Video: Gingrich answers Hoffman supporter at book signing
posted at 11:00 am on October 25, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
Lisa Miller, organizer for Tea Party Washington DC, tracks down Newt Gingrich at a bookstore while he promotes his latest novel, To Try Men’s Souls. Miller sets up the interview outside the bookstore by reviewing NY23 candidate Dede Scozzafava’s policy record, then goes inside and asks Newt (politely, it seems) what he was thinking when he endorsed Scozzafava. Chris at HAP captures the transcript of Newt’s response, but this encounter has more than one instructive moment:
Gingrich: “Lets 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, she has signed a no tax increase pledge, she is endorsed by the National Rifle Association, she has come out against Cap and Trade, [crosstalk] she is opposed to the Obama Health Care plan, she will vote for John Boehner instead of Nancy Pelosi.
All of those things together make her it seems to me, a legitimate, authentic, Republican nominee. In addition, the last poll that came out yesterday, she is well ahead of, 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, she 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..
So I just think it is a mistake for the Conservative movement, to think splitting in the special elections is a smart idea, if we give that seat to the Democrats, shame on us…
Uh … isn’t Miller, as a Tea Party organizer, supposed to be a loose cannon, out of control, screaming epithets and acting irrationally? Isn’t that the impression that the media leaves when they cover these events? Yet here we have Miller calmly approaching Gingrich, politely asking her question, and thanking him for his cooperation after getting a full answer from Gingrich. Why, it’s almost like Tea Party organizers were normal, rational, thinking Americans. Imagine that!
For that matter, kudos to Newt as well. He actually responded substantively to Miller’s polite question, although I disagree with his answer, which I’ll get to in a moment. That’s a lot more responsiveness to a private citizen than we’ve seen from many elected officials — and it certainly beats the hysterical and slanderous response Scozzafava had when an actual reporter, Weekly Standard’s John McCormack, tried to ask her about those policy positions Newt reviews in the video.
But Newt’s still wrong. First, the NRCC and the RNC have the duty to elect endorsed Republican candidates, so one cannot blame them for following the lead of local party officials — but that’s not Newt’s role unless he chooses it for himself. He has held himself up as a leader of conservatives more than the Republican Party. Next, the idea that we should refrain from criticizing party bosses for their candidate selection reminds me somewhat of my experience at WCPAC, when I was told it was “the height of rudeness” to criticize its organizers while covering it. Scozzafava did not get the endorsement through a convention process, after all, but in a closed-room meeting of sorts with the party leaders of the eleven counties in that district. I’m also not sure Newt has all of those policy positions correct, and he fails to mention that Scozzafava backs Card Check, which dumps the secret ballot in organizing elections and leaves working people at the tender mercies of union bosses, as well as imposing federal control over compensation for all American industries through its mandatory arbitration clause. That’s hardly conservative.
Besides, this is a special election, and the same seat comes up again next year. If Scozzafava wins it, it will make it more difficult for a fiscal conservative to dislodge her in the 2010 primary. If the Democrat wins it, Pelosi wins one more vote for a year in a chamber which already gives her a 70-seat majority, and Hoffman can run as the truly Republican candidate in 2010.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 3 Next »
Absolutely Newt is the one who has become the screaming idiot. I honestly dont get the moderates who scream bloody murder about how we arent a “BIG TENT” then demand that others change their political veiws to “Fit in” so they can win elections.
THE GOP DIDNT LOSE BECAUSE OF IDEAS IT LOST BECAUSE IT WAS POORLY RAN !
Its not a question of Ideas its a question of methods. Those that demand we abandon ideas for political expeidency are really demanding orthodoxy and dogma for their beliefs.
William Amos on October 25, 2009 at 11:07 AM
Does Newt have any opinion about Lindsey Graham? I suspect not. What he would have promised if he were in an election year is certainly very different from the damage he is promising.
Marcus on October 25, 2009 at 11:08 AM
AMEN!
I completely agree with Newt’s arguments. The problem is he is applying them to entirely the wrong situation. If he was talking about the race for New Jersey Governor I would be with him. As applied to the Scozzafava situation he makes absolutely no sense. This is entirely the wrong situation for Newt to make the points he’s making. Makes no sense whatsoever. Conservatives, social conservatives, fiscal conservatives, libertarians, classical liberals, anyone in the center-right coalition should take this race as an opportunity to send a message to the Republican establishment.
http://bit.ly/48bzEK
D0WNT0WN on October 25, 2009 at 11:09 AM
Yah but Scuzza signed a pledge. She signed it, right here see?
Bishop on October 25, 2009 at 11:10 AM
Newt was on Fox News earlier giving the same justification for his endorsement of Scozzafava. Ed’s right…just because the local party apparatus picked her doesn’t mean everyone has to fall in line and endorse her. She favors card check. That alone should earn her the undying enmity of every conservative.
flipflop on October 25, 2009 at 11:11 AM
I find it so hilarious that the Moderate McCain lost in 2008 and the moderates in our want to make it about Conservatives. We went down that road in 2008 and that is what contributed (It wasnt the main event but it was an event)the election.
The moderate wing of the GOP lost in 2008. That is the fact that needs to be admitted.
William Amos on October 25, 2009 at 11:11 AM
Newt was on peddling his bullsh!t on Fox and Friends, this morning, too. He seems all revved up that Scozzafava has signed something saying that she wouldn’t raise taxes – or something like that. Oooh! She signed a pledge. That’s great. Newt is digging his hole deeper and deeper, and he seems to enjoy doing it, too. He is starting to remind me very much of a certain McShame moron. Then he babbled on about some stupidity of outsiders trying to force NY-23 to do something …. and even had some totally incoherent mention of the tenth amendment, as if that had anything to do with this. Newt has lost it.
I was a big-time Newt supporter, especially during his years in the wilderness, when he was considered radioactive by most people. But, I have been more disgusted by his support of Scozzafava than I can possibly express. He is doubling down on a seriously losing hand and he hurts everything else in his attempt to do so.
When Newt supported global warming, I gave him a bit of a pass, since he was still supporting domestic drilling and nuclear power. When he did a commercial with Nazi Pelosi, right before the friggin’ election, I really got ticked at him, as that was a stab in the back without any question. But, what he’s doing now is just insane and stupid.
Newt, go away and try to get your head straight. Don’t come back until you do. You are making a fool of yourself.
progressoverpeace on October 25, 2009 at 11:14 AM
Putting her in office is the same as re-electing Arlen Specter to any position. Party doesn’t really matter.
Cybergeezer on October 25, 2009 at 11:15 AM
Except when he tries making the NY23 a local issue and everyone knows Newt is a national figure trying to keep other more conservative national figures from weighing in on Hoffman.
fourdeucer on October 25, 2009 at 11:16 AM
The country is starving for conservative principles right now. My mother is a conservative democrat from Illinois. She’s totally disgusted with the democrats and voted republican in the last election- for the first time. However, she said she’s sick of the republicans too because they don’t seem to be espousing conservative values any longer. She doesn’t believe they are fighting hard enough for the country.
My step-mother, also a conservative democrat from Illinois, feels the exact same way. Wake up GOP!
alwaysright43 on October 25, 2009 at 11:16 AM
Newt is displaying a completely oblivious demeanor here. He has no idea what is going on in NY-23 and simply regurgitates the Scozzafava talking points aimed at swaying conservative support.
She deserves to lose. She deserves to come in 3rd. Hoffman deserves to win, but even if he doesn’t, a one-on-one Owens-Hoffman showdown beckons in 2010.
Red Cloud on October 25, 2009 at 11:19 AM
Ask folks in California about politicians who sign no tax pledges. Then ask them about Anthony Adams.
Yeah. No tax pledges mean a whole heckuva lot.
Not.
BardMan on October 25, 2009 at 11:19 AM
As long as the 15% of the party that is raving, compromising, go along to get along RINO’s run the party, they will see more and more party dissent from the overwhelming conservative majority.
I am tired of the RINO tail wagging the conservative base.
JIMV on October 25, 2009 at 11:19 AM
The ineptness of the “Big Tent” Moderates in the GOP brought us McCain. It will take a Charismatic Conservative to defeat the Charismatic Cipher.
kingsjester on October 25, 2009 at 11:20 AM
One other issue besides her tax and spend history and being for Card Check…
She’s pro-abortion. Or so I’ve heard.
What the hell is Gingrich thinking?
TXUS on October 25, 2009 at 11:22 AM
I really don’t feel the newtster needs any kudos.He needs a board up side his head to knock sense into it but then again,sometimes these older people are so set in their ways ,they may never see it, ever.
ohiobabe on October 25, 2009 at 11:24 AM
I just explored Frum’s New Majority page. Many articles on what a complete disaster Scozzafava is but deep in your heart you know that that crowd and Newt would rather the Democrat win than Hoffman. Because their political stock will crash. In fact, New Majority finds Scozzafava such a mess but in the end, especially with Sarah Palin’s endorsement of Hoffman, they just don’t know what to do.
Marcus on October 25, 2009 at 11:24 AM
Another disturbing thing about Newt is his free will in converting to Catholicism, surely he knows somethings come before party and party affiliations.
fourdeucer on October 25, 2009 at 11:26 AM
Newt was on Fox & friends and pushed the “local control” argument, saying it was wrong for “outsiders” to intervene in local elections. But that argument gets a “w.t.f.?” because Newt (an outsider) endorsed Scozzafava.
And yeah, neither Card Check nor the Working Families Party’s (ACORN front group) endorsement was not mentioned on F&F either.
Buy Danish on October 25, 2009 at 11:27 AM
Newt’s a consummate political operator. It should be of no surprise that notions of ‘electability’ and ‘strength vs. the democrat’ come to his mind. If Hoffman is indeed polling behind Scozzafava, wouldn’t nominating Hoffman give the seat to a dem? Isnt a dem worse?
ernesto on October 25, 2009 at 11:27 AM
I got a call last night from a man selling a movie that Newt is pitching.
I asked him if he had anything to say about the 23rd district race in NY. He said he had heard something about it but didn’t have a response to it in particular but didn’t I want to support this great guy Newt (and work against that dastardly Obama) by buying the movie?
I told him that I wouldn’t give Newt a penny of my hard earned cash until he got his head on straight and stopped endorsing candidates who did not have firm conservative ideals.
The guy quietly and politely ended the conversation.
keebs on October 25, 2009 at 11:28 AM
note to NEWT and the GOP a party has to be more than about TAXES. Yes taxes are important but it is the principles behind the believe that taxes are bad that is important. Taxes gives power to the government and takes power away from private citizens. taxes enables the government to grow. Taxes need to be tailored to give the gov the rev it needs to do the job however it is the principles of the individuals that determine what the job is and a small government person is less likely to need to raise taxes.
unseen on October 25, 2009 at 11:28 AM
Hoffman doesn’t seem a great candidate. He and Scozzafava should split the center-right vote and let the Dem have the seat for a year. Surely a principled and local conservative can get through the primary process.
exdeadhead on October 25, 2009 at 11:29 AM
An (R) voting with Dems is far, far worse than a Dem. Olympia Snowe is more of a destructive force than a Dem in her seat would be, because she sells the (R) as part of the package, even though she isn’t a Republican in any sense other than to be a turncoat working for the enemies of America. Her vote to keep national socialized health care moving along is the perfect example – and in that case, it only moved along because of the (R), as it could not have gotten out of committee without an (R) vote.
progressoverpeace on October 25, 2009 at 11:32 AM
Ed,
If you can, can you get the Fox clip from this morning and add it as a update.
Newt was down right pissed in the Fox clip.
Clyde5445 on October 25, 2009 at 11:32 AM
But you see he’d have won if he went with someone sensible like Charlie Crist and not that Alaskan hillybilly.
promachus on October 25, 2009 at 11:32 AM
Hmmm…I didn’t know these things about Hoffman. I’ll bet that NY23 voters DO know these things, though—and I’ll especially bet that the local media (Dem-friendly, perhaps?) has made sure local voters know them.
A minor quibble here. No, Newt has not held himself up as a leader of the GOP…but the GOP is the best mechanism conservatives have for getting conservatives elected. The NRCC and RNC exist to get Republicans elected—and in most cases those candidates are (at least somewhat) conservative.
At some point, you have to support the people who you’ve put on your team and charged with the responsibility of getting things done day-to-day. That, in this case, is the RNC and NRCC. Therefore, I don’t fault Newt for supporting the candidate whom the GOP party apparatus approved.
Do I think the RNC and NRCC made a mistake? Yes. Should they withdraw their support of Scozaffava? IMO, yes.
Neverthless, we should think twice before critcizing Newt for supporting the national GOP apparatus here.
smagar on October 25, 2009 at 11:33 AM
The other thing about NY-23 that’s important is the election is for a one-year unexpired term. Unless you think that Obama’s going to completely turn things around in 12 months, the idea that voting your beliefs this time rather than your party is going to make a permanent change in NY-23 — where the Democrat despite all this infighting is still getting only 35 percent of the vote — is just silly.
Odds are the vote will trend even more towards the GOP in 2010, so the fear isn’t that Owens is going to win an turn a long-time Republican seat into a long-time Democratic one so much as it is Scozzafava wins this time and just to to the (R) in front of her name becomes Upstate New York’s Chris Shays or Arlen Spector for the next decade or more.
jon1979 on October 25, 2009 at 11:35 AM
Every article I read about Scozzafava on Frum’s site said she was polling in last place.
Marcus on October 25, 2009 at 11:37 AM
Aren’t voters entitled to their preferred representation? Snowe voters could easily vote for a more conservative candidate…but they dont. Why? Could the same forces be at play here (namely, that NY-23 isn’t as conservative a district as yours)?
ernesto on October 25, 2009 at 11:37 AM
The RNC and NRCC have brought us to far from the strict platform that the party has put in place. We need to get back to our conservative roots.
fourdeucer on October 25, 2009 at 11:37 AM
In head to head matchups with the dem? Hoffman comes out the better? If that were the case, I can’t imagine why even the local party would choose her.
ernesto on October 25, 2009 at 11:38 AM
Fixed it for you.
All of Newt’s arguments might have some validity- if that approach had shown success of late. It hasn’t and it’s time to replace the RINO (Rockefeller Republicans to us old warhorse) leadership. Not just for principle, but also for effectiveness (though the former is more important).
michaelo on October 25, 2009 at 11:39 AM
Exactly. Furthermore, he articulated (inadvertently) the defacto republican party platform which, according to him, are the following:
1. made some pledges to do or not do some things
2. endorsed by the NRA
3. against cap and trade
4. against Obamacare
5. ahead of the polls/most likely to win
Now, this really needs to be discussed. What makes us republican? What makes us conservatives? It appears that Washingtonians are quite comfortable with jettisoning all social conservative positions in favor of dry policy positions, except when their liberal. The question is, can we have a republican candidate voting liberal on social issues and NOT violate core republican/conservative principles of limited government and states’ rights? Nine times out of ten these socially liberal republicans are much more in favor of top-down morality than federalism. We really want to take that chance?
Diane on October 25, 2009 at 11:39 AM
Sorry Newt . . . blindly endorsing the “local party” nominees is what got us into this pile of goat dung.
rplat on October 25, 2009 at 11:40 AM
She wasn’t the nominee of the local party. She was the nominee of a bunch of moron, probably old geezer, out of touch idiot chairmen who clearly don’t understand the demographic makeup of their district.
Speedwagon82 on October 25, 2009 at 11:41 AM
This seems to be what the Republican Party is truly trying to accomplish; This way they don’t have to take any firm stand on issues; It’s the McCain Method.
Cybergeezer on October 25, 2009 at 11:41 AM
There’s an article there called “How we ended up with Scozzafava” on New Majority. Yes, she is polling third and it boiled down to one woman’s vote for her over the more Conservative candidate they were thinking. Some “best friend” who has the same voting record she does.
Marcus on October 25, 2009 at 11:41 AM
fixed. and to clarify, I was meaning that social con principles are rejected, except when they are LIBERAL social positions (oddly.)
Diane on October 25, 2009 at 11:43 AM
I’m making zero sense today. ugh.
Diane on October 25, 2009 at 11:43 AM
Hey Newt the RINOS will hear a louder voice this next voter session than anything you have to say. You’re a smart man to go down with them.
bluegrass on October 25, 2009 at 11:44 AM
She was beating the Dem until Hoffman entered the picture to split the vote.
Buy Danish on October 25, 2009 at 11:46 AM
LOL leave it to new york. Honestly its amazing theres even a party here with the name republican.
ernesto on October 25, 2009 at 11:47 AM
What happened to Newt’s pro-life stand! Both the DEM and GOP candidates are pro-choice while Hoffman is pro-life. Newt just showed himself for what he is, A BIG GOVERNMENT politician! Bye Bye Newt!!!!
Dread Pirate Roberts VI on October 25, 2009 at 11:47 AM
As Obama is now finding out, the first duty is to lead …
tarpon on October 25, 2009 at 11:48 AM
I hope you are not advocating blurring the lines for the sake of an R.
Clyde5445 on October 25, 2009 at 11:51 AM
This is just wrong. Every poll puts the Dem around 33%, Scozzafava around 30%, and Hoffman far behind at around 23%.
AngusMc on October 25, 2009 at 11:53 AM
Yes. And I’m entitled to my opinion and my analysis, along with my assessment of the consequences. So what?
What’s your point? Maine can vote for whomever they want, but the GOP in the Senate doesn’t have to let the traitor caucus with them, thereby holding a vote that will move marxist and un-American legislation out of committee.
As I asked above, what’s your point? If NY-23 wants to call Scozzafava a Republican and vote her in, then that’s up to them. She will still be a traitor who will stab America in the back and be a slimeball letist parading around as a Republican, just like Snowe.
I make my assessments based on people’s ideas and their attitudes towards American governance and tradition. Do you have a problem with that?
progressoverpeace on October 25, 2009 at 11:53 AM
He’s been inside the beltway way too long.
ohiobabe on October 25, 2009 at 11:54 AM
Rigidity and defensiveness are the hallmarks of a sick political class. Newt has become the apologist for this class. Sitting there signing his book he reminds me of a fat artistocrat brushing away the upstart peasant.
He doesn’t get it. He can’t. And he won’t. Goodbye, Newt.
rrpjr on October 25, 2009 at 11:55 AM
Sorry Newt . . . blindly endorsing the “local party” nominees is what got us into this pile of goat dung.
rplat on October 25, 2009 at 11:40 AM
///
Best comment!!:)
ohiobabe on October 25, 2009 at 11:56 AM
That was before the dynamics of last week changed the race.
Clyde5445 on October 25, 2009 at 11:57 AM
I am glad Newt took this opportunity to publically support the Scuzz because he exposed himself and what he really stands for. I think most RINOs do not have core principles; therefore, it is impossible for them to support the conservative movement. RINOs are politicians, period.
mobydutch on October 25, 2009 at 12:05 PM
Speaking of the Working Families Party/ACORN, I’m shocked to learn they allegedly stole an election for Democrats in Troy, New York.
If they want to be taken seriously, Republicans must repudiate any and all connections with the WPA before they run office.
Buy Danish on October 25, 2009 at 12:05 PM
William Amos on October 25, 2009 at 11:11 AM
THE MODERATE WING OF THE GOP LOST IN 2008
COMMENT:
Let me play devil’s advocate. Shortly after the November 2008 vote Joel Mowbray wrote an article at townhall.com How Conservatives Helped Elect Obama where he made an argument that “conservative voters” provided the margin of victory for Obama and not an increase in youth or black vote. It consisted of almost 1/5 of Bush 2004 voters chose Obama with the biggest defectors being conservative-leaning independents, Security Moms and Roman Catholics. Obama picked up 1/3 more conservative voters than Kerry.
In addition it was estimated that 6m conservatives either did not vote or voted 3rd party.
Why did this happen? Two words: George Bush. Because of his stand on amnesty, reckless spending habits and of course the financial meltdown.
Bottom line: the conservatives did not come out in full force in 2008 despite the presence of Palin; too much water had unfortunately gone under the bridge. Having said that the moderate wing of the GOP did not do much to curry their favor, except for the Palin pick.
technopeasant on October 25, 2009 at 12:05 PM
Newt is using this race to try to tell Republicans not to be voting for a third party because he’s afraid that the Democrats will end up winning.
Sorry Newt, but you’re wrong. If the people are telling the Republican Party to get back to conservative values and the party doesn’t listen the blame doesn’t lie with the people, but with the party. Does Newt need to be reminded of the first few words of the Constitution? It begins with “We the people…” not “We the (fill in the blank party).”
moonsbreath on October 25, 2009 at 12:06 PM
I would have just told Newt, You Screwed the pooch with that endorsement……in a nice calm voice of course.
Old Hippie Vet on October 25, 2009 at 12:07 PM
beltway elitist.
moonbatkiller on October 25, 2009 at 12:07 PM
No, I was merely stating the facts.
Buy Danish on October 25, 2009 at 12:08 PM
So let the Donk rent the seat for a years. BFD.
The main thing is to beat the GOP establishment. Let them smell the fear.
The Tea Party folks need to go Alinsky, and this is as good a time as any.
Bruno Strozek on October 25, 2009 at 12:08 PM
I don’t suppose Newt saw Rasmussen’s recent poll saying that 73% of the base feel Republicans are out of touch.
Murf76 on October 25, 2009 at 12:10 PM
What does Newt’s opinion matter anyway?
He’s a talking head for the t.v. shows who makes the Republicans look vaguely corrupt and old-fashioned and out-of-touch.
He is a man of the ’90′s.
And he failed to keep the Party on a conservative course.
Let some new blood lead the renewed fight, Newt.
Just write more marginal books and attack Obama.
profitsbeard on October 25, 2009 at 12:11 PM
Go rogue, Newt.
Ronnie on October 25, 2009 at 12:16 PM
The Tea Party thing could go bad. I like the idea in theory. But please remember a lot of things don’t go along with theory. Just a little small worry but a worry none the less.
PS.. I am not a RINO.
Dire Straits on October 25, 2009 at 12:17 PM
Like most others here, I disagree with Mr. Gingrich.
The Republican Party doesn’t just consist of a candidate in this race — it consists of a platform as well. To support a candidate who doesn’t support the party platform is folly, and will lead to the eventual downfall of the party itself.
In examining these two candidates, Ms. Miller brings up at least two items (fiscal responsibility and right to life) on which Mr. Gingrich’s candidate falls far short. She brings up at least one other element (card check) which, while not addressed in the 2008 party platform, goes to the heart of Republican philosophy — that an uncoerced secret ballot is the best way to determine the will of the people.
The secret ballot is at the heart of our democracy, and Newt’s candidate would deny that right to millions of workers, against Newt’s own position on the matter, wherein he calls “Card Check” a mortal threat to democracy.
unclesmrgol on October 25, 2009 at 12:17 PM
I actually think both sides have a good argument.
Newt is right that Hoffman is just making easy for the Dem to win. From reports it seems like he doesn’t even know the local issues.
However, Hoffman supporters have every right to be upset who the local Republican Party chose. She has a liberal voting records.
terryannonline on October 25, 2009 at 12:19 PM
Sorry if this has been pointed out, I haven’t read all the comments yet. I see that “He doesn’t live in the District” is being trotted out. If he was ineligible then why did the Republican Folks interview him as a candidate in the first place? Question Two Is anyone else having problems with this site running slow as molasses?
Cindy Munford on October 25, 2009 at 12:19 PM
Newt reminds me of a sometime revolutionary whose actions were once personally governed by principles and values coupled with his ideas who has now in old age has become jaded and forsaken his principles and values and in order to embrace ideas that sound sexy and part of the New Zeitgeist, that to be at odds with such a cultural shift would make one an enemy of the state and that the maintenance of ironclad principles and values no longer can be justified in an era that is dominated by amoral behavior.
technopeasant on October 25, 2009 at 12:22 PM
You forgot to mention the “moderate wing” of the GOP also lost in;
1960,
1964,
1976,
1992, and
1996.
The leftists defeated themselves in ’68 and ’72. And had it not been for Ronald Reagan, the moderates would have lost in ’80 and ’84. As we found out in 2000, G. W. Bush was no conservative. Ask a “moderate” republican their views on any topic and the responses will be indistinguishable from a liberal. If elections, be they local or national, come down to a Democrat or RINO, I’ll vote by doing something more productive with my time. I will abstain before I’ll waste my vote on another RINO. If party hacks like Newt want to take down the Republic, let ‘em. They’re obviously too stupid to do anything else.
oldleprechaun on October 25, 2009 at 12:23 PM
She doesn’t support ALL of the party platform. From what Newt was saying it seems like she does support some of the party platform… if she didn’t why would she run as a Republican?
terryannonline on October 25, 2009 at 12:23 PM
The conservative wing loses to. Ever heard of Barry Goldwater.
The Bushes were moderates and between both of them they have had THREE terms as president.
terryannonline on October 25, 2009 at 12:25 PM
There is one mistake that almost every news company and almost all politicians make… the assumption that CENTRISM is on teh rise! Centrism is rarely, if ever, on the rise. People like clearly delineated choices.
As it is now, conservatism is on a rise… especially among the grass roots GOP… Newt has cast his lot with a unreliable centrist (which is what you always get with coreless centrists). Big mistake… Vannity will continue to bow an scrape to Newt but those of us who trusted him (I was an early supporter of his look at the Presidency) can no longer trust him. In a sense, he’s dead to me (as a reliable conservative leader).
mankai on October 25, 2009 at 12:26 PM
Also forgot to mention that Nixon won TWICE.
terryannonline on October 25, 2009 at 12:26 PM
A. 1964 against LBJ riding JFK’s tails… and BG led to Ronald Reagan.
B. The Bush’s ran as conservatives. They BOTH embraced Reagan as their model. Both left office will horribly low approval numbers and both cost the GOP the White House… whereas Reagan handed Bush 41 a HUGE win.
mankai on October 25, 2009 at 12:28 PM
The smart thing to do would be to promise her some useless position in the state GOP with a fancy title if she withdraws tomorrow and endorses Hoffman. I’d rather have a win than humiliate a RINO.
Speedwagon82 on October 25, 2009 at 12:28 PM
I fully understand the concept of party loyalty. Incumbent in being a party member is the understanding you will support the actions of your party through thick and thin.
However there is also an understanding that the party leadership will endorse candidates who reflect the membership of the party. For example if the greater majority of the party is conservative, candidates selected should definitely not be predominantly “liberal” oriented.
Dede Scozzofava appears to be of this ilk. The GOP leadership IMHO is guilty of betraying the trust that its members have bestowed on them. When this occurs, the membership has every right to take matters into their own hands especially if a candidate is running that reflects their interests over the candidate one’s party has chosen.
it is what it is.
technopeasant on October 25, 2009 at 12:30 PM
Nixon ran as a conservative. In ’72 he ran against McGovern, a far leftist. Goldwater could have defeated McGovern. And the centrist loss of the White House continued with Nixon/Ford.
mankai on October 25, 2009 at 12:30 PM
I always enjoy hearing Newt. He’s bright, articulate, and even when I disagree, I like hearing something besides the superficial shock-jock type explanations.
AnninCA on October 25, 2009 at 12:32 PM
W. ran as a “compassionate conservative.” I remember during the 2000 campaign how all the comedians would make jokes about there not being much difference between Bush and Gore, they mostly agreed on many issues. Unless Al Gore also embraced Reagan as his model?
terryannonline on October 25, 2009 at 12:33 PM
From wiki:
In 1970 he was setting pice controls! And yet he was still re-elected a few years later.
terryannonline on October 25, 2009 at 12:37 PM
Please think about the 2000 election and consider if you want to hold it up as an example. Also, stop worrying about all these past Republicans and whether they were conservatives and what they would be considered to now. TODAY is the problem and we need fiscal conservatives. Real ones. Making comparisons is useless when you have all the stuff we are having thrown at us within ten months.
Cindy Munford on October 25, 2009 at 12:42 PM
The problem with Newt is he doesn’t realize that politicians lie.
Although I think Newt is good at strategy and I wish there was someone like him in the party today. Newt is smart and can write in a way that even dense lefties understand.
We need something like his “Contract for America” And we would win both houses back in 2010.
There is a vacuum of Newt’s kind of leadership in Congress right now.
Oh and I plan to read his book. I love Washington and my husband loved his civil war books. I find the civil war sort of boring… but I love the Revolutionary period.
petunia on October 25, 2009 at 12:42 PM
I’d like to see something to back the suggestion that Bush did not cling to Reagan in an attempt to cast himself as a conservative. He ran as a Texan and embraced the cowboy image.
How did trying to govern from the center work out? He struggled to defeat John Kerry (John Kerry!)… and gave us Obama (who defeated another centrist).
mankai on October 25, 2009 at 12:42 PM
We have a new successor to the RINO: the Newtasaurus.
OT: Where is AP? Did he defect to LGF?
Dr. Carlo Lombardi on October 25, 2009 at 12:43 PM
I’m a conservative. I prefer a conservative in office. My point is that moderates do win. And I gave you examples. I just don’t buy the line here that it is often said “Moderates lose, conservatives win.” Well, no, that is not true.
terryannonline on October 25, 2009 at 12:44 PM
How’d those price controsl work out for the conomy? You want the GOP to support those kinds of candidates? Just win… then govern from the Left?
He defeated McGovern… essentially a communist.
Ford then lost to a no-name governor from Georgia. Reagan won twice by huge landslides.
mankai on October 25, 2009 at 12:45 PM
I agree. It is useless. However, it is useless to argue that “conservatives win, moderates lose” because it is not true.
terryannonline on October 25, 2009 at 12:46 PM
But they have to run as conservatives… then when they govern from the center, they do damage to the whole party.
mankai on October 25, 2009 at 12:47 PM
I’m a conservative…of course I don’t want price controls. My point is (again) it is not true that moderates lose…because we’ve had moderates win.
terryannonline on October 25, 2009 at 12:48 PM
I agree. There are moderate areas. They are going to vote in representatives who reflect their values. There are conservative areas. Ditto for them. And then there is SF, which Pelosi represents. It’s never going to be anything but highly progressive.
This just seems like commonsense to me. And, frankly, even if a conservative ends up winning in a moderate area? They won’t last.
AnninCA on October 25, 2009 at 12:49 PM
I don’t agree. As noted in above this person that wins will only be seated for a year. This is a great opportunity to take a stand and make sure conservatives are heard. I don’t go to Lefty blogs but do they whine when “conservative” democrats run and get elected? Moderates shot conservatives in the back on a regular basis, rhetorically speaking. I don’t see a down side to supporting Mr. Hoffman.
Cindy Munford on October 25, 2009 at 12:50 PM
Allah is on vacation according to Ed. Be bacak in couple of days.
Dire Straits on October 25, 2009 at 12:58 PM
As Jazz Shaw pointed out yesterday on the radio a hard line conservative will not win in some places in the 57 states of America but a moderate might and does. What we have to get rid of is the DIABLO’s.
Dire Straits on October 25, 2009 at 1:01 PM
I also appreciate Newt’s answer here, and I think he gives solid reasons for his support for Scozzafava. However, since Newt was gracious enough to schedule a brief interview with me, I do intend to follow-up politely on his answer by asking what the conservative reaction to Scozzafava, not to mention that fact that people who self-identify as Conservatives outnumber the people who self-identify as Republicans almost 2 to 1, means for the future of the GOP.
It is the same fundamental question Reagan asked during a 1975 CPAC speech: “Our people look for a cause to believe in. Is it a third party we need, or is it a new and revitalized second party, raising a banner of no pale pastels, but bold colors, which make it unmistakably clear where we stand on all of the issues troubling the people?”
DarkKnight3565 on October 25, 2009 at 1:02 PM
The issue is not what she promised but how she has actually performed as a State level politician. Her actions speak far louder than her words. She is a far left liberal and will vote as one in the House if elected.
chemman on October 25, 2009 at 1:03 PM
The best thing for Newt to do now is to come out, admit he made a mistake and throw his support behind Hoffman.
JellyToast on October 25, 2009 at 1:07 PM
I don’t the issue here is moderate vs. conservative, and the electoral performance of either, at least in essence. I think this is or has become an issue of faith and betrayal, of core issues of political principle as they relate to the political mismanagement and failed leadership of a party.
This is a race with its own immediate implications but it is also a metaphor in which frustration and the future are playing themselves out.
rrpjr on October 25, 2009 at 1:11 PM
Newt’s explanation for the Ms. Pelosi global warming commercial was that it gave him a seat at the table. Big Deal, he still doesn’t have a vote. Granted he didn’t have anything to do with this pick in 23 but to support this candidate for the Big Tent Theory is wrong. Another place and time maybe but not now.
Cindy Munford on October 25, 2009 at 1:13 PM
You need to get off the THC. McCain would have lost big time. 5-7 million conservative Evangelicals sat out this election. If McCain had chosen Crist there would have been a whole lot more conservative Evangelicals sitting out the election.
chemman on October 25, 2009 at 1:13 PM
Even if the Dem wins and votes for Cap and Trade and ObamaCare?
terryannonline on October 25, 2009 at 1:14 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 3 Next »