Palin: Yes, I’d vote for Newt in Nevada to keep the race going

posted at 9:37 pm on January 31, 2012 by Allahpundit

She’s made this point about keeping the primaries going at least three times before, I believe. Has any Fox News reporter thought to ask her point-blank yet whether in theory that would mean encouraging people to vote for Romney if suddenly there were a big momentum shift and Newt started winning states? Somehow it’s hard for me to imagine that, but she should at least have a chance to answer. Also, what’s the endgame here? The idea is that the race should roll on because “competition breeds success.” Fair enough; in that case, presumably undecideds in any given state should vote for whichever candidate is behind at any given moment in order to extend the primary as long as possible. Is that correct, or are we looking at a shorter timeline? I’m skeptical that there are many Republicans who want this race to go all the way to the convention while Obama builds up his arsenal, but presumably most voters are happy to let it go on a while longer. How long is optimal? Super Tuesday? A bit longer than that? I’m asking earnestly. Click the image to watch.


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 4 5 6 7

Palin is a political idiot! It is clear that she could never participate successfully in a national primary, and proved that she doesn’t have the fortitude to finish a Governorship. I guess when Romney wins the GOP primary, she will encourage people to vote for Obama. I hope so, since her influence didn’t do Gingrich any good. Palin only runs her mouth to make money by keeping her job with Fox and trying to stay relevant by being controversial.

lhuffman34 on February 1, 2012 at 7:46 AM

tinkerthinker on February 1, 2012 at 7:03 AM

Exactly. You can tell by his campaign staff.

kingsjester on February 1, 2012 at 7:05 AM

I guess that’s where all the negative ads came from.

tinkerthinker on February 1, 2012 at 7:48 AM

Hearting that he will lose? I don’t.

tinkerthinker on February 1, 2012 at 6:54 AM

No silly. It’s heartening that so many losers think so.

MJBrutus on February 1, 2012 at 7:51 AM

Palin probably did the most to kill any hope of an anti-Romney candiate. She let her passionate followers dangle in their insistence that “oh yeah, she’s gonna run for sure” while she made hints, wrote books, did reality shows and then finally didn’t come through. When she left, the non-Romney vote was dispersed among a number of candidates and one by one they chewed each other up until not much was left but a grumpy old white guy playing the victim card.

I saw Palin’s appearance last night. She sounded disjoint and vague and perhaps a little tipsy. It wasn’t one of her most stellar performances. Being the “anti-Romney” has to stand for more than playing victim to a perceived vast moderate-wing establishment conspiracy. Maybe there’s a reason the establishment is established. Passion is all well and good and boy does it feel great but a candidate also needs organization, fund-raising abilities and discipline. That’s how you get “established”.

rhombus on February 1, 2012 at 7:56 AM

No silly. It’s heartening that so many losers think so.

MJBrutus on February 1, 2012 at 7:51 AM

It hearting to you to think many people don’t believe mitt will win, wow, that’s hearting.

tinkerthinker on February 1, 2012 at 8:00 AM

lhuffman34 on February 1, 2012 at 7:46 AM

Left wing talking points from last year? lol

tinkerthinker on February 1, 2012 at 8:03 AM

I think it is pretty apparent that the GOP Establishment wants a coronation, not a primary.

It is also apparent based on the Romney supporter comments here at HotAir that they know Romney will lose votes in the general election. They know he will not be supported by conservatives because he is a Rino liberal.

If he wins the primary, he’ll surely lose the general, and one big reason is that he burns bridges to the same voters he needs in the general. He and his people don’t get it. Palin gets it. She does not alienate voting groups. She knows that you CAN campaign hard without crossing the line with vicious attacks.

None of these four will do particularly well in the general election, but the worst is Romney because his record overlaps so much with Obama.

As much as I agree with Palin that this should not be a coronation, I don’t think the GOP leadership cares.

We nominate Mittens as the boring Rino placeholder like in 2008, we lose the general, but so what? Jeb Bush knows he will get his shot in 2016.

And let’s be honest, as bad as another term of Obama would be, we’d survive it. Obama cannot destroy this country. If we take the Senate, it will be difficult for him to ‘destroy’ the country anyway.

So quit with the lame talk of the world ending. It won’t. He’ll simply veto some of the GOP legislation they try to pass. Big deal. It will simply be gridlock, etc.

And if the new GOP Senate and the House water down legislation simply to say they passed something, that is their fault, not O’s.

We’ll survive Romney losing (and he will lose the general if he wins the primary), and we’ll survive another term of O.

KirknBurker on February 1, 2012 at 3:34 AM

I agree with this.

Aitch748 on February 1, 2012 at 8:04 AM

non-Romney vote was dispersed among a number of candidates and one by one they chewed each other up

Conservatives know exactly the machine behind destroying each and every “non-Romney”.

Gee, a lot of Palin bashing going on from the bots, and now she’s a secret alcoholic?!! Yes, his forces are out and Mittens sits on Fox News and smiles like a choirboy.

Come November he’ll be “where did the Conservatives go???!”

Marcus on February 1, 2012 at 8:04 AM

This woman Palin does not deserve the platform she has been given. The Fox News hosts kiss up to her like there’s no tomorrow, but that treatment is NOT deserved.

bluegill on February 1, 2012 at 4:58 AM

Somebody else said he wanted to wring Steve Schmidt’s neck just for introducing Palin to the world.

I’m just waiting for you Palin haters to start calling for a boycott of FOX until Palin’s contract is up.

Aitch748 on February 1, 2012 at 8:08 AM

Marcus on February 1, 2012 at 8:04 AM

I’m a victim, you’re a victim, wouldn’t you like to be a victim too? Nope, they’re in the other party.

rhombus on February 1, 2012 at 8:08 AM

We’ll survive Romney losing (and he will lose the general if he wins the primary), and we’ll survive another term of O.

KirknBurker on February 1, 2012 at 3:34 AM

I agree with this.

Aitch748 on February 1, 2012 at 8:04 AM

I do, too.

tinkerthinker on February 1, 2012 at 8:08 AM

I do, too.

tinkerthinker on February 1, 2012 at 8:08 AM

Same here.

DRayRaven on February 1, 2012 at 8:11 AM

Finders, keepers, losers, weepers, Mitt Romney never cries.

csdeven on February 1, 2012 at 8:14 AM

You guys need to quit being so pessimistic. Out of the remaining candidates, any one of them will beat Obama. In 2008 he was made out to be a god. In 2012 everyone knows he’s a reclusive, angry man with a radical agenda. Nothing has improved, and nothing will improve as long as he’s president.

Just remember Rome wasn’t built in a day. It took a long time to get where we are, and it’ll take a long time to go where we need to go. One step at a time. We need the Senate, the House and the presidency. Hang together.

darwin on February 1, 2012 at 8:16 AM

If you don’t use ridiculous and hypocritical logic to justify supporting the only corrupt politician in the race, you are the establishment. – Sarah Palin.

csdeven on February 1, 2012 at 8:16 AM

Finders, keepers, losers, weepers, Mitt Romney never cries.

csdeven on February 1, 2012 at 8:14 AM

You must’ve missed his South Carolina concession speech then. Pity. Homeboy was crying to high heaven about how mean they were to him.

RepubChica on February 1, 2012 at 8:18 AM

We’ll survive Romney losing (and he will lose the general if he wins the primary), and we’ll survive another term of O.

KirknBurker on February 1, 2012 at 3:34 AM

I agree with this.

Aitch748 on February 1, 2012 at 8:04 AM

I do, too.

tinkerthinker on February 1, 2012 at 8:08 AM

You have to believe it. Or there’s going to be a lot of people needing therapy on our side come November 2012. Like all the W haters who ended up in psychiatrist’s offices or (like Michael Moore) under the bed for days.

Marcus on February 1, 2012 at 8:18 AM

rhombus on February 1, 2012 at 7:56 AM

+1

csdeven on February 1, 2012 at 8:19 AM

Why don’t you go be a boohoo crybaby in a corner and let the other people like Romney do the heavy lifting in taking out Obama. Your type of person is good for nothing, as far as I’m concerned.

bluegill on February 1, 2012 at 5:24 AM

Your implicit support for Obama by working tirelessly to depress potential turnout for Romney is noted.

ElectricPhase on February 1, 2012 at 8:20 AM

We’ll survive Romney losing (and he will lose the general if he wins the primary), and we’ll survive another term of O.

KirknBurker on February 1, 2012 at 3:34 AM

I agree with this.

Aitch748 on February 1, 2012 at 8:04 AM

I do, too.

tinkerthinker on February 1, 2012 at 8:08 AM

I agree also.

dominigan on February 1, 2012 at 8:20 AM

Your implicit support for Obama by working tirelessly to depress potential turnout for Romney is noted.

ElectricPhase on February 1, 2012 at 8:20 AM

Your implicit support for Obama by working tirelessly to depress the conservative base turnout by selecting Romney is noted.

dominigan on February 1, 2012 at 8:21 AM

ElectricPhase on February 1, 2012 at 8:20 AM

dominigan on February 1, 2012 at 8:21 AM

Sorry about that. I misread the context of the original thread.

dominigan on February 1, 2012 at 8:23 AM

Your implicit support for Obama by working tirelessly to depress the conservative base turnout by selecting Romney is noted.

dominigan on February 1, 2012 at 8:21 AM

You’re new around here, I guess. I’ve been a vocal ABR guy going way back, but if he’s the nominee….

ABO trumps ABR

ElectricPhase on February 1, 2012 at 8:23 AM

RepubChica on February 1, 2012 at 8:18 AM

Hahaha….you may support a historian, but you don’t get to rewrite history.

JC Watts whined last night. Cain was just whining on Fox. And it appears that Gingrich didn’t even congratulate Romney.

Familiarity breeds contempt. And America is becoming all too familiar with the ingrained nature of Neutron Newt, the only admitted corrupt politician in the race.

csdeven on February 1, 2012 at 8:24 AM

Sorry about that. I misread the context of the original thread.

dominigan on February 1, 2012 at 8:23 AM

Ah, ok.

ElectricPhase on February 1, 2012 at 8:24 AM

Familiarity breeds contempt. And America is becoming all too familiar with the ingrained nature of Neutron Newt, the only admitted corrupt politician in the race.

csdeven on February 1, 2012 at 8:24 AM

How is Gingrich corrupt?

darwin on February 1, 2012 at 8:26 AM

Behind every good man, there is a good woman. Behind Mitt Romney, are defeated candidates.

csdeven on February 1, 2012 at 8:26 AM

Your implicit support for Obama by working tirelessly to depress potential turnout for Romney is noted.

ElectricPhase on February 1, 2012 at 8:20 AM

LOL

Night Owl on February 1, 2012 at 8:27 AM

How is Gingrich corrupt?

darwin on February 1, 2012 at 8:26 AM

Hahahahaha. I am not surprised that a Gingrich supporter has to ask that question.

csdeven on February 1, 2012 at 8:27 AM

Hahahahaha. I am not surprised that a Gingrich supporter has to ask that question.

csdeven on February 1, 2012 at 8:27 AM

I support anything that has an “R” on it somewhere. Man or beast, even a can of spam will do.

Now, you can answer the question.

darwin on February 1, 2012 at 8:30 AM

Familiarity breeds contempt. And America is becoming all too familiar with the ingrained nature of Neutron Newt, the only admitted corrupt politician in the race.

csdeven on February 1, 2012 at 8:24 AM

That’s a tad off the original subject. We were discussing Mitt’s palpable melancholy after the South Carolina primary. You said he doesn’t cry. The man does indeed cry. We all do.

RepubChica on February 1, 2012 at 8:32 AM

I am not surprised that Romney supporters see a Romney victory solely as an occasion to ridicule Gingrich, Palin, and people who don’t support Romney.

Aitch748 on February 1, 2012 at 8:33 AM

Go up to the Byron York thread. Romney put his silver-plated foot in his mouth again on CNN this morning.

Marcus on February 1, 2012 at 8:36 AM

Aitch748 on February 1, 2012 at 8:33 AM

It’s all they’ve got. They have nothing positive or good to say about Romney. Like Newt said:

“it’s terribly pathetic that someone running for the presidency of US has nothing positive to say about himself.”

HerneTheHunter on February 1, 2012 at 8:36 AM

Marcus on February 1, 2012 at 8:36 AM

Saw that. The ads write themselves. I mean wait till Obama and Dems release “I like to fire people and I not concerned about the very poor, just the middle class.”

This is your nominee.

HerneTheHunter on February 1, 2012 at 8:39 AM

You don’t know what the end game is? Please.

My spin! LOL

Romney received 47% of the vote – the liberal in conservatives
clothing who ran close to 20 million in attack ads – most of
which were lies about Gingrich – not positives about Romney’s
positions

Newt received 32%
Santorum received 13%
Added together means 45% of the vote went the conservative way

47% vs. 45% – too close for Romney’s comfort. And when Romney
gets to red states – we will see.

Then there are the 7% of whack jobs who voted for Ron Paul -
I have no spin for this!

Publically Romney is estatic; privately he might be a little
worried. His minions are probably working behind the scenes
to keep Santorum and Paul in the race. He might have donors giving to their campaigns to keep them in it.

Newt Gingrich should be encouraged. 32% ends up not looking
too bad in the grand scheme of things.

Amjean on February 1, 2012 at 8:40 AM

Too bad Sarah didn’t get in the race. Her history is newly picked over unless they went back to when she played basketball in high school and found she missed a bank shot. She would have kept the ball in Obama’s back court and wouldn’t have let the media aka debate mods change the subject. All she wants is the most conservative candidate and Obama to load up a moving van in Dec.

Kissmygrits on February 1, 2012 at 8:41 AM

What do you expect from Romney supporters, including the repulsive Meghan McCain? They loathe the conservative wing of the republican party. It’s almost comical how they’re promising that either McDonnell or Rubio may be the VP. Haven’t we been down this road before?!? And dangling a carrot/token conservative to prop up a weak liberal, yes liberal republican, is a recipe for disaster. When will we learn? Sarah Palin is very shrewd and why drag the conservatives over the cliff with a loser like Romney. I’m with her, keep on fighting and make the candidate whoe ever it will be actually earn the nomination. Not buy his way to the top.

mozalf on February 1, 2012 at 8:43 AM

Hahaha….you may support a historian, but you don’t get to rewrite history.

JC Watts whined last night. Cain was just whining on Fox. And it appears that Gingrich didn’t even congratulate Romney.

Familiarity breeds contempt. And America is becoming all too familiar with the ingrained nature of Neutron Newt, the only admitted corrupt politician in the race.

csdeven on February 1, 2012 at 8:24 AM

Don’t look now but you just stumbled into your own theory.

Gee, does Mitt Romney represent ALL that we view as Familiarity
when it comes to Republican nominees??

Why YES, he does!

You claim Newt as the poster child for corrupt politician,
Romney is the poster child for the rich, elite power broker
backed candidate who is chosen because it’s “their turn”

Sound familiar??

ToddPA on February 1, 2012 at 8:44 AM

Santorum received 13%
Added together means 45% of the vote went the conservative way

47% vs. 45% – too close for Romney’s comfort. And when Romney
gets to red states – we will see.

Amjean on February 1, 2012 at 8:40 AM

You have no evidence whatsoever that all of Santorum or Gingrich’s support will go to which ever one stays in the race. The latest NBC/Marist poll, which I linked to several times last night, showed that Romney is the second choice among all the other candidates.

csdeven on February 1, 2012 at 8:49 AM

+1

csdeven on February 1, 2012 at 8:19 AM

Careful, that kind of debating skill is “profoundly and fundamentally” useless – not that anyone cares.

rhombus on February 1, 2012 at 8:50 AM

I am not surprised that Romney supporters see a Romney victory solely as an occasion to ridicule Gingrich, Palin, and people who don’t support Romney.

So not true. My observation has been that Gingrich and his supporters, such as Palin, have been unbelieveably sore losers. Newt reportedly refused to call Romney to concede, despite having received a call from Romney in SC, Palin began her commentary last night by whining that the only reason that Mitt won was because he spent more money, JC has been beating that drum too, and I know so many people who are basically apathetic about the Republican race, but have been commenting on Gingrich’s constant character bashing of Romney. They are not Romney supporters, but they are totally turned off to Gingrich, because nobody likes a crybaby, especially one who alternates his whining with the kind of braggadocio that Newt exhibits every time his poll numbers go up.

Most average folks want a president who exhibits some class and shows emotional stability. The lack of those to characteristics in Gingrich’s recent behavior is what has turned me from a possible Newt supporter to solid Romney.

Priscilla on February 1, 2012 at 8:52 AM

Now, you can answer the question.

darwin on February 1, 2012 at 8:30 AM

Are you being serious or is this just another desire on your part to argue an issue that you are not open to learning about?

csdeven on February 1, 2012 at 8:55 AM

Most average folks want a president who exhibits some class and shows emotional stability. The lack of those to characteristics in Gingrich’s recent behavior is what has turned me from a possible Newt supporter to solid Romney.

Priscilla on February 1, 2012 at 8:52 AM

Romney will beat Obama hands down if he takes a cue from Newt and periodically turns into a pit bull against Obama. He can be a classy and emotionally stable pit bull, but he needs to be a pit bull nonetheless.

darwin on February 1, 2012 at 8:56 AM

Sarah Palin still rocks.

The Rogue Tomato on February 1, 2012 at 8:57 AM

“Whining” is the new “abdicate”

katy the mean old lady on February 1, 2012 at 8:58 AM

Are you being serious or is this just another desire on your part to argue an issue that you are not open to learning about?

csdeven on February 1, 2012 at 8:55 AM

I’m very serious. You said Gingrich is corrupt. Prove it.

darwin on February 1, 2012 at 8:59 AM

“Whining” is the new “abdicate”

katy the mean old lady on February 1, 2012 at 8:58 AM

Yes, along with “crybaby.”

Aitch748 on February 1, 2012 at 9:00 AM

I’ll listen to her over Ann Coulter and Meghan McCain.

mozalf on February 1, 2012 at 9:00 AM

He can be a classy and emotionally stable pit bull, but he needs to be a pit bull nonetheless.

darwin on February 1, 2012 at 8:56 AM

Absolutely agreed. Being classy doesn’t mean being wimpy, as many here seem to think.

Priscilla on February 1, 2012 at 9:02 AM

So not true. My observation has been that Gingrich and his supporters, such as Palin, have been unbelieveably sore losers.

Priscilla on February 1, 2012 at 8:52 AM

(1) Gingrich being an “unbelievably sore loser” doesn’t refute what I said.

(2) People aren’t too thrilled with poor winners, either.

Aitch748 on February 1, 2012 at 9:02 AM

Most average folks want a president who exhibits some class and shows emotional stability.

Priscilla on February 1, 2012 at 8:52 AM

Really? I suppose then that the embarrassing end zone showboating and schoolyard taunts and butchering of the “America the Beautiful” song courtesy of Team Romney is your definition of a great stable and mature mind in modern politics. Got it, sister.

RepubChica on February 1, 2012 at 9:03 AM

RepubChica on February 1, 2012 at 9:03 AM

Weak. Singing patriotic songs now qualifies as “showboating”?

Priscilla on February 1, 2012 at 9:05 AM

A bit off topic–but hinted at in the comments: anyone else think Sarah might be physically ill? She’s off her game and looks gaunt and like bad make-up is covering something up.

Makes me wonder if that’s why she decided not to run.

sallyjo on February 1, 2012 at 9:06 AM

Weak. Singing patriotic songs now qualifies as “showboating”?

Priscilla on February 1, 2012 at 9:05 AM

Does that mean the Tea Parties are showboating too (not to mention engaging in “Pious Baloney”? ;-)

rhombus on February 1, 2012 at 9:07 AM

Romney is the poster child for the rich, elite power broker
backed candidate who is chosen because it’s “their turn”

ToddPA on February 1, 2012 at 8:44 AM

The arrogance oozing from your comment is palpable. You see yourselves as the only people in the country who are wise beyond measure and everyone else are ignorant rubes who are fooled by money and some shadowy “establishment” conspiracy. The narrative that Romney cannot get above 25% is permanently off the table for the Gingrich campaign. The 21% increase in support came from the people that Gingrich claimed were wise supporters when they were in the not-Romney camp.

Additionally, so what if Romney is the choice of the rich and powerful? That is just more of the class warfare and wealth jealousy that Gingrich is trying to establish. The problem for Gingrich now is that Romney has shed his wealth guilt and is refusing to allow the progressive PC tactics to take him off his game.

Gingrich is going to see that as the primary progresses, Romney will get stronger and stronger and by the end of March, the TEA Party and the very conservative will close ranks behind Romney in strong enough numbers that anyone who still rails against him will be seen as out of touch.

csdeven on February 1, 2012 at 9:09 AM

A bit off topic–but hinted at in the comments: anyone else think Sarah might be physically ill? She’s off her game and looks gaunt and like bad make-up is covering something up.

Makes me wonder if that’s why she decided not to run.

sallyjo on February 1, 2012 at 9:06 AM

You could very well be correct. I thought she looked a little tipsy last night (in a nice way) but maybe it’s meds or something. But I agree, she was off her game (at least last night).

And I do say that with affection. Had she just won Florida last night, I’d be planning to vote for her but she didn’t so I won’t.

rhombus on February 1, 2012 at 9:10 AM

sallyjo on February 1, 2012 at 9:06 AM

She looks fine to me. I saw Mitt Romney state on CNN this morning he “doesn’t care about the very poor.” You think his neuro-syphilis is flairing up again?

Maybe that’s why he said it.

/

Marcus on February 1, 2012 at 9:11 AM

I’m very serious. You said Gingrich is corrupt. Prove it.

darwin on February 1, 2012 at 8:59 AM

I remember when this clown claimed, in his quest to paint Palin as spectacularly incompetent, that the job of the Governor of Alaska was “much, much easier” than the job of the President. I asked for an explanation. Instead, he just shrieked with laughter like a high-school girl and claimed that intellectual honesty required me to simply concede his point. Of course, I never saw him repeat the point again.

So I’d be very surprised if he makes any attempt to “prove it.”

Aitch748 on February 1, 2012 at 9:12 AM

The lack of those to characteristics in Gingrich’s recent behavior is what has turned me from a possible Newt supporter to solid Romney.

Priscilla on February 1, 2012 at 8:52 AM

The Romney haters should take notice of the importance of your comment. You made your decision on the behavior of Gingrich and not the behavior of those who support him.

Very wise. Very wise indeed.

csdeven on February 1, 2012 at 9:13 AM

Weak. Singing patriotic songs now qualifies as “showboating”?

Priscilla on February 1, 2012 at 9:05 AM

I just threw that in there. Actually, is he wasn’t such an arse he’d of endeared himself to my good graces with that hideous crooning. My point was that in the last 48 hours in where Romney knew he and his establishment had FL wrapped up he chose to act like a pure ass and not like a statesman. Or was that just healthy political jousting to you?

RepubChica on February 1, 2012 at 9:13 AM

“I am not very concerned about the poor.”
Mitt Romney.

“I like to fire people.”
Mitt Romney.

HerneTheHunter on February 1, 2012 at 9:14 AM

Romney will get stronger and stronger and by the end of March, the TEA Party and the very conservative will close ranks behind Romney in strong enough numbers that anyone who still rails against him will be seen as out of touch.

csdeven on February 1, 2012 at 9:09 AM

But they’ll still want to be “right” and will hope that Romney loses to clear the path for the next Conservative Great Pumpkin who is waiting to rise from the pumpkin patch and smoke everyone with the ghostly words of the gipper. If only “they” would let it happen.(sound of crickets chirping)

Perpetual victims.

rhombus on February 1, 2012 at 9:15 AM

Gingrich is going to see that as the primary progresses, Romney will get stronger and stronger and by the end of March, the TEA Party and the very conservative will close ranks behind Romney in strong enough numbers that anyone who still rails against him will be seen as out of touch.

csdeven on February 1, 2012 at 9:09 AM

You may be right. However, I think having to put up a tough fight against Gingrich thus far is making Romney a stronger candidate for the general. So, in this Sarah has been correct. Keep it going. Make him fight and make him earn it. Don’t let an untested candidate be coronated and become cannon fodder for Axelrod.

Missy on February 1, 2012 at 9:15 AM

Palin is working for Gingrich – she is on the payroll, and apparently, this is not going to change. Back when Sarah used to claim that she was a conservative, she would never have worked for a progressive like Gingrich, but times change, and people change. Sarah has sold out.

It is time for real conservatives to coalesce around Rick Santorum.

Pork-Chop on February 1, 2012 at 9:16 AM

Brokered convention, Palin/West….take it to the bank.

NY Conservative on February 1, 2012 at 9:16 AM

“I am not very concerned about the poor.”
Mitt Romney.

“I like to fire people.”
Mitt Romney.

HerneTheHunter on February 1, 2012 at 9:14 AM

Mitt Romney 2012. Because Newt Gingrich Has No Class.

Aitch748 on February 1, 2012 at 9:17 AM

It is time for real conservatives to coalesce around Rick Santorum.

Pork-Chop on February 1, 2012 at 9:16 AM

That should have happened long ago but Newt’s “pious baloney” and “in-your-face” theatrics were shiny objects that distracted people who are hungry to tell someone off. Either way, Santorum should have always been your guy.

rhombus on February 1, 2012 at 9:21 AM

RepubChica on February 1, 2012 at 9:13 AM

I’m not sure what behavior you are referring to then. The fact that his spokespeople responded to Newt’s calling him “a congenital liar,” “a maniacal liar,” and sent out robocalls saying that he withheld kosher meals from Holocaust survivors. In my view, the Romney camp had every right to call these things “pathetic.” I find it fairly frustrating that, on the one hand, Gingrich supporters say that Romney is not a fighter, but then, when he fights, they claim that he doesn’t fight fair. It becomes fairly obvious after listening to Newt and his supporters that they want to have it both ways. That, to me, is unreasonalble and lacks class.

Priscilla on February 1, 2012 at 9:24 AM

This woman is irrelevant and I have no idea why people seek out her opinion on political issues.

Sleeper on February 1, 2012 at 9:26 AM

I’m very serious. You said Gingrich is corrupt. Prove it.

darwin on February 1, 2012 at 8:59 AM

How about you research it yourself?

Select part one of the report. (Use the report page numbers and not the PDF page numbers)Go to page 79 and read the bullet points from letter he signed and sent to the ethics committee. Then see the footnotes on page 85. Then for the meat of the matter, go to page 89 and read, in it’s entirety, the “Analysis and Conclusions” section.

That is all the research I’m going to do for you. Although I will tell you to pay special attention to the tax issue. The sanction imposed on Gingrich did not consider the legality of the use of the 501 c3. That matter was referred to the IRS. Ergo, any findings by the IRS are stand alone. Had he been found in violation of tax code, he would have received additional punishment. And when he was found in compliance with IRS code, he avoided additional punishment. The sanction and reprimand remain.

csdeven on February 1, 2012 at 9:34 AM

The arrogance oozing from your comment is palpable. You see yourselves as the only people in the country who are wise beyond measure and everyone else are ignorant rubes who are fooled by money and some shadowy “establishment” conspiracy. The narrative that Romney cannot get above 25% is permanently off the table for the Gingrich campaign. The 21% increase in support came from the people that Gingrich claimed were wise supporters when they were in the not-Romney camp.

Additionally, so what if Romney is the choice of the rich and powerful? That is just more of the class warfare and wealth jealousy that Gingrich is trying to establish. The problem for Gingrich now is that Romney has shed his wealth guilt and is refusing to allow the progressive PC tactics to take him off his game.

Gingrich is going to see that as the primary progresses, Romney will get stronger and stronger and by the end of March, the TEA Party and the very conservative will close ranks behind Romney in strong enough numbers that anyone who still rails against him will be seen as out of touch.

csdeven on February 1, 2012 at 9:09 AM

Umm,you posted a comment pointing out familiarity, did you not?
I posted a comment pointing out familiarity with Mitt Romney
as the nominee, did I not?

What the hell is the matter with you? Your idiotic put downs
of everybody who dares to point out flaws in your arguments
is pathetic. Do I support Gingrich, why no, I do not. But I
certainly have a problem with Romney. Re-read your first sentence
of your response to me. The arrogance “oozing” is from your
Formaldehyde soaked brain cells. Or is it Ignorance??

ToddPA on February 1, 2012 at 9:37 AM

You may be right. However, I think having to put up a tough fight against Gingrich thus far is making Romney a stronger candidate for the general. So, in this Sarah has been correct. Keep it going. Make him fight and make him earn it. Don’t let an untested candidate be coronated and become cannon fodder for Axelrod.

Missy on February 1, 2012 at 9:15 AM

I reluctantly agree. The complaint I have is not that Romney has to defend himself, but rather that video of republicans calling Romney a vulture capitalist will be used by Obama in the general.

Romney certainly is stronger and the more dirt Gingrich can dig up, irrespective of it’s validity, the more prepared Romney will be to take on Obama. Because Obama certainly will find every bit there is to find. And he will use it.

csdeven on February 1, 2012 at 9:40 AM

We’ll survive Romney losing (and he will lose the general if he wins the primary), and we’ll survive another term of O.

KirknBurker on February 1, 2012 at 3:34 AM

I agree with this.

But I don’t want to “simply survive” with a Liberal Supreme Court and Obamacare. And there is no guarantee we will win the Senate, especially if Obama manages to win. But if just going along to get along is good enough for you, fine.

Deanna on February 1, 2012 at 9:42 AM

please go away Palin

nparga23 on February 1, 2012 at 9:43 AM

Perpetual victims.

rhombus on February 1, 2012 at 9:15 AM

Gingrich has taking a page from Palin playbook. That perpetual victim schtick is her MO.

So along with St Palin the Victimized, we now have Bishop Gingrich the Persecuted.

csdeven on February 1, 2012 at 9:44 AM

Aitch748 on February 1, 2012 at 9:12 AM

Apparently I was wrong. He just gave a link to the same 83 ethics complaints that were all later dropped because they had no basis in reality. On the other hand, not very surprising at all.

Aitch748 on February 1, 2012 at 9:45 AM

csdeven on February 1, 2012 at 9:34 AM

Gingrich was cleared of all charges.

darwin on February 1, 2012 at 9:46 AM

Palin probably did the most to kill any hope of an anti-Romney candiate. She let her passionate followers dangle in their insistence that “oh yeah, she’s gonna run for sure” while she made hints, wrote books, did reality shows and then finally didn’t come through. When she left, the non-Romney vote was dispersed among a number of candidates and one by one they chewed each other up until not much was left but a grumpy old white guy playing the victim card.

Good sumation, but you left out the most important event that brought such folly about, The entire GOP establishment came out with gnashing teeth against her, complete with calling in Dick Cheney to fire a round or two at her. They tried to take her down when McCain’s croney’s were given their orders to publically humiliate her before she became independently powerful -which she did.
The GOP panicked when they saw that and went so far as to call in Dick Cheney to take a shot at her. Then there was the GOP puppets squad firing systematic salvos at her, one by one: Will, Coulter and Christie, Krauthammer, Rove, Noonan, Laura Ingraham,Parker,Coulter and Ingraham again -it was a barrage reminiscent of D-Day.
Sarah’s no fool. She knew that she could never win for a party that cannibalizes its own -unless you were the chosen one -Oromney!

Don’t blame Sarah, blame all those in the party that don’t see that it is the enemy of conservativism.

Don L on February 1, 2012 at 9:51 AM

Brokered convention, Palin/West….take it to the bank.

NY Conservative on February 1, 2012 at 9:16 AM

Nobody bailed that bank out, sorry.

But West would be a formidable VP but I’d like to see him as the next Speaker. I’m expecting Romney/Santorum.

rhombus on February 1, 2012 at 9:54 AM

Gingrich is going to see that as the primary progresses, Romney will get stronger and stronger and by the end of March, the TEA Party and the very conservative will close ranks behind Romney in strong enough numbers that anyone who still rails against him will be seen as out of touch.

csdeven on February 1, 2012 at 9:09 AM

I’ve asked this before, give me a reason to vote for Romney. He has next to no conservative credentials. He has never been a voice for conservatism. Romneycare is a noose around his neck. His supporters, in the media (not lame assed commenters on a blog), have turned off alot of conservatives who may have supported him. Tell me why I should vote for him

Garym on February 1, 2012 at 9:55 AM

I posted a comment pointing out familiarity with Mitt Romney
as the nominee, did I not?

ToddPA on February 1, 2012 at 9:37 AM

Your perceived familiarity is at best factually incorrect and at worst an unprovable conspiracy theory. Your view is that Romney is a bad person because the rich and powerful support him and by extension that they are bad people. Is the $10 million that Gingrich received from rich and powerful casino magnet from Nevada a problem for you also? If so, you haven’t mentioned it. Wealth and power is not a negative except in the view of class warfare proponents.

If you want to discuss familiarity as it relates to fact based views of Romney, then your comment would be acceptable. As an example, his flip flops and moderate views.

And if my comments were harsh and inappropriate, I apologize and will pay more attention to your words in the future.

csdeven on February 1, 2012 at 9:56 AM

Gingrich was cleared of all charges.

darwin on February 1, 2012 at 9:46 AM

No he wasn’t. If he were, his record would have been cleared and the $300K returned.

csdeven on February 1, 2012 at 9:58 AM

Don’t blame Sarah, blame all those in the party that don’t see that it is the enemy of conservativism.

Don L on February 1, 2012 at 9:51 AM

There you go again, playing the victim. Smell the coffee in this heated kitchen – everyone is the enemy of everyone. It’s a primary.

rhombus on February 1, 2012 at 9:59 AM

Because Obama certainly will find every bit there is to find. And he will use it.

csdeven on February 1, 2012 at 9:40 AM

Okay. But what if Gingrich was to win? Would you then blame Romney for digging up all the stuff against him, because it would then become ammunition for Obama?

I sense a double standard here.

Either way, both Romney and Gingrich have to have strong, viable responses to the stuff that has been – and will be – flung at them. Palin’s been saying this all along.

Missy on February 1, 2012 at 9:59 AM

Then there was the GOP puppets squad firing systematic salvos at her, one by one: Will, Coulter and Christie, Krauthammer, Rove, Noonan, Laura Ingraham,Parker,Coulter and Ingraham again -it was a barrage reminiscent of D-Day.
Don L on February 1, 2012 at 9:51 AM

Don’t forget about O’Reilly. After Palin embarrassed him over a lame question about social security, he went on a 2 week destroy Palin spree. She hasn’t been on his show since then.

Garym on February 1, 2012 at 10:02 AM

No he wasn’t. If he were, his record would have been cleared and the $300K returned.

csdeven on February 1, 2012 at 9:58 AM

74 of 75 charges were dismissed and the IRS cleared him of the 75th.

darwin on February 1, 2012 at 10:02 AM

the TEA Party and the very conservative will close ranks behind Romney in strong enough numbers that anyone who still rails against him will be seen as out of touch.

csdeven on February 1, 2012 at 9:09 AM

The Mittbots must think that is the political version of Beetlejuice – if they just repeat it the right number of times something good will happen. But I have to admit that the last bit about naysayers being seen as “out of touch” is a new twist.

katiejane on February 1, 2012 at 10:05 AM

JPeterman on January 31, 2012 at 10:52 PM

No one can tell you who to vote for and it appears to me that any viable reasons you have already refused through emotions.

Newt: Lied about a balanced budget (this was all government accounting gimmickry), to have a balanced budget there would have been absolutely zero deficits. You check, deficits were there. The deficits did lower due to gutting the military. This should turn you away from Newt faster than a speeding bullet (if this is truly about conservatism and being taxed too much). You haven’t apparently. Newt in 2007 is on tape touting the individual mandate for health care, there are even tapes of Newt touting the MA health care law, even after Deval Patrick came in and fundamentally changed what Romney had signed into law.

The so called History Lessons – contracts prove he was a lobbyist for Fannie and Freddie. Where ever the money is flowing in from Newt’s position changed. 30 years in Washington DC (why didn’t he go back to his HOME state of Georgia?) and now lives in Virginia inside the beltway. Yet, he is the outsider?

Give me a break. If these do not change your emotions to a more conservative bent of emotions facts do not seem to work on you.

uhangtight on February 1, 2012 at 10:09 AM

Tell me why I should vote for him

Garym on February 1, 2012 at 9:55 AM

I don’t tell anyone why they should vote for Romney. I expect them to do the research like I do. I read articles, blogs, reports, etc. I consider all facts and then make a decision.

My morals also inform my decisions. Until Gingrich showed that he has not changed his stripes after his corrupt behavior in the 90′s I was ready to support him over Romney. But his lies about being a “historian”, his extremely erratic behavior and heresies against conservative tenets, brought his past back into relevance. If I vote for Gingrich, who has already violated the sacred public trust, when I have three other candidates that have no history of violating the public trust, what would that say about me? It would say that I claim to be a conservative, but do not value the basic tenet of conservatism…..honorable public service. The progressives are the party of moral relativity not conservatives.

So irrespective of the forays away from true conservatism, we are only talking about the level of conservatism between the remaining three candidates. At this point, I would prefer to support Santorum. But he has not been vetted yet and that preference could change. I can support Paul also. But my main concern is the SCOTUS justices that will be selected in the next term. Obama must go. Period. And that means I must support the most conservative candidate that can win. As of this time, Romney is that guy.

csdeven on February 1, 2012 at 10:09 AM

Well looks like I need a cup of coffee...

JPeterman on January 31, 2012 at 10:52 PM

No one can tell you who to vote for and it appears to me that any viable reasons you have already refused through emotions.

Newt: Lied about a balanced budget (this was all government accounting gimmickry), to have a balanced budget there would have been absolutely zero deficits. You check, deficits were there. The deficits did lower due to gutting the military. This should turn you away from Newt faster than a speeding bullet (if this is truly about conservatism and being taxed too much). You haven’t apparently. Newt in 2007 is on tape touting the individual mandate for health care, there are even tapes of Newt touting the MA health care law, even after Deval Patrick came in and fundamentally changed what Romney had signed into law.

The so called History Lessons – contracts prove he was a lobbyist for Fannie and Freddie. Where ever the money is flowing in from Newt’s position changed. 30 years in Washington DC (why didn’t he go back to his HOME state of Georgia?) and now lives in Virginia inside the beltway. Yet, he is the outsider?

Give me a break. If these do not change your emotions to a more conservative bent of emotions facts do not seem to work on you.

uhangtight on February 1, 2012 at 10:10 AM

Bye, bye sara! It was good to know you and defend you from all commers. Never again!

Bambi on February 1, 2012 at 10:13 AM

74 of 75 charges were dismissed and the IRS cleared him of the 75th.

darwin on February 1, 2012 at 10:02 AM

You didn’t read it did you. That’s what I figured. You are simply committed to regurgitating the opinions of others.

This is why I questioned your seriousness. You are a waste of time.

csdeven on February 1, 2012 at 10:15 AM

Okay. But what if Gingrich was to win? Would you then blame Romney for digging up all the stuff against him, because it would then become ammunition for Obama?

I sense a double standard here.

Either way, both Romney and Gingrich have to have strong, viable responses to the stuff that has been – and will be – flung at them. Palin’s been saying this all along.

Missy on February 1, 2012 at 9:59 AM

If Romney attacks from the left, then yes I would feel the same way. But Romney hasn’t attacked from the left.

Palin is shilling for Gingrich. When Romney was down, she didn’t suggest the people of Florida vote for Romney to keep it going. What she is doing is supporting the only corrupt politician in the race. That weakens her as the politician who fought corruption in her own party. She should have suggested the voters get behind Santorum. He isn’t an admitted liar.

csdeven on February 1, 2012 at 10:20 AM

You didn’t read it did you. That’s what I figured. You are simply committed to regurgitating the opinions of others.

This is why I questioned your seriousness. You are a waste of time.

csdeven on February 1, 2012 at 10:15 AM

Maybe you just didn’t read what I wrote. 74 of 75 dismissed, the 75th cleared. Nothing you can provide changes that fact.

darwin on February 1, 2012 at 10:22 AM

Bambi on February 1, 2012 at 10:13 AM

Sarah Palin is absolutely crushed.

HerneTheHunter on February 1, 2012 at 10:33 AM

I find it fairly frustrating that, on the one hand, Gingrich supporters say that Romney is not a fighter, but then, when he fights, they claim that he doesn’t fight fair. It becomes fairly obvious after listening to Newt and his supporters that they want to have it both ways. That, to me, is unreasonalble and lacks class.

Priscilla on February 1, 2012 at 9:24 AM

Hey, Priscilla. Had to step out. I was actually referring to Romney on the stump prior to the vote and his arrogant “I got this in the bag” attitude. He all but grabbed his crotch in an obscene gesture toward Gingrich and his supporters. Just look at his words and actions the last 48 hours prior to the vote. I’m not talking about his surrogates.

As for Romney being a fighter…yes, he definitely drew legitimate blood from Newt in the debates, but the rest is more the media’s contempt for Gingrich and their willingness to go along with anything Team Romney throws out there in order to destroy his candidacy and reputation. Temporary marriage of convenience.

RepubChica on February 1, 2012 at 10:34 AM

My morals also inform my decisions. Until Gingrich showed that he has not changed his stripes after his corrupt behavior in the 90′s I was ready to support him over Romney. But his lies about being a “historian”, his extremely erratic behavior and heresies against conservative tenets, brought his past back into relevance. If I vote for Gingrich, who has already violated the sacred public trust, when I have three other candidates that have no history of violating the public trust, what would that say about me? It would say that I claim to be a conservative, but do not value the basic tenet of conservatism…..honorable public service. The progressives are the party of moral relativity not conservatives.

csdeven on February 1, 2012 at 10:09 AM

I don’t care for any of these candidates. Ron Paul is off the list, he should be running in the Libertarian party where he belongs. Gingrich and Santorum have both been in the fight for many conservative values, but both have flaws. Gingrich more so, than Santorum. But Romney has been a no show. He ran against Reagan as a candidate for senator. He is what he is, a blue blood, country club republican. He will never shrink the government. The only reason for me to vote for him at this time is the SCOTUS. In my book, that is a sorry reason.

Garym on February 1, 2012 at 10:35 AM

Sleeper on February 1, 2012 at 9:26 AM

Yet here you are commenting on a blog.

HerneTheHunter on February 1, 2012 at 10:37 AM

Comment pages: 1 4 5 6 7