Gingrich is beating Romney on substance, not media-bashing
But Republican voters in South Carolina—and, I imagine across the country—are hungry for a candidate who can articulate a proudly conservative message and make an effective case against Barack Obama. Gingrich improvised a different stump speech at nearly every campaign stop—you never knew what to expect. Like a professor, he didn’t dumb down his stump speech to the same several, stale talking points. Many voters who attended as undecideds frequently came away impressed with Gingrich’s depth of knowledge. This goes against Presidential Campaigning 101, but it worked for Gingrich.
Gingrich may not be like Paul Ryan or Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels in style, but he is in substance. In Aiken, his wonky presentation about health care reform nearly put Texas Gov. Rick Perry’s son Griffin, in attendance, to sleep. But it wowed the audience, who came away thinking Gingrich sounded presidential, reform-oriented, and authentic…
By contrast, Romney’s events were all the same, down to the candidate’s oh-so-sincere “Thanks, you guys!” introduction at every stop. He continued to annotate “America, the Beautiful” to demonstrate his patriotic feelings. In his South Carolina concession speech, Romney spoke vaguely about the merits of free-market capitalism.
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
But he’s beating him on that, too.
de rigueur on January 25, 2012 at 2:03 PM
I’m a Freddie Mac Historian who specializes “in the history of Washington” is the wrong kind of substance.
“Lack of concern for humanity” if you’re against illegal immigration is the wrong kind of substance.
haner on January 25, 2012 at 2:04 PM
Romney has never been an option for conservatives. Not this cycle, not last cycle, not in any cycle.
Rebar on January 25, 2012 at 2:05 PM
Newt could lay off the stupid Bain bashing for once…
Chip on January 25, 2012 at 2:05 PM
Newt is in danger of losing his conservative street cred with the BS attacks on Romney that appear to take leftist positions.
I’ll vote for either one, but I want to be excited about my nominee, not embarrassed by him.
beatcanvas on January 25, 2012 at 2:06 PM
Excellent article on why the establishment hates Newt.
Schadenfreude on January 25, 2012 at 2:07 PM
All should lay off the turdfest, that was started by Mitt, and focus on the real nemesis of the land.
Schadenfreude on January 25, 2012 at 2:08 PM
Gingrich is beating Romney, period. I wouldn’t be surprised if he started beating him with a two-by-four at this point. He’s beaten him every other way imaginable.
Stoic Patriot on January 25, 2012 at 2:09 PM
Gingrich is beating the guy who lost to both McCain, & Huckabee last cycle.
Romney lost to HUCKABEE in ’08.
Think about that.
portlandon on January 25, 2012 at 2:09 PM
I agree. The Bain stuff is out there now. No need to keep flogging that horse.
portlandon on January 25, 2012 at 2:10 PM
At the height of the bitter struggle with the Democratic leadership Gingrich chose to attack . . . Reagan.
The best examples come from a famous floor statement Gingrich made on March 21, 1986. This was right in the middle of the fight over funding for the Nicaraguan contras; the money had been cut off by Congress in 1985, though Reagan got $100 million for this cause in 1986. Here is Gingrich: “Measured against the scale and momentum of the Soviet empire’s challenge, the Reagan administration has failed, is failing, and without a dramatic change in strategy will continue to fail. . . . President Reagan is clearly failing.”
Gingrich scorned Reagan’s speeches, which moved a party and then a nation, because “the president of the United States cannot discipline himself to use the correct language.” In Afghanistan, Reagan’s policy was marked by “impotence [and] incompetence.”
Such was Gingrich’s faith in President Reagan that in 1985, he called Reagan’s meeting with Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev “the most dangerous summit for the West since Adolf Hitler met with Neville Chamberlain in 1938 in Munich.”
Gingrich and Reagan: In the 1980s, the candidate repeatedly insulted the president
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/289159/gingrich-and-reagan-elliott-abrams
haner on January 25, 2012 at 2:11 PM
That’s not hard, since Newt is running against a stealth Democrat: http://www.redstate.com/erick/2012/01/25/romney-advisor-no-obamacare-repeal/
Doomberg on January 25, 2012 at 2:12 PM
Agreed, They should all be focusing on the true menace [Yes, I used that word] to the Republic: The Downgrade Administration.
If they want to after each other, it should be on whether they are solid in their Conservative principles.
Chip on January 25, 2012 at 2:14 PM
Atleast Gingrich was a Republican during the Reagan Administration.
Mitt was an independent and hated the Reagan/Bush years.
Out of Romney’s own mouth….
portlandon on January 25, 2012 at 2:14 PM
Mitt has a lot of substance stashed away in Switzerland. I wonder if Mittens and Soros bank together?
Punchenko on January 25, 2012 at 2:15 PM
Romneybot-twins activate! Form of…denial!
Romney will not repeal Obamacare, wants to increases taxes, wants to introduce VAT, wants to increase the price of gas and wants to open direct talks with the Taliban
Holy Cow, where doesn’t Romney agree with Obama, that appears to be a much smaller list to keep track of.
Can someone get this democrat of the republican ticket…please!!!
Skwor on January 25, 2012 at 2:17 PM
Newt is beating Romney at all. Not in Florida, not in the primary itself.
Go RBNY on January 25, 2012 at 2:19 PM
Good for you for that even being a possibility. The only excitement I can work up is the slim possibility of getting rid of The Won and I think it will take $5 a gallon gas prices to do it.
Cindy Munford on January 25, 2012 at 2:23 PM
But…but…Newt has ex-wives and stuff!
-Mittbots
Dack Thrombosis on January 25, 2012 at 2:28 PM
Doh! forgot a word:
Chip on January 25, 2012 at 2:29 PM
Slim? You really think so? I mean, my left sock could beat Obama, but I guess that’s imagining that our nominee will be smarter than my sock.
My sock’s platform: I’ll stink less than Obama, and sign less progressive legislation.
beatcanvas on January 25, 2012 at 2:30 PM
ROTFLMAO… So Denial really isn’t just a river in Egypt after all…
SWalker on January 25, 2012 at 2:33 PM
If Newtie is so substantial, why wasn’t he the out-of-the-gate preferred non-Romney?
Everyone likes his policies so much that they gave him resounding victories in IA and NH. Oh, wait…
And he even had the much-coveted Union-Leader endorsement in NH. ‘Cause he’s such a substantial guy and all.
And yet…yawn.
He didn’t catch fire until he started throwing anti-media red meat to the angry mobs.
Kraushaar is as deluded as the rest of Newtie’s fan club.
Meredith on January 25, 2012 at 2:36 PM
Sadly, won’t do it in California. We’re already at record high $3.71/gal state average, closer to $4 in L.A., which with S.F. will carry the state for Obama anyway.
But the good bad news is the rest of the country is in for California gas prices and probably won’t be as laid back about it at the polls as the Left Coast.
de rigueur on January 25, 2012 at 2:45 PM
On the substance of far left attacks perhaps.
Zaggs on January 25, 2012 at 2:47 PM
I vacillate, depending on what dumbazz thing any one of our candidate is doing at any given moment. To say I am underwhelmed would be a major understatement.
Cindy Munford on January 25, 2012 at 2:52 PM
Wrong on two counts.
Newtie was beating Mitt purely by (largely unfair) media bashing, but Mitt’s substantially ahead now in FL.
itsnotaboutme on January 25, 2012 at 2:53 PM
The Husband and I have cut our driving almost as much as humanly possible, it’s hard to imagine how much more we can do.
Cindy Munford on January 25, 2012 at 2:53 PM
No, he’s beating Romney among ethical and mentally challenged voters. Only a person with low ethical standars (like Sarah Palin) can vote for Gingrich.
Falz on January 25, 2012 at 2:57 PM
You need a high speed rail! Like the one CA may actually pass a proposition to repeal.
They say Nobody Walks in L.A., but we see a LOT more bicycles.
de rigueur on January 25, 2012 at 3:07 PM
Newt should forget about bashing Willard on Bain, and start bashing him on Willard’s Wimps: Norm Coleman and the Charlie Crist team Willard’s got working for him.
Iblis on January 25, 2012 at 3:08 PM
My representative in Florida gets kind of glassy eyed when they dangle a high speed train in front of him also. Fortunately now that he is the majority chairman of Transportation in a country that is in near economic collapse, he seems be holding himself together. I bet he has a model that he pulls out when he dreams of the day when we are back in high cotton and go back to wasting money.
Cindy Munford on January 25, 2012 at 3:25 PM
A two-by-four, huh? Nah, that’s reserved for some clueless moderator. Otherwise, it’s back to OWS-approved attacks on capitalism. That’s called #winning! in the Charlie Sheen sense of the word.
cicerone on January 25, 2012 at 3:49 PM
Nonsense. Newt is beating Romney entirely on substance. Newt and Romney are two peas in a pod. In fact, Newt is further left on some of the major issues of the day, including free market capitalism and illegal immigration. He’s beating Romney because folks think he’ll give Zero a bloody nose at a debate. And maybe he will. But maybe he won’t. Either way, we still have a squish as a candidate, and the shorter, rounder squish sure does love him some government spending and far-left talking points.
Rational Thought on January 25, 2012 at 3:54 PM
Probably not. But it’s funny that you mention Soros who, like Comrade Gingrich, appreciates some really hot OWS-style attacks capitalism. Of course, they don’t actually have a problem with tremendous wealth. But they’re okay with using the rhetoric to further their agendas. “True Conservative?” No, not really.
cicerone on January 25, 2012 at 3:56 PM
Is that what passes as “substantive” these days in the Newtist colony?
cicerone on January 25, 2012 at 3:58 PM
Newt is mopping the floor with Mutt Romney.
I take Newtie and not the blow fish.
SparkPlug on January 25, 2012 at 4:02 PM