Gingrich: Romney should be ashamed of these incredibly effective, hugely damaging Super PAC ads

posted at 6:45 pm on December 20, 2011 by Allahpundit

Why should he be ashamed, exactly? Gingrich unilaterally disarmed on negative ads, whether because he thought they’d backfire and hurt his image or because his own Super PAC can’t yet afford them, and now he’s peeved that Romney and Ron Paul haven’t followed suit. But why would they? The ads have been invaluable in deflating Gingrich’s Iowa balloon and making it a race again. And spare me the “attack ads only help Obama” lecture: The One has an army of oppo people ready to air Gingrich’s dirty laundry if he’s the nominee. Does anyone seriously think Obama needs Mitt Romney’s ad team to remind him of Gingrich’s relationship to Freddie Mac?

“Well, that makes my point,” Gingrich said. “If you see Romney, ask him to take them off the air. I mean, you know, it would be nice if candidates were responsible for the things being done by the people who know them personally who are trying to help them get elected.”

He later closed his 37-minute session with this: “Ask (your friends) if they run into one of these candidates, to tell them they ought to be ashamed of themselves, to take this junk off the air. And don’t hide behind some baloney about the superPAC that I actually have no control over that happens to be run by five of my former staff. That’s just baloney.”

Gingrich’s spokesman went a step further today — accidentally:

On Tuesday morning, Romney sought to distance himself from Restore Our Future [his Super PAC].

“We really ought to let campaigns raise the money they need and just get rid of these super PACs,” Romney told MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.”…

The Gingrich campaign likewise sees Romney as being duplicitous. The candidate’s spokesman, RC Hammond, told a reporter on Tuesday that Romney is “either a lying politician or a piece of sh*t.” The statement was meant to be off the record, but was accidentally tweeted (and subsequently deleted). Hammond expressed his “sincere apologies to Governor Romney” in an email to The Huffington Post.

Romney, of course, is not alone in taking both sides of this issue. President Barack Obama has criticized the proliferation of independent electoral groups, going so far as to warn that they are a threat to democracy.

True enough about The One, but then he’s the guy who used to drone on in 2007 about the glories of public financing for campaigns before summarily dumping the public finance system the next year when he realized he could raise lots, lots, lots more cash by opting out. And true enough about Romney too. When Scarborough asked him this morning why he didn’t call off the dogs, he had the stones to say, “I’m not allowed to communicate with the super PAC in any way, shape or form” — because, see, it’s totally separate from his campaign. Two clips below, one of the newest ad from his Super PAC kicking Gingrich’s teeth in and the other a vintage 1994 snippet of him calling for PACs … to be abolished. Turns out he’s a hypocrite who’ll say or do whatever’s necessary to win. Who knew?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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

Who does Newt Gingrich think he is, Barack Obama circa February 2008?

libfreeordie on December 20, 2011 at 6:50 PM

Romney is “either a lying politician or a piece of sh*t.”

Those two certainly aren’t mutually exclusive…

Lawdawg86 on December 20, 2011 at 6:50 PM

Progressive Mud Wrestling…….

if either of them win……..the GOP loses.

PappyD61 on December 20, 2011 at 6:51 PM

I should have said……CONSERVATIVES lose.

PappyD61 on December 20, 2011 at 6:51 PM

Full court press on Gingrich!

SlaveDog on December 20, 2011 at 6:51 PM

Gingrich has been compared by some to Winston Churchill and Ulysses S. Grant. I see him more as the arrogant George Armstrong Custer pushing his luck with the Lakota and Cheyenne once too often.

The “madness of the king” is upon us, watch.

VorDaj on December 20, 2011 at 6:52 PM

What’s amazing is that after all the ads and after Newt’s “collapse”, Gingrich is STILL the front runner with about 25-30% support.

He’s going to be the nominee. And I gotta say I’m warming to him.

pamplonajack on December 20, 2011 at 6:52 PM

Mittens won’t be denied his Presidency. It’s his turn, and since he lost millions in his own money losing last time he is going to make sure he gets the nomination.

I’m just shocked at the range of supposed “Republican intellectuals” who are supporting Romney. He is a terrible candidate, and is Obama jr.

portlandon on December 20, 2011 at 6:53 PM

Negative ads get made because they work.

OhioCoastie on December 20, 2011 at 6:54 PM

The candidate’s spokesman, RC Hammond, told a reporter on Tuesday that Romney is “either a lying politician or a piece of sh*t.” The statement was meant to be off the record, but was accidentally tweeted (and subsequently deleted).

I could have told you, deleting damaging tweets won’t work.

- Ex-Congressman Anthony Weiner

Flora Duh on December 20, 2011 at 6:55 PM

What’s amazing is that after all the ads and after Newt’s “collapse”, Gingrich is STILL the front runner with about 25-30% support.

He’s going to be the nominee. And I gotta say I’m warming to him.

pamplonajack on December 20, 2011 at 6:52 PM

The national polls do not matter right now. What matters is who comes out of Iowa, NH, and SC, and more importantly, whom of those three wins Florida. Whoever takes Florida will win the nomination. Bank on it.

Lawdawg86 on December 20, 2011 at 6:55 PM

first, its against the law to communicate with a pac. So Romney claiming he doesn’t is no surprise(even though i’m sure he does).

second. Is Newt saying He does communicate with his PAC,or Perry with his, or santorum with his.

third, as far as I can tell the commercials run by Paul and Romney
appear to be totally accurate. Most of them show Newt in his own words.

fourth. The posters on this site say they want a candidate that will go after OBAMA, that why they want Newt. If Romney goes after Obama as hard as he’s gone after Newt he’ll do fine.

gerry-moderate republican-mittbot-GERRYPAC

gerrym51 on December 20, 2011 at 6:55 PM

He’s going to be the nominee. And I gotta say I’m warming to him.

He’s really not. And his lead is only holding in national polls. In Iowa, which is all that counts, he’s fading.

Allahpundit on December 20, 2011 at 6:56 PM

Gingrich is down to what in InTrade? 9 or 10%. A week or two ago he was around 30 or 40%. The man does not seem to comprehend even one of Murphy’s Laws.

VorDaj on December 20, 2011 at 6:56 PM

IF(and that’s a big IF) Romney wins, I hope he is as aggressive against Obama as he has been the past few weeks against Gingrich.

However, as soon as Obama’s campaign starts talking about how Romney was part of a “religion” that excluded blacks for a hundred years, he will cower in the corner.

dirtseller on December 20, 2011 at 6:56 PM

If Romney can destroy you with these ads imagine what One-bama and the MSM will do to you. Good bye, Newt. Thanks for playing us all for saps.

NickDeringer on December 20, 2011 at 6:56 PM

Gingrich deserves all of this, and more. Hilarious to see him squealing now.

Guess what? The guy was a pig slopping at the hog-trough of government lobbying and influence peddling for over a decade. He’s either naive (unlikely) or stupid (unlikely) or disingenuous (bingo) if he thinks this is an illegitimate issue or one that won’t utterly destroy his campaign should he manage to seize the nomination.

Good for Romney and his Super-PAC for hitting him, and hitting him hard, on this.

Esoteric on December 20, 2011 at 6:56 PM

Glad you posted that video AP.

Romney ran to the left of Ted Kennedy on campaign reform, and wanted PACs abolished.

Yet another Romney flip flop.

cat_owner on December 20, 2011 at 6:56 PM

I don’t want an un-vetted candidate getting nominated. I can see why Newt does.

DEAL WITH IT CRYBABY. You have a long sordid past.

hanzblinx on December 20, 2011 at 6:57 PM

Intrade:
Mitt Romney 68.1% chance.
Freddy Mac Gingrich 10.0%
Ron Paul 8.2%

VorDaj on December 20, 2011 at 6:59 PM

Gingrich is FUBAR.

VorDaj on December 20, 2011 at 7:01 PM

Oh, God! PLEASE Allah, not again!!!
It’s like deja vu all over again.

PS–Couldn’t you have worked Palin into this at all? ‘Cause that thread is cruising along smashingly.

RedCrow on December 20, 2011 at 7:02 PM

If Romney goes after Obama as hard as he’s gone after Newt he’ll do fine.

gerrym51 on December 20, 2011 at 6:55 PM

If Romney goes after Obama as hard as he has gone after Newt, then maybe I’ll get on board. The concern many of us have with Romney is that he’s going to run McCain’s playbook from 2008 where he savages other Republican’s in the primary and uses kid gloves on Obama in the general. His performance on O’Reilly last night only reinforces that fear.

Kataklysmic–former ‘Nista–uninspired by current field, especially Mittens–hoping gerry is correct about Mitt’s desire to attack Obama

Kataklysmic on December 20, 2011 at 7:02 PM

He’s really not. And his lead is only holding in national polls. In Iowa, which is all that counts, he’s fading.
Allahpundit on December 20, 2011 at 6:56 PM

Paul is not winning Iowa. Either Newt or Romney will

Sorry AP. Perry is a doofus that has jumped the shark too many times to count (heartless, crony, “oops”, drunk NH, “faith” ad, etc.). Tell ace the perry train done blew up!

pamplonajack on December 20, 2011 at 7:02 PM

Romney ran to the left of Ted Kennedy on campaign reform, and wanted PACs abolished.

I PACS are outlawed then Rich people like Romney can have more of an upper hand because they can fund their own campaigns.

gerrym51 on December 20, 2011 at 7:02 PM

Kataklysmic–former ‘Nista–uninspired by current field, especially Mittens–hoping gerry is correct about Mitt’s desire to attack Obama

I couldn’t say it better-so I won’t

gerrym51 on December 20, 2011 at 7:03 PM

He’s going to be the nominee. And I gotta say I’m warming to him.

AP’s right: Romney pretty much has this thing wrapped up once Paul takes Iowa. The economy will bounce back in the summer and O will trounce Romney in the GE. :-(

Punchenko on December 20, 2011 at 7:04 PM

The great Mark Steyn just very recently called Newt Gingrich a totalitarian, but I hear tell their is a vacancy coming up in Venezuela. The one in North Korea has apparently already been filled.

VorDaj on December 20, 2011 at 7:04 PM

“And spare me the “attack ads only help Obama” lecture…”

Allah…

… Attack ads on Obowma would be more helpful!

Seven Percent Solution on December 20, 2011 at 7:06 PM

Allahpundit on December 20, 2011 at 6:56 PM

When did you jump on the Perry bandwagon?

promachus on December 20, 2011 at 7:08 PM

In my opinion, it doesn’t matter if a candidate likes or dislikes the political system as it sits. They have to maximize their advantage and would be fools not to just to live up to some principle that voters won’t appreciate.

So how can you blame Obama or Romney for taking advantage of a system they don’t agree with? Even if you don’t like the rules of the game, if those are the rules of the game, you should maximize them while you are playing the game.

cd98 on December 20, 2011 at 7:08 PM

Yeah, that’s what we want, an all out slug fest.

Speakup on December 20, 2011 at 7:08 PM

Intrade – Iowa -

Paul 43.7%
Romney 32.9%
Santorum 7.5%
Gingrich 7.5%
Perry 5.8%

VorDaj on December 20, 2011 at 7:08 PM

o/t: I wonder what Coulter’s column will be about tomorrow. I’m guessing she goes for the hat trick.

Kataklysmic on December 20, 2011 at 7:10 PM

Unilateral disarmament is usually not a good idea, what with human nature and all.

a capella on December 20, 2011 at 7:11 PM

P.S. if the economy bounces back before the next election, it doesn’t matter who the Republican nominee is, Obama will win. Heck, even if the economy doesn’t bounce back, but shows significant signs of improvement, Obama will be tough, if not impossible, to beat.

cd98 on December 20, 2011 at 7:12 PM

I don’t want an un-vetted candidate getting nominated. I can see why Newt does.

DEAL WITH IT CRYBABY. You have a long sordid past.

hanzblinx on December 20, 2011 at 6:57 PM

Haha, no kidding. People think Newt’s gonna hold up to the MSM smear machine and he can’t even handle a couple negative political ads. Meanwhile he’s going on about delegitimizing a branch of government.

Further he stays away from the nomination the better.

1punchWill on December 20, 2011 at 7:12 PM

Gentlemen- it’s time.
Release the Nasty Newt

jjshaka on December 20, 2011 at 7:12 PM

Gingrich The United States: Romney Newt should be ashamed of these incredibly effective, hugely damaging Super PACGlobal Warming ads with Nancy Pelosi!

When did you jump on the Perry bandwagon?

promachus on December 20, 2011 at 7:08 PM

He has always been a Santorum guy.

upinak on December 20, 2011 at 7:12 PM

o/t: I wonder what Coulter’s column will be about tomorrow. I’m guessing she goes for the hat trick.

Kataklysmic on December 20, 2011 at 7:10 PM

By “hat trick” do you mean she will call the Tea Party racist, sexist, and religious bigots all in one column?

Lawdawg86 on December 20, 2011 at 7:13 PM

This is embarrassing Newt…really


Politics Aint’ Beanbag

workingclass artist on December 20, 2011 at 7:13 PM

This reminds me of the scene in Liar Liar when Jim Carey’s character says “I object” and the judge says on what grounds and he replies “Because it’s devastating to my case!”

Gingrich’s campaign guy sounds like this is a touchy subject, which no doubt is due to money.

Obama is the only one to blame for SuperPacs anyway.

All the GOP candidate should use SuperPacs.

sheryl on December 20, 2011 at 7:15 PM

By “hat trick” do you mean she will call the Tea Party racist, sexist, and religious bigots all in one column?

Lawdawg86 on December 20, 2011 at 7:13 PM

Well, I was thinking more like another MOAB dropped on Newt, but yeah–with her anything is possible.

Kataklysmic on December 20, 2011 at 7:15 PM

If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.

GOPRanknFile on December 20, 2011 at 7:16 PM

It was pretty clear from the get-go that all of Newt’s high-minded calls for a positive campaign since his recent surge were because (a) he has more negatives in hiding than anyone else and (b) he’d noticed that voters had somehow forgotten what a disaster he was in the late 90s and how much of a money whore he’d become in the last decade. Unfortunately the only way those – very salient – facts were going to get out to the public was with some negative campaigning.

InVinoVeritas on December 20, 2011 at 7:16 PM

jjshaka on December 20, 2011 at 7:12 PM

HA!

workingclass artist on December 20, 2011 at 7:16 PM

AP’s right: Romney pretty much has this thing wrapped up once Paul takes Iowa. The economy will bounce back in the summer and O will trounce Romney in the GE. :-(

Punchenko on December 20, 2011 at 7:04 PM

Obamabot alert

gerrym51 on December 20, 2011 at 7:18 PM

Somebody should make an add about Newt spending the first half of his campaign cruising around on a luxury liner.

1punchWill on December 20, 2011 at 7:20 PM

gerrym51 on December 20, 2011 at 7:18 PM

It’s performance art.

a capella on December 20, 2011 at 7:21 PM

OhioCoastie on December 20, 2011 at 6:54 PM

They work if they have some truth in them…Otherwise they are easy to counter.

Mitt’s aren’t that good really but he’s doing a blanket bombing…and Newt ever the excellent and disciplined candidate got caught flat footed with 2 weeks of saturation.

Paul’s serial hypocrisy was a better ad…the irony was that it came from Paul who is himself a hypocrite among other things.

workingclass artist on December 20, 2011 at 7:22 PM

This is embarrassing Newt…really

Politics Aint’ Beanbag

workingclass artist on December 20, 2011 at 7:13 PM

That was my first thought. And the former Speaker knows that better than most. I’m surprised he hasn’t done so already, but I expect him to drop the ‘let’s play together nicely’ tactic soon.

And when he does it will be, Katey Bar the Door.

Flora Duh on December 20, 2011 at 7:25 PM

Suck it up Newt. It is all part of the game. Start working on getting some monetary backing and put your positive ads on the air.

astonerii on December 20, 2011 at 7:26 PM

The only question I have is: if Newt/Mitt lose to Obama, do we get someone MORE moderate in 2016? Or do we finally get a conservative? I’m not liking the progression here: REAGAN->HW Bush->Dole->W Bush->McCain->Unknown Moderate

KingOfTheRoad on December 20, 2011 at 7:28 PM

“The Gingrich campaign likewise sees Romney as being duplicitous. The candidate’s spokesman, RC Hammond, told a reporter on Tuesday that Romney is “either a lying politician or a piece of sh*t.” The statement was meant to be off the record, but was accidentally tweeted (and subsequently deleted). Hammond expressed his “sincere apologies to Governor Romney” in an email to The Huffington Post…”
posted at 6:45 pm on December 20, 2011 by Allahpundit

CAMPAIGN STRESS SYNDROME

workingclass artist on December 20, 2011 at 7:28 PM

Newt has every incentive to play the above-the-fray candidate. With a surge that happened just before voting, taking him down without negative ads or attacks at the debates would be very difficult. Moreover, why would he spend any money attacking Romney when he knows the DNC will do that for him. In fact, I’m surprised any of the republicans running for the nomination would bother spending much money attacking Romney when they know the DNC will do it for them.

cd98 on December 20, 2011 at 7:29 PM

Four down (Bachman, Perry, Cain, Newt), only Paul to go. Why is it that nobody at hotair notices this flavor of the week, swoon peak and crash scenario. It’s like groundhog’s day movie, same story every time.

Romney is the only person that never crashes.

hanzblinx on December 20, 2011 at 7:30 PM

Flora Duh on December 20, 2011 at 7:25 PM

Can’t wait for Mitt to be ambushed by senior Newt Grannies wagging their fingers at him on Youtube…for shame bad mitt!

workingclass artist on December 20, 2011 at 7:31 PM

Romney is the only person that never crashes.

hanzblinx on December 20, 2011 at 7:30 PM

Sure…Mitt Romney Mr. 26%

workingclass artist on December 20, 2011 at 7:31 PM

“If your enemy is superior, evade him. If angry, irritate him. If equally matched, fight, and if not split and reevaluate.”
– Sun Tzu

claudius on December 20, 2011 at 7:33 PM

I’m surprised he hasn’t done so already, but I expect him to drop the ‘let’s play together nicely’ tactic soon.

And when he does it will be, Katey Bar the Door.

Flora Duh on December 20, 2011 at 7:25 PM

No sooner had I hit submit on the above comment, I saw this.

Slumping Gingrich promises sharper counter-punch

Flora Duh on December 20, 2011 at 7:33 PM

I would not by a used car from Romney, let alone would I support him as President.

DDay on December 20, 2011 at 7:33 PM

In Iowa, which is all that counts, he’s fading.

Allahpundit on December 20, 2011 at 6:56 PM

Really? Tell that to Mike Huckabee.

Snorkdoodle Whizbang on December 20, 2011 at 7:35 PM

I do find the “Romney as untrustworthy as a used car salesman” bit pretty funny. Didn’t lots of folks trust him with their millions of dollars when he was at Bain? How did that work out for those folks?

cd98 on December 20, 2011 at 7:35 PM

The argument for all candidates not running negative ads during the primary is:
* At the end of the day, the primary goal is to beat obama
* Most voters are already aware of all the negative info anyway so the effect of the negative ads is not to inform but to temporarily push voters over the edge so to speak. Seriously, do you think anyone who isn’t aware of the negatives was going to take the time to vote? It’s not informing, it’s just depressing enough voter turnout for the targeted candidate to temporarily win a primary.
* Rather than placing negative ads against other candidates, everyone could be running negative ads against the democrats – so its a waste of valuable resources.
* Getting the nomination via negative ads is going to result in a percentage of republican/tea party voters being alienated from the nominee
* So there really is no reason other than self interest to run the ads, and the long term effect is to make it more likely that Obama will win.

In a normal election, where the future of the country wasn’t really in question, the normal tactics of negative ads might be OK…. and voters might get over them. At this point, against Obama….if Romney wins the nomination with negative ads…he better be absolutely sure he can win the general election without gingrich voters.

deploylinux on December 20, 2011 at 7:36 PM

Romney is “either a lying politician or a piece of sh*t.

He’s both.

But why’s Newt crying foul. I seem to recall the 2008 Dem primary was so bloody people wondered if Hill would even show up at the convention.

Newt – man up. It’s frightening to be racing against someone who looks like a recruiting posterboy for the Church of Scientology but for goodness sake grow a pair.

CorporatePiggy on December 20, 2011 at 7:40 PM

I’ve always considered Romney to be a lying piece of sh!t. I’m just surprised that 25% of the republican electorate are still under the impression that Willard is a straight up kind of guy. However, Newt is fooling himself if he thinks his own sh!t doesn’t stink because it does and that’s why his numbers are heading into the toilet. The hell with both of these inside operators.

Spirit Crusher on December 20, 2011 at 7:41 PM

…… In Iowa, which is all that counts, he’s fading.

Allahpundit on December 20, 2011 at 6:56

Not everyone believes that Iowa is all that counts. In fact there are some who believe that Iowa is not only irrelevant but downright misleading.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1211/70674.html

FTA: What especially worries Iowa Republican regulars is the possibility that Paul could win here on January 3rd with the help of Democrats and independents who change their registration to support the libertarian-leaning Texas congressman but then don’t support the GOP nominee next November.

(snip)

While there’s no evidence of an organized effort, public polling shows that Paul’s lead is built in large part with the support of non-Republicans – and few party veterans think such voters would stick with the GOP in November.

Iowa is beginning to sound like just another lefty circus.

timmytee on December 20, 2011 at 7:42 PM

Gingrich has been compared by some to Winston Churchill and Ulysses S. Grant. I see him more as the arrogant George Armstrong Custer pushing his luck with the Lakota and Cheyenne once too often.

The “madness of the king” is upon us, watch.

VorDaj on December 20, 2011 at 6:52 PM

Couldn’t have said it better myself.

Splashman on December 20, 2011 at 7:42 PM

Pass the popcorn.

I hope they destroy each other. They deserve it.

More likely, Gingrich destroys himself. Romney’s not terribly disciplined, but Gingrich makes him look stoic by comparison.

Splashman on December 20, 2011 at 7:45 PM

Sure…Mitt Romney Mr. 26%

workingclass artist on December 20, 2011 at 7:31 PM

You happen to know anyone that’s doing better? And please dont shill for Mr 6% himself Perry.

hanzblinx on December 20, 2011 at 7:45 PM

I actually hope that Paul wins in Iowa because that will prevent Romney from trumpeting the significance of any victory he picks up in New Hampshire. Romney will then have to go and get results in states like Florida and South Carolina, and he most likely won’t thereby preventing his inevitability media blitz. There is still hope for a Perry or Santorum outside surge. We’ll just have to see how all this plays out.

Spirit Crusher on December 20, 2011 at 7:45 PM

Gingrich has been compared by some to Winston Churchill and Ulysses S. Grant. I see him more as the arrogant George Armstrong Custer pushing his luck with the Lakota and Cheyenne once too often.

I think the comparing was done by Newt himself. He can’t beat his quote from DEC. 1. I WILL BE THE NOMINEE!

gerry-moderate republican-mittbot-wishes Mitt could get above 30 percent(hey he had 30 in one poll)

gerrym51 on December 20, 2011 at 7:47 PM

With Gingrich now down and out, we can focus on taking down Ron Paul.

1punchWill on December 20, 2011 at 7:48 PM

I’m pulling for Gingrich, but he played his hand wrong. He thought the people only wanted to hear them go after Obama and not each other. That is true to a certain extent, however the people need to know what the person believe they are voting for. Gingrich has a lot of baggage and he allowed the others to put it out there without him giving it context or a rationale.

RonDelDon on December 20, 2011 at 7:51 PM

Shame on you Mitt , attacking Newt and being a coward when it comes to Obama, you have been running for so many years I am tired of you , Just go away.

evergreenland on December 20, 2011 at 7:52 PM

In Iowa, which is all that counts, he’s fading.

Allahpundit on December 20, 2011 at 6:56 PM

Really? Tell that to Mike Huckabee.

Snorkdoodle Whizbang on December 20, 2011 at 7:35 PM

Iowa is all that counts because it’s the only state in play to determine the anti-Mitt. NH is not in play this year. If Newt is behind anyone in Iowa (as he will be) he is not the anti-Mitt. Personally I’d bet Newt takes 3rd or 4th in Iowa and likewise in New Hampshire.

hanzblinx on December 20, 2011 at 7:53 PM

Light the bat signal! “S”

golfmann on December 20, 2011 at 7:54 PM

Romney is the only person that never crashes.

hanzblinx on December 20, 2011 at 7:30 PM

I’m for Mitt. But its hard to crash when your stuck at 25.

gerrym51 on December 20, 2011 at 7:59 PM

The economy will bounce back in the summer and O will trounce Romney in the GE. :-(

Punchenko on December 20, 2011 at 7:04 PM

Lots of things are going to change between now and the end of the general election campaign. One thing that I have serious doubts about is the notion that the economy will begin to measureably rebound between now and then. Their are too many global factors weighing down our economy, the debt burden is too great and without some sort of stability re: taxes that will allow employers to plan ahead, they won’t be hiring. Imagine if the economy collapses in Europe? I really don’t see Obama abandoning his base before the election and making the Bush tax cuts permanent or anything close to that. And these things only relate to the singular (however important) issue of jobs creation and economic health.

To take that a step further, if there is one thing we should have learned from previous election cycles, its that what appears to be the election issue a year out from the end of the general (the economy), will most likely not be. Can I say for sure that the economy will not be the singularly most important issue on the minds of voters come election day? No. But I can say that there is a very good chance that it won’t be. Think about it, last election, everything seemed to indicate that the election would be one that revolved entirely around foreign policy, Iraq, Afghanistan, tracking down OBL, preventing terrorist attacks, etc. We elected John McCain in the primary largely because he was a foreign policy guy. Well it turned out that on election day the economy was first and foremost on the minds of voters and on the to of the ticket was a man who had been telling voters for years that he was an economic ignoramous.

Elections are unpredictable and we need to be sure to elect someone who is not strictly the most qualified to handle whichever issue appears to be the most important at this moment in time. We need to elect someone who knows his/her stuff on the economy yet also has the ability to speak in depth about the foreign policy issues that are sure to work their way towards the top of the list in terms of importance. This is what worried me about Perry who seemed to have trouble speaking about issues that he had not dealt directly with beyond the scope of Texas. Sure, he has the job creation credentials and that is the issue of the moment but when/if that changed he/we would be in trouble as we were with John McCain.

Zetterson on December 20, 2011 at 8:00 PM

CorporatePiggy on December 20, 2011 at 7:40 PM

someone who looks like a recruiting posterboy for the Church of Scientology

LOL!! Are you referring to the candidate whose facial expression never changes in any circumstances, like his makeup is done by Mme Tussaud?

timmytee on December 20, 2011 at 8:04 PM

pamplonajack on December 20, 2011 at 7:02 PM

The race will come down to Mitt and Perry…and it will go into the spring.

workingclass artist on December 20, 2011 at 8:10 PM

hanzblinx on December 20, 2011 at 7:45 PM

Rick Perry can raise money…That matters

As Head of the RGA he broke records raising money. Once the chaffe drops out the race for money will get serious & Perry will match Mitt.

workingclass artist on December 20, 2011 at 8:14 PM

Shame on you Mitt , attacking Newt and being a coward when it comes to Obama, you have been running for so many years I am tired of you , Just go away.

evergreenland on December 20, 2011 at 7:52 PM

Romney has hit Obama more consistently than any other candidate. Follow politics if you want to comment on it.

1punchWill on December 20, 2011 at 8:15 PM

Gingrich is following the Bob Dole example. In 1988, Dole told the GHW Bush campaign to stop lying about his record. In this case, though, Gingrich is asking for the truth to stop being told.

tbrickert on December 20, 2011 at 8:17 PM

If Romney goes after Obama as hard as he’s gone after Newt he’ll do fine.

gerry-moderate republican-mittbot-GERRYPAC

gerrym51 on December 20, 2011 at 6:55 PM

He won’t. He said as much in last week’s debate. He is going to be cloyingly friendly toward Obama and is going to get his @$$ whipped because of that. It’s going to be another “nothing to fear from an Obama presidency” flavored campaign. Getting his butt whipped is one thing, but because if we nominate this leftist Republican loser, the country’s last chance to change course and possibly recover from the last 75 years of socialist decay will be lost.

AZfederalist on December 20, 2011 at 8:17 PM

The race will come down to Mitt and Perry…and it will go into the spring.

Yes, and then states like New York and California will be winner take all. As a matter of fact, after April 1 all the states are winner take all and Romney as the advantage in most of those states.

tbrickert on December 20, 2011 at 8:21 PM

LOL…Newt you are such a clown. He’s playing with the big boys now, and he don’t like it.

rubberneck on December 20, 2011 at 8:25 PM

He won’t. He said as much in last week’s debate. He is going to be cloyingly friendly toward Obama and is going to get his @$$ whipped because of that. It’s going to be another “nothing to fear from an Obama presidency” flavored campaign. Getting his butt whipped is one thing, but because if we nominate this leftist Republican loser, the country’s last chance to change course and possibly recover from the last 75 years of socialist decay will be lost.

Mitt will have his superpacs and surrogates do it like now

gerry-moderate republican-mittbot=allahpundit,tina,and ed are gods(who says i can’t kiss up)

gerrym51 on December 20, 2011 at 8:26 PM

Gingrich: Romney should be ashamed

The one with none, wants the other to have some.

Heh.

rukiddingme on December 20, 2011 at 8:29 PM

LOL!! Are you referring to the candidate whose facial expression never changes in any circumstances, like his makeup is done by Mme Tussaud?

timmytee on December 20, 2011 at 8:04 PM

Yes. He has a genuinely creepy look and demeanor about him. The last time I saw someone like Mitt they were giving away copies of Dianetics and randomly quoting El Ron Cupboard.

CorporatePiggy on December 20, 2011 at 8:31 PM

If Newt can’t take Mitt’s attacks..what does he think a billion dollar corrupt machine is going to do? Play ring around the rosie?

Sorry, Newt, this is small potatoes.

But, hey hats off to Romney…proves to me you’re in this thing to wing. Play as dirty as you can, get bloody…but you’ll be ready.

Redford on December 20, 2011 at 8:33 PM

Negative ads get made because they work.

OhioCoastie on December 20, 2011 at 6:54 PM

They’re also great if you don’t have a list of accomplishments to run on. Just hope you can make people hate and be more scared of the other guy then they are of you.

29Victor on December 20, 2011 at 8:44 PM

But, hey hats off to Romney…proves to me you’re in this thing to wing. Play as dirty as you can, get bloody…but you’ll be ready.

Redford on December 20, 2011 at 8:33 PM

No he won’t. Look how vicious McCain was in winning the nomination. He had no qualms about dishing dirt or doing whatever it took to win. Once he got the nomination though, he was unwilling to go on the attack against the Bamster. He even threw people under the bus who dared use Barrack Hussein Obama’s real name.

Sadly, just as in investments, a moderate/liberal Republican’s past willingness to go on the attack and savage other Republicans is not an indication of future willingness to vigorously attack his or her Democrat challenger in the general elections.

… and the sad thing is Romney has already telegraphed this.

Even if he were to get elected, how stalwart do you think he’d be? He had the line in the debate the other day about the need to “work with the other side” and stated he had the ability to do so and the experience from his time as governor in MA. Didn’t he say that Romneycare was the best he could do in liberal MA because it was controlled by Dems? So what he is basically saying is that he is willing to bend over and grab his ankles if the Dems push him hard.

AZfederalist on December 20, 2011 at 8:45 PM

The GOP already sent out the memo to go easy on O because most folks still like him “personally”. Romney will most likely follow the memo and not hammer away at him.

Punchenko on December 20, 2011 at 8:57 PM

Romney is weak on every front. NOT who you want to answer the red phone at 3 AM. This sleazy, petulant, control freak is exactly who Axelrod is writing his campaign strategy against.

When the Republican elites, the RINO pundits and the media want Romney, shouldn’t it be anyone but Romney?

America is so lost and so confused!

Sparky5253 on December 20, 2011 at 9:02 PM

Mr. Newt does not have the money to run the negative ads he would like, so he has to try and get them off the air by whining. All he is doing is calling attention to them. Romney is sweating, and who can blame him. The Republican party is so yesterday’s news. Time for a third party and I hope the nut Ron Paul runs as a third party candidate and his cult follows. May as well show the Pubs what treating their base like a crap sandwich gets them.

they lie on December 20, 2011 at 9:15 PM

The GOP already sent out the memo to go easy on O because most folks still like him “personally”. Romney will most likely follow the memo and not hammer away at him.

Punchenko on December 20, 2011 at 8:57 PM

Romney muscled aside Jane Swift. and he did not hesitate to attack in 2008(although he still lost). It amazes me how people can take him as so genial but not realize how tough he can be. He made multi millions in business -not for the faint hearted.

although he’s a nice enough guy he;ll smile at you and stick the knife in at the same time. don’t worry.

gerry-mittbot

gerrym51 on December 20, 2011 at 9:21 PM

Yeah, people are forgetting Mitt’s previous campaigns. The guy’s a knife-fighter. He will smile, and smile, and say “I don’t think the President is a bad guy, he’s just a pathetic miserable failure as a President.” And then he’ll make sure that all those nominally unaffiliated Super-PACs burn Obama to the ground.

You can make the strong case that McCain really didn’t want it enough. But there’s no question that Romney does. He will go to the mats to win this thing in both the primary and the general, but he won’t be stupid about it. Look at what Obama did to win in 2008, after all: stayed personally above the fray, and sent his minions out to do the dirty work.

Honestly, I’m looking forward to having some sneaky hatchet-men playing on our team, for once. That’s one of the good things we’ll get with Mitt.

Esoteric on December 20, 2011 at 9:36 PM

Haven’t you noticed the one common denominator whenever a major fight breaks out between the candidates in the Republican primaries is Mitt Romney. He is always in the middle of it all. In 2008 he hammered fellow Republicans for weeks with misleading attack ads and he’s doing it again in 2012. I am all for getting to the truth and being bold about it, but he’s always fighting with the others and really lowers the bar of political debate.

apocalypse on December 20, 2011 at 9:38 PM

Gov. Romney is a total phony. He’ll shape-shift into whoever he needs to be for the situation, like he did Saturday in South Carolina. That’s when he told a rally that he’s “the ideal[TEA Party] candidate.”

What’s worse than a presidential candidate lying is a formerly steadfast conservative stalwart like Ann Coulter endorse Mitt. Apparently, the TEA Party principles she once espoused don’t mean much anymore.

BTW, will the media call Mitt on his lack of recent private sector or will they just let him keep peddling the myth? Mitt was last in the private sector in February, 1999.

That’s when he left Bain to straighten out the Salt Lake City Olympics. Immediately after that, Mitt ran for governor, was elected governor, announced he wouldn’t run for re-election, then announced his candidacy for the White House. He’s been on the presidential campaign trail since late 2006.

LFRGary on December 20, 2011 at 9:39 PM

Comment pages: 1 2