« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

An island of stability in the polling for Newt Gingrich

By: Neil Stevens (Diary)  |  November 22nd, 2011 at 03:00 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

Newt Gingrich

Once Newt Gingrich finally gained some genuine attention after months of praise of his debate performances, the Republican presidential race became a mess. We didn’t know who was leading. It could have been Gingrich, Mitt Romney, or Herman Cain.

For now though it’s settled: Newt Gingrich leads. And as I’ve said in the past, watch his favorability ratings to know whether it’ll last.

Three new polls. CNN/ORC International, Quinnpiac, and Gallup/USA Today. CNN polled 402 Republican voters, mobile and landline, MoE 5. Quinnipiac polled 1,039 Republican primary voters, mobile and landlines, MoE 3. Gallup polled 946 Republican and GOP-leaning RVs, MoE 4.

Long story short, Gingrich leads every poll, with a range of 22-26% support. Romney is in second in every poll, with a range of 20-22% support. Cain is in third, in a 14-17% range. Rick Perry continues to hang on at the brink, in a more volatile 6-11% range. In absolute terms, Gingrich’s lead is below where Cain and Perry were when they led, but that isn’t surprising as Gingrich leads a four way race, Cain led a three way race, and Perry led a two way race.

CNN asked how Republicans would feel about each man being nominated. Every top candidate had good feelings: Cain +29, Gingrich +43, Perry +21, Romney +41. Those are great figures for Romney and Gingrich. Should Gingrich hold on to that, he has a great shot at the nomination.

Quinnipiac’s straight favorability story is the same. Among Republicans, Cain is at +23, Romney +43, Gingrich +54. The question was not asked about Perry.

So again, I draw two conclusions: outside of the Internet bubble, nobody’s making this race out to be Romney vs non-Romney. Mitt Romney isn’t just supported. He’s liked. And right now, Newt Gingrich is supported more and liked more than Romney was, just like the advantage Cain and Perry each enjoyed for a time.

Gingrich must survive the attacks that are already starting this week, if he wants to hold onto this lead. If he doesn’t, it’s going to be a mad dash by Cain and Perry to grab back at his support. Perry will need some of it in order to stay alive.

Crossposted from Unlikely Voter

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • satchman3

    from outside the internet bubble?

    I’ve read several diaries and comments saying that Romney can’t beat Obama but all the polling data I’ve seen at rcp seems to indicate that Romney is best positioned against Obama.

    I mainly read RS and it seems that the commentariat here is substantially different than poll results – not sure what that means or why it happens but it seems to be true.

  • adamd

    I have said for a while I doubt the nominee will be Romney. While Perry, Cain and Gingrich have been in first place in the polls, Romney has been stuck at the 20-25% level.

    The Republicans do not want Romney to be the nominee.

  • andystone

    attacked by the media. The Obama campaign has been firing a few token platitudes in his direction, but there are far juicier bits in store (witness McCain campaign’s 200 pages on Mitt).

    The simple explanation for all this is that Democrats have long been expecting Romney to win the primary and are saving their ammo. Should Romney clinch the nomination, you can expect a huge deluge of years of oppo research, with quite possibly some October surprises thrown in.

  • snowshooze

    Even longer than Obama.
    His polling numbers appear to be set in stone…
    And he is the MSM selection for the Nomination.
    We will not hear a peep out of them against him until after the Nomination, but then the gloves come off.
    McPalin beat him out on the last go around, so we have a Candidate who was already weeded out once still trying..
    When Romney is forced to make his move against Newt, it is going to be very interesting. Romney get’s rattled under pressure, but Newt just swims in it.
    I’ll wager Newt slaughters him. And would as easily gut Obama.
    I still have hope that Perry can recover, I like his ideas, and Newt and Romney both are far from perfect.

  • jgge

    has not be exposed yet to the general public. The CEO of Bain Capital has no chance of defeating Obama in an environment where a majority of voters have great dislike to Wall Street.

  • bzip

    My conclusion from all of this is: If (and that is a big if) the media thoroughly vets Newt and does the job it should there is no way Newt will be the nominee or even come close.

    But I have been surprised by our fellow conservatives. It shocks me to no end that Cain was ever in the top tier and even after all the negatives, all his baggage – he still remains in the top tiers.

    I have all but given up on a segment of the conservative base that refuses to hold to their principles and conservative values and are bent on electing the worst candidates they can based on how well the debate.

  • conservativeparrothead

    Reagan a little in 1968 and for sure in 1976 – gets the nomination in 1980.
    Rockefeller ran many times – gets the VP slot under Ford.
    Dole – 1980, 1988 – gets nomination in 1996.
    McCain 2000 gets nomination in 2008.

    Romney???

  • conservativeparrothead

    When Romney says “Im not a career politician”…is Yes, but its not for a lack of effort.

    In 1994 You ran for Senate and lost, committing yourself to at least 6 year term and maybe more. In 2002, you ran for Governor, probably would of lost re-election bid, so decided to run for President and now youve been doing that since 2006?

  • adamd

    It fails more times than it succeeds.

    Reagan was the one exception when it worked. Regan ran three time and once elected created an economic expansion that lasted until the financial crisis of 2008. Do not forget in 1988 Jack Kemp was the rightful heir to the Reagan revolution but the primary voters gave the nod to Bush 41. They thought it was “his turn.” Bush 41 betrayed the biggest part of the Reagan revolution when he raised taxes and we got stuck with Clinton tor eight years.

    Dole was a disaster and McCain was too. Romney is even less deserving of the nomination than both McCain and Dole considering he did not even finish in second place in 2008.

  • pdawk

    Until I see a poll out of Iowa, New Hampshire, Florida, South Carolina or Nevada that says Perry has a pulse, he is shouldn’t be talked about in the same breath as the top tier candidates. He is closer to John Huntsman in polling than he is to Newt, Mitt or Herman.

  • independentmike

    Newt is more conservative than Romney, but Romney is not as bad some Republicans seem to think. Consider that while dealing with a legislature that was 85% Democratic, Romney did the following:

    * Balanced the budget in four years after inheriting a $3 billion deficit, and did so without raising the income tax or the sales tax.
    * Held state spending to virtually zero real growth (1.1% AFI).
    * Vetoed over 200 spending bills (over 800 bills total).
    * Cut property taxes for seniors.
    * Pushed through a bill that refunded $275 million in capital gains taxes back to the taxpayers who had paid them.
    * Increased the state’s reserve fund.
    * Improved the state’s bond rating.
    * Lowered the state’s overall tax-burden ranking from 13th to 17th.
    * Consolidated the social service and public health bureaucracies.
    * Restructured the Metropolitan District Commission and even eliminated half of the executive branch?s press positions.
    * Used his emergency fiscal powers to make $425 million worth of cuts in 2006 alone, cut local earmarks, and prevented the legislature from taking money from the state?s reserve fund.
    * Made it easier to get gun permits (and earned high marks from the NRA and the Gun Owners Action League for doing so).
    * Vetoed in-state tuition for illegal aliens.
    * Blocked the legislature from allowing illegal aliens to get driver’s licenses.
    * Vetoed over-the-counter access to the morning-after pill.
    * Vetoed embryonic stem cell research.
    * Blocked the state from joining a regional cap-and-trade scheme.
    * Lowered the state’s unemployment rate to below the national average.
    * Pushed for and funded abstinence education.
    * Repeatedly tried (three times in four years) to cut the state income tax.
    * Vetoed a bill that aimed to change the definition of when life begins.
    * Tried to reinstate the death penalty.
    * Tried to prevent private hospitals from being forced to provide emergency contraception.
    * Tried to prevent gay marriage from being legalized in the state, harshly condemned the state supreme court’s ruling that effectively mandated gay marriage, tried to get a gay marriage ban on the ballot, and invoked an obscure state law to prevent out-of-state gay couples from getting Massachusetts marriage licenses.
    * Managed to get 9 conservative Republicans confirmed as judges, even though the state council that had to approve all judicial nominations was dominated by Democrats, and all of his judicial nominees, including those who were Democrats, were judges who were known to be tough on crime.

  • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

    One must expect that he will inevitably overreach and go off on liberal tangents from time to time? Right? Hence the lack of a drop despite the Freddie hush money revelation.

  • federalfarmer1

    If you want to be pejorative, protection money would be more accurate.

  • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

    Let everyone else rush ahead, use up their engines and brakes, then wreck, leaving him as the last man standing.

  • federalfarmer1

    We still know less about Perry and Cain than we do Newt.

  • federalfarmer1

    In which primary does Perry have a chance of being in the top two before Texas?

    Huntsman has a path to relevance that I don’t see for Perry. Redstate is a pro-perry bubble that doesn’t exist anywhere else.

  • Common_Cents

    Going into the holidays, people are less likely to be plugged into lame stream media, kinda like the friday dump in reverse. People are also getting a case of smear fatigue. We saw that w/ the Cain debacle as people are starting to push back and remain ever more skeptical of whatever accusations come up.

    Tonights debate should only add to Gingrich’s momentum.

  • Scope

    on the age of those supporting Newt. Anyone now 30 wasn’t even yet old enough to vote back in 1999 when he was driven to resign from Congress. Also, until Obama started campaigning on college campuses, and driving the college students to get out and vote for him, there really wasn’t much interest in politics among the majority of college students. They were much more interested in partying and the opposite sex. His polling at the top has got to be driven by those that know nothing about his past. The fact that he is seen as the best debater also seems to bear that out.

  • theredrider

    he’s the right man for the job.

    This is all Obama knows about money: it comes from the government.

    Was it a surprise to anyone that when Obama took office, the first thing that he did was print out a bunch of money and hand it out to everyone with a sad story?

    Then Obama tried the “Cash for Clunkers” tack as a way to stimulate the economy. Why not? Give the chronically unemployed some money. If that doesn’t work, give them a subsidized car. Now, Obama’s trying to get honest tax payers who have been paying their mortgages to subsidize the homes of those who can’t or won’t pay their mortgages.

    Newt was in bed with Freddie Mac when the decision was made to bail out Freddie Mac at taxpayer expense.

    Once voters realize that Obama’s ideas all come from the Marxist playbook. And then accept the realization that Marxism generally leads to the kind of social collapse that the USSR experienced in the early 1990′s, then they will see that a conservative Republican with private sector experience at the helm is the only way that we will be able to dig ourselves out of the mess that Obama, Gingrich, Bush, Clinton, and Congress created over the last 16 years. (Going back to when Acorn got HUD to start forcing banks to lend money to people who were not able to verify income or collateral (aka “liar loans” or “no-no loans”).

  • federalfarmer1

    Anybody who listened to rush in the nineties know what lying sacks of crap the media was in peddling garbage ethical claims made up by democrats, and what unprincipled sellouts the republicans were who traded Newt for Tom delay and jack abromoff.

  • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

    a lot of people born centuries before I was and so even yute support could be informed. I guess a better way for me to characterize my statement is that anyone that lived thru the 90s as an informed adult would only be supporting Newt with their eyes wide open…

    Which is why after Cain imploded on Iran and the straws of his ignorance on many subjects nearly choked me, I rejected my initial intent to next lean to Newt.

    Then I woke up in a cold sweat remembering his flaws and said, “Gamecock, very soon we are going to not just lean, but actually endorse the most reliable conservative in the field, for the duration.”

    Official endorsement coming soon, and you will be happy with it.

    God bless

  • theredrider

    “dialed-in” conservatives and an occasional nut job looking for validation.

    It is not representative of the GOP or of conservatives in general.

    If you want to know how conservatives in general feel, you need to look at the polls.

    RS’s unwritten, but strictly enforced policies make it very difficult for Romney supporters to comment here without someone alleging that they are offended or that the rules were somehow broken. In that sense, Romney supporters are held to a higher standard than anyone else here. So you won’t get a fair and balanced perspective of where conservatives in general stand simply by coming here.

    Freerepublic and hotair.com are just as slanted.

    Read the polls. That’s all I can say. And don’t put too much emphasis on polls put out by PPP. PPP is funded by George Soros and the Media Matters gang. When you compare their polls to other polls taken within the same time period, it is obvious that their polls are biased against Romney, the only candidate who has an honest chance of beating Obama next year.

  • bzip

    Oh hogwash!

    There is new and recent issues with Newt.

    Don’t you think new voters have come into play since the last vetting of Newt ages ago.

    Don’t you think some people have forgotten some of the trash on Newt.

    Just because you thin Newt was vetted doesn’t make it so.

  • Scope

    donated to Obama in 08. He’s off my list. LOL

  • federalfarmer1

    Are as stupid as attacks on Perry for his real estate deals and TEF crony capitalism fund. Which smears have been discussed more by the media? Cain still has all kinds of unknown issues.

  • conservativeparrothead

    I think a lot of voters, like myself, liked Newt, was happy to see him get in the race, but ultimately looked for someone who maybe shared some of Newts strengths without some of the divisive history. I was hoping for a Mitch Daniels or Paul Ryan candidacy myself, and as much as I like Newt, either of them would of had my support.

    But I think with Newt, it really is very much a bandwagon support. Meaning, lots of people saw him in the debates, liked him, but as he polled in the 4-8% range, many thought they just didnt see enough support there to believe he would be a viable candidate. So when the calls came, they went elsewhere with support. But as time went on, he appeared the most coherent and articulate of the bunch…and as he started to surge, those who wanted to support him but thought “this candidacy has no shot” have jumped over willingly.

    I guess the one area I would be concerned with if I were Newt or his staff, is they mentioned the number of first time guest to their website. Take myself, who is a fan of Newt, even if I thought, “this guy has no shot”, Ive been to his website hundreds of times. So the ones going for the first time? Are they really Newt enthusiasts who are now here to stay because he has a shot OR are they just that true bandwagon electorate going from candidate to candidate who will be convinced by either MSM or those who are convinced he isnt conservative enough.

    Time will tell.

  • federalfarmer1

    good to know. They have been brutal on Perry.

  • Common_Cents

    I have seen evidence they like Newt’s fresh thinking, intellect, and ability to communicate clearly.

    Old baggage, is, old baggage. Everyone has it. We are all sinners. But somehow, Gingrich is the only one to get bashed repeatedly for things 15-20 yrs ago.

  • pdawk

    It is very scientific. The true test of whether you are worthy to be the president is how you spell your name. If your name is spelled R-I-C-K P-E-R-R-Y then you are golden. It doesn’t matter that you barely register in the Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, Florida, or Nevada Polls. Who cares if you routinely poll behind Ron Paul nationally. It is irrelevant.

    If you are not the current governor of Texas AND you did not announce your candidacy at the RedState gathering, then you are not worthy to be the Republican nominee for President of the United States.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    .

  • Scope

    to Rush over the last few weeks knows that he went all in for Cain, knowing virtually nothing about him, what his campaign was, what his knowledge was, if there was anything to the sexual harassment charges, he just kept talking Cain up as though he was the greatest thing to ever hit the R party. His goal, to attack the leftist media most likely. I wouldn’t be surprised if he had the same goal with defending Newt in the 90′s, if he in fact did.

    The $300,000 penalty against Newt for whatever ethics violations they in fact found him guilty of, was voted for by 328 yeas to 28 nays. Not all those R’s that voted for the penalty were sell-outs. Gingrich was only to happy to be charged with a penalty, rather than a censure or an expulsion. He admitted guilt, and agreed to pay the penalty. You don’t agree to pay $300,000 when you have done nothing wrong. Then of course you had the near mutiny with the Republicans all but promising to vote him out as Speaker with a vote of no confidence. Then, with no other choice, he quit Washington period, in shame.

  • bzip

    Excuse me but Newt has serious issues. A ethics violation causing his resignation, that is serious! True it happen a long time ago but that doesn’t excuse the seriousness of the ethics violation!.

    He has lobbying ties not only to Fannie but to drug companies and goodness knows what other companies.

    Newt has flip-flop more than Romney, he at one time supported the mandate, global warming, core issues that shouldn’t put aside as “Newt was vetted before, nonsense”. These are real issues, that hit at the core of the conservative base and are, in my opinion worse than Romney’s problems.

    How dare you try and excuse Newt’s issues as something that was already discussed ages ago and no need to talk about it – you do realize the voters have aright to know!

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    ..

  • federalfarmer1

    But some of the the commenters here seem to be living in an alternative reality, and I have noticed they seem to be able to say anything about gop candidates other than Perry without comment, but any response in kind is strictly moderated. Maybe a lot of the non Perry backers avoid the frustration, which would account for the artificially high level of Perry supporters.

  • theredrider

    PPP does a great job of skewing polls. When Perry was hot, they tended to show tamped-down support for Perry.

    Now that Perry has pretty much self-destructed, PPP has been focused on helping Cain (first) and now Gingrich. Look at which states PPP chooses. Hawaii? When have the opinions of Hawaiian Republicans ever decided a GOP primary?

    PPP is now looking for states that will show support for Gingrich. I expect to see some PPP polls out of Georgia and the surrounding states over the next few weeks. PPP is keenly focused on trying to stop Romney at this point. Romney is the most electable Republican and, hence, the only Republican that PPP skews against.

  • Scope

    Newt is the only one getting bashed for things from 15-20 years ago? When was the Perry rock on the hunting lodge ordeal from? When did Perry sign the in state tuition laws? Norquist stood on the same stage as Perry a hundred years ago, that story is out yet again today.

    What is it specifically about Perry that you dislike? It better be something recent.

  • federalfarmer1

    Good, I hope Newt is thoroughly vetted. But the fact that you mention ethics violations proves my point. That’s very old and completely without merit. Look it up and tell me why any conservative should pay any attention to newts ethics violation. You just like to refer vaguely to ethics violations because once you look at the facts, you see its a complete nonissue.

  • federalfarmer1

    Do you thin Perry has a chance in any initial primary? Which one?

  • federalfarmer1

    And rush hasn’t been the same since his ear issue

  • theredrider

    around to speak for all Republicans.

    But seriously folks, there are a lot of conservative Republicans who enthusiastically support Mitt Romney.

    Some of them have been banned from this site for engaging in the same kind of numb-skulled behavior that everyone else here is allowed to engage in. But the Romney conservatives are out there.

    And if Obama gets kicked out of office next year, you all will owe every one of them a heartfelt “thank you” and, preferably, an apology. Romney has had to fight a two-front war for the last 6 months with the Obama administration aggressively trying to knock him off of his perch and the far-right litmus-testers on his other flank saying that they will never support Mitt Romney because he doesn’t pass the litmus tests that no other Republican candidate has been subjected to.

    If Romney’s religion isn’t at least a partial cause of his lack of support among conservatives and evangelicals, then how do you explain the fact that Huntsman has never been considered as an acceptable alternative candidate? Cain actually gets more serious consideration than a conservative former governor of Utah? Really?

  • Common_Cents

    Where did I say I dislike anything about Perry? I didn’t even mention Perry in my comment.

    Don’t read into things so much.

    It’s a fact that Gingrich has been targeted significantly more than any other candidate. Sheesh, just search this site or internet search “baggage”. Like nobody else has any. hehe

  • bzip

    You could not even come close to the ethic violation Newt has or all of his other baggage, past or present.

    Why Newt Gingrich Will Never Be President
    http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/11/why-neevberwt-gingrich-will-never-be-president/248456/
    ?
    The House ultimately voted 395-28 to reprimand Gingrich and order him to pay a $300,000 penalty for ethics violations involving contributions and political activity. It was the first and only time in the history of the House that a sitting Speaker had been disciplined for ethical violations.?

    Gingrich made big bucks pushing corporate welfare
    http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/article/gingrich-made-big-bucks-pushing-corporate-welfare
    Report: Gingrich took money from drug lobby while pushing Bush?s prescription drug bill

    http://hotair.com/headlines/archives/2011/11/16/report-gingrich-took-money-from-drug-companies-while-pushing-bushs-prescription-drug-bill/

    Gingrich Said to Be Paid at Least $1.6 Million by Freddie Mac
    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/print/2011-11-16/gingrich-said-to-be-paid-at-least-1-6-million-by-freddie-mac.html

    I can go on and on with more links and in Newt’s own words on YouTube for his support of the mandate, his flip-flopping, etc.

    Do you really want to go there.

  • beefeater

    Outside of the Internet bubble nobody is paying any attention to any of them yet.

  • theredrider

    is much ado about nothing.

    That was the Dem caucuses way of retaliating against Newt for Newt’s attempt to do what no House Speaker had done for over 100 years: reclaim the role that the Founding Fathers intended Congress to have.

    Newt’s biggest problems as a candidate are as follows: (1) he was on Freddie Mac’s payroll back when big government Freddie needed nominal (e.g. “RINO”) conservatives to make the argument to real conservatives that the banks needed big government to insure it against the losses that big government guaranteed they would incur as a result of leftist policies designed to give houses to people who could not afford them at the expense of everyone else, (2) he ran for Congress as a pro-environment liberal alternative to then-congressman Jack Flynt in both 1974 and 1976. Newt didn’t re-invent himself as a conservative Republican until the Reagan Revolution of 1980, (3) Newt is understandably distrusted by social conservatives for leading the charge against Clinton in 1998 while hypocritically maintaining an illicit relationship with his then-mistress, Callista Bisek. Was this a one-night “indiscretion”? Not at all. It was a continuing pattern by a guy who just doesn’t take marriage vows seriously.

    The country barely survived 8 years of Clinton’s philandering. I would hope that any Republican who is old enough to remember the stained dress deposition will have enough dignity to say, “I won’t have Newt Gingrich represent me. He doesn’t live his life as a social conservative. He only wants other people to toe that line.”

  • theredrider

    Not you, obviously. Some of the people here keep saying, “Oh, but if Perry hadn’t said x at this debate, then he would still be the front-runner.”

    Yeah, well.

    Anyway, like you, I live in the present. Perry’s done what he’s done and the country now depends on us looking at the remaining nominees and saying, “Which one can beat Obama?”

    Saying it that way makes it a really, really easy choice.

    Only one candidate outpolls Obama in must-win states like Florida and Michigan. And it ain’t the guy who’s still schtooping his former mistress.

  • federalfarmer1

    I’ll probably get banned.

    I’m not saying don’t vet Newt, in saying there’s not much new the people don’t know about. And I’m saying peiple who cite the ethics issue aren’t conservative and just want to smear Newt.

    The lobbying is a problem for Newt and it’ll all get aired. That’s a good thing. Can you say the same thing, that we should vet Perrys crony capitalism fund or his real estate deals?

  • theredrider

    Romney also wrote letters to every member of the U.S. Senate to get them to support the Marriage Amendment to the Constitution. This amendment would have banned same-sex marriage in the U.S. and protected states like Alabama, Mississippi, Georgia, Texas, Ohio, Florida, etc. from being forced to accept gay marriages performed in other states.

    Not bad for a governor of a state that was/is so liberal that it was the first state to legalize gay marriage.

  • federalfarmer1

    The mind boggles. Balancing the budget and shutting down the government and the contract with America all happened after that, you know. Or wasn’t that conservative for you.

  • Common_Cents

    Nothing wrong with that, I think he’d make a fine President. Just shows that many at RS are actively promoting Perry as their favorite.

    He’s got to string together some real strong debates to get back in the mix.

    Reality is, debates and public communication are critically important to get elected, and to effectively govern this country. Perry will have to be a slick debater even after if he is elected. He’s going to have to outfox Dems AND the establishment RINOS in DC. A very tall task.

    I think Gingrich/Perry would be an awesome ticket and governing pair. Gingrich very sharp debater, communicator, knows the ins/outs of DC(this is very important even though people want an outsider). Perry would bring the outside small government tea party power and governing credibility.

    To combat the left, and rino squishes, to undo obummers damage we almost need two strong nearly Co-Presidents out there working hard together. Would be a tremendous combo.

  • uncmike

    If you’re a Perry supporter, try posting on NRO something about him and watch the Romneybots come out in droves to attack. And if you don’t have one of their coveted “stars” you’re post might not even make it onto the board. If RS is the land of the anti-Romney supporter, then that simply adds some balance since the Weekly Standard, NRO and other establishment Republican sites are certainly in the bag for Mitts.

  • benko

    The left will do everything possible to discredit/take down the republican candidate. Newt is in the best position to deal with interviews, debates (presidential debates aren’t everything, but not irrelevant), etc. No he is not the perfect conservative (hopefully the country will survive till Rubio can run) but he can deal with the heat, and he can get stuff done. Perhaps Perry would be a better president, I don’t know his record well enough. But I hope Newt hangs on and wins the nomination.

  • theredrider

    I had thought that Cain might ride out the sex harassment allegation and the Libya question debacle. But it seems like GOP voters will stick to bad candidates until they find a new bad candidate to flock to.

    Gingrich’s numbers will stay high until the evangelicals and other anti-Romney Republicans find a new candidate to run to.

    However, it is getting so close to the Iowa caucuses, they will have to choose one of the anti-Romney candidates that they have already rejected at this point. Bachmann? (Shudder)

  • theredrider

    It worked for McCain in 2008. And it worked for GHW Bush in 1988.

  • federalfarmer1

    I won’t vote for a moderate in the primary.

  • theredrider

    I think that there are several possibilities.

    If not for Romney, I might (emphasis on might) be tempted to support Gingrich even will all of his baggage. But I still like Huntsman better.

    I will support the eventual GOP nominee, whoever that may be.

  • bzip

    I totally disagree with the ethics violation – his own party voted for the ethics violation. It wasn’t and isn’t a dem smear hit piece and I disagree with it. Okay fine, dismiss it if you will then.

    You can NOT dismiss his flip-flopping on core conservative issues: mandates, global warming.

    You can NOT dismiss his social baggage, social conservative issues

    Neither of those has anything to do with Perry nor the clear cut crony-capitalism charge against Newt.

    You would be stretching miles to try and drag Perry into the same ring under the same charge of crony capitalism,

    I also disagree that just because it is old should not be brought up, that is pure hogwash. There are new big voting blocks out there, new people, new faces that have never paid any attention to this – don’t you think they have a right to know and make a informative decision or do you just want to make everyone live in a bubble by what you define as your standard?

    I have never argued against vetting Perry and he has been vetted and is still being vetted for the same things even the Al Gore nonsense that took place more than 20 years ago. Don’t give me that nonsense, voters have the right to know, period. It doesn’t matter who the candidate or how long ago it was, voters have the right to know and voters deserve to have their candidates vetted (and NOT by your standards).!

  • Scope

    You said Newt is the only one being targeted by things from many years ago. I pointed out your falsity. The only thing I can add is that those who refuse to look at history, including candidate records, is doomed to repeat those same mistakes. As they say, a tiger doesn’t change it’s stripes. Newt has a whole lot of stripes he is currently trying to reconfigure to his advantage.

  • Common_Cents

    There is no balanced look at Gingrichs career. Like the guy did conservatives and Republicans no good, ever.

  • theredrider

    It’s a free country, thank God (and I do mean thank God).

    But I see Romney as a conservative who said what he had to say in 1994 to try and expel the most liberal member of the senate at that time.

    I knew, even back then, that there was a reason why he studiously avoided using the phrase “pro-choice” to describe his views on abortion. But I didn’t want the liberal voters in Massachusetts to know that there was a good reason that Mitt avoided using this phrase.

    After he was elected as governor in 2003, people got to see the real Mitt, the conservative pragmatist. He did a lot of good as the governor of Massachusetts and I don’t think that Rick Perry or Newt Gingrich could have done a better job.

    This is a guy that I will support in the primary and in the general election.

  • Scope

    and positive state economic record will prevail.

  • Scope

    voter climate now. There were no Tea Parties before the 2008 election season. Republicans were just not as engaged as they are now.

  • lucasblack

    I think this is extremly unfair to PPP. First of all, their polls over the past few years have had a very good record. They report bad Dems polls just as much as good ones. As for reporting on races like HI, they have people vote on their website every week to select the next state to poll. They polled HI because people were interested in the Senate race and since they were polling the state, they asked about the GOP primary as well.
    In fact, HI is a perfect example. Their poll showed the GOP actually has a shot in that race – something many people didn’t expect to find. PPP is open about being a Dem outfit, but they are a first class polling outfit and I think that your attack on them is not at all accurate.

  • Common_Cents

    Tell that to the large majority of any type cases that are settled out of court. Tell that to any insurance company.

    Rush wasn’t all in for Cain, he was looking at the bigger picture of how powerful and dangerous the left wing media machine really is. Non-stop accusation w/out facts, death by headlines.

    Rush would have defended any candidate from attacks outside of due process. He has been defending Gingrich of late as well.

    Would the media take the same tack against a muslim terrorist? Heck, you can have a terrorist on camera committing the act and the media will still say “alleged”.

  • federalfarmer1

    I don’t care how they voted. And if you think the ethics charge was a joke, quit bringing it up. You only attack conservatives from the right, not the left. I think lobbying and comments on global warming etc are all fair game with Newt. That’s just fine. Newt can defend himself on those issues. He should have been calling to abolish fannie and Freddie years ago, like he is now.

  • bzip

    You don’t like the links, well I furnish some more from different places. They all say the same thing. BTW, I never said Newt never did “any” good, just that his is a flip-flopper with serious issues and needs vetting.

    Gingrich calls GOP support for Hoffman a ‘purge’
    http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/64921-gingrich-calls-gop-support-for-hoffman-a-purge

    An ACORN-Friendly, Big Labor-Backing, Tax-and-Spend Radical in GOP Clothing
    http://michellemalkin.com/2009/10/16/an-acorn-friendly-big-labor-backing-tax-and-spend-radical-in-gop-clothing/

    Newt Gingrich Slept with the Enemy Part 2
    http://campaigntrailreport.com/2011/11/12/newt-gingrich-slept-with-the-enemy-part-2

    Video: Gingrich’s connection with Freddie Mac
    http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/11/14/video-gingrichs-connection-with-freddie-mac/

    http://cnn.com/video/?/video/politics/2011/11/14/tsr-sylvester-gingrich-freddie-mac.cnn

    Newt Gingrich Supports Individual Mandate
    http://townhall.com/video/newt-gingrich-supports-individual-mandate#

    Gingrich Supports ‘Variation’ on Obamacare-Type Health Insurance Mandate
    http://youtu.be/ThwVp0cwOMA

    Gingrich Backs Obamacare’s Individual Mandate Requiring Health Insurance
    http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/gingrich-health-care-insurance/2011/05/15/id/396426

    Newt Gingrich Was For The Individual Mandate Before He Was Against It
    http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/newt-gingrich-was-for-the-individual-mandate-before-he-was-against-it/

    Interview with: Newt Gingrich
    http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/hotpolitics/interviews/gingrich.html
    ?I think if you have mandatory carbon caps combined with a trading system, much like we did with sulfur, and if you have a tax-incentive program for investing in the solutions, that there?s a package there that?s very, very good.? ? Newt Gingrich

    Just how many links, from how many different sites and even in person videos of Newt does one need to see his issues, his flip-flopping?

  • Common_Cents

    re-read my comment.

    It’s actually now working to Newts favor that people keep mentioning baggage. It has already desensitized people to it and their collective eyes are glazing over.

    Can you really sit there with a straight face and deny that Newt has been attacked significantly more for ‘baggage’?

    We have reached the point of diminishing returns as far as Gingrich baggage.

  • theredrider

    job that journalists and universities are supposed to do: polling the electorate.

    If you want to see just how sparse the polling has been this year, compare the number of polls done this year in important states like Florida, Texas, and California to the number of polls done in 2007.

    PPP is filling a gap which was created by the collapse of print journalism and the fact that the liberals who still run print media don’t care to spend time or money trying to figure out which Republican has the most support in the aforementioned states.

    But PPP is biased and I think that we all need to recognize that. My attack in PPP is based in part on their poll finding strong support for Gingrich in California this month when a USC poll of a much larger group of registered voters found that the plurality of registered GOP voters in California supported Mitt Romney. The polls are so different that bias is the most logical explanation for the disparity.

    Review the polls yourself if you want to see bias: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/elections/

  • Common_Cents

    There have been many closet Newt fans all along, they just needed a catalyst and didn’t want to be the first to jump on bandwagon.

    I’d prefer a more pristine candidate, and Perry fits that bill but you gotta get elected. Debates are a huge part of that as we have found out.

    People cry about it that debates shouldn’t matter so much, but they do. Debates are priceless free exposure to millions if you are on your “A” game, or will expose you if you screw up.

    How many hands can you shake to offset poor debating performances when hundreds of thousands or millions are watching?

  • federalfarmer1

    It’s part of the package.

    Newt the talking head says a lot of things. Newt, in government, accomplished a transformation of government despite a democratic president, despicable media, and traiterous rinos.

  • federalfarmer1

    Part of a conservatives job is to push them to structure their proposals in the least idiotic and economically destructive fashion possible. Mandates are better than single payer. Cap and trade is better than hard emissions standards. Etc. Thats why you have otherwise good conservatives voicing support for those versions of plans.

  • theredrider

    There are no “Romneybots” on this site. In fact, there are very few Romney supporters on this site. They have almost all either left here after getting tired of getting ganged-up on by anti-Romney posters and moderators, or they were banned for engaging in the same kind of banter that everyone else here engages in.

    I don’t know who runs NRO. But I can guarantee you that it is someone who is closer to being fair toward all of the GOP candidates than the anti-Romney faction here is.

    Weekly Standard is not totally pro-Romney. Bill Krystal has added his voice to the growing clamor of the “anyone but a winner” crowd.

    An interesting phrase that I keep thinking of is “the anti-establishment establishment”. In the 60′s, 70′s, 80′s, and 90′s this referred to the politically correct establishment that had litmus test on issues like the Vietnam War, abortion, gay rights, etc.

    This is the group that refused to let Democrat Bob Casey speak at the 1992 DNC because he was proudly pro-life.

    Now, the term “anti-establishment establishment” aptly fits RedState, freerepublic, Rush Limbaugh, Bill Krystal, George Will, and every other talker/poster/editor/moderator who wants to endear himself to the Tea Party wing of the party by giving slanted coverage of Mitt Romney.

    Has Mitt changed over the years? Sure. He’s gotten more conservative. Have Gingrich, Perry, and Cain all changed as well? Sure, but you’d never know it from listening to the anti-establishment establishment. They want so badly to beat Romney that they are willing to help Obama get re-elected.

    The anti-establishment establishment is trying to “purge out” all of the “impure” elements in the GOP. But the last time I checked, the “big tent” approach was far more effective at winning elections than the “only the pure survive” approach. Witness Bill Clinton’s success as a “new Democrat” and George W. Bush’s success as a “compassionate conservative”.

    The Tea Party seems to have signed some kind of suicide pact with the anti-establishment establishment and no one here seems to want to acknowledge this.

    Good luck on that beating Obama thing.

  • Tbone

    Newt will be 70 in June 2013. That means he would be 73 when waddling for re-election in 2016.

    Newt certainly doesn’t have a record of good decisions when he was younger and as a codger, God help us.

    However, as fat as he is, if he picks a good VP that could be important because he is liable to keel over with a heart attack at any moment.

    And no, he ain’t no Ronald Reagan.

  • changeforrickperry

    My big question: do you think that Republicans who consider themselves “Tea Party” are REALLY contributing to The Newt’s rise? I highly doubt that. He’s a Washington insider, Allen West just said he has 200 pounds of political baggage, and his personal values…well, I’ll be nice and say that they’re questionable. Not things the Tea Party embraces.

    I don’t see Newt lasting much more than a couple of weeks, if that long. As acat so cleverly puts it, somewhere between the mashed potatoes and the gravy this Thanksgiving, American grandparents will start retelling tales of Gingrich back in the 90′s.

  • bzip

    Boy the amount of spin coming from you to deflect all of Newt”s flip-flopping is amazing. The Newt camp should hire you or perhaps Team Romney might since they are both great at spinning these flip flops.

  • federalfarmer1

    Which doesn’t happen when we nominate candidates who feel like they need to apologize for the conservatives in the party instead of defending them.

  • Tbone

    “He should have been calling to abolish fannie and Freddie years ago, like he is now.”

  • center77

    Reagan had been losing to Carter for much of the Republican primary. So much will happen between now and next November. The thing that makes Romney a loser against Obama is all his flip flopps and his time as a destroyer of jobs. The left wing media would love to have Romney as the nominee, and right now they are just attacking him enough to try and make people think they are afraid of him.

    The optics is what we should look for. If Romney is to become the nominee, the MSM will no longer treat him with kid gloves like they have been so far. Romney is more of a flip flopper than John Kerry ever was, so convincing people Romney would say anything to get elected will not be hard at all, because the fact is Romney has shown he really is willing to say anything to get votes. The country is very dissapointed in Obama, but they like him and trust him. Romney will not be trusted because there is so many instances he has changed stances seemingly to fit the times.

    This is why Romney cannot win, and why if Republican want to win, they better not picl Romney.

    Perry is the exact opposite of Obama, his record highlights Obama’s weakness (jobs), Perry has a rags to success story, but not super Rich on the backs of many Americans. Perry’s plan really does hit Washington where it hurts them and thats their abilitary to use power to make money (insider trading-lobbying).

  • Tbone

    Congratulations, this just cracked my top five dumbest posts ever list.

    ” Newt the talking head says a lot of things.”

    There you have it ladies and gentlemen, the world’s worst excuse ever for flip-flopping.

  • federalfarmer1

    Unlike Mr. Perry

  • center77

    we know this because they say they do not want to. The Main Stream meida and their left wing friends are not going to just come out and say hey, we are scared of Romney, please donot elect him. No they are going to try their best to convince people that they are scared of Romney, while brushing aside the one they really fear. I can say this, Obama does not want to run against a guy who created half of the economic activity under his watch. Romney would be a gigt to Obama, and they are playing people like fools.

  • federalfarmer1

    It was a rationalization.

  • center77

    he is the exact thing we want to get rid of in Washington. He is the ultimate insider, and his lobbying and ethics violations are just the way he does things. I would never vote for him. The only ones I’d vote for is in this order- Perry, Huntsman, the other Rick, Bachmann, the other Rick, and thats it. Newt,

    Romney and Paul are out of the question for me. I did not spend the last three years helping to fight thjis big government push just to willingly vote for the worse of the worse. I know people will scold me for saying this, but I have [principles, and if the Republican party does not meet them, I will find a party that does, and if it does not happen, then I will sit write in a candidates name. I am starting to feel the real battle is with the Republican establishment right now.

    Paul is not Newt and Romney, but Obama would protect the country more than Paul would.

  • center77

    I would consider listening to what they have to say, but finding myself really voting for them is not going to be easy. I really in my heart believe they would do the movement more damage than good, and if 2016 is when we get the chance, then so be it. The challenge is great, the solutions need to be big, and the leader needs to be right. Romney and Newt are not it.

  • Scope

    You say that the Republicans in Congress have been a joke since Newt left Congress. Just earlier you said the Republicans in Congress were sell-outs because they voted for his ethics penalty. Which is it dude?

  • Common_Cents

    that would be baggage of all baggage.

  • Scope

    the more we, including me, respond to his posts, the more idiocy he writes. If he had the first valid argument for Newt, I’ve yet to see it.

  • bzip

    Makes you wonder who Reagan voted for when he was a democrat?

  • Scope

    with his comments that no one cares about Newt’s past, and that his supporters are looking forward, and don’t care about his past.

  • lucasblack

    Red State is the only place I know where Rick Perry has a significant and vocal following. I don’t see the harm in that; if it bothered me that much ,I’d go elsewhere. I don’t see any other candidate’s supporters being driven off (with the possible exception of the more obnoxious Ron Paul ones, but they have a tendency to not play well with others). I don’t see why people on Red State can’t love ‘em some Perry. I’ll agree that some are a bit wild where it comes to attacking other candidates, but I have no reason to believe they won’t all come together for whoever the nominee is.
    No, I don’t really GET why so many of them freak out over Perry, but it was actually worse in 2008 when Lazy Fred Thompson made the scene and large numbers of RedStaters acted like he was the second coming of Reagan or something. I never understood that. I expect in two months time, Rick Perry will be a footnote and we won’t have to hear about him on the site again.

  • changeforrickperry

    Bachmann CAMPAIGNED for Carter. Perry says 1976 was the last time he voted Dem for President. See his interview with Parade. So there.

  • federalfarmer1

    Republicans turned on Newt because he hurt their election chances, and delay had a plan for a permanent republican majority. selling out was a process started by bob dole in 96

  • lucasblack

    I think Perry has an outside chance of doing well in IA. And if he does that and Gingrich implodes, he could well win SC. Not likely, but quite possible.

  • Scope

    and helped to get him elected. She was a Democrat also, that helped put the second worst president in the WH. That was before Obama.

  • lucasblack

    Feel the Newtmentum! If he makes it through the next couple of weeks, he’s in a great spot.

  • lucasblack

    The polls show Newt getting more Tea Party support than any other candidate.

  • federalfarmer1

    Everybody knows that.

  • Common_Cents

    NOT the silent treatment!

    Let’s keep our head in the sand plug our ears and yell naaa naaa naaa when someone says something that we don’t agree with.

    but calling a candidate too old and fat is excellent analysis and adds value to RS? LOL.

    Geez people, lighten up.

    Perry would make a fine President. He has to run the table on some debates to get back in it.
    I’m just laughing a bit at some Perry supporters who sound like Rick is their own child. Look at Ricky, he took his first step! And some of the posts are sounding like Obama hope and change supporters, hoping, praying, crossing fingers for Rick to have the debate of his life.

    One poster even said Perry had a smart strategy w/ the brain freeze in order to appeal to seniors. LOL. Cmon folks, thats reaching a bit, don’t you think?

  • Scope

    Great minds think alike. We were posting at the same time.

  • changeforrickperry

    The last time Perry voted Dem for President was 1976. Which means he voted Republican in 1980.

    Time to retract your statement, federal farmer.

  • Tbone

    yet.

  • lucasblack

    Every polling company is going to have the occasional outlier. A poll came out last week that showed Newt tied with Romney in NH – I think it was by Magellan or someone like that. Clearly it was an outlier as other polls have shown Romney still with a lead, though the Newtmentum is still there.
    PPP just put out a poll from PN that was devastating for Obama. I think they are a good polling outfit and are very fair in their polling.

  • Tbone

    It would take away a lot of my fun. By example down below, I got me a CC the hard way. LOL

  • Scope

    who says that you should ignore a candidates past, and just look forward, doesn’t deserve the posting name you have claimed as your own.

  • tyman

    Just saying. It’s funny that Newt got a loan from someone he once called the tax collector for the wellfare state.

    Each man has his price, Bob, and yours was pretty low…just thought I’d throw that Roger Waters lyric in.

    I wonder if Newt paid the fine because he wanted them off his back to keep them from focusing on something else he had done.

    I like Newt, but between his baggage and the vendetta that libs have for him in going after Speaker Jim Wright, I think they’ll go after him like nothing you’ve ever seen. Remember that the libs were bent on destroying Richard Nixon for what he did against Alger Hiss. That was in the 50s, and they kept at it until Watergate came along and they made sure that Nixon was destroyed. They’re going to pay Newt back big time.

    That has to be part of the strategery. I think one of Perry’s many pluses is that if there were any dirt on him, it would have been gotten by now.

    When Newt said the ad with Nancy Pelosi was a mistake, what part? The ad itself or saying that something has to be done about global warming?

    Plus, I just don’t see Newt having the energy to campaign nationally. I can see him get up to make a speech and gasping for breath.

    Like it or not, people vote for looks.

  • changeforrickperry

    Gotta keep the facts straight! I can’t believe people are throwing this kind of stuff out. I even went to my copy of the Parade interview and double-checked to make sure I wasn’t putting false info up here. It is a crying shame that people don’t fact-check.

    Well, look on the bright side: we’re doing a good job holding down the fort while pttx333 is gone.

  • conservativeparrothead

    A lot of the Tea Party was concerned over spending in Washington, at the end of the day, much of the other stuff is rhetoric.

    Newt was there to see job creation and a balanced budget. When he left, the Republicans who “took over” blew a hole in the budget and created much of the mess we are in now from a debt perspective.

  • earlgrey

    and there was one where he really looked like Reagan to me. The similiary was striking, but I imagine the shadows in the pic made him look different. I realivze this isn’t the high level political discussion that are typical of Red State, but it is was a slow and depresing news day.

  • Common_Cents

    Not a bad start, he’d pick up a good money train if he does well in IA, and likely to pick up support as well as ground support, by other candidates that drop out. Bachmann, Cain, Santorum. Their supporters will prob likely go to Gingrich.

    He consistently gets praise from other candidates in debates and now that he leads in some polls people are more likely to endorse a contender.

    I think if he does well in IA he’ll also get Palin’s endorsement which would be huge.

    He just has to survive the onslaught from the left, left wing media, and Republican opponents. I think thanksgiving is great timing for Gingrich in that people wont be paying much attention for the next several days.

    If he has a good debate tonight, people will be talking about the well spoken, intelligent Gingrich at Thanksgiving, spreading the word to family, friends and relatives to check him out.

  • center77

    which is odd coming off 2008 when we elected the most articlulate canidate that made us feel good (I mean as a nation), but I think record and plan should matter more than anything. THis election will be about Obama, and contrasting Obama. We cannot run agaist him with candidates that fit the bill he will be selling to the American people. Health Care, Romney fails. The Washington insider, Newt fails, the big business that sends jobs overseas (Romney fits that to a tea).

    In 2008, people said that Romney looked like the guy who fired you, and this election that concept will matter even more. Romney has not been clearly vetted by the left. They want to run against him despite the polls, because they have a awesome shot at convincing Americans they cannot trust Romney, Romney cannot even get his own base to trust him.

    The idea that Romney is more electable is just something the establishment says because they want to keep their power, they will not do that if Perry is president, so they have gone all out and tried to destroy him.

  • federalfarmer1

    But others might be interested in a citation

  • kestrel

    that Romney has private sector experience if you based your judgment strictly on how he governed Massachusetts? I don’t see a lot of difference between Democrats forcing banks to make bad housing loans, and Romney forcing health insurers to run their businesses at a loss:

    Mr. Romney insists that in Massachusetts, “We didn’t do what President Obama’s doing, which is putting controls on our system of premiums for private insurance companies.”

    But that is what’s happening now: Faced with soaring medical expenses… Mr. Romney’s successor, wants to cap insurance rate increases at 4.8%, not the 8% to 32% increases the companies have requested for April 1. Three of the four major health insurers in Massachusetts showed operating losses for 2009. If their rates are capped, they say they’ll be forced to cut payments to health providers, putting further pressure on doctors and fragile hospitals.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703625304575115691871093652.html

    It’s no good to blame skyrocketing state healthcare costs and the subsequent artificial rate caps entirely on Romney’s successor, Governor Deval Patrick, when both events were a perfectly predictable result of Romney’s legislation — or at least they should have been a perfectly predictable result to a long-time businessman with private sector experience. Seriously, how do you answer this? What is the difference difference between government forcing banks to make bad housing loans, and government forcing health insurers to operate at a loss?

  • changeforrickperry

    If so, he has a few mannerisms that are so Reaganesque, it’s scary. His thumbs-up and his jaunty salute, to be specific. My sister, who adores Reagan, gets tickled every time she sees Perry saluting. (And yes, he’s very nice-looking, and don’t worry about the “level of conversation.” Sometimes we all just need a good laugh at ourselves.)

  • Common_Cents

    Let’s keep it respectful Scope.

    Anyway, who says ignore his past? I am saying its been overdone, compared to other candidates.

    I am also saying that since America’s house is on fire, people will focus LESS on past transgressions and MORE on current confidence and solutions.

    and someone who can articulately present their ideas and solutions to millions of Americans.

    In a perfect world, my first choice is Perry for Prez, but in reality, I think Gingrich is more electable in this climate. Yeah we can hate reality but it is what it is.

    And people want to Hinz me for that? Go ahead if that makes you feel better.

  • center77

    he is too close to being Obama in his negative qualities, all the while he really is everything Obama claims he is. He is not trustworthy, he has been on every sidfe of every issue, and while at Bain he really did what many in this country feel helped tank the economy. This country has been bleeding jobs to other counties, and Romney as been part of that. There is a ad that Edward Kennedy ran against Romney when he ran for senate that will be very powerful in the general election. It has video of people who really got fired by Romney, and there jobs were sent to another country. That will not play well, and showing people why they cannot trust Romney will be easy as pie.

  • superpatriot

    And same holds true for Cain.

  • federalfarmer1

    I’m saying newts baggage is old and doesnt matter and that republicans , should not smear their own with dnc talking points.

    I would like to do a reverse hintz and request that you stop responding to me because you misrepresent what I say or make disrespectful points that I cannot respond to without being banned.

  • kestrel

    A little clout on the head for redrider, for which I’ll gladly apologize in exchange for a serious answer to my question.

  • earlgrey

    on paying attention to the blog. I am sitting on the phone making voter Id calls for my local republican party, and it is boring waiting for an answer so I switch back and forth to the blog article.

    I was afraid I would get slammed for such a superficial comment, but things are so bad that I am finding myself looking for the lighter side.

  • windwaker24

    and the $300,000 was a plea deal. I don’t trust the source since it’s Yahoo Answers. Anyone know if this is true?

  • Scope

    You talked about Rush’s statements on the phony Newt charges from the 90′s. Do you have any cites or links to those comments about Rush’s position on Newt in the 90′s? You want cites, provide your cites for your statements, then you might be able to ask others for their.

  • Scope

    and I have challenged you on saying that a candidates past is not important. You said yourself that young voters were not looking back 15 years, and that they are looking forward. Are you know denying that CC? Reread your posts, and mine, and tell me where I have been disrespectful? You can’t. Your claim that no one should look at Newt’s past was ……………..

  • federalfarmer1

    Sorry.

  • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

    protection money. Good one fed’

  • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

    Leghorn…

  • Common_Cents

    was just a little odd when you made a comment about questioning my name, no big deal.

    It’s great to discuss issues, candidates, records, and electability.

    I learn from others and hope they keep an open mind in return.

  • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

    no text

  • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

    years that he is getting criticized for.

  • Xasteius

  • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

    conservative

  • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

    if you can

  • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

    not a text

  • changeforrickperry

    Q: “Have you ever voted for a Democratic candidate for president?”
    A: “Yes, ma’am. In 1976, I voted for Jimmy Carter, because I was in the air force, and I came from an agricultural family. A peanut farmer from Georgia had to be better than anyone else on the Democrats’ side. He was the last Democrat I voted for for president–in fact, the only Democratic president I ever voted for. Holy mackerel, what a mistake.”

    http://www.parade.com/news/2011/10/23-rick-perry-hates-to-lose.html?index=2

    There you go. Although I’m sure this will do nothing to assuage your dislike of Rick Perry, I’m posting this for the benefit of others on this blog, whether actual members or lurkers.

  • federalfarmer1

    But its so hard to find good sources, so who knows.

  • changeforrickperry

    Link or it never happened.

  • Scope

    will more likely be very active with candidate talk.

  • Scope

    and that is a fact. acat called that correctly. Grandma and grandpa will be talking.

  • federalfarmer1

    Do you know who he voted for in the next three presidential elections?

  • Scope

    You sir have had troll written all over every post you’ve made. But hey dude, have at it.

  • changeforrickperry

    He never voted for a Democrat for president against after Carter in 1976. Since I trust Perry’s word, then by that info I’d say that he voted for Reagan in 1980, then Reagan again, and then Daddy Bush in 1989. You coulda figured that one out yourself, federalfarmer1. ‘Specially if you’ve read “The Anti-Federalist Papers,” judging from your name–that’s a hard ‘un (read it myself) and not for the faint of heart or slow of reading comprehension.

  • Scope

    you are already lost. I guess the next question you will be asking change will be asking who your neighbor voted for in the last three elections.

  • changeforrickperry

    How’s the debate? Twitter feed says it’s going good for Perry, but I want your opinion!

  • federalfarmer1

    I should have been clearer and asked if you knew whether he voted for Reagan and bush.

  • Scope

    and then some. He won the immigration section hands down. Gingrich said he would not break up families. More later as GC would say.

  • federalfarmer1

    I just think he’s not especially conservative and has some issues the democrats could make some hay with. After Newt, its pretty much a toss up between huntsman and perry for me. Im not thrilled with the selection, to say the least.

  • changeforrickperry

    is a good way to get your scoop. Sounds like Newt had a bad moment there on immigration and essentially called us all “heartless.” Hmmmm….

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    McCain actually convinced people he was solid on enough issues and that he would win in a tough political climate.

    That’s how it works. You can’t just win by default. You have to get people to show up and vote for you.

  • clowngirl

    And I agree with your analysis.

    I find not only the liberal media’s kindness to Romney but also his apparent lack of baggage kind of unsettling. Partly because I suspect there must be some — but also because he’s just too much of a blank. Deadly boring candidates (like Al Gore) don’t win the Presidency. He needs to cop to some flaws ( not yet known) just to seem relatable and potentially trustworthy.

  • Common_Cents

    Not any stuff that comes up in the lame stream media.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    …

  • tomatin

    He destroyed Romney tonight. He’s really the only candidate that I want to see debate Obama. Right now!

  • tomatin

    Newt proved tonight that he is the MOST electable.

    Romney just withered because he’s principled challenged to say the least.

    I like the other more genuine candidates too but Newt is the only one I would trust against Obama with the media against us. The other genuine candidates would just need to make one mistake and the lamestream media would have them for lunch.

  • tomatin

    I like Perry in principle too but I just think Newt is better right now.

  • Scope

    Gingrich had his Perry heartless moment tonight. It was one of the first things that came up on CNN analysis. That will be his high moment for the night. It will be the talk for days.

    Now I call Hintz rule on you. You are not an honest poster, or at least one that isn’t smart enough to tell the hype from reality. Have a good night sir.

  • Common_Cents

    Happy Thanksgiving!

  • Common_Cents

    I see Gingrich winning IA, coming in 2nd in NH, and winning SC.

    Next debate isn’t til Dec 10 in IA so people will be talking about Gingrich’s win for over 2 weeks.

  • tomatin

    If you have to write a list that’s kinda tragic because that’s what liberals do.

    Romney just does not have conservative principles when he was in a Dem ocrat he had no problems running like a Dem.ocrat.

  • tomatin

    Whenever anyone threatens Romney the media pounces because the GOP establishment is in it with the media and want’s Romney because they can control him..

    How many times are we going to let the media control the GOP because of “electability”

    No matter what you say. Nobody can control Newt.

  • tomatin

    But I think your comment was a cheap shot.

  • greyeagle

    The same thing happens on Free Republic.

  • greyeagle

    That was the last year I voted for a Democrat too. I used the same idea. Peanut Farmer from the South, attended Baptist Church, taught Sunday School etc. Boy was I ever wrong. That man turned out to be the worst loon ever. So last year I voted Democratic.

  • lucasblack

    Sending me on a hunt here, because I’ve looked at a lot of polls lately, but lets start with the recent SC one:

    Tea Party supporters exhibited similar enthusiasm for Gingrich
    as he claimed 37% within this subgroup, surpassing the
    next-??closest competitor by 17 points (Herman Cain, 20%)
    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/docs/2011/PollingCompany_SC_1122.pdf

    The CNN poll showed Newt on top of Tea Party supporters with 24% (Results on page 10)

    http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2011/images/11/21/rel19b.pdf

    Page 12 of the PPP PN poll shows Newt with 32% of Tea Party support – more than double anyone else. On page 36, you see him leading with 25% in AZ – not as big a margin, but still in front.
    http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_AZPA_1121925.pdf

    I remember seeing others, but that’s what i can find right now. So you can see that it is possible and I am able to back it up.

  • lucasblack

    Links in post above.

  • Common_Cents

    Kind of shocking that they are for Gingrich and valuing his electability, intelligence over any baggage. It was a group of 30 or so and about half raised hands for supporting Gingrich.

    It was on Hannity tonight.

  • tea4me

    …who simply don’t get it. Romney is a liberal. He was elected governor of Mass for cryin’ out loud.

    And conservatives simply will not vote for him in a primary. No matter how much you whine and complain about us.

    And it’s got nothing to do with his religious beliefs.

  • tea4me

    ….

  • hweila

    Years in sales taught me an important lesson, once you lose a customer, they’re gone. Even if they end up dropping their new vendor, they aren’t coming back to you as that would require admitting they were wrong and most people just don’t do that if they any other option. For the same reason, the supporters Bachmann, Perry, and Cain have lost aren’t coming back to them.

    This means that, barring an unexpected rise by Santorum, the 30% Gingrich has right is really solid, if only because they have nowhere else left to go.

  • maisy

    No, never liked this phoney-I’ll take Romney over this Fraud anyday!!!

  • theredrider

    I’m already re-telling some of my favorite Gingrich stories. Like the one about the high school graduate who married a much-older math teacher as a way to marry his way out of poverty. LBJ could not have done it any better.

    And then there’s the one about the guy who said that child labor laws are “stupid”. http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-gingrich-child-labor-20111121,0,6466282.story

    It is amazing to me that Perry is the one getting lampooned on SNL when Newt’s ideas strain the imagination. I am not making this up. Watch the video and tell me which “child laws” (presumably he is referring to child labor laws as I don’t think that he’s suggesting lowering the drinking age or the age of consent, but who knows), he thinks are “truly stupid”. He goes on to rant about how kids aren’t allowed to work until they’re 14 or 15.

    This displays remarkable ignorance. And all for what? So that a 13-year-old who finishes his homework on time will be able to rescue his family from poverty by helping the janitor empty the trash cans? Seriously?

    Speaking is not Newt’s strong point. If he actually did write the books that he is credited as writing (“Gettysburg” and “Winning the Future”), then he is a much better writer than speaker. Especially when he’s going off the cuff.

    Newt is the next “please get rid of him now” candidate. I can’t believe that he forgot to file in Missouri. Even Gary Johnson and Buddy Roemer figured that one out.

  • theredrider

    That Newt? He is not ready for the big leagues. He just conceded the state of Missouri. He’s got a lot of splainin’ to do on that one. He can’t blame the media or another candidate for that.

  • theredrider

    Romney doesn’t apologize for conservatives or conservativism.

    Even Erick Erickson and Mike Huckabee are now conceding that Romney will be the nominee.

    Unlike Erick, I think that Romney will be a great nominee. He certainly puts Michigan and Florida in play, which no other candidate can do.

    The biggest strategic difference between our party and the democrats is that they are willing to re-evaluate even sacred cow policies like their pro-choice policy on abortion or their anti-military policy if it is necessary to get back into power.

    What the Democrats did to take back Congress in 2006 was to put centrist Democrats like Bob Casey, Jr. on the ballot. They even considered putting centrists on the ballot in Ohio and Rhode Island but the DLC didn’t get its desired candidate in those races due to outcry among the Democrat base.

    Here we are with the opportunity to take back the White House and the Senate and conservatives are reflexively bashing the guy who will be their nominee. This is not smart. It is what BHO and George Soros want.

    BHO knows that 2012 will be a tight race. He wants to run against someone like Gingrich or Perry. He does not want to have to run against Romney.

  • federalfarmer1

    He lobbied for corrupt organizations as a private citizen. Sounds like a a lot of lawyers I know.

    How many of us would turn down millions of dollars to say nice things about questionable company? He didn’t do anything unethical. And some Perry wackos are saying Newt should go to jail.

    What politicians do in office is much more serious. Im much more worried about a politician that becomes a millionaire while in office, than one who waits until after he’s out of office. Does anybody think the democrats would just ignore Perrys pay for play scandals in Texas, or shady rezko like real estate deals?

    Ideally, wed have a conservative less baggage, bit we dont.

  • federalfarmer1

    When he ran in mass. People change a few positions overtime. They do not undergo massive overhauls like that. It’s a joke. I’d laugh if it wasn’t so pathetic how coastal republicans treat conservatives. I won’t be the fool in the primary that thinks romney cares anything about conservatism.

  • nathanalbright

    ….because he’s not in the race there.

  • paladin1

    the Romney numbers that don’t seem to go up but are coming down. The Mitt Romney aura of “inevitability” is fading with primary voters. I would not confuse them with the general voters because he has to get past the primaries first. Since they are the 78% that are looking for the anti-Romney, I think he is gradually seeing that the light at the end of the tunnel may be a train. Don’t know for sure who is driving it yet but I hope its Governor Perry.

    The idea that Romney has become more conservative over the years is bogus. He has begun to talk more conservative but when pressed on issues, he hedges anytime he can. A man of positional expediency can’t close the deal with conservatives.

  • paladin1

    the Romney numbers that don’t seem to go up but are coming down. The Mitt Romney aura of “inevitability” is fading with primary voters. I would not confuse them with the general voters because he has to get past the primaries first. Since they are the 78% that are looking for the anti-Romney, I think he is gradually seeing that the light at the end of the tunnel may be a train. Don’t know for sure who is driving it yet but I hope its Governor Perry.

    The idea that Romney has become more conservative over the years is bogus. He has begun to talk more conservative but when pressed on issues, he hedges anytime he can. A man of positional expediency can’t close the deal with conservatives.

  • paladin1

    concedes Romney will be the nominee, you might want to check this out:

    http://www.redstate.com/erick/2011/11/22/why-harriet-miers-er-mitt-romney-cannot-be-the-gop-nominee/

  • gcards

    I knew, even back then, that there was a reason why he studiously avoided using the phrase ?pro-choice? to describe his views on abortion. But I didn?t want the liberal voters in Massachusetts to know that there was a good reason that Mitt avoided using this phrase.nike kobe

  • avagreen

    By Michael A. Memoli Washington Bureau

    November 22, 2011, 8:51 a.m.
    The Family Leader, a leading group of conservatives hoping to play kingmaker in the Iowa caucuses, announced Tuesday that it had narrowed its endorsement choice to four of the Republican presidential hopefuls: Michele Bachmann, Newt Gingrich, Rick Perry and Rick Santorum.

    http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-iowa-endorsement-20111122,0,86313.story

  • nathanalbright

    …so if you throw Bob Dole under the bus you throw Newt under too. Sorry.

  • buckedup

    Romney – 35
    Gingrich – 18
    Paul – 11
    Cain – 8
    Huntsman – 8
    Bachmann – 4
    Perry – 4
    Santorun – 2
    The Polling Company (R)

  • lakeshore

    Newt Gingrich is going to make it even harder for the GOP to win. He has so much baggage, is so untelegenic, that the Dems must be high-fiving themselves in anticipation of facing him in the general. Just because you don’t like any of the current candidates does not mean we have to settle for a guy who independents and Dems and even most conservatives such as myself have a visceral reaction against. Please people, try to see this person the way most of the country sees him, not as a debater but as what he is: not Presidential. Politeness prevents me from giving my full opinion on him. I don’t know who I will vote for yet, but it won’t be Newt. The guys I wanted to run didn’t, but I won’t vote for Gingrich.

  • renl57

    Gingrich is NOT going to win any female Independent votes. He has too much personal history for that.

    The problem with folks here on RedState.com is they assume that anyone they like they can eventually sell to Independent voters. And that’s not going to happen with Gingrich.

    Nominating Gingrich to take on Obama is just like nominating Sharron Angle to take on Harry Reid. Instead of choosing someone who would give voters a soft comfortable feeling, RS wants to choose someone who will stir the pot. But when you’ve got 9% unemployment, being reassuring counts for much more than being controversial.

  • btpull

    For all the talk of the demise of Cain he is still virtually tied for 1st with Gingrich in Iowa and South Carolina. Romney is within striking distance in the two states and is running away with New Hampshire.

    The other candidates are too far behind to have a realistic change. Paul is in a distance 3rd in New Hampshire and 4th in Iowa and South Carolina. Everyone else is in single digits in the first three primary states.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    Hint: that four includes Cain. :)

  • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

    corrupt orgs usually don’t get nominated.

    We want a President that can turn down bribes. The standard for the nomination is not simply not to have been incarcerated.

    I will happily campaign for Newt if he gets the nomination.

    Happy?

  • adamd

    If Romney is the nominee and wins the Presidency I will be very happy. However, I do not think he will be the nominee.

    Why do conservative not like Romney much, the answer is simple, Romneycare. Romneycare is the blue print for Obamacare. Romney has yet to admit Romneycare was a mistake although he has removed from the second version of his book the passage that says Romneycare could work nationally.

    Two front war? No other Republican candidate has been subject to? Are you kidding me? Every Republican candidate has faced the firing line. When Michelle Bachmann’s poll numbers started to rise the press ruthlessly attacked her. Same can be said about Perry and Cain. Newt is now going to see the same treatment in the coming weeks.

    Romney has actually had it pretty easy so far. Nobody has dug up any dirt on deals at Bain capital, There have been no hit pieces on Mormonism and polygamy.

  • Common_Cents

    “While Palin has characteristically kept her cards close to her chest, advisers suggest that the 2008 Republican vice presidential nominee is likely to endorse before someone emerges as the inevitable nominee — and that Newt Gingrich appears to be best-positioned to secure her support.

    “They speak very favorably of Newt and what they see as his credentials as compared to Perry and Romney,” one member of Palin’s inner circle said of the former Alaska governor and her husband, Todd, who has long served as her unofficial chief adviser.”

    http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57330373-503544/gingrich-may-have-inside-track-on-palins-endorsement/

  • avagreen

    but the link I posted didn’t support that view.

    I must have had two different threads open?? Crazy things happen at times on this forum and it WAS busy last night.

    Regarding your NH poll, don’t think anyone would think that any candidate but Romney would win there. No news.

    But, we can have dueling polls all day long, I guess:
    CNN/Opinion Research 11/18 – 11/20
    Gingrich 24
    Romney20
    Cain 17
    Perry 11

  • buckedup

    Gingrich – 27
    Romney – 20
    Paul – 16
    Bachmann – 6
    Cain – 6
    Santorum – 6
    Perry – 5
    Huntsman – 3
    UNDECIDED – 11
    American Research Group
    Americanresearchgroup.com/pres2012/primary/rep/ia