.

          • keyesforpres

            And Romney is?
            Santorum was the 5th most conservative senator when he was in the senate.

            • Mtncougar

              They don’t see Santorum as conservative and they don’t see Romney as conservative, but they do see Romney as electable. (yawn)

    • cabensg

      If the basic decency of Santorum were true I’d be advocating he be VP to Gingrich. Even a cursory look at what he’s done not what he’s said in this nominating process shows he’s had to lie consistently to appeal to voters. Lying is inconsistent with decency.

      • K-Bob

        A charge of lying is serious. You aren’t going to prove he lied with that. And I’m not going to rehash all the dumb accusations made about him being strongly pro-union or being a liar because he endorsed Specter or whatever. Those things have been shown to be stupid accusations so many times now that if people still want to go with ‘em, it says more about the accusers than it does Santorum.

        Santorum is a basically decent guy. This isn’t even questioned by most rational people.

    • keyesforpres

      Well, if many of Newt’s supporters would go to Romney, than they aren’t conservative. They keep hitting us over the head with “Newt’s the most conservative” and yet you’re telling us they’d go to the most liberal candidate if he dropped out. Makes no sense.

      • K-Bob

        I’m guessing It’s only the chickens who think Santorum is going to usher in an American “Taliban” or something (because of his Christian faith) that would go from Newt to Romney. Oddly enough, I’m betting it’s the most strident “moral values” voters who would move to Romney if Santorum dropped out.

        Regular folks need to just get over Newt’s flaws and Santorum’s strongly-held religious values and pick one. Both are better than Romney.

  • http://profiles.google.com/ajtelles Art Telles

    Rick Santorum – jump on this – like, right NOW!!!…

    – – – – – – – – – –

    The 4 minute video is like “… a British sketch comedy.”

    “What if Obamacare Really was Like Auto Insurance?” – Eric Scheiner March 15, 2012
    >> CNS News – http://cnsnews.com/blog/eric-scheiner/what-if-obamacare-really-was-auto-insurance

    “Is it me?

    “Or is the ongoing argument that the individual mandate in Obamacare is somehow the same as some states requiring proof of insurance when registering an automobile just absurd?

    “Can you imagine if buying car insurance was actually similar to what’s in Obamacare?

    “It would be like absurdist theater.

    “For those who cannot imagine, we imagined it for you.
    “So there’s no need to visualize,
    “just click ‘play’ and enjoy.”

    – – – – – – – – – –

    Santorum should hire Eric Scheiner for future ads… before Gingrich hires him.
    Gingrich should hire Eric Scheiner for future ads… before Santorum hires him.

    Romney should… uh, he probably isn’t interested in the “mandate” truth.

    Art

    • sDee

      The car insurance mandate argument has always been false. States mandate a driver carry liability insurance in the event the driver causes damage or injuries to others. The driver is not forced to carry insurance for damages to himself or his own car. Most states are aware of the implications of this mandate and allow for bond posting or self insurance.

      • http://profiles.google.com/ajtelles Art Telles

        Transcription…

        sDee, the comedy sketch uses car insurance is a vehicle to make an ideological point, that I liked so much so I transcribed it.

        Enjoy… the 4 minute video and the text.

        – – – – – – – – – –

        Welcome to Mutual of Obamaha…

        CNS News –
        Eric Scheiner
        March 15, 2012
        >> http://cnsnews.com/blog/eric-scheiner/what-if-obamacare-really-was-auto-insurance

        Welcome to Nutual of Obamaha –

        During a March 8th interview on C-Span Rep. Jackie Speier (D- Calif.) was discussing the upcoming Supreme Court date focused on Obamacare.

        When asked what would happen if part, or all of the healthcare law was overturned she said,

        “ I don’t think that it’s going to be overturned.
        “We have a long history of requiring proof of auto insurance at the time of registration of a vehicle, mandatory responsibility to carry auto insurance.

        “So this individual mandate for health insurance, I think, will be held constitutional.”

        Eric –

        “Is it me, or is this argument that the mandates in Obamacare are a lot like requiring proof of insurance when registering a vehicle just a little bit absurd?
        “I mean, if all the Obamacare mandates applied when buying auto insurance, purchasing auto insurance would become like a… a British sketch comedy.”

        – – – – – – – – – –

        Setting is the interior of an insurance office.

        Eric, Insurance Agent (IA) –
        Man, Insurance Customer (IC) –

        IA –
        “Oh, welcome sir, to Mutual of Obamaha. How can I help you?”

        IC –
        “I just came in to cancel my car insurance policy.”

        IA –
        “Oh, canceling your car insurance policy.
        “Oh, sir, sure, we can certainly help you out with that.
        “Would you prefer the tax or the penalty?”

        IC –
        “Neither.
        “I don’t want to pay anything.
        “Things are tight with my wife.
        “I sold my car.
        “We’re taking public transportation, and…
        “That’s why I’m choosing not to have a policy.
        “I just wanted to cancel everything.”

        IA –
        “Oh, but, see sir, you can’t choose not to have a car insurance policy.
        “It’s Federally mandated.”

        IC –
        “I can’t choose to not buy something?”

        IA –
        “No sir.
        “You see, we found that if people had choice, they might make a decision that they don’t like, and then they’d feel bad.
        “So, what we did is, we’ve eliminated the choice, to focus on making you happy with the mandated policy.”

        IC –
        “I’d be happier if I could just have my money.
        “How about I just don’t renew my policy when it’s due?”

        IA –
        “You can do that sir.
        “Again, it depends on if you want the tax or the penalty.”

        IC –
        “What’s the difference?”

        IA –
        “Well see, the tax is so the mandate holds up in court.”

        IC –
        “But, I don’t want to buy anything.
        “How can you tax the purchase of nothing?”

        IA –
        “Well, in that case.
        “You probably want to be interested in the penalty.”

        IC –
        “There’s a financial penalty given out for not buying something.”

        IA –
        “Well, sir.
        “We found out, the people that don’t like to pay their taxes, don’t even like the concept, are more likely to pay a penalty.”

        IC –
        “I don’t really like either.
        “I don’t even own a car anymore.”

        IA –
        “Well sir.
        “In that case, may I suggest the mandated policy.
        “See, the car insurance that’s mandated, not only gives you all your traditional coverage, but also covers you, say, in the event, you’ll get abortion pills, or sterilization.
        “Wink wink, nudge nudge.
        “It’s coming.”

        IC –
        “I’m a deacon.
        “I don’t want paying for coverage for abortions.”

        IA –
        “Oh, sir.
        “You’re not paying for them.
        “The best part of the plan, it’s free.”

        IC –
        “Excuse me.
        “I do not want to be associated with funding abortion pills in any way, shape or form.”

        IA –
        “But sir, they’re free.”

        IC –
        “If they’re an option on my policy, I’m obviously funding them.
        “I don’t want to be associated with them.
        “It’s against my religion.”

        IA –
        “Oh, against your religion.
        “Why didn’t you say so sir.
        “See, the nice thing about the mandated car insurance policy is it absolutely eliminates the freedom of religion.
        “See, we’ve found sir, that people with religion have morals.
        “And, with morals, there’s choices.
        “And again, you might feel bad if you make the wrong choice.
        “So, we’ve eliminated the freedom of religion so we can focus on you being happy, sir, with your individual mandated car insurance policy.”

        IC –
        “I’m so confused.”

        IA –
        “Oh, sir, noting to be confused about.
        “It’s easy.
        “Think of it as, uh, health insurance.”

        – THE END –

        – – – – – – – – – –

        Yes.

        It’s THE END of our “individualist” Republic.

        This is the “The Road We Have Traveled” conclusion to the “social justice” and “collectivist” democratic “commune that BHObama had in mind when he said that “… we are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America” five days before his election.

        Yes.

        THE END of the American Republic… UNLESS…

        WAKE UP AMERICA

        Art
        – THE END -

  • Constance

    But, Romney is the best one to win against Obama, right? Right, Ann Coulter? Right, Gov. Christie? You just keep telling us that, and when Romney is the GOP nominee, and when he loses to Obama, then I can’t wait to hear you blame the conservative base for his loss. I can see this coming a mile away.

  • K-Bob

    The order itself is at the White House website. I don’t know if it matches the freeper’s article word for word. We all should read it and see if it’s as bad as they claim.

    • K-Bob

      Right off, I see it replaces and revokes a similar order by Bill Clinton in 1994, and parts of a similar order issued by Reagan in 1988.

      I’m guessing this isn’t as dire as the freepers said it was. It still needs looking into, though.

      • sDee

        Another red cape for us to go charge at. My guess is he is buying votes. That order gives every cabinet secretary carte blanc to spend money and hand out guaranteed loans for anything and everything, at their discretion.

        • K-Bob

          Yeah, I saw that. Including “staffing up,” which is actually already happening, since now we have more gun-totin’ “enforcers” in more branches than ever before.

      • HARP2

        The main order rescinded was one signed by WJC and was named “National Defense Industrial Resources Preparedness”.

        Emperor Barry’s rescinds all of it and replaces it with “National Defense Resources Preparedness”

        Notice that it no longer concerns merely industrial resources but ALL resources.

        I’m going through it line by line and it is a means by which private concerns can be nationalized by the Administrative Branch of government. There are no provisions for any consultation with Congress and it can be put in place by merely declaring some sort of “emergency”, which is not defined anywhere in the document–how convenient. It is an autocrat’s dream come true–declare an emergency and take over by fiat.

        • K-Bob

          Yes, indeed. You haven’t isolated any conditions under which such a declaration must be made, have you?

          (I’m programming so I can’t read it now)

  • cabensg

    Wait until next week it’ll be something different. This early it doesn’t mean squat. Jeez! They had Obama ahead of everyone not more than two weeks ago.

    • wodiej

      They’ve already changed. Today Santorum is now behind Obama by 7. Every other polling organization has every one of them down by 10. But I don’t think it means anything this far out especially when there is no nominee.

  • Sober_Thinking

    Speaks volumes huh?

    Go Rick!

  • Nukeman60

    I try to watch closely any Friday dump by the White House. There is so much that they try to slip by us.

  • sDee

    I suspect at best is another transfer of our money to Hussein’s political cronies just in time for the election. His coffers runneth over.

    He conned as much stimulus and green energy money that he could. I guess it is time to prepare for a defense crisis.

    The great thing for Hussein is that he need not go through Congress. His Secretaries can purchase and issue loans at their discretion. Much of the spending and loans do not actually need a actual defense energency. For example…

    Sec. 301. Loan Guarantees. (a) To reduce current or projected shortfalls of resources, critical technology items, or materials essential for the national defense, the head of each agency engaged in procurement for the national defense, as defined in section 801(h) of this order, is authorized pursuant to section 301 of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2091, to guarantee loans by private institutions

    Sec. 310. Critical Items. The head of each agency engaged in procurement for the national defense is delegated the authority of the President under section 107(b)(1) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2077(b)(1), to take appropriate action to ensure that critical components, critical technology items, essential materials, and industrial resources are available from reliable sources when needed to meet defense requirements during peacetime, graduated mobilization, and national emergency

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Fred-Lee/100000182470888 Fred Lee

    Those 4 states are clearly republican states after 2010 . Any republican will win those 4 states . What is wrong with Rasmussen . Duh

    • sDee

      They are key swing states. All went with Hussein in 2008.

  • Trust1TG

    BAD NEWS CAUCUS in St. Charles county MO:
    Noisy Paul supporters demand manual vote count. Reports of collusion between Romney and Paul supporters to share delegates and shut out Santorum. Only a few Newt supporters there. Two Paul supporters arrested.

    Caucus finally shut down without assigning delegates.

    http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/gop-caucus-in-st-peters-is-shut-down/article_a8eb35ec-7050-11e1-acac-0019bb30f31a.html

    • Asian_chic

      What ever happened to “the will of the people”? I guess it doesn’t matter when you have RuPaul and Flipper’s supporter around.

    • stage9

      what does liberalism and libertarianism have in common?

      8 to 10 in federal prison

  • librtifirst

    If we keep believing that our votes are being counted for who we cast them for, they will win, and we will have Romney as the nominee. These media reports, all of them, are theater only. They are not real. They are simply to keep us distracted from reality. The only real battle going on is between the establishment, and the anti-establishment. Any campaign that isn’t trying to expose the fraud is, quite simply, an establishment campaign.

    Your votes are being used, and are not being counted for anything but manipulation. You can vote for Santorum, but YOUR vote may very well be given to Romney.

    Here is an ABC new report on a caucus where RP supporters were arrested.

    http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/03/police-intervene-arrest-ron-paul-backers-at-missouri-caucus/

    Notice how they reported it. The actual events were not reported, as video on youtube will verify. These people were reconvening a meeting that was conducted illegally by the GOP leaders. It was GOP rules that were being followed by reconvening. The GOP leaders called the cops and had them arrested.

    The GOP establishment is ramrodding the votes, and its pre-chosen delegates down the throats of everyone. The RP supporters are the only ones trying to hold them accountable by following the rules.

    Root for Santorum, or Gingrich, but realize that you are wasting your time, just as the RP voters are. You will get Romney. Period.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=500549684 Corey Kitchens

    They say according to the delegate count that Santorum is going to lose to Mitt Romney……if that is true for Santorum then that is true for Newt. Santorum has won a lot more states and has more delegates that Newt…..At this point Newt does not have a chance even at a brokered convention. The only reason for him to stay in is to make sure Mitt Romney wins.

    • http://www.facebook.com/steamboat2302 Joshua Saunders

      At this point w/o major changes neither gets 1144, and newt staying in makes it more likely that a conservative that is neither santorum or gingrich gets the nom. If gingrich drops out it makes it easier for santorum to get 1144 but also makes it easier for romney who is closer to it

      • Mtncougar

        “People are assuming if Newt gets out, it helps Santorum because it sets up a one-on-one contest against Romney,” said RealClearPolitics senior elections analyst Sean Trende. “But by Newt staying in, he’s actually gobbling up some of Romney’s delegates. And that’s the name of the game at this point: keeping Romney below 1,144. So I think Newt staying in actually helps Santorum.” (source below)

        http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2012/03/15/how_gingrichs_candidacy_could_help_santorum__113488.html

        If Romney gets to 1144, it’s all over for Santorum. And if Gingrich is out, Romney will bury Santorum in mud as was done to Gingrich. At this point, Romney needs to divide his guns between Newt and Santorum because Newt still can garner more delegates than Romney (as he did in the last two states). Romney also has to be careful since he could simply drive Santorum’s votes into Gingrich’s camp and vice versa.

        Gingrich may be taking some of Santorum’s votes, but he’s also taking Romney votes from long-time Republicans who see Romney as an acceptable alternative and/or view Santorum as big-government and vulnerable on divisive social issues. (last I read it was close to 50-50). Gingrich hopes to bring this to convention by depriving Romney of the delegates to lock it up. Santorum will not likely deprive Romney of the delegates alone.

        townhall.com/columnists/matttowery/2012/03/15/creators_oped

        • Major914

          I agree completely. I can’t say things won’t change at some point later in the primaries–but right now, I see Newt as wisely and earnestly playing a role to prevent Romney from securing the nomination outright prior to the convention…

  • cabensg

    In his own words.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Steven-Valdez/1806887704 Steven Valdez

    Interesting the illegal porn angle of Santorum going after the Obama Admin.
    Wondering how that is going to play out. I can’t find any way how to defend illegal porn but at the same time it’s easy to say he isn’t focusing on the economy. Obamacare, the Economy, and Energy policy are the biggest issues of the day.

    • http://twitter.com/nestroyat64 Johann Streit

      He would be destroying “jobs”. We are in a dilemma here.

  • 3seven77

    I wouldn’t base anything on 500 voters. That isn’t a large enough sample.