This can’t be happening.
When a group of tea partiers came out for Newt last week, I was incredulous. Newt Gingrich, the culmination of the tea party’s efforts? No, seriously.
Then Sarah Palin sort of endorsed him…followed by Perry. I lost respect for them both at that point. Neither made a believable case for doing so, other than typical political maneuvering. I cannot believe that this is the best the Republican Party can come up with: a serial adulterer, complicit on the edges of the mortgage fiasco via Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, someone who has never run a business, or run a state, and what career he had in government ending up in an ethics investigation. A hardcore lobbyist who profited from everything he railed about in Congress, as soon as he left office.
A frequent commenter here emailed me last week with the subject heading: Stopping Romney. He noted that over the past few months I have seemingly supported a few people who have already jumped ship in the presidential race (Cain, Perry), and a few people who never got on board (Daniels, Christie). He suggested the best way to stop Romney might be for me to throw my support behind him since my track record is so bad. (Actually, I never completely backed any candidate, just have shared thoughts along the way.)
Too funny really, but the thing is, between Romney and Newt, I’m going for the guy who has been a successful business executive, who hasn’t cheated on two sick wives while parading as a Christian Coalition Conservative, and who made his money via legit ways (as opposed to sitting on a couch with Nancy Pelosi promoting global warming theories). Between Newt and Romney, I’ll go with Romney, which doesn’t mean I’m backing Romney. It just means I’m not backing Newt. And in the sum of it, it means I think the choices are dismal. For crying out loud, to think that in the end I may be forced to support Paul, even though I think he has shown minimal leadership ability or the coalition building skills necessary to get things done…..
Newt Gingrich has ZERO chance of beating Barack Obama. And I unapologetically think the goal should be Defeating Obama. I really have nothing else to say.
January 22, 2012 at 11:39 am
And Ronald Reagan in 1979 was not going to beat Jimmy Carter. How about we wait and see just who it is the GOP nominates and then let them square off with Obama before we attempt to smear the fog from our lenses while our guy may still be in this thing for now. Its a new ball game during the summer Sara. It doesn’t matter whether its Mitt, Newt, or Paul. The deciding factor in this election will not be personalities—we made that mistake last cycle- but unfortunately very well could be what happens in Europe and the ME. Also pay particular attention to Saudi Arabia and whether they opt to dump millions of barrels of oil on the market to stabilize prices below $4 which would help Obama. All indications are at current levels that gas should rise to the mid-$4 without them dumping and that would certainly hurt Obama dearly. Greece, Italy and such are still looming issues that Obama has zero control over as well that can impact the world economy/banking. Who better to educate the American people during a campaign/debates as to the impacts of such policies and/or blunders of the Obama camp than Newt? Sure his personality can seem toxic at times, but then not everyone was so enamored with Reagan- “that actor” either in the late 70′s. We are all imperfect people but our imperfection do not neccesarily preclude us from being great leaders either politically or professionally.
January 22, 2012 at 12:24 pm
Mark Sanford’s wife, Jenny, said something in regards to Newt that summed up my views pretty well:
There are a lot of people who believe character doesn’t matter. For example, you’ll hear people criticize someone for not supporting a candidate for “personal” reasons, as if it should be discounted. Why should it be discounted? Perhaps they know something that others don’t, but prefer to keep it private…perhaps their own personal experiences have led them to believe that certain things, certain lines, shouldn’t be crossed, and if they are, it is reason not to vote for someone. What is wrong with holding back from supporting someone simply because you don’t LIKE them, even if they agree with you on policy? Are we that screwed up that we only listen to what someone says as opposed to what they have done? That’s messed up.
January 22, 2012 at 11:54 am
Re: “And I unapologetically think the goal should be Defeating Obama. I really have nothing else to say.”
And (from the article you quoted)
“…we can see that voters who selected Romney did so because they believe he has the best chance to take down Obama, which is consistent with the Tea Party having many complaints but few solutions. “
It’s also interesting that the article (which appears to have a conservative source) refers to the Tea Party as a “fad.”
The article also notes (correctly, in my opinion) that the President “…has behaved like a moderate conservative.”
“Defeat Obama” expresses a sentiment, but it is not a basis for governance in a time where the economic health of America and our allies is shaky, where the effects of “Citizens United” are now obvious to anyone with his or her eyes open, and where nations openly hostile to us are developing nuclear weapons.
If you think that any alternative would be better than the current administration, you might want to think again. You might also want to consider how Ronald Reagan might have fared in the current GOP primary atmosphere.
January 22, 2012 at 12:18 pm
Defeating Obama is not a mere sentiment, it is an imperative if you believe the actions he is taking outside of Congress (yes, John, I know you think there is little impropriety in what he’s done to date) are a threat to a Republic founded on the principle that THREE branches matter, not just one.
I don’t need to “think again”. Look, I don’t constantly bring up Ronald Reagan here… he was our President during different times. Whether he could be elected today isn’t relevant – he’s not on the ballot, nor is he breathing.
January 22, 2012 at 12:30 pm
I didn’t quote that article by the way. It linked here, in an effort to prove that tea partiers are simple-minded for not supporting Ron Paul. :)
January 22, 2012 at 12:51 pm
It’s not the first time and will not be the last but I’m confused!! Is the the Tea Party movement merely an Anti-Obama one? Man, I hope that is not the case because if it is it dies after November. Thats is not what I thought it was about in reality for many of the Tea Party followers I had a chance to speak with over the last year, but it very well may have simply just been a movement against the President because it seems that since the campaign cycle has begun the movement has withered in terms of events and in the online community it is apparent that the advocates of the TP have moved into supporting one candidate or another and not the larger, broader picture; to appeal to more Americans.
I really think that in the next few years we really all need to have a gut check on just what “conservatism” is in reality because it appears to me it is becoming nothing more than a cloak in which people use as a vehicle of moving one agenda or another forward. Frankly, I have met quite a few people claiming the conservative banner but have to know in their hearts they are Libertarian or STRICT Constitutionalists.
January 22, 2012 at 7:08 pm
We can wrap ourselves in whatever cloak we want to, but at the end of the day, if Obama is still in Office in 2013, the tea party will be spending its time on defense, not offense. I’d rather work in a movement that has a hope of accomplishing something, wouldn’t you?
January 22, 2012 at 11:31 pm
Honestly, I think supporters of the TP movement appear to be in a holding pattern. I mean Jaime Radtke is not “tea party” enough and she was the leader, whether we want to admit it or not for a period of time. Now, none of the remaining conservatives on the stage appear to be aligned with the TP except maybe Paul? As much as people criticized OWS for not having a platform; does the Tea Party in 2012 know what its real platform is or its vision. I think many thought it could be the start of a viable third party until it was co-opted by the establishment GOP and the Dick Armey busess:) now I wonder if it will even make it to 2013.
January 23, 2012 at 8:37 am
You are right..Paul is the only candidate still in stage that seems to care about tea party principles. Newt seems mostly to care about himself. It is truly amazing when you think about it. How very far we haven’t come from 2009.
January 23, 2012 at 9:26 am
My concern Sara is the lack of real understanding of the power that the Paul folks could yield. His foriegn policy stances I cannot support but frankly there is alot about out sitting President I cannot support but what the Paul folks are missing is if they aligned themselves unilaterally with the TP/Patriot groups across the country and stop doing exactly what the media and establish want them to do which is focus on the White House AND center their energy on an effort to primary current Congressman. The issue is not the President as an office per say. Sure he/she can stop getting us into wars as the Paul folks propose BUT then who is going to decide where those savings get spent? Exec orders aside, I think we live in an era of a diminished Presidency where the Congress- with an epidemic of incumbancy and greed- has centralized its power. As long as the TP and Paul folks focus on the White House, the media and the establishment will be all too happy BUT if they start going after sitting members of Congress- modern day “do-nothings” you will see panic to a much greater degree than when the TP first took off. We will need leaders who refuse to be co-opted by the establishment as has happened with the first movement. If Paul can raise the kind of money he is right now does a united Paul/TP need the GOP. This is the GOP’s beiggest fear IMHO. can you imagine what shockwaves would occur if a Paul-like, TP figure managed to defeat Eric Cantor in a primary Sara? We both know that turnout is very low in a Primary and with Paul supporters a Primary in that environment could be overwhelmed:)
January 23, 2012 at 11:30 am
I can imagine the shockwaves, but such a “Paul-like” figure would need some legislative/elective background, plus impressive private sector experience or perhaps a military stint (Paul was a military flight surgeon). It takes more than simply espousing tea party words to run against entrenched establishment figures — and win.
January 23, 2012 at 12:25 pm
Or simply just a good communicator or someone to remind us just exactly what it means to be a conservative and permit som eof us to be proud of it again:)
January 27, 2012 at 8:25 am
Sara I think you can stop worrying because Romney will win Florida easily (Romney 39%, Newt 31%, Santorum 25% and the guy who should not even be called a republican 5%). After Florida the next 6 primaries are all in strong Romney states that he won in 2008 against MCCain. SO he will win the next 7 primaries and the Fat Lady will be singing. The fringe elements in both parties are really largely irrelevant – 46% of the people will vote for the democrat and 46% will vote for the republican – no matter who they are – the election is about the 8% of the independents in the 6 -8 battle ground states. Mitt can compete there and Newt has no chance. Newt’s abrasive style and arrogant attitude will offend the 8 percenters. Romney is our only chance and he will be our nominee.
January 27, 2012 at 9:40 am
Ha, me worry? You know I never worry. :)
Romney had a good debate last night. He benefited from his new debate coach or something. He tore Newt apart on the FNMA/Freddie issue (Newt has his own investments there), and he did it without being a bona-fide jerk like Newt is. I’m liking what I’m seeing: a willingness to be aggressive, and to fight as hard as Obama has said he is going to fight for a second term. Romney has to prove to conservatives that he really believes limited government is the answer, and that our country depends on first principles. When he mutters off-hand that “it’s not worth getting angry about”, it appears he really is out of touch with the rest of us.
He doesn’t have my support, but as the field narrows down, it is what it is…
January 29, 2012 at 2:21 pm
Sara
I think you are selling Newt short. There is no candidate who can better articulate conservative principles like individual responsibility, getting government out of the way, lower taxes and liberty than Newt. Is he a perfect vessel? No he is not. He is a flawed human being like all of us. However he has made his peace with God and is a new creation according to the Bible.
The Fannie freddie stuff is nonsense. The man had a right to make a living and as the Crisis was on the horizon he was urging congress to stop backing them. Romney made millions investing in Fannie Freddie too and further owned a company that defrauded Medicare. The man is a serial liar and does not show signs of repenting as Newt did.
As for space, we should be a country focused on being first and the leader in space. Space will likely be a critical area for national defense in the next generations and we lose sight of that at our own peril. Newt has said he wants to shrink the government to meet the revenue not the grow the revenue to keep up with the government. Given that core principal, I trust his space expenditures will be limited and valid and primarily privately funded.
This is a changed man, who for decades has been a strong conservative, of course he has occasionally had variances but those are minimal compared to Romney who was not even a republican 20 years ago when Newt was building a conservative revolution in congress.
New will exceed his polling in Florida and it will be a tighter race, Newt will be ahead by the time super Tuesday has passed and then be able to focus his efforts on Obama.
Current polling suggest Romney has a better chance to beat Obama but this is to far out to be reliable. Romeny will be trashed by Obama and does not have the conservative backbone that Newt does to fight back with any sort of believable case. Newt on the other hand will be able to fight Obama on principle and slowly change minds through his articulate and sensible conservative views. By late fall he will be far better positioned to win than Romney would.
Thanks for your site and for your time.
January 29, 2012 at 4:28 pm
If he is a “changed man” — what about him changed?