« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

The Danger of Projecting Hope

From the Diaries…

Newt Gingrich is still leading Mitt Romney and Ron Paul in Iowa, and nationally among Tea Party voters.  But like so many polls, the numbers aren’t what they seem.  In fact, while it might look at first glance that the conservative grassroots are flocking to Gingrich, there are still too many Tea Partiers on the sidelines for comfort.  In order to beat Obama next fall and avoid the kind of fractious performance delivered by conservatives in 2008, both Romney and Gingrich have a lot of work to do to energize the Tea Party movement (if that’s even possible).

What America needs is what the economic conservatives in the Tea Party movement want – reliable and bold fiscally-conservative leadership in Washington.  On that front, both Romney and Gingrich are treated with a great deal of skepticism by large numbers of tea party members across the country.

True, some of them have stated that one or the other is acceptable.  True, Cain’s supporters among the Tea Party have gone almost exclusively to Gingrich.  However, some of that support overlaps with socially conservative voters that do not represent the driving force behind the larger movement.  Accounting for that, what we’re left with at this point is a movement waiting to be moved.

Gingrich, who advocates the individual mandate, promoted Medicare Part D and TARP,  and climate regulations, has become the anti-Romney by default as tea partiers, who are searching desperately for an alternative to the safe, slick father of RomneyCare.   Romney’s poll numbers among tea party members, like his numbers generally, stay level as he struggles to connect both philosophically and emotionally with the grassroots.

Gingrich has clearly benefitted from the misfortune of others: as everyone else either imploded or kept stumbling, people kept cycling through the candidates, looking for an anti-Romney. The last one standing at the moment who is not Romney seems to be Newt, the lucky winner of the “Anyone but Romney” lottery.

His numbers also reflect something else: people projecting their hopes for a conservative champion onto Newt. A conservative champion he is not. No one inherently conservative, deep down inside, promotes such things as individual healthcare mandates. People have argued that he just talks about the idea, and that Romney actually implemented it. My response is: if Newt were in power, you’re telling me he wouldn’t have implemented such ideas? Others argue that Newt will be a tremendous debater against Obama. Remind me just what part of governing does debating fit in to? The last time Newt had a chance at governing and managing as Speaker, his own caucus, many of who came in on the power of the Contract with America, tried to depose of him a little over two years after he took the Speakership.

The trouble is that for all those who remember the Contract with America and the 1994 Republican Revolution, there are just as many if not more who will dig deeper into his record and not be comfortable with the progressive positions he’s taken on a range of issues over the last 15 years; yes, progressive, as in statist. Romney is just hoping that his presentation, general credibility and perceived electability will force the grassroots into an indefensible choice between him and Obama.

Essentially, you have two candidates who can’t accuse each other of flip flopping that have only tacit acceptance from a minority of the very movement that was the driving force in American politics in 2010.

That leaves the race for President wide open when it comes to economic conservatives.  Gingrich and Romney have a lot of work to do to be responsive to the tea party movement and other conservatives demanding bold moves to reduce government spending and systemic entitlement reform.   If they don’t, 2012 is going to resemble 2008 where there was an enthusiasm deficit from the conservative grassroots and consequently no excitement for the nominee.

Romney and Gingrich have to find avenues to create a comfort level with economic conservatives who doubt their commitment and credentials.  They need to adopt platforms that will be bold, fresh and respond to the urgent need for systemic change in Washington including entitlement reform, deficit reductions and significant spending restraint.  They are going to have to do the tough spade work with the leaders of the movement attending meetings and rallies to help increase confidence and stoke a sense of outrage about the President’s policies.

More than anything, they have to earn the trust of people who genuinely believe, and with good reason, that the very essence of America is slowly slipping away.  Both Gingrich and Romney have a long way to go before any poll or pundit can credibly say that the Tea Party is on board with any campaign.

If they fail to convince the grassroots that they are worthy of support, we may be left with a campaign bereft of ideas and passion for anything other than defeating the incumbent President.  It may in the end be effective out of pure desperation, but it will result in a weaker Presidency for the last man standing.

COMMENTS

  • expanding_man

    Romney and Gingrich are not conservatives. Worse than that, they have no ideology, just the ability to do or say whatever they believe will help them acheive their goals in the short term. They stand for little other than themselves. What a shame we can’t do better.

    • citizenkh

      That is what I’ve hearing from someone with deep TP roots in SC about what Newt is doing. I already knew that Cain had done some of this in Louisiana.

  • benko

    http://townhall.com/columnists/michaelreagan/2011/12/14/has_the_right_gone_mad

  • bzip

    Thank you Ned for summing up many of the same concerns and points many of us have been say. Even Erick has pointed out that, Newt isn’t as conservative as many would like to think.

    Essentially both Newt-Romney are far less conservative then many of the other candidates and far better at flip-flopping then the other candidates.

    As I said before, there is an obsession with ensuring Romney doesn

  • http://boldcolor.blogspot.com/ Paula

    While I agree with of Ryun’s comments about Romney and Gingrich, it’s based on the false premise that Gingrich and Romney – two non-conservatives – are our only two choices. WHY MUST WE SETTLE? Is the Tea Party movement completely bereft of any power or influence to elevate one of the actual conservatives in this race?

    • http://boldcolor.blogspot.com/ Paula

      Romney and Gingrich have to find avenues to create a comfort level with economic conservatives who doubt their commitment and credentials. They need to adopt platforms that will be bold, fresh and respond to the urgent need for systemic change in Washington including entitlement reform, deficit reductions and significant spending restraint.

      Sorry, I have to add one more thing to my comment. What Ryun is really saying is that Gingrich and Romney must essentially convince conservatives that they are not who they really are. They need to trick us.

      This is very similar to SBC’s Richard Land’s creepy letter to Gingrich advising him on how to manipulate Evangelical women into voting for him.

      How dumb do they think we are? This is insulting.

      • JSobieski

        and he just didn’t talk about as a candidate, he was pushing for it as Speaker.

        Remember the “whither on the vine” comment re: HCFA?
        Newt was taking on entitlements when there was no appetite for it in DC or by the public at large.

        Newt has proven that he has great ideas and can actually get to the stage of implementation.

        The country would be better off today had Clinton and Newt been able to do what they were looking to do.
        http://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2008/05/29/the-pact-between-bill-clinton-and-newt-gingrich

      • Aaron Gardner

        Ned is no fan of Mitt or Newt. What he is saying in the post is best captured in the title. There is a danger in projecting our values on to Newt and Mitt, doing so will end up being a betrayal of ourselves.

        If you have followed Ned, or his brother Drew, and American Majority you would know that they do no support Newt or Mitt at all.

        I would have figured this would be clear after reading just the title. And if not, then this should have cleared it up for you:

        His numbers also reflect something else: people projecting their hopes for a conservative champion onto Newt. A conservative champion he is not. No one inherently conservative, deep down inside, promotes such things as individual healthcare mandates.

        • http://boldcolor.blogspot.com/ Paula

          I’ve been a fan of Ryun and AM and agree with them on a lot of things. But this post seems fatalistic and resigned.

          ” Both Gingrich and Romney have a long way to go before any poll or pundit can credibly say that the Tea Party is on board with any campaign.

          If they fail to convince the grassroots that they are worthy of support, we may be left with a campaign bereft of ideas and passion for anything other than defeating the incumbent President. It may in the end be effective out of pure desperation, but it will result in a weaker Presidency for the last man standing.

          I don’t know how else to read this other than:

          a) advice for how Newtney can reassure TP’ers that they’re worth fighting for and

          b) what the consequences will be if the TP doesn’t get on board with one of these (inevitable) candidates.

          Ryan says the consequences of Newtney (and Newtney alone, no other candidates mentioned) failing to convince the base they are worthy of their support would be “a campaign bereft of ideas and passion for anything other than defeating the incumbent President.”

          That’s a very strong statement. He’s saying that every other candidate except Newtney would run a campaign “bereft of ideas and passion,” and “it will result in a weaker Presidency for the last man standing.” What does that even mean?

          If Ryun thinks there are other viable candidates who can out-gun Romrich, he should say so. Clearly.

          • Aaron Gardner

            I will start from the top:

            <blockquote"both Romney and Gingrich have a lot of work to do to energize the Tea Party movement (if that

          • http://boldcolor.blogspot.com/ Paula

            Still, I wouldn’t say there’s anything clear about this post. It still comes across as suggestions for what Gingney must do to convince conservatives. Why no mention of conservative alternatives?

            Maybe I’m just being overly sensitive after hearing Hannity’s rant last night. He basically said that the TP is furious with the GOP establishment for beating up on poor Newt and as a result, in rebellion against the establishment, TP’ers are flocking to Gingrich in droves. Unfortunately, this has some basis in reality and I’m completely puzzled by it, since Newt is not a true conservative as the TP generally defines it.

            Hannity tried this with Michele Malkin, gushing about Newt’s conservative cred. Malkin looked stunned at the end of the interview with her mouth agape and probably would have choked Hannity if she had been in the studio with him.

            So that’s the context of my concern about Ryun’s comments. I’d like a little more clarification, about whether he’s moving along the same lines as Hannity, that’s all.

        • bzip

          You just really summed up everything so well, so precise with this one sentence of yours:

          “There is a danger in projecting our values on to Newt and Mitt, doing so will end up being a betrayal of ourselves.”

          I can’t say it any better than that. Thank you Aaron.

    • Bill S

      …and its support for Newt? Polling is showing that Newt’s support has come from those who identify with the “Tea Party”.

      Ned makes it perfectly clear that the TP folks are looking for Not Romney, and for some reason they’ve settled on Newt… go figure.

      • romeg

        Doesn’t necessarily mean that the entire Tea Party movement has embraced him. IOW, virtually ALL of the support he has COULD come from the TP but it is highly doubtful that ALL of the TP supports him.

        Personally, I really like Newt. I also like Mitt. But given a choice between the two, I’d have to pick Newt. But throw someone more reliably conservative into the mix and my desire for a conservative nominee begins to outweigh my affection for Newt.

        I believe Newt’s support in the Tea Party movement is based more on his performance in his earlier years in Congress when he became known as “A Bomb Thrower” than his current performance in the debates. Way back then, he was willing to stake out positions that were clearly at odds with the party leadership as well as with the, then, Democrat majorities in both houses of Congress. But when you see him, quite literally to the Left of Nancy Pelosi agreeing with her even on the color of the sky, gives me pause.

        I and my fellow geezers long for the return of the OLD Newt. We are pretty fed up with the flaccid accommodationists that are running the GOP at the moment and are, perhaps, guilty of the projection against which Ned warns in this very excellent piece. Newt says some things we like and with which we agree so we say to ourselves “Hmmm. HE agrees with ME. I like that so I will support him. maybe.”

        This lasts until someone that we believe to be more reliably conservative AND capable of taking on the machine that defeated the Clinton Machine and winning comes along or recovers from earlier missteps.

        I expect this to continue until after Super Tuesday, which promises to be not so super in 2012. We’ll just have to wait and see.

        • Bill S

          .

  • elayman

    The field is contracting in NH with Newt and Mitt slipping together, meaning the field is close. Huntsman and Paul are climbing. This is great news for Huntsman. He needs a strong Independent vote turnout in NH. Three flawed candidates in Newt, Romney, & Paul – the voters are searching for alternatives. :)

  • tomatin

    Never ever do you mention Newt’s actual record in office.

    Passing DOMA
    Ending the worse part of the welfare state.
    Actually getting close to a balanced budget.
    Ending onerous banking regulations.
    Cutting capital gains tax the most in history.

    I don’t even care what “Contract with America” says it’s what Newt accomplished with is allot more than any conservative since Reagan. Newt’s the only one who took on the welfare state and WON.

    If Newt does not win Romney will and you can all vote for your candidate who has a moderate progressive record IN OFFICE. Anyone who believes him now deserves what they get.

    • http://boldcolor.blogspot.com/ Paula

      They have been documented on RS extensively. Newt had some notable conservative accomplishments, although it’s debatable how much credit he deserves for them. But we can’t just ignore his big-government proposals through the years and his many votes to expand the size and scope of government. You can’t just focus on one microcosm of his career and blatantly ignore the rest.

    • http://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress.com nathanalbright

      There are other viable options aside from Newt and Gingrich. Keep repeating it to yourself until it sinks in.

      • http://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress.com nathanalbright

        ….erg, I meant Newt and Mittens.

  • Kyle-MI

    They both can promise conservative policy until the cows come home, but in the end their weaknesses are in their non-conservative records. They cannot go into the past and change that.

    Having said that, their past records are an indication that they might implement poor policies, not necessarily that they will. We know who definitely will implement radically liberal policies, Obama. We have a better chance with Mitt or Newt than with Obama even if we can’t be 100% sure about how our candidates will behave in office. It is even better if we can provide them with a conservative House and Senate.

  • TopGun

    Both therefore are against the Constitution.

    Therefore both are just as dangerous as Obama, and a threat to our Republic.

  • Pingback: Shandra Sago