Green Room

Newt: I’m not ruling out 2016

posted at 12:47 pm on November 26, 2012 by

Could Newt Gingrich run for President in 2016?  He certainly could, but whether or not he can build a following again would be an open question:

The former Republican presidential candidate and House Speaker said he has not ruled out running for president in 2016 — but first the GOP must take on a “very serious analysis” of what went wrong in 2012, Gingrich said.

“I have no idea at this stage,” Gingrich said, referring to another run for the White House.

I’d assume at this point that any “very serious analysis” would show that the GOP needs some fresh new faces in leadership, but never underestimate Gingrich.

Recently in the Green Room:

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

Just go away already.

hatecraft on November 26, 2012 at 12:54 PM

I like Newt.

Night Owl on November 26, 2012 at 12:56 PM

Good. We need you Newt.

portlandon on November 26, 2012 at 12:57 PM

I’d be happy to rule it out for you.

CurtZHP on November 26, 2012 at 1:08 PM

He couldn’t beat Mitt Romney, but thinks he has a shot against Rubio, Jindal, or Ryan. Whatever.

Mark1971 on November 26, 2012 at 1:11 PM

Newt, you’ve got too much baggage.

rbj on November 26, 2012 at 1:12 PM

Jeez… Yes, rather than nominating the cultural attuned 40 something guy, let’s have a nominating contest between Dubya’s brother and the corrupt, disgraced 70 something speaker with a creepy trophy wife.

Illinidiva on November 26, 2012 at 1:15 PM

I thought we hated retreads. Go away Newt.

thebrokenrattle on November 26, 2012 at 1:16 PM

Other than putting up a woman to be the sacrificial lamb against 2016 Hillary! — Newt would be the best man for the job – after all Hillary! does forgive peckerdillos, and Newton would not suffer that same fidelity issues he faced against Mitt.

In fact the left might embrace him for his indiscretions.
/

FlaMurph on November 26, 2012 at 1:19 PM

Newt: I’m not ruling out 2016

Please do rule it out.

He’d be better served running a think tank or something else. I think the GOP would be better served by having someone other than any of the candidates this go around.

ConservativePartyNow on November 26, 2012 at 1:20 PM

but first the GOP must take on a “very serious analysis” of what went wrong in 2012, Gingrich said

You and your ilk, Newt, are part of the reason of what went wrong. Get busy on your moon colony, Newt and take the helmet headed wife with you.

JPeterman on November 26, 2012 at 1:23 PM

I like Newt.

Night Owl on November 26, 2012 at 12:56 PM

I think the debates would have been a lot more fun with Newt in there.

DeathtotheSwiss on November 26, 2012 at 1:24 PM

He couldn’t beat Mitt Romney John McCain or Mike Huckabee, but thinks he has a shot against Rubio, Jindal, or Ryan Pawlenty, Bachmann, Cain or Perry? Whatever.

Mark1971 on November 26, 2012 2008 at 1:11 PM

portlandon on November 26, 2012 at 1:25 PM

Newt was my guy this time around, but he simply has too much baggage. Let’s get a good guy in the White House in 2016 and make Newt Press Secretary (and John Sununu Dep. Press Sec.). THAT would be some quality television!!!

Glenn Jericho on November 26, 2012 at 1:31 PM

Newt: I’m not ruling out 2016

Well, you should. You are waaaaaaaaay past your “sell by” date.

Resist We Much on November 26, 2012 at 1:32 PM

Gosh portlondon you sure pick the real winners. Romney won because the field was weak. If he had had to face Rubio, Ryan, and Jindal, he probably wouldn’t have won either. The 2016 field is much more appealing than the 2012 field.

Illinidiva on November 26, 2012 at 1:38 PM

Look, Newt, as a commentator I like you. However, you just don’t have the right temperament to be President. You have this nasty little habit of, getting nasty, whenever it looks like things are slipping away from you. Between this, your age, and your baggage, and I just don’t think you can plausible expect a realistic chance at winning a general election.

A primary, maybe you could win, but if you cannot win a general whats the point of winning a primary?

WolvenOne on November 26, 2012 at 1:43 PM

Gosh portlondon you sure pick the real winners. Romney won because the field was weak. If he had had to face Rubio, Ryan, and Jindal, he probably wouldn’t have won either. The 2016 field is much more appealing than the 2012 field.

Illinidiva on November 26, 2012 at 1:38 PM

Congratulations! You wrote a whole post with out using the words “Palin” or “M’kay”.

portlandon on November 26, 2012 at 1:43 PM

There’s no fool like an old fool – that sums up “Callista and I” and helps explains why he was bashing Romney for his “free gifts” statement.

bw222 on November 26, 2012 at 1:53 PM

New faces, no retreads (or Bush family members).

changer1701 on November 26, 2012 at 1:54 PM

I like Newt.

Night Owl on November 26, 2012 at 12:56 PM

So did Wives #1 and #2 (once upon a time).

bw222 on November 26, 2012 at 1:55 PM

Congratulations! You wrote a whole post with out using the words “Palin” or “M’kay”.

portlandon on November 26, 2012 at 1:43 PM

I am proud of her too. Think we can get bluegill to go along? Is grass red?

bw222 on November 26, 2012 at 1:56 PM

Ever heard of snark.. m’kay. And also I’m writing alot about Palin because her delusional toadies have come out of the woodwork and apparently want her to be nominated for President in 2016. They overlap alot with those who think that Gingrich and Santorum would be formidable candidates. As I’d like to see an R win in my lifetime, presumably in such a manner that would allow me to laugh, mock, and gloat in front of lefties, I think it’s my duty to point out duds when I see them.

Illinidiva on November 26, 2012 at 1:58 PM

Newt: I’m not ruling out 2016

Newt will have a new book to hawk and more campaign vendors to stiff. I am as conservative as can be, but this guy makes my skin crawl.

bw222 on November 26, 2012 at 1:59 PM

I am ruling Newt out for 2016. Even if he is the nominee.

earlgrey133 on November 26, 2012 at 2:03 PM

Harpies just can’t let it lie, can they?

bw222 on November 26, 2012 at 2:04 PM

Illinidiva claims to be a “moderate conservative.” That’s a code word for liberal.

bw222 on November 26, 2012 at 2:06 PM

And I voted for Romney why exactly if I’m an evil liberal. By moderate, I mean more socially moderate.. pro gay marriage for instance. I also live in an urban area, so I don’t live in an echo chamber hay might make me think Sarah Palin, Rick Santorum, or Newt Gingrich for President is a winning idea.

Illinidiva on November 26, 2012 at 2:23 PM

I think the debates would have been a lot more fun with Newt in there.

DeathtotheSwiss on November 26, 2012 at 1:24 PM

I think the whole campaign would have been more fun! I doubt he will actually run. I just hope Romney doesn’t have any such aspirations.

Night Owl on November 26, 2012 at 2:23 PM

Well, he sure couldn’t do any worse than Romney.

Add to that the fact he’s a whole helluva lot smarter than Mittens, and who knows…?

avgjo on November 26, 2012 at 2:25 PM

So did Wives #1 and #2 (once upon a time).

bw222 on November 26, 2012 at 1:55 PM

LOL! I don’t LIKE him, like him. I just like him.

Night Owl on November 26, 2012 at 2:25 PM

bw222 2:16

Exactly right.

these people don’t get it: social conservatism and fiscal conservatism go hand-in-hand. Take away one, and you take away the other.

History bears this out.

avgjo on November 26, 2012 at 2:27 PM

The infidelity, the creepy trophy wife, the ethics violations, and the insufferable know-it-all attitude are all great Gingrich assets.

Illinidiva on November 26, 2012 at 2:32 PM

Can we please survey the new folks for someone? I have an idea, how about we recruit and prepare an actual conservative candidate?

What a concept.

dogsoldier on November 26, 2012 at 2:37 PM

Illinidiva 2:32

Yeah, kinda like flip-flopping (even mid-debate, 1994), stupid gaffes (47%, anyone), being a ‘moderate’ and aloofness were great assets of the wonderful, moderate Romney, right?

I’ll take a flawed fighter over an unprincipled wimp, anyday.

avgjo on November 26, 2012 at 2:39 PM

Yes.. Mittens was a flawed candidate. This is why lots of Republicans were looking for a different candidate and why someone who had been governor for less than two years was considered viable. The forty something trifecta has a lot less baggage and alot more upside than Gingrich. Heck, if you like unprincipled sleazy Southern politicians, you can get it in 40 something Bobby Jindal and not have to deal with Newt’s personal baggage.

Illinidiva on November 26, 2012 at 2:48 PM

Exactly what we need, someone who couldn’t seal the deal in the last all out primary the Republican party held. That’s something we haven’t tried before.

amazingmets on November 26, 2012 at 2:50 PM

The 40something contingent doesn’t know anything about legislative maneuvering compared to Newt. None of them have the courage Newt had in shutting down the government. They come from an effeminized, weak culture. Newt’s weakness was of a different kind: he couldn’t control his libido. These guys can’t control their fear. Prove me wrong: name one who has done anything that compares with shutting the gov’t down. they are typical of their generation (and mine, which is the younger). They talk a good story, but they can’t/won’t back it up.

avgjo on November 26, 2012 at 2:52 PM

I like Newt also, but way too much baggage.
Just like my first choice this time around – Herman Cain – he’s a smart guy (policy-wise) and I think he would actually be a decent President – BUT, he could never win the election.

dentarthurdent on November 26, 2012 at 2:52 PM

Just go away, Newt. Stay on the lecture circuit or teach another history course but forget about elective office. You’re toxic.

JohnAGJ on November 26, 2012 at 2:56 PM

I will vote for you NEWT, as long as someone more conservative with a better chance of winning does not come along!

astonerii on November 26, 2012 at 3:05 PM

Newt’s weakness was of a different kind: he couldn’t control his libido.
avgjo on November 26, 2012 at 2:52 PM

Have you read about his relationships? It was not his libido…

His first wife was a teacher of his, and they married shortly after he graduated. She very likely abused her position of power over him. This led to some marriage issues as you can imagine.

Not what I call a libido issue. The women he married were just simply evil. Callista seems pretty good.

astonerii on November 26, 2012 at 3:07 PM

astonerii 3:07

Perhaps. He should have divorced before cheating. He should have made better decisions. Nevertheless, there is room in the world for forgiveness, and we on the right need to remember that (and I’m not directing that at you, astonerii).

I know you’re one of the few here that saw the cluster Rombo would be. At least I think we’re in agreement that Newt couldn’t be any worse, and in fact, would probably be better.

avgjo on November 26, 2012 at 4:08 PM

I like Newt, but he was borderline too old in 2012, so 2016 is a no-go.

Mr. Prodigy on November 26, 2012 at 4:52 PM

Perhaps. He should have divorced before cheating. He should have made better decisions.

avgjo on November 26, 2012 at 4:08 PM

That part is true. Cheating should not have happened. I guess my worshiping of Newt made me forget that he did cheat.

astonerii on November 26, 2012 at 5:42 PM