Open thread: South Carolina; Update: Gingrich wins; Update: Full exit poll data added; Update: Romney video added; Update: Gingrich video added; Update: Jeb Bush staying neutral

posted at 6:00 pm on January 21, 2012 by Allahpundit

Polls close at 7 p.m. ET. If PPP and ARG are right, the race should be called at around 7:01. But maybe they’re not right: More than 22,000 absentee ballots were cast, many of them before Newt’s last-minute surge, so Romney might be stronger than he seems. On the other hand, reporters are chattering about Democrats in South Carolina voting for Newt in order to prolong the Romney/Gingrich war. Read pollster Mark Blumenthal on why trying to predict a race with lots of eleventh-hour developments is a fool’s errand.

Here’s Google’s page for South Carolina election returns. Assuming Newt wins, the margin obviously matters in shaping the pre-Florida spin. If it’s narrow, Romney will claim that Gingrich won only because SC is in his backyard. If it’s wide, you’ll hear the phrase “aura of inevitability shattered” roughly eight thousand times over the next few days. See Ed’s post this morning on why Romney probably isn’t worried, even if he ends up swamped tonight. He’s piling up absentee ballots in Florida, where he currently holds a huge lead, and rumors continue to fly about him rolling out Jeb Bush for the big endorsement at an opportune moment. And then there’s this:

After Florida, Gingrich’s outlook becomes even more bleak. The February calendar presents Romney with the opportunity to do to Gingrich what Barack Obama did to Hillary Clinton in 2008. Caucuses in Nevada, Colorado, and Minnesota will benefit a more organized campaign, giving Romney and Rep. Ron Paul a boost over Gingrich. The two primaries that month, in Arizona and Michigan, will take place on Romney-friendly turf; Arizona has a sizable Mormon electorate, while Michigan is Romney’s home state. By the end of February, Romney is likely to have the majority of the 274 delegates awarded to that point. Paul’s focus on caucus states means Gingrich may not even be in second place by the end of the month.

Then comes Super Tuesday, when 10 states will allocate a total of 407 delegates. With few debates left on the horizon, Gingrich won’t have the time, the exposure, or the money to build the type of national campaign Romney has already started to build (Gingrich isn’t even eligible for the 46 delegates from Virginia; his campaign didn’t submit enough valid signatures to make the ballot there).

In short, South Carolina presents Gingrich’s last real chance to be on equal footing with Romney before the race goes national. Barring a sustained surge in campaign contributions for Gingrich and a real stumble by Romney’s campaign, the reality is that the race for the Republican nod is as clear today as it was before Gingrich’s revitalization: There will be no extended fight for delegates a la Obama-Clinton, there will be no brokered convention, and Romney will be the Republican nominee. The deck is stacked too much in Romney’s favor to give Gingrich’s campaign anything more than a temporary reprieve.

Once Gingrich is formally crowned Not Romney tonight and becomes the last real obstacle to Mitt’s nomination, he shouldn’t have any trouble raising money for months to come. One of his advisors told Stephen Hayes, in fact, that Newt will be in it until the convention. I wouldn’t rule out a “real stumble” from Romney on the trail either. As effective as Gingrich has been this week, Romney has been terrible, hemming and hawing about his tax returns to feed the suspicion that he has something to hide and letting his campaign stupidly float the idea that he might back out of one of the Florida debates, which plays right into Newt’s message that he isn’t tough enough to handle Obama. He won’t implode in a flash the way Perry did with his answer on in-state tuition for illegals, but if he continues to look weak and untrustworthy he could bleed enough support to keep Gingrich going.

Here’s your thread to follow results; lots of updates to come, including a link to the exit polls as soon as they’re available. Ed will be on Hugh Hewitt’s show sometime between 7 and 9 p.m. ET to talk about the results, so be sure to tune into that too.

Update: The hard feelings begin before the vote ends:

Not to be outdone, Romney’s campaign later put out a statement celebrating the “15th anniversary” of the House decision to reprimand Gingrich for ethics violations, during his days as speaker. The Romney campaign plans to deliver an anniversary cake to Gingrich’s South Carolina headquarters to mark the occasion on Saturday.

Update: Behold, my friends, as Team Romney prepares the ultimate “You know who this benefits?” spin:

“I think we’re going to lose tonight, we could lose big,” the aide said, speaking on condition of anonymity. “But I think it’s been a terrible week for Gingrich and a great week for us.”

From the former Speaker’s demonization of Romney’s business record, to his decision to indignantly deflect criticism from his ex-wife, the aide said Gingrich has ensured that he won’t win the Republican nomination…

Of course, a loss is still a loss, and up until very recently, Romney and his surrogates had been predicting a first-place finish in the Palmetto State. Asked whether Romney’s collapse in the polls is forcing Romney’s campaign to consult its own mortality, the aide laughed.

“Oh God, no,” he said. “I mean, to face Newt Gingrich?”

Update: Here comes the exit poll data. You know who this doesn’t benefit?

Sixty-four percent said the debates were an important factor for them; just 34 percent said they were not. Gingrich won standing ovations in both debates while Romney often struggled – and at one point received a smattering of boos for equivocating over how many years of his tax returns he would release.

Gingrich, who polls suggest overtook Romney in the final days before today’s primary, is hoping for a victory that would keep Romney from locking up the nomination before the end of the month. A majority of voters – 53 percent – said they made up their mind about who to back within the last few days.

Forty-five percent say electability is most important. We’ll see how that breaks between Gingrich and Romney.

Update: Looks like it’ll be a short night: “Romney aides tell Fox News they expect a second place finish based on exit polls.”

Update: Nate Silver sends a chill through Team Romney by wondering whether he’s still ahead … in Florida:

Essentially all of the polling data used for the forecast, however, predates the Monday night debate in Myrtle Beach, since which time there has been a dramatic reversal of fortunes in the Republican race. Mr. Romney has lost 15 points from his lead nationwide, according to the Gallup national tracking poll. There has been an even larger swing – a net of about 21 points between Mr. Romney and Mr. Gingrich – in South Carolina.

If the Florida polls have swung as much as the national polls during the past several days, Mr. Romney would have only about a 5-point lead there now. And if the Florida polls have swung as much as the South Carolina ones have during the last week, Mr. Gingrich and Mr. Romney would now be essentially tied there.

The wider the margin tonight, the more buzz Newt will have and, presumably, the more momentum heading into Florida. (There’s another debate on Monday too, don’t forget.) Speaking of which, here’s the answer to the electability question I posed above about the exit poll data: Of the 45 percent who said beating Obama was most important, 49 percent said Gingrich was best positioned to do it compared to just 41 percent who said Romney. In South Carolina, Newt’s the electable candidate.

Update: A picture is worth a thousand words.

Update: All the nets are calling it for Gingrich promptly at 7 p.m. Stand by for exit poll data so that we’ll have some sense of the margin.

Update: Here’s the exit poll data. Newt wins, 38/29.

Update: The most amazing thing about the exit poll is how many different demographics Newt won. Romney led by double digits less than a week ago but couldn’t hold onto his advantage in virtually any group. Newt won men, women (sorry, Marianne), independents, marrieds, singles, veterans, non-veterans, and all income groups. He won on electability and on the economy and on the deficit. He won among voters who decided today and within the last few days, and tied Romney among those who decided earlier this month. (A rare win for Romney came among those who decided before that.) He even won among those who approve of Nikki Haley’s job performance as governor, notwithstanding her endorsement of Mitt.

As for Bain, here was the response when voters were asked their view of Romney’s background of investing in and restructuring companies:

Most think positively of Romney’s career, but Mitt beats Newt within that group fairly narrowly. Among the minority who view Romney’s career negatively, Gingrich crushes Romney. Could be that the Bain attacks didn’t matter much to most voters, but to the voters who cared, they mattered a lot.

Even though Newt topped Mitt on nearly all the issues, I think this’ll be the media spin tomorrow: “Romney lost on the basis of two debates. Welcome to U.S. of American Idol”.

Update: For what it’s worth, here’s the Democratic reaction tonight via our old friend KP: “Getting ecstatic emails from my Dem operative friends re Newt.”

Update: A mind-boggling exit poll data point from John Dickerson. I guess that ABC interview with Newt’s ex didn’t work: “Gingrich got the same share of the evangelical vote in SC as Mike Huckabee in 2008. One of them is an ordained minister.”

Update: Two more tidbits from the exit poll. In case there was any doubt, yes, Gingrich killed Romney at the debates:

As for this, make of it what you will:

Update: One more and then I’ll stop. This doesn’t prove that the Bain attacks worked, but I’m not sure that’s a comfort to Mitt. If voters are starting to feel alienated by Romney’s wealth, whether because they think he doesn’t understand their problems or for other reasons, then Gingrich could become the “blue-collar candidate” by default and suddenly Mitt has a big problem:

Update: Team Mitt would have preferred to roll out the Jeb Bush endorsement closer to the Florida vote, but I guess they’re panicky about a “sinking Romney ship” narrative tomorrow. Three sources are telling CNN tonight that Jeb will in fact endorse Mitt sometime soon. Will that be enough, though, if Santorum drops out? Says PPP, “Florida Santorum voters prefer Newt over Mitt 58-32…his decision whether to stay in or not will have major implications”.

Update: Chris Cillizza of WaPo tweets that “Close Jeb Bush ally tells me that no Romney endorsement is in the works.” Jeb’s camp being coy, or is he getting cold feet about throwing in with Romney after tonight’s drubbing?

Update: Santorum’s speaking as I write this and Ed notes on Twitter that he’s using the past tense a lot. Him dropping out would be Romney’s worst nightmare, needless to say.

Update: Wouldn’t you know it, Nikki Haley couldn’t make it over to the Romney rally tonight. Sad.

Update: Here’s Mitt’s concession speech. The money line: “Our party cannot be led to victory by someone who also has never run a business, and never run a state… We cannot defeat [Obama] with a candidate who has joined in that very assault on free enterprise.”

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Update: At long last, more than three hours after the race was called for him, here’s Newt. Quote: “I articulate the deepest-felt values of the American people.”

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Update: Oh my. Did Jeb just head for the lifeboats on the S.S. Romney?

Jeb Bush, the popular former Florida governor, said he will “stay neutral” in the Republican presidential primary while warning his party’s candidates to leave the “circular firing squad” of their primary debates behind and start appealing to a broader audience of voters.

Bush’s remarks, in an exclusive interview today, come as the contest advances to Florida, where the Jan. 31 primary will take the race into its biggest and most diverse arena yet. The winner will be awarded all of the state’s 57 delegates…

The younger Bush described both Romney and Gingrich as “credible” candidates in a November contest with President Barack Obama. “I intend to help whoever wins the nomination,” the former governor said…

He also says Romney should disclose his income tax records during the Florida contest, calling Romney’s riches “a wonderful success story.”

Bush is going to spin this as having been his position all along but the rumors that he’d endorse Mitt have been circulating for weeks. (His dad endorsed Romney a few weeks ago, remember.) The fact that he’s declaring neutrality on the same night that Gingrich swamped Romney in South Carolina is a terrible signal for Mitt.


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 28 29 30 31 32

correlation not causality

WryTrvllr on January 22, 2012 at 6:22 AM

Actually, does look like it doesn’t it. Hope Newt’s prepared.

WryTrvllr on January 22, 2012 at 6:27 AM

I am sitting this election out. No fundraising, no pounding pavement or working phones. I will just be voting. First time in over thirty years I’ll be sitting on my hands…

OmahaConservative on January 22, 2012 at 6:28 AM

Exit polls showing religion played a major role in Romney’s defeat.

tommyboy on January 22, 2012 at 6:16 AM

Makes you wonder what changed since Iowa. Maybe all the South Carolinians were born again YESTERDAY. Or perhaps Newt began to look more viable.

Guess will have to wait for Florida.

WryTrvllr on January 22, 2012 at 6:32 AM

Interesting that Haley just couldn’t be there with Romney at the end.Bet that treacherous witch would have been there if he had won!

redware on January 22, 2012 at 6:33 AM

correlation not causality
WryTrvllr on January 22, 2012 at 6:22 AM

When someone says religion “strongly influenced” his vote you’ve got causation.

tommyboy on January 22, 2012 at 6:33 AM

I am sitting this election out. No fundraising, no pounding pavement or working phones. I will just be voting. First time in over thirty years I’ll be sitting on my hands…

OmahaConservative on January 22, 2012 at 6:28 AM

Your choice. But ABO is still my prime motivation

WryTrvllr on January 22, 2012 at 6:35 AM

When someone says religion “strongly influenced” his vote you’ve got causation.

tommyboy on January 22, 2012 at 6:33 AM

Got it. I agreed after seeing the number breakouts.

WryTrvllr on January 22, 2012 at 6:37 AM

Interesting that they didn’t flock to Santorum

WryTrvllr on January 22, 2012 at 6:40 AM

WryTrvllr on January 22, 2012 at 6:35 AM

Yep, I’m all about AB0, but I am so underwhelmed at this point I just cannot muster any enthusiasm unless a dream running mate is added to the ticket. McCain sorta’ burned me out…

OmahaConservative on January 22, 2012 at 6:43 AM

what % of Mormons vote for Romney? (I will bet that it’s about the same % of blacks that vote for Obama ….90 to 100%) who’s the bigot?

Pragmatic on January 22, 2012 at 6:44 AM

No one seems to be pointing out the fact that evanfelicals clearly weren’t interested in voting for some weird Mormon guy.

urban elitist on January 22, 2012 at 6:48 AM

No one seems to be pointing out the fact that evanfelicals clearly weren’t interested in voting for some weird Mormon guy.

urban elitist on January 22, 2012 at 6:48 AM

I know. Clearly when you think “weird Mormon guy” you think slam dunk! with Independents in the general./

Marcus on January 22, 2012 at 6:52 AM

No one seems to be pointing out the fact that evanfelicals clearly weren’t interested in voting for some weird Mormon guy.

urban elitist on January 22, 2012 at 6:48 AM

Actually, it’s interesting that the “weird” mormon dude did better than the social conservative. So obviously something else is drawing them to Gingrich.

WryTrvllr on January 22, 2012 at 6:53 AM

I am sitting this election out. No fundraising, no pounding pavement or working phones. I will just be voting. First time in over thirty years I’ll be sitting on my hands…

OmahaConservative on January 22, 2012 at 6:28 AM

The corrective to horrible Presidential candidates is Operation Counterweight which is an electoral strategy for such conditions. There are unreliables, undependables and sheer crooks and big government followers in both parties at all levels of government and they need to be rooted out at the lowest level, and cannot be gotten rid of by voting JUST for President. That is the way federalism is supposed to work not just intra-government, that is within the federal government, but between the governments and the people. The valuation of human liberty and freedom is to be safeguarded from all tyrants from petite to huge as they are all monsterous. The rolling back of large, intrusive, and costly government doesn’t start with the Executive Branch but with YOU, willing to hold all levels of government to account during the election process.

Once you close yourself off from the entire political process, you become a serf willing to take what government serves up to you. Citizens do not do that. Citizens know they are the last, best hope of freedom from tyrannical government and the sovereign cure to the sovereign power over-reach. This Nation cannot be guided by a people who have become detached from the political process and, indeed, must see that process ITSELF as the threat to their liberty and freedom. We have a century of ‘inevitable’ larger government and candidates that benefit by a system that reduces the population to beggars and victims… the cure to that is to teach yourself and others to be citizens and if you love the M1911 you also know that your vote marked up between you and your conscience is the voice that is as powerful as any force of arms and is the method to ensure you don’t need to resort to arms. This isn’t a question of others being good citizens: are you willing to take up the burden of being a citizen and do the right thing as part of your duties to yourself and your Nation?

Sit out the upper echelons if you can find no one worthy and write in the name of the person you think who would do a better job in that space. Concentrate on the lower level stuff, the local and State stuff and help bring your fellow citizens together to do the hard job of reclaiming our liberty from government gone authoritarian and soon to be an utter tyranny. You can’t do it alone and you can’t do it at all if you step away from the system. Yes it is a field of despair…and if you let them despair for your Nation and do nothing, they will win by default.

ajacksonian on January 22, 2012 at 6:58 AM

Gingrich won in SC — YAY!!!!!

Conservchik on January 22, 2012 at 7:02 AM

Actually, it’s interesting that the “weird” mormon dude did better than the social conservative. So obviously something else is drawing them to Gingrich.

WryTrvllr on January 22, 2012 at 6:53 AM

Among the 27% of the voters who said that it mattered “a great deal” that a candidate shared their religious beliefs, Romeny got stomped by both Newt and Santorum, 45%-32%-9%.

Among those who said it mattered “smewhat,” Newt wone 47%-27%. That’s 60% of the primary vote between the two categories.

urban elitist on January 22, 2012 at 7:02 AM

I just find it confounding why people can’t seem to forgive stupid things Newt did in his past but somehow they can forgive all the stupid things Romney did. Oh well.

tkyang99 on January 22, 2012 at 7:04 AM

mitt needs to rethink his career path. After 8 years of running for POTUS he still can’t break 30% within the GOP party. He stands no chance whatsoever of winning in the South in the general election. without the GOP taking the South Obama wins. The GOp doesn’t need the Northeast but they need the South, the Southwest and the upper Midwest. Mitt plays well in one of those areas. We can not afford to nominate a man like Mitt who places the GOP stronghold states in Play.

Mitt needs to drop out of the race. His showing in SC was dismal and a massive warning sign to the GOp machine that nominating Mitt is a sure defeat come NOV.

unseen on January 22, 2012 at 7:05 AM

Oh this is too much,Obama gets Millions in loot from
Bundlers,and obscene amounts of cash,from Wall street,

and Lefty Operative Ted Koppel says, what does the
“Millionaire get out of it” to Newt in this interview!!
=======================================================

Gingrich says his Billionaire backer’s ‘central value’ is Israel
Added: 21 hours ago Occurred On: Jan-21-2012
*********************************************

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=6ef_1327155709

canopfor on January 22, 2012 at 7:06 AM

Something that not many people are talking about is the fact that Santorum got 17% of the vote.

I think it is pretty clear at this point that Santorum will be a non-factor in FL. As a matter of fact, anyone voting for Santorum will be throwing away their vote.

Sop, who do the Santorum voters go to, Newt or Mitt? I haven’t done any deep analysis but the Occam’s Razer response would be, clearly Newt.

All religion and conservatism vs moderatism aside, the REAL difference between Newt and Mitt is that Newt has balls and Mitt doesn’t. Since Reagan Republicans have not had a national leader with a set and we want one.

Newt will be the nominee and he will defeat Obama by a surprisingly large margin.

mitchellvii on January 22, 2012 at 7:07 AM

mitt needs to rethink his career path. After 8 years of running for POTUS he still can’t break 30% within the GOP party. He stands no chance whatsoever of winning in the South in the general election. without the GOP taking the South Obama wins. The GOp doesn’t need the Northeast but they need the South, the Southwest and the upper Midwest. Mitt plays well in one of those areas. We can not afford to nominate a man like Mitt who places the GOP stronghold states in Play.

Mitt needs to drop out of the race. His showing in SC was dismal and a massive warning sign to the GOp machine that nominating Mitt is a sure defeat come NOV.

unseen on January 22, 2012 at 7:05 AM

Youu really think Mitt can’t win South Carolina, Alabama, Mississippi and Texas?

Or are you worried about Florida and Virginia (two purple states where a moderate might play well)?

urban elitist on January 22, 2012 at 7:09 AM

unseen on January 22, 2012 at 7:05 AM

Been missing you!
Please come back more often!

KOOLAID2 on January 22, 2012 at 7:13 AM

“The best-laid plans of mice and men often go awry.”
My take.

kingsjester on January 22, 2012 at 7:19 AM

I am sitting this election out. No fundraising, no pounding pavement or working phones. I will just be voting. First time in over thirty years I’ll be sitting on my hands…

OmahaConservative on January 22, 2012 at 6:28 AM

The corrective to horrible Presidential candidates is Operation Counterweight which is an electoral strategy for such conditions. There are unreliables, undependables and sheer crooks and big government followers in both parties at all levels of government and they need to be rooted out at the lowest level, and cannot be gotten rid of by voting JUST for President. That is the way federalism is supposed to work not just intra-government, that is within the federal government, but between the governments and the people. The valuation of human liberty and freedom is to be safeguarded from all tyrants from petite to huge as they are all monsterous. The rolling back of large, intrusive, and costly government doesn’t start with the Executive Branch but with YOU, willing to hold all levels of government to account during the election process.

Once you close yourself off from the entire political process, you become a serf willing to take what government serves up to you. Citizens do not do that. Citizens know they are the last, best hope of freedom from tyrannical government and the sovereign cure to the sovereign power over-reach. This Nation cannot be guided by a people who have become detached from the political process and, indeed, must see that process ITSELF as the threat to their liberty and freedom. We have a century of ‘inevitable’ larger government and candidates that benefit by a system that reduces the population to beggars and victims… the cure to that is to teach yourself and others to be citizens and if you love the M1911 you also know that your vote marked up between you and your conscience is the voice that is as powerful as any force of arms and is the method to ensure you don’t need to resort to arms. This isn’t a question of others being good citizens: are you willing to take up the burden of being a citizen and do the right thing as part of your duties to yourself and your Nation?

Sit out the upper echelons if you can find no one worthy and write in the name of the person you think who would do a better job in that space. Concentrate on the lower level stuff, the local and State stuff and help bring your fellow citizens together to do the hard job of reclaiming our liberty from government gone authoritarian and soon to be an utter tyranny. You can’t do it alone and you can’t do it at all if you step away from the system. Yes it is a field of despair…and if you let them despair for your Nation and do nothing, they will win by default.

ajacksonian on January 22, 2012 at 6:58 AM

I am thinking like OC…if there is an election to sit one out on, it was the upcoming one. I was thinking it should not be close!
I almost did so the last presidential…but than Sarah Palin motivated me since “MY FRIENDS” was such a fist pumping joke!

Then! Like jack says…and look at the Ed Mprrissey piece of Jan 21, 2012 12:20 PM…these bastids are bending us over … from the ground up!

KOOLAID2 on January 22, 2012 at 7:26 AM

nyuk, nyuk, nyuk …
Hey, Mittens! Ya got moitalized.

‘Tis a great day. Hopefully, the GOP holds that thought.
Newt was 10 points down in the polls (which most of us know means nothing) and then he won by 10 points. That would be a 20 point swing. If I’m not mistaken, that’s enough for Newton to beat the Black Narcissus.
Yes, Newt has a huge hill to climb before November, but who knows?
The Shadow?
Is that why so many Leftists want Hillary to replace Ö’Bumbler on the Dem ballot?
Hang on, it’s gonna be a long ride!
ABM

~(Ä)~

Karl Magnus on January 22, 2012 at 7:33 AM

Actually, it’s interesting that the “weird” mormon dude did better than the social conservative. So obviously something else is drawing them to Gingrich.

WryTrvllr on January 22, 2012 at 6:53 AM

Good morning! It’s bad when you go to Hot Air just before you go to church.

Vince on January 22, 2012 at 7:38 AM

How can we win with Newt when every poll has him 10 or more points behind Obama? I’m not a big Mitt Romney fan. I was backing the only true conservative in the race (Rick Perry). But after Perry left, I decided to back the candidate that has the BEST CHANCE to defeat Obama. All the polls show MItt beating or tied with Obama. So how is Mitt unelectable, as many on here claim?

Jack_Burton on January 22, 2012 at 3:04 AM

Because right now, the polls are worse than worthless, they are manipulated.

I.e., Reagan.

stenwin77 on January 22, 2012 at 7:39 AM

Actually, it’s interesting that the “weird” mormon dude did better than the social conservative. So obviously something else is drawing them to Gingrich.

WryTrvllr on January 22, 2012 at 6:53 AM

Worth repeating.

Vince on January 22, 2012 at 7:40 AM

Good morning! It’s bad when you go to Hot Air just before you go to church.

Vince on January 22, 2012 at 7:38 AM

Lolz, ain’t that the truth. Heading to the shower now. Bible Study at 9:15 and Divine Service at 10:30…

OmahaConservative on January 22, 2012 at 7:42 AM

Newt is Lazarus! Bless you Newt!

Pragmatic on January 22, 2012 at 7:43 AM

Bill Whittle Takes on the Liberal Media
Jan 21 2012
************
************
(Video 6:41)

From the YT video:

In this week’s Afterburner, Bill Whittle takes on the liberal agenda by addressing the underlying assumptions of Juan Williams when he asked Newt Gingrich this question:

“You recently said black Americans should demand jobs, not food stamps. You also said poor kids lack a strong work ethic and proposed having them work as janitors in their schools. Can’t you see that this is viewed, at a minimum, as insulting to all Americans, but particularly to black Americans?”

For a primer on how to respond to race-baiting, watch this Afterburner.
============

http://www.therightscoop.com/bill-whittle-takes-on-the-liberal-media/

canopfor on January 22, 2012 at 7:44 AM

Actually, it’s interesting that the “weird” mormon dude did better than the social conservative. So obviously something else is drawing them to Gingrich.

WryTrvllr on January 22, 2012 at 6:53 AM

Worth repeating.

Vince on January 22, 2012 at 7:40 AM

We have 4 candidates in the race….THEY have one!
The only “Wierd” one in the race…IS JugEars!

KOOLAID2 on January 22, 2012 at 7:48 AM

Sharpton: Gingrich “Race-Baited” In Order To Win South Carolina
Jan 21 2012
************
(Video 1:29)

“It’s the birthday of Citizens United and of Newt Gingrich being censored [sic]. I think, though, we cannot take out of the analysis, the polarizing tone that Newt Gingrich used in South Carolina.

And I think what is going to be something to watch, he outright race-baited and I’m not bringing up race, he did. Talking about blacks by name, Tea Party — Tea Party president. We should not forget he’s made a very ugly tone. And going forward, and if in fact he’s the nominee, against an African-American president, he could cause one of the most divisive races in America,” Al Sharpton said on MSNBC’s coverage of the South Carolina primary.
================================================================

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/01/21/sharpton_gingrich_race-baited_in_order_to_win_south_carolina.html

canopfor on January 22, 2012 at 7:52 AM

Hume: SC Voters Said Electability Means Who Is Able To Debate Obama
Jan 21 2012
***********
***********
(Video 3:16)

“The voters in South Carolina basically said to us that what they mean by electability is the ability to take on Barack Obama in a debate. There is no doubt this past week who was the strongest debater. You saw this when Gingrich took on a question from my colleague Juan. And mostly on the issue, not directly Juan, hit the thing out of the park, got a standing ovation and then similarly on Thursday night in the other debate you saw him take on a question from John King about something his wife had said and got a standing ovation,” Brit Hume said.

Hume says Romney’s loss in South Carolina will cost him support.
================================================================

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/01/21/brit_hume_electability_means_who_is_able_to_take_on_obama_in_a_debate.html

canopfor on January 22, 2012 at 7:57 AM

Al Sharpton quotes, really?

Roy Rogers on January 22, 2012 at 7:58 AM

Newt is Lazarus! Bless you Newt!

Pragmatic on January 22, 2012 at 7:43 AM

Amen to that… and his speech was to the American people, it was excellent.

Shain1611 on January 22, 2012 at 8:01 AM

Krauthammer: Lazarus Only Had To Rise Once, Newt Has Risen Twice
Jan 21 2012
****************
****************
(Video 5:07)

“I think John King, if Gingrich wins the presidency, is going to have a gilded seat in the White House briefing room,” Charles Krauthammer said about Gingrich’s win in South Carolina.
========================================================

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/01/21/krauthammer_lazarus_only_had_to_rise_once_newt_has_risen_twice.html

canopfor on January 22, 2012 at 8:02 AM

Al Sharpton quotes, really?

Roy Rogers on January 22, 2012 at 7:58 AM

Roy Rogers:Know your MoonBat,good for a laugh tho!!

canopfor on January 22, 2012 at 8:04 AM

Al Sharpton quotes, really?

Roy Rogers on January 22, 2012 at 7:58 AM

Illustrates what we’re up against. No matter who the nominee is, because this is a campaign against Obama, the race card will be played over and over.

chewmeister on January 22, 2012 at 8:04 AM

The only “Wierd” one in the race…IS JugEars!

Unfortunately, Newt is pretty wierd. I find it hard to believe that the people of SC would vote for him on the basis of a couple of questions from Juan Williams and John King, but there is a great desire for someone to smack down Obama in a debate, and I suppose they feel that Newt is the one to do it.

Too bad that there will be only 3 short debates, the “moderators” will be carefully prepared not to give Newt any opportunity for the kind of grandstanding that he has done in the GOP debates, and Obama has so much oppo research to use that he’ll have to leave some of it behind.

If Newt gets the nom, we may lose the House, we will certainly fail to win the Senate, and Obama will get at least 2 more SCOTUS picks.

Is this what you Romney haters want? Newt to give Obama a good talking to, and then we’re screwed for good? What fools.

Priscilla on January 22, 2012 at 8:07 AM

Rage’n Cajun,break it down!(sarc)

James Carville: Romney “Has Been A Lousy Candidate”
Jan 21 2012
***********
***********
(Video 1:28)

James Carville on CNN: “He might have been a great CEO, I’m saying he has been a lousy candidate so far. He doesn’t do well on his feet.”
=======

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/01/21/james_carville_romney_has_been_a_lousy_candidate.html

canopfor on January 22, 2012 at 8:08 AM

The cognitive dissonance of the Sharpton wing is breath taking. Accusing Newt of polarization while stumping for the most divisive politician in history of the country. The manufactured reality crowd would be most amusing if not for the social devestation they leave in their wake.

tommyboy on January 22, 2012 at 8:09 AM

http://www.therightscoop.com/bill-whittle-takes-on-the-liberal-media/

canopfor on January 22, 2012 at 7:44 AM

I liked that!
I’m sure we will see that as part of the program of every alphabet news station in America!(the analysis on BOR with Juan Williams on FOX the other night…was not quite the same) Oh! Ok…never mind!

KOOLAID2 on January 22, 2012 at 8:12 AM

Wolf Blitzer Calls Out Piers Morgan For Saying John King ‘Attacked’ Gingrich
2:02 am, January 22nd, 2012
****************************
****************************
(Video 1:31)

During CNN’s election coverage of the South Carolina primary results, Wolf Blitzer

“corrected” Piers Morgan for saying fellow network colleague John King “attacked” Newt Gingrich

when he asked the former Speaker of the House about the “open marriage” controversy. “I want to make one correction,” Blitzer acknowledged. “I know what you meant, but your wording wasn’t precise, when you said John King attacked Newt Gingrich. He asked the question, and you of course, as anyone knows, it’s one thing to ask a question of a candidate, an important question, but it doesn’t necessarily mean you’re attacking him.”(More…)
==========================================================

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/wolf-blitzer-calls-out-piers-morgan-for-saying-john-king-attacked-gingrich/

canopfor on January 22, 2012 at 8:17 AM

John King did not attack Newt.

Priscilla on January 22, 2012 at 8:20 AM

If Newt Mitt gets the nom, we may lose the House, we will certainly fail to win the Senate, and Obama will get at least 2 more SCOTUS picks.

Is this what you Romney Newt haters want? Newt Mitt to give Obama a good talking to, and then we’re screwed for good? What fools.

Priscilla on January 22, 2012 at 8:07 AM

FIFY

chewmeister on January 22, 2012 at 8:21 AM

canopfor on January 22, 2012 at 7:44 AM

I liked that!
I’m sure we will see that as part of the program of every alphabet news station in America!(the analysis on BOR with Juan Williams on FOX the other night…was not quite the same) Oh! Ok…never mind!

KOOLAID2 on January 22, 2012 at 8:12 AM

KOOLAID2:Every Lefty outlet,lol.I thinks the Left were betting the
farm on Mittens!!:)

canopfor on January 22, 2012 at 8:21 AM

Al Sharpton quotes, really?

Roy Rogers on January 22, 2012 at 7:58 AM

They were trying to get Tawana Brawley but she wouldn’t go on tape…and the hooker from the Duke LaCrosse case, was in Jail!
Stand by for the Reverend Jesse Jackson and Jeremiah Wright!

KOOLAID2 on January 22, 2012 at 8:21 AM

ajacksonian on January 22, 2012 at 6:58 AM

Thank you so much for an excellent post.

Naturally Curly on January 22, 2012 at 8:22 AM

Watching Newt’s stellar victory speech. The guy’s on fire. Really quick though–can someone with a higher IQ than mine answer this biting question: what the hell is so important about Jeb Bush’s endorsement? Or any political endorsement for that matter. Such establishment pageantry. Let the damn people vote! That’s what I’m talking about. SC did good.

RepubChica on January 22, 2012 at 8:26 AM

How can the race card be played if Newt picks Allen West as a Veep?

1/2 white Obama versus 100% authentic black West?

Chip away at the black vote. Fire up the Conservative base, leave an heir as VP. WINNER.

PappyD61 on January 22, 2012 at 8:28 AM

what the hell is so important about Jeb Bush’s endorsement?

It’s not. It just gives the chattering class something to talk about and fill air time.

tommyboy on January 22, 2012 at 8:29 AM

I am sitting this election out. No fundraising, no pounding pavement or working phones. I will just be voting. First time in over thirty years I’ll be sitting on my hands…

OmahaConservative on January 22, 2012 at 6:28 AM

Really? No local or state candidates to promote?

disa on January 22, 2012 at 8:32 AM

chewmeister

Check out the numbers, look at Newt’s history (no, not his personal history, although that is bad enough) of supporting liberals and liberal causes, of taking money from anyone who will pay him, of attacking the Ryan plan and the free market….look at polling among independents an moderates, who are poised to vote for Romney in droves – they hate Gingrich, and he will drag down the entire party, as he always has.

Listen, congrats for deluding yourself entirely that the Dems really meant it when they said they wanted Mitt…that was bravado based on their shaky OWS strategy. With Newt, they would not even have to have a strategy – he is capable of defeating himself. I only hope he does it in the primaries.

Priscilla on January 22, 2012 at 8:35 AM

Actually, it’s interesting that the “weird” mormon dude did better than the social conservative. So obviously something else is drawing them to Gingrich.

WryTrvllr on January 22, 2012 at 6:53 AM

Worth repeating.

Vince on January 22, 2012 at 7:40 AM

Actually, the wierd Mormon dude got beaten among those who said that it mattered “a great deal” or “somewhat” that the candidate “shares my religious beliefs.”

urban elitist on January 22, 2012 at 8:35 AM

How can the race card be played if Newt picks Allen West as a Veep?

Because it will be seen as the transparent attempt to pander that it is. Sort of the way racist people say “oh, but I have a few black friends!” as if that’s some kind of defense after calling all black women “welfare queens.” Or, as has been done on this very thread, suggesting that the Kim Roberts is somehow part of the mainstream of black life. Its going to be an ugly campaign, but its going to emerge from your end. At least Mitt isn’t a race baiter like Gingrich.

libfreeordie on January 22, 2012 at 8:37 AM

Really? No local or state candidates to promote?

disa on January 22, 2012 at 8:32 AM

Since Judas Nelson dropped out, only Bob Kerrey going in the senate race might get me motivated…
We’ll see…

OmahaConservative on January 22, 2012 at 8:37 AM

Youu really think Mitt can’t win South Carolina, Alabama, Mississippi and Texas?

Or are you worried about Florida and Virginia (two purple states where a moderate might play well)?

urban elitist on January 22, 2012 at 7:09 AM

Yes, Mitt as the nominee means millions of conservatives in RED states sit home. which means the Black vote in those southern states come into play. NC, GA among others will be battleground states. Hint to you. If you are having NC and GA has battleground states and you are a gop candidate you are losing. Be it his relgion, his moderation, his rich out of touch personility, his team’s dirty tricks or all four Mitt does not play well in the South nor in the Southwest. His stronghold is the Northeast and mountian states moderates/mormons. We don’t need to win Ny or PA to win the election but we sure as hell better win NC and Ga if we want a victory. Mitt brings nothing to the ticket in those terms. 2012 will be a base on base election. the myth of moderates will not appear in 2012 anymore than it appeared in 2008. You want a landlside nominate a republician that the base can support. Mitt is not that man.

unseen on January 22, 2012 at 8:38 AM

John King did not attack Newt.

Priscilla on January 22, 2012 at 8:20 AM

Yes, he did…a story drummed up by the media for the media to attack.

tinkerthinker on January 22, 2012 at 8:42 AM

I am sitting this election out.

Me, too. Obama isn’t so bad. He’ll pick Supreme Court Justices (and dozens of other federal judges) I can live with for the next 40 years. He’ll defend our allies, strike fear into our enemies and make the world a safer place.

The crowd he brings into the federal bureaucracy aren’t too bad. They say they care. His anti-oil fanaticism (at least for America) can’t be too bad or people would complain about it more. I mean, how many jobs is it costing the country, really? Drilling more oil wouldn’t lower the price of oil much. Sure, it would help the trade deficit, but who really understands that, anyway?

After all, the Chinese need Canadian oil, too.

And what’s wrong with strengthening the EPA? And why not keep running up the debt? After all, it’s free money!

Really, the more I think about it, the better that Obama guy sounds.

Thanks, OmahaConservative. We really need to get the ball rolling on this. If enough conservatives like us can just wake up and realize sitting out the election and giving Obama four more years won’t be too bad, then we can really hurt those damned Republicans for being so imperfect.

Let’s teach them a good lesson.

fadetogray on January 22, 2012 at 8:46 AM

Because it will be seen as the transparent attempt to pander that it is. Sort of the way racist people say “oh, but I have a few black friends!”

libfreeordie on January 22, 2012 at 8:37 AM

Which of course is exactly why we have Obama now. Not even moonbats would’ve nominated a white guy with such a paper-thin resume.

ddrintn on January 22, 2012 at 8:46 AM

Yes, Mitt as the nominee means millions of conservatives in RED states sit home. which means the Black vote in those southern states come into play. NC, GA among others will be battleground states. Hint to you. If you are having NC and GA has battleground states and you are a gop candidate you are losing. Be it his relgion, his moderation, his rich out of touch personility, his team’s dirty tricks or all four Mitt does not play well in the South nor in the Southwest. His stronghold is the Northeast and mountian states moderates/mormons. We don’t need to win Ny or PA to win the election but we sure as hell better win NC and Ga if we want a victory. Mitt brings nothing to the ticket in those terms. 2012 will be a base on base election. the myth of moderates will not appear in 2012 anymore than it appeared in 2008. You want a landlside nominate a republician that the base can support. Mitt is not that man.

unseen on January 22, 2012 at 8:38 AM

I’m familiar with the larger electoral dynamics. I was just wondering if in the face of a second term for the Kenyan Marxist, serious conservatives would really stay home and also if you don’t think that there’s the chance of offsetting moderates who would be turned off by Ginginrich — not a likeable or tolerant fellow — shifting into the GOP column for Romney. Clearly, it’s imprtant to fire up the base. Just as clearly, in the general, that’s not eough.

urban elitist on January 22, 2012 at 8:48 AM

fadetogray

These “conservatives” aren’t too bright, I’m afraid……

Priscilla on January 22, 2012 at 8:51 AM

I’m familiar with the larger electoral dynamics. I was just wondering if in the face of a second term for the Kenyan Marxist, serious conservatives would really stay home and also if you don’t think that there’s the chance of offsetting moderates who would be turned off by Ginginrich — not a likeable or tolerant fellow — shifting into the GOP column for Romney. Clearly, it’s imprtant to fire up the base. Just as clearly, in the general, that’s not eough.

urban elitist on January 22, 2012 at 8:48 AM

Tell ya what, buddy. Here’s what you do: start you up a good old Moderate Party and let’s see how it does.

ddrintn on January 22, 2012 at 8:51 AM

Ginginrich — not a likeable or tolerant fellow —

I find that particular bit of the media narrative absurd. I like Gingrich. A great deal.

And not tolerant? The guy who toured with Al Sharpton and shared a love seat with Pelosi? I thought the problem was he was too tolerant. Could you Newt bashers please make up your minds?

fadetogray on January 22, 2012 at 8:53 AM

unseen on January 22, 2012 at 8:38 AM

Gosh you’re goofy. There is no way any GOP candidate could’ve beaten Obama or Hillary in 2008. The non-White House party after an 8 year incumbent always has a huge advantage. Not to mention that the housing market started to collapse in 2007 and 2008 was the year of Lehman, Bear Stearns, AIG and massive bailouts for wall street firms. The initiative was around getting rid of Republicans.

libfreeordie on January 22, 2012 at 8:53 AM

fadetogray

These “conservatives” aren’t too bright, I’m afraid……

Priscilla on January 22, 2012 at 8:51 AM

They seem to have more of a handle on things than Mittbots lately.

ddrintn on January 22, 2012 at 8:53 AM

I’m familiar with the larger electoral dynamics. I was just wondering if in the face of a second term for the Kenyan Marxist, serious conservatives would really stay home and also if you don’t think that there’s the chance of offsetting moderates who would be turned off by Ginginrich — not a likeable or tolerant fellow — shifting into the GOP column for Romney. Clearly, it’s imprtant to fire up the base. Just as clearly, in the general, that’s not eough.

urban elitist on January 22, 2012 at 8:48 AM

at this point “serious conservatives” see not much difference between the father of romney care and Obamacare. Serious conservatives see not much difference between Mitt and Obama. So if the choice is between a socialist and a liberal what is the motivation to go vote? there is none. “Serious conservatives” understand if McCain were president in 2010 the TEA party would have never happened and all the conservatives elected in 2010 would never have occurred. WIs would still be a blue state, NC would still have a dem house and senate. there is no payoff in electing a liberal GOP president like Mitt or Bush. the country goes to hell as the dems take over the states and congress and the gop gets the blame . electing a liberal like Mitt means a shift to the left for the country as the policies of the GOP become more like those of the dems before they became socialists. JFK was more conservative than Mitt.

unseen on January 22, 2012 at 8:54 AM

Gosh you’re goofy. There is no way any GOP candidate could’ve beaten Obama or Hillary in 2008.

libfreeordie on January 22, 2012 at 8:53 AM

If McCain had been someone other than McCain in 2008 and had come out against TARP and the bailouts, your token-in-chief would’ve been dead meat.

ddrintn on January 22, 2012 at 8:55 AM

ddrintn on January 22, 2012 at 8:53 AM

Blast from the past courtesy of you…

Good Lord. I could come up with 3 or 4 possible SNL skits for Romney, Huckabee and Jindal. And don’t even talk about Gingrich.

ddrintn on August 11, 2009 at 5:25 PM

Must kill you to see Gingrich do well….

Bradky on January 22, 2012 at 8:56 AM

So much for the so-called party of “Values” eh?? Honestly, why did Cain have to drop out for allegedly having mistresses when Gingrich flat out committed adultery TWICE — (even calling his wife from the bedroom of the other woman and telling her he loved her while the other woman listened!!).

1. He’s an adulterer
2. He’s a professional LOBBYIST
3. He supports UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE
4. He supports Man Made Global Warming theory
5. His approach to many issues is GOVERNMENT
6. He’s a professional triangulator who has been on BOTH sides of many issues.

Somehow the co-called conservative movement has thrown out principle and bought into the LEFTIST media and GOP insider’s “electability” garbage. The only one who benefits from this is the Democrats/Left. McCain was “elecatable” and got his butt kicked, and I don’t recall anyone ever saying Reagan was “electable.”

Settle for “electable” and settle for another 4 years of Obama AND trashed any pretense at being the party of principles!!!

EasyEight on January 22, 2012 at 8:56 AM

“I intend to help whoever wins the nomination,” the former governor said…

Suddenly Newt isn’t so extreme? Hmmm….

Newt gave a truly great speech! Very gracious!

JellyToast on January 22, 2012 at 8:58 AM

Gosh you’re goofy. There is no way any GOP candidate could’ve beaten Obama or Hillary in 2008. The non-White House party after an 8 year incumbent always has a huge advantage. Not to mention that the housing market started to collapse in 2007 and 2008 was the year of Lehman, Bear Stearns, AIG and massive bailouts for wall street firms. The initiative was around getting rid of Republicans.

libfreeordie on January 22, 2012 at 8:53 AM

that’s a cop-out. Any GOP candidate can beat any dem if they run a good campaign. McCain decided to move to the left to get the moderates and only figured out after he had the nomination that the base was not supporting him and had to pick someone like Palin to even have a chance in hell at victory. You do not win elections by going to the moderates. the moderates will screw you every time as the new “cool thing” crops up. You win over the base. You get the base excited fired up and then and only then can you even think about going for the moderates. Obama won because he had his base fired up. His base swayed the moderates to vote for him. they pounded the streets, called their friends, got thier churchs involved. Theb base wins you elections not moderates that think about the election a day before they vote.

unseen on January 22, 2012 at 8:59 AM

So much for the so-called party of “Values” eh?? Honestly, why did Cain have to drop out for allegedly having mistresses when Gingrich flat out committed adultery TWICE — (even calling his wife from the bedroom of the other woman and telling her he loved her while the other woman listened!!).

Black man committing adultery with a white woman is not gonna win a single Republican primary, especially in the south.

libfreeordie on January 22, 2012 at 9:00 AM

How can the race card be played if Newt picks Allen West as a Veep?

1/2 white Obama versus 100% authentic black West?

Chip away at the black vote. Fire up the Conservative base, leave an heir as VP. WINNER.

PappyD61 on January 22, 2012 at 8:28 AM

PappyD61:Yur teas’n me Pappy,most brilliant idea,go West!:)

canopfor on January 22, 2012 at 9:00 AM

look at polling among independents an moderates, who are poised to vote for Romney in droves – they hate Gingrich, and he will drag down the entire party, as he always has.

Priscilla on January 22, 2012 at 8:35 AM

Really? So where were they in S.C.? Did he “drag down the party” in 1994 too? If Mitt(BHO lite) is the nominee, we will have the same results as 2008.

chewmeister on January 22, 2012 at 9:00 AM

ddrintn on January 22, 2012 at 8:53 AM

Blast from the past courtesy of you…

Good Lord. I could come up with 3 or 4 possible SNL skits for Romney, Huckabee and Jindal. And don’t even talk about Gingrich.

ddrintn on August 11, 2009 at 5:25 PM

Must kill you to see Gingrich do well….

Bradky on January 22, 2012 at 8:56 AM

Kill? Nah. But it must kill to see that Mittmentum come to a screeching halt. And I still pretty much stand beside what I wrote. It’s a reflection on those who choose “media-safe” candidates which don’t exist. Did you ever come up with that comment in which I expressly made fun of Christie’s weight or Jindal’s religion, by the way?

ddrintn on January 22, 2012 at 9:00 AM

So much for the so-called party of “Values” eh?? Honestly, why did Cain have to drop out for allegedly having mistresses when Gingrich flat out committed adultery TWICE — (even calling his wife from the bedroom of the other woman and telling her he loved her while the other woman listened!!).

1. He’s an adulterer
2. He’s a professional LOBBYIST
3. He supports UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE
4. He supports Man Made Global Warming theory
5. His approach to many issues is GOVERNMENT
6. He’s a professional triangulator who has been on BOTH sides of many issues.

Somehow the co-called conservative movement has thrown out principle and bought into the LEFTIST media and GOP insider’s “electability” garbage. The only one who benefits from this is the Democrats/Left. McCain was “elecatable” and got his butt kicked, and I don’t recall anyone ever saying Reagan was “electable.”

Settle for “electable” and settle for another 4 years of Obama AND trashed any pretense at being the party of principles!!!

EasyEight on January 22, 2012 at 8:56 AM

Here, have a medicated crying towel…or two.

tinkerthinker on January 22, 2012 at 9:01 AM

Theb base wins you elections not moderates that think about the election a day before they vote.

unseen on January 22, 2012 at 8:59 AM

Fair point, but I still think that political history tells us that any GOP candidate had a much higher uphill climb than either of the Dem candidates wold have. Even if McCain ran a strong campaign and he was facing Hillary instead of Obama I think a lot of conservative women may have flipped to vote for the first female President. It may have been a closer electoral vote count, but Hillary would still have one.

Still, I’m curious whether or not Newt will fire up the GOP “base” or just the tea party? Moderate Republicans in the GOP either no longer exist or have been turning out in much smaller numbers in primaries outside of New Hapmshire. If Newt wins its a victory for the Tea Party but the tea party also thought Christine O’Donnel could win.

libfreeordie on January 22, 2012 at 9:04 AM

3. He supports UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE
4. He supports Man Made Global Warming theory
5. His approach to many issues is GOVERNMENT
6. He’s a professional triangulator who has been on BOTH sides of many issues.

EasyEight on January 22, 2012 at 8:56 AM

“Vote for Romney instead!!!!!!!eleventy!!!!” ROFL…

ddrintn on January 22, 2012 at 9:06 AM

Really? So where were they in S.C.? Did he “drag down the party” in 1994 too? If Mitt(BHO lite) is the nominee, we will have the same results as 2008.

chewmeister on January 22, 2012 at 9:00 AM

Peep the exit polls, the GOP electorate in S.C. this time around was much more conservative than it was in 2008. S.C. moderates stayed home. The state has become radicalized and this might inspire GOP radicals to coalesce and organize around Newt. But that will spell doom for him and down ticket races in the general.

libfreeordie on January 22, 2012 at 9:07 AM

Jeb Bush declining to endorse Mitt should be the canary in the coal mine. Given the scale of last night`s repudiation of Mitt, the establishment Republicans see the writing on the wall. Rather than further circling the wagons, they are ready to turn their backs and put some distance between themselves and the man who ran to the left of Ted Kennedy.

Typhonian on January 22, 2012 at 9:12 AM

Wow! I just finished listening to the entire speech! Newt is truly inspiring! God bless him and protect him out on the campaign trail!
If he wins Florida this is going to be great! First time I’ve been really excited in a long time!
I loved his graciousness with the other three candidates! Great ideas and a proven track record.

You can say whatever you want to say about some things he said over the past few years… but his track record, the things he’s done, have been conservative!

JellyToast on January 22, 2012 at 9:14 AM

Peep the exit polls, the GOP electorate in S.C. this time around was much more conservative than it was in 2008. S.C. moderates stayed home. The state has become radicalized and this might inspire GOP radicals to coalesce and organize around Newt. But that will spell doom for him and down ticket races in the general.

libfreeordie on January 22, 2012 at 9:07 AM

wait I thought Mitt was suppose to BRING OUT The moderates? If Mitt can’t even fire up the moderates in his OWN PARTY why do you think the moderates in the dem party or the mod independents are going to bother to vote?

unseen on January 22, 2012 at 9:17 AM

One of these mornings the anti-Mitts are going to wake up and ask themselves “Oh my God what have we done?”.

CW on January 22, 2012 at 9:18 AM

but his track record, the things he’s done, have been conservative!

You’re kidding, right?

Priscilla on January 22, 2012 at 9:21 AM

but his track record, the things he’s done, have been conservative!

JellyToast on January 22, 2012 at 9:14 AM

Yup, massive ethics violations, lobbying on behalf of Freddie and Fannie and pissing all over the “sanctity of marriage” = conservative. Jeez, if its that easy to characterize conservatism, progressivism may have a good turn this election.

libfreeordie on January 22, 2012 at 9:21 AM

One of these mornings the anti-Mitts are going to wake up and ask themselves “Oh my God what have we done?”.

CW on January 22, 2012 at 9:18 AM

Not really. We haven’t deluded ourselves into believing in the SuperMitt electability myth. Besides, what HAVE we done if most of us haven’t even voted yet? Failed to worship at the altar of Mitt at some website?

ddrintn on January 22, 2012 at 9:22 AM

One of these mornings the anti-Mitts are going to wake up and ask themselves “Oh my God what have we done?”.

CW on January 22, 2012 at 9:18 AM

Aw, we agreed on something. Its kind of cute.

libfreeordie on January 22, 2012 at 9:24 AM

CW on January 22, 2012 at 9:18 AM

Yep.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/ct-met-kass-0122-20120122,0,941553.column

Bradky on January 22, 2012 at 9:25 AM

Yup, massive ethics violations, lobbying on behalf of Freddie and Fannie and pissing all over the “sanctity of marriage” = conservative. Jeez, if its that easy to characterize conservatism, progressivism may have a good turn this election.

libfreeordie on January 22, 2012 at 9:21 AM

“Massive ethics violations”. LOL…and anyway, I thought those same conservatives were always getting blasted for being hung up on the social issues? Now that they don’t seem to be so, they get blasted anyway. Who’s being more inconsistent here?

ddrintn on January 22, 2012 at 9:25 AM

One of these mornings the anti-Mitts are going to wake up and ask themselves “Oh my God what have we done?”.

CW on January 22, 2012 at 9:18 AM

The pro-Mittens crowd should be thinking “Why is Mittens such a lousy candidate. . .he’s not even a Republican. . .woe is us.”

Pragmatic on January 22, 2012 at 9:25 AM

Peep the exit polls, the GOP electorate in S.C. this time around was much more conservative than it was in 2008. S.C. moderates stayed home. The state has become radicalized and this might inspire GOP radicals to coalesce and organize around Newt. But that will spell doom for him and down ticket races in the general.

libfreeordie on January 22, 2012 at 9:07 AM

Actually that is true nation-wide, the conservatives are the largest demographic, beating out the moderates and especially the liberals. That makes the liberals the radicals.

tinkerthinker on January 22, 2012 at 9:27 AM

CW on January 22, 2012 at 9:18 AM

Yep.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/ct-met-kass-0122-20120122,0,941553.column

Bradky on January 22, 2012 at 9:25 AM

You guys and Mittens are such wimps . . . now go to your rooms and cry!

Pragmatic on January 22, 2012 at 9:28 AM

wait I thought Mitt was suppose to BRING OUT The moderates?

Most moderates are looking for an alternative to Obama, and do not necessarily consider themselves conservatives or Republicans, so they do not vote in primaries. Plus the neverending stories of how Mitt’s nomination was a done deal probably kept them from coming out against Newt who, until the last 2 debates, was doing nothing but attacking capitalism and doing Obama’s campaign work for him. Don’t kid yourself, moderates vote, they want to vote for someone who they perceive as better than Obama, and they will see Newt as worse than Obama. His own egomania and propensity to step in it with his impulsive comments will only reinforce that perception. I live in NJ, and saw how Christie won in a deep blue state. All of my moderate/independent friends now support him and want Romney to be the next POTUS. Not one would vote for Newt. I would, but I’m ABO….not one of of them would. They can’t stand him, and would hold their noses and vote for Obama.

Priscilla on January 22, 2012 at 9:28 AM

Which of course is exactly why we have Obama now. Not even moonbats would’ve nominated a white guy with such a paper-thin resume.

ddrintn on January 22, 2012 at 8:46 AM

Yep.

BallisticBob on January 22, 2012 at 9:29 AM

Priscilla on January 22, 2012 at 9:28 AM

The same people who were worried Romney would run away with it by the time SC voted were bemoaning how 3 states could make the difference, etc. Now that Newt has pulled off an impressive win in SC they are declaring it over…

funny….

Bradky on January 22, 2012 at 9:31 AM

I can’t believe that so many people still think that questioning the intelligence of fellow voters is the way to promote their candidate.

Cindy Munford on January 22, 2012 at 9:33 AM

Comment pages: 1 28 29 30 31 32