The Improbable Gingrich Scenario
posted at 9:53 am on January 13, 2012 by Karl
The conventional wisdom is that Mitt Romney, the first GOP non-incumbent to win the Iowa caucuses and New Hamsphire primary, is thisclose to being the party’s de facto presidential nominee. The conventional wisdom is almost certainly right. However, one of my New Year’s resolutions has been to question straight-line projections from the current situation.
So how could Romney lose the nomination at this point? At a minimum, he would have to lose (or eke out a squeaky Iowa-esque win) in South Carolina. Could that happen? The latest poll from Insider Advantage has Romney ahead of Newt Gingrich by only two points. That’s just one poll, but PPP has its Palmetto state poll due later today that may well show a competitive Mitt vs Newt race.
If Romney stumbled in South Carolina, the questions about his candidacy would linger and perhaps grow, depending on the degree of the stumble. People would revisit his IA and NH wins and perhaps conclude they are more the product of divided opposition than any improvement in Mitt as a candidate. They might worry about how much worse the Bain issue might play in a general election in the hands of the left. They might think hard about whether 2012 is the year to nominate a high financier.
Romney is well ahead of Gingrich in Florida at the moment. But a win (or very-near-win) in South Carolina might change those numbers. Indeed, those numbers include Rick Santorum; if he dropped out, Romney would likely find himself in a tight race with Gingrich, whose favorables even now are second only to Romney’s in the Sunshine State. If Gingrich beat Romney in Florida, Mitt would have a severe case of The Emepror’s New Electability.
I doubt all these dominoes would fall Newt’s way. Romney is well-organized, well-funded, and has the establishment lining up for him. Gingrich even now is a loose cannon capable of doing himself in, with loads of his own baggage. Romney is a better fit for South Carolina than he was four years ago. Other NotRomneys, including Santorum will likely stay in the race through Florida, allowing Romney a win in the fashion McCain won four years ago.
The conventional wisdom is that Mitt Romney, the first GOP non-incumbent to win the Iowa caucuses and New Hamsphire primary, is thisclose to being the party’s de facto presidential nominee. The conventional wisdom is almost certainly right. But if Romney was going to lose, this is probably how it would happen.
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
1. Newt wins SC
2. Perry drops out after SC and Newt collects Perry’s base
3. By the time FL rolls around, Newt’s carpet-bombing campaign will have had the same effect Romney’s did on Newt
4. Newt wins FL
5. Santorum drops out after FL and Newt collects Santorum’s base
6. New ball game…..
MTLassen on January 13, 2012 at 10:12 AM
I think it still boils down to a choice between Romney and Gingrich. Perry comes across as a buffoon, Santorum as a colorless prig, Huntsman is just…. oily.
Romney = stable, looks the part, smooth surface.
Gingrich = mercurial, intense, unpredictable, brilliant.
For me, it’s coming down to whether we try to smooth things over and muddle along, or whether it’s time to roll the dice and break some stuff.
Newt as president would be unpredictable, even scary, but he would break stuff in Washington and make the pigs squeal. As screwed up as Washington is, I vote for the candidate who’ll break stuff.
cane_loader on January 13, 2012 at 10:28 AM
It’s going to come down to where the Santorum and Paul voters go.
Would Santorum’s voters go to Romney or Gingrich? I would think Gingrich, 2 to 1. Perry voters? Gingrich, 2 to 1. Paul voters? Half to Santorum, 25% to Gingrich, 25% hang fire and follow Paul to the end of the earth.
So, time for some very sloppy math:
Romney gets 33% of Santorum voters plus 33% of Perry’s, plus 0% of Paul’s, for an increase of 67%.
Gingrich gets 67% of Santorum voters plus 67% of Perry’s, plus 25% of Paul’s, for an increase of 159%.
Lots of upside still for Gingrich to gain voters; Romney, not so much.
cane_loader on January 13, 2012 at 10:33 AM
I like Newt. He’s a fighter! He’s in there getting bashed from all sides and he’s still standing. It’s a long shot but people like an underdog.
saspepper on January 13, 2012 at 10:35 AM
Between the Bain Capital hit piece and his (to me, more concerning) plan to combat judicial activism by sanctioning Executive Branch activism, I think Newt has lost a large part of his reason for running, since he has created his only niches where he’s positioned himself to the left of Romney (Gingrich might smack down judicial activism from a conservative angle by giving the president the power to ignore rulings and the power to recall lifetime appointments, but giving President Gingrich powers you’d never want President Obama to have is big government overreach at its worst).
By going to a desperation/scattershot attack on Team Mitt, where “Throw everything on the wall and see if something sticks” trumps ideological consistency, what is the scenario for Gingrich to rally? An open primary state where Democrats can vote for the Republican presidential hopefuls because they like Newt’s new tone as of late? The only thing I’ll say is that at least Gingrich continues to be proactive in his efforts, misguided as they are; in contrast, Rick Perry comes across like a hungry dog searching for a bone, jumping onto other people’s attacks in hopes that he can steal their message and catch lightning in a bottle (and Perry showed in 2007 if he thinks their are voters to be swayed by shifting to the left, his conservative principles are not going to stand in the way of winning a future election).
jon1979 on January 13, 2012 at 10:46 AM
All the establishment operatives, media, pundits and mittbots that relentlessly trashed Sarah Palin to keep her out of the race because Romney is the chosen one, are now doing the same to Newt. Come on Sarah, endorse Newt. You know you want to.
saspepper on January 13, 2012 at 10:46 AM
Paul has a more realistic path than Gingrich. He was 3% in SC just 3 months ago and now he’s at 16%. A second place finish or even first isn’t out of the question given the surge trends of every other candidate thus far. At that point, Hunstman, Perry and Santorum drop out, leaving a 3-man race of Gingrich, Paul and Romney. Heck, even Gingrich might drop out at that point depending on his numbers in Florida.
Paul then has the military experience and bona-fide domestic spending cuts thing going for him versus a bank-bailout, romneycare moderate. Tough choice, but the path is there.
tozee on January 13, 2012 at 11:18 AM
So my choice is between Obamneycare and the Freddie Mac womanizer.
That is not a choice. I can’t support either of them in the primary.
juliesa on January 13, 2012 at 11:25 AM
In the same way that I don’t understand why Obama is considered brilliant, I don’t understand why Newt is considered brilliant or a “dynamic thinker” (Hannity). In a lot of ways, I consider Newt to be more like Obama than Romney is. It seems to me that at heart both Obama and Newt are academics/intellectuals and both temperamentally inclined toward Utopian visions. I’m disinclined to count someone as a “dynamic thinker” or brilliant who is either fundamentally clichéd in his/her thinking (more true of Obama) or fundamentally undisciplined in his/her thinking, which seems to me more true of Newt. Newt is as inclined to sit on a couch with Pelosi or call a conservative budget “right wing social engineering” (not the first time he has used this phrase, as Ann Coulter notes ) as he is to try to chastise liberal media. The task of academics/intellectuals is to come up with ideas, and the more apparently the ideas are “out of the box thinking” or “cutting edge,” the better. And sending out U.S. Marshals to haul sitting federal judges in front of Congress for interrogation doubtless counts as thinking outside the box. Yet it probably doesn’t square well with a firm commitment to constitutional conservativism, any more than his willingness to countenance circumstances under which we might limit free speech…and of course, in Newt’s view, someone like Newt (or Obama) will decide the nature of those circumstances. Because of Newt’s attachment to his own ideas – better – to generating ideas (the more outre), the better, Newt seems to me an unreliable conservative. Based on his remarks on his radio show yesterday, Hannity is hopeful that, with a Republican Congress, a President Newt will reel us back from the abyss that President Barack has led us. Newt, however, did not obviously reel Fannie Mae back. And I think Hannity’s hope is easily disappointed, just because of the intrinsic nature of people like Newt and Obama: they are after all sent to us to lead us to that Promised Land. Coulter closes her Human Events piece with a selection of Newt’s own notes: Newt wrote of himself that he is [will be?] the “definer of civilization, teacher of the rules of civilization, arouser of those who fan civilization, organizer of the pro-civilization activists, leader (possibly) of the civilizing forces.” Like Obama, running for President is a step down for someone like Newt.
EastofEden on January 13, 2012 at 1:41 PM
Sarah endorses Newt. Cain endorses Newt. Newt takes SC. Santorum and Perry drop out. Money flows to Newt. The race is on. Go Newt!
Kaffa on January 13, 2012 at 1:50 PM
Sorry, the base is NOT going to nominate a grumpy, 77 year old crazy man to run against Obama.
karenhasfreedom on January 13, 2012 at 1:59 PM
The improbable is become more and more possible as SC polls show tightening at the top.
eaglephin on January 13, 2012 at 2:05 PM
Sorry, I’m in the ABN column now. I’ll vote Ron Paul over Newt.
E L Frederick (Sniper One) on January 13, 2012 at 2:09 PM
Yes, C’mon Sarah!! Her kiss of death should knock out this fat, double talking, class baiting snake once and for all.
xxessw on January 13, 2012 at 2:20 PM
To quote Spock, “Only Nixon could go to China.” As the godfather of Obamacare, Romney may be the best qualified to dismantle it. His promises to grant waivers to everyone and to see O-care repealed have become central planks in his campaign; he can hardly renege on them now.
FogDog on January 13, 2012 at 2:30 PM
It is a long race, and hanging fire past SC and FL is more than a possibility as the proportional awards means no clear ‘knock out’ after the first few contests. Everyone should welcome this and make sure that air time gets eaten up at a phenomenal rate at least until 01 APR. Obama hates to be out of the spotlight, and the fewer chances he has to get it to himself, the worst things will get for him. The economy is not bouncing back, the EU is on the brink of collapse, the Chinese internal debt structure is starting to shake the place, and our own situation now is on borderline tyrannical government that is both incompetent and over officious… that last is not pleasing to much of anyone, and they are a triumvirate that goes together once you get the first part.
Romney will be a front-runner, yes, and without question. He will not be a front-runner who is out of reach so long as others stay in the race. After Romney there are other candidates set to continue on post-SC: Newt, Perry, Paul. Santorum needs to come up big in SC or FL to keep on any roll for a campaign unless he has a hidden volunteer base that no one knows about… then all bets are off…
And as long as Obama can’t concentrate on a presumptive nominee, that makes it harder for him to do anything but demonize in generalities while the specifics of the economy drag him further down. If the R’s can keep a viable set of primaries with candidates going until the MAY tickets, then they will have substantially shown viability as a party and have air time at the most important month in a campaign cycle: at MAY in election year, things get pretty well set and if the incumbent isn’t polling over 50% he has a difficult time getting re-elected as undecided break for the opponent, not the incumbent. That means a long, hard, rather rough campaign that gets a whole lot of people tapped out… and time to work out the disagreements is bought to finally solidify a case behind any of the candidates.
Yeah the backstabbing is nasty early on, but those cases are dealt with and after initial outlay of the negatives the candidates should have time to explain themselves. Cain couldn’t do so and dropped out yet that took WEEKS to happen. And some of his impact on talking about taxes is still felt. It is that sort of long-term case about what needs to be done that needs to go forward and that won’t happen with an early pick… because they don’t have to fight and defend themselves and then alter their case when weaknesses show up. Once you get the nominee from a long cycle, you have your case… and the incumbent won’t be able to effectively respond until the real campaign begins.
ajacksonian on January 13, 2012 at 2:31 PM
I won’t vote for Gingrich now, he should give his supporters to Santorum. Perry should do the same, they have shown, that without a teleprompter their instincts are class warfare, economic ignorance and believe in the Hollywood fiction version of Wall street and bad banks.
The negative advertising about Newt in Iowa was true, according to Pat Buchannan and Charles Krauthammer, even if it stretched truths, it stretched them, and did not create a Hollywood fiction from innuendo.
Newt has a bad case, after studying too much history, of Hubris, and his ego drives him to behave badly. I won’t vote for him, and I now remember why so long ago, I didn’t care when he got into trouble.
Rick Perry has been led down the fool’s path by Gingrich. What an idiot.
I will be turning off the TV when I see them now.
There is nothing wrong with Mitt Romney except that he wants to be pro life, and some people won’t let him in their special club. When I look at his life, I can see that in his own life, his family, and every child comes first. I have a big family too, so I don’t sniff at this like the childless TV pundits who know better than me. I would like to ask them, where are your five boys and sixteen grandchildren?
Fleuries on January 13, 2012 at 2:40 PM
Need a Newt grand slam on Monday night. Hope he’s given more questions and time than he has been lately.
sleepingiantsup on January 13, 2012 at 2:46 PM
I’m with you. We need more than new drapes in the White House and a reduction in the rate of increase of the budget.
theCork on January 13, 2012 at 2:48 PM
This scenario is improbable and undesirable for anyone who considers himself a Republican.
In Mitt Romney, we had a potential candidate who couldn’t use Obamacare arguments against Obama. In Newt Gingrich, we will have a candidate who couldn’t use Obama’s class warfare rhetorics against him—what arguments are left that Newt Gingrich could use against Obama in the general election?
novakyu on January 13, 2012 at 2:50 PM
Mitt was pro-gun control but flipped when runnung for President in the last cycle. Coincidentally, that’s when he became pro-life. But there’s more. Check some of these:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/mitt-romney-flip-flopper-or-not/2011/11/30/gIQAH6ubEO_blog.html
theCork on January 13, 2012 at 3:01 PM
Let’s look at their records.
Romney will supposedly create jobs. Massachusetts ranked 47th in the country in jobs under Mitt Romney
Where’s the proof of those 100,000 jobs he created? How many were in the US? How many were lost because of his actions during the same period? What kind of jobs were they- “decent” pay or minimum/ low wage?
The point is does he do what he says he will do? It’s a matter of record what Mitt and his liberals did with tax increases, abortion, and gun control.
As Speaker of the House, Gingrich balanced the budget for the first time in a generation and repaid $400 billion (with a B) to the US debt. Under his leadership, we got welfare reform and the first tax cut in 16 years.
Here’s an article from the Cato Instiitute regarding Gingrich’s (first) Contract With America.
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=2704
excerpt
“The Gingrich Republicans were a heroic bunch. They did a great service in turning around our economy and our government after two years of the totally dimwitted tax-and-spend policies of Clintonomics. The Contract with America contained policy changes of great consequence.”
The point is Gingrich delivers on what he says he will do. Romney. Hasn’t
Romney has to attack other candidates because he can’t run on his record. Where have we seen that before? (BHO)
sandollar_sa on January 13, 2012 at 3:03 PM
Thomas Sowell and Art Laffer endorse Newt. That trumps Ann Coulter and Mark Steyn.
Kaffa on January 13, 2012 at 3:21 PM
Ron Paul = NYC/KABOOM
Ron Paul = ORLANDO/KABOOM
Ron Paul = L.A./KABOOM
Be very, very careful about voting for “I don’t care if Iran has a bomb”-Ron Paul.
stenwin77 on January 13, 2012 at 3:34 PM
Stopped reading after that. When Thomas Sowell and Art Laffer endorse someone, he’s no more closer to Obama than I am…and I am white…middle class….and a doctor.
Ridiculous comparison.
JP1986UM on January 13, 2012 at 3:54 PM
And when every respectful conservative calls out Newt for his OWS comments all week, And Thomas Sowell, and Art Laffer say nothing then they stand for nothing in my humble opinion,
OrthodoxJew on January 13, 2012 at 4:02 PM
Newt is a fighter, he’ll take shots at everyone (sadly including himself). Romney can’t fight or argue, he’s much too milquetoast to defend himself, let alone conservatism.
JP1986UM, despite my respect for Steyn and Coulter, Sowell ALONE trumps them. Laffer’s endorsement is just icing on the cake.
Newt has lately been focusing on Romney’s record as Governor of Mass, this is a fertile ground for planting doubt about his policies, his vision and his stewardship. Bain capital wasn’t a good avenue of attack.
drewmesq on January 13, 2012 at 4:04 PM
Usually, a dramatic comeback relies on several factors (using a football analogy):
1. Identifying the mistakes that made you fall behind, e.g., interceptions, fumbles, overly conservative play-calling.
2. NOT making those mistakes anymore (no more turnovers, etc.).
3. Coming up with a game plan that takes into account the weaknesses of the opposition (suddenly making them turn over the ball).
4. Executing the new game plan flawlessly.
In the case of Newt, he’s way behind and it’s late in the game. He shows little sign of learning from the mistakes he’s made. His most recent attack on Bain (and, in essence, on capitalism) is yet more fumbling.
He has learned that carpet-bombing your opponent can be a successful strategy. But when you carpet-bomb with a mixed message (attacking Bain, not Romneycare), you’ll get mixed results.
Newt continues to show he is undisciplined and makes the same mistakes as the ones that got him into this mess.
I just don’t see how he comes back. It’s not just luck that will get him the nomination. He needs to adapt and change his strategy, but he shows no sign of doing that.
EMD on January 13, 2012 at 4:14 PM
He knows where the bodies are buried and where to set the fuse on the bridge. He’s learned some hard lessons.
And the Bain thing is not so bad. Think how THAT would affect the class warfare issue in the general. The same people who told us Mitt’s the best and inevitable are the same people who are now telling us Newt’s the anti-Christ. And Newt’s innoculated himself on the illegal alien thing already and managed to do it without telling conservatives they’re heartless. Mitt’s on the side of mass deportation.
Oh, and the dog thing is not dying. Everyone, including me, is looking for one of those enclosed kennels. Just consider the wise acres who are going to suggest Mitt ought to get a job with the Eagles.
Portia46 on January 13, 2012 at 4:19 PM
I’m for Newt, and will never support Romney even if it meant voting for Paul if that’s my only choice. Limbaugh was talking up Romney today to a Newt supporter and floated a quote from Romney saying that he will be a one-term President because of all the the reforms he plans on such as Obamacare, social security, medicare, etc., and that the left would be so angry at him that he would never win re-eloection. Rush said that if he did that, Romney would win in a landslide. All I could think of is the guy who gave us Romney/Obamacare also reforming the others, and it scared the (insert word here) out of me. I’m not sure that’s the reaction Rush was looking for, but I’m sure I’m not alone in feeling that way.
lea on January 13, 2012 at 4:20 PM
1. Newt wins SC
2. Perry drops out after SC and Newt collects Perry’s base
3. By the time FL rolls around, Newt’s carpet-bombing campaign will have had the same effect Romney’s did on Newt
4. Newt wins FL
5. Santorum drops out after FL and Newt collects Santorum’s base
6. New ball game…..
MTLassen on January 13, 2012 at 10:12 AM
jfs756 on January 13, 2012 at 4:27 PM
After Newt and Romney destroy each other in nuclear slugfest and Santorum runs out of money:
The most experienced and best qualified man in this race and the only Tea Party candidate left in the field is still standing.
The person with 11 years of executive experience running the world’s 13th largest economy that has gained 4 congressional seats because businesses and jobs are flocking there (it is not for the weather) is still standing.
.
The man that presided over the creation of 45% of all the jobs created in the entire United States in the last 2 years due to his policies of low taxes, low regulation and tort reform is still standing.
While Barak Obama and the US lost 2 million jobs, his leadership led to 1 million new jobs.
The only person running that volunteered and served in the US military. This was Vietnam. NOT drafted. NO deferment. When his country called he stepped up to the plate. He attained the rank of Captain in the US Air Force.
The consistently pro-life and the signer of the Parental Consent Bill, the Sonogram law and the bill to de-fund Planned Parenthood causing 12 of their clinics to close is still standing.
The signer of Conceal and Carry law in Texas and has an A+ rating from the NRA is still standing.
Granted his first two debates did not go well but he had just had back surgery in late July and standing for 2 hours and possibly pain medication hurt his performance. You never get a 2nd opportunity to make a 1st impression but it will be America’s loss if Governor Perry is not given the opportunity to accomplish for the country what he has accomplished for Texas.
Governor Perry has done an exceptional job of job creation and conservative leadership for 11 years in Texas. He has been re-elected Governor 3 times. He has been down by double digits and counted out before.
Rick Perry is not of Washington nor Wall Street which got us into this mess in the first place.
Rick Perry is the ONLY person in this race that is ALL three legs of Ronald Reagan’s conservative stool. Economic conservative. Social conservative. National Security conservative.
Rio2010 on January 13, 2012 at 4:40 PM
Karl, I think you’re right on the money here. This is the same scenario I’ve been pointing out to friends of mine.
My only quibble, though, is why can’t we substitute Santorum for Gingrich? Couldn’t Santorum still come from behind in SC to beat Romney?
Publius 2.0 on January 13, 2012 at 5:18 PM
Those who don’t like Romney might better be focused on how to elect the RIGHT House and Senate in the fall rather than how to nominate a candidate who can’t beat Obama and will be a disaster if nominated. A thoroughly conservative house and senate will force Romney to be the kind of prez we all want and will insure that as prez he will not be faced with a split Congress and inability to get anything meaningful done on the BIG problems. If Romney is not forced to compromise for progress…he won’t….but if he NEEDS to compromise for progress…he will and therin lies the danger. Romney WILL be the nominee. Conservatives can either insure that he is the kind of prez they fear or work to insure he is the kind of prez they want.
camaraderie on January 14, 2012 at 10:58 AM