Gingrich: It seems I have no choice but to go nuclear on Mitt Romney

posted at 5:25 pm on January 2, 2012 by Allahpundit

His aides have been begging him to start throwing some punches and now, finally, he’s ready. This is being phrased, of course, not as a case of going negative but of simply “drawing a contrast,” which is the standard boilerplate anytime a candidate goes negative. Let’s see how “drawing a contrast” worked out this past weekend, shall we?

“Speaker Gingrich, do you think that Mitt Romney is buying the election?” a reporter asked the candidate after he accused Romney of attempting to buy votes earlier in the day.

“No, I didn’t say he was. I said he would if he could,” Gingrich told the reporter as he was leaving a campaign event. “He would buy an election if he could.”

More from Politico:

Newt Gingrich, the clear Iowa front-runner just three weeks ago, typically delivers wide-ranging speeches — and is regularly more than 30 minutes late for his scheduled events. His campaign bus was forced to pull over Thursday so the former speaker could conduct a tele-town hall meeting because his cell phone dropped the call. At other town hall meetings, Gingrich has been forced to respond to queries about President Barack Obama’s citizenship and a man who suggested Gingrich is a polygamist because the Bible doesn’t account for divorce.

Gingrich’s campaign sees the distinctions between the two campaigns as a virtue.

“He’s not a robot,” spokesman R.C. Hammond said. “We’re not Mitt Romney and it shows.”

Mitt’s a soulless, filthy-rich automaton who’d gladly use his wealth to subvert democracy if he could — and that’s just Newt “drawing a contrast.” Imagine when he really gets nasty.

Two points. One: That GOP debate in New Hampshire on Saturday night will be insane. There’s no doubt who the target will be, regardless of what happens in Iowa, and you’ll have at least three and possibly four candidates onstage — Paul, Santorum, Huntsman, and Gingrich — desperate to pull him back towards the pack by throwing everything they’ve got at him. (Only Perry, who’s focused on marginalizing Santorum in South Carolina, won’t be heavily invested in attacking Mitt.) I get the sense that Gingrich is itching to damage Romney over the next few weeks even if his own campaign quickly ends up looking like a lost cause. He’s already written off his chances of winning Iowa but is treating it as a moral victory simply for having survived Romney’s attack-ad onslaught; he’s also taken to complaining bitterly at pressers about being “Romney-boated.” If there’s any candidate who’s likely to drop out before South Carolina and throw his support to a rival to consolidate the Not Romney vote, I’m thinking Newt is it.

Two: Do either of the coming week’s big primaries really matter? At this point, the only way Iowa complicates things for Romney is if he finishes behind either Perry or Gingrich, but his share of the vote in the big Des Moines Register poll this weekend was equal to their two shares combined. Just doesn’t seem likely that he’d fade that badly, especially when Santorum’s surge is likely pulling undecideds away from Perry and Newt. As for New Hampshire, Romney’s polling has actually gotten better there over the past two weeks despite Paul’s and Santorum’s surges. His favorable rating in NH is 69/27 compared to just 47/42 for Paul, and in some polls he leads Santorum (who’s still in the low single digits) by nearly 40 points. Hard to believe anyone’s going to get such a boost of momentum from Iowa that they take him out. All of which means that the only meaningful primary at this point is South Carolina, since that’ll be the acid test of whether any Not Romney can beat him on turf favorable to conservatives. The only candidates who are likely to be out by then are Huntsman and Bachmann, so prepare yourselves for a fun 10 days after New Hampshire of arguing about which two among Santorum, Perry, and Gingrich should drop out and endorse the third in the interest of creating a strong challenger to Romney.

Exit question: Should righties unhappy with a choice between Romney, Santorum, and Paul be rooting for a long contested race between the three? That’s the only shot we’ve got at no one winning a majority of delegates followed by a brokered convention. Second look at Ryan/Rubio? Click the image below to watch.

video platformvideo managementvideo solutionsvideo player


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 3

Exit question: Should righties unhappy with a choice between Romney, Santorum, and Paul be rooting for a long contested race between the three? That’s the only shot we’ve got at no one winning a majority of delegates followed by a brokered convention. Second look at Ryan/Rubio? Click the image below to watch.

Why wouldn’t a brokered convention yield the establishment choice?

ghostwriter on January 2, 2012 at 8:18 PM

First things first.

While Newt hasn’t attacked opponents directly, he’s been pretty content to let the Newt PACS do some attacking. So it’s not as if he’s less guilty than Romney on this front.

Secondly, Newt himself acknowledged that if a few weeks worth of attacks could bring a candidate down then they probably didn’t have what it takes to be president. This, was only a few weeks ago, so by his own logic he essentially admits now that he does not have what it takes to be president.

I do actually feel a bit bad for him, he’s a bright guy and he deserves, SOME sort of position somewhere. Regardless, we need a candidate that can survive a harsh campaign. Obama’s campaign machine is well known for playing hardball, and the media will be going to bat for Obama every day. If a few weeks of attacks during a primary is enough to take a candidate down, then they have no chance in a general election.

So as smart as he is, I don’t think he deserves to win this time. I dunno, maybe he can get an cabinet position or something later on, seems a shame not to utilize him in some capacity.

WolvenOne on January 2, 2012 at 8:19 PM

First things first.

While Newt hasn’t attacked opponents directly, he’s been pretty content to let the Newt PACS do some attacking. So it’s not as if he’s less guilty than Romney on this front.

For my part, I don’t mind if these candidates rough up each other a little bit. Hopefully, nobody will go too far, and say something that can’t be walked back after the primaries.

ghostwriter on January 2, 2012 at 8:26 PM

As an Obama supporter who hangs out here just to see some variety and diversity of political opinion, I’ll tell you: there’re few things I’d enjoy more than an all-out newtclear attack on Romney. I mean, yeah, you guys nominating some lightweight like Perry, or Bachman or (dare I dream?) Palin would be a gift beyond compare. But staying within the realm of the reasonable, your top two most electable guys destroying each other while Obama’s attack machine can focus on gathering donations and ammo for the general election is a really, really nice scenario from where I stand.

Time Lord on January 2, 2012 at 8:32 PM

So now Gingbat thinks he is Harry Truman dealing with the Japaneses. This man is becoming more and more of an embarrassment. Maybe when Romney boated him or waterboarded him or whatever it was, it made him lose the rest of his marbles.

VorDaj on January 2, 2012 at 8:33 PM

As an Obama supporter who hangs out here just to see some variety and diversity of political opinion, I’ll tell you: there’re few things I’d enjoy more than an all-out newtclear attack on Romney. I mean, yeah, you guys nominating some lightweight like Perry, or Bachman or (dare I dream?) Palin would be a gift beyond compare. But staying within the realm of the reasonable, your top two most electable guys destroying each other while Obama’s attack machine can focus on gathering donations and ammo for the general election is a really, really nice scenario from where I stand.

Time Lord on January 2, 2012 at 8:32 PM

You support a lightweight like Obama despite his miserable perfrmance in office, and you scoff at Palin being lightweight? LOL! Talk about irony. Yeah, Palin probably is a lightweight, but no less so than Obama.

ghostwriter on January 2, 2012 at 8:37 PM

I mean, yeah, you guys nominating some lightweight like Perry, or Bachman or (dare I dream?) Palin would be a gift beyond compare.

Time Lord on January 2, 2012 at 8:32 PM

There is no one in the Republican field who is as lightweight as Obama. No one. You must open your mind and let in some light. You can not remain in the dark for much longer or there will be no road left for you back to reality.

VorDaj on January 2, 2012 at 8:39 PM

Bryan Preston is in Iowa and reported that J. C. Watts is there to stump for Gingrich.

INC on January 2, 2012 at 8:42 PM

Even Bill Clinton knows what a lightweight Obama is. I think even his own wife knows too, in spite of her being a heavyweight only by pounds and not IQ points, which is probably why she flies on a separate jumbo jet so often when they take another of their royal vacations where they probably only pass each other when absolutely necessary.

VorDaj on January 2, 2012 at 8:43 PM

Didn’t JC Watts vote for Obama?

VorDaj on January 2, 2012 at 8:44 PM

Obama doesn’t even know when his own birthday is. Yes, he is that stupid. Three weeks before he turned 50 (the big five-oh) he said he had a birthday in another week. On May of this year (2011 if you read this Dumbo Obama) he signed the year 2008, not even getting the right decade. Yes, he is very stupid. Yes, I know he got into Harvard, but they must have had affirmative action for potted plants.

VorDaj on January 2, 2012 at 8:52 PM

Didn’t JC Watts vote for Obama?

VorDaj on January 2, 2012 at 8:44 PM

I don’t know. I’ll see if I can find something.

INC on January 2, 2012 at 8:53 PM

VorDaj on January 2, 2012 at 8:44 PM

No. But didn’t Romney campaign for Paul Tsongas? And I believe Rick Perry voted for Al Gore.

mike_NC9 on January 2, 2012 at 8:56 PM

INC, apparently he said he considered it. But he donated money to McCain, not Obama according to Wiki. fwiw.

mike_NC9 on January 2, 2012 at 8:57 PM

alwaysfiredup on January 2, 2012 at 8:12 PM

If he doesn’t push back, he’s a loser and if he does push back he’s a whiner. In the meantime, no one lays a glove on Romeny. It must be because he is perfect. I’m losing interest in all of them.

Cindy Munford on January 2, 2012 at 8:58 PM

mike_NC9 on January 2, 2012 at 8:57 PM

Thanks, I just saw that. Evidently he was disgruntled about what he perceived as lack of Rs reaching out to blacks. That’s very disappointing that he lacked discernment as to exactly who Obama & the Dems are.

INC on January 2, 2012 at 9:01 PM

Didn’t JC Watts vote for Obama?

VorDaj on January 2, 2012 at 8:44 PM

I’m pretty sure he did.

Link

JPeterman on January 2, 2012 at 9:02 PM

I’m pretty sure he did.

Link

JPeterman on January 2, 2012 at 9:02 PM

Wow! He said the earth moved. Can’t get much more into the Obama cult than that.

VorDaj on January 2, 2012 at 9:05 PM

I like Newt. He understand politics better than any of our contenders. He would be uglier and nastier than Mitt or Ron Paul…only if he had the $$$$.

What does he think Obama and the dems will do? Offer him cake?

Hell’s kitchen awaits our nominee, and Newt can’t take it

Redford on January 2, 2012 at 9:13 PM

It’s about time, but punch back and ditch the Romney-boated thing.

GMO on January 2, 2012 at 9:13 PM

So are you saying that doesn’t apply to the other candidates?

Are only Catholic’s Christians or are Protestants and Mormons also supposed to do that sort of thing?

sharrukin on January 2, 2012 at 8:03 PM

Of course it should apply to the other candidates. But the other candidates didn’t proclaim at every opportunity that they were going to run a relentlessly positive campaign of ideas. And to give Newt credit, his approach elevated the primary; his example inspired (or forced, or shamed) the other candidates into behaving better than perhaps they would normally. By staying positive, Newt provided a pleasant and defining contrast to his rivals when they inevitably descended into the usual petty and pointless bickering.

Newt’s approach was the correct one, and I wish the other candidates had followed his example. Newt’s approach would destroy Obama in the general, because Obama has no positive record to run on, and his Hope and Change rhetoric has been exposed as a flatulent con job. Obama and his minions will have to go negative, and a focused, Reaganesque campaign of optimism and ideas will lead to a landslide victory of monumental proportions.

Unfortunately, standard procedure has been followed, candidates have gone negative, and Newt’s principled response has been to cast off his principles at the first sign of adversity. Way to go, Newt! That’s the real recipe for success: abandon the one quality that got you noticed in the first place, and act like everybody else because they made you do it. Had Newt stuck to his guns after being attacked, he might have recovered his momentum. Now, after the “ill-gotten gains from Bain” nonsense; and the “Romney would buy the election if he could” idiocy; and the “I’ve been swift boated crap”; Newt is just another flailing loser who will fade back into obscurity once this election is over.

Mr. Arkadin on January 2, 2012 at 9:14 PM

If he doesn’t push back, he’s a loser and if he does push back he’s a whiner. In the meantime, no one lays a glove on Romeny. It must be because he is perfect. I’m losing interest in all of them.

Cindy Munford on January 2, 2012 at 8:58 PM

Your weariness is understandable. This campaign seems to have been going on forever, in response to Obama’s announced running for reelection in early April last year. Obama pounds on the Republicans, in general, and the Republicans pound on each other, and we have months to go without a single vote having been cast. Now is when we should be building enthusiasm.

GaltBlvnAtty on January 2, 2012 at 9:16 PM

Newt also had no choice but to cheat on his wives.

galtani on January 2, 2012 at 9:16 PM

“I’ve been swift boated crap”; Newt is just another flailing loser who will fade back into obscurity once this election is over.

Mr. Arkadin on January 2, 2012 at 9:14 PM

Your posts are so long that they suggest you have lots of material. Yet you falsely quote Newt. Don’t the facts give you enough material? Do you think false quotes increase your credibility or the strength of your arguments?

GaltBlvnAtty on January 2, 2012 at 9:22 PM

Romney running these negative ads towards his fellow Repubs shows that if he gets to the Office of Pres, he will turn his back on fellow Repubs and stab them in the back too.

blondie2011 on January 2, 2012 at 9:27 PM

Time Lord on January 2, 2012 at 8:32 PM

If it wasn’t for the fact that MSM destroyed everything in Obama’s path (including Hillary Clinton), there’s no way that lightweight ever could have been elected. Their biased coverage is all that keeps him above 30%.

Compare the media coverage of Michelle Obama’s $100,000+ plus cost to the U.S. taxpayer because she wanted to go to Hawaii early to the cost of Sarah Palin’s campaign wardrobe (funded by the McCain campaign), which Palin never even asked for.

bw222 on January 2, 2012 at 9:28 PM

blondie2011 on January 2, 2012 at 9:27 PM

Either Romney or Gingrich would betray conservatives in a heartbeat.

bw222 on January 2, 2012 at 9:30 PM

The GOP is NOT the Democratic Party, with enough delegates slots reserved apart from the primaries to substantially alter the outcome. In fact, most of our delegates are determined by primaries, by how people vote, not by party bosses or “super delegates” like the Democrats.

There is almost no chance of a “brokered convention” in either party under modern rules, but especially not in the GOP. But if the Paulbots think they can take over the state parties and conventions, let ‘em try.

~~~~~~~~~~

Gingrich’s record should be fair game, but I notice he isn’t worrying about accuracy in portraying Mitt. Nasty Newt is back! We wondered how long it would take, and if anyone remembered it was we conservatives who dumped the jerk from the Speaker’s chair in the first place.

Adjoran on January 2, 2012 at 9:30 PM

Scott Brown from Mass ran as a Republican but votes with the Dems.

blondie2011 on January 2, 2012 at 9:30 PM

Newt also had no choice but to cheat on his wives.

galtani on January 2, 2012 at 9:16 PM

Right. He was forced to do it because he worked so hard for his country. When I work hard, the last thing I think about is banging Callista Flockhart.

bw222 on January 2, 2012 at 9:33 PM

Scott Brown from Mass ran as a Republican but votes with the Dems.

blondie2011 on January 2, 2012 at 9:30 PM

I contributed to Brown, but don’t plan to again. He was the deciding vote against the DREAM Act and that alone was worth the $35.

bw222 on January 2, 2012 at 9:35 PM

Didn’t JC Watts vote for Obama?

VorDaj on January 2, 2012 at 8:44 PM

He was very positive about Obama in the 2008 election, but I don’t know if he actually voted for Him. Race is the ultimate trump card.

bw222 on January 2, 2012 at 9:39 PM

Voting for the candidate who goes through trophy wives like they’re disposable accessory items is much closer to untrustworthy.

ray on January 2, 2012 at 9:45 PM

Scott Brown votes with the moderate-to-liberal crowd sometimes. But the majority of the time he is voting moderate-to-conservative.

• He voted against Harvard leftest Elena Kagan for the Supreme Court

•  He voted against Berkeley moonbat Gordon Liu for the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals

• He voted to repeal Obamacare

• He voted against the DREAM Act

• He opposed cap-and-trade

• He voted against the second “stimulus” — another payoff to the public-sector unions

So yeah, we would be much better with a crazy democrat senator from Massachusetts than have Scott Brown. /s

ray on January 2, 2012 at 9:52 PM

I hope somebody unloads on the Man in the Magic Underwear. I could see that dirtbag Romney attacking Palin with SuperPacs if she ran. Mitt Romney is a piece of trash and he deserves to be thrown in the garbage with Mike Tyson.

CoolChange80 on January 2, 2012 at 9:56 PM

If there’s any candidate who’s likely to drop out before South Carolina and throw his support to a rival to consolidate the Not Romney vote, I’m thinking Newt is it.

Um, I thought Newt was doing good in S. Carolina….why in the world would he drop out before S. Carolina?

terryannonline on January 2, 2012 at 10:00 PM

Newt is hardcore… Romney should be afraid.

equanimous on January 2, 2012 at 10:06 PM

Holy crap, Greta just slapped down Perry.

dforston on January 2, 2012 at 10:06 PM

Romney running these negative ads towards his fellow Repubs shows that if he gets to the Office of Pres, he will turn his back on fellow Repubs and stab them in the back too.

blondie2011 on January 2, 2012 at 9:27 PM

No, it shows that he will take the fight to Obama in the general election.

ghostwriter on January 2, 2012 at 10:11 PM

Romney running these negative ads towards his fellow Repubs shows that if he gets to the Office of Pres, he will turn his back on fellow Repubs and stab them in the back too.

blondie2011 on January 2, 2012 at 9:27 PM

Besides, what precisely has Romney hit Gingrich with that’s out of bounds?

ghostwriter on January 2, 2012 at 10:12 PM

Your posts are so long that they suggest you have lots of material. Yet you falsely quote Newt. Don’t the facts give you enough material? Do you think false quotes increase your credibility or the strength of your arguments?

Since I am not quoting Newt, how did I misquote him? I was paraprasing. Please show how my paraphrases were false. Newt said this about Romney:

I love the way he and his consultants think of these things. I would just like to say, that if Governor Romney would like to give back all the money he’s earned from bankrupting companies and laying off employees over his years at Bain, that I would be glad to then listen to him. And I’ll bet you $10—not $10,000—that he won’t take the offer.

And this:

Romney would buy the election if he could.

And this:

I’ve been Romney-boated.

If you can show me where my paraphrases are a falsification of what Gingrich said, I will vote for him in the primary. Oh wait, I can’t. I live in Virginia.

Mr. Arkadin on January 2, 2012 at 10:16 PM

Voting for the candidate who goes through trophy wives like they’re disposable accessory items is much closer to untrustworthy.

ray on January 2, 2012 at 9:45 PM

I doubt many consider Newt’s brides trophy wives, unless you are partial to hairdos high school girls had in the 1960s.

bw222 on January 2, 2012 at 10:20 PM

If you can show me where my paraphrases are a falsification of what Gingrich said, I will vote for him in the primary. Oh wait, I can’t. I live in Virginia.

Mr. Arkadin on January 2, 2012 at 10:16 PM

That wasn’t Newt’s fault. Admiral Yamamoto’s grandson did that to him.

bw222 on January 2, 2012 at 10:22 PM

So, Gingrich shows more of his wacky instability. First he’s going to be positive. Then he goes negative. Then he apologizes for going negative. Then he promises to be positive and never go negative again. Here we are and Gingrich is going negative again.

Good gravy! The guy treats his promises like his wives.

csdeven on January 2, 2012 at 10:32 PM

Romney running these negative ads towards his fellow Repubs shows that if he gets to the Office of Pres, he will turn his back on fellow Repubs and stab them in the back too.

blondie2011 on January 2, 2012 at 9:27 PM

By that metric, all of the candidates will stab the reps in the back. So what is your point?

csdeven on January 2, 2012 at 10:36 PM

Mr. Arkadin on January 2, 2012 at 10:16 PM

So, per your rules your use of quotation marks does not mean that you are quoting. That will help us give due consideration to your posts.

GaltBlvnAtty on January 2, 2012 at 10:37 PM

Besides, what precisely has Romney hit Gingrich with that’s out of bounds?

ghostwriter on January 2, 2012 at 10:12 PM

Nothing that Romney and the ohters hit Newt with wasn’t true. That is why I think Gingrich tried to take the high road for a few weeks because he knew he couldn’t spin them. I mean how many times can Newt say it was a mistake that he sat on the couch and did a global warming commercial with Pelosi while it’s playing on the Iowa airwaves 24/7 for 3 straight weeks? That really left a mark. Heck it left a crater.

Roymunson on January 2, 2012 at 11:01 PM

Holy crap, Greta just slapped down Perry.

dforston on January 2, 2012 at 10:06 PM

I missed it (since I no longer watch Fox-Mitt-Romney-News), but it’s no surprise: Greta’s husband is a lawyer and he vowed to take Perry down when Perry announced (lawyers loathe Perry because Perry passed tort reform in TX).

-Aslan’s Girl

Aslans Girl on January 2, 2012 at 11:21 PM

Nothing that Romney and the ohters hit Newt with wasn’t true. That is why I think Gingrich tried to take the high road for a few weeks because he knew he couldn’t spin them. I mean how many times can Newt say it was a mistake that he sat on the couch and did a global warming commercial with Pelosi while it’s playing on the Iowa airwaves 24/7 for 3 straight weeks? That really left a mark. Heck it left a crater.

Roymunson on January 2, 2012 at 11:01 PM

I think that Gingrich went positve because he didn’t have the money for the ad buys that going negative would have necessitated.

ghostwriter on January 2, 2012 at 11:41 PM

All this girlish kvetching about how Romney has allegedly “Romney boated” Mitt but never ANY substance in the midst of the narrative about what has been said that isn’t true.

So – what has been said about Newt (in either Paul or Romney adverts) that isn’t true? Out with it.

Also, it’s funny that (a) the most devastating hits on Gingrich actually came directly from Ron Paul’s camp but (b) neither Gingrich nor Fox News ever references that fact.

InVinoVeritas on January 2, 2012 at 11:48 PM

I hope somebody unloads on the Man in the Magic Underwear. I could see that dirtbag Romney attacking Palin with SuperPacs if she ran. Mitt Romney is a piece of trash and he deserves to be thrown in the garbage with Mike Tyson.

You’re a piece of trash for making adolescent, gratuitous references to someone else’s religious practice.

The HA mods ought to consider dropping the hammer on dreck like this.

You have no argument and you put vitriolic bigotry in its place.

InVinoVeritas on January 3, 2012 at 12:27 AM

I could see that dirtbag Romney attacking Palin with SuperPacs if she ran.

CoolChange80 on January 2, 2012 at 9:56 PM

Maybe you should send her a donation.

Go RBNY on January 3, 2012 at 12:58 AM

So, Gingrich is saying he’s not really a leader, that he’s just blown along by the political weather?

claudius on January 3, 2012 at 2:51 AM

InVinoVeritas, So its bigotry to bring up magic underwear now? And undergarments as a practice? Your reaching! Next up holy socks for salvation, dont make fun of the practice! Heavens Gate wore Nikes. Dont make fun! Or you’re a bigot!

Gedge on January 3, 2012 at 3:27 AM

InVinoVeritas, So its bigotry to bring up magic underwear now? And undergarments as a practice? Your reaching! Next up holy socks for salvation, dont make fun of the practice! Heavens Gate wore Nikes. Dont make fun! Or you’re a bigot!

Gedge on January 3, 2012 at 3:27 AM

The magic underwear jokes are juvenile, not funny and appear meant to disparage and mock someone for their religious beliefs. People are certainly free to make the “jokes,” but others are also free to point out what an immature, uncreative, lowlife bigot the person making them appears to be.

I guess when your candidate (probably Perry, given the obvious low IQ of the name-caller) is a complete loser and you have no substantive criticism to offer, you have to resort to childish religious insults.

No wonder Romney is way ahead. His haters all sound like moronic, unhinged, irrational boobs.

bluegill on January 3, 2012 at 4:34 AM

I missed it (since I no longer watch Fox-Mitt-Romney-News), but it’s no surprise: Greta’s husband is a lawyer and he vowed to take Perry down when Perry announced (lawyers loathe Perry because Perry passed tort reform in TX).

-Aslan’s Girl

Aslans Girl on January 2, 2012 at 11:21 PM

I wish the Perry supporters would stop whining and blaming others for the failure of their rodeo clown candidate. Bozo Perry has received fawning coverage on Fox News, yet he is still floundering. It is Romney who has received a lot of challenging coverage (most of it fair) from Fox News, yet he has managed to handle the criticism and always comport himself well. Romney’s steadiness, consistency and toughness are winning over voters. Perry is shedding voter support like crazy because he appears to be totally and utterly incompetent.

The smart choice is Romney. No doubt about it. GO ROMNEY!!

bluegill on January 3, 2012 at 4:38 AM

The media is happy to help the righties destroy any candidate who could beat Obama, if by the “righties” you mean nihilistic talibangelicals who expect the end to come this year so why do anything so long term as plan for economic recovery in 2014 or so. Might as well insist on abortion litmus tests and repeal of the 14th Amendment.

borntoraisehogs on January 3, 2012 at 4:51 AM

So does the pig eyed fornicating Newt think the adverb suffix “Boating” means being unfairly attacked or have the truth brought into the light? The Swift Boat Vets told the truth about Kerry and the Romney super pacs and others have told nothing but the truth about Newt.

borntoraisehogs on January 3, 2012 at 4:55 AM

So does the pig eyed fornicating Newt think the adverb suffix “Boating” means being unfairly attacked or have the truth brought into the light? The Swift Boat Vets told the truth about Kerry and the Romney super pacs and others have told nothing but the truth about Newt.

borntoraisehogs on January 3, 2012 at 4:55 AM

I don’t support Newt (Romney is the best, by far), but I think you are making way too much out of Newt’s play on words.

bluegill on January 3, 2012 at 5:25 AM

I wish Gingrich the best. He needs to destroy two mantras:

Romney = electable

(Prof. Jacobson over at “Legal Insurrection” has done a decent job of collecting items under a to-date 3-part series on this. SEE: http://legalinsurrection.com/2012/01/what-if-everything-we-have-been-told-about-mitt-romneys-electability-is-wrong-part-3/)

Gingrich = baggage

There is not one other candidate currently in the running who would as clearly and persuasively bring forth to the American populace that it is Obama who is the candidate with the most damaging “baggage.”

Czar of Defenestration on January 3, 2012 at 6:00 AM

If there’s any candidate who’s likely to drop out before South Carolina and throw his support to a rival to consolidate the Not Romney vote, I’m thinking Newt is it.

You’re right, AP, that Newt will act out of bitterness rather than what’s good for the nation or even what’s good for him.

Remember, he’s the guy who once casually announced to reporters that a grudge against President Clinton affected his actions as Speaker.

itsnotaboutme on January 3, 2012 at 6:58 AM

I’m getting the sense that the not-Romney dynamic is fading as folks look at the choices and become resigned to the inevitable.

Happy Nomad on January 3, 2012 at 7:44 AM

Kinda sad that AP is now resorting to blatant anti-Newt propaganda. He even throws in anti-Newt digs in posts that have absolutely nothing to do with Newt. Get a grip AP. Many, many HotAir readers support Newt. Anyone with an IQ over 3 knows he’s more conservative and just as electable as Mitt.

davenp35 on January 3, 2012 at 7:49 AM

I’d be more than happy if gNewt & Mittens destroy each other…I’d rather go Galt than have to vote for either one!

insidiator on January 3, 2012 at 7:52 AM

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/home2/53201394-183/mormon-says-lds-church.html.csp?page=1

An interesting article from an anti Mormon newspaper in Salt Lake.

Bambi on January 3, 2012 at 7:58 AM

Egalitarianism…equality…they all sound nice Bambi but it is not a stretch to see how that translates into RomneyCare etc and what it might mean should Mittens attain the Presidency. While I doubt the latter (Obama would love to face an old style country club Repub almost as much as he would enjoy facing off against a power-broker with a plus-sized ego) the point is valid. I have nothing against the Mormon faith per se (I have a problem with the fantasy story behind it) but as a people they are family-oriented, hard working and trustworthy. As to the latter even the mob found it wise to employ them in casinos. I however have serious misgivings about both Romney’s ability to beat Obama and what he would do in office. A Romney Admin could make W’s “compassionate conservatism” look mild by comparison.

insidiator on January 3, 2012 at 8:10 AM

Roe VS Wade is the law, but that doesn’t make it conservative.

sharrukin on January 2, 2012 at 7:53 PM

It cleaarly says in the goood book WECREATE Chapter 4:5-13
“All men are to unquestionably follow diligently all mysterious emanations from penumbras discovered and so identified by men in blackened robes, without question”

Don L on January 3, 2012 at 8:23 AM

I wish Gingrich the best. He needs to destroy two mantras:

Romney = electable

(Prof. Jacobson over at “Legal Insurrection” has done a decent job of collecting items under a to-date 3-part series on this. SEE: http://legalinsurrection.com/2012/01/what-if-everything-we-have-been-told-about-mitt-romneys-electability-is-wrong-part-3/)

Gingrich = baggage

There is not one other candidate currently in the running who would as clearly and persuasively bring forth to the American populace that it is Obama who is the candidate with the most damaging “baggage.”

Czar of Defenestration on January 3, 2012 at 6:00 AM

Agree.

Romney is not electable, just as McCain and Dole were not electable and for the same reasons. The reason the dems are pushing for Romney, ie feeding us the line that he’s their worst nightmare, is because they’re dying to face him. Their spin belies their motives.

Gingrich is without a doubt the most qualified for the office of the presidency, and will take it to Obama. As opposed to the ‘hands off’ policy of Romney and the RNC (Don’t attack Obama because he’s a nice guy and people like him) ie McCain in 2008.

I see why the Gingrich camp went with the ‘nice guy’ tact; that’s what caused him to surge in the first place. People liked that he didn’t attack others in the debates or in ads, and that he called out the media for inciting attacks between the candidates. Iowans typically don’t like attack ads. Romney, Paul and Perry churned them out constantly against Newt and they seem to have worked in Iowa this time. We’ll see tonight just how well they worked. Maybe there will be a backlash.

At any rate, no matter the outcome in Iowa, I’d love to see Newt go after the anointed one, Mitt. Ha, it’s about darn time for Romney and all of his liberal policies to get vetted.

Take the gloves off, Newt. Do it for the 75-80% of the people that don’t want Mitt Romney, establishment candidate.

IndeCon on January 3, 2012 at 11:30 AM

Kinda sad that AP is now resorting to blatant anti-Newt propaganda. He even throws in anti-Newt digs in posts that have absolutely nothing to do with Newt. Get a grip AP. Many, many HotAir readers support Newt. Anyone with an IQ over 3 knows he’s more conservative and just as electable as Mitt.

davenp35 on January 3, 2012 at 7:49 AM

This.

IndeCon on January 3, 2012 at 12:12 PM

Anyone with an IQ over 3 knows [Newt]‘s more conservative and just as electable as Mitt.

davenp35 on January 3, 2012 at 7:49 AM

Funniest thing I read all day!

EddieC on January 3, 2012 at 1:07 PM

Anyone with an IQ over 3 knows [Newt]‘s more conservative and just as electable as Mitt.
davenp35 on January 3, 2012 at 7:49 AM

That’s the whole point. There is no way that Newt Gingrich will get the votes of the hardcore radical leftist “I will never vote for anyone besides Barack Hussein Obama as long as I live” voters out there.

Of course, neither will Mitt Romney. But he will make them feel slightly happier while they vote Democrat. And when you think about it, that’s all that really matters.

logis on January 3, 2012 at 2:58 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3