E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
The hottest argument in Republican circles these days isn’t about immigration, taxes or even health care policy. It’s about New Gingrich and whether nominating him as the party standard-bearer would be disastrous or providential.
The pundits and professional consultants have weighed in on the question in a largely negative manner but many of the Republican candidates seeking election to Congress next fall don’t appear to share the concerns the GOP establishment seems to have about the impact Gingrich would have on downballot races as their presidential nominee.
A dozen of the GOP’s top recruits to run for Congress, part of the National Republican Congressional Committee’s “Young Guns” program for 35 promising candidates, said in interviews with NBCPolitics.com over the last week that they’re not worried about running with the former House speaker at the top at the ticket. Some are downright excited about the prospect.
"I’ve been telling people all along that Newt is the real thing, and he’s substantially different than when he was Speaker of the House," said Dave Garrison, the Republican challenging Democratic Rep. Lloyd Doggett in Texas.
“I think for my race, my views are more in line with Newt Gingrich, and if the base rallies behind a Newt Gingrich-like candidate, it will benefit me,” said another Republican running for Congress in the southwestern U.S., who asked for anonymity in order to speak candidly about the race. “I think Newt’s a more exciting candidate; he’s going to bring more attention to the conservative cause.”
Some Republicans worry that, at best, Gingrich wouldn’t be as competitive of a candidate against President Barack Obama, and would diminish Republican prospects downballot. At worst, the GOP establishment fears an implosion by Gingrich, whose career has been marked by lapses in discipline, that has catastrophic effects on the Republican brand in 2012.
Conventional wisdom in Washington, reinforced by recent polling, suggests that Gingrich would perform worse as a general election candidate than former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney. But the crop of Republican candidates seeking election to Congress doesn’t seem to mind.
Data from the most recent NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll reinforces that viewpoint. Gingrich performs worse against Obama than Romney in key demographic groups like women aged 18-49 and independents. Romney also fares better versus Obama in the Northeast and West, according to the data. At the same time, the poll showed that conservative enthusiasm is behind Gingrich, signaling that he could carry GOP enthusiasm with his candidacy.
In the interviews, the Candidates’ opinions toward Gingrich boiled down to the belief that, while he might not be the perfect nominee, he’s more likely to aggressively contest the election and, by that strategy, spark Republican enthusiasm, particularly among conservatives. The candidates brushed off Gingrich’s baggage, both personal and professional.
Most candidates refused to pick explicitly between Gingrich and Romney when assessing which of the two might help their own prospects. Two of the GOP’s most astute political minds – Oklahoma Rep. Tom Cole and former Virginia Rep. Tom Davis, each of whom spent time running the NRCC – said the Gingrich-or-Romney effect would vary most strongly across regions of the country.
“What we’ve seen in polling to date is that Gingrich is a weaker candidate at the top of the ticket, especially in the Northeast and Midwest,” Davis explained. “Romney is more acceptable to swing voters in that area.”
But even an admitted Romney admirer like Mike Clark, a Republican candidate in Connecticut, expressed comfort about having Gingrich at the top of the ticket. “He certainly stimulates a lot of discussion. One of my concerns is that a lot of voters are apathetic, and I think he erodes that,” he said. “I would not view a Gingrich campaign as a death knell for the Republican Party in the Northeast.”
The candidates see the presidential contest affecting their own races in several key ways. Chiefly, they say that a good candidate could help drive turnout, especially in swing districts where every vote matters at the margin. They also see the eventual presidential candidate as helping to set the pace and tone of their debates. That might mean that when Gingrich, who’s given to speak extemporaneously, says something controversial on the national stage, it will trickle down to other GOP candidates.
“If he’s the candidate and he takes a position on something with illegal immigration or the economy or whatever, I think it’s a totally appropriate question to ask a candidate,” said California Republican candidate Gary DeLong.
“There isn’t any question about it that my opponent, whoever he or she may be, will try to find whatever the most extreme position whatever presidential candidate might have, and push me right up against it,” said John Koster, a GOP candidate in Washington state. “And they can probably expect Republican candidates will take Democrats and shove them right up against President Obama.”
It’s fear of exactly that scenario that’s driven concerns about Gingrich among Republicans in Washington, some of whom view the prospects of a Gingrich implosion as a matter of when, not if. And at that point, a serious stumble could harm the GOP brand. Their unease about Gingrich is well-documented; a number of them expressed their concerns this week to Roll Call, the Capitol Hill newspaper.
“Romney definitely gives Republicans their best chance downballot,” said a veteran GOP strategist familiar with congressional contests who requested anonymity to provide candid analysis. “Whether the Republican nom wins or loses, the most important thing for congressional candidates is a close race.”
Cole, the Oklahoma congressman who headed House Republicans’ campaign efforts in 2006-08, was more forgiving. “The reality is that presidential campaigns are long and complex,” he said. “While that can really magnify your flaws, it also means that any single flaw is seldom debilitating.”
A few of the Republican candidates contacted by NBCPolitics.com citied the Massachusetts health reform Romney spearheaded as governor as a reason to give them pause about him.
“In my district, what I hear, the epitome of right track/wrong track is ObamaCare,” said Ed Martin, one of two Republican candidates in Missouri’s Second district. “Here’s the problem with Romney: RomneyCare dilutes that argument.”
Most of the candidates said they’re planning their campaigns independently of the eventual nominee. (“Campaigns can really rise and fall in a matter of minutes. I’m not going to irrevocably tie myself to any one candidate,” said Ricky Gill, a GOP candidate in California).
And still others believe that Republicans’ enthusiasm in beating Obama in 2012 is enough to carry the day, regardless of the eventual nominee. (“To the extent that the election is a referendum on the Obama administration, whoever the nominee is, they’re going to do just fine,” said Andy Barr, a repeat Republican candidate in Kentucky.
Even Gingrich supporters acknowledge the candidate’s flaws. Garrisson said the former Speaker’s talk about “amnesty” – referencing his statements in favor of allowing a citizenship process for illegal immigrants who establish roots in the U.S. – doesn’t help him. Garrisson also said Gingrich’s advocacy work on behalf of troubled mortgage giant Freddie Mac, which earned his firm a reported $1.6 million, “cumbersome.”
The former speaker’s personal baggage – three marriages, the current one being the byproduct of an affair – are well-documented, too. None of the candidates mentioned that as a concern, though. And Gingrich has sought to defuse the issue by publicly acknowledging that he’s made mistakes, and saying that he’s sought forgiveness for his actions.
And just as primary voters appear to be looking for someone who might rock the boat, so are Republican candidates.
“I think what we want at the top of the ticket is someone who’s smart and articulate and is willing to challenge the status quo,” said Mark Meadows, a House candidate in North Carolina.
Leave a Comment:
All I know is that this is not a popularity contest! Polls or no polls. That was last time around and look what that got us? This country needs to get back to grass roots values. It's what the person can do in office, working with people of all political factions. I mean really work. The current government has overspent itself, overstepped it's boundaries into the private sector and totally ignored the Constitution. We the people of this country need to choose an individual that will keep this country strong from within. Only people put people to work. The government does not. The best people on their payroll is the military. God Bless America. Keep it that way.
Quite the contrary. Elections are nothing more than popularity contests. If Newt is all they got, it's all over but the crying.
Newt and Nancy. Two whores on the same global warming sofa.
so thats a NO on Newt ????
Was that necessary? You young people have no idea what politics in America was like before all of this animosity and name calling. Things actually got done and the US was able to build a middle class that was (please note past tense) the envy of the world. People like you are throwing all of that away. Shame on you.
Actually I do study history. I am tired of the government "getting things done" that it has no business doing. Less government was the reason you had a middle class. As the government grows the middle class disappears. I am voting for Ron Paul. He is the only person running who has a spotless record of telling the truth anda set of principles that he uses for every decision. Clowns like Ginrich will change for whoever is throwing money or power at him.
It isn't left vs. right, it's the state vs. YOU. The leadership of the two parties are the same and only interested in their own power and if you still do not see that then spare me the lectures on what I supposedly don't know.
lol. Nothing ever got done in this country, outside of the uncommon instances where both Houses and the Executive were all from the same party. You would not win historian of the year.
Randy and urgay, you are both dead wrong. Do some reading about what life was like before there was a dept of education or a dept of labor or a dept of health and human services or national cancer institute (created by a bill that was signed and supported by R. Nixon that was sponsored by T Kennedy and a bunch of other democrats from the democratically controlled congress). My years in the military afforded me the luxury of visiting many a nation where there was no gov't involvement save for the military that was there to protect the gov't from its own people. You don't know what you are asking for, but, you'll remember what I said once you get it. I feel sorry for people like you. Your so cheap you expect that everything should be free of charge. Want to fight a war - let my neighbor go but don't expect me to pay for the armored vehicles that might save his life (thanks for that one D. Rumsfeld). Want to drive across bridges that are sure to remain intact until you get to the other side - of course but just don't ask me to pay a gasoline tax or a fair registration/license fee (Tim McVeigh refused to mount a license plate to his car out of protest). Yeah, I know your kind and this nation would be much better without you.
Randy must get his history from Faux News!
The middle class was created by a series of government initiatives that received one of their greatest boosts from the New Deal of Franklin Roosevelt. Power corrupts, and the 1%'ers have it now and desperately want to keep it.
Great point Porter. What are they teaching kids in the schools now. There was a reason that there were pictures of Jesus Christ and FDR hanging in almost every southern kitchen (at least before civil rights was passed during the Johnson administration). This country used to do great things and not all of it was for profit. How the heck do they think we got to the moon before the USSR?
It does not matter what idiot the Redumbicans put forward Obama will win in a landslide yet again.
America is fed up sith the 1% and the Redumbican are it the sights.
If you make less than 250K a year and vote anything but democrate you are truly an idiot or just brainwashed by your church.
Wake up they spout they care about you but only tell you what you want to hear and then stab you in the back.
don't believe it look at your foreclosure statement or unemployment check.
Obama is more about supporting the people making 50k and less.
Take money from any one making over 250k and give it to people making less than 50k, its called socialism.
Actually I would say he doesn't even wat to give it to people making 50k or less he just wants to spend it on BS.
Paul or Huntsman would take Independents. If Republicans also turn out en-masse to punish Obama, the outcome is rather elementary. Obama loses in a landslide. Instead, we get more of the same. Republicans would rather run "their" candidate and lose to Democrats, a scenario that doesn't really matter to Independents, because we see little difference between Obama and Gingrich. You need us. We don't need you. That's the bottom line. Until you figure it out, these elections will continue to be a toss-up.
All you teatards, birthers, flat earthers, religious fanatics, mindless dittoheads, evolution deniers, Fox noise cultist and all around 15th century Republicans, you better get used to President Obama because he's not leaving office until January 2017. And if your Republicans field a similar collection of worthless candidates such as Slick Rick Perry, Pizza Man Cain, Flip-flop Romney, insane whacko Bachmann, and washed up has been, never was Newt the con-man for 2016 like you have for 2012, a Democrat will win that time around too.
Time for Sarah to step back in. She's more electable than Newtster. She'd bring all the crazies out of their holes, running to the voting booth. Besides, could you imagine having to look at Newt's ugly mug for the next four years?
You know that just might be the plan.. I can see the possibility that no GOP contender gets enough votes to secure the election and at the GOP convention in steps Sarah to save the day...
Hopefully she'll be wearing a bikini
She catches a lot of @!$%#, but I think it's charming she's closer to my dumb, hot neighbor than she is to egomaniacal crooks we always get stuck with. I'd vote for her over Obama or Ginrich, but not Paul. He's too cute of an elf, and his message is spot-on to cure this nation.
Actually, there is another choice. I wrote it up on my column ...
http://porterrockwell.newsvine.com/_news/2011/11/15/8820495-inevitable-romney
Oh, they're bullish on Nit. I thought it said that ther were bull-hit on Nit.
I agree with Ron Paul about Gingrich and big business and big government, particularly after listening to Gingrich's responses in the debate, calling for more government regulations, home purchase assistance, civil boards, etc. I couldn't believe how he was taking all the credit for everything that Congress did while he was there - it wasn't even a joint effort to hear him tell it. He will do nothing to shrink the federal government and I think might even make it more intrusive just to feed his need for power. I'm having a hard time remembering ever seeing such a smug man.
My wife,who doesn't follow politics,said that Newt looked SMARMY....?????
Since you neither have any grasp of what is going on politically in our country, there must be total confusing at the cowboy household!
It sounds like you think Newt is a good choice, which makes you the political pundit equivalent of Corky Thatcher. ONLY Paul or Huntsman have the right message. The only problem is neither can do anything against 535 douche bags in Congress. That being the case, you can put Big Bird in the Oval Office, and he'd do just as well as Obama or Gingrich. Until there are 535 Pauls in Congress, this country is doomed to decline.
I wonder how many of our lovely right wingers understand that all the communist, leftist, socialist, fascist extremist talk isn't really accurate. It's not that Dems and Liberals are so far left, it's that they are so far right that ANYTHING other than their view seems to be extreme.
It seems to me that there is an extreme right viewpoint, mainly by those who rarely leave the comfort of their own community and almost exclusively inform themselves ONLY with viewpoints that support their preconceived notions on poverty (and any other politically charged topic) that they alone have the answer to poverty without ever seeing poverty OR while living in poverty themselves, convince themselves that they're the "good poor doing poor right" while the real problem is all the "other poors".
Maybe just maybe it's not that we're too far left. Maybe just maybe you're too far right. Come towards the middle. I know it's cold out here in the real world and you hate compromise of any sort...unless it's us
giving you what you want. But c'mon over towards the center. You'll find yourselves a lot less angry and isolated.
BEAR: Well, I'm hardly the first person to make the observation that were the patron saint of the GOP, The Gipper, to run for the nomination in today's GOP he would be laughed off the stage as being far too "Liberal" if yu can believe that.
When you think of some of the things Reagan did, several tax hikes, granting amnesty to undocumented aliens, actually compromising with Democrats, he would be pillaried by today's Far, Far Right reactionaries.
Good call BEAR !!!! It's a hate thing like I have never seen before,I mean I was disgusted with Bush...but not hateful,but these people REALLY hate !!! I can only wonder why ?????
Right (.... ummmm .... 'left' ??) you are Bear.
Would you believe it! Reagan got gun control passed in California!! He was a big advocate as governor.
Newt is the grinch who helped steal your house.
Well, it sounds like Romney will do much better in states we cannot win anyway.......New York , Mass, Conn, Il,CA, WA, OR.........SOWHAT??? Newt will win the states that we must have. Most conservatives do not care how well our candidate do in a Blue State. It is about electoral votes not popular votes STUPID!!!
Newt is not going to win SQUAT !!! He is a repulsive money grubbing immoral pig...and not a very nice guy.....and I'm proud to have him in the Republican party...Haaaa!!!!
A vote for Newt is a vote for Insanity.
Limbaugh said this about Romney and Gingrich attacking each other, "The bad thing about that is we got two people attacking rich people".
Tells you that the right ONLY cares about money and power. They don't really care about Obama's policies, citizenship, faith or ideology. All they care about is that he's holding their source of power/money. They gin up the rest of the base to literally HATE this president just so they can get "their" power/money. Then they will cast you aside once you've served your purpose and go back to taking care of those with money.
Gingrich is a dope. He had no idea he'd get the nomination. He's the girl who showed up at the dance in granny panties not expecting anyone to take her home.
Agreed.............Huntsman would be better than those two
That's true, Bear. It seems that money and power are the alpha and omega for the right. Win-at-any-cost thinking.
I just can not understand why somebody making less than $20 an hour would actually defend someone extorting millions from America at their expense. It's like some weird pain freak saying, "Hit me again!"
Jon Huntsman is the best of the bunch............but the media seems to want Newt or Romney
As a liberal, I'm actually scared of Huntsman. He could win in a general election. But on the other hand, I wouldn't fear for the country if he were president.
absolutely !!!!
Huntsman would be a real challenge for President Obama. He's educated, reasonable, and there's no trainload of dirty laundry following him around. (In fact, he's a lot like Obama if Obama was white, belonged to a fringe religion and was born with a silver spoon in his mouth.)
But Republicans just don't seem to be that smart. Greedy, yes. Power mad, yes. But not smart.
I must be missing something . . . Gingrich and the Tea Party want to make government smaller and weaker, not to mention that they want it to create jobs, lower taxes, have a strong military defense, patrol our borders and build electric fences along them. Sounds like a major welfare project to me.
DUDE!!!! It's all about NEWT POWER!!
to me welfare is the govt allowing food stamps without a piss test . mom goes and gives food stamps to the drug dealer on the corner at a rate of two $-one for a high . making mom look for work and prove she is drug free would be welfare reform .
WALT: And who would know better about national defense than these 2 fellas??? Both opted for the oldy but goody "student deferment" when their country came calling. And I had always thought that every member of the GOP was a bonafide war hero. LOL
It's like this one, if non-dope heads were the only ones getting welfare, look at all the welfare handing out bureaucrats we would need to get rid of, then up goes unemployment again and by the time we pay them 99 weeks, we will have wasted even more money.
A better solution is to do away with all the dope laws. Then dope will be cheaper and they won't need so much welfare.
Intrepid ... Actually, the idiot Bush's father was a genuine war hero! Hit by antiaircraft fire and delivered his bombs to the enemy anyway.
It's always been my theory that the reason the idiot Bush started the Iraq war was that he has a massive, and well deserved, inferiority complex and just had to do what his daddy was actually too smart to do.
We've got a 42% deficit and some here complain about Newt's wifes hair.
This country is seriously broke.
....not to mention broken :-).....
Without any of the incendiary stuff that I usually use when talking about most of these people, I'll try to explain this as best as possible: there used to be two parties- a Republican Party, which was essentially the party of the Northeastern elites (which is why Republicans nowadays call Democrats elitists, I have to laugh), and the Democratic Party, which was essentially the party of the unions and the Dixiecrats. After "the traitor", LBJ, consorted with "the enemy", the Dixiecrats began to slowly abandon the Democrats, culminating in the "Reagan revolution" of 1980.
The problem now is that, 30 years later, these two groups of people: the old time, Wall Street Republicans, and the religious Right (who are still Dixiecrats, to an extent), along with a third group, the libertarians (why these people side with social fascists is beyond me; I'm guessing they just hate government more than they like personal freedom [as opposed to corporate freedom]....which is why I abandoned them a few years ago), are all in the same boat, trying to pick ONE Presidential candidate for three different perspectives- knowing that if they were three parties, instead of one, they would likely be subjected to the the rule of Democrats forever (although I think there are at least 20% of Democrats....like the Clintons, for example.....who are more like the Northeastern, Rockefeller Republicans than the rest of the Liberals, so a combination of them and those Republicans might give the Liberals a run for their money...but getting them together might be impossible).
At any rate, THIS is why they end up with what most of us consider pinheads as their potential candidates for President. For example, Mitt Romney is the kind of guy that I personally think of as a "Republican", but a lot of people who consider themselves Republicans nowadays hate him, and anyone like him.....yet those same folks are good with wackos like Bachmann. It's going to be a rougher ride for them to come up with a good consensus than it even appears now- because they are SO diverse in what they believe, to the point of nearly violent anger. The wealthy heavy hitters REALLY want Romney....I just don't know if they're going to be able to convince everyone else that he is their best idea...
the bottom line is simply this: 40% will vote for any democratic candidate, 40% will vote for any GOP candidate and the remaining 20% who vote independent will determine the next president. If Gringrich can't attract the independents, he loses. Same is true for any other candidate. I voted GOP for 44 years and am now an independent. Many of my friends have also left their party affiliation. People are just fed up with business as usual. It's not going to matter if a dem or a GOP wins based on the current crop. The GOP assembly just voted for the new law that gives the government the right to pick up citizens and lock them in Gitmo or any other gulag indefinetely without a trial. Obama will sign it into law. That process started with Bush. and people say the Dems want to strip us of our rights. They ALL do. The only way this is going to change is if we all abandon the parties and start electing people who are of the people and for the people, not professional politicians who are only interested in power, riches and fame in that order.
Educated vs uneducated? smart vs dumb? haves vs have nots? rich vs poor? Really??? Am I to ascertain from the comments I read here that the agenda is division and derision? am I to gleen from these many comments that thoughtful discussions of substance is beyond the understanding of those who purport themselves to be enlightened? My singular vote will be cast in an effort to extract Mr. Obama from the presidency and replacing him with a republican in the hope of restoring some measure of conservativism to the white house.
YES, the rights agenda is to division. They have the money but not the numbers. They MUST absolutely MUST divide the country in order to win elections.
Your claim of "restoring some measure of conservativism to the White House" is the problem. It's not restoring what's best for the country but restoring a single ideological viewpoint, good or bad to the White House.
If we started taking care of our country instead of our political positions, we'd be much better off.
AHHHH....so like, you're a moron?
My one vote will be cased for Obama so we cancel each other out.
Nope ... I'm going to vote for Obama too. You cancel him out and my vote will elect Obama.
Twirl around three times and click your heels together.....NEWT POWER!!!
Newt's sordid history doesn't matter. Do you really think the toothless gullible hillbillies that would vote for him can actually remember that far back, or even care?
sure i do , i am a "hick , red neck and a college graduate" you city folk that live off crack dealing are the ones with memory problems
ONE REAL: You're a hayseed and a college graduate??? Where did you go to school, Goober U???
Intrepid, from your language, we must construe that you were bullied growing up.......The amenity of the internet has given you the courage to attack the stronger types that terrorized you during your formative years.
Nope ... it seems to me that Intrepid (like the ship that had the same name) has only defended when attacked. Actually, I had the same thought, but I decided that the hick, redneck must have graduated from Liberty University.
Huntsman is a closet conservative. Has kept the fact hidden like he is ashamed of it. We don't want our flag bearer afraid to unfurl the conservative banner!
DADDY: Huntsman is far to sane and logical for your GOP to ever accept him. There was a time when your party was inclusive of all kinds of ideology but them days is long gone.
Yea ...good old conservative Newt....can you really hear your self daddy..??? He whored for an individual mandate,he rubs elbows(or cheeks) with the tea party favorite Nancy Pelosi,and he wants to rebuild Fannie and Freddie....You seem confused ?????
Yes, we have encouraged all extreme diversity of thought to gravitate towards the inclusive democrat party. Now from the pictures of OWS, it appears that the good looking women have stayed with us:) Gee, you sure have the lock on ugly angry women! Got to give you that..........
daddy ...
"like he is ashamed of it"
Sounds like a good theory to me. Being a knuckledragging conservative neanderthal is actually something that anyone should be ashamed of.
How so?
How so??
Look at the clown circus you have running for President! It would be embarrasing to have to pretend that you actually think any of them could lead this country.
This article is exactly what the PROPAGANDA REPUKEILANS WANT FOLKS !!!!!!!
They want him in BECAUSE he is the ONLY ONE THAT ACTS LIKE A DICTATOR AND KNOWS THE MAFIA AGENDA !!!.
This whole article reeks of Propaganda from all the REPUKEILANS. They are feeding into this because they know that IDIOT PEOPLE are MAD and will like sheep in a herd follow the twisted brainwashing to get YOUR VOTE.
This is TACTICS folks. BE very careful !!!!! Think about this WHY? would they go against their OWN?
Especially like this. Read very carefully between the lines and it is CLEAR AS DAY what their agenda is.
If you do not see it YOU SHOULD MOVE TO A COMMUNIST STATE. You have been DUMBED OUT !!!!
...and the chant from the masses of asses goes up.... NEWT!! NEWT!! NEWT!!
i am told the worst part of a donkey show is the smell , i find that hard to believe after seeing the star of the donkeyshow .
the donkeyshow sure has a short memory when it comes to Vera Baker . they talk about scandal all the while ignoring the fact that Obama is covering up the murder of agent Terry Miller . they aren't hypocrites they are sheeple , you know the pack theory otherwise known as a UNION .
you got it:)
wowsy...their coming in PAIRS now !!!! Christine O'Donnell should be flying in on her broom any minute now !!!
Onerealman, it's interesting that you bring up the murder of a state employee in a state run gunrunning crackdown.
I thought you guys were all about states rights? Why all the sudden is the Obama administration (or Obama personally as you claim) responsible for "covering up" a state case that the he wasn't a part of from the beginning?
ONE UNREAL: Still going on about the gun deal gone sour? As if the Mexican drug cartels would not have been able to obtain weapons otherwise.
Want ot compare notes on how many kids Bush & Cheney sent to their deaths???
Reality time teatards. The only teapublican candidate even close to beating President Obama is Romney and he's behind. In a match up between Newt and Preaident Obama, Obama wins huge. Now I know you teatards don't WANT to believe that but that's the reality. Take a look!!
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/president_obama_vs_republican_candidates.html
Obama could'nt win against a ham sandwich.
That's right...he can't! Don't bother showing up to vote....he doesn't stand a chance anyway so just take the day off...
Sure stanboy --- you keep living in your make believe world. Remember -- tea parties are for little girls and their pretend friends.
keep telling yourself and sticking to that ideology that most of America thinks puts teapublicans in the paranoid schizophrenic loony category. You virtually guarantee 4 more years of Obama, I am independent who would vote for Huntsman in a heartbeat over anyone else and NEVER vote for Gingrich, Obama will likely get my vote. Hopefully the republicans haven't totally destroyed all credibility by the election and will be able to have one of the houses of congress.
You are right, obama wins if you can get all the minorities out to vote again, i suppose with a billion dollar campaign he can pay them off again.
You live in a world totally divorced from reality.
President Obama won because he represented a vision for a better America.
(The Party of No had a different vision, however. A really short vision: "No"!)
Quote:
"I’ve been telling people all along that Newt is the real thing, and he’s substantially different than when he was Speaker of the House," said Dave Garrison, the Republican challenging Democratic Rep. Lloyd Doggett in Texas."
Did you know? Newt "Slimy Salamander" Gingrich recently said he wants to give amnesty to illegal aliens who've been here at least 25 years? Why? 25 years ago is 1986. 1986 is when Ronald Reagan signed the Immigration Reform and Control Act which gave amnesty to illegal aliens then. So those illegals who've been here at least 25 years have, mostly, already been given amnesty!
Newt calculated that Hispanics will be a critical factor in 2012, and in his despicable, cynical, and duplicitous way, he thinks he can pander to Hispanics by tricking them into voting for him.
This is Newt Gingrich today. Yes, he's changed. He's even more devious! Newt called for jail for politicians dealing with Freddie Mac...until he himself was found out to have been paid $1.6 million as a consultant for...Freddie Mac.
Yeehaaa, we hope you do nominate him, thank you, and Happy Christmas and Merry New Year to you!
Now Dan...let's play nice