Oh my: Gingrich finally set to go negative on Romney?

posted at 5:50 pm on December 26, 2011 by Allahpundit

Last week he was promising a stronger counter-punch to Romney’s attacks, this week he’s apparently going to throw roundhouses unprompted.

Eight days to the caucuses. Gloves off.

Gingrich’s campaign, urgently in need of recapturing their momentum from earlier this month, is putting out a statement mocking a new Romney ad, in which the former Massachusetts governor portrays himself as a “conservative businessman.”

“Can we trust a Massachusetts Moderate to enact a conservative agenda?” says Gingrich communications director Joe DeSantis. “Our campaign might have plenty of things to say about that, but the best response certainly comes from Mitt Romney himself: ‘I think people recognize that I am not a partisan Republican. That I’m someone who is moderate, and that my views are progressive.’”…

Included with DeSantis’s statement are a slew of past Romney quotes in which he similarly says things that are unhelpful in the context of a GOP presidential primary.

While many of the quotes aren’t new, the combination of a spokesman launching a conventional attack and sending along oppo is certainly novel for Gingrich. He has thrown elbows at Romney in the past, but it was usually a spur-of-the moment move and it came only from the candidate’s mouth. This is a different thing – a planned assault.

So confident are Romney’s advisors now that Paul is threatening to clear the field for him in Iowa that they’re going around telling reporters, “I don’t see any scenario where we’re not the nominee.” (The Boston Herald quotes a Republican strategist: “If you’re Romney, I’d be giving Ron Paul’s supporters rides to the caucus-places.”) Why is Newt focusing on Mitt, then, instead of the guy who’s actually leading in the polls? Two reasons. One: The more the media buzzes about Paul’s newsletters, the greater the odds that the dynamic next Tuesday will be “Paul vs. Stop Paul.” If Newt can damage Romney before then, he might become the default “Stop Paul” option for undecideds. Two: It’s not strictly true that a Paul win in Iowa automatically helps Romney to the nomination. It’s probably true in the sense that Romney is likely to finish second at worst, but what if he finishes fourth or even fifth behind Paul, Gingrich, Bachmann, and/or Perry? That’ll wound him badly headed into New Hampshire; meanwhile, if Gingrich finishes second in Iowa, he (and Huntsman) would be in good shape to become the Stop Paul/Not Romney candidate in New Hampshire. If he won there, then suddenly Romney would be 0 for 2 and taking a ferocious beating in the media for underperforming. That would make a Gingrich victory in South Carolina, where he’s currently leading, seem very likely, and then Romney would try to make a stand in Florida against Newt’s momentum. It’s hard to believe that scenario will play out, but the odds aren’t zero. All that needs to happen to make it possible is Mitt doing badly next Tuesday night. Since Iowa’s a jump ball right now, why not?

Exit question: Why would undecideds in Iowa vote for a guy who can’t figure out how to get on the ballot in all 50 states?


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

Romney in 2008 said the same thing about not doing negative ads but the truth hurts as a lot of times the negative ads work, as most people don’t research or do anything they just vote for whoever sounds good and whoever at the time is up in the polls. A lot of silly people in the world. So Newt decides to go negative cause wussy Romney won’t face him in a debate…actually those two are meant for each other. LOL. They both are not that conservative and both have flip flopped on lots of issues. I am still behind Rick Perry, as he has the most awesome jobs record of any of the candidates and that is what our country needs is jobs.

conjn19 on December 27, 2011 at 7:57 AM

Exit question: Why would undecideds in Iowa vote for a guy who can’t figure out how to get on the ballot in all 50 states?

You just had to ask, didn’t you? Someone in Newt’s campaign screwed up big time and should be fired muy pronto.

Ron Paul is a non-factor: Period.

Mittens can’t win squat south of the Mason-Dixon Line. Romney’s continual boasting about winning the nomination doesn’t sit well with conservatives. We’ll be out in droves to make sure that doesn’t happen. Sadly, here in Michigan, Mittens is the son of a favorite son (daddy George was Governor once upon a time). This State is still run by Leftist labor unions, but we did get a real “businessman” in 2010, Republican Governor Rick Snyder and a GOP legislature. Snyder has been cleaning up the horrible economic mess left behind by The One’s pal – Jennifer Granholm.

I’m hoping that Mittens and Newton tear each other down so much, it will open the way for Rick Perry to get some attention, and not just for “gaffes”. Conservatives really have only one candidate who can win it all – Governor Perry.

If absolutely necessary, I’d hold my nose and vote for Newt though.
(OHhhhh NOooooo … I’m having a McCain flashback!)
Brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr …

~(Ä)~

Karl Magnus on December 27, 2011 at 8:25 AM

Exit question: Why would undecideds in Iowa vote for a guy who can’t figure out how to get on the ballot in all 50 states?

Yeah we get it, says the I am in love with Mitt fan!

jistincase on December 27, 2011 at 9:23 AM

Perry will get my vote, too. He certainly understands jobs, the economy, and energy… and those things that get in the way (regulations, more regulations, and the EPA).

Absolutely LOVE the idea of having Congress meet for one short period of time as is done in Texas now. The less time they spend in session, the less mess they can make.

Corgi-Mom on December 27, 2011 at 9:28 AM

Note to the Newt:
Good guys finish last.

Signed: Community Activist Obamma

timberline on December 27, 2011 at 10:11 AM

Personally, I refuse to go through another election like Dole and McCain, and that’s even if Christy runs as V.P. The Republican Party/Establishment wants Romney because they care more about the moderate vote than conservative vote. As a conservative, I feel like I don’t have a party representing me anymore, which is probably why Ron Paul is doing so well. I am going to keep my registration as Republican in order to caucus for Gingrich, then I am switching to unaffiliated if Romney gets the nomination. It will just be entertainment at that point.

lea on December 27, 2011 at 10:16 AM

Can we trust someone who was run out of congress on a rail by his fellow conservatives.

rubberneck on December 27, 2011 at 10:50 AM

Perry will get my vote, too.

Corgi-Mom on December 27, 2011 at 9:28 AM

Make sure you use crayon and you might want to confirm the vote three times or he might forget.

csdeven on December 27, 2011 at 11:14 AM

@rubberneck: Actually, yeah I would…compared to this:

http://buddysblog.typepad.com/.a/6a0134873aa66a970c0162fe7a41b1970d-pi

I’d vote for a shoe box before I’d vote for Mitten’s or Paul.

coach1228 on December 27, 2011 at 12:33 PM

Exit question: Why would undecideds in Iowa vote for a guy who can’t figure out how to get on the ballot in all 50 states?

It’s call “STRATEGERY”…LOL!!

coach1228 on December 27, 2011 at 12:35 PM

Comment pages: 1 2