« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

The one simple reason Newt Gingrich will not win the general election: Women

By: RealQuiet (Diary)  |  December 7th, 2011 at 10:02 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

Newt Gingrich has conducted a brilliant campaign strategy since he stumbled back in late spring regarding Paul Ryan’s Path to Prosperity Plan.  He has been masterful in debates and shown an eagerness to take on and fight the media elite.  He has owned up to his personal and political mistakes and stated candidly what his positions are, though many may disagree with them but still live with them.  He hasn’t shown the brash ego and self-centeredness that reared its ugly head so many times when he was the Speaker of the House.  He certainly seems to be a changed man.

BUT…..

Though Gingrich has engaged in his own political cronyism and playing both sides of the fence on political issues like Mitt Romney has in the past (which the Republican voter seems to be willing to overlook), there is one thing that will stop him from winning the general election:

A considerable majority of American women will not vote for him because of his past marital actions of betrayal

Most American women whether they be Democrat, independent, or Republican will not vote for a man who cheated on his previous wife(s).  Among women, men like this cannot and will not be trusted.  People like to point out that Ronald Reagan had two wives.  The key thing is Ronald Reagan never cheated on Jane Wyman, his first wife.  She left him because there was nothing left in common between them as she claimed.  That is a very big difference. 

The dangerous trap that the conservative and Republican voter may be falling into is that we want to beat President Obama so badly that we’re willing to overlook a very serious character (and likely fatal) flaw that is considered to a bridge too far for a huge portion of the voting electorate. We are mesmerized by the fact that we have someone who has incredible ideas and is able to articulate and debate them so effectively.  We relish the thought of Newt Gingrich taking on Barack Obama in a debate.  No matter how badly Newt might hand Barack Obama’s lunch to him, women voters will not forget that this man cheated on his life partner(s).  And that, ultimately among that huge number of our population, prevent them from pulling the lever for Newt Gingrich in a general election.  Traps like this are lethal because people are so anxious right now to beat Barack Obama.  Unfortunately, this anxiousness is blinding us to the peril of compromising a core principle of character that is not open for compromise historically in the Republican party.

I will vote for Newt if he is the nominee because I want Barack Obama out of office. However, Newt Gingrich will never be president for this one simple reason.  Gingrich supporters may think this may not be fair, but it is what it is.

Most women in this country will not trust Newt Gingrich

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • http://boldcolor.blogspot.com/ Paula

    I completely agree. I think this will be especially true with the (allegedly) all powerful independent women, who will be much less likely to forgive Newt his trespasses than evangelical Christians.

  • westcoastpatriette

    I am watching in horror as so many Republicans want to gloss over Newt’s past and try to find ways to insist that his unfaithfulness is irrelevant to his quest for the Presidency.

    And it’s true. His series of affairs is unforgivable–not in a spiritual sense, but in terms of invoking the kind of respect one should merit if they are asking us to allow them to be in the most powerful position in the world for four years. To me it is the height of arrogance on Newt’s part that he would have the audacity to parade around his present wife–who will become our First Lady–knowing that we all know she was the floozie who helped break up his previous marriage.

    Disgusting. Does he really think the conservative base of the party is going to go for this? I predict his days are numbered and I do not think he will win the nomination.

    • David123

      The conservative base will vote for whoever the nominee is, even if it’s Newt – last time that added up to 48% of the voters.

      There are many Democrats who really liked Bill Clinton, but who support Barrack Obama less strongly – we need 3% or more of these people. Someone who is mildly liberal, but sees the hard times caused by Obama’s policies may be reachable.

      Newt Gingrich, the leader of the VRWC to impeach Bill Clinton for lying about sex, is not the nominee we need to attract Clinton Democrats. The left will paint Gingrich as an extremist, an adulterer, and a hypocrite, and that will make Gingrich unattractive to moderate liberals.

      Anybody who is nonideological but considers being a good family man to be important will vote for Obama over Gingrich. Some of these people would happily vote for Perry, Romney, or Santorum who are all good family men.

      Gingrich might still win; he hasn’t spent 20 years in a hate-America church, wasted money on Solyndra, given guns to Mexican drug lords, or palled around with terrorists. However, all the other Republican candidates have these advantages too, while also managing to stay faithfully married.

      • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

        I know a lot of blue collar workers who are not political. And while this is only anecdotal, I will say they, all of them, are extremely frightened of Obama and his regime.

        It is not so much that they like Republicans, most of them don’t, but they are really scared of Obama. and the way the society is headed.

  • windwaker24

    It really wasn’t the cheating that dropped him as my second choice. It was the lie he came up with during that interview with the CBN. Cheating on your wives because you loved your country too much is the lamest excuse ever. Who in the world is ever going to believe that whopper?! I want to know what was going on in Newt’s head and the interviewer’s head for letting him get away with that without question. The interview was in May, but I unfortunately found out about it on, of all days, Veteran’s Day which made me even more livid. Many of our brave men and women go off to many foreign lands for long periods of time, yet can still stay faithful to their spouses. Newt should have just said “I made mistake” and moved on.

    • aesthete

      I’d bet a year’s earnings that America was the last thing on Newt’s mind while he was cheating on his wife wives.

  • Common_Cents

    He’s leading across the board, including nearly 50% in a recent poll in FL. Are they all men?

    America is on fire, Americans want to beat Obama, they’ll show this isn’t the time to be so critical of personal mistakes.

    • andystone

      to suggest that the main way they evaluate a male candidate is by considering how he acts in his romantic relationships. Female voters are just as concerned about the economy, foreign policy etc. as their male counterparts – and yes, polls do include women.

      • barleycorn

        I am astounded at how these arguments get trotted out, without any apparent irony, that women decided their vote based not on a candidate’s positions on issues but rather on whether or not he matches up well with Ward Cleaver.

        • Flagstaff

          by a cheating wife, I can appreciate a certain level of distrust of any marital cheater.

          Having twenty years pass has added some perspective. I’m no longer so sure that “unacceptable” modifications of marital arrangements disqualifies the cheater from participation in polite society, and I really don’t think it has any bearing on whether a person would make a good President or not. Heck, it doesn’t even mean (s)he’s a bad person.

          So I look on this subject as a question of electability, not of ability. I don’t believe this is a big issue with that many voters, not one that will overcome other factors, anyway.

          Is Gingrich the man to lead us out of the hole Obama has dug for us? If not, who is? That’s the question we need to answer.

          • bzip

            I don’t really buy the argument that cheating isn’t going to have an serious affect in the general BUT for the sake of argument lets say it doesn’t and we stick with your question of:

            “Is Gingrich the man to lead us out of the hole Obama has dug for us? If not, who is? That?s the question we need to answer.”

            I don’t see how Newt could possibly be the one to dig us out and for that matter take it to Obama in the general based on his well documented big gov’t solutions he has supported over then years:

            a) Mandates
            b) TARP
            c) Global Warming
            d) Crony capitalism- Lobbying
            e) Supported Medicare Part D
            f) He favored No Child Left Behind
            g) Spoke favorably about the infamous Harriet Miers nomination
            h) Ethic violations, his own peers voted him out.
            I) Supports a form of Amnesty

            Newt has supported these ideas how can he be the solution to the very same things we are against and even worse is take a fight to Obama over these issues?

            Based on a decade of proven consistent conservative policies the person who could dig us out is clearly: Rick Perry. His record speaks volumes as to how he would govern and dig us out.

            Arguments for Perry and being able to dig us out:

            1)Strongest voice on Abortion:
            Passed the sonogram bill and defunded planned parenthood in Texas. Due to legislation Perry pushed for and passed 13 abortion clinics in Texas have been shut down and more will follow.

            2)Gun Rights:
            Having the stance that there should be no laws restricting the right to bear arms. Perry signed into law Castle Law and further amended legislation to include the law extend to our vehicles and further be allowed to carry concealed without a permit while traveling with the clear and simple definition of traveling to include going to and from your home to our car and any destination thereafter.

            Perry is a CCL holder and below YouTube Video clip with response from Perry on gun control is all any conservative needs to know on how he will deal with gun control. It should be very clear by anyone and everyone what a pro10th amendment rights guy Perry is, you surely can’t dispute that.
            http://youtu.be/OenAw39A0b8

            3)Taxes
            Perry has signed legislation totally 14 billion in tax cuts; among them a veto on the internet sales tax, and bills signed cutting property and franchise business taxes.

            4)Government size:
            Perry has signed into law protection against eminent domain and when alerted to the threat of land grabs from the TTC, so scuttled the program and bound by law under scorched earth mandate that the TTC shall never rise again under an name and earned him the endorsement of the highest ranking conservative in Texas, Wayne Christian

            http://texasgopvote.com/2012-presidential-election/most-conservative-state-representative-texas-endorses-rick-perry-president-expla-003248

            5)Perry has also signed into law several bills protecting Texas against EPA over-regulation and is the worst enemy of the EPA
            http://www.texastribune.org/texas-politics/2012-presidential-election/perry-vs-ep-epic-illuminating-clash/

            6) Don?t forget Perry pushed for lawsuit reform and got it ? he signed into law comprehensive reforms that have made Texas a leader in the fight against lawsuit abuse. These reforms include a recent loser pay law that will cut down on frivolous lawsuits. His medical liability reforms have increased the number of physicians practicing in the state by the thousands, improving patient access to medical specialists.

            7) Protected the ?Rainy Day Fund,? which set aside at least $6 billion for future needs and a lot of people were wanting to spend that money but he would not touch it. And Perry is the only governor since World War II to reduce state general revenue spending. Perry also signed a historic property tax cut, and a tax cut for small businesses with less than $1 million in gross receipts.

            8) ID required when voting. The law, scheduled to take effect Jan. 1, bars anyone without a valid state or federal photo ID from voting.

            9) Signed a bill that prevents driver?s licenses for illegals. Additionally, he vetoed a bill that would have allowed the use of a matricula consular, which is an ID card used by the Mexican government, to get a driver?s license in Texas.

          • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

            continue to call Gingrich a lobbyist. He was never a registered lobbyist. Isn’t honesty an important aspect of character?

          • rcastonjr

            you people better get over yourselves and vote FOR whoever the Republican nominee is or be ready to bend over and take whatever Obama has in store for us for another 4 years. This infighting is stupid and its getting old. Wake the heck up people. You nor I will be nominating the Republican nominee by ourselves. Remember that and remember not to pout too much if your favorite candidate doesn’t make it. Once the nominating process is over, unless you want four more years of communist rule, you had better get behind our candidate, whoever that may be.

        • porkandcheese

          Women, like any voter, look to a candidate’s character. I forget who the woman was, but she is an elderly Iowa activist. Every candidate courts her endorsement. In an interview, she talked about how she became active in politics and admits she doesn’t really look at the candidates’ policy proposals. She cast her first vote for Humphrey after listening to his mother talk about how devoted he was to her for weeks on end as she did her hair. She was a beautician, and she figured any man that respectful toward his mother was a decent and trustworthy person.

          Likewise, I would never vote for a candidate who was a deadbeat dad, especially after being raised by a single mother. I am sure many women who have had a divorce will be turned off by the story of Gingrich cheating on a woman with cancer and serving her with divorce papers in the hospital. That shows a lack of compassion and a selfish streak that are not presidential.

          • Flagstaff

            Like many others promoted by the left, this one has only a little bit of truth in it. The wife WAS in the hospital, and Mr. and Mrs. Gingrich got into an argument.

            However, the divorce was already in the works, it was her idea, the visit to the hospital was to take the kids to see their mother, and the cancer was a relatively simple one (the ex-Gingrich is still alive).

            I’m not sure what the story about Humphreys proves unless it is that liberals will grasp at any reason whatsoever to vote for another liberal Democrat.

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

            I was very impressed with Newt last night and the whole campaign with how cool and positive he has been.

          • Flagstaff

            I didn’t even know about it.

            To hear the MSM, and even the Fox commentators, tell it, there isn’t anybody in the race who can beat Obama, except maybe Mitt.

            I like Mitt. I wish he had been our choice to run four years ago. But I just can’t figure out why everybody else is too radical, too “zany,” too egotistical, too smart, too dumb, too much like Bush, too shrill, too hard, too folksy, too human to beat Obama. Tonight or last night Bill Bennett essentially said Gingrich is “too unpredictable” and would therefore not be a good candidate for us, laying the old “not conservative enough for sure” label on him. He’d give Obama too easy a target to smear. Why would Obama need to? We are doing it for him.

            Obama has been a disaster as president. Hogan’s goat should be able to beat him.

            All the candidates are campaigning too hard. They are using easy sound bites with easy insults, and responding in kind. That may get them air time, but as the butt of jokes, not as serious contenders for the presidency.

            If Mitt says Newt should “give the F and F money back,” Newt should either ignore it or ask why he should give back money he earned honestly and paid big taxes on. Or if it wasn’t earned honestly, maybe he should give it back. But he shouldn’t stoop to class warfare against another Republican.

            And each one should be telling us why s/he is “the leader for our time,” not why so-and-so isn’t conservative enough. (Bachmann tries, but she hasn’t convinced me.) Why is this so important?

            Because the United States is presently in the process of being destroyed by the Obama policies, and it’s going to take more than just a doctrinaire belief in conservatism, or in the founding fathers, or in the Constitution, to rectify that. Those make up a good starting point, but we need a leader who can go from there and turn the ship around, not just talk a good game.

            When democracies fail, the next step is often authoritarian control by a single party government, not necessarily totalitarian fascist or totalitarian communist rule. Control of the economy is indirect, rather than direct. As you may have noticed, we have already turned a great deal of control over to the Democrat/union bureaucracy of the current government.

            Our democracy is on the brink of failure, brought on by overspending, over-promising and over-reaching. We need someone who can understand that and reverse it without tearing the country apart.

            The fall of the Soviet Union exposed the false promises of Communism. The failure of Greece exposed the impossibility of broad-based Socialism. The Occupy Wall Streeters exposed the failure of mass education. The election of Barack Obama exposed the fragility of democratic balance. Will the election of his successor prove its resilience?

  • falgore

    and she is as unforgiving of marital infidelity as they come (she has made this pretty clear to me). I actually asked this question directly of her and 2 other Baptist-bred adult women at dinner this week. They would gladly vote for Newt over the current pristine occupant of the White House.

  • chbroussard

    of what another four years of Obama will do to this country and would vote for Newt, even if they had to hold their nose to do so. While betraying a spouse is bad, betraying one’s country is worse. We cannot afford another four years of betrayal, and I think most women would agree.

  • hls87

    either the nomination or the election is that far too many voters are sane. Nominating Mitt Romney would be a tragic mistake. Nominating Newt Gingrich would be suicidal madness.

    This diary gives Newt way too much credit. He hasn’t run a good campaign and he hasn’t been good in debates. Conventional wisdom on this point is, as per usual, nonsense. Gingrich’s policy proposals are a muddle. His much vaunted articulation consists almost entirely of sneering at debate moderators. That plays well to the gallery, but it isn’t substantive and it won’t carry him any further than it already has.

    Ideologically, tempermentally and morally the Republican Party couldn’t do worse than Newt Gingrich. He is a creature of the distant past when it was enough for conservatives to fight a half-hearted rear guard action against the worst progressive excesses. That won’t do in the 21st century. Newt has shown no capacity to move beyond the dated politics of the last millenium. He is also a volatile, odious toad.

    Gingrich was the face of the Party once before and it was a disaster. He is a national laughingstock and has been for 15 years, ever since his became a household name. As Speaker he embarrassed the Party and the conservative movement repeatedly. As the GOP nominee he would destroy them.

    The Democrats will try to demolish any Republican nominee. They’ve already demolished Newt Gingrich and there’s no way to put Humpty Newty back together again. Right now Newt is enjoying his bubble. It will pop before Iowa caucuses, and not just because women won’t vote for him. No informed, rational person will vote for him. Like Herman Cain before him, he’s a nonstarter.

    • wbf

      I am still absolutely stunned we are even talking about Newt Gingrich as the nominee!!

      It will be more than just marital unfaithfulness that will cause him to lose.

    • trelane

      and unite behind the only conservative who can win – Newt. Yeah we all like Bachmann and Perry but their time in the sun is ancient campaign history at this point. Without Newt it will be Mitt, and you really don’t want that.

    • ripusa32110

      From your mouth to God’s ear. I mean that with complete sincerity and no flippancy.

      • ripusa32110

        That earlier post was meant as a reply to his87. A merciful God wouldn’t inflict an amoral man like Newt Gingrich on America. A righteous holy God would inflict a president like Obama or Romney or Gingrich on a wicked sinful country like the United States.

    • writescribe

      articulate and well put. I was in my 20s when Gingrich took over as Speaker, and it really was like watching a slow-motion train wreck.

      “His much vaunted articulation consists almost entirely of sneering at debate moderators.” LOL, this became an instant classic in my book.

  • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

    While it will cost him some votes with women to be sure, the jury is still out on whether they reject him wholesale. Bill Clinton proved you can get caught and still keep your popularity with women. Before him, they were all Gary Hart. Time will tell which one Newt ends up being like.

    • trevorb

      but Clinton’s a democrat and if you’re a democrat, particularly a slick one, you can get away with just about anything. Ask Barney Frank; Gingrich doesn’t have that luxury.

  • lucasblack

    And yet Clinton did quite well among women even though everybody knew he had screwed around on his wife with multiple women.

    • ripusa32110

      I believe the women who supported Clinton were so pro-abortion that they didn’t care about anything else Clintion did in the White House.

    • Ender

      and conservative women ideologically. We can’t pretend they are all in the same pool of women.

      Liberal women are much more likely to be less caring about the societal morality when supporting a candidate.

      I like Newt but I don’t think he is electable. Thus I support Romney.

    • porkandcheese

      But the Iowa woman I cited upthread said she never liked him. She thought he looked like a “skirt chaser” — ha!

  • conservativecurmudgeon

    I think 20% real unemployment upsets women as much as men. I think women are as upset at the smothering debt that their children will endure unless we get Obama out of office as are men. I think women get just as upset at the thought of authoritarian health care as men.

    Women are judicious, descriminating, intelligent, sentient beings. They suffer, their blood is red, their tears are just as real as men.

    All the destruction that Obama is visiting upon this country is as real and devastating to women as it is to men. Obama is reviled. He is loathed. He despised by both men and women. As Republicans, we cannot, under any circumstance, make this election a referendum about ANYBODY other than Barack Obama: The same Barack Obama who is the absolute worst, most destructive president of the modern era. Newt Gingrich cheating on his wives means as much to me as Mr. Romney’s Mormonism: In this wave election, nothing matters other than the horrific record of the incumbent. Nothing. Period.

    If Newt Gingrich is nominated, women will vote for him. If Rick Perry is nominated, women will vote for him. If Michele Bachmann is the nominee, women will vote for her. If Bozo is the nominee against the loathsome Barack Obama, women will vote for, and elect, Bozo. Obama is more upside down than even LBJ at this point in his term. President Obama is going down in spectacular flames.

    Barack Obama is destined for an historic landslide. Make book on it.

    • RealQuiet

      The economic climate in our country is going to have to be awfully bad for women to overlook Newt’s infidelities.

      One thing that I cannot but help notice among Romney supporters is he does the best with independents and moderates. I think any candidate the GOP winds up with will have a substantial majority of independents in their corner. Obama is polling at 30-35% of this deciding group. Combine that with a rabidly fired up GOP base, he certainly appears to be toast. However, I wouldn’t underestimate him or his Chicago cronies for one second :)

      • conservativecurmudgeon

        The Chicago Machine will stop at literally nothing to keep Obama in the oval office. All the stops will be blown out on behalf of their candidate.

        But, it won’t be enough. The Eurozone is about to implode, and there is a limit to what the Fed can do to prop it up. Iran has nukes. The Muslim Brotherhood is taking over in Egypt, Tunisia, and Yemen. North Korea is growling. If the Mid East goes up in flames, there goes the Barrel price of oil– and with it any facade of stasis.

        We’re heading into “You ain’t seen nuthin’ yet” territory.

        Hold onto your skivvies.

      • lineholder

        reflects my own, and I’m a female, RQ. I want Obama out of there. I want to see the left’s progressive “fundamental transformation” of this nation come to an end. We’re not in a position where we can endure four more years of this, RQ.

        I just posted similar comments on another thread, but suppose we have candidate A who has been faithful to his/her spouse and candidate B who has been unfaithful to his/her spouse. If candidate A succeeds in making a connection with voters that will maximize the potential to beat Obama, then I definitely will go with candidate A.

        OTOH, if candidate A doesn’t manage to succeed in making this connection and candidate B does succeed, I’ll go with candidate B. Past infidelities and all, I’ll go with candidate B. I’m not the least bit inclined to look a gift horse in the mouth on this just for the sake of principle.

        My nation’s future, i.e., my future, my children’s future, and their children’s futures, etc. are at stake. What I think or feel about candidate B’s past conduct becomes secondary to beating Obama.

        • trevorb

          rule Obama out; it’s still possible for him to win. He’s got the media in his pocket, he’ll have a billion dollars, and he is a Chicago politician. You think what we’ve seen now and in 2008 is bad? Just wait until we have a nominee and watch him run constant attack ads.

  • David123

    First lets analyze that flip-flopper Mitt Romney. Inconsistent – what the heck does he believe about abortion? We can’t vote for him. Let’s vote for a real man who stands up for his principles on the important issue of abortion. I’m talking about Barrack Obama – now he’s consistent and he’s got principles. He’s always fought for the right of doctors to deny medical care to an infant born alive after a botched abortion. So do you think that will convince the swing voters to vote for Barry the TOTAL FLOP instead of Mitt the flip-flop?

    Ok – how about if Perry the racist gets the nomination. Perry is just such a racist, he walked by a nasty racist word and didn’t paint over it right away. I hope nobody votes for Perry except people who have walked past nasty graffiti at some point in their lives and they didn’t paint over it. Oops, if that happened Obama would lose in a landslide – have to try something else. I know, “Rick Perry got a dishonorable discharge from the Air Force, and we’ve got the WORDPERFECT documents from 1977 to prove it.”

    So what kind of dirt would the Democrats make up about Newt Gingrich, the cad, to make him lose the general election? Well they could say he cheated on his first wife when she got cancer; then divorced her and married wife number 2. Then he cheated on wife number 2 with the woman who became wife #3. Oh, and while he was doing this he was leading a group of right-wingers in trying to get Bill Clinton impeached for – LYING ABOUT SEX. The problem is, the Democrats can’t MAKE-UP slanderous accusations like that about Newt Gingrich because those accusations are true.

    So which of the three, Romney, Perry, or Gingrich, do you think the Democrats would have the most success with, if they went all-out negative?

    • Common_Cents

      Perry=Bush
      Perry=dumb
      Perry=Bush
      Perry=birther
      Perry=hates gays
      Perry=Bush

      Let’s be a little honest here. The left will come out with this non stop, 24/7 no matter who the candidate.

      • naraht

        I’d love for Perry to specifically mention differences in how he has run Texas compared to Bush, perhaps a pre-emptive strike on Democrats attempting to morph Perry into Bush in campaign commercials.

  • hweila

    is to pick up a VP that balances out his perceived “meanness”. The reality is that the sort of women who would refuse to vote for someone due to infidelity ( a distinict minority among women voters as a whole) aren’t the sort that are going to even consider voting Democrat. For them it isn’t whether they’d vote for Obama or Gingrich but rather whether Gingrich can get them to turn out.

    An obvious example would be former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee. Huckabee’s strongest appeal in the 2008 primaries was to women and to Evangelicals, the two groups Gingrich will have the hardest time assuring the turnout of. Having a VP that can campaign directly towards those groups would be enough to get them to polls.

    • avagreen

      I wouldn’t vote for either one in these in the primary. Especially, the grudge- holding Huckabee. (On a personal level and totally unrelated to his politics…. It bothers me just to watch him talk with that sideways motion….to keep from being further unkind about that, I’ll just stop.)

      Both of these guys are RINOs.

      • pttx333

        single word – and then about a few hundred more that I know you’re thinking! HA ;-)

  • williamjameson

    you guys and girls need to digest. You’ve had you say and the facts are counter intuitive to the minority opinion.

    Newt found his way back and all sins are forgivable if you follow the good book.

    If you people are going to vexx someone afterthefact then Romney is too big a liar to be trusted. Romney is a dime store republican who only wears the gop label because he’s stuck on himself while thinking people are easily swayed by his flip flop excuses and lack of time in office with less impressive results.

    http://www.redstate.com/neil_stevens/2011/12/08/gingrich-is-his-rise-sustainable/

    http://www.foxnews.com/interactive/politics/2011/12/08/fox-news-poll-gop-presidential-race/

    Gingrich Men 36% Women 35%
    Romney Men 24% Women 22%

    FYI the GOP?s traditional gender gap in the general is about the same.

    Gingrich or Romney versus Obama

    Gingrich Men 44% Women 37%
    Romney Men 48% Women 37%

    • romansdaughter

      so I am voting for a more conservative candidate in the primaries. I don’t think at all that this is down to Newt And Romney. Both of these candidates are big government, I don’t care how you look at it.

      • williamjameson

        candidate but their records speak for themselves,I have faith Newt is right of Romney and unless someone pours on the mad skillz I think we’re down to 3 leaders including Perry who may get second chance, doubtful though.

        No matter who wins, the nominee needs to shift to the center and avoid Bush’s mistakes of caving into liberal demands of more entitlements.

  • haroldhervey

    Aside from the meteoric rise and epic decline of Herman Cain, the most curious phenomenon of the GOP Primary race has been the dazzling ascent of Newt Gingrich. His jet-like climb in the national polls among Christian conservatives is especially curious considering Newt?s considerable moral, ethical and legal baggage. Gingrich will need the supportive fuel of those conservatives if he hopes to keep his campaign airborne.

    But there are some real pending questions. Why in God?s name would people who dearly hold (and espouse) traditional family values like business/political ethics, respect for your fellow man and matrimonial fidelity actually support a man like Gingrich? Did they forget about his legendary moral/ethical lapses? Has their disdain for Obama made them lose all sense of virtue or propriety? Or..have they just lost their minds?

    Let?s review key elements of Newt?s history: Gingrich was charged by the House Ethics Committee with serious violations and fined $300,000; he cheated on his first wife while she was bed-ridden with cancer and divorced her; he cheated on his second wife while simultaneously blasting President Clinton for the Lewinsky affair (hypocrisy personified); he divorced the second wife and married the woman with whom he had another affair; House Republicans revolted and wanted to oust him as Speaker due to horrible leadership and abandoning his own conservative agenda; he was eventually forced to resign in disgrace.

    In addition, Gingrich: flip-flopped on climate change and even made a commercial with Nancy Pelosi; toured the nation with Al Sharpton (of all people) to promote Obama?s education agenda; accepted millions in fees from the Freddie Mae and Fanny Mac in private while publicly condemning them; practically invented and openly supported the Individual Mandate that he now rails against; supported TARP, Medicare Part D and ?No Child Left Behind?; and wants to give illegal immigrants amnesty if they?ve been in the US for 25 years.

    For heaven?s sake – pun intended – Gingrich even changed his religion. That alone should be a huge flip-flopping red flag for Christian Conservatives.

    And yet?..Christian conservatives seem willing to forgive and forget all those serious moral, ethical, legal transgressions and flip-flops. And yet?.they simultaneously crucify Mitt Romney for changing his stance on some issues. Curious. Neither Romney nor Santorum nor Bachmann nor Huntsman ever cheated on their one-and-only spouses, was never accused of any business ethics violations and is generally considered to be very ethical and moral by any standard.

    And Romney flip-flopped to their side of the issues. Romney is against abortion, gay marriage and ObamaCare just like the conservatives who now condemn him but embrace Gingrich. While some disagree with RomneyCare for policy reasons, it?s not a mortal sin or violation of an oath; the people of Massachusetts still support that Plan by 2-1.

    Neither Santorum nor Bachmann nor Huntsman were run out of town by their colleagues or their spouses. They have clean records, are family oriented, articulate and competent. And yet?.except for Ron Paul, Christian conservatives have given only pocket lint to those worthy candidates. FYI: It will take more for Gingrich to win the White House than out-snarling Obama in a debate.

    Based on current polling one must come to the conclusion that Christian conservatives have lost their minds. Or maybe they just forgot to remember the long and troubled history of Newton Leroy Gingrich.

    Or maybe they?ve lost their moral standing to preach the basic tenets of their belief system. Voters must not forget our nation’s Judea-Christian values when considering a candidate. To paraphrase Mathew 16-26: What good do you benefit if your candidate gains the nomination while losing your own soul in the process?

    • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

      Christian conservatives have come their right minds and understand that Romney is absolutely worse on any issue – and being faithful to his wife is NOT an issue. Romney has no core – the has held every possible position on every issue, and if you think for a second that he’s any more truthful about what he’d do in office than Obama has been, your a fool.

      And, you’re out of your depth with that scripture.

      • dcacklam

        when it comes to sticking with a position….

        • acat

          Gingrich hasn’t tried to straddle *every* barbed wire fence that’s come along.

          Mew

  • dcacklam

    For standing up to BJ Bill.

    Too many people forget everything else he did…

    • acat

      remembered Newt this way:

      Mew

      • tomatin

        Sorry I remember Gingrich actually passing a conservative agenda. Not like Bush who passed tax cuts and then went big government the rest of his term.

        • acat

          Keep in mind, this is mild compared to what Team Obama will unleash. You think the candidate who destroyed his opposition by leaking divorce records to get his senate seat will stop at anything to keep his White House seat?

          Mew

        • dcacklam

          Than maintaining orthodoxy on domestic policy…

          Well, that and the fact that his campaign promises included both a drug benefit (the signature issue of the campaign was HOW – not IF but HOW – to provide prescription drugs to medicare recipients) and NCLB.

          Without the promise to enact Med-D, we would have had President Gore, because senior care was the #1 issue of the 2000 campaign…

  • tea4me

    And did so before I even did…

  • geoph

    (In my best Newt voice) I reject your conclusion, as you are starting from a flawed premis.

    Women will vote for an adulterous man, they’ve proven that when all those “soccer mom’s” flocked to Clinton. Now that does not mean women will vote for Newt, but the underlying reason is not infidelity. It may be nothing more than “R’s are mean” or as hypocritical as “We hold Republican men to a higher standard” and therefore can not dismiss cheating, but even then the question becomes why do they accept a lower standard from some?
    An answer to that would rock, not only politics, but the world.

    • RealQuiet

      That’s what Newt’s current wife is. Harsh? Yeah, but it’s the truth. Once that settles in, particularly with the evangelical voters in the GOP base, I wouldn’t be surprised at all if they abandoned Newt and didn’t vote at all. That would probably be too much for them to stomach as the First Lady is someone whom typically plays role model for the country, particularly women and our youth.

      Second, it’s funny how everyone is using Clinton, a Democrat, as an example. It may not matter to Democratic voters but the core base of the GOP? That matters quite a lot more. Remember what happened to Mark Sanford, governor of South Carolina? He was considered a 2008 presidential prospect…until he betrayed his wife.

      You may see all these polls showing that Gingrich does just as well with women as Romney does. However, the true sign whether this is going to be an impact is if Gingrich gets the nomination and people (and the press) dig up Gingrich and his wife’s life story. It’s a big gamble nominating Newt just for this reason. There are also a lot of others but this will probably be the main issue because it plays to one of the largest voter segments.

      • pttx333

        For me, I have seen enough of a low-class first lady these past 3 years to last me a lifetime. And for those who think a first lady is trivial, think again. She MUST represent us all over the world as a gracious and nice person who follows all of the protocols.

        Protocol is very important when dealing with other countries and their traditions – whether anyone believes them to be silly or not does not matter. I still cringe over Mitchell Antoinette putting her arm around the Queen of England, along with all of her many other insults to others. Are they done from sheer ignorance, or are they done intentionally?

      • muggedliberal

        than a Stepford wife. Romney’s wife seems just about at ‘real’ as ‘he’ does. Every time I sit back and observe Romney, I can’t help but think ‘if he smiles enough, and looks, speaks, acts just right, the fairy dust will sprinkle from the sky, and he will turn into a ‘real live boy’. His wife effects me similarly.

        I’m a female conservative and I’d rather have people with a couple of warts in our White House. Is Gingrich the ultimate conservative.. heck no, but the ultimate (if such a person existed) would NEVER EVER get elected, as much as many of us would wish. His past indiscretions (and his wife’s inclusion in the last one) mean much less to me than my total disconnect with Romney on simply a ‘human’ level.

        *A liberal is a conservative that hasn’t been mugged yet.*

    • pttx333

      there should be a distinction between liberal women vs. conservative women. By and large, liberal women and conservative women are poles apart and vote the same, which is to say “poles apart.” I’m speaking in general terms here, but conservative women never bought into the old “if it feels good, do it” mantra as did liberal women. Hence, the votes for Slick. All of my conservative lady friends think as do I – Slick is a sleazy, slimy, arrogant piece of work who defiled OUR Oval Office, not to mention all of his other escapades. And I’m not cutting Hitlery any slack here – she is no better than Slick, and there is no way I ever felt sorry for her. She’s stuck by him for the power.

      With Newt, I feel that his personal life is absolutely unacceptable as Presidential material, but that is not the only goal post. He has made some really sorry choices in his political life that are also very unacceptable as well as his arrogant, condescending demeanor. The whole package is pathetic to me, to say the least, and I am not the only one who feels this way.

      • geoph

        I hear what you are saying, and to a degree – agree with you.
        I just think the claim that the OP made concerning women not voting for Gingrich due to infidelity is bogus. I must say, I never thought about “the other woman” becoming First Lady…!

        Women may not vote for Newt, but for some other, as of yet unknown reason. If I have to “settle” – I’ve had more than enough settling for the more Liberal Republican for 30 years. If I have to hate the sin, but love the sinner (making all things equal) it’s Gingrich in a cakewalk, and a coin flip between Obama and Romney for last place.

        • pttx333

          perspective for you to consider. For me personally, the infidelity thing has been ongoing with Newt for many years, up to and including the past few years. And, yes, I would cringe at the current wife (who was “the other woman” for six long years) being my First Lady. Notice the last word there – “Lady.” That does not mean they cannot or should not be forgiven, but with every choice we make there are consequences – some good, some bad, depending on the choice(s) we make.

          Yeah, isn’t it the pits to hold one’s nose to vote? I did that with McCain – just can’t stand the man. He is just another RINO, just like Romney, and, in my view, Newt. But that is just my opinion and certainly plays a huge part in my decision(s) regarding Newt.

          Just thought I’d let you know for discussion’s sake. Thanks for your reply, geoph.

          • geoph

            Pttx333,

            It’s been a real struggle being a Republican these past 30 plus years.
            I’ve been trying to see this year as different; seeking encouragement from the Tea Party movement, but all that does is expose just how broken our system is.
            This leadership has got to go (or come around to our way of thinking). Putting more Cons in office may help, but is there time enough to do so and will the courts just undo the changes?

            People (see G. Will’s column today) harp on Gingrich as projecting “everything is connected to everything else, and only he knows how.”
            I think a lot of us believe everything is connected, and we have (at least a vague) idea as to how. Just give us an opportunity to support someone who agrees with our general ideology; someone who will say what we all think.
            THAT is what drives support for an individual or “T” Party; That is why those
            in power assault those who dare. If Newt continues to speak for us, his popularity shall grow. It turns out maybe you do need an office and title to have an impact, or at least an active voice. Move over Mrs. Palin – you’ve been silent for too long. Time is short and we need to have our frustrations and worries heard.

          • geoph

            Pttx333,

            It’s been a real struggle being a Republican these past 30 plus years.
            I’ve been trying to see this year as different; seeking encouragement from the Tea Party movement, but all that does is expose just how broken our system is.
            This leadership has got to go (or come around to our way of thinking). Putting more Cons in office may help, but is there time enough to do so and will the courts just undo the changes?

            IPeople (see G. Will’s column today) harp on Gingrich as projecting “everything is connected to everything else, and only he knows how.”
            I think a lot of us believe everything is connected, and we have (at least a vague) idea as to how. Just give us an opportunity to support someone who agrees with our general ideology; someone who will say what we all think.
            THAT is what drives support for an individual or “T” Party; That is why those
            in power assault those who dare. If Newt continues to speak for us, his popularity shall grow. It turns out maybe you do need an office and title to have an impact, or at least an active voice. Move over Mrs. Palin – you’ve been silent for too long. Time is short and we need to have our frustrations and worries heard.

  • clowngirl

    Has there been much polling asking independent and moderate female voters if they would vote against Newt – even if they preferred him on every issue – based solely on his (long repented) infidelities??

    Clinton seems to be remembered as a fairly good President – particularly among women- despite his digusting and well publicized affairs. JFK is admired by many despite his well known and utterly revolting private life.

    I don’t see any reason to think that women will be significantly more unforgiving than men — and recently saw a poll that Newt polls a lot better with Republican women than Romney. There may be many reasons for this — probably partly because Newt seems more emotionally expressive and genuine — but, at any rate, it doesn’t support the idea that most women will automatically choose the candidate who has been maritally faithful.

    And that fact that Newt has his wife entrusts his wife with a lot of responsibility with his campaign – suggests that he now thinks well of women in general.

  • Scope

  • Pingback: continue