Tough new Gingrich ad: “What kind of man?”

posted at 4:20 pm on January 27, 2012 by Allahpundit

So psyched is Team Newt about this spot that they started pushing it to the media this morning before the vid was even done, sending around the script instead. It’s good, but the image of Romney as a ruthless, slippery politician who’ll say whatever he has to in order to win is, I fear, already priced into his stock. In fact, just as this ad hit YouTube, BuzzFeed came up with yet another example:

The campaign makes a practice of whitewashing transcripts and stories before circulating to the press, a practice that has become familiar to reporters covering the candidate.

For example, last Monday, during a press call with Tim Pawlenty, a Miami Herald reporter asked the campaign surrogate about Romney’s investments in Freddie Mac…

Pawlenty punted on the question–saying that he’d “have to ask the campaign to follow up with you.” But when the Romney press shop e-mailed out a transcript of the call later that day, the exchange was nowhere to be found…

The cherry-picking extends to the news and opinion articles the campaign forwards to reporters as well.

Remember, this is a guy whose very first attack ad against Obama late last year was built around a ridiculously out-of-context quote. If you nominate Romney, that’s what you’re getting. The thing is, conservatives want him to be this way in the general against O, right? One of the sorest spots on the right about the 2008 campaign was the sense that McCain didn’t hit Obama as hard as he could; that fear persists with Mitt because he dutifully concedes The One’s good intentions whenever he’s asked, which irritates the hell out of the “Obama is evil” crowd but is defensible strategy in appealing to undecideds who don’t hate Obama the way many grassroots righties do. Maybe we shouldn’t fear that Romney will go easy on O, though. Like Obama himself, Mitt tends to play the nice guy on the stump while letting his ad team and other surrogates be as cutthroat as they need to be with his opponents. He does what he thinks he needs to do to win, which is alienating if you’re a Newt fan but maybe not so alienating if you’re a Republican who’s most interested in ousting O. All of which is to say, while this spot does a nifty job of making Romney less likable, I’m not sure that the big conclusion on electability is true.

Besides, how receptive are voters really to attacks on a politician’s honesty? It’s like attacking a pol for influence peddling: In exceptional cases it might matter (the Freddie Mac fingerpointing between Mitt and Newt is exceptional because of Freddie’s role in the housing crisis and wider recession), but to some degree voters cynically expect that behavior. Exit question: How much of an effect can any one ad have at this point when Romney’s outspending Newt by this much?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 5

all i know is, there’s a huge anti-romney backlash a-brewing in florida. the drudge and nro types on the net, mittens’ ads on tv, crazy whining stories in the papers…

i think mittens wins by just by a few, people are souring on mr “you dont have a choice im inevitable”

pamplonajack on January 27, 2012 at 4:23 PM

what i mean is, people are pushing willard SO HARD, that voters are starting to say… wait! WHY?

pamplonajack on January 27, 2012 at 4:23 PM

Time to end this…already.

The Mormon will win

liberal4life on January 27, 2012 at 4:24 PM

Patiently awaiting AP’s red meat thread on Romney’s “It’s not worth getting angry about” gaffe.

Christien on January 27, 2012 at 4:25 PM

all i know is, there’s a huge anti-romney backlash a-brewing in florida. the drudge and nro types on the net, mittens’ ads on tv, crazy whining stories in the papers…

i think mittens wins by just by a few, people are souring on mr “you dont have a choice im inevitable”

pamplonajack on January 27, 2012 at 4:23 PM

Wishful thinking. Whatever gets you through the day…

cicerone on January 27, 2012 at 4:25 PM

HA! Gingrich is trying to win on character against Romney? Please. All I could think about while watching these piddily claims of Romney supposedly lacking Character is about how much worse Gingrich is on this issue (leaving wife 2 when diagnosed with disease, asking for open marriage, ethics violations, etc. etc.)

kmalkows on January 27, 2012 at 4:25 PM

Newt seems to becoming unhinged and it’s comical that he blamed his per performance on Romney’s lies.

Wish people we get behind Santorum if they don’t like Roney as Newt just seems like he’s going to lose it.

jonkk on January 27, 2012 at 4:26 PM

Not a man, but a mouse. A mouse with a swiss bank account. Gees, could Romney more of a stereotypical Republican.

Smedley on January 27, 2012 at 4:26 PM

Time to end this…already.

The Mormon will win

libtard4life on January 27, 2012 at 4:24 PM

You have a problem with him being Mormon?

cicerone on January 27, 2012 at 4:26 PM

Here’s my thing. A few months ago, you could easily say that the GOP primary is an argument over who is going to beat Obama in November.

Now it seems like the goal of the GOP primary is to make whomever wins an embarrassment to the party.

lorien1973 on January 27, 2012 at 4:27 PM

“It’s not worth getting angry about.” What else is there to know?

mooseygoosey on January 27, 2012 at 4:27 PM

At least one other group is play the anti-Romney game in Florida. The left-leaning labor union, AFSCME, has spent nearly $1 million on television ads hitting Romney, who is leading in the most recent polls in Florida.

Nice of the union to team up with Newt on Mitt.

changer1701 on January 27, 2012 at 4:27 PM

Those of us who are interested in finally getting rid of this blight on our country currently darkening the White House, want Romney.

Those with a completely delusional sense of what “conservative” is, who follow talk show hosts who talk about how great it would be to have a talk the talk “conservative” in the White House (we already have one, thank you), are for the Newtwit.

I’ll vote for either one to get rid of the pestilence in the Oval Office. What will the Newtwits do?

NoDonkey on January 27, 2012 at 4:27 PM

You have a problem with him being Mormon?

cicerone on January 27, 2012 at 4:26 PM

Sometimes he does, sometimes he doesn’t. This troll is unique in its cognitive dissonance.

lorien1973 on January 27, 2012 at 4:28 PM

Not a man, but a mouse. A mouse with a swiss bank account. Gees, could Romney more of a stereotypical Republican.

Smedley on January 27, 2012 at 4:26 PM

Apparently still too much for Newty and the rest of the paranoid posse to handle. “Panties in a wad?”

cicerone on January 27, 2012 at 4:28 PM

Those of us who are interested in finally getting rid of this blight on our country currently darkening the White House, want Romney.

Yes, but the point is what if Romney wins. So what? Do you seem doing anything positive for smaller government? If not, who cares if he wins or not.

lorien1973 on January 27, 2012 at 4:29 PM

What kind of man cheats on his wife, then dumps her to marry the woman he cheated with?

What kind of man then cheats on that wife, and dumps her to marry the next woman he cheated with?

If that man betrays and lies to the women he claims to love…how do we know he won’t do the same with the country he claims to love?

Gingrich. Slime.

I’m MadisonConservative, and I approve this message.

MadisonConservative on January 27, 2012 at 4:29 PM

Newt – the epitome of the “honest politician”

Yeah, OK.

Newt was called out on his dishonest on the immigration subject on stage for all to see, and he withered like a wilting daisy. That’s because Newt knew he was using dishonest attacks and didn’t expect Romney to come after him so forwardly about it.

So this is Newts response – get more butthurt and sling more mud.

Swerve22 on January 27, 2012 at 4:30 PM

[Romney] does what he thinks he needs to do to win, which is alienating if you’re a Newt fan but maybe not so alienating if you’re a Republican who’s most interested in ousting O.

Really? On what do you base this baseless assumption? I ask because on more conservative sites than this you have entire threads hundreds of comments deep of people swearing up and down that they will never, ever support Romney because of how he has treated other conservatives. (I will admit to adding my voice in support of this sentiment.)

I also ask because the polling in the last cycle suggests otherwise: Romney’s scorched earth tactics in that era ensured that the voters that his rivals losts because of Romney’s negative ads almost never went for Romney. What would be different now, I wonder?

casuist on January 27, 2012 at 4:30 PM

The thing is, conservatives want him to be this way in the general against O, right? One of the sorest spots on the right about the 2008 campaign was the sense that McCain didn’t hit Obama as hard as he could; that fear persists with Mitt because he dutifully concedes The One’s good intentions whenever he’s asked, which irritates the hell out of the “Obama is evil” crowd but is defensible strategy in appealing to undecideds who don’t hate Obama the way many grassroots righties do. Maybe we shouldn’t fear that Romney will go easy on O, though. Like Obama himself, Mitt tends to play the nice guy on the stump while letting his ad team and other surrogates be as cutthroat as they need to be with his opponents. He does what he thinks he needs to do to win, which is alienating if you’re a Newt fan but maybe not so alienating if you’re a Republican who’s most interested in ousting O.

Well, I hope some of you here are taking notes, since some of you like to keep fronting the myth that Romney has been a softie against Obama.

1.) He really hasn’t been. He’s been criticizing the president, and putting out ads against him, for MONTHS now.

and

2.) Just because he hasn’t been frothing at the mouth and labeling a socialist at every chance he can, doesn’t mean he’s a lightweight. Some of you will never understand this, because you can’t see outside your bubble, but really, why don’t you take a good look at Obama’s favorables, and then come back to the discussion. A great many people now firmly believe that Obama is either in over his head or doesn’t know what he’s doing / is doing a poor job……but that doesn’t mean that the same percentage of people HATE him like you do, or think he’s an evil, Manchurian-esque socialist / quasi-communist who goal all along was to gain power and willingly destroy the United States of America. “Obama is an evil socialist” isn’t a strategy that plays well with moderates / indies. “Obama is a well-meaning, but incompetent, buffoon” plays a lot better, and is a “nicer” way of saying that Obama is a “stuttering clusterf*** of a miserable failure.”

Vyce on January 27, 2012 at 4:30 PM

newt is the more aggressive word twister, what kind of man says he offered people to ABC to testify about what someone said on a phone while he was in bed with Callista and talking to marianne…and claims he has witnesses to say it is false…then withdraws that claim quietly the next week…

If this ad was released today, a lot of it is late, don’t you think? he already used most of these lines to no avail at last nights debate, where he was lackluster, and surprised that Mitt brought his own cheering squad. Shocking!

Newt sounds a lot like he is trying to win this election spouting Occupy Wallstreet slogans like Elizabeth Warren…also a rich elite college professor type…except not a glutton, and not, as far as we know a serial adultress.

Fleuries on January 27, 2012 at 4:30 PM

Allah –

The price of the media spend is nothing compared to the impact of a media spend – hence Romney’s 25% support, 12 months after spending millions.

Is this ad effective? I think so – being that “known failure of Romney on character” is, a well known factor. Newt’s opponents, including Romney and Dems are trying really hard to tear down Newt’s character – prime battlefield to hammer a point.

And lets not forget, that “think tank” behind the Romney campaign, millions in ad dollars included – are flunky McCain retreads who were also well funded and failed.

Odie1941 on January 27, 2012 at 4:30 PM

What kind of man cheats on his wife, then dumps her to marry the woman he cheated with?

What kind of man then cheats on that wife, and dumps her to marry the next woman he cheated with?

If you are the woman he cheated on his wife with, you shouldn’t be overly surprised to be the woman who gets cheated on later.

lorien1973 on January 27, 2012 at 4:30 PM

all i know is, there’s a huge anti-romney backlash a-brewing in florida. the drudge and nro types on the net, mittens’ ads on tv, crazy whining stories in the papers…

i think mittens wins by just by a few, people are souring on mr “you dont have a choice im inevitable”

pamplonajack on January 27, 2012 at 4:23 PM

That sounds like wishful thinking if the polls are any indication. I don’t even think that it’s because Mittens is worth a damn as a closer. It’s just that Newt is a horrible candidate. Romney’s gonna win this pretty much by process of elimination. Which leaves him as an uninspiring candidate who’ll basically be banking on the economy continuing to suck, the public not buying into Obama and the media trying to convince them otherwise, and the conservative base along with a majority of independents wanting to get rid of Obama so badly that they’ll pull the lever for anyone with an R after their name.

It’s not the most sound electoral strategery, but it might just work this time. It’ll be close though. And I don’t wanna imagine what folks like Huckster or even Palin are thinking right now after passing on 2012.

Doughboy on January 27, 2012 at 4:31 PM

JACKSONVILLE, Florida — If you read the emails from Mitt Romney’s campaign, there are no tough questions, no gaffes, no slip-ups: Everything’s going swimmingly.

The reason: The campaign makes a practice of whitewashing transcripts and stories before circulating to the press, a practice that has become familiar to reporters covering the candidate.

4 more of Obama, or 4-8 of this, and people will commit suicide.

Schadenfreude on January 27, 2012 at 4:31 PM

It only takes one ad for Newt to take a toll and hurt Romney permanently.

“It’s not worth getting angry about” Obamacare.

It reinforces Romney’s biggest negative and hits a majority across the board that didn’t want Obamacare shved down their throats.

It is also a much shorter ad (30 seconds max) that includes the awkward pause of several seconds after he made the statement and the audience was literally stunned he had said it.

This ad – forget it. This is trying to go back and win a moment when Newt stumbled – that moment has already passed.

PolAgnostic on January 27, 2012 at 4:32 PM

Newt has run the most dishonest campaign to date – his entire resurgence was based on him loudly lying while insulting John King which he later admitted.

Swerve22 on January 27, 2012 at 4:32 PM

Nice of the union to team up with Newt on Mitt.

changer1701 on January 27, 2012 at 4:27 PM

Nice to see AFSCME and the Tea Party joining together.

Vyce on January 27, 2012 at 4:32 PM

Just saw the Huckster on Cavuto. He’s saying that clip of him is totally out of context and he’s demanding that it be removed or the ad be pulled.

JPeterman on January 27, 2012 at 4:32 PM

If you are the woman he cheated on his wife with, you shouldn’t be overly surprised to be the woman who gets cheated on later.

lorien1973 on January 27, 2012 at 4:30 PM

100% agreed. Anyone with any common sense should avoid relying on a cheater.

MadisonConservative on January 27, 2012 at 4:33 PM

Yes, but the point is what if Romney wins. So what? Do you seem doing anything positive for smaller government? If not, who cares if he wins or not.

lorien1973 on January 27, 2012 at 4:29 PM

Romney’s a business man. He understands the value of the private sector. So why would he want to grow the government? Newty is the one that wants to grow the government to include a lunar colony.

cicerone on January 27, 2012 at 4:33 PM

I want a candidate that is the least likely to volunteer to shovel sh!t in Louisiana.

celtic warrior on January 27, 2012 at 4:33 PM

By the way, anybody wanna take bets that an urgent “crisis” comes up in October that LOLbama is so busy dealing with that he doesn’t have time to go to the debates?

Swerve22 on January 27, 2012 at 4:33 PM

100% agreed. Anyone with any common sense should avoid relying on a cheater.

MadisonConservative on January 27, 2012 at 4:33 PM

I’d pick the cheater over the guy who thinks government can force people to enter into a contract with another party.

But that’s me.

lorien1973 on January 27, 2012 at 4:34 PM

Time to end this…already.

The Mormon will win

liberal4life on January 27, 2012 at 4:24 PM

What’s the matter? You wanted Lady Gaga to perform at the inaugural ball instead of the Osmonds?

Kataklysmic on January 27, 2012 at 4:34 PM

If you are the woman he cheated on his wife with, you shouldn’t be overly surprised to be the woman who gets cheated on later.

lorien1973 on January 27, 2012 at 4:30 PM

You don’t have to be a woman to not trust the guy ever again.

Guy leaves his wife and family and he’s no friend of mine.

That’s conservative.

NoDonkey on January 27, 2012 at 4:34 PM

I just saw Huck saying that this ad was done without his permission and that he wished they would pull it down. His clip was from something last year and not about Mitt Romney…

d1carter on January 27, 2012 at 4:34 PM

what i mean is, people are pushing willard SO HARD, that voters are starting to say… wait! WHY?

pamplonajack on January 27, 2012 at 4:23 PM

What “people”? The Bilderberg Group? The Illuminati? The Reptilians?

Unless you mean Marco Rubio.

joana on January 27, 2012 at 4:34 PM

I’ve been surprised at the number of GOP voters I’ve spoken to here in Florida who are tired of Romney’s schtick where he acts sweet and innocent and allows his Super-PAC and others to butcher the other candidates.

The one comment everyone is gossiping about from the debate is the “It’s nothing worth getting angry about.” That was a killer even for some of my friends who were leaning toward Romney.

Many folks noticed when all these anti-Gingrich hit pieces came out on the same day.

shannon76 on January 27, 2012 at 4:34 PM

So why would he want to grow the government?

Would he shrink it?

Status quo is nice, until the status quo is out of hand.

lorien1973 on January 27, 2012 at 4:34 PM

100% agreed. Anyone with any common sense should avoid relying on a cheater.

MadisonConservative on January 27, 2012 at 4:33 PM

Yet here we are, with a serial cheater/liar lecturing us on “what kind of man” the other candidates are.

Swerve22 on January 27, 2012 at 4:34 PM

Right, this is already “priced in.” Play instead the Romneycare / “I’m a progressive” ad. This ad is pointless. This is also hurting our potential nominee. The Romneycare / ‘progressive’ ad does not go against the 11th commandment so much.

I am FOR Gingrich, but open deception has to be frowned upon. The 1992 Tsongas vote by Mitt was done to throw a monkey wrench into the Dem race, and Newt knows that. So this ad is openly deceptive, ironically.

This ad, causing classic ‘psychological reactance’ in me, almost makes me want to switch back again, to Mitt.

So drop this ad, Newt.

anotherJoe on January 27, 2012 at 4:35 PM

Elliott Abrams lied for Romney.

Schadenfreude on January 27, 2012 at 4:35 PM

I’d pick the cheater over the guy who thinks government can force people to enter into a contract with another party.

But that’s me.

lorien1973 on January 27, 2012 at 4:34 PM

I pick the guy who thinks the MA state government can mandate people to buy insurance over the guy who for decades defender that the federal government can do the same.

joana on January 27, 2012 at 4:35 PM

Nice to see AFSCME and the Tea Party joining together.

Vyce on January 27, 2012 at 4:32 PM

lol

cicerone on January 27, 2012 at 4:35 PM

NoDonkey on January 27, 2012 at 4:27 PM

this Newt backer .. former Perry backer… former Palin backer …. will vote for either mittens or Newt …. Ron Paul …. I will have to think long and hard on it …
heck at this point I will vote for a Ham sandwich with swiss and spicy brown mustard on it ….

conservative tarheel on January 27, 2012 at 4:35 PM

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black! Gingrich has a lot of cajones bringing up character about ANYBODY else in the race.

I’m not fond of Romney’s flip-flopping RINO ways, but Gingrich is a slime.

Common Sense on January 27, 2012 at 4:35 PM

I’d pick the cheater over the guy who thinks government can force people to enter into a contract with another party.

But that’s me.

lorien1973 on January 27, 2012 at 4:34 PM

Protip – the cheater thought the same thing and pushed for it for 20 years.

Swerve22 on January 27, 2012 at 4:35 PM

There was a whole segment on CNN about this ad exchange between Gingrich and Romney. Campaign people readily admitted the candidate often doesn’t see the ads. The overall point was Mitt turned that on Gingrich who had basically said what the Romney ad claimed. That was the point.

Huckabee also put out a statement disavowing use of his image or statement in this ad. This is also a 60 second ad – too bad Gingrich couldn’t manage to find a few seconds to note the usual “I approve this message” disclosure he is hitting Romney for in this ad.

This is a nothingburger.

msmveritas on January 27, 2012 at 4:36 PM

I’d pick the cheater over the guy who thinks government can force people to enter into a contract with another party.

But that’s me.

lorien1973 on January 27, 2012 at 4:34 PM

“Buy this or go to jail”

-Governor Mitt Romney

portlandon on January 27, 2012 at 4:36 PM

I pick the guy who thinks the MA state government can mandate people to buy insurance over the guy who for decades defender that the federal government can do the same.

joana on January 27, 2012 at 4:35 PM

Yeah, pick the guy who implemented the idea that not only can the government tax you for 40%, but they can also tell you how to spend the other 60%.

Rock on, conservatism.

lorien1973 on January 27, 2012 at 4:36 PM

The Plebs are going to walk into the booth in November and turn the blogs into a suicide watch. We field the five stooges.

Limerick on January 27, 2012 at 4:36 PM

Protip – the cheater thought the same thing and pushed for it for 20 years.

Swerve22 on January 27, 2012 at 4:35 PM

Only 2 people implemented it. can you name them?

lorien1973 on January 27, 2012 at 4:37 PM

Remember, this is a guy whose very first attack ad against Obama late last year was built around a ridiculously out-of-context quote. If you nominate Romney, that’s what you’re getting.

Sweet!

Go RBNY on January 27, 2012 at 4:37 PM

Newt, you should probably have something a little better than that ad and a nice shoeshine if you want to win FLA.

JohnGalt23 on January 27, 2012 at 4:37 PM

That sounds like wishful thinking if the polls are any indication. I don’t even think that it’s because Mittens is worth a damn as a closer. It’s just that Newt is a horrible candidate. Romney’s gonna win this pretty much by process of elimination. Which leaves him as an uninspiring candidate who’ll basically be banking on the economy continuing to suck, the public not buying into Obama and the media trying to convince them otherwise, and the conservative base along with a majority of independents wanting to get rid of Obama so badly that they’ll pull the lever for anyone with an R after their name.

It’s not the most sound electoral strategery, but it might just work this time. It’ll be close though. And I don’t wanna imagine what folks like Huckster or even Palin are thinking right now after passing on 2012.

Doughboy on January 27, 2012 at 4:31 PM

Can’t have it both ways.

After months of being told by Tea Party types that, essentially, Obama was so vulnerable he’d lose to a ham sandwich (an argument they made in order to prop up their own exceptionally weak candidates like Palin, Bachmann and Cain), they now turn around and say, “but Romney is a sure loser!”

Vyce on January 27, 2012 at 4:37 PM

Lord vs. Abrams

Schadenfreude on January 27, 2012 at 4:38 PM

conservative tarheel on January 27, 2012 at 4:35 PM

All I ask is that everyone votes the NoDonkey ticket.

Whoever can beat this worthless smoldering crapstack polluting the White House.

Because all else is folly.

Can I get an “Amen!”?

NoDonkey on January 27, 2012 at 4:38 PM

I’d pick the cheater over the guy who thinks government can force people to enter into a contract with another party.

lorien1973 on January 27, 2012 at 4:34 PM

The cheater boosted such a notion in a book he write a few years ago.

Regardless, it doesn’t matter what the cheater says they believe. They’re a cheat. If they’re a serial cheater, they’re comfortable with cheating. Gingrich is no more reliable than Romney. They’re both compulsive liars.

I’m voting “F**k the GOP” this year. I’ll never cast a vote for Obama, but I also won’t cast a vote for the sputum we’ve been left with.

MadisonConservative on January 27, 2012 at 4:39 PM

Only 2 people implemented it. can you name them?

lorien1973 on January 27, 2012 at 4:37 PM

Romney implemented a national mandate? He supported one like Newt? He didn’t have a veto proof legislature demanding single payer which he was able to talk down?

Swerve22 on January 27, 2012 at 4:39 PM

I’d pick the cheater over the guy who thinks government can force people to enter into a contract with another party.

But that’s me.

lorien1973 on January 27, 2012 at 4:34 PM

Let God sort out the rest.

Schadenfreude on January 27, 2012 at 4:39 PM

Sometimes he does, sometimes he doesn’t. This troll is unique in its cognitive dissonance.

lorien1973 on January 27, 2012 at 4:28 PM

I’m telling you… the original post doesn’t read exactly like a trotline that a highly-placed person in the ecclesiastical hierarchy, or a chess piece, would run out under his own name if he were around, which I read the old timers complaining that he isn’t?

de rigueur on January 27, 2012 at 4:39 PM

We have back to back one term POTUS’s…?

d1carter on January 27, 2012 at 4:39 PM

Great, a Swiss bank account president who wins with money not ideas, by relying on a cadre of nut cases like Drudge and the nitwits at the National Review to do the heavy lifting for him. Go ahead, elect Romney, Obamacare won’t be repealed, the debt will grow bigger, no tax reform, no attempt to revitalize federalism, only a go along to get along RINO whose only agenda is a second term. Sound familiar?

Smedley on January 27, 2012 at 4:39 PM

Now it seems like the goal of the GOP primary is to make whomever wins an embarrassment to the party.

lorien1973 on January 27, 2012 at 4:27 PM

I’m having a hard time believing they could be any more embarrassing. The more the people in D.C., who get their asses handed to them constantly, tell me who is the guy best choice, the more I want to push back. It may not be logical but it is what it is.

Cindy Munford on January 27, 2012 at 4:39 PM

Vyce on January 27, 2012 at 4:37 PM

Those “exceptionally weak candidates” were conservatives. Romney is not. Nor was McCain. That is why they lose.

MadisonConservative on January 27, 2012 at 4:39 PM

“Buy this or go to jail. It’s not worth getting mad about it.”

-Governor Mitt Romney

portlandon on January 27, 2012 at 4:36 PM

Fixed.

Christien on January 27, 2012 at 4:40 PM

Gingrich: Vote for me …I’m less of a lying a**hole!

The Ugly American on January 27, 2012 at 4:40 PM

cicerone on January 27, 2012 at 4:26 PM

Ignore. Is a sockpuppet for dough, or just for amusement. Is NOT a liberal.

Schadenfreude on January 27, 2012 at 4:40 PM

The desperation from the Gingrich camp is palpable. Does Newt really want to explore character, does he want people to start making that comparison even moer than they already do? They will be locked to anyone but Newt by the time the get to his second wife in his political timeline.

tpw on January 27, 2012 at 4:40 PM

MadisonConservative on January 27, 2012 at 4:39 PM

Then stay home and suck your thumb then.

Failure this time is not an option.

NoDonkey on January 27, 2012 at 4:40 PM

Would he shrink it?

Status quo is nice, until the status quo is out of hand.

lorien1973 on January 27, 2012 at 4:34 PM

Hell yeah he’ll shrink it. If all he did was cut out Obama’s creations that would be a start. But, of course, the question is disingenuous because it’s not completely up to the POTUS, is it? He has a role, but at the end of the day all he can do is to cut back within the executive branch and sign whatever legislation a GOP-controlled Congress sends him. We have got to take control of Congress as well as the White House.

cicerone on January 27, 2012 at 4:40 PM

That sounds like wishful thinking if the polls are any indication. I don’t even think that it’s because Mittens is worth a damn as a closer. It’s just that Newt is a horrible candidate. Romney’s gonna win this pretty much by process of elimination. Which leaves him as an uninspiring candidate who’ll basically be banking on the economy continuing to suck, the public not buying into Obama and the media trying to convince them otherwise, and the conservative base along with a majority of independents wanting to get rid of Obama so badly that they’ll pull the lever for anyone with an R after their name.

It’s not the most sound electoral strategery, but it might just work this time. It’ll be close though. And I don’t wanna imagine what folks like Huckster or even Palin are thinking right now after passing on 2012.

Doughboy on January 27, 2012 at 4:31 PM

That’s just it…this is a process of elimination field, and it’s extremely difficult to say that Gingrich would make the better nominee. I get not liking Romney, not wanting to cede the health care debate to Obama and so forth, but when you get down to it Romney has the better shot to win. Having a more conservative nominee doesn’t get you anywhere if they lose anyway (and end up hurting the down-ballot races in the process).

changer1701 on January 27, 2012 at 4:40 PM

What kind of man sends nasty leftover pizzas to the Obama campaign offices ? Mitt Romney , that’s who. (true story, kids)

runner on January 27, 2012 at 4:40 PM

Tough new Gingrich ad: “What kind of man?”

actually, this is a sorry attempt at an attack ad.. the ad uses the very distortions that it rails against…

I’d give it a solid C only because they didn’t use any video in the ad.. all still images.

gatorboy on January 27, 2012 at 4:40 PM

He didn’t have a veto proof legislature demanding single payer which he was able to talk down?

Swerve22 on January 27, 2012 at 4:39 PM

Only nixon could go to china. Liberals were unable to pass a mandate with a democrat governor, but did so with a republican one instead. Cuz him being a republican shut up the opposition. Good job, Mitt.

Romney implemented a national mandate?

He only set up the blueprint for it. Close enough for any sane person, I guess.

lorien1973 on January 27, 2012 at 4:41 PM

Newt should never make an ad about character, just like he shouldn’t talk about “three wives” in a debate.

Romney’s wife was diagnosed with MS in 1998.

Newt’s second wife was diagnosed with MS in 1999. Newt dumped her in 1999.

haner on January 27, 2012 at 4:41 PM

If Romney is our nominee. We lose.

Obama and his team have been planning their whole campaign against Romney because Republicans ALWAYS nominate the “next” in line. That would be Mitt. Therefore not long after Axlerod and Ploffe go back to Chicago to work on Obama’s re-election, we get OWS and 1% vs 99%. This has always been their strategy and it will work. Romney has shown he has a glass jaw and he is incapable of defending himself against Bain Capital charges and his taxes. He is incapable of defending capitalism in a way that is comprehensive and compelling. Mitt can not relate to the average American and they can’t relate to him.

If he is our nominee, we lose.

Rio2010 on January 27, 2012 at 4:41 PM

already priced into his stock

This.

Interesting that in what looks like a Huckster ad, Newt’s name is never voiced. Is Newt trying to snake Santy votes?

kunegetikos on January 27, 2012 at 4:41 PM

I’d pick the cheater over the guy who thinks government can force people to enter into a contract with another party.

But that’s me.

lorien1973 on January 27, 2012 at 4:34 PM

You do realize that Gingrich was defending the individual mandate as recently as December 2011, don’t you?

Or wait, perhaps you don’t.

I forget, we’ve entered into this new reality, wherein we completely ignore that Newt Gingrich supported or pushed for virtually all of the big-government / “Establishment” policies that supposedly make Romney so toxic, and wherein we have people like Sarah Palin whining about “rewriting history” when that’s EXACTLY what she and other Newt supporters are doing.

Talk about whitewashing. Geez.

Vyce on January 27, 2012 at 4:41 PM

Nice to see AFSCME and the Tea Party joining together.

Vyce on January 27, 2012 at 4:32 PM

Richard Trumpka approves this message.

JPeterman on January 27, 2012 at 4:41 PM

I’d pick the cheater over the guy who thinks government can force people to enter into a contract with another party.

But that’s me.

lorien1973 on January 27, 2012 at 4:34 PM

I’m curious…

What part of the US Constitution do you think gives the US Government the authority to tell the state of Massachusetts that it, as a sovereign state, is prohibited from requiring its citizens to carry health insurance?

JohnGalt23 on January 27, 2012 at 4:42 PM

And…this guy (Romney) is the guy many of you on here want to elect? Do you really think he’s the so-called conservative he claims to be? Folks, you’d better re-think this before it’s too late. Remember, the ultimate goal is to remove Obama from office, and Romney is definitely not the one to get that done.

jfs756 on January 27, 2012 at 4:42 PM

Hell yeah he’ll shrink it.

Romney has no history of shrinking government – when faced with opposition, he’ll go out of his way to make it as burdensome as possible. His own budget calls for like $20 billion in cuts in government. That’ll get us far.

lorien1973 on January 27, 2012 at 4:42 PM

After months of being told by Tea Party types that, essentially, Obama was so vulnerable he’d lose to a ham sandwich (an argument they made in order to prop up their own exceptionally weak candidates like Palin, Bachmann and Cain), they now turn around and say, “but Romney is a sure loser!”

Vyce on January 27, 2012 at 4:37 PM

That’s because most of the candidates the tea party (which I used to consider myself a part of) turn out to be worse than a ham sandwich.

Tea Party flubbed it this time. Cain, Bachmann, Ron, Perry – 4 credible candidates that they could have thrown in with if they didn’t think Romney was conservative enough – instead they chose to throw in with Newt Gingrich.

It’s like saying “I wish my hair was longer, so now I’m going to shave my head”.

Swerve22 on January 27, 2012 at 4:42 PM

NoDonkey on January 27, 2012 at 4:40 PM

I really love you idiots who talk tough to anyone who is refusing to vote for whatever milquetoast moderate the GOP craps out at the convention. It belies the fact that your “another Obama term will destroy this country” rhetoric gives Obama way too much credit and America way too little.

MadisonConservative on January 27, 2012 at 4:42 PM

JohnGalt23 on January 27, 2012 at 4:42 PM

So, in principle, you think a government has the power to tell people to enter into contracts with another party?

lorien1973 on January 27, 2012 at 4:42 PM

What kind of man sends nasty leftover pizzas to the Obama campaign offices ? Mitt Romney , that’s who. (true story, kids)

runner on January 27, 2012 at 4:40 PM

Wonder if it was Domino’s pizza (a Bain success story).

haner on January 27, 2012 at 4:42 PM

Huckabee is calling on Newt to pull the ad. He did not give him permission and he was not talking about Romney when he said what he said.

tbrickert on January 27, 2012 at 4:43 PM

I’ll give Newt credit for hutzpah, he’s the biggest liar ever to run for office yet he still has the ability to take things out of context and call another opponent a liar as if it’s somesort of disqualifier. Maybe they should ask Newt’s ex-wives if he is honest?

Tater Salad on January 27, 2012 at 4:43 PM

jfs756 on January 27, 2012 at 4:42 PM

And a serial adulterer with negatives off the charts is?

NoDonkey on January 27, 2012 at 4:43 PM

Newt’s second wife was diagnosed with MS in 1999. Newt dumped her in 1999.

haner on January 27, 2012 at 4:41 PM

Of course. Because MS suddenly makes a loveless marriage full of….love?

portlandon on January 27, 2012 at 4:44 PM

He only set up the blueprint for it. Close enough for any sane person, I guess.

lorien1973 on January 27, 2012 at 4:41 PM

The Dim-o-crats can talk about what “inspired” them all they want. The fact of the matter is that the issue at hand is OBAMACARE. It’s a 2,000-page turd sandwich and Obama will be forced to defend every single page of it.

cicerone on January 27, 2012 at 4:44 PM

Still confused as to why everyone one here claiming to be a “true/real” conservative is supporting Newt.

I could understand your position if you were backing Santorum or even Paul, but Newt has been anything but a small/limited government guy, and has been on the same side of many of the issues as Romney. Is talking back to moderaters during debates really that important to you?

kage on January 27, 2012 at 4:44 PM

Politifact says the “gutter” ad claim Romney’s camp made is “mostly true”.

I can’t believe Team Newt put that in this ad.

And is it me? The part about the blind trust is weird…sounded like they were saying, “Yeah, he has a blind trust…but he made OTHER money, too!”

And when I think Gingrich, I do not think “character”. I do think “What kind of man…” however.

This field sucks.

capitalist piglet on January 27, 2012 at 4:45 PM

MadisonConservative on January 27, 2012 at 4:42 PM

And not voting against Barry in the election is going to do what, exactly?

Because it worked so well when “conservatives” gave the House to the Democrats in 2006 and the White House to Barry in 2008.

Can we get over “sending messages” and focus on winning?

NoDonkey on January 27, 2012 at 4:45 PM

if this is all team Newt has got, its over.

gatorboy on January 27, 2012 at 4:46 PM

Having a more conservative nominee doesn’t get you anywhere if they lose anyway (and end up hurting the down-ballot races in the process).

changer1701 on January 27, 2012 at 4:40 PM

Well now, that’s “RINO”-squishin thinking, my friend.

As every good little true con will tell you, it’s perfectly okay, and in fact far more noble, to lose, and lose horribly, with the more conservative candidate, even if it also costs you control of Congress in the act, because that’s far more principled and preferable than to run and win with a “RINO”, who’s only slightly less evil than a liberal Democrat.

Even if it means Democrats taking control again, and being able to completely fulfill their destiny of transforming America into a failed European-style welfare state. Because as we all know, a few decades of that will have people BEGGING for true conservatives to take over.

Or something.

Vyce on January 27, 2012 at 4:46 PM

Besides, how receptive are voters really to attacks on a politician’s honesty? It’s like attacking a pol for influence peddling

You really don’t get it, AP. Voters who are looking for some shred of truth and honesty in the people they send to Washington do care. Both Newt & Mitt have made blunders in this campaign, but Mitt has Fox News in his corner spinning like crazy to answer every charge against him. Just like they did with Bolling bringing Huckabee on a few minutes ago. That pettiness reminds me of exactly why I didn’t vote for Huckabee last time around.

Newt has backed off his spin. Romney has continued his lies.

Mitt Romney has used not just normal political spin, but he has used outright lies about Newt since the beginning. Real lies. Outrageous lies about a man who has worked long and hard for this country. And it matters.

Connie on January 27, 2012 at 4:46 PM

Huckabee is calling on Newt to pull the ad. He did not give him permission and he was not talking about Romney when he said what he said.

tbrickert on January 27, 2012 at 4:43

PM

Not surprised:

Interesting that in what looks like a Huckster ad, Newt’s name is never voiced. Is Newt trying to snake Santy votes?

kunegetikos on January 27, 2012 at 4:41 PM

kunegetikos on January 27, 2012 at 4:46 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 5