Monday, February 27, 2012


My head is spinning. First CNN tells us that a Michigan Democratic strategist has put out a robocall urging Democrats to vote in the Republican primary for Rick Santorum just to embarrass Mitt Romney. Then we learn that Santorum's campaign admits putting out its own robocall to Democrats. And then I see Public Policy Polling tweeting the fact that its Monday polling in Michigan showed Santorum over Romney by 5 points, and Democrats are the reason:

Romney leads among Republicans in Michigan. It's Democrats putting Santorum over the top. We'll see if they really show up...

Well, Michigan had the quintessential Reagan Democrats -- socially conservative, wary of urbanity, but pro-union. Santorum's own robocall shamelessly plays on the latter sentiment by denouncing Romney for opposing the auto bailout -- without mentioning that Santorum also opposed it:

The Michigan Democratic strategist's robocall is very different:

In his robo call, DiSano says "Democrats can embarrass Mitt Romney and expose him as the weak frontrunner that he is, by supporting Rick Santorum on Tuesday."

So are Democrats really going to put Santorum over the top? And if so, which Democrats? And what will the media takeaway be? Santorum won but didn't really win? Santorum might be stronger than Romney against Obama in the Rust Belt? Hard to foresse. It could be anything.


UPDATE: The PPP poll is here.


Danp said...

So far, I haven't seen "the media" even report on the Republican robocalls, just the Dem mischievous calls. Voting for Santorum is short-sighted, even if only to extend the primary season. Get the discussion back to the economy and away from transvaginal probes. If Dems win in Nov because of these nonsense issues, Reps will continue to claim their economic message resonates. If the economy is the issue, Obama will win regardless of unemployment rates, and Republicans will have to modify their extremist rhetoric.

Doggerelo said...

Some Democrats want Rick to be
The GOP’s choice for nominee.
His positions in the past,
On gays, religion, women, war -
There’s right-wing craziness galore -
Will offer such a sharp contrast
To Obama’s solid, grounded view
That independents will come through
And vote the Democratic way
So that we’d win election day.

You should take care for what you wish
Because events can turn nightmarish -
Like Israel could bomb Iran
Or Europe’s euro could collapse -
For this Obama would perhaps
Be blamed and therefore, rather than
Obama’s hoped-for re-election,
The people’d vote for his rejection.

When world events cause stress and strain
Don’t you think it’d be insane
To have a man like Rick Santorum
Be our nation’s president?
I’m really much more confident
In Mitt. And though I do deplore ‘em
Both, if I were forced to pick,
Mitt’s a lesser evil than is Rick.

more political verse at http://

BH said...

I have a deeply uneasy feeling about supposedly "strategic" crossover voting like this, especially when it's encouraged by one of my/our opponents (and a particularly vehement opponent, at that). The law of unintended consequences looms large somehow.

Barry DeCicco said...

"Well, Michigan had the quintessential Reagan Democrats -- socially conservative, wary of urbanity, but pro-union. "

First, by now those people are Republicans. Reagan's last election was 27 years ago.

Second, if you look at Michigan politics, the GOP here is definitely anti-union.