Gingrich ad: Only I can win debates with media, Obama, and beat Obama in general election
posted at 1:30 pm on January 23, 2012 by Ed Morrissey
This isn’t a terribly new ad for Newt Gingrich; in fact, its title is “Decision Time in South Carolina,” but it’s only four days old and contains the Gingrich argument in a nutshell for Florida and the rest of the primary. The Corner calls it a good ad even if one doesn’t agree with the argument, but perhaps that’s, er, debatable too:
There is only one candidate who can debate Barack Obama and win, stand up to the news media and win, and run against Barack Obama and win. His name is Newt.
Let’s take these premises one at a time. First, despite Gingrich’s optimism on this point, Obama will not agree to seven 3-hour “Lincoln-Douglas style” debates with Gingrich, or anyone else, either. It’s fascinating to contemplate, but Obama will probably only accept two 2-hour debates, three at the most, in the general election, and only in the traditional media-moderated format. Why would he agree to do anything different than George Bush did in 2004 and 2000, or Bill Clinton in 1996 and 1992? And while Gingrich would still out-debate Obama in those formats, so too would Rick Santorum or Mitt Romney. Obama’s not really that good at debates; John McCain was just worse at them.
On “winning” debates with the media, that’s even more of a fantasy. Gingrich certainly would win with conservatives, but the media will take those kinds of attacks and turn them into either (a) pandering or (b) paranoia. It will be fun to watch for conservatives, and it might produce a few surprises, but it’s more likely to add to Gingrich’s negatives among the general electorate than improve them. And his negatives are pronounced even among Republicans, as today’s Rasmussen poll in Florida shows even while he leads.
I agree with his final argument, though. With the economy in as bad a shape as it is — and with perceptions of it still driving the election — Gingrich has a good chance of beating Obama. However, so does Mitt Romney, and current polling (taken well before South Carolina, though) shows Romney more likely to do so than Gingrich, and even Rick Santorum could probably beat Obama. That actually argues against the debates having much of an impact on the election in this cycle. This election will be a referendum on Obama much more than a love affair with a Republican alternative, so a couple of debates probably won’t have much impact at all. If the economy stays poor this year, voters will want to give Obama the heave-ho. The best chance for victory would probably come with a candidate who can keep their negatives from overwhelming the Obama-referendum focus, and Gingrich might be the least likely of the three to accomplish that.









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: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »
You’re right. I’d forgotten that. Well, with that out of the way and in regard to the question of how we got here, I’d say a lot of our A team waved the white flag. They know who they are and we know who they are.
a capella on January 23, 2012 at 2:04 PM
…and so was Hitler.
timberline on January 23, 2012 at 2:04 PM
Tuna salad only! All-important Muslim sector won’t vote for a BLT or a ham sandwich.
Archivarix on January 23, 2012 at 2:05 PM
Didn’t Gingrich say something about “It isn’t because I’m a great debator” in his SC victory speech? And yet, yet…the ONLY thing he wants to do is debate. *Rolls eyes* That one-trick pony is getting old.
The commission on presidential debates already set up debates. His wanting to tack onto those debate is pointless. And if he thinks following around Obama chanting “debate me, debate me!” makes for good optics in a general election, he’s not as brilliant as he gives himself credit for being.
LiquidH2O on January 23, 2012 at 1:44 PM
the key there is ‘master debator’ :-)…and you are right, he’s not at all, he’s good at throwing red meat that works with the S Carolina-type voter…he surveys that type of crowd, determines what they want to hear, and gives it to them on a platter with absolutely no integrity. That’s Newt for ya…
jimver on January 23, 2012 at 2:06 PM
This man is not the conservative you think he is:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eyeB36ctO5I&feature=player_embedded
Swerve22 on January 23, 2012 at 2:06 PM
Rush is spot on today.
they lie on January 23, 2012 at 2:06 PM
So no pants, no kilts, what’s left? Depends®?
novaculus on January 23, 2012 at 2:08 PM
Mitt Romney has been running for President since 2006. Question,why is he so unprepared for attacks on his record?
celtic warrior on January 23, 2012 at 2:09 PM
Ron Paul’s finances are probably second to Robot Romney; he just sees no point in spending it on Florida where non-Repubs cannot vote and Repubs come in two flavors, red-meat and senile, none of which is predisposed to vote for Ron Paul. Moreover, he clearly doesn’t aim to win, but to grab just as much votes to become a kingmaker for the brokered convention. For that, he just needs a good showing in caucus states and grab-what-you-can in others.
Archivarix on January 23, 2012 at 2:11 PM
Yes.
Gingrich’s proposal isn’t to ask Obama politely for 7 debates, it’s to follow Obama around the country relentlessly like Lincoln did to Douglas after Douglas declined to debate, and rebut everything Obama says after he says it — for months on end.
That’s what Gingrich proposes to do, and that’s what Lincoln did.
Random on January 23, 2012 at 2:12 PM
Newt IS the man to defeat Obama in 2012.
Folks, if you don’t like the word “debate,” fine.
Substitute “campaigning” for it.
It’s all the same, whether a candidate is on stage with his opponent or not.
You have to know how to persuade people to be a leader.
Gingrich can do this (just ask those jealously criticizing his accomplishments).
Slick ads alone do not a winner make (Romney, take note).
And that’s all Romney has. He talks like a PolitiBot.
He is *not* convincing. I find his past work record weak at best.
Gingrich has the concrete achievements,
and the testicular fortitude to not only back them up,
but also to confront and defeat The Obama Machine.
UNLEASH GINGRICH IN 2012!
Czar of Defenestration on January 23, 2012 at 2:13 PM
The so-called “true” conservatives are stroking their anger organs again and that won’t be very convincing for those damnable moderate independents who are the ones who actually decide elections.
rhombus on January 23, 2012 at 2:14 PM
Yeah, it’s a real mystery.
tommyhawk on January 23, 2012 at 2:14 PM
Because the only voters who buy them are:
- those who are victim of resentment and envy over others personal success
- those to whom politics is more of an arena to show anger and emotions than a path to advance policies by winning elections
- bigots
That’s why most attacks you read here aren’t on Romney’s record or policy positions but on his wealth and the fact he “isn’t angry enough with Obama!” (and sporadically on his religion).
There’s no point in being prepared to answer to attacks that are directed to the type of people who are vulnerable to this type of attack.
joana on January 23, 2012 at 2:14 PM
Unzip your Gingrich?
Archivarix on January 23, 2012 at 2:15 PM
unlike in S Carolina where the Reps come in just one flavor, the ’20-points-IQ-drop type :-)…reminds me what James Petigru, one of S Carolina politicians once remarked, “South Carolina is too small for a republic and too large for an insane asylum.” Looks like it still is :-)…
jimver on January 23, 2012 at 2:16 PM
Welfare reform would not have been possible without Bill Clinton. True enough, upon taking Dick Morris’ advice, Clinton embraced the issue so that he could broaden his appeal beyond the Democratic base–a crucial tactic since he had lost much of the middle in the HillaryCare debacle-but Clinton’s motivations don’t alter the result. So it wasn’t Gingrich riding into town and single-handedly facing down the Washington Establishment.
Gingrich also overplays his hand when he talks about ‘working with Reagan’ during the Cold War. He didn’t.
Gingrich also claimed to teach generals and admirals the art of war. He didn’t. (Don’t believe me, read any one of Gingrich’s histories. We’re not talking blindingly brilliant strategic insight here. Let me put it this way: he’s not the second coming of Liddell-Hart.)
Newt has also compared himself favorably to Churchill, Thatcher, and Reagan. What kind of person makes those kinds of comparisons about themselves? Oh, yeah, that’s right: our current President does that sort of thing, too. You find that reassuring?
troyriser_gopftw on January 23, 2012 at 2:16 PM
Lead-lined 80′s era leg warmers, to keep the government mind-control waves that are transmitted through the ground from reaching your brain.
They work, I’m wearing a pair right now.
Bishop on January 23, 2012 at 2:17 PM
Y’all have probably heard the term “The Long Game” when referring to 0bama’s re-election campaign. A long game is predicated on an opponent being utterly predictable. When Palin dropped out, the Donks have predicted Romney. A large component of OWS was injecting the meme about 99 percent and 1 percent, Wall Street “banksters” and other such ideas. This was done before most people could even really associate it with 0bama’s political campaign, even though 0bama’s people were hip deep in OWS.
0bama was preparing the ground for a predicted run against Mitt Romney. The way to throw off a long game is to become unpredictable. The Democrats can throw their usual attacks at Gingrich, but they can’t go back 6,9,12 months and prepare the electorate with memes unfavorable to Gingrich.
Sekhmet on January 23, 2012 at 2:18 PM
This has to be quoted. All of you should read this.
Romney droids believe the MSM has no stake in the election, is absolutely impartial and shouldn’t be addressed.
That’s the best inditement you would ever read of the deluded, out of touch GOP elite which believes the election could be won just by being nice and cozy to everyone.
Masih ad-Dajjal on January 23, 2012 at 2:18 PM
True, but since we have them, why not win them?
Cleombrotus on January 23, 2012 at 2:18 PM
Latest national poll
29% favorable impression of gingrich
60% unfavorable impression of gingrich
He maybe able to debate, but unfortunately he can’t make people like him.
BTW, I’d like to see these numbers on the gingrich’s wife as well.
Good luck Newt.
rubberneck on January 23, 2012 at 2:20 PM
Is there a hidden message somewhere in your post or is there a tinge of jealousy and resentment buried somewhere in your low self-esteem.
Like I always say; if you need to resort to personal vitriol, then you’ve lost your argument and your credibility in other peoples’ eyes.
timberline on January 23, 2012 at 2:21 PM
Now that conjures up some scarey imagery. Doesn’t that leave some stuff, you know, hanging out?
Or does a raincoat come with it?
novaculus on January 23, 2012 at 2:21 PM
I just wrote this on another thread that was dying. I don’t understand why moderates would not like Newt. Moderates tend to be socially liberal, so I don’t see why Newt’s personal past would bother them, they gave Clinton a pass.
As far as Newt’s policies, he will put America’s interests first. He will push to eliminate issues that are preventing job creation by small businesses. He will allow for the use of our nation’s own energy resources. He will not bow to political correctness in our schools. And he will have no problem articulating the reasons why Obama’s policies have failed dramatically.
Rose on January 23, 2012 at 2:22 PM
I think it’s entirely possible BHO could skip the debates, and go on an Oprah moderated tour of town halls and do fine with his supporters.
I am not aware of any requirement that would compel anyone to have to attend these. It might not be smart to skip them, but attendance isn’t mandatory.
More like 6 – 19: “as George Will noted, since 1994, Mitt Romney is 6-19 in elections where his name was on the ballot.”
Difficultas_Est_Imperium on January 23, 2012 at 2:22 PM
I’m not finding anything objectionable in this.
Random on January 23, 2012 at 2:22 PM
I still think Willard will win FL for some reason
liberal4life on January 23, 2012 at 2:23 PM
Got a link to this “poll”, or are you expressing an opinion?
You know what they say about opinions. They’re like dupas. We all have them and they all stink.
timberline on January 23, 2012 at 2:24 PM
So what does President Gingrich do in office? When one of his big ideas hit a snag in congress does he debate the Speaker, the Majority leader? Debate Ahmahdinejad over Iran nukes? Putin and Hu? Who does he debate to get the economy working? I can’t wait!
/
cartooner on January 23, 2012 at 2:25 PM
I noticed that NOT being able to debate can sure unmake one pretty quick!
cartooner on January 23, 2012 at 2:27 PM
LOL! That would mean no arguments are won and there is little credibility on HA. Try again.
a capella on January 23, 2012 at 2:28 PM
Yes, Gallup has Newt at -20fav and Mitt at -1fav, while the same Gallup has Newt and Mitt at exactly the same position vs Obama.
Newt is able to match Mitt against Obama, even when the -19fav difference. Romney is unable to beat Obama even when his favs are higher than Obama’s and much higher than Newt’s.
Now, what’s the logical conclusion? Do enlighten us.
Masih ad-Dajjal on January 23, 2012 at 2:28 PM
Because you want to. Your boy is only prepared for him. The wrench is now on his knees.
Schadenfreude on January 23, 2012 at 2:28 PM
All he has to do is make you dislike Obama more.
Or, at the very least, keep reminding you why you dislikke him in the first place.
Cleombrotus on January 23, 2012 at 2:29 PM
IT’S ALL OUT WAR
EXCERPT: “I’m quickly becoming fatigued with so-called conservative websites that are trying to push their candidate as if we care who they support. Just give me the good, bad and ugly and let me make up my own mind. Stop trying to manipulate me with your misleading headlines, so called opinions (some of the articles I have read are truly just propaganda swill) and telling only half the story.”
from: http://iowntheworld.com/blog/?p=115452
Link to more: http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2012/01/22/we-know-whats-coming-time-to-fix-bayonets/#more-30601
Czar of Defenestration on January 23, 2012 at 2:32 PM
Wait…. Isn’t the soundtrack to that ad from one of the Transformers movies?
Deep Thought on January 23, 2012 at 2:32 PM
He has, alas, the exact opposite effect on more moderate people :(…
jimver on January 23, 2012 at 2:32 PM
I know a few moderate women who are still outraged over the statement about women getting diseases in foxholes. I’m not going to condemn him or defend him on that but it’s just another “shock-jock” type statement that Newtie is famous for that sometimes stays with people for a long, long time.
rhombus on January 23, 2012 at 2:32 PM
BTW, how does Newt plan to big “Call Out?” of Obama?
Crony? No – who’s a bigger crony insider than newt?
Obamacare? No – he supports the individual mandate…obama will laugh in his face. (romney as well)
Taxes? No – he’s already lit the fire with Bain with his populist argument. IMO, great for his primary fight…horrible for the general. Obama’s gonna say were are both on the side of the 99%.
Leadership? No – oops…not when you got kicked out of the house and job.
Morality/Ethics? Let’s not even venture to this spot…it’s all down hill.
Foreign Policy? Nope. Obama has the upper hand on this. He got Bin Laden, amongst other terrorists.
Immigration? Nope…already supports some a form amnesty.
Go Nuclear on moderator? That would not be smart sitting next to the president.
So newts gonna throw out a 100 ideas and thrill us all with his accumen. Personally, it will be interesting theatre, but Obama 55-45.
PS. I will vote for Newt, and hold my nose in the process…unlike the childish romney haters who refuse to vote for him.
rubberneck on January 23, 2012 at 2:33 PM
I don’t understand why moderates would
notlike Newt. Rose on January 23, 2012 at 2:22 PMjimver on January 23, 2012 at 2:33 PM
Ha, excellent point. I suppose he can yell at CNN while trying to get a bill passed, too.
changer1701 on January 23, 2012 at 2:33 PM
There won’t be any problems with Congress. McConnell will be the Senate Majority Leader and Boehner or Cantor will be the Speaker.
America will have spoken November 6, 2012.
timberline on January 23, 2012 at 2:34 PM
True dat. Berry true dat.
Cleombrotus on January 23, 2012 at 2:34 PM
That Romney has room to grow while Gingrich is as good as done. That’s the entire point of personal popularity – it’s a good metric for potential. When a candidate has a +50% unfav, you know there’s a very good chance he will never be able to win a majority. The only chance is if his voters hate his opponent even more – see how Harry Reid was re-elected for example.
joana on January 23, 2012 at 2:34 PM
ONe more thing for the taxes part…he list the fire with the Ryan/Social engineering thing. That will come into play.
rubberneck on January 23, 2012 at 2:34 PM
Why would someone choose food stamps over a paycheck? Of course any member of a disadvantaged group should want opportunities to work, and that includes all races. But the reason I would see for him pointing out the African American communities is that these are the people who reliably vote for Democrats and they have done nothing for them.
Rose on January 23, 2012 at 2:34 PM
There….all fixed and shiny.
timberline on January 23, 2012 at 2:36 PM
And these guys worked out so well for Charlie, didn’t they?
Flora Duh on January 23, 2012 at 2:36 PM
Do you have any idea of the long term effects of making the partisanship of the major media a national issue would be?
If that was the sole accomplishement of a Gingrich administration, it would outweigh everything the Contract With America ever did.
It is, without a doubt, one of our biggest internal problems and one upon which rests so many other problems.
An ill or mis-informed electorate is the one thing preventing any meaningful change from occurring. Period.
Cleombrotus on January 23, 2012 at 2:37 PM
So newts gonna throw out a 100 ideas and thrill us all with his accumen.
rubberneck on January 23, 2012 at 2:33 PM
you mean like the one to build a permanent lunar colony to exploit the moon’s resources :-)…so much for acumen, eh :-)…
jimver on January 23, 2012 at 2:37 PM
This cultural bigotry is Mittens is losing. Are you going to say the same thing about Floridians when he gets his head handed to him there?
Bill C on January 23, 2012 at 2:38 PM
Newt is running against Romney with demagoguery and making the politics of resentment.
He’ll run against Obama by saying there’s a conspiracy from the press against him and explaining why the fine he paid for Ethics violation doesnt’ matter, why his admission that he mislead the House Committee doesn’t matter because even though he signed the documents someone else wrote them (the Ron Paul newsletters excuse), how his lack of any executive experience doesn’t matter, how the fact he made millions as a lobbyist doesn’t matter and so on.
What can go wrong?
joana on January 23, 2012 at 2:39 PM
Romney can’t debate…at best, he the same as McCain. Newt mops the debate floor with Obama…10 times more than Hillary did. That’s noticeable!
No one can do to the media what Newt does to them. He taunts them and they are frozen…the examples are too numerous to list here. They are still trying to counter Newt’s Alinsky and Obama challenge from yesterday, but not to Newt’s face.
I’ll vote for Obama before ever voting for Romney…I dislike the lukewarm politics of socialism, and choose communism over it. Romney couldn’t even beat McCain…simple as that!
Karmi on January 23, 2012 at 2:39 PM
with people like ed knowing what he doesn’t know man would have never ventured out of his cave. this column is like most “expert “columns base on fear. romney is the safe choice. the people are that are backing romney the establishment are afraid of newt bringing them down.that’s rich ! the people with the approval rating of a sh!t sandwich are worried about newt’s favorables.
rik on January 23, 2012 at 2:39 PM
I think Obama and Romney are decent people.
I already dislike Obama…not the person, but his policies. I can get beyond someone’s politics and still like them. As for Newt. I dislike him immensely. I dislike his character. I dislike his ego. He completely lacks any charisma. I dislike his cheating gold bricking tiffany loving wife.
Nothing is gonna change that…Newt is who he is.
rubberneck on January 23, 2012 at 2:40 PM
Let’s be honest, Newt IS the only candidate who can stare down both Obama and his liberal cohorts in the media. Newt is second to none in debates, and can more than hold his own in any interview setting. I’m sincerely hoping that after Newt wins Florida (and he will), Santorum will bow out gracefully and we can forge ahead with an all-out united, conservative effort to finish off Romney and ultimately defeat Obama.
jfs756 on January 23, 2012 at 2:42 PM
wishful thinking, much? :-)…
jimver on January 23, 2012 at 2:42 PM
The better question is why won’t Romney fight for anything? Probably because he doesn’t believe in anything.
Bill C on January 23, 2012 at 2:43 PM
Hilarious
Brian Brown, the president of the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) today congratulated GOP presidential contender Newt Gingrich on his victory in the South Carolina primary.
http://www.nationformarriage.org/site/apps/nlnet/content2.aspx?c=omL2KeN0LzH&b=5134145&ct=11599627¬oc=1
Dave Rywall on January 23, 2012 at 2:44 PM
.
So why is team oblunder trashing Mitts and rooting for Newter in FL ?? Hmmmm – Reverse psychology ?? your “logic” is debunked here
.
(Courtesy of HA)
.
The Dims want the master debter Newton.
FlaMurph on January 23, 2012 at 2:45 PM
lolwut.
Abby Adams on January 23, 2012 at 2:45 PM
Newt is a narcissist, we’ve seen the damage a narcissist can do over the past 4 years.
V7_Sport on January 23, 2012 at 2:46 PM
Mmmm…no, joana, Romney has no room to grow. He maxed out, reaching the highest favorables a candidate can have while still polling badly vs Obama. He’s the dead end candidate. Everyone thinks he’s nice, nobody thinks he’s presidential material.
Masih ad-Dajjal on January 23, 2012 at 2:47 PM
Beating up on Juan Williams and John King is the equivalent of waiving something shiny in front of a toddler to distract him from the shot going into his rump. I can’t believe that people are buying it.
V7_Sport on January 23, 2012 at 2:49 PM
Wow, I just heard this ad on my local radio station during the Rush show. It is actually a pretty good ad.
karenhasfreedom on January 23, 2012 at 2:50 PM
And they wanted Reagan. Carter probably feared John Anderson.
You don’t get it. The U.S.A. is a center right nation and Obama is a socialist. There is no way Obama is going to win reelection so whether our candidate is Newt or Mittens, we win. This nomination process is about the soul of the Republican party. Conservatives are trying to win it back.
I take that back. You do get which is why the Mittbots are lying through your teeth.
Bill C on January 23, 2012 at 2:50 PM
The narcissist in chief did win. So by your logic, Newt is the man to beat Obama.
angryed on January 23, 2012 at 2:52 PM
Right on all three counts!
jfs756 on January 23, 2012 at 2:53 PM
Don’t you know nuthin’? When a RINO loses it’s because the knuckle dragging toothless hicks didn’t support him. National Review told me so. Therefore it is true.
angryed on January 23, 2012 at 2:53 PM
.
Its good to know it can work both ways- at least for a little while. Never pick a fight with anyone who buys ink by the barrel or pixels by the gazillions ?
FlaMurph on January 23, 2012 at 2:55 PM
OLD MITTBOT: Anyone who doesn’t love Mittens is a Mormon hating idiot.
NEW MITTBOT: Anyone who doesn’t love Mittens is a toddler.
I’m not sure if this is an improvement or not.
angryed on January 23, 2012 at 2:55 PM
and Romney?!?
* What a Romney-Obama debate would be like:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mv078A36t7Y&feature=player_embedded
Czar of Defenestration on January 23, 2012 at 2:55 PM
As usual, Ed is dead on here. You may not like to hear it, but Newt would not crush Obama in the type of debate that would actually happen and would probably clinch the election for The One. The evidence is clear:
talktozig on January 23, 2012 at 2:55 PM
and Romney?!?
* What Huntsman had to say about him a week ago
http://electad.com/videos/jon-huntsman-mittstant-replay/
Czar of Defenestration on January 23, 2012 at 2:55 PM
and Romney?!?
* What McCain had to say about him in 2008
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=IS33Hkgnls4
Czar of Defenestration on January 23, 2012 at 2:55 PM
LOL! That would mean no arguments are won and there is little credibility on HA. Try again.
a capella on January 23, 2012 at 2:28 PM
timberline on January 23, 2012 at 2:56 PM
and Romney?!?
* Liberal Mitt’s Greatest Hits (long, but worth it)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7OQoBxZZPqU&feature=player_embedded
Czar of Defenestration on January 23, 2012 at 2:56 PM
talktozig on January 23, 2012 at 2:57 PM
talktozig on January 23, 2012 at 2:55 PM
Yeah…that’s the sort of “evidence” I expect from a Romney supporter.
Czar of Defenestration on January 23, 2012 at 2:57 PM
Not sure why the “link” won’t work: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/01/the_myth_of_newt_the_great_debater.html
talktozig on January 23, 2012 at 2:58 PM
The Mittens brigade is missing the big picture (quel surprise).
It’s not that Newt took on Juan Williams about his divorces. It’s that he didn’t back down like a little girl when confronted the way John McRomney did and will. He stood his ground and went on the offensive.
That’s what people like. Not the fact he “berated” a member of the MSM. They compare it to 2008 and the way McCain sat by and watched the MSM destroy him and Palin without a peep from McCain’s campaign in defense of them.
With Newt you know that shit will not happen. You know he will not play the MSM gotcha game. And he will not be afraid to go on offense against Obama.
angryed on January 23, 2012 at 2:58 PM
.
Dude- Get a grip ! I just linked an article posted on HA. I didnt write the damn thing ! Its from team obie trashing Mitts – using SC etc. So it would appear to be helping Newter. What is so hard to get ?
FlaMurph on January 23, 2012 at 2:58 PM
Hey Newt they don’t plan on debating you. Then what are you going to do?
steveracer on January 23, 2012 at 2:59 PM
That’s where you’re making your first mistake. Don’t know about Romney, I suspect he IS a decent person, nothing indicates otherwise, but Obama is NOT a decent person. He has the character flaws of a professional shyster who’s been doing it so long he believes his own act now.
True, Gingrich is a ton of character flaws rolled into one glorious package – BUT – he doesn’t hate the fundamental premise the country is founded on and he DOES NOT want to fundamentally change it.
Cleombrotus on January 23, 2012 at 3:00 PM
Just a crazy thought, but what if the court case in GA gains traction and the dems have to quickly find a new candidate (as in Hillary). I know it’s crazy, but we have to think outside of the box. I know it’s off topic, but at least it’s a break from Newt vs. Romney.
mr.idaho on January 23, 2012 at 3:01 PM
They’d be foolish to give him THAT as an issue.
Cleombrotus on January 23, 2012 at 3:02 PM
Let’s hope it’s the beginning of a larger strategy.
Cleombrotus on January 23, 2012 at 3:04 PM
it’s ‘quelle surprise’ actually…surprise est feminine :-)…
jimver on January 23, 2012 at 3:05 PM
Newt is a disaster waiting to happen if he becomes the nominee – it’ll guarantee 4 more years of Obama. You can’t beat Obama just by getting the southern hick vote – you need independents and some democrats.
The Newt factor changes this election from being a referendum on Obama to do we want someone who’s been charged with corruption in Washington and forced to resign put in the White House.
The only reason Newt has had a chance in this election is anti-Mormon bigotry within the Republican base.
If Mitt Romney were a Catholic/Baptist/Evangelical – this election would be sown up already as he would have won the first 3 contests running away.
joncoltonis on January 23, 2012 at 3:05 PM
I haven’t yet read all of the comments on this thread, but from what I have read here – and from other threads on the topic – there seems to be an assumption that if Newt is the nominee, he won’t change his strategy in the general election.
People who argue that “He can’t run against the media!” or “Of course he’s doing well – he’s playing to a red-meat crowd!” aren’t considering the possibility that he will not be campaigning the same way if running against Obama.
Why assume that?
Newt has a lot of negatives, but being stupid is not one of them.
Just Sayin on January 23, 2012 at 3:06 PM
That article was immediately called out for the piece of trash it is and deftly refuted HERE:
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/01/its_time_for_the_bull_in_the_china_shop.html
Czar of Defenestration on January 23, 2012 at 3:06 PM
Stupid frogs. What do they know :)
angryed on January 23, 2012 at 3:06 PM
Didn’t Gingrich earlier say that any of the Republican candidates could beat Obama? My, how things change when they need to change.
Seixon on January 23, 2012 at 3:07 PM
Who changes their mind because of a debate between nominated candidates?
The undecided “moderates” who know nothing, care about nothing, stand for nothing, and will fall for anything.
Is Newt’s BS mojo better than Hussein’s BS Mojo with this group? I doubt it very much.
borntoraisehogs on January 23, 2012 at 3:08 PM
Reagan had the fundamentals on his side both times.
He used debates to refute the two arguments Democrats used against him: that he was crazy in 1980, and that he was too old in 1984.
Gingrich hasn’t shown that he can be that charming.
Mister Mets on January 23, 2012 at 3:09 PM
He must not read HotAir threads.
Cleombrotus on January 23, 2012 at 3:09 PM
To those whiny Romneyites crying that Gingrich is “anti-capitalist”:
FROM: http://iowntheworld.com/blog/?p=115452
Gingrich didn’t attack capitalism, he attacked the practices at Bain, which DOES include some very undesirable practices.
Here is an anecdote about a PE firm -
___PE’s sole goal is to maximize return for their investors which simply means that they need to raise the value of an asset by whatever they deem necessary or expedient. My experience with a pe outfit (not Bain) involved their acquisition of a small eastern pa manufacturing facility with a 120 person workforce. The company had been in operation for twenty years and had a niche role in providing fixtures to retailers. The Company was making a small profit and was not in debt. After its acquisition, the PE firm loaded up on debt and tried to expand market share with no real results. After not being able to grow the business, the PE guys closed up shop and fired all the workers failing to follow large plant termination rules under the WARN Act and deciding they weren’t on the hook for unpaid wages, OT and accrued vacation.__
This should be attacked before Obama attacks it. No problem here with what Gingrich did.
Czar of Defenestration on January 23, 2012 at 3:09 PM
..that’s been deconstructed already. It’s BS; an ODS wet dream, watching him squirm when Newter follows him from stump to stump.
But it will NEVAH, EVAH happen.
The truth is that the knee-pad wearing, tongue-bathing LSM will still be in the tank for Obama like crazy. If Gingrich is trailing — which he figures to be when the general campaign starts — the press will make him out to be a desperate, desperate man.
And that ain’t gonna be pretty.
The War Planner on January 23, 2012 at 3:11 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »