E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
MONROE, LA – Newt Gingrich faces a significant hurdle in his strategy of winning the GOP presidential nomination at the party’s August convention, lengthening the already-long odds of him becoming the Republican nominee.
The former House speaker is already struggling to stay afloat financially; he finished behind Texas Rep. Ron Paul in last night’s Illinois primary, even though Paul barely campaigned in the state.
Nonetheless, Gingrich has vowed to press his candidacy all the way through the Republican National Convention this August in Tampa, Fla. His strategy hinges on the assumption that Romney will fail to win the 1,144 delegates needed to secure the nomination, prompting a contested convention in which Gingrich could emerge as conservatives’ consensus choice.
But an RNC rule stipulating that candidates seeking the nomination must have won a plurality of votes in at least five states could complicate Gingrich’s already far-fetched strategy. RNC rule No. 40 states:
Nominations(b) Each candidate for nomination for President of the United States and Vice President of the United States shall demonstrate the support of a plurality of the delegates from each of five (5) or more states, severally, prior to the presentation of the name of that candidate for nomination.
RNC Chairman Reince Preibus issued a stern warning to the candidates to that end this morning on the Daily Rundown.
“It's an important rule,” he said. “So when these candidates are adding up their delegates or when people out there have a particular issue that they would like to move at the convention, they had better make sure they at least have a plurality of five states to make these things happen.”
Gingrich, of course, has only won two primaries – first, South Carolina, and second, Georgia, the state he had represented in Congress. (Paul finds himself in a similar situation, having won delegates, but no caucuses or primaries.)
“Obviously we need to win some more states,” said a source close to the Gingrich campaign, acknowledging that they need to win at least three more states before the August convention. “I don’t think he [Gingrich] would be doing this if he didn’t think there was a road to winning.”
There is a caveat that could allow Gingrich to slip through. RNC press secretary Kirsten Kukowski told NBC News that a candidate may still be nominated at the convention if they are able to garner a plurality of five states on the floor. The only real road toward accomplishing that would involve capturing unbound delegates, who will be few and far between come August.
While this scenario remains possible, the likelihood of it actually happening seems slim.
If no GOP candidate reaches the 1,144 delegates needed to seal the nomination by the Tampa convention, it would open the possibility that all four remaining candidates would participate in a floor fight.
“The purpose of the primary season is to vet your candidate. The purpose of the convention is to pick your candidate,” the Gingrich source says. “The longer we stay in this race, the longer people are going to contrast and compare and then you get to the convention and then, we will have this big debate on who our nominee needs to be.”
But if Gingrich cannot win five states – or even if he does win just five – he would still face a perception problem come convention time. With 56 states and territories in play, it would be difficult for the winner of just a handful of those contests to make the case that he deserves the nomination.
“To change history, the primaries, in your favor is exceedingly difficult and almost unrealistic,” said Doug Heye, the former RNC communications director turned political consultant. “For a lot of folks, the perception that Gingrich cannot win is already there and you’ve seen it state after state as Gingrich has been left out of the conversation.”
RNC rule No. 40, Heye noted, basically codifies the notion that Gingrich no longer faces a viable path to the nomination.
“I fully expect that Speaker Gingrich will be in Tampa this summer but not as a viable candidate for President of the United States,” he said.
Leave a Comment:
Hasn't Newt sold enough DVD's & books already?
Time to pack it in old man & take the zones out Stepford wife with ya!
Your 15 minutes were up a half an hour ago...
The guy finished 4th of the 4 candidates in last nights IL primary.
This should be a strong indicator that Gingrich should be sent packing by the RNC.
Can we shoot him and his Jane Jetson wife into space? If he wants a moon colony, send him there with a shovel so he can build it himself.
Newt just hasn't realized that he got the boot (again) weeks ago.
Newt and Helmet Head will go on to bigger things like establishing the moon colony and convincing folks to put their ten year olds to work cleaning toilets at school.
Newt will be free to call the Ryan Budget 'right wing social engineering'!
Wow. The writing on the wall is clear. The RNC has spoken.
The Great and Imperial Reince Priebus has spoken!
(Newt, Ron and Rick)
I am the great and powerful... Chairman of the RNC.
What's he going to do, take away the "Conservative Only" Men's Room Key?
I'd bet that Newt Gingrich doesn't know what the new RNC rules are; he still follows the old rules. The size of his ego only exceeds the size of his arrogance otherwise how else could he possibly think he would win as the "consensus choice" when he can't even win southern states and when his own former House colleagues were calling him unqualified and a disaster as Speaker.
Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain (Karl Rove)
Good one devie! lol
Reince is gayer than Liberace. I watched them question all the candidates for the RNC Chair and Reince answered "Reagan" to every question, even when Tucker Carlson (another closet dweller) asked what his favorite book was, Reince answered "Reagan, The Reagan Diaries", and of course Tucker and Grover (closet dweller number 3) smiled and nodded in affirmation.
I have a sneaking suspiscion that about 90% of conservatves are gay closet dwellers, that is why they cling so tightly to religion, they are afraid of their "perverse" desires so they hold tightly to their imaginary friend so people won't suspect that they are really Striesand listening "friends of Dorothy".
Newts chances are as slim as the President being able to dictate the price of oil on the world market. Thus controlling the price of gas!
The words "newt" and "consensus" just dont seem right together.
Newt must have promised his wife the honor of being the First Lady. Now little wife number? has ordered Newt to stay in race or else! So he stays, and stays, and stays.
Deprogrammer
It appears as you have been programmed to be prejudiced.
I've been hoping that all 4 would stay in and force a brokered convention where anyone could be nominated right there on the convention floor.
Then, Sarah Palin could be nominated at that point, and she said if that were to happen she would accept the nomination, knocking Mitt "The Jobs Cremator" Romney off the block.
Gee I'd love to see that!
Obama / Biden 2012
Memo to Newt:
Unlike Sally Field; we really do NOT like you, we really don't. Americans have much longer memories than you give us credit for. Please just fold your circus tent and go home. You are NOT Presidential material. You are; however, more boring than old photos of Paris Hilton's tw@t.
Santorum-Gingrich vs Romney.
I can't even go on youtube without the "and I'm a Mormon ads" glaring me in the face. It's not enough that they bother me at home with the postalizing, they stare me down on youtube, collapse every post that has the word "Mormon" in it.
You folks are hawkish on defense, yet don't serve in the military. You folks have a lot to hide.
As for Newt, he hasn't a chance but hopes he can broker a deal with Frothy to be the VP. All of them are just about as competent as a blind service dog.
Only thing Newt is interested in is women and money. If either or both are gonna be in Tampa He'll be there looking to get as much as He can of each.
Sandtrich you're an idiot.
There are plenty of Mormons who currently serve in the military and HAVE served in the military. Just because Romney's sons decided to pursue a career that does not involve the armed forces does not make them bad people.
My son is in the Air Force and his grandfather served for over 20 years so don't play the no Mormons in the military card you uninformed clown.
The president of the Mormon church served in the Navy and loved every minute of it.
And if you don't like the videos on You Tube, then don;t watch them. Last time I checked, there's no rules about Mormon's not being able to post videos or you being froced to watch them.
Get some help you blind service dog.
actually yellowdog, I have never had anything against gays, lesbians or transgendered people, I only have a problem with conservatives who are in the closet while condemning everyone else for their way of life. if they would come out of the closet and accept who they are they wouldn't be filled with so much hate. It is not their fear of others "sinning" that makes them wear their religion on their sleeve and attempt to force it down the worlds throat at the point of a sword, it is their fear of who they themselves really are inside that makes them hate, or pretend to hate the ones who live freely and openly. I thought DiCaprio's portrayal of J. Edgar Hoover perfectly depicted the damage one can do to ones mind by not accepting ones true nature, and as we saw in real life the damage his (hoover's) paranoia did to this country and the world.
This article is NOT about the candidates. It is soley about the I'm gonna make the rules up as I go or take my ball home RNC lack of leadership. To place a rule like that in place AFTER the thing is more than half done is irresponsible and should not be allowed.
I guess what I'm trying to say yellowdog is that if "men" like Reince, Tucker and Grover, who are all so obviously gay to the rest of the world, would come out of the closet and accept their homosexuality then possibly they would spend more time singing show tunes and less time spreading lies and propaganda, which in turn would make the whole world a much better place to live for both gays and straights.
Help me out with the "other stuff." How many wives did Jesus have? How many children? Why are black people black? etc
Why is Utah #50 of all states, per capita, in military volunteerism?
"Why is Utah #50 of all states, per capita, in military volunteerism?"
And #1 in porn downloads!!!
DAMNITNEWT---!!!!
Don't go away mad or (do, cuz I don't care), BUT PLEASE, please go away!!!
He's worse than H. Ross Perot!!
Yellow, why is saying you suspect someone is gay a sign of prejudice?
@Sandtrich: The original tenets of mormonism were to stay out of the Gentiles Business, including war. They were and would continue to be allowed the status of "conscientious objectors" if the country still had a draft. They could however, volunteer if they so chose. While some do, the overwhelming majority opt not to. Actually, mormons favor proselyting and stealing from infidels about as much as they like sex with multibile partners. Regards my Friend
Romney has never said anything about bringing his faith into White House policies. Until he does, his faith, except that he has lived his beliefs and tried to be a good man, do not belong in the discussion.
It's bigoted to do so.
Where was your voice when President Obama was being called a "Muslim" or the birther scam perpetrated by the right? Bigoted? Mormons are playing the sacred minority card.
Just because he doesn't drink or smoke, due to his religion, doesn't make him a decent human. He's a crook bankster! While President Obama has his money in US Treasury Bills, Romney's money is in the Caymans and Switzerland. Romney is a con artist.
sandtrich - and I do speak out about that.As a matter of fact - just yesterday I was on that merry go round. I think people display their racist attitudes every time they bring up those types of red herrings. Why? Because the man has been in office for three years now and that is his resume and those are the issues that people should be debating on. When someone go off on those types of tangents, they are opposing Obama as a motive in itself - and that is racist.
I do not want Romney as President. But I am not going to demonize the man either. And I happen to agree with a lot of what you say - but I still say - there is no reason to bring his faith into this discussion. To do so is doing the same thing those who bring in the birther issues do. And it's still not right.
More con than Artist. Tis the way, the truth and the life of Mormons. Katheryn, If a Mormon is in politics the brand likewise shall be found there. Course it's the same with all the religions.
My Friend, You know that I have no use for religion, but when this character constantly misrepresents the truth misquotes President Obama, and outright lies, I'll ride his a$$ like that $.10 pony that they had at Woolworth's when I was just a lad.
Even in satire, you always hit the nail on the head.
“Obviously we need to win some more states,”
That will be when you see those fat GOP Elephants flying...Gingrich wants to be the laughing stock. Nobody is even listening to him any more.
The Porcine Piece of Pussilanimous Pustulence from Georgia is over done, he's starting to stink.
Feisty............... good morning and I hope you have a great day. Nice to see you here again.
I couldn't believe it when I read the results of the IL elections and saw that Walsh pulled out a victory. How does a dead beat father continue to win so much support? I don't care if he's in a district of 100% republican backers, the guy should still get beat by anyone running against him.
Good Morning to you nomoresameo,
Walsh was running unopposed - I can't wait for November when you have a decorated Iraqi war veteran versus a loud mouth creep who won't take care of his kids!
Should make for some interesting campaign commercials! ;o)
Should make for some interesting campaign commercials! ;o
Those would be some campaign commercials worth watching!
I have faith that the good people of IL will rally around his opponent and send him packing.
Walsh will without a doubt let his mouth overload his a## in any ad against Tammy Duckworth.
He won't stand a chance against her.
The campaign commercials comparing what Obama said/promised the last time around and what he did/said while in office will be far more interesting.
And yet King, you didn't even bother to notice that the republicans all ran on jobs in 2010 and have produced no jobs.
Apparently you are not worried about the promises that the republicans broke.
VOTE FOR TRUE FREEDOM.....Obama/Biden 2012
nomoresameo,
I forgot to mention yesterday, I see where you were collapsed over on the Robert DeNiro thread.
CONGRATS!
You are now an official member of First Read! ☺
AF, Well said! Nice in your face. That looks like it hurt King. The Tea Party said anything the lunatic fringe wanted to hear and then did the opposite.
But AF, You folks are here every Friday talking about the great Jobs reports and the Economic recovery, that coincidentally started after the 2010 elections.
Double standard much?
Feisty............I forgot to mention yesterday, I see where you were collapsed over on the Robert DeNiro thread.
As you know, I am rather new here. I'll have to research what it means when a comment is collapsed unless you'd care to share it with me. I'm assuming that the comment must not have been received well by others?
I just come here to become a little more enlightened by the comments of others and to share some of my own feelings (and sometimes vent a bit). I have been able to learn more than a little from some of the threads that people suggest through their comments.
Well the good jobs reports have not been the result of what republicans have done, that's for sure. It has been accomplished with only an occasional GOPer leaving the pack of sheep, the legislation passed has been by democrats, from 2009 through 2010 and the lame duck session of 2010. President Obama managed to let the GOPers paint themselves into their own corner--in other words, while the GOP was busy huffing and puffing and demanding this, that and whatever, President Obama slipped them a mickey and they accidentally passed something in 2010 that benefited the economy. As GOP Senator Lindsay Graham stated so perfectly: he (President Obama) ate our lunch!
A comment can be collapsed if (5) or more people hit the (!) in the bottom right hand side of the comment box regardless of how many people voted for it...
Great system... eh?
What they haven't figured out is, collapsing a comment is equivalent to putting a neon border around it with an (R) rating!
Everyone opens it to see why it was collapsed in the first place - curiosity kills the cat & all! lol
nomoresameo, Feisty explained the details. From my viewpoint, when you're collapsed and you didn't violate the Code of Honor, it means that your post annoyed those who believe in Free Speech--theirs, that is. They just cannot stand to see truth and facts posted, bugs the heck out of them.
Thank you for the explanation Feisty.
What they haven't figured out is, collapsing a comment is equivalent to putting a neon border around it with an (R) rating!
You're absolutely right about that as I've "opened" many comments that were "collapsed" to see what I otherwise couldn't. I had no idea that what I said on that thread would have such a negative impact by anyone. But then again, there are many who would even like to "collapse" a great deal of the constitution when it inhibits what they want.
Americans First-3238795 -
What do you know about freedom saying a vote for Obama/Biden was a vote for true freedom?? Ever heard of the powers of the NDAA? You want freedom, vote for Ron Paul.
AF
Actually the Repubs in Nov 2010 ran on cutting the debt and deficit, which is what they have tried to do, but Obama keeps deficit spending like there is no tomorrow. And lets no forget, that it was Obama that ran around for three years telling everyone that he was focused, like a laser, on creating jobs. Yet, unemployment remains above 8%. And the extension of unemployment benefits and the payroll tax cut has done nothing to spur economic growth, despite being a central feature of Mr. Obama's n(belated) jobs creation proposal,
BTW, I'm sure the Repubs will also be reminding the voters of the 25-30 bills they passed, designed to spur job growth, that wound up collecting dust on H Reid's desk with no leadership effort on Mr. Obama's part to get Mr. Reid to bring them to the floor of the Senate for a vote.
Wake up and smell the facts Mr. Obama. Your about to be consumed by them.
KingK,
I'd worry more about the campaign ads that show statements Mitt made four years ago and in the meantime to ones he's making today. There are some real character, policy, ethics, and political stance concerns about who the real Mitt really is.
Obama should actually do pretty well with promises versus results. The few he couldn't keep were due to Congress blocking his ability to do so. Closing Guantanamo is a prime example since the Congress would not allow the prisoners to be housed or tried on U.S. soil. Unless Obama does something really stupid between now and November (like drive to Canada with his dog strapped to the top of his car), he should be able to weather the spin his opponents throw at him and come out looking fine to most of the voters.
The Republican bloggers didn't notice that those TP/Republicans who were elected to Congress has sponsored or indorsed PORK BILLS for their home States costing well over 5 Billion dollars IN THEIR 1st year in Office. Their response was that they didn't attach money to the Bills. They just MANDATED(?) that the work be done. PS: Play on words.
Can't wait to find out how much PORK spending will be mandated for the second year.
PS: To the Republican and TP voters: Suckers!
KingK,
If all Obama cared about was lowering the Unemployment rate below 8%, he could have vetoed any extension of benefits and let those people fall off the rolls. That's exactly what a GOP president would have done and given the wealthy more tax breaks at the same time.
I know it's a really hard concept for Republicans to grasp, but he genuinely cares about working people and the hardships they face. He's not all business at any cost and heartless like Mr. Romney. The 99% know that he's their best and only option and that only the 1% and above are better served by the GOP policies.
And in this case, I mean 1% with .1% of it comprised of the super-wealthy and the other .99% of the super-stupid.
TO: KingK who wrote:
I too am looking forward to the campaign ads showing Mitt "The Jobs Cremator" Romney giving 3 different answers to the same question: Yes, No, and Maybe, and then watching him deny he gave any answer at all.
Obama / Biden 2012
TO: White Collar Auto who wrote:
Wait! You mean that Republicans are going to attempt to take credit for bills they voted AGAINST?
How lovely!
Obama / Biden 2012
You have GOT to be kidding me:
Americans First-3238795
VOTE FOR TRUE FREEDOM.....Obama/Biden 2012
Freedom under this administration? Should I remind you about the NDAA where American citizens can be the target of imprisonment just for having more than two weeks of food or some other ODD behavior? Then there is the recent EO where DURING PEACE TIME the Federal government can take whatever they deem needed without compensation.
Yeah, freedom.
Umm....Idaho-steven....If you are going to announce that you are from Idaho, perhaps it would be wise to sound a little less like someone with a shaved head guarding a stockpile in a compound.
I just can't imagine why you would have issues with an African-American man being President. Such "interesting" people crawl out of the woods when Newt is the topic of conversation....
Idaho Steven I hope you know that John McCain was one of the leading senators who endorsed and sponsered ndaa
Indeed some of the best comments are collapsed and Feisty`s correct as usual, you just can`t NOT read `em.
“The purpose of the primary season is to vet your candidate. The purpose of the convention is to pick your candidate,” the Gingrich source says.
And here are the rest of us who thought that voting actually meant something.
I'd love to see how the RNC would explain their decision to nominate Gingrich after all of his dismal finishes in the primaries across the country.
Newt's view might have something to do with that "corporations are people, too, my friend" thing meaning people's votes aren't worth much.
Suckers are born everyday.
Newt was done when he couldn't pull Mississippi and Alabama.
He, Paul and even Santorum should hang it up. Any of the three would not even present a challenge to President Obama. Romney, well, that will be an interesting race. They are very similar in certain key areas, and very apart on others.
It's time to do away with the conventions. They are nothing but a waste of time and interruption of network programming (of course with the wasteland of TV, I guess it just adds to the wasteland.) The General Election slate selection needs to be by the same laws as the General Election...One Man/One Vote. That is why I support the Popular Amendment Movement (faircampaignreform(dot)us) and so should all of you. Get those petitions signed and help get the amendments passed. That is the only way we will ever see true election and campaign finance reform.
Petition for US Constitutional Amendment For Election Reform
We, the undersigned US citizens, duly registered voters in our respective states/territories, do hereby petition for our state to approve the following amendment to the United States Constitution by the method noted below.
Election Reform:
1. Abolish the Electoral College (Repeal Amendment 12)
2. ONE NATIONAL primary date to be held on the Tuesday eight (8) weeks prior to the General Election day for Congressional offices and for the President. Candidate petitions must be filed with the local/state elections boards 60 days prior to the Primary Election date. Federal election petitions shall be uniform in every state and shall include a “contract with the voters” that spells out clearly what that candidate stands for on all issues that they may have to address in elected office. They shall be held accountable in court for breach of that contract if elected and any/all terms are not met.
3. NO campaigning allowed for any elective federal office more than 60 days prior to the National Primary Date.
4. NO campaign contribution shall be donated to any candidate of more than $200 from an individual or $500 maximum from a family (spouses/children living in the same household.) No donations shall be made to a candidate more than sixty days prior to the primary date. No candidate shall contribute from their own funds more than 60% of the total donations from other private individuals.
5. NO campaign contribution from any PAC, corporation, union, non-profit organization, special interest group, etc. shall be allowed for any elected federal office.
6. NO third party campaigning (separate PAC ads, corporate ads, etc.) for/against any candidate shall be allowed at any time during or before the election season.
7. NO party conventions shall be held to select the presidential candidates. The selection must be done at the ballot box in the primary election.
8. The One Man/One Vote Supreme Court ruling shall be enforced by this Amendment, namely that NO federal candidate selection shall be by any means other than the ballot box on Primary/General Election Dates.
9. National Party Organizations shall NOT raise money for or donate to specific candidates of their party prior to the dates outlined above.
10. PAC’s shall NOT be granted tax-exempt status by the IRS, and any non-profit organization who uses their funding for political purposes shall lose their tax-exempt status.
11. All lobbyists shall be outlawed from influencing Congress at all times.
This amendment shall be approved ONLY by State Constitutional Conventions to be called within 90 days of this petition being submmitted to a state’s Secretary of State. A minimum of 25% of the registered voters in each state shall be required to further this petition to the respective Secretary of State.
Name Signature State Address
Petition for US Constitutional Amendment For Congressional Term Limits
We, the undersigned US citizens, duly registered voters in our respective states/territories, do hereby petition for our state to approve the following amendment to the United States Constitution by the method noted below.
Term Limits for Congress:
1. Representatives to Congress shall serve no more than two two-year terms in the House.
2. Senators shall be elected to no more than two six year terms in the Senate.
3. No elected official shall serve more than six terms in office in any combined elected offices (House/Senate/Presidency.)
This amendment shall be approved ONLY by State Constitutional Conventions to be called within 90 days of this petition being submmitted to a state’s Secretary of State. A minimum of 25% of the registered voters in each state shall be required to further this petition to the respective Secretary of State.
Name Signature State Address
"one man/one vote".....You blew your cover on that one, didn't you. I'm sure you didn't mean that women get two votes.....
Typical teabagger trash. Your candidates are making total fools of themselves and your solution is to get rid of the primaries...which have actually served us well over the past couple of centuries...
Just because the teabaggers are too dumb to come up with a decent candidate does not mean that the entire system is broken and needs complete overhaul. It simply means that the teabaggers are just too dumb to come up with a decent candidate.
I was referring to the title of the Supreme Court ruling, not as a gender specific statement. The ruling itself should have said One Person/One Vote, but it didn't back in those days. I'm a GDI and don't support any party, especially the Tea Party. The system IS broken, and even more so with the Citizen's United ruling. That, and the amount of money wealthy candidates were spending out of their own pockets back in 2010 is what drove some of us to put together the Popular Amendment Movement in July/August 2010.
The keys to the ECFR amendment are in Sections 2-7.
To Anti -Trust Proponent
Thanks for your post!
At least someone on this forum has a valid point to make! I will sign the petition even knowing we have little hope of its passage.
Unfortunately, even the people taking the time to pay attention are too caught up in their own opinions (like the ones on this vine) to realize the need for collective bargaining. I have little hope there are 25% of any states residence smart enough to make this critical change and take back our country.
We can only try and keep the faith Amercicans will wake up!
Rasman, that is how grassroots movements get started. ONE PERSON talks to another who talks to another, etc. Print out the petitions from the website or cut and paste from my post, sign them, then get others in your community to sign and circulate copies. Form a local group, then spread out into neighboring communities and add to the numbers. Email the petitions to your family and friends throughout the country and urge them to get involved. You'd be surprised how quickly you might be able to get those 25% minimum signatures. But you also need to check with your own Secretary of State to see how many valid signatures would be required to get a convention called. It varies from state to state. That is why the petitions are worded the way they are at the end.
Because I live in a US territory (St. Croix, USVI) and have NO vote for president, I am only working to help further this petition drive and finance the website promoting them. That is my contribution to the effort. Unlike all of the other "organizations" circulating other "reform" petitions, PAM solicits NO contributions to the cause. Each person who downloads and circulates a petition is financially responsible for the promotion efforts of that circulation. Each local "organization" would be responsible for financing their local efforts. Each larger group is also likewise responsible for its own financing. We want NO big contributions from any individual and especially no contributions from any corporation, union, PAC, SuperPAC, or any other outside organization. We want this to truly be a "peoples' movement".
ATP:
Thanks for the feedback and yes we need a place to coalesce without (Big Money) involved. I will take your suggestions and research PAM, local laws regarding petitions in our state, and continue to promote the idea to all that middle class tax paying Americans have no representation in Washington.
You are correct that private money needs to be removed from all elections including city, county, state, and federal offices. After voting for over 35 years I find it amazing that any US citizen believes our system is not in need of a complete overhaul including the process selecting the Supreme Court.
The blatant violations of trust imparted on us by the supreme court (PAC ruling) should have created an "American Spring" and it barely made the news!
Glad to know there are still a few free thinkers that remain!
Good luck in your area. Be sure to join the community forum on the website as well. It was created for people to network their efforts in their own communities. My hosting package for the website doesn't cost me that much each year, so I'm keeping it going until you mainlanders succeed in getting the amendments passed.
Can't the GOP just change the rules midstream as they seem to have done with so many state primaries so far this year?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's over, Newton. The continuation of your campaign will be no more effective than a child throwing a temper tantrum in the toy store.
Not if his little wifey has anything to say about it.
Frankly I find Newt extremely amusing. And, what is even better is how he has blindly obstructed the American people. When I am laughing at Newt I'm at the REPUBLICAN PARTY in general. Let's keep Newt around for the show to come.
While I supported Newt when the primary came to my state, it has now become obvious that his time would be better spent campaigning for either Romney (preferably) or Santorum. Newt could be a valuable source to either campaign. As it stands right now, his value is being wasted.
PS, you can not run a full fledged campaign for President when your organization is minimal and you do not make good use of your volunteers. Time to give it up Newt.
How can a man that was forced to resign as Speaker of the House in disgrace, married his ugly concubine, was a highly paid consultant for Freddie Mac and couldn't even have the brains to figure out how to get on the ballot in Virginia where...uh...he LIVES be a "valuable source" to any campaign?
Used toilet paper has more value than Newt.
You use toilet paper to clean away Newt!
Newt will NEVER campaign for Romney, because he is jealous of him. He WILL, however, be pushing his face on any talk show that will have him once he is no longer a viable candidate,(as a "political expert") and will be out on the guest speaker market.
I think, most of all, Newt is jealous of Romney's wife. As much as I can't stand Romney, he did, at least, marry an intelligent woman that is an asset to his campaign (arguably his ONLY asset).
All Newt has is that worn out blow-up doll he keeps dragging around like a stinky old security blanket.
If Newt really does not want Mitt to be the nominee, he needs to quit before Louisiana votes.
The only thing Newt cares about is Newt. Just ask wife #1 and wife #2.
Personally, I think Newt doesn't want Santorum to win the nomination and that is why he has stayed in the race. For all his bluster and ego, Newt is smart enough to see what a disaster a Santorum nomination would be for the GOP. His bankroller Sheldon Adelson did not want Santorum to win and he's the only reason Newt has been able to afford to stay in this race this long. We saw a hint of that last night when he sort of praised Romney and said some less flattering things about Santorum.
Newt can take Sanitorium with him. These guys give the Republican party a bad name.
Off topic - but since Newt Gingrich's candidacy - or lack thereof - doesn't seem to be inspiring much discussion anyway, I thought I'd take a minute to clear up some "misconceptions" posted on First Thoughts yesterday as a direct result of deceptive statements posted on ultra-conservative sites like The Blaze regarding Malia Obama's trip to Oaxaca Mexico:
1. As a result of the coverage of the earthquake in Mexico yesterday, we now know that the President's daughter was not "vacationing with a group of friends" there for spring break. She and the other students from her school (who may or may not have actually been her friends) were actually giving up their spring break to go there on a school-sponsored service project:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/46800450?ocid=ansmsnbc11
2. Regarding the flap from posters here as well as from the as-usual uninformed Rick Santorum about the presidential partents sending their daughter to a place where the State Department was advising U.S. citizens against traveling to because of the dangers, the State Department's own website indicates otherwise:
"Oaxaca: Oaxaca, Huatulco and Puerto Escondido are the major cities/travel destinations in Oaxaca -see map (PDF, 286 kb) to identify their exact locations: No warning is in effect."
http://travel.state.gov/travel/cis_pa_tw/tw/tw_5665.html
3. Regarding the outrage that the initial reports of this story were being "scrubbed", implying some underhanded pressure from the White House, The White House has stated for a second time: "We would reiterate our request that the media respect the privacy and security of the Obama children and not report on or photograph the girls when they are not with their parents," Schake said." (same link as above).
If this sounds familiar, maybe it's because:
"During the campaign, Bush officials actively discouraged media questions about the twins. "There will be no information at all about them," Kim Black, Laura Bush's spokeswoman, said when turning down a request for an interview with the twins last year. "The family does not want to see their names in the paper, and we expect you to respect their privacy.......Those who don't could feel the wrath of the president.
After Connie Mabin, an AP reporter, wrote about the twins' graduation in May, Bush made a point of bypassing her when greeting reporters at an event with Colin Powell. Newspapers that ran the story received complaints from the Texas governor's staff.
In an interview on ABC's "20/20" just before the inauguration, Bush issued a stern warning. "I am going to be angry at people mistreating my girls in the public arena. I'm going to let people know if they do, too."
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2001-01-29-bushtwins.htm
I hope that now that we've cleared up this non-story, we can resume our normally scheduled discussion of all the other non-stories that appear today - i.e., Newt Gingrich's supposed candidacy.
Oh, and by the way - could we all just be grateful that none of the students on the Mexico trip were injured by the earthquake?
Jo anne, I would like one last word on the Mexico vacation.
First it was the press that printesd the stories and the pictures of Obama's daughters not the GOP and the attacks on the posters here that called that out were unwarranted.
Second, I am the Father of a Daughter that is Malia's age and here is the concern. If my daughter was in Mexico with or without security I would be concerned for her safety. In fact it would be at the top of mind the entire time she was gone. Add to that the unexpected earthquake and I wouldn't be able to do my job or anything else for that matter until I knew she was initially safe and finally back home.
How effective do you think the President was during the time that his daughter is in Mexico?
I believe it was iresponsible of the First Family to allow their daughter to go to Mexico. I am sure the President worries on a daily basis about the safety of his daughter. I worry about mine and I'm not the President.
But to put her in harms way, (obviously he didn't plan on the earthquake) seemed to me to be an unnecessary risk.
This has nothing to do with Malia, but with the Presidents ability to govern effectively and I believe he already struggles with that.
WCA, she wasn't in harms way so get over it. There was an earthquake in DC not too long ago so at least you recognized that is an unexpected natural event. She went on a school trip, well chaperoned and with Secret Service protection. No one knew she was gone until some media outlet reported it. The fact that the right makes such a big deal out of this is nitpicking just as they nitpick every vacation President Obama and/or Mrs. Obama has taken; every evening out; every White House Event. It's tiresome, and everytime conservatives go this route, it simply makes them look stupid, ridiculous and petty.
P.S. It has nothing to do with leadership either.
WCA -
I don't have any children, but if you're the father of a daughter, I'm sure worry goes with the territory on a daily basis, so I feel for you. But from everything I have read about the Secret Service since doing a book report on them way back in fourth grade, their single focus is protecting their assignments - at times, even from themselves. If they thought there was any danger AT ALL involved in this trip, I'm quite sure they would have vetoed the entire idea, and they can be pretty damned obstinate about such things.
As to how effective the President was during that time, only he can answer that, but we've already seen countless examples of his ability to multi-task under pressure. I have the utmost faith in him; you have none - nothing new here, either.
But in any case, I thought this was a non-story yesterday and think so even more today, so the last word is all yours. I'm just not up for these kinds of arguments anymore.
As to Obama's daughters going to Mexico, please be aware that it equally dangerous to walk or ride down the streets of any city within the U.S. even Washington, D.C. Heck, that even applies to small towns and rural America. Just look in the newspapers or watch TV.
Let's face it .. WCA needs to get in his daily dose of Obama bashing, and what better to bash than Obama's parental skills. So in a fair play turn-about, I would say that if I were WCA's daughter, I would run off to Mexico as fast as possible to get out from underneath the thumb of that ultra-bigoted, ultra-conservative parent.
Nice that you all missed the point.
I guess I'm not surprised.
reddevps: Hate much? Just saying.
JoAnne...Thank you for posting some facts.. I really get sick of the folks that shoot their mouths off without having the facts.
For White Auto Worker. I'm sorry to say, but to me it looks like you have a hidden agenda like most tea partiers, republicans, including the most obvious one from these two groups: Racism to the nth degree. If you, as you profess to be an auto worker, there is the possibility that you live in Detroit, MI, which here is where I get a bit confused, although to be fair, democrats also have some racist to the core people, but not that many. But, I digress, your problem is not with security, per se, but with your racism. You hate Mexicans and there is the basis for your trying to become "the father of year award", when most likely, again for being an auto worker, you also use drugs. Now, let's get to the security question, worry. If you live in Detroit, MI, your city is considered to be one of the most violent cities and the only thing that changes is from number 6 to number one, but that can't be compared where Obama's daughters are in Mexico. Oaxaca, where they are, is not involved in the drug war and besides, that city is considered by Mexicans and Americans safer than your city and or 100 of cities here in the U.S. Just in case you don't believe me, racist people are not too bright, let me cut and paste this I found and that clearly debunks your worries and confirms, corroborates that you are just plain racist. Here it goes:
d this publicly. Undo
– Mexican cities are also safer than some urban centers north of the border: ... San Miguel de Allende, Queretaro, Chiapas, San Cristobal de las Casas, Oaxaca ... analysis found that rates of violent crime along the U.S.-Mexico border have ... and b) you can count the number of tourists affected on one hand." On the other hand, there are many cases, thousands of cases of children walking to school from home and they have disappeared right in front of everybody's eyes and years, decades later, they continue there and possibly forever. Recap: Your worries, to me at least, have more a racist connotation than really caring what happens to Obama's daughters. Remember, it is people like you, that see Michelle Obama like a real terrorist and why is that? Because you, supposedly, are white and she is black, ergo, you can try to hide your secret agenda, but you sound too much like a racist and have spoken clearly as one. People who live in glass houses, shouldn't throw stones. Trying to compare Oaxaca with many cities here in America is like comparing the Taj Mahal with a ghetto, there is no comparison, ergo, your "logic" is illogical and racist and I just wanted to let you know, that won't pass w/o a challenge. You're welcome!
Hell no--While I do echo your sentiments on the coverage of Obama's daughter, I DO question the wisdom of sending her on such a trip. It is a sad commentary on our times, but one consideration on running for President HAS to be that there will be some things your kids gain from it--(life in the White House, world travel, meeting people normal kids will NEVER have the opportunity to ) etc, there are also certain things that will NOT be a gain for them.
I personally have visited Mexico, and even lived there with a family some years ago, and still have friends there. And here's the kicker--a group like this already attracts attention from the wrong type of folks, and the addition of 'security' (secret service men do NOT wear vests that say that, so they could JUST be hired by "Joe Millionaire" to protect his kid) just points out that SOMEONE in the group is kidnap bait. And sadly, there is also the 'wrong place at the wrong time' factor in random shootings, where innocent MEXICANS are killed alll the time in an after thought.
See, I admire this group's desire to do a service project, but wonder why they couldn't have done it, say, in an Indian reservation IN the US?
And Hell no--Sorry, but I would not want my young teen daughter doing a service proect in the ghetto's of Detroit EITHER. but here's the real kicker--in Detroit, if something bad happens, the Detroit police are available, and for the most part, NOT corrupt, but rather are well trained.
I have, for the most part, been VERY impressed with Michelle Obama, and with Both of them in their job of raising their daughters in a fish bowl. I also VOTED for Obama (NOT so sure this time, but...) so you cannot seriously believe that no one can question the wisdom of sending their daughter to Mexico without that person being RACIAL, or hating Mexicans.
And ALL or us parents think WE know better than some other parents, at least some of the time. Doesn't make us bigots.
And PS--one of my friends from my time spent in Mexico had his wife and kids KIDNAPPED from their home and held for ransom. That was from a 'safe' 'secure' neighborhood in a low crime area.
FORTUNATELY, that turned out relatively well (if you count his paying an enormous ransom by borrowing from everyone he knew and selling every thing he could, turning out well. but his wife and kids had no political value.
I have traveled through out the world, through Mexico and the only thing I had to worry was, as the Mexicans call it, la mordida-a bribe- that you have to give to the police every time they stop you. That said, if you were to offer me to choose between Detroit and Oaxaca, then to me is a no brainer, like that other super coward from Wyoming usde to say, I'll go with Oaxaca. As for Detroit cops being w/o corruption, well, I want a second opinion, because what I have heard, they are part of the problem. You can't tell me that the police are doing their job and your city is at the top of crime statistics, cause that just don't make any sense. Look at the better places to live in the world, and I'm sure there is a better chance of you seeing Oaxaca first than Detroit and if you don't believe me and want to move there, the city is giving away abandoned houses. You would be lucky if you could find a house in Oaxaca for less than 200,000usd dollars and no, not close to the beach. The last part I made up, but I used to sell tickets and Oaxaca has been a very popular tourist attraction with American tourists. I'm just trying to tell you that there is no comparison. You haven't heard that Detroit is been abandoned by its own people? I have.
I thought Norquist ordered him and Santorum to get out of the way !
Toot, toot, toot there goes Newt the chubby little caboose at the end of the GOP/TP train again. Somehow he desires to be the little engine that could but, instead is dragging the engine and the rest of the cars down. Maybe they need to uncouple the little fellow and put him on a side track for awhile. He can have his moment in the sun as he enlightens the world with all his historical (maybe hysterical) knowledge later at the convention. The sage of Atlanta, as we can call him, can then be put in the yard and allowed to deterioate with all the other obsolete cars and cabosses.
RNC?? Who cares what they think. It ain't over til Rush says it's over.
Now THAT took a lot of thought, hey, sideburns? (sarcasm intended)
Gingrich is obviously damaged goods now. It is about time that his wife leaves him.
(Isn't that how his marriages work?)
The rule prevents Newt from having his name placed in nomination. It does not however prevent his delegates from voting for him. There is still clearly a strategy available to be a problem in the process -- the party is just spared the time eating, unscripted and potentially harmful nominating and seconding speeches. No?
And it will only get worse when the price of gas and energy continues to climb this summer , the market takes a correction dive and unemployment continues to stagnate or get worse.
Polls are just as unreliable as the Pollster. Tailor the questions just the right way, poll just the correct base, and you get the results that you desired BEFORE doing the polling.
“I don’t think he [Gingrich] would be doing this if he didn’t think there was a road to winning.”
Yeah...it's called his oversized ego!
Jeb Bush endorses Mitt. Rush is looking at Mitt. The Tea Party while not endoring Mitt will no longer oppose. Newt and Rick need to get the message; Pack up and go home!
“I fully expect that Speaker Gingrich will be in Tampa this summer but not as a viable candidate for President of the United States,” - note to the Republican party, Gingrich was NEVER a viable candidate to begin with...
Bobby G--not to ME he wasn't!!
Did NONE of his backers have the least bit of problem with the thought that a man who stood in front of God and Congregation and SWORE an oath to be faithful to one woman (3 times!) and broke that vow, and stood in Congress and SWORE to uphold the rules, and broke those vows,
Would have ANY believability in putting his hand on a book and swearing to protect and defend the Constitution?
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, SHAME on ME.
Go ahead and get that spaceship to the moon ready Newt could be leaving as early as May.
Newt, Rick and Ron better walk the line.
Newt & Ron need to get out of the way. They had their 15 minutes.
I think this guy is just too stupid to give up. Broke and finished last AFTER Paul who BARELY campaigned. His wife must be telling him to keep going she likes the attention that a few people are giving them. I'll bet she dumps him after there is no way he could even run for anything not even dog catcher.
I think the key to note here is the mention of Vice President. I think Gingrich knows that he doesn't actually need 5 states if he is just going to use his delegates to leverage his way into a VP ticket.
I could definitely see a Romney/Gingrich ticket. Gingrich would supply the delegates to put Mitt over the 1144 and some credibility with the conservatives that don't much care for Romney.
On the flip side though Gingrich's past would provide easy targets for Biden in a VP vs. VP debate. For Mitt to take Gingrich as his VP he is also going to have to put up with Newt's baggage.
How true!(ref. Biden VS. Gingrich for VP)Biden has /talks so much B.S. he could even out-B.S. Gingrich!(and that's saying something!)
Romney will NEVER pick Gingrich as his # 2. He needs someone younger, who doesn't have a bunch of baggage.
Personally, I'd rather Romney would pick (Shudder!) Jeb Bush. (who IS, after all, the Bush brother who SHOULD have been pres.) but there surely have to be some younger guys out there who would have appeal.
And Santorum carried too much baggage too!
NO ONE is going to need Newts delegates ... Romney would get Pauls and thats enough.
as for Santrich ... Dude you are stupid, I work with Vets and percentage wise Utah has more people in the Guard and in Active Military Service than over 1/2 of the States ... Yes, that is less in sheer numbers than California, NewYork, and Texas but DUMMY not percentage wise.
Porn downloads ... 1) Who cares 2) Nevada has owned that title for decades with Oklahoma, Texas, Florida, and the maker of most porn California the buyers of most Porn ... Utah might conh 3) Do you think Romney with his hot wife needs porn? nah but Santorum ... yeah, but probably gay porn ... Gingrich DEFINITELY ... Obama ... he admitted to it.
Santrich go with Santorum to the gay bar and take it up the rear. Liar and you suck
I think that it is time for Newt Gingrich to ride off into the sunset and take his wife for now with him so Santorum and Romney can keep throwing themselfves under a moving bus.
Gingrich has swindled trillions of dollars out of the American people and for Gingrich to convince the stupid GOP would be a piece of cake.
The Republican electorate is more stupid than I ever thought possible. Newt is the man with the proven track record and innovative ideas that still embrace the old fashioned values that built this country and made it great. He is the only candidate with the skills necessary to beat Obama, restore America and confront her enemies. Romney is a party hack who will look like Obama light standing next to the President during a debate. Santorum has turned out to be a religious extremist ego maniac who doesn't know when to retire for the good of his country. Paul is just a nit wit isolationist appeaser who projects cowardice to America's enemies. The bottom line is that only Newt can beat Obama in the head to head and anyone else results in the utter destruction of this country by Socialism. It is time for the Republican grassroots to get it's collective head out of it's ass and reject the party's perpetuation of it's own power by it's support of their chosen hack Romney.
oooh... utter destruction! im so afraid! are we socialists yet? how out now? now?
They just keep Newt around so the southern racist vote will stay for the Repubs
scorn: The only way that gingrich could beat President Obama in anything is that if President Obama let him or did not show up. Gingrich is no more than a pure B.S artist with no true intellect to speak of which becomes apparent when he opens his mouth because he talks out of both sides at the same time.
Hawk: I'd like to see YOU debate him!(Newt)
Newt has 3 dominate priorities. They are: Newt, Newt, and Newt.
Well, I am enjoying this election cycle, it is quite entertaining to watch the GOP implode, eat their own AND provide the Obama Campaign with hours of campaign ads courtesy of all those ridiculous debates...in their own words,even. I must also give a big shout out, to Rush helping the Obama Campaign by his Sluts r us brilliant comentary. Cheers!
Scorn--NEWT--Old fashioned VALUES? Set aside the cheating on his wives, how about his ETHICS investigations? (and yeah, I know--not found guilty, but DID resign, which usually acknowledges he COULD have been.)
how about his connection with Fannie/Freddy?
Sorry, but IF I were a pub, I'd have a problem with Newt.
"But if Gingrich cannot win five states – or even if he does win just five – he would still face a perception problem come convention time. With 56 states and territories in play, it would be difficult for the winner of just a handful of those contests to make the case that he deserves the nomination."
now, im just SURE you are all going to carp on Alex Moe for the next four years right? i mean, you SAW IT right there, 56 STATES!! right there in writing! come on repubs! dont be hypocrites! lets hear your rage! he's an imbecile cause he said 56 states right! RIGHT!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?! RIGHT?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!
56 states includes Washington D.C. and the territories of Guam, N. Marianas, Virgin Islands, American Samoa, and Puerto Rico.
They are not states but only us territories. Puerto Rico is a commonwealth, you must be a repugnican, as stujpid as ever.