Gingrich: Maybe Romney should pull out if he loses Michigan

posted at 1:55 pm on February 20, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Whatever one thinks about Newt Gingrich in the context of the presidential race, every interview with the former Speaker is interesting and provocative in one way or another. Yesterday Gingrich sat down with Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday to discuss politics and policy, spending almost two-thirds of the interview wearing his “analyst cap,” as Wallace requested. Wallace challenged Gingrich on why he hasn’t followed his own advice on pulling out of the race in order to strengthen the leading conservative alternative to Mitt Romney, and Gingrich replies that he now agrees with Rick Santorum on staying in the race — and points to the ups and downs Gingrich has already experienced as a reason to stay the course. Almost at the same time, Gingrich muses that a Romney loss in Michigan should have the long-time frontrunner and leading delegate gainer thus far considering retirement:


Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich hinted Sunday that if rival Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney loses the primary election in his home state of Michigan, he should drop out of the race.

“If he loses his home state, I don’t see what he says the next morning to his donors to stay in the race,” Mr. Gingrich told “Fox News Sunday.”

If Mr. Romney, a former Massachusetts governor, can’t win his home state in a primary election, how can he beat President Obama in Michigan, which typically votes with the Democrats, Mr. Gingrich asked.

“For a general election, that’s not a very good sign,” he said.

Gingrich didn’t go as far as committing to withdrawal if he loses Georgia, his own native state. So far, he has a pretty substantial lead in the Peach State per the RCP average, but the last polling is from two weeks ago — and Santorum is within single digits, nine back in the Landmark/Rosetta Stone survey of almost 1500 likely voters. Santorum might give Gingrich reason to eat his words yet again on withdrawal thresholds. The notion that Romney should consider withdrawing ahead of Gingrich on the basis of one loss — while Gingrich has only won one contest in this primary process — is a bit self-serving and rather laughable. But what else is he supposed to say at this point?

Nevertheless, Gingrich does well in this interview at presenting a reasonable and intellectually sound basis for his policy stances in the final third of the interview. We’ll see if this is the Newt Gingrich we see at the next debate, the one who impressed Republicans with his message of unity against Obama and focus on fiscal conservatism, or the one who lashed out at Romney for several weeks and talked about moon bases by 2020. If it’s the former, he may have a good night indeed, especially if Santorum and Romney spend the night going after each other.


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

The notion that Romney should consider withdrawing ahead of Gingrich on the basis of one loss — while Gingrich has only won one contest in this primary process — is a bit self-serving and rather laughable. But what else is he supposed to say at this point?

And here I thought Ed would make it through ONE newt post without some snark.

pamplonajack on February 20, 2012 at 1:57 PM

What is it with this guy always trying to get everyone to drop out? Or is this payback to National Rino Online for suggesting Newt himself drop out?

Kataklysmic on February 20, 2012 at 1:58 PM

what i mean is, Ed, Romney has been “invevitable” since 2006. he’s spent what, $200 MILLION in two prez campaigns. he’s led polling since election day +1 2008.

…and he’s won what? new hampshire? and florida.

ouch

pamplonajack on February 20, 2012 at 1:58 PM

I’m depressed thinking about Mitt as the nominee. I’m despondent thinking about Santorum as the nominee. And I’m suicidal thinking about this egotistical blabbermouth as the nominee.

BuzzCrutcher on February 20, 2012 at 1:59 PM

I love how Le Extablishment is quaking in its boots at Santorum. (Okay, I am, too!), but if the primary voters want Santorum there is no need to draft anyone else.

SouthernGent on February 20, 2012 at 2:00 PM

Obama = NotRomney?

faraway on February 20, 2012 at 2:02 PM

Advice from guy whose won almost nothing. Beginning to look as if Newt thinks his only chance is he’s the only one running. He’s probably right about that.

jeanie on February 20, 2012 at 2:02 PM

If Mr. Romney, a former Massachusetts governor, can’t win his home state in a primary election, how can he beat President Obama in Michigan, which typically votes with the Democrats, Mr. Gingrich asked.

The GOP usually loses Michigan in the general, so I don’t know how much of a barometer it should be anyway. Is Newt winning MI (or any state outside traditional red ones)?

changer1701 on February 20, 2012 at 2:03 PM

Methinks the candidates who have zero chance of winning the nomination don’t drop out because the are selfish, short-sighted and intuitively know the longer they stay in, the better chance Obama has of being reelected.

But that’s just me.

Marcus Traianus on February 20, 2012 at 2:03 PM

I love how Le Extablishment is quaking in its boots at Santorum. (Okay, I am, too!)

SouthernGent on February 20, 2012 at 2:00 PM

lol

Kataklysmic on February 20, 2012 at 2:03 PM

News flash Newton – Omarxist wins Michigan AGAIN in 2012- like the dems have done for thirty years –
.
Michigan is an open primary with mucho DEMocrat blue collar union voters – who will go for Omarxist in Nov. 2012 AGAIN anyway – so ask yourself- Do you really want Romney to be the popular darling of a Big Labor- Govt. bailout state ? I don’t.

FlaMurph on February 20, 2012 at 2:03 PM

spending almost two-thirds of the interview wearing his “analyst cap,”

And Newt falls right into Wallace’s trap. Two-thirds of what could have been a good interview about ideas flushed down the toilet.

JPeterman on February 20, 2012 at 2:03 PM

Newt standing in a puddle of gasoline warning people about fire hazards. Look at your own campaign first buddy. You have 99% donations from one person, that pretty much sums it up.

hanzblinx on February 20, 2012 at 2:04 PM

I hope Joba has his arm strength back.

a capella on February 20, 2012 at 2:06 PM

Was beginning to think that Newt had fallen off the end of the earth.

CorporatePiggy on February 20, 2012 at 2:06 PM

Looks like classic projection to me. I predict Newt is very close to the end.

booter on February 20, 2012 at 2:07 PM

Well, BuzzCrutcher, those of us concerned with population growth must hope Gingrich is the nominee and that you are serious. In fact, why wait? Since you cannot be reasoned with, there is no excuse for your existance. Listen to the candidates. What is Romney’s plan? What is Santorum’s plan? After they repeal Obamacare there is silence. Gingrich has a plan and he knows how to work that plan based upon his past accomplishments. Compare and contrast the candidates. Not by their words but by their deeds. Only Gingrich is solidly conservative and always has been.

Zelsdorf Ragshaft on February 20, 2012 at 2:07 PM

Is this another contraception story?

kunegetikos on February 20, 2012 at 2:07 PM

SouthernGent: Mr. Santorums’s chief of staff was openly gay for years,and guess what? He was kept on his position.

celtic warrior on February 20, 2012 at 2:07 PM

Newt blames Romney for all his problems so of course he will take a shot. Romney will win Michigan and Georgia Newts home state and then hopefully Gingrich will just go away.

BobScuba on February 20, 2012 at 2:07 PM

Gingrich muses that a Romney loss in Michigan should have the long-time frontrunner and leading delegate gainer thus far considering retirement:

Mr. “also ran” seems to be awful quick in calling on others to leave the race. Seriously, I don’t see Romney supporters giving Newt a second look if Romney drops out of the race.

And while on the subject of Romney, it is absurd to call MI a must-win home state for Romney. He hasn’t lived there since high school and doesn’t own a home there. It would be an emotional win given his father’s association with the state but it is Romney’s “home state” in the same way that the Chicago street thug in the White House is from Hawaii (supposedly).

Happy Nomad on February 20, 2012 at 2:08 PM

FlaMurph on February 20, 2012 at 2:03 PM

Don’t bet on that. Michigan is not what it was 4 years ago or even 2 years ago. The I-75 corridor has lost it’s clout for the dems.

Watch and learn.

booter on February 20, 2012 at 2:08 PM

I thought Ed would make it through ONE newt post without some snark.

pamplonajack on February 20, 2012 at 1:57 PM

Some of us come here (in part) for the snark.

It’s a shame that Ed is woefully misguided in his endorsement of Santorum, but I’m glad he’s on our team anyway.

And, now, to the subject at hand ….

Go Newt!

Keep taking those votes away from Santorum!

Syzygy on February 20, 2012 at 2:09 PM

Hang in there Newt!

But please stop suggesting that anyone pull out of the race.

Flora Duh on February 20, 2012 at 2:10 PM

I voted for “pulling out” before I was against it, and then for it again, but not for me, for another candidate, and not the candidate I intended before, but for a new candidate I intend now, which is to say everyone in the race besides me should get out of the race because the polls clearly showed that I was going to win the nomination, before they didn’t, and then they got worse, but forget the polls, they only mean other people should get out, while they’re meaningless when they indicate I should get out.

Isn’t that fundamentally clear?

WisRich on February 20, 2012 at 2:11 PM

Santorum: pulling out is a form of contraception, so I can’t get behind that.

ElectricPhase on February 20, 2012 at 2:11 PM

If you can’t win the state that your Dad was the Governor of, that should, at least, be cause for concern.

kingsjester on February 20, 2012 at 2:12 PM

Newt
Do all of us a favor and craw back under the rock were you came from

Sparty on February 20, 2012 at 2:13 PM

“a reasonable and intellectually sound basis for his policy stances in the final third of the interview”

I have this wacky notion that this more than anything is what it takes, and is the way to win the general. When he’s on, Newt can persuade. He can make sense, make a case, and gain support. He can get it from independents and swing voters who WILL swing the election this time.

SarahW on February 20, 2012 at 2:14 PM

At this point, Newt is kind of like Bluto in Animal House hanging out a bar waiting to see whether pretty boy Greg Marmalard of Beta house (Romney) strikes out with the hot girl in the bar. Newt’s wingman (D-Day) just kicked in another $10 million to help Newt buy more rounds until closing. My guess is that Newt is in this until last call. The questions are whether Greg strikes out and whether Pinto (Santorum) can stiff arm Newt to get the girl.

BuckeyeSam on February 20, 2012 at 2:16 PM

Looks like classic projection to me. I predict Newt is very close to the end.

booter on February 20, 2012 at 2:07 PM

Are you kidding me? he’ll be looking in through the windows at the Tampa Convention yelling, “I never got out of the race, guys! Come on, let me in there!”

g2825m on February 20, 2012 at 2:18 PM

Since Newt has declared he will be the eventual nominee, I wish he would JSTFU!

KOOLAID2 on February 20, 2012 at 2:19 PM

Don’t bet on that. Michigan is not what it was 4 years ago or even 2 years ago. The I-75 corridor has lost it’s clout for the dems.

Watch and learn.

booter on February 20, 2012 at 2:08 PM

Four more years of a bad economy under Jennifer Granholm and Barak Obama. Unions thwarting any real reform. Negative population growth. Lack of economic opportunity, hope, or sense that things are getting better……

Only fools and the most rabid of partisans in Michigan should be cheering the idea of four more years for the Chicago street thug and her evil husband.

Happy Nomad on February 20, 2012 at 2:21 PM

Looks like classic projection to me. I predict Newt is very close to the end.

booter on February 20, 2012 at 2:07 PM

Out of money or not, Newt will stay in the primary race until the convention. He considers himself a Great Man Of Destiny (TM), another Reagan, Thatcher, Churchill. (No, really. Gingrich has publicly compared himself (favorably) with Reagan, Thatcher, Churchill.) Anyway, Gingrich can’t understand why voters don’t seem to appeciate his special awesome greatness, so I guess he’s determined to stay in the race until we do.

Besides, Gingrich hates Romney with the passion peculiar to the hatred held by fat know-it-all high school nerds for the handsome rich kid king of the prom who drives the cool car and dates all the cheerleaders. He’ll stay in the race out of spite, if nothing else.

troyriser_gopftw on February 20, 2012 at 2:22 PM

Whatever one thinks about Newt Gingrich in the context of the presidential race, every interview with the former Speaker is interesting and provocative in one way or another.

Ed Morrissey on Feb 20, 2012 1:55 PM

I would much prefer either Rick Santorum or Newt Gingrich as the Republican candidate. I think both of them not only would be better candidates than Mitt Romney, I think both of them would be more effective Presidents and would be good, relatively good, on the issues that we’re concerned about. Mitt Romney on the other hand, I think he’s a bad candidate. I think he’s not an effective candidate against Barack Hussein Obama. I think that he’s extremely vulnerable and I think he’s not good on the issues. I think he’s a phony and I think he’s not good on the issues.

apocalypse on February 20, 2012 at 2:23 PM

I love how Le Extablishment is quaking in its boots at Santorum.

SouthernGent on February 20, 2012 at 2:00 PM

Can someone PLEASE give me a list of who is in “The Establishment” of the GOP? I keep hearing about them, but I get less than a dozen names and I never find out where the meetings are held and what the secret handshake is.

csdeven on February 20, 2012 at 2:23 PM

Newt, feel free to follow your own advice about dropping out, since the only remaining candidate who has won fewer states than you is Ron Paul. Remember the guy in Iowa who suggested you drop out because you’re only embarrassing yourself?

talkingpoints on February 20, 2012 at 2:23 PM

I donated to Newt.

I think he should quit.

If you never ran anything bigger than a bake sale or worked a budget bigger than a personal checkbook, you are really confused right now.

Why the Community Organizer is just as good as the earmark and religion crazed Senator who is just as good as the brilliant but crabby attack serial polygamist and they are all better than the guy who looks best and has a resume consistent with running the show.

Because he has changed positions and doesn’t come across as dumb enough.

At least he is tough on immigration.

IlikedAUH2O on February 20, 2012 at 2:24 PM

R has already won a ‘home’ state. NH, which is nearly one, likes him just fine. And while I’m about it, the State is chock a block full of the species indy and unaffiliated voter unlike MI which is reliably blue in the general. Cannot speak for indies nation wide of course but candidates who dismiss this are missing a big piece of the puzzle.

jeanie on February 20, 2012 at 2:27 PM

How did we get here?

Let’s sum up the 2012 GOP Primary season: Anticipointment.

juanito on February 20, 2012 at 2:27 PM

every interview with the former Speaker is interesting and provocative in one way or another.

A box of chocolates…that’s for sure. Keep bringing it Newt.

lynncgb on February 20, 2012 at 2:28 PM

Mitt Romney can count to infinity-and back again.

csdeven on February 20, 2012 at 2:32 PM

Gingrich: Maybe Romney should pull out if he loses Michigan

Why wait?

Stoic Patriot on February 20, 2012 at 2:32 PM

Gingrich is a joke, at least it’s on him. If Rom-zombie gets the nod, the joke’s on us.

abobo on February 20, 2012 at 2:33 PM

Mitt Romney never saw a Mandate he didn’t like.

kingsjester on February 20, 2012 at 2:36 PM

Methinks the candidates who have zero chance of winning the nomination don’t drop out because the are selfish, short-sighted and intuitively know the longer they stay in, the better chance Obama has of being reelected.

But that’s just me.

Marcus Traianus on February 20, 2012 at 2:03 PM

If you think any of them want Obama reelected, you are full of it.

They stay in as long as other people are paying the bills. It’s a huge ego trip – for all candidates, and always has been, no matter how much they pretend it isn’t.

Gingrich’s problem is he spends money too fast – his burn rate is astronomical. Even when low in the polls and having a hard time raising money, he stayed at the best hotels and refused to cut corners. Adelson’s money pays for a lot of ads, but cannot pay the campaign expenses by law. If he gets out, it’s because he couldn’t raise the money to keep going – but that’s why we haven’t seen him lately, he’s been pressing the fundraising flesh in person.

Adjoran on February 20, 2012 at 2:36 PM

Adjoran on February 20, 2012 at 2:36 PM

Don’t forget about Newts love of private chartered jets.

JPeterman on February 20, 2012 at 2:39 PM

So what if Gingrich loses Georgia? How rich and convenient for him, he would like Romney to drop out, this guy is outrageous, I hope he wins though. LOL

residentblue on February 20, 2012 at 2:41 PM

I think both of them not only would be better candidates than Mitt Romney, I think both of them would be more effective Presidents and would be good, relatively good, on the issues that we’re concerned about. Mitt Romney on the other hand, I think he’s a bad candidate. I think he’s not an effective candidate against Barack Hussein Obama. I think that he’s extremely vulnerable and I think he’s not good on the issues. I think he’s a phony and I think he’s not good on the issues.

apocalypse on February 20, 2012 at 2:23 PM

On what basis do you assert that either Santy or Newt would make a more effective President? They might, but I don’t see anything in either of their resumes to conclude that, at all. Neither have ever run anything before.

changer1701 on February 20, 2012 at 2:41 PM

I see a Rick/Newt partnership in the future…

right2bright on February 20, 2012 at 2:41 PM

Newt has all the charm of a rattlesnake…It’s time to go Newt. Maybe your billionaire pal will let you keep a few million from your campaign war-chest to retire on and keep the Tiffany’s account…

Nozzle on February 20, 2012 at 2:42 PM

Neither have ever run anything before.

changer1701 on February 20, 2012 at 2:41 PM

Well Jimmy Carter ran a large business, and Gore is a big businessman now, Edwards, Perot, Forbes, Rockefeller, Jessie Jackson jr., all have “run” businesses.
Many people “run” businesses and are fools, Eisenhower was a great president, and military man, are all military men presidential material?
How about a man who worked his way through college, born in a blue collar family, obtained his MBA, JD, passed the bar and was a successful attorney, does that count?
How about someone who was a blue collar family, worked their way through college, became Speaker of the House, and runs several businesses…Does that count?
How about someone who was given everything in life, from one of the most influential political families in the country, went to college, came out and became a consultant, earned the first year $250,000–the first year with no experience, is that person qualified to be President?

right2bright on February 20, 2012 at 2:47 PM

As you requested csdeven

From Charles Krauthammer on Fox’s Special Report with Bret Baier Thursday, January 26, 2012

Who makes up the “Republican establishment”?

Karl Rove is the president. We meet every month on the full moon. I’ve explained this. At the Masonic Temple. We have the ritual: Karl brings the incense, I bring the live lamb and the long knife, and we began . . . with a pledge of allegiance to the Trilateral Commission. That is how it works.

jb34461 on February 20, 2012 at 2:50 PM

Newt has done such a piss-poor job running his own campaign, and he is hardly in a position to be doling out advice.

ghostwriter on February 20, 2012 at 2:52 PM

I wonder about this plan;

Romney should pull out if he loses MI
Gingrich should pull out if he loses GA
Santorum should pull out if he loses PA

Dasher on February 20, 2012 at 2:52 PM

So what if Gingrich loses Georgia? How rich and convenient for him, he would like Romney to drop out, this guy is outrageous, I hope he wins though. LOL

residentblue on February 20, 2012 at 2:41 PM

LOL- He is one of the few left to save you from finally being able to live your moronic communist utopia dream. I don’t think it would be near as much fun as you seem to think. Why don’t you and Obama do like Allen West advised, go find someplace else to peddle your crap. I hear North Korea is lovely this time of year.

Night Owl on February 20, 2012 at 2:52 PM

I see a Rick/Newt partnership in the future…

right2bright on February 20, 2012 at 2:41 PM

Oh yeah, a Santorum/Gingrich dream ticket, one with all the electability of Mondale and Ferraro. Can’t wait.

What are you guys thinking, anyway? Do you honestly believe the two most antagonistic, abrasive, alienating politicians in modern memory have the slightest chance of garnering independent votes and winning the general election, or are you just supporting them to spite the mythical Republican Establishment? And just who is the Republican Establishment, anyway? Republicans who make more money than you?

Speaking of money, both Gingrich and Santorum make their living as lobbyists when not running for office–but that’s okay now since that’s only a bad thing when the Democrats do it.

troyriser_gopftw on February 20, 2012 at 2:54 PM

maybe all four of them should pull out and we can start over with different candidates.

Sachiko on February 20, 2012 at 2:55 PM

Newt has done such a piss-poor job running his own campaign, and he is hardly in a position to be doling out advice.

ghostwriter on February 20, 2012 at 2:52 PM

As opposed to who?

Night Owl on February 20, 2012 at 2:55 PM

How about someone who was given everything in life, from one of the most influential political families in the country, went to college, came out and became a consultant, earned the first year $250,000–the first year with no experience, is that person qualified to be President?

right2bright on February 20, 2012 at 2:47 PM

Those advantages don’t guarantee success later, though. But that’s beside the point…regardless of their more humble upbringing, neither have run anything. I don’t know on what basis anyone could say they’d be a more effective leader, then, when we’ve not seen them in those roles. (I guess you could argue that as Speaker Newt had an executive role, but that’s stretching it.) Having run a business, or a state, doesn’t mean someone will make a good President, but obviously we have ample evidence in the last three years alone that just being a legislator doesn’t lend itself to leadership, either.

changer1701 on February 20, 2012 at 2:56 PM

Gingrich does well in this interview at presenting a reasonable and intellectually sound basis for his policy stances…

And why is this not the deciding factor? You people who snark Newt probably also read People magazine. This election should not be about who is more beautiful, who has more money, who the RINOs like, who had fewer wives, or who didn’t beat their dog. For god’s sake, this election is about saving this country from further progressive decay. That is Newt’s strong point.

NOMOBO on February 20, 2012 at 2:57 PM

The man is absolutely OBSESSED with people waving the white flag. He can’t go a week without calling for someone else’s surrender.

CycloneCDB on February 20, 2012 at 3:00 PM

changer1701 on February 20, 2012 at 2:56 PM

You never answered my question…is that a good base to start as president of the United States, being from a powerful political family, never having to work as a youth, college grad from a top rated university, a “consultant” hired at $250,000 per year (I wonder why so much), you think that is a good base to start from? That is who you want (formative years and all) to be your leader?

right2bright on February 20, 2012 at 3:02 PM

Those advantages don’t guarantee success later, though. But that’s beside the point…regardless of their more humble upbringing, neither have run anything. I don’t know on what basis anyone could say they’d be a more effective leader, then, when we’ve not seen them in those roles. (I guess you could argue that as Speaker Newt had an executive role, but that’s stretching it.) Having run a business, or a state, doesn’t mean someone will make a good President, but obviously we have ample evidence in the last three years alone that just being a legislator doesn’t lend itself to leadership, either.

changer1701 on February 20, 2012 at 2:56 PM

What would you say if Newt’s business experience is more expansive and more varied than Mitt’s, would you than concede that Newt is better qualified?

Now you have two challenges that will confuse you on how to answer…but you can handle it, forthright I would hope.

right2bright on February 20, 2012 at 3:04 PM

Here is how Romney is treated differently on Fox than Newt.

Newt sits down. Chris Wallace asks for the 900th time why Newt resigned from the Congress in disgrace and can’t win the presidency because of it.

Then Chris Wallace asks why Newt was having an affair with Callista but proceeding with impeachment against Clinton for what amounts to perjury about sex, lying about sex, which is what Newt was doing behind Marianne’s back.

Then he asks about sitting on the bench with Nancy Pelosi.

Then he asks about what he actually did as a Fanny and Freddy employee.

Then Chris Wallace asks him why he is getting annoyed with the same questions asked over and over again, and why he won’t be able to win until he answers properly.

Then Newt says there are a lot of other things that are important about the race for president that you have not asked him yet, and that night the pundits say, Yah Newt never answers the most important questions.

Fleuries on February 20, 2012 at 3:05 PM

Michigan is an open primary with mucho DEMocrat blue collar union voters – who will go for Omarxist in Nov. 2012 AGAIN anyway – so ask yourself- Do you really want Romney to be the popular darling of a Big Labor- Govt. bailout state ? I don’t.

FlaMurph on February 20, 2012 at 2:03 PM

This is why this whole bruhaha about Michigan being Romney’s waterloo is so dumb. Michigan is such a liberal state, and the unions are actively trying to get Santorum as the GOP nominee.

BettyRuth on February 20, 2012 at 3:07 PM

Speaking of money, both Gingrich and Santorum make their living as lobbyists when not running for office–but that’s okay now since that’s only a bad thing when the Democrats do it.

troyriser_gopftw on February 20, 2012 at 2:54 PM

Rick was never a lobbyist, that is an outright lie…as a Senator, he would have had to first not “lobby” for several years, than he would have had to register, if not, he would have been prosecuted.
Maybe the dems have overlooked that…or maybe you are just passing on the lie…

right2bright on February 20, 2012 at 3:07 PM

Then Newt says there are a lot of other things that are important about the race for president that you have not asked him yet, and that night the pundits say, Yah Newt never answers the most important questions.

Fleuries on February 20, 2012 at 3:05 PM

Exactly, and similar for Rick…

right2bright on February 20, 2012 at 3:08 PM

and the unions are actively trying to get Santorum as the GOP nominee.

BettyRuth on February 20, 2012 at 3:07 PM

Maybe you could link that, I haven’t seen that story in print…thanks

right2bright on February 20, 2012 at 3:09 PM

You never answered my question…is that a good base to start as president of the United States, being from a powerful political family, never having to work as a youth, college grad from a top rated university, a “consultant” hired at $250,000 per year (I wonder why so much), you think that is a good base to start from? That is who you want (formative years and all) to be your leader?

right2bright on February 20, 2012 at 3:02 PM

I wouldn’t say it’s a bad base to start as President…why would it be? As to whether it’s a good basis, maybe…depends on what the person has done with it. And Romney, for one, built on it and achieved success.

What would you say if Newt’s business experience is more expansive and more varied than Mitt’s, would you than concede that Newt is better qualified?

Now you have two challenges that will confuse you on how to answer…but you can handle it, forthright I would hope.

right2bright on February 20, 2012 at 3:04 PM

No I wouldn’t concede that, because his business experience consists of promoting himself.

changer1701 on February 20, 2012 at 3:17 PM

Gingrich: Maybe Romney should pull out if he loses Michigan

What’s good for the goose…

Will newt commit to drop out and support santorum if he loses his home state of georgia?

TeaPartyNation on February 20, 2012 at 3:18 PM

What a laugh u r Newt. You should take yourself out of the race for taking money from Fannie/freddie. In fact you should resign from the Republican party. Dope.

sbvft contributor on February 20, 2012 at 3:18 PM

I think Mitt should get out, period. But then, I just might be just a little biased.

ErickAnt on February 20, 2012 at 3:19 PM

Gingrich does well in this interview at presenting a reasonable and intellectually sound basis for his policy stances

kenny on February 20, 2012 at 3:20 PM

Rick was never a lobbyist, that is an outright lie…as a Senator, he would have had to first not “lobby” for several years, than he would have had to register, if not, he would have been prosecuted.
Maybe the dems have overlooked that…or maybe you are just passing on the lie…

right2bright on February 20, 2012 at 3:07 PM

Not a lie and I’m not a liar. Santorum has made lots of money since he was voted out of office. Guess how–no, really, go on. Guess. Give up? Go here.

As long as Santorum could claim two degrees of professional separation between himself and his former colleagues in Congress, he didn’t have to register as a lobbyist. Seems like an ethical gray area to me, which is especially rich coming from a guy who shouts moral absolutes from the rooftops.

troyriser_gopftw on February 20, 2012 at 3:24 PM

And why is this not the deciding factor? You people who snark Newt probably also read People magazine. This election should not be about who is more beautiful, who has more money, who the RINOs like, who had fewer wives, or who didn’t beat their dog. For god’s sake, this election is about saving this country from further progressive decay. That is Newt’s strong point.

NOMOBO on February 20, 2012 at 2:57 PM

I don’t know about the People Magazine part, but otherwise, EXACTLY!

Night Owl on February 20, 2012 at 3:25 PM

No I wouldn’t concede that, because his business experience consists of promoting himself.

changer1701 on February 20, 2012 at 3:17 PM

And Mitt’s experience is promoting himself and making money also…he is a perennial candidate for something…
Good answer on the other challeng, of course you were assuming I was talking about Mitt, but I wasn’t…it was Chelsea Clinton, graduated from Stanford and became a “consultant”, that’s a catch-all for; I can use your political leverage to make money…and she did and has.
You see, just being a “businessman”, a successful one, means nothing in politics, you can’t name a successful business person who became President…but a lot of good ones who were never businessmen…Eisenhower, Reagan…
What is more valuable is someones track record on voting…
Rick received an A for fiscal voting (all 12 years) from the unbiased National Taxpayers Union, and the only Senator to receive an A rating the last 4 years of Bush’s rein…no one else has that good of record, none even close who are running…
So now, who has the best fiscal voting record? Who has the history and the actual votes to prove they are fiscally sound?
Of course you can’t say Rick, but it’s there, you can’t change the facts, you can ignore them (and you will) but you can’t change them.

right2bright on February 20, 2012 at 3:27 PM

Gingrich should pull out if he loses Virginia.

Ronnie on February 20, 2012 at 3:29 PM

Gingrich should pull out if he loses Virginia.

Ronnie on February 20, 2012 at 3:29 PM

lol. just shows what a hypocrite Newt is

hanzblinx on February 20, 2012 at 3:33 PM

Newt makes some great points and can debate better than most, however he is the consummate politician and Washington insider, teaming with Pelosi about AGW, lobbying for Fannie and Freddie etc. Politically expedient to be sure, but one wonders what compromises and knee jerk policy intitiatives would come out of Newtonian presidency. It may be great, but then again…

JBA66 on February 20, 2012 at 3:35 PM

right2bright on February 20, 2012 at 3:07 PM

Please tell me again how Santorum hasn’t been a lobbyist since he was voted out of office. He has:

Allison said someone like Santorum would be extremely valuable in that regard. “He’s an expert on the legislative process. He knows who the players are,” Allison said. “Even if he’s not contacting people, he can tell them where the levers are, who is receptive to hearing a message. And he also knows how the system works with money and influence, and can offer advice about who to contribute to, which leadership PACs to pump money.”

Yup, that’s the guy I want lecturing me and the rest of the country on personal morality.

troyriser_gopftw on February 20, 2012 at 3:39 PM

troyriser_gopftw on February 20, 2012 at 3:24 PM

HaHASHAHA! I knew you were probably going to link that hit piece…notice they didn’t call him a lobbyist, but a “stealth lobbyist” because calling his a lobbyist would have been illegal. So they have to couch their little hit piece, and of course you fell for it…so easy to manipulate haters, you guys.

“He has been, essentially, a stealth lobbyist,” said Bill Allison, editorial director for the Sunlight Foundation, a watchdog group.

Essentially, meaning, he wasn’t but we want to call it that…if he was, he would have had Senate investigation, you don’t think a dem controlled Senate would not have like to have skewered him? They didn’t even give him a passing glance…they leave it to journalist liberal hacks, and their easily led readers to pass that lie around.
It was a lie, he was not a lobbyist…if so he would have been, by law, registered, and by law, for several years not be a “lobbyist”.
Here is a hint…learn to think on your own, and don’t be led by a bunch of journalists…gee, I wonder how Obama ever got elected…never mind, you have given me insight.

Just to enlighten you, since you think so highly of them:

The Sunlight Foundation received $300,000 from the Foundation to Promote Open Society in 2010 and $250,000 from the Open Society Institute in 2008. Both these groups organizations are run by convicted insider trader George Soros. The Center for American Progress received $550,000 from Soros’ Foundation to Promote Open Society in 2009 and $1,250,000 in 2008 from his Open Society Institute.

The most vicious attackers of Rick are you guys who embrace Soros and his tactics…

right2bright on February 20, 2012 at 3:40 PM

I think that Newt’s father should have pulled out the night he was conceived.

libertarianlunatic on February 20, 2012 at 3:42 PM

Yup, that’s the guy I want lecturing me and the rest of the country on personal morality.

troyriser_gopftw on February 20, 2012 at 3:39 PM

And you are not the type I feel comfortable voting…you can be told anything, by anyone, and if it fits your “scheme” you embrace it without question.
So easy to manipulate you guys, it’s no wonder Soros is a billionaire with you guys running around.
I repeat, Allison the spokesperson for this group:

The Sunlight Foundation received $300,000 from the Foundation to Promote Open Society in 2010 and $250,000 from the Open Society Institute in 2008. Both these groups organizations are run by convicted insider trader George Soros. The Center for American Progress received $550,000 from Soros’ Foundation to Promote Open Society in 2009 and $1,250,000 in 2008 from his Open Society Institute.

Your a bunch of patsy’s, pawns…easy to pull your strings…oh look Soro’s group says he is a lobbyist, and we like Romney, so…Rick is a dirty no good lobbyist.

You do realize that Romney has received more money from lobbyists than all the other candidates combined…all of them from the beginning of the campaign…
Weak minded fools so easy to manipulate…create a Romney supporter, than feed them garbage, they eat it up, spew it out…and when Romney is the candidate, tables turned…it happens every time, every single time…

right2bright on February 20, 2012 at 3:46 PM

The most vicious attackers of Rick are you guys who embrace Soros and his tactics…

right2bright on February 20, 2012 at 3:40 PM

I have nothing against Soros’ tactics, which are evidently legal–although I understand some of his financial dealings have skirted the bounds of legality in the past. I wouldn’t embrace Soros but must admit to a kind of perverse admiration for his tactics.

In politics, all that is legal is allowable. For once, I wish we had a Republican Establishment worthy of the name, a group of ruthless, scheming, Machiavellian operators determined to take on the Chicago Machine on its own terms. As it is, we get GOP primary candidates whining whenever an opponent goes negative–as if the Obama campaign and its allies in the MSM won’t go for a scorched earth strategy in the general election. If a Republican presidential candidate can’t take the heat in the primaries, how in the world can they expect to prevail in the general election?

troyriser_gopftw on February 20, 2012 at 3:52 PM

Gingrich should pull out if he loses Virginia.

Ronnie on February 20, 2012 at 3:29 PM

He’s not on the ballot…whaaaaa….wait! I see what you did there!

CycloneCDB on February 20, 2012 at 3:52 PM

As long as Santorum could claim two degrees of professional separation between himself and his former colleagues in Congress, he didn’t have to register as a lobbyist. Seems like an ethical gray area to me, which is especially rich coming from a guy who shouts moral absolutes from the rooftops.

troyriser_gopftw on February 20, 2012 at 3:24 PM

So you knew that he was not a lobbyist, yet you stated he was a lobbyist, and you don’t call that a lie?
Talk about a gray area…good grief, well if George Soros thinks he is a lobbyist than…

right2bright on February 20, 2012 at 3:53 PM

troyriser_gopftw on February 20, 2012 at 3:52 PM

Interesting tact…you get nailed for spewing lies, than have admiration for the guy that manipulated you…you are the perfect subject for people like Soros…like I stated, I have no delusions of the people who voted for Obama.
The “anything goes that is legal”, well that’s your personal feelings, and people like you (as you have shown) will delude themselves into thinking most anything is legal.
I prefer integrity, integrity even above what the law requires…guess I am just a “whiner” in your eyes, but than you are the one who was so easily taken in by an article, because it “fits” you.

right2bright on February 20, 2012 at 3:59 PM

I prefer integrity, integrity even above what the law requires…guess I am just a “whiner” in your eyes, but than you are the one who was so easily taken in by an article, because it “fits” you.

right2bright on February 20, 2012 at 3:59 PM

Yes, you are a whiner in my eyes, and none-too-bright, either.

troyriser_gopftw on February 20, 2012 at 4:02 PM

troyriser_gopftw on February 20, 2012 at 3:39 PM

I guess that explains why Santorum was so quick to deflect from discussing Newt’s lobbying-but-not-really-lobbying.

I’m so looking forward to Wednesday’s debate. Let’s see how the flavor of the week performs from center stage.

Syzygy on February 20, 2012 at 4:04 PM

Romney by now must be feeling really down b/c he is now competing with the guy who was at the bottom of the polls during most of this primary season.

evergreenland on February 20, 2012 at 4:08 PM

One of the things pulling Romney down, is his supporters are such angry people…it’s just weird.
No other candidate has whiners like he has…PPP was wrong on the poling data when Rick was ahead, but they are the greatest polling firm when Mitt is ahead….good grief, Mitt attracts just plain strange people…zealots, much more than his last attempt.
But like one of his supporters say, he admires Soros, and thinks his tactics are sound…and that pretty much tells you the kind of supporter that Mitt attracts.

right2bright on February 20, 2012 at 4:33 PM

One of the things pulling Romney down, is his supporters are such angry people…it’s just weird.
No other candidate has whiners like he has…PPP was wrong on the poling data when Rick was ahead, but they are the greatest polling firm when Mitt is ahead….good grief, Mitt attracts just plain strange people…zealots, much more than his last attempt.
But like one of his supporters say, he admires Soros, and thinks his tactics are sound…and that pretty much tells you the kind of supporter that Mitt attracts.

right2bright on February 20, 2012 at 4:33 PM

100% Correct. My experience w/ Mitt supporters has been that if you consider voting for another candidate, you just are not very bright. And, that being the case, you should just trust the smart people and vote for Romney right along with them.

It’s rather offputting and feels an awful lot like the way Dems treat conservatives…which doesn’t make any conservative feel better about Mitt’s conservative bona fides.

CycloneCDB on February 20, 2012 at 4:39 PM

Gingrich and Santorum should both stop whining, stop talking, and go home. On second thought, they live in Virginia so keep them out there.

lhuffman34 on February 20, 2012 at 4:41 PM

No other candidate has whiners like he has…

right2bright on February 20, 2012 at 4:33 PM

Pot. Kettle. Black.

troyriser_gopftw on February 20, 2012 at 4:55 PM

Pot. Kettle. Black.

troyriser_gopftw on February 20, 2012 at 4:55 PM

And who am I supporting wise guy?
Let’s see how brilliant you are in your analysis…

right2bright on February 20, 2012 at 5:02 PM

And who am I supporting wise guy?
Let’s see how brilliant you are in your analysis…

right2bright on February 20, 2012 at 5:02 PM

What, you don’t know…pal, calling someone out and making them eat their lies is not whining, it’s calling you out…don’t whine about it.

right2bright on February 20, 2012 at 5:14 PM

No other candidate has whiners like he has…PPP was wrong on the poling data when Rick was ahead, but they are the greatest polling firm when Mitt is ahead….good grief, Mitt attracts just plain strange people…zealots, much more than his last attempt.

But like one of his supporters say, he admires Soros, and thinks his tactics are sound…and that pretty much tells you the kind of supporter that Mitt attracts.

right2bright on February 20, 2012 at 4:33 PM

If by “zealot” you mean folks who are genuinely interested in defeating Obama in November. Why does that seem “strange” to you? I love it when some anti-Romney paranoid whines about how much supporters of another candidate “whine.” It’s not our fault that Newty went dumpster diving in OWS rhetoric and disgraced himself.

cicerone on February 20, 2012 at 5:24 PM

Wikipedia Reports the following for Secured Delegates

Mitt Romney:
Secured delegates: 91
Popular vote: 1,119,307(38.9%)

Newt Gingrich:
Secured delegates: 32
Popular vote: 838,366(27.5%)

Rick Santorum
Secured delegates: 4
Popular vote: 430,827(18.7%)

This is the total as of today Sunday, 2/19/2012. According to this Santorum only has 18% of the popular vote and 4 delegates.

Polls are polls, but actual votes show that this race is a long way from over. Go Newt!

Kaffa on February 20, 2012 at 5:26 PM

What, you don’t know…pal, calling someone out and making them eat their lies is not whining, it’s calling you out…don’t whine about it.

right2bright on February 20, 2012 at 5:14 PM

In other words, “I’m not a baby YOU’RE a BABY!” A lack of maturity is a big part of Newty’s problem and the same goes for the whining dupes who still support him.

cicerone on February 20, 2012 at 5:27 PM

Comment pages: 1 2