Is Newt running out of cash?

posted at 12:10 pm on February 10, 2012 by Jazz Shaw

It’s starting to sound that way. A new investigation by Bloomberg has been digging through the campaign finance reports, interviewing campaign aides and donors, and reaches the conclusion that Newt Gingrich may be running on fumes at this point in terms of election cash. And his Super PAC money may be drying up also.

Newt Gingrich was just days away from the Jan. 31 Florida Republican presidential primary when he told reporters that his campaign was down to its last $600,000.

Five losing contests later, Gingrich and Winning Our Future, an outside political action committee supporting him, are almost silent on television airwaves, offering free water and coffee at events, and revamping a fundraising strategy based largely on the support of a single wealthy backer, Sheldon Adelson and the Las Vegas casino owner’s family.

In the past seven days, Winning Our Future has spent $61,290 on broadcast television advertisements, compared to $636,920 spent by Mitt Romney and a super-PAC backing him, Restore Our Future, according to data compiled by New York-based Kantar Media’s CMAG, a company that tracks advertising.

T-Paw got in on the act, telling NBC that he hopes Las Vegas billionaire Sheldon Adelson will “shut off the spigot” in terms of keeping Newt’s campaign afloat. That strikes me as a rather strange position for Pawlenty to take, given that he’s backing Mitt. The minute Newt gets shoved out of the race entirely, the game effectively turns into a one on one fight between Romney and Santorum, and all of the latest polls indicate that that’s a story which really doesn’t end well for Mitt. If I was Pawlenty, I’d probably be pumping money into Newt’s coffers just to keep him going.

But in all seriousness, if this report proves true, Newt is in trouble. There are contests coming up in some big states with very expensive media markets, and if he can’t take part in the air war, he’s at a tremendous disadvantage. Earned media can get you a long way, but Iowa probably showed Newt how effective a good ad game can be also. The Speaker is going to need a real stem winder of a speech at CPAC today if he’s going to turn the tide.


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

I take a lot of heat in this forum for being a “Mitt-bot”. I don’t mind the term, as I believe he’s best equipped to handle the job. I’m happy to say that I have been consistent. Unlike many people in the forum who jump from candidate to candidate on a whim. That’s why I can’t take the lion share of you seriously. It’s hilarious to watch you people abandon an candidate at the drop of a hat. I guess those of you anti-rino’s have no real serious conviction. So, how can anyone take your so called “conservative convictions” seriously? Anyhow, Gingrich would never win the general election, and neither will Santorum.

rubberneck on February 10, 2012 at 1:52 PM

let them have their 10 minutes of delusion…I saw Cain the other day talking at CPAC, what a crackpot, and when you think that he was their candidate of choice star before Newt was, before Santorum was, before….as for Santorum, isn’t that funny, after they had to go through every single possible mental gymnastics gimmick to defend Gingrich on his morality record (or lack of it thereof) and after they told everybody how personal morality doesn’t matter and it’s not our business what a man does in bis bedroom as long as he has stellar debate skills that would make Obama history :-), now they chose a man whose only claim to ‘fame’ is that he wants to get into people’s bedrooms and teach us a thing or two about ‘morality’ :-)…jumping on the bandwagon of three candidates, each one whackier than the predecessor, but all having one feature in common – they are all completely detached from reality – it boggles the mind really…

jimver on February 10, 2012 at 2:02 PM

Where do Newt supporters get this notion that he’s the anti-establishment candidate? You’re not paid $1.6 million by Freddie Mac for being anti-establishment, and you certainly don’t become Speaker of the House as an anti-establishment congressman.

ncconservative on February 10, 2012 at 2:02 PM

Where do Newt supporters get this notion that he’s the anti-establishment candidate? You’re not paid $1.6 million by Freddie Mac for being anti-establishment, and you certainly don’t become Speaker of the House as an anti-establishment congressman.

ncconservative on February 10, 2012 at 2:02 PM

never you mind, the ‘defence’ of Newt as anti-establishment candidate (you can’t say it with a straight face, can you :-) was entirely circumstantial, it lasted as long as Newt was their candidate of choice, now that he fell from grace, he’s back to being the sore loser, mean establishment guy :-)…

jimver on February 10, 2012 at 2:07 PM

Hate to break it to you, but this is NOT Romney. He will not fight Obama (Romney only thinks he’s “in over his head”; Romney doesn’t recognize that Obama is determined to wreck and re-make America in his liberal vision), he will not put up a fight to repeal RomneyCa..er, I mean ObamaCare (Freudian slip). Going negative on fellow GOPers is about all the fight Romney has.

Bitter Clinger on February 10, 2012 at 1:17 PM

You say Romney can’t fight? Gee, I dunno. He’s been the man to beat for all other primary candidates, who have been called ‘Not Romneys’ for a reason, yet the guy’s still in the ring. And ‘going negative on fellow GOPers’ is how primaries are won.

And now that you Not Romney supporters have sang hosannas and blessed as the One True Conservative just about everyone but poor Buddy Roemer, why don’t you give it a rest? Santorum is no more conservative than Gingrich, probably less so, and both have actual voting records that go slightly to the left of Romney on just about every issue that matters. You can’t make (fill in blank) the perfect conservative candidate by wishing it. Reality trumps perception every time.

troyriser_gopftw on February 10, 2012 at 2:08 PM

Where do Newt supporters get this notion that he’s the anti-establishment candidate? You’re not paid $1.6 million by Freddie Mac for being anti-establishment, and you certainly don’t become Speaker of the House as an anti-establishment congressman.

ncconservative on February 10, 2012 at 2:02 PM

He had to leave the House because the reforms he was pushing were messing up the play pen.

kenny on February 10, 2012 at 2:10 PM

If this were an election for the President of “flyover country” any of our GOP candidates would win handily.

The issue is that this election is for the President of all 50 states and a far-right candidate will have a much, much tougher time of gaining votes from the very important swing states or swing voters. As much as I’d like the most conservative candidate to end up on top, I’m very worried that a candidate with some stances that totally infuriate large voter blocks would hurt our chances.

This ‘all or nothing’ attitude could sink us if we keep trying to destroy our own candidates just because he’s not our first choice. 4 more years of this administration would wipe out this country as we know it. I will support the GOP candidate that has the absolute best chance of beating Obama. This is winner take all and there is no 2nd place.

JetBlast on February 10, 2012 at 2:10 PM

Stick a fork in Chucky, he’s done.

Norky on February 10, 2012 at 2:10 PM

In the hotair home picture for this post, Newt looks like TRoosevelt. We know that he fancies himself as a “TR Progressive.” It’s got to be no accident that he tries to make himself look like TR as well.

Newt keeps talking about how he is the “big solutions” guy. But that’s not the mood at all of the country, and especially Repubs. We want small… smaller govt. It’s pretty much that simple.

Newt has trumpeted big solutions for months, but still, how many of us know what these solutions are? I haven’t a clue. Unmuddle the message.

anotherJoe on February 10, 2012 at 2:11 PM

Newt has trumpeted big solutions for months, but still, how many of us know what these solutions are? I haven’t a clue. Unmuddle the message.

anotherJoe on February 10, 2012 at 2:11 PM

Some solutions he mentioned:(1) Open up oil drilling and exploration domestically both on and offshore. Use royalties from oil production that would come to South Carolina to deepen Charleston harbor for the bigger ships now being built. (2) Apply congressional procedures that passed Obamacare (Reconciliation) to immediately repeal Obamacare. (3)Radically change tax structure and reduce taxes using recommendations from Dr Laffer, a supporter. These are few that come to mind. There are more.

kenny on February 10, 2012 at 2:24 PM

rubberneck on February 10, 2012 at 1:52 PM

I dunno, as some one who is for Romney and has been since 2008, I still cannot get used to being called a bot. As I believe my decision was based on a viable process of deducing the truly capable candidate. Not out of some silly emotional cult of personality dogma.

But, I agree with everything else. I guess I could get used to being part of the MittBots??

uhangtight on February 10, 2012 at 2:24 PM

The minute Newt gets shoved out of the race entirely, the game effectively turns into a one on one fight between Romney and Santorum, and all of the latest polls indicate that that’s a story which really doesn’t end well for Mitt

The only way that it “Doesn’t end well for Mitt” is if you, Jazz, and the rest of the “Conservative Establishment” decided that Santorum is your last hope and you don’t do your due diligence tearing him to pieces like you’ve done with every other Not-Romney.

Rick has a lot to take pause with, and in some way is worse than Romney.

Critic2029 on February 10, 2012 at 2:26 PM

anotherJoe on February 10, 2012 at 2:11 PM

I thought he looked more like Ted Kennedy…

Critic2029 on February 10, 2012 at 2:27 PM

So, how can anyone take your so called “conservative convictions” seriously? Anyhow, Gingrich would never win the general election, and neither will Santorum.

rubberneck on February 10, 2012 at 1:52 PM

You don’t get it…what “general election” has Mitt won? He lost, big, the last general primary election, he has shown that he can’t win.

You have to face the facts…the “anyone but Mitt” campaign is strong and is determined not to elect Mitt, and it is the majority of the Republicans.

Mitt cannot argue ObamaCare, gov. takeovers, TARP, bailouts, even this contraceptive argument he has to be silent, since he did the same in Mass.

Everything you hate about Obama, Mitt has had his hand on, and has supported…so yeah, some of us have skipped around, because we are convinced Mitt is a loser, his record shows it, and his liberal habits have proved it, and look at his “ads” nothing but personal attacks, and no policy.

Rick has never been “out”, he is just more quiet, and less “in your face”, but even he has now taken over leadership. Because of his steadyness in facing he issues, Mitt now has to revert to “code words”, and less personal attacks…so if nothing else, he has shown to Mitt that he needs to take it down a notch, be civil, and be focused on being conservative…and that my friend is real leadership, by example.

right2bright on February 10, 2012 at 2:27 PM

Anyhow, Gingrich would never win the general election, and neither will Santorum.

rubberneck on February 10, 2012 at 1:52 PM

Yes, that’s what we keep hearing from you Mittbots.

cajunpatriot on February 10, 2012 at 2:28 PM

Santorum still has a lot of collapse room. And Romney will find it. I just hope it happens before Newt is forced to drop.

Sekhmet on February 10, 2012 at 1:58 PM

Me too.

Night Owl on February 10, 2012 at 2:29 PM

Rick has a lot to take pause with, and in some way is worse than Romney.

Critic2029 on February 10, 2012 at 2:26 PM

Care to elaborate?

kenny on February 10, 2012 at 2:29 PM

, and in some way is worse than Romney.

Critic2029 on February 10, 2012 at 2:26 PM

Such as…the “worse” has to overcome Mitt’s support of TARP, gov. bailouts, gov. takeovers, abortion support, even this contraceptive issue, Mitt can’t argue, he was for forcing Catholics to give up their religious freedom…
So where is Rick “worse”?

right2bright on February 10, 2012 at 2:31 PM

they are all completely detached from reality – it boggles the mind really…

jimver on February 10, 2012 at 2:02 PM

Would you support someone who thinks that one day they will have their own world to rule and be a God? They will have multiple wives, hundreds of spirit children. That their whole life revolves around that one day, they will own a world, and you will be subject to them, they will have built that world for you to live in and control every aspect of your life. They will allow and choose who to live, who to die, and how and when…they will come and live among us and heal us and show us the way, the light, the hope…they will be your savior, and the only way for you to obtain heaven, is through them…they will be your God, your only God, and He will have complete control of your life…one of the candidates believes that.

right2bright on February 10, 2012 at 2:39 PM

You can’t make (fill in blank) the perfect conservative candidate by wishing it. Reality trumps perception every time.

troyriser_gopftw on February 10, 2012 at 2:08 PM

you’d think…

jimver on February 10, 2012 at 2:40 PM

they will be your savior, and the only way for you to obtain heaven, is through them…they will be your God, your only God, and He will have complete control of your life…one of the candidates believes that.

right2bright on February 10, 2012 at 2:39 PM

no, I’ll support an imbecile with three functional neurons who never rn anything in his sorry life and wants to get into my bedroom and tells me what brand of contraceptive I shouldn’t use….

jimver on February 10, 2012 at 2:43 PM

‘never run’ that is…

jimver on February 10, 2012 at 2:44 PM

Ann Coulter just gave a good speech at CPAC..:)

Dire Straits on February 10, 2012 at 12:21 PM

Ann Coulter is a stanky skank.

Sam Widge on February 10, 2012 at 2:46 PM

wants to get into my bedroom and tells me what brand of contraceptive I shouldn’t use….

jimver on February 10, 2012 at 2:43 PM

LoL He sure will be a busy little feller.

kenny on February 10, 2012 at 2:47 PM

right2bright on February 10, 2012 at 2:31 PM

I would say Rick actual record of Pork, and moderate positions within a purple state are just as bad as Mitt’s. Instead of blindly defending him why don’t you actually read up on Santorum’s record in the Senate. Educating you isn’t my job.

That said.

Fine… Nominate Rick.

the GOP will lose…

And the funniest part is. The take away from the “Conservative Establishment” will be that Rick wasn’t conservative enough.

Elected a Center Right President, with a conservative House and Republican Senate. That is the only formula that fixes our problems.

Critic2029 on February 10, 2012 at 2:47 PM

Would you support someone who thinks that one day they will have their own world to rule and be a God? They will have multiple wives, hundreds of spirit children. That their whole life revolves around that one day, they will own a world, and you will be subject to them, they will have built that world for you to live in and control every aspect of your life. They will allow and choose who to live, who to die, and how and when…they will come and live among us and heal us and show us the way, the light, the hope…they will be your savior, and the only way for you to obtain heaven, is through them…they will be your God, your only God, and He will have complete control of your life…one of the candidates believes that.

right2bright on February 10, 2012 at 2:39 PM

Is this the point where we bring Gingrich’s or Santorum’s Catholicism into it? I’m a Protestant Christian, not that it matters to anyone but myself, my family, and my God, and so don’t share the same beliefs as Romney, Gingrich, or Santorum.

Drop the religous bigotry. We’ll get plenty of that from the Democrats if either Romney or Santorum wins the nomination. They’d give Gingrich a pass on his faith, I think, simply because–unlike Santorum and Romney–Gingrich pays it occasional lip service, as Obama does, but doesn’t seem to practice it.

troyriser_gopftw on February 10, 2012 at 2:49 PM

I dislike Santorum much less than I dislike Leroy, so if Santy gets the nod, so be it.

captn2fat on February 10, 2012 at 2:52 PM

They’d give Gingrich a pass on his faith, I think, simply because–unlike Santorum and Romney–Gingrich pays it occasional lip service, as Obama does, but doesn’t seem to practice it.

troyriser_gopftw on February 10, 2012 at 2:49 PM

And you know that how?

kenny on February 10, 2012 at 2:52 PM

And you know that how?

kenny on February 10, 2012 at 2:52 PM

The way Gingrich behaves, what he publicly says and does. What other measure is there? I keep hearing Newt Gingrich is a new man, no longer the slimy little egomaniac so fondly remembered from his days as Speaker of the House. So far, I’ve seen no evidence of any kind of change. Does a guy claiming the humility of the Christian faith publicly compare himself to great figures such as Churchill, Thatcher, and Reagan? How about these whiny displays of his where he carps about the harshness of the Romney campaign’s attacks? How about his outright lies aobut his consulting engagement with Freddie Mac, when he claimed he was a ‘history consultant’, not an influence-peddling lobbyist, and also claimed he was paid $300,000 and it later turns out he was paid $1.6 million? How about his lie regarding the veracity of his 2nd wife’s interview and his (intentionally false) claims her side of the story had been somehow debunked by (unnamed) mutual friends? And so on.

So I don’t know, Newt supporter. You tell me. Looks to me like your guy’s a thin-skinned serial liar who thinks he’s a Great Man Of Destiny (TM). What makes you think differently?

troyriser_gopftw on February 10, 2012 at 3:04 PM

troyriser_gopftw on February 10, 2012 at 3:04 PM

Well, let us start with the idiot 2nd wife since she carries so much credibility with you. Have you asked yourself why, if he was so naughty to her, after 15 plus years does she still retain his Gingrich name even though he has been remarried for 15 yrs? Cash value maybe? Do you wonder how much the Romney campaign and ABC payed her for that glorious bit of slime known as an interview? Why does that woman have more credibility than Gingrich, unless you want to believe the accusations.
Next, since when is someone not allowed to practice their skills after leaving office?
Next, with respect to comparisons to historical figures (Churchill et al). Aspiring to emulate those you admire is not a fault. Also do not confuse self confidence with egotism. Any of us that have served in the military know that a Can Do attitude is instilled and encouraged. Gingrich grew up in a military family and those values were probably passed down to him.

kenny on February 10, 2012 at 3:21 PM

Any of us that have served in the military know that a Can Do attitude is instilled and encouraged. Gingrich grew up in a military family and those values were probably passed down to him.

kenny on February 10, 2012 at 3:21 PM

Too bad Gingrich only learned those ‘Can Do’ military values second-hand, although what he learned probably came in handy while he was frantically dodging the draft.

Laughable you would ascribe military values to an abject coward.

troyriser_gopftw on February 10, 2012 at 3:33 PM

Reality trumps perception every time.

troyriser_gopftw

And the reality is Romney is a big government democrat in republican clothing.

So where is Rick “worse”?

right2bright

Uh…uh…EARMARKS! Yeah, yeah, that’s a good one. Sure, earmarks are constitutional, but yeah, EARMARKS! Because that argument worked so well for John McCain, lol.

xblade on February 10, 2012 at 3:36 PM

Rick has never been “out”, he is just more quiet, and less “in your face”, but even he has now taken over leadership. Because of his steadyness in facing he issues…

right2bright on February 10, 2012 at 2:27 PM

You’re right. Rick defiantly has the bona fides to stop government spending. He’s been very resolute throughout his career on pork barrel politics. He has immeasurable managerial experience. He’s never lost an election. All aboard!

rubberneck on February 10, 2012 at 3:40 PM

And the reality is Romney is a big government democrat in republican clothing.

xblade: That made me burst out laughing after reading all the comments by the Romney moderates on here.

There is no way you can be a conservative and support the flip flopper former Governor of MA who ran the left of the Democrat for Governor. That was only ten years ago and now they want us to believe he is now conservative. Shows he will say anything to get votes and has a lack of core values as he morphes into whatever the group he is speaking to wants to hear. Very dishonest with his immigration stance not to mention Obamacare especially now we learn through AG Pam Bondi of FL that Romney asked her to be on a healthcare task force and that he wants to mandate health coverage in every state.

At the Romney Town Halls in 2008 only Mormons or paid staff could ask questions which caused some of us to walk out and vow to never support the man.

PhiKapMom on February 10, 2012 at 3:44 PM

Where do Newt supporters get this notion that he’s the anti-establishment candidate? You’re not paid $1.6 million by Freddie Mac for being anti-establishment, and you certainly don’t become Speaker of the House as an anti-establishment congressman.

ncconservative on February 10, 2012 at 2:02 PM

How do you know what he was paid for? Name one living human being over the age of 18 who would have turned down the money for performing a service from Freddie. Just one will do.

“the establishment will keep Romney on a short leash…Newt will chew through his leash in ten minutes” – Jonah Goldberg

Reagan was the last President that wasn’t controlled by the Party. We’re overdue for another one…especially now.

cajunpatriot on February 10, 2012 at 3:46 PM

Too bad Gingrich only learned those ‘Can Do’ military values second-hand, although what he learned probably came in handy while he was frantically dodging the draft.

Laughable you would ascribe military values to an abject coward.

troyriser_gopftw on February 10, 2012 at 3:33 PM

Believe me, if he lived with an infantry father it was passed down. Yeah you know that reminds me. Where was old Romney during the draft? I gather they had a raffle type of apparatus for the draft during its latter days. Before that, in my time, it was by age. Where did you serve?

kenny on February 10, 2012 at 3:47 PM

Believe me, if he lived with an infantry father it was passed down. Yeah you know that reminds me. Where was old Romney during the draft? I gather they had a raffle type of apparatus for the draft during its latter days. Before that, in my time, it was by age. Where did you serve?

kenny on February 10, 2012 at 3:47 PM

You’re argument about the infantry father doesn’t fly very far since notions about honor and courage and Service evidently didn’t quite take with young Newt. As an aside, I’m an infantry father and my son enlisted in the infantry two weeks ago, so I guess it depends upon a variety of factors. I wouldn’t care if my son humped a ruck as a line doggie or swabbed decks on a Coast Guard cutter, as long as he learned the value of service and the importance of giving back. 11B was his choice. I’m very proud of him (and forgive me for going on about it).

Unlike Gingrich, Romney registered for the draft, taking deferrals for his two-year Mormon mission and upon completion of his Bachelor’s degree. He drew a high number in 1971 and so wasn’t drafted for active Service. Romney’s son Taggart was born in 1970, so he was a father by that time–which was, by the way, Gingrich’s excuse for not serving.

troyriser_gopftw on February 10, 2012 at 4:02 PM

Where did you serve?

kenny on February 10, 2012 at 3:47 PM

Weapons Squad, 1st PLT, B Co., 1/508th Inf., 3rd BDE, 82nd Division (ABN), Ft. Bragg, NC.

troyriser_gopftw on February 10, 2012 at 4:04 PM

troyriser_gopftw on February 10, 2012 at 4:02 PM

Ok, good enough. Most of this conversation is fairly irrelevant to getting the job done in the Oval Office. Romney is a disguised liberal and won’t fix things very much. Maybe Romney is a fine fellow, but a fine fellow is not the prescription for fighting the pure evil that inhabits the WH. We need an A-Dog that will clean house and that Romney dog doesn’t hunt. We simply disagree. Thanks for the discussion.

kenny on February 10, 2012 at 4:16 PM

Santorum has ZERO record of accomplishment. He could not even hold on to his own seat in the Senate, he has no bold ideas, he is a Washington apparatchik who was basically a back slapper in the Senate.

Reading HA, which clearly has become the official stenographer for the Santorum campaign, you would think we are talking about someone that had a strong record.

Rick lead nothing, he has no signature achievements, he created no conservative movement, he is a BIG Government anti-libertarian who would not even get 40% of the women’s vote

Really, reading HA now you would think that most conservatives don’t have an IQ above 90…and speaking of intelligence, the one think Rick never has to worry about is being called the smartest guy in the room

georgealbert on February 10, 2012 at 4:26 PM

Once again Newt has shot his load and is getting nowhere. Bye bye Newt, it was fun in the 90′s. As of today? Not so much.

David in ATL on February 10, 2012 at 4:49 PM

I don’t know how a serious conservative could hear the three speeches today and not favor Newt. Personally, I want to live in Newt’s America!

Truizm on February 10, 2012 at 5:00 PM

Newt has trumpeted big solutions for months, but still, how many of us know what these solutions are? I haven’t a clue. Unmuddle the message.

anotherJoe on February 10, 2012 at 2:11 PM

If you check out his CPAC presentation:

12.5% corporate income tax

Bye Bye Capital Gains and Death Taxes

This is supply-side economics writ large. Ernst & Young had a recent report out comparing Dividend and Capital gains effective tax rates world-wide and the US is not competitive and the end of the 2003 tax reductions will make it worse.

Romney may manage well but his economic plan (25% capital gains tax and no reduction in capital gains for the investor class) looks like it was based on focus groups’ perceptions with an eye to winning an election rather than really fostering growth in investment and wealth production here in the US.

Now we need a man with Rick Santorum’s firm convictions and integrity, Newt’s economic program and experience at getting legislation passed and Mitt’s experience at running large organizations. Unfortunately such a Chimera is not available at the moment; but Mitt or Rick could steal some of Newt’s ideas.

KW64 on February 10, 2012 at 6:14 PM

Yes, Newt doesn’t have an unlimited warchest supplemented by contributions by all the bailed out firms, this would be the
same Bloomberg that did that ‘indepth investigation’ of the Koch Bros. some months back right, they didn’t get anything wrong there.

narciso on February 10, 2012 at 10:46 PM

Comment pages: 1 2