Rasmussen nat’l poll showing second Gingrich boomlet?

posted at 11:10 am on January 18, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

After a brilliant debate performance by Newt Gingrich on Monday, some wondered whether it was too late in the cycle for a second bounce.  According to a Rasmussen poll taken yesterday of 1,000 likely GOP primary voters, Mitt Romney’s team may want to keep the party favors in the box for a little while longer:

The race for the Republican presidential nomination is now nearly even with Mitt Romney still on top but Newt Gingrich just three points apart.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of Likely Republican Primary Voters nationwide shows Romney with 30% support and Gingrich with 27% of the vote. Former U.S. Senator Rick Santorum, who was running second two weeks ago, has now dropped to 15%.

Texas Congressman Ron Paul captures 13% support from likely primary voters, and Texas Governor Rick Perry remains in last place with four percent (4%). Another four percent (4%) like some other candidate in the race, and seven percent (7%) are undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)  

But the story in the new numbers, taken Tuesday night, is Gingrich’s jump 11 points from 16% two weeks ago. Romney’s support is essentially unchanged from 29% at that time, while Santorum is down six points from 21%. Paul’s and Perry’s support is also unchanged. Former Utah Governor Jon Huntsman earned four percent (4%) of the vote at the start of the month but dropped out of the race this week. This suggests that many voters are still looking for an alternative to Romney and currently see Gingrich as that candidate.

Bear in mind that Rasmussen polled South Carolina the day before and found Romney in the lead by 14 points.  That’s a big margin to overcome in a short period of time, but that is what debates can do for candidates, thanks to their immediate reach.

Gingrich still has issues in the internals.  Romney edges him among Republicans (31/28) and non-Republicans (27/25), the latter of whom comprise 28% of the overall sample.  Gingrich has a three-point lead among men but an 11-point deficit among women. He also has a lower favorability rating than Romney (58/38 and 68/29, respectively), which means that undecideds are a little more likely to drift to Romney than to Gingrich.  Also, Romney leads bt 14 points on the question of which would be stronger against Obama (13 points among Republicans and 16 points among non-Republicans), and 70% expect Romney to win the nomination anyway.

Still, the bounce upward indicates momentum for Gingrich, who squandered it in Iowa in December.  Romney hasn’t actually lost any momentum, either.  At whose expense has this momentum swung toward Gingrich?  It looks like Rick Santorum, while still polling respectably in the mid-teens, has begun dropping off the pace.  If the race comes down to Romney and a Romney alternative, at the moment the latter would be Gingrich — which is interesting, because Santorum has at least arguably tied for the win in one state, something Gingrich hasn’t even come close to doing as of yet.

Gingrich had better hope that this momentum is for real, and that it reaches the Palmetto State.  Coming in second in South Carolina won’t work, as Hugh Hewitt explains in his post titled “Elect Me Because The Guy I Can’t Beat Can’t Beat Obama”:

Trying to brand Romney a “moderate” is a fine campaign tactic that most voters just shrug off as noise, but they do hear the “and the odds are fairly high that he will lose to Obama,” which doesn’t hurt Romney but Gingrich himself, just as did the attacks on Bain.  Ginrich has risen when he has attacked Obama or the MSM or the sacred cows of media elites.  He falls when he lashes out at his competition or at the prospects of the party in the fall.

That’s because it’s a process argument, not a policy argument, and Gingrich hasn’t ever won a statewide election in this cycle or any other, let alone a national election for himself.  That doesn’t make Gingrich’s point false, but it doesn’t exactly give him the standing to make it, either.  If he wins South Carolina, this argument might work better for him in Florida.


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 4

cane_loader on January 18, 2012 at 12:09 PM

If Newt is Churchill then Ron Paul is George Washington.

FloatingRock on January 18, 2012 at 12:14 PM

Gunlock Billie Bob:

Tell me more about Gunlock ‘special’ math where Romney cut $1.6B from the budget even though spending under his watch increased 30% during his tenure.

angryed on January 18, 2012 at 12:14 PM

Are you suggesting Newt has an ounce of moral character? – Save your mea culpas for confession.

FlaMurph on January 18, 2012 at 11:49 AM

If we were holding an election for Most Honorable Man, then you’d have a point.

angryed on January 18, 2012 at 12:09 PM

Actually, I think Gingrich does have a great deal of moral character. It’s just, he’s fixing a sex addiction problem late in life, after spending a lot of years philandering. At least he’s fixing it.

He’s got a lot more moral character than, say, Barack Obama. Can you imagine Newt Gingrich jimmying the credit card checks on his campaign web site so foreigners could contribute to his campaign? I can’t. Remember, Gingrich is the guy at whom House Democrats threw 76 separate ethics charges to see which one would stick. In the end, all of them turned out to be spurious. This evidence suggests that, far from being a slime ball, Speaker Gingrich is an unusually honest politician.

philwynk on January 18, 2012 at 12:16 PM

I wasn’t defending either portlylandon or Debbie Wasserman angryeyed.

Gunlock Bill on January 18, 2012 at 12:12 PM

If ignorance is bliss, you must walk around smiling all the time.

kingsjester on January 18, 2012 at 12:16 PM

Newt would make a poor prez. I hope SC voters agree.

jeanie on January 18, 2012 at 12:16 PM

You just can’t wait ’till Saturday, can you? You’re hoping, hoping, hoping to run out the clock with that so-called “lead,” but you can’t help but notice the thundering applause and standing ovations that keep going to Newt–can you??

Go get ‘em, Newt!!!

jfs756 on January 18, 2012 at 12:13 PM

If he didn’t just go through a Michael Moore-style argument and wasn’t generally a Frakenstein-like hybrid of a conservative and a communist, everybody would LOVE the thundering applause. As it is, all that applause means he is quite a performer for the crowd.

Igor R. on January 18, 2012 at 12:17 PM

Beck and his sidekick are eating rocks.

Schadenfreude on January 18, 2012 at 12:17 PM

Do we need to review his ethics violations?

FlaMurph on January 18, 2012 at 12:05 PM

You mean the 75 ethics charges that were found to have no merit, except for one in which he paid a $300,000 fine, yet 3.5 years later the IRS determined no improprieties were found, so he shouldn’t have been charged, or fined, in the first place?

Flora Duh on January 18, 2012 at 12:17 PM

REPORT: Mitt Romney Proposed Charging A Fee For Being Mentally Retarded

Michael Bre

this was too good to check. a true republican

gerrym51 on January 18, 2012 at 12:13 PM

He did impose a $20 fee to receive a certificate of blindness from the state.

This is how Romney balanced the budget “without increasing taxes”.

angryed on January 18, 2012 at 12:17 PM

So Republicans are suppose to ignore it while no one else will? And from what I understand it’s John McCain’s opposition book on Gov. Romney. This is what primaries are all about, getting to know everyone.

Cindy Munford on January 18, 2012 at 11:59 AM


I hear you. So what’s next though ? e-mail hacking? I’m sure there’s way more than 24,000 to look at. There has to be a higher road somewhere.

FlaMurph on January 18, 2012 at 12:18 PM

REPORT: Mitt Romney Proposed Charging A Fee For Being Mentally Retarded
Michael Bre

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/report-mitt-romney-proposed-charging-a-fee-for-being-mentally-retarded-2012-1#ixzz1jpYSGGl5

davemason2k on January 18, 2012 at 12:07 PM

Hey Mittbots, do you see the irony?

Typhonian on January 18, 2012 at 12:18 PM

Man, and people say that Romney supporters are sheeple. Toss one rant against Juan Williams at the conservatives after a couple weeks of uncoordinated, awkward and decidedly unconservative rants against creative destruction as it concerns investment capitalism and they’ll go right back to loving you in an instant.

I’m not sure whether to be impressed by how easily he can cow you all or be sad. Ah well, on to South Carolina.

WealthofNations on January 18, 2012 at 12:12 PM

Newtrons pontifications are what stupid people think smart people say.

It is really that simple.

Gunlock Bill on January 18, 2012 at 12:19 PM

But…but…it’s Mitt’s turn!!!

**snort**

kingsjester on January 18, 2012 at 11:25 AM

Hey, Champ, this comment is so 2008, oh wait, 2000…

The simpleton reaction to the ‘that is not my choice’ along with some of the other comments here establishes to me why we are in the mess we are in, because simple minded people are voting. Despite the constant mantra of the purists, no a Purist Conservative can not win in the General Election. And, NO Reagan was not a Purist Conservative. He signed Abortion legislation as a Governor that completely changed the existing legislation. It went from abortion okay if death of mother, etc., to any and all abortions okay. Sorry, folks that is fact, now, I do not want to confuse some of you with facts, but Reagan also compromised with the left and gave us a revolving door down south with Amnesty.

The key to turning this country around is taking over the House and the Senate (as well as the legislatures in each of the states). In the WH it doesn’t matter, as long as we have a Moderate/Conservative POTUS. And, YES, all of our candidates up there are Moderate/Conservatives. The list is long on the left of center policies, legislation and philosophies of all of the candidates. ALL OF THEM.

If we are to have a 3rd party we need it to take over the legislatures; and, that is where this party needs to exert its power, not in the WH. We will see another Obama either siding with Liberal or Liberal Lite. Veto power will be usurped with 2/3 majority collaboration. This is a long process and must be done in phases (election cycles). We must take over the House and Senate. Whoever is in the WH if Republican will go along to get along. Yes, even the Newtster.

uhangtight on January 18, 2012 at 12:19 PM

If Newt is Churchill then Ron Paul is George Washington.

FloatingRock on January 18, 2012 at 12:14 PM

Newt really is something like Churchill before WWII. We don’t know how he’d respond to a situation like WWII, because he hasn’t faced one. He might do alright. We don’t know.

Ron Paul, OTOH, is like the guy who plays with George Washington Action Figures, and IMAGINES he’s George Washington.

philwynk on January 18, 2012 at 12:19 PM

Igor R. on January 18, 2012 at 12:17 PM

Either that or his audience could just as easily be enthused by the jingling of keys.

WealthofNations on January 18, 2012 at 12:19 PM

Of all the candidates, whom do you trust to nominate best SCOTUS judges? The rest can and will be done by the Congress.

Newt Gingrich / Rand Paul ’2012

Archivarix on January 18, 2012 at 12:19 PM

[Newt] Churchill got sent packing [after Gallipoli and came back to rally the nation in the next budget fight war.]

gerrym51 on January 18, 2012 at 12:11 PM

FIFY

cane_loader on January 18, 2012 at 12:19 PM

Newt is no Churchill anyway, Newt is just an adulterous scumbag, the kind of person Churchill always condemed.

haner on January 18, 2012 at 11:54 AM

We aren’t electing President of the Upstanding Husband Club.

angryed on January 18, 2012 at 12:06 PM

Well, look at how many statist/liberal positions Newt has jumped around to. Just like wives. He has a pattern you can’t trust.

cartooner on January 18, 2012 at 12:21 PM

If Newt is Churchill then Ron Paul is George Washington.

FloatingRock on January 18, 2012 at 12:14 PM

That is, if George had let the Hessians sleep on Christmas and waited for them to cross the Delaware to attack him.

Yep, Ron is George.

cane_loader on January 18, 2012 at 12:22 PM

Cigars and champagne values are as overrated as Obama’s unemployment and retail sales numbers.

Arrogance is indignant.

Schadenfreude on January 18, 2012 at 12:22 PM

You mean the 75 ethics charges that were found to have no merit, except for one in which he paid a $300,000 fine, yet 3.5 years later the IRS determined no improprieties were found, so he shouldn’t have been charged, or fined, in the first place?

.
You mean this awesome role model statesman resigned his speakership for nothing? Thats just not right. Now I feel bad.

FlaMurph on January 18, 2012 at 12:23 PM

he simpleton reaction to the ‘that is not my choice’ along with some of the other comments here establishes to me why we are in the mess we are in, because simple minded people are voting.
uhangtight on January 18, 2012 at 12:19 PM

As opposed to yourself, of course.

The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom.

- President Ronald Wilson Reagan

kingsjester on January 18, 2012 at 12:25 PM

This is impossible MSM/RNC/HotAir/National Review have told me for months that the race is over.

angryed on January 18, 2012 at 11:23 AM

Just goes to show you, not to believe everything you hear and only 1/2 of what you see:-) Nowadays, you can’t even believe 1/2 of what you see!! LOL

bluefox on January 18, 2012 at 12:27 PM

Mitt = 1986 Red Sox?

Mitt = 2011 Red Sox

Right Mover on January 18, 2012 at 12:27 PM

FlaMurph on January 18, 2012 at 12:23 PM

Really, the ethics charges are the very least (as in, near absolute zero) of the reasons one shouldn’t support Newt Gingrich. As Flora pointed out, they’re largely insubstantial.

The big take away from Newt’s time as Speaker was that, once he came to power as a leader, he was pretty terrible at either commanding that power or using it wisely, with the Budget impasse and the shutdown of the government and the immediate fallout that crippled the Republican Party being probably the crown jewel in this example.

Also, a large part of what people say Newt ‘accomplished’ really wasn’t Newt’s own accomplishments, but rather the unified effort of a Republican Congress and a newly centrist Bill Clinton as led by Dick Morris. Balanced Budgets and Welfare Reform was largely okayed by the Clinton White House, not because Newt had Clinton by the short ones, he really, really didn’t if comparative approval ratings of the era are any indications, but because Dick Morris convinced Clinton, rightly so, that triangulation was the only way for him to get re-elected.

Let’s also not forget who Newt was cursing as he left the House Speakership. Certainly, Clinton was one of the names, but for a while there all Newt could do was mutter ‘The Conservatives’, as if it had become a new curse word.

WealthofNations on January 18, 2012 at 12:28 PM

Well, look at how many statist/liberal positions Newt has jumped around to. Just like wives. He has a pattern you can’t trust.
cartooner on January 18, 2012 at 12:21 PM

He may have advocated some statist policies, but comparing his statism to Romneys demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding of either (1) what statism is; or (2) what Romney’s record is.

besser tot als rot on January 18, 2012 at 12:28 PM

Man, and people say that Romney supporters are sheeple. Toss one rant against Juan Williams at the conservatives after a couple weeks of uncoordinated, awkward and decidedly unconservative rants against creative destruction as it concerns investment capitalism and they’ll go right back to loving you in an instant.

WealthofNations on January 18, 2012 at 12:12 PM

+1 trillion.

JPeterman on January 18, 2012 at 12:28 PM

Man, and people say that Romney supporters are sheeple. Toss one rant against Juan Williams at the conservatives after a couple weeks of uncoordinated, awkward and decidedly unconservative rants against creative destruction as it concerns investment capitalism and they’ll go right back to loving you in an instant.

I’m not sure whether to be impressed by how easily he can cow you all or be sad. Ah well, on to South Carolina.

WealthofNations on January 18, 2012 at 12:12 PM

A good framing of the problem. Those who support Newt are willingly blind to his anti-constitutional nature. They are fooled like little children by his periodic anti-liberal outbursts. “Yeah, he will really show Obama!” Pathetic.

Igor R. on January 18, 2012 at 12:29 PM

Yep, Ron is George.

cane_loader on January 18, 2012 at 12:22 PM

I’m not going to bother listing all the ways that Churchill is unlike Newt.

FloatingRock on January 18, 2012 at 12:29 PM

You mean this awesome role model statesman resigned his speakership for nothing? Thats just not right. Now I feel bad.

FlaMurph on January 18, 2012 at 12:23 PM

No, because that was the beginning of the RINO’s who were afraid of the press, and not strong enough to stand up for what is right…I am afraid Mitt falls into this category. He would rather give into being a liberal, than lose an election on principle…sometime you gotta lose a battle, to win the war.

right2bright on January 18, 2012 at 12:29 PM

Hey Mittbots, do you see the irony?
Typhonian on January 18, 2012 at 12:18 PM

Now that’s funny. (Not very nice though!)

besser tot als rot on January 18, 2012 at 12:30 PM

Either that or his audience could just as easily be enthused by the jingling of keys.

WealthofNations on January 18, 2012 at 12:19 PM

They are from the same genetic pool that elected Obama.

Igor R. on January 18, 2012 at 12:31 PM

Also, a large part of what people say Newt ‘accomplished’ really wasn’t Newt’s own accomplishments, but rather the unified effort of a Republican Congress and a newly centrist Bill Clinton as led by Dick Morris.

[snip]

WealthofNations on January 18, 2012 at 12:28 PM

So the “Contract with America” had nothing to do with unifying the Republicans and pressuring Clinton rightward? And Gingrich had nothing to do with the “Contract with America?”

cane_loader on January 18, 2012 at 12:31 PM

McCain opposition research book on Romney published

Gun Control, abortion, spending, GW, gay rights, Romneycare, affirmative action… True Conservativeman Romney™ was on the wrong side of almost every single issue right up until he ran for president last time.

https://twitter.com/#!/AKaczynski1

29Victor on January 18, 2012 at 12:31 PM

Those who support Newt are willingly blind to his anti-constitutional nature. They are fooled like little children by his periodic anti-liberal outbursts. “Yeah, he will really show Obama!” Pathetic.

Igor R. on January 18, 2012 at 12:29 PM

And you think that Gov. takeover of business is constitutional? That TARP was, that demanding the gov. pay for abortion and forces you to buy health care is constitutional? Than Mitt is your guy.

right2bright on January 18, 2012 at 12:32 PM

I’m not going to bother listing all the ways that Churchill is unlike Newt.

FloatingRock on January 18, 2012 at 12:29 PM

Newt Gingrich is more like Churchill than any other GOP candidate.
How about that?

cane_loader on January 18, 2012 at 12:32 PM

Newt Gingrich is more like Churchill than any other GOP candidate.
How about that?

cane_loader on January 18, 2012 at 12:32 PM

He is also more like Che Guevara.

Igor R. on January 18, 2012 at 12:34 PM

Newt is the right person for the times. I can’t think of any time Mitt would be.

tinkerthinker on January 18, 2012 at 12:34 PM

Actually, when I imagine which candidate might walk around like Churchill, in his robe with his hair sticking up all over, muttering to himself, it’s not Newt who comes to mind….

cane_loader on January 18, 2012 at 12:34 PM

Actually, I think Gingrich does have a great deal of moral character. It’s just, he’s fixing a sex addiction problem late in life, after spending a lot of years philandering. At least he’s fixing it.

I stole this from somebody else’s post but this sounds like a letter to penthouse or playboy

gerrym51 on January 18, 2012 at 12:35 PM

He is also more like Che Guevara.

Igor R. on January 18, 2012 at 12:34 PM

Well Mitt is the most like a Ken doll.

Nanny nanny boo boo.

cane_loader on January 18, 2012 at 12:36 PM

I wonder if the Palin’s endorsement has anything to do w/this surge?

Danielvito on January 18, 2012 at 11:31 AM

Heh Reading my mind. I checked the polling data but couldn’t find the time listed. If a more current poll shows another jump for Newt over this one, then I’d conclude it was done prior to her statement.

However, if it’s the same, then I’d say it was done after Palin’s statement. I tend to think this poll was taken after. Don’t see how Newt could jump that much from just the debate.

bluefox on January 18, 2012 at 12:36 PM

Romney hasn’t actually lost any momentum, either.

He hasn’t gained any momentum either, if you want to look at the flip side of the coin.

timberline on January 18, 2012 at 12:36 PM

Well, look at how many statist/liberal positions Newt has jumped around to. Just like wives. He has a pattern you can’t trust.
cartooner on January 18, 2012 at 12:21 PM

What has new DONE? What has he SAID?

What has Mitt DONE? What has Mitt SAID?

Newt says lots of shit. He DID cut taxes, welfare reform and balance a budget.

Mitt says lots of shit. He DID raise taxes, increase spending.

See the difference?

As for the wives, why in the world do you care who a man sleeps with on his personal time?

angryed on January 18, 2012 at 12:36 PM

I am waiting for Newt to attack Romney for being a rich fat cat who avoids paying the same tax rate as working people.

Igor R. on January 18, 2012 at 12:37 PM

but what happened? just the other day we were told that everyone was rallying around the inevitable and highly electable Mitt Romney and he had amassed a 20 point lead in SC and that Gingrich’s attack on Bain Capital had backfired?

exceller on January 18, 2012 at 12:38 PM

Newt as president might remember that he is there because of conservatives.

Mitt would believe he is there in spite of conservatives.

WhatNot on January 18, 2012 at 12:38 PM

He is also more like Che Guevara.

Igor R. on January 18, 2012 at 12:34 PM

You’ll say anything to get attention, but I won’t comment on it.

Oh…wait….

timberline on January 18, 2012 at 12:38 PM

cane_loader on January 18, 2012 at 12:31 PM

The Contract with America was, in my opinion, a very similar move to how Jefferson argued against John Adams before the 1800 election. Arguing your points from the stump and unifying your bloc before an election is one thing, but what you do with that support after you get elected and the results of those actions is what really matters.

Now, where the similarities end was that Jefferson managed to use his support coming in from 1800 to make the Democratic-Republicans the only game in town for several election cycles, eventually giving way to their successors, Andrew Jackson’s Democratic Party, as well as an enumerable list of successes that put our country on the right track.

Newt Gingrich basically took his Contract with America, waved it around and, upon getting into office, manged to get his behind repeatedly outdone by Clinton in just about every battle. Clinton might not have been able to afford to stay left of center after 1994, but once again, it was Dick Morris’ prodding that got him there, not Newt Gingrich’s flailing around.

In addition, you’re as bad as Newt Gingrich when it comes to over blowing his historical importance if you think that Newt and his Contract were the end-all-be-all ‘this is how the 1994 election was won’. There were factors significantly more in play and more important to the eventual Republican victory, all Newt Gingrich did was ride the wave and wait to kill morale until after he had gotten elected to office.

WealthofNations on January 18, 2012 at 12:38 PM

Also, a large part of what people say Newt ‘accomplished’ really wasn’t Newt’s own accomplishments, but rather the unified effort of a Republican Congress and a newly centrist Bill Clinton as led by Dick Morris.

[snip]

WealthofNations on January 18, 2012 at 12:28 PM

Pal, Newt won the congress for Reagan, for 40 years the dems controlled the house, and he kicked them out, he was the leader, he was the unifier, that’s like saying Washington, Jefferson, Adams, had no leadership in forming the constitution and the republic…that’s like saying Churchill didn’t fight in the military so he didn’t win the war for England…that’s like saying Reagan didn’t take a hammer to the wall so he didn’t contribute or was the reason for the wall to tumble…good grief, leadership means leading, not doing it all.
Here try this for a history lesson on who Newt is…

right2bright on January 18, 2012 at 12:38 PM

Gun Control, abortion, spending, GW, gay rights, Romneycare, affirmative action… True Conservativeman Romney™ was on the wrong side of almost every single issue right up until he ran for president last time.

sounds like a winning general election strategy

gerrym51 on January 18, 2012 at 12:38 PM

This is so strange. After Newt’s Marxist rants against capitalism, now he’s surging among so called conservatives? Is this the Twilight Zone?

scotash on January 18, 2012 at 12:39 PM

right2bright on January 18, 2012 at 12:38 PM

My goodness, did Newt Gingrich write your history book or something. Must be, because that sounds like exactly what he thinks of himself. Newt Gingrich, the man who, by riding a wave of discontent with Democrats that was already well building by 1994, is the equal of the Founding Fathers in terms of leadership for having written the Constitution.

Delusions of grandeur are apparently not exclusive to just Newt Gingrich, it seems.

WealthofNations on January 18, 2012 at 12:41 PM

Newt as president might remember that he is there because of conservatives.

Mitt would believe he is there in spite of conservatives.

WhatNot on January 18, 2012 at 12:38 PM

Thank you. I just couldn’t think of a way to say it so succinctly.

dmn1972 on January 18, 2012 at 12:41 PM

This is so strange. After Newt’s Marxist rants against capitalism, now he’s surging among so called conservatives? Is this the Twilight Zone?

scotash on January 18, 2012 at 12:39 PM

Only people who thought they were Marxist attacks were Mittbots (and Sean Hannity / Glenn Beck of course).

angryed on January 18, 2012 at 12:41 PM

Newt was the biggest problem his republican colleagues faced in the house when he was the leader. They say so on camera.

Igor R. on January 18, 2012 at 12:41 PM

No, because that was the beginning of the RINO’s who were afraid of the press, and not strong enough to stand up for what is right…I am afraid Mitt falls into this category. He would rather give into being a liberal, than lose an election on principle…sometime you gotta lose a battle, to win the war.

right2bright on January 18, 2012 at 12:29 PM

+1000

tinkerthinker on January 18, 2012 at 12:42 PM

REPORT: Mitt Romney Proposed Charging A Fee For Being Mentally Retarded
Michael Bre

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/report-mitt-romney-proposed-charging-a-fee-for-being-mentally-retarded-2012-1#ixzz1jpYSGGl5

davemason2k on January 18, 2012 at 12:07 PM

See! Gunlock Bill & Jailbreak would be unfairly taxed.

portlandon on January 18, 2012 at 12:42 PM

I am waiting for Newt to attack Romney for being a rich fat cat who avoids paying the same tax rate as working people.

Igor R. on January 18, 2012 at 12:37 PM

I think Newt is already waiting to jump on Romney’s tax record if or when Romney releases them. Newt already mentioned that he can’t wait to see if Romney even paid as much as 15% on his taxes.

timberline on January 18, 2012 at 12:42 PM

So The Mittigaters endorsements don’t do it for you. Chris Christie ? Nikki Haley? John Bolton ? Possibly Rubio in the next few days ahead of Fla ??
Are all these good Republicans wrong then ???

FlaMurph on January 18, 2012 at 11:33 AM

Republicans, but Conservative? Not so much:-)

bluefox on January 18, 2012 at 12:42 PM

And you think that Gov. takeover of business is constitutional? That TARP was, that demanding the gov. pay for abortion and forces you to buy health care is constitutional? Than Mitt is your guy.

right2bright on January 18, 2012 at 12:32 PM

And Newt was against TARP and health mandates? Newt is practically a father of mandates. Abortion? Yeah, he’s been consistent, just like on adultery.

Igor R. on January 18, 2012 at 12:44 PM

Igor R. on January 18, 2012 at 12:41 PM

Your desperation is so fun to watch.:o)

tinkerthinker on January 18, 2012 at 12:44 PM

Whooo, go Newt!

Lawdawg86 on January 18, 2012 at 12:44 PM

bluefox on January 18, 2012 at 12:42 PM

… Right. John Bolton, Rubio and Nikki Haley aren’t Conservative.

Right then, back to Wonderland with you Mr. fox

WealthofNations on January 18, 2012 at 12:44 PM

Newt Gingrich is a disaster of epic proportions. Not only do these people want to lose, they want to lose by selling out their principles.

Swerve22 on January 18, 2012 at 12:45 PM

Your desperation is so fun to watch.:o)

tinkerthinker on January 18, 2012 at 12:44 PM

My desperation? How about my frustration that not a single real Conservative is left running, all are flawed in major ways, even both Ricks. Happy? Be happy, closet lib.

Igor R. on January 18, 2012 at 12:45 PM

WealthofNations on January 18, 2012 at 12:38 PM

You forgot to mention that 9 of the 10 “contracts” were won, and all 10 were said to be unattainable…

Newt Gingrich basically took his Contract with America, waved it around and, upon getting into office

9 out of 10 pretty much shuts down your claim of “waving it around”…

And Dick claims he moved Clinton (of course, he is to Clinton, what Gore is to the internet), but the simple fact is that America moved Clinton, and America listened to the contract and the substance behind it. Newt wrestled the house from 40 years of dem control, and forced the very liberal Clinton to become moderate, and at some times conservative for the sake of winning…which btw, could be our saving grace since Obama doesn’t have that sense—or maybe Dick Morris to advise him.

Good try tho…well not really,but I say that so you actually think you may have fooled some people with your foolish post.

right2bright on January 18, 2012 at 12:46 PM

This is really about the media and keeping interest going. They need to shake as many dollars out of the candidates and Superpacs as they can and they do this by keeping the appearance of a horse race going. Oh yeah… that goes for the Internet media as well. ;-)

rhombus on January 18, 2012 at 12:46 PM

Newt was the biggest problem his republican colleagues faced in the house when he was the leader. They say so on camera.

Igor R. on January 18, 2012 at 12:41 PM

You mean the most conservatively productive Republican congress, lead by Newt Gingrich? That congress?

Yeah. Because Denny Hastert did a terrible job. But hey, everybody loved him!

portlandon on January 18, 2012 at 12:46 PM

Very good point. This is what Mittbots on this site and elsewhere don’t realize. The establishment GOP CAVES on everything. Newt may have his faults, but I am fairly confident he would not crater to Dems/Media pressure like current leadership does and Mitt would.

davek70 on January 18, 2012 at 11:39 AM

That’s why they hate him. He’s upset their “good ole boys” club!!

Rush’s rule: You can tell who they fear by who they hate:-)

bluefox on January 18, 2012 at 12:46 PM

Igor R. on January 18, 2012 at 12:45 PM

Hahahaaaaa…you are funny! Newt is conservative.

tinkerthinker on January 18, 2012 at 12:47 PM

There are valid and solid reasons why Newt Gingrich should not be the nominee. I direct you to his own record as Speaker and the fact that he racked up 83 ethics violations and was formally reprimanded by his colleagues, the fact that those colleagues became so concerned about his rank self aggrandizement, self promotion to the point of putting his own ambitions above the best interest of his party and his nation, and innate nastiness to anyone in his own caucus who dared to oppose him or even question him, that they tried to frag him during his tenure, and that he was literally enamored of Bill Clinton saying ‘When I talk to him I just melt’ and was so thin skinned that he shut down the government in 1995 admitting that he did so because Clinton had ‘snubbed’ him during a flight on Air Force One by not speaking to him.

The more information that comes out during this primary the more the difference between what Gingrich has done and what he claims is showcased. The lobbying for Freddie Mac under the guise of ‘historian’, the paid speeches endorsing the same kind of company as Bain, which he now decries and attempts to castigate Romney over, the cheap pettiness to which he is willing to sink. He hasn’t “changed”. He’s still the same man who put himself and his interests above his party and his country.The same man of whom those who actually worked with hims say outright that he was incapable of negotiating and resorted, instead to intimidation and hostility. He would be a disaster as a statesman if put in a position of dealing with foreign heads of state.

We already have a man like that in the White House. If the GOP electorate is foolish enough to nominate Gingrich, I won’t even bother to vote since there’s not really a dime’s worth of difference between Obama and Gingrich. They are equally ill equipped for the office and duties of President of the United States.

thatsafactjack on January 18, 2012 at 12:48 PM

He’d s/b

bluefox on January 18, 2012 at 12:48 PM

And Newt was against TARP and health mandates? Newt is practically a father of mandates. Abortion? Yeah, he’s been consistent, just like on adultery.

Igor R. on January 18, 2012 at 12:44 PM

Here is the difference, Newt has backed away from health mandates, he said that was an error…Mitt embraces RomneyCare, he embraces TARP, he embraces gov. takeover of business, he embraced abortion…not sure about adultery, I don’t look into the sexual activities of the candidates, do you have pictures? Photos? You kind of like that sort of thing?
Newt made mistakes, and he owned up to them…Mitt has never made a mistake…that’s the difference.

right2bright on January 18, 2012 at 12:49 PM

Newt was the biggest problem his republican colleagues faced in the house when he was the leader. They say so on camera.

Igor R. on January 18, 2012 at 12:41 PM

Mitt would be the biggest problem for republicans.

If you thought George W Bush twisted republicans to where they could not recognize themselves any more, imagine with Mitt would do.

What Would Mitt Do? (WWMD?)
- or is that Willard, Weapon of Mass Destruction!

WhatNot on January 18, 2012 at 12:49 PM

My desperation? How about my frustration that not a single real Conservative is left running, all are flawed in major ways, even both Ricks. Happy? Be happy, closet lib.

Igor R. on January 18, 2012 at 12:45 PM

West/McDonnell

Schadenfreude on January 18, 2012 at 12:49 PM

CUDA!

TheAlamos on January 18, 2012 at 12:51 PM

Speaker and the fact that he racked up 83 ethics violations and was formally reprimanded by his colleagues,

thatsafactjack on January 18, 2012 at 12:48 PM

That right there disqualifies you from the adult table…you must now sit with the kids and let the adults talk until you learn to think on your own…

right2bright on January 18, 2012 at 12:51 PM

No. This primary race is pretty much over.

Bitter socons are doing everything they can to help Obama for the general election, though.

Tell us some more about evil rich Mitt Romney, who is a Mormon.

Moesart on January 18, 2012 at 12:52 PM

right2bright on January 18, 2012 at 12:46 PM

To claim that one man accomplished 9 out of 10 of the things on the Contract of America as it concerns the American Government is kind of like saying that if we only sent Eisenhower to the beaches of Normandy that he would’ve killed the NAZIs with his bare hands. It’s nice imagery and it certainly is more simple for those of us with only two brain cells to rub together to attribute successes or failures to only one person, but then doing so makes us no better than Democrats who blame Bush for all the bad things that happened from 2000-2008.

Did Newt Gingrich write the Contract with America. Yes. Was there already a movement in his direction as it concerned the American voting public. Yes. Did the Contract significantly change what would’ve likely passed anyway because of voter discontent with the size and scope of government at the time. Not really.

Newt Gingrich was one out of several hundred Republican Congressmen and women who managed to work together, despite Newt’s own ineptitude when it came to wielding power (and, as in the case of 1996 and 1998, keeping himself from becoming an ad monster that Dems could use against Republicans), with each other and Bill Clinton in order to get this stuff passed. Newt Gingrich just became the spokesperson and, like Isaiah Mustafa, while what he’s selling was good he wasn’t the person who either made it good or made it possible.

To think otherwise is, frankly, insulting to everyone’s intelligence, including your own.

WealthofNations on January 18, 2012 at 12:52 PM

thatsafactjack on January 18, 2012 at 12:48 PM

Some of us were alive back then so we know what you said is a twisted false talking point and that’s a fact, jack.

tinkerthinker on January 18, 2012 at 12:53 PM

No. This primary race is pretty much over.

Bitter socons are doing everything they can to help Obama for the general election, though.

Tell us some more about evil rich Mitt Romney, who is a Mormon.

Moesart on January 18, 2012 at 12:52 PM

Please elaborate on why the Primary Race is over, Hillary.

kingsjester on January 18, 2012 at 12:53 PM

Newt may have his faults, but I am fairly confident he would not crater to Dems/Media pressure like current leadership does and Mitt would.

He caved on plenty after he became Speaker.

That’s what happens when you are in charge. You have to work with everyone, not just your little clique.

Moesart on January 18, 2012 at 12:54 PM

Newt was the biggest problem his republican colleagues faced in the house when he was the leader. They say so on camera.

Igor R. on January 18, 2012 at 12:41 PM

No doubt, he took down Jim Wright and many of his Republican colleagues were concerned, he strong armed them, but to go after “one of them” horrors…the fact is, he was a strong leader, and many people don’t like strong powerful leaders…now President Bush, the “read my lips” and caving, or the younger Bush and never using the veto, those were real Republican’s huh?

right2bright on January 18, 2012 at 12:54 PM

right2bright:

I think your attitude speaks for itself.

thatsafactjack on January 18, 2012 at 12:55 PM

Please elaborate on why the Primary Race is over, Hillary.

kingsjester on January 18, 2012 at 12:53 PM

Denial. It’s not just a river.

And, I said pretty much.

Moesart on January 18, 2012 at 12:55 PM

He caved on plenty after he became Speaker.

That’s what happens when you are in charge. You have to work with everyone, not just your little clique.

Moesart on January 18, 2012 at 12:54 PM

Caved, negotiated, dealt, whatever, but he forced Clinton to the middle, and I haven’t seen anyone do that to Obama…

right2bright on January 18, 2012 at 12:56 PM

Moesart on January 18, 2012 at 12:55 PM

Asking a Mitt supporter to elaborate is not denial, nor is it blasphemy. Answer the request, Mobysart.

kingsjester on January 18, 2012 at 12:57 PM

tinkerthinker:
Since you claim to have been alive back then… you should have done more than read the banner headlines and actually have read the articles… or did you just watch the Main Stream Media on television… since alternative media didn’t exist… “back then”.

You also jump to conclusions and make false assumptions predicated on those conclusions. Your critical thinking skills could use some work.

thatsafactjack on January 18, 2012 at 12:59 PM

Newt comes off as a bombastic, controlling know it all. Should he,please not, become the nom, I will have a problem voting for him. Hope I’m not faced with this choice. Simply dislike him and would rather have any of the others except Paul.

jeanie on January 18, 2012 at 12:59 PM

Caved, negotiated, dealt, whatever, but he forced Clinton to the middle, and I haven’t seen anyone do that to Obama…

right2bright on January 18, 2012 at 12:56 PM

Yup. Brought him kicking and screaming. It’s unbelieveable how some candidate’s supporters are so willing to throw a conservative hero under the bus & rewrite his history while at the same time willfully ignoring the history of their own candidate.

I’m repeatedly amazed at the gyrations a person’s mind will go through to convince themself that they’ve made a good decision.

29Victor on January 18, 2012 at 1:00 PM

Please elaborate on why the Primary Race is over, Hillary.

kingsjester on January 18, 2012 at 12:53 PM

Because Romney supporters have two “arguments”

1– Your guy is [an idiot/fat/angry/liberal/stupid]
2– Resistance is futile!

29Victor on January 18, 2012 at 1:01 PM

You also jump to conclusions and make false assumptions predicated on those conclusions. Your critical thinking skills could use some work.

thatsafactjack on January 18, 2012 at 12:59 PM

You check your own facts, jack.

tinkerthinker on January 18, 2012 at 1:02 PM

Everyone with a brain knows that Newt is in the best position to defeat Obama. Romney is a train wreck waiting to happen. It is all falling apart for him now and his hidden agendas and evasiveness would never survive a national campaign, not as a Republican.

Our choice now is to select Newt or to allow Obama to get 4 more years…that is the math and it is ineluctable.

georgealbert on January 18, 2012 at 1:03 PM

right2bright:
Prehaps you’re monicker should be “not too bright”… since there were several hundred other representatives in the House and 100 senators in the Senate who all worked together to ultimately force Clinton TOWARD the ‘center’. To claim that Gingrich, as Speaker, was responsible, single-handed, for forcing Clinton to do anything is patently ridiculous.

thatsafactjack on January 18, 2012 at 1:03 PM

29Victor on January 18, 2012 at 1:01 PM

Exactly.

kingsjester on January 18, 2012 at 1:03 PM

To think otherwise is, frankly, insulting to everyone’s intelligence, including your own.

WealthofNations on January 18, 2012 at 12:52 PM

You didn’t read my post…or didn’t understand when I said he was the leader, leaders are not expected to do all things…notice the analogy of Churchill not fighting, or Reagan not taking up a hammer, the same analogy you used…notice I said America.

that’s like saying Churchill didn’t fight in the military so he didn’t win the war for England…that’s like saying Reagan didn’t take a hammer to the wall so he didn’t contribute or was the reason for the wall to tumble…good grief, leadership means leading, not doing it all.

If I am insulting everyone’s intelligence, and you are using my arguments….

You basically took my talking points…that Newt was the leader that brought about that change, and like all leaders he led others to victory, and it was a major victory.
Michelle Bachmann thought the same in 2008…follow the link, and she was there in the battlefield at the time.

right2bright on January 18, 2012 at 1:03 PM

If Romney is the nom, this election will be about image.

If Newt is the nom, this election will be about ideas.

29Victor on January 18, 2012 at 1:05 PM

He may have advocated some statist policies, but comparing his statism to Romneys demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding of either (1) what statism is; or (2) what Romney’s record is.

besser tot als rot on January 18, 2012 at 12:28 PM

Any misunderstanding of that would be on your part, not mine.

cartooner on January 18, 2012 at 1:06 PM

thatsafactjack on January 18, 2012 at 12:55 PM

It’s good that you have no attitude.

Now back to the nursery room with you.

WhatNot on January 18, 2012 at 1:06 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4