America hates Newt Gingrich [Reader Post]


Beating Barack Obama and ending the damage he can do to this country is one of the most important tasks facing this country. Much to my chagrin, many of my fellow conservatives are all to willing to do Obama’s bidding in taking down Mitt Romney. What does that leave?

Newt Gingrich?

America hates Newt Gingrich

Unlike Mitt Romney, who occasionally beats President Obama in general election poll match ups, Newt Gingrich trails far behind President Obama in every survey. But just how bad are Gingrich’s unfavorable among the general public compared to Obama and Romney?

Not every poll releases their full results, so here are the most recent favorability results I could find for Obama, Romney, and Newt.

Fox News, 1/12-1/14:
Obama, fav/unfav, 51%/46%, +5
Romney, fav/unfav, 45%/38%, +7
Gingrich, fav/unfav, 27%/56%, -29

CBS/NYT, 1/12-1/17:
Obama, fav/unfav, 38%/45%, -7
Romney, fav/unfav, 21%/35%, -14
Gingrich, fav/unfav, 17%/49%, -32

PPP, 1/13-1/17:
Obama, app/dis, 47%/50%, -3
Romney, fav/unfav, 35%/53%, -18
Gingrich, fav/unfav, 26%/60%, -34

America does not love Romney, but boy do they hate Newt.

Electability is the key here. None of us is going to find our ideal candidate. But Newt Gingrich is NOT going to be President. Not ever. He is not temperamentally suited to be President. Between his global warming commercial with Nancy Pelosi his reference to Paul Ryan’s plans as “social engineering” shows that he shoots off his mouth without thinking and does alarmingly stupid things.

Gingrich could be a real force for a campaign but he is never going to be President. He is too polarizing. He is too widely disliked.

Supporting Gingrich is supporting Barack Obama. This isn’t about what I want. This is about reality.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

You are right electability is a key. However Romney is pro illegal. Since illegal means against the law, he has no respect for the law of the land. Romneycare. The obamadeathcare law was fashioned after this. Taxes. If you check into romney’s record, he had increased spending and taxes. Income tax returns. He will or maybe he won’t release them. I think we have that problem now. IF you have nothing to hide, you will share. Caymen islands. I could only wish that I had so much money I would have to put it in many banks, especially an off shore account. His platform. Frankly I haven’t heard very much as to what he would do to bring this country back. How about jobs, how about letting GM and the other companies sink on their own, repeal insane laws inacted by barry, etc etc. Romney looks to me like the bully that once someone says something that he can’t respond, he will either go home and take the ball with him or freeze and cringe. He just does not seem to be someone that can get the country back on track. I think he is all bravado. Maybe some think because he wears expensive suits, has nice hair and is nice on the eyes that qualifies him to be president, but I do not.

Gingrich. I am not sure about him. However I couldn’t care less about his ex wife and the allegations. Remember Herman Cain? Did you find it strange that after he dropped out the allegations stopped? What a crock.

I do hope that whoever is the candidate will press Barry for his past records, because you know darn well he will. If you look at how barry got into the Illinois senate, he dug down and using the Chicago machine had sealed records opened. .

The bottom line for me is, I want my country back.

Funny thing is that something like half the people who voted for Newt in SC did so because they perceived him as the most electable. Guess they’ll get a rude awakening if he actually gets the nomination.

I’m starting to warm up to Newt, but the paraphrase the author; I will NOT vote for Romney, NOT ever. And the right is all to capable of “social engineering” just as the left is. The term “polarizing” IMO is not relevant, the nation, is and for 99.5% of it’s history always been “polarized”. What we NEED is a pol to serve as the opposite “pole” lest we become “unipolar” which has never been good for any society.

I don’t recall previous primaries being decided by debate performances versus campaign speeches and meet-and-greets, but it seems this is the new vehicle for winning elective office.

“The View” only with candidates instead of “guests.”

I supported Perry because I thought (and still do) that he the best complete package. He ran a state that’s larger than most nations, he had to work with those on the other side of the aisle, he had well documented record of achievement, a stable marriage, he won reelection several times AND HE HAD TO BALANCE A BUDGET.

But Perry was a lousy debater. (Time…to…gooooooo!).

Perry endorsed Gingrich and I think he was smart to do so. The writer of this article talks about electability, but AT THIS POINT IN TIME it seems rather clear that what republicans want is………………………………..

someone who can destroy Obama (with teleprompter) in a national televised debate.

That’s what we want right now, and the absolutely stunning rise in Gingrich’s support in the course of mere days after Newt slayed the media in that debate gave these Primary voters the Red Meat they were looking for.

Should Newt win the nomination, I think it would be presumptuous to think millions of moderates won’t relish that Red Meat too.

Remember: The Republican Nominee already has the ANYBODY BUT OBAMA vote.

Red Meat: A little dab’ll do ya.


However Romney is pro illegal.

How does Romney’s stance differ from Gingrinch on the issue of immigration?

Gingrich has taken a softer stance — if only slightly — than Romney on the issue. He said he would allow some undocumented immigrants, such as those who have been here for 25 years or more, to stay, but only if approved by a citizen review board. Romney opposes all legalization and said he would veto the Dream Act, a bill supported by most Latinos that would provide legal status to some undocumented young people.

Both candidates are behaving as politicians, walking the tightrope of not alienating conservative voters for the primary and all Americans for the general:

Romney has arguably the toughest immigration position of any of the Republican candidates. Newt Gingrich would give legal status to illegal immigrants who have deep roots in the U.S. and lived otherwise lawfully.

Conversely, Romney has been adamantly opposed to any type of amnesty for illegal immigrants since his first White House run in 2008. Previously, he called reasonable a bipartisan proposal to allow immigrants to seek green cards in exchange for certain penalties, though he says he never officially supported such legislation.

Last year, Romney objected to the DREAM Act. But he went further in the days before the Iowa caucuses when asked if he would veto the measure.

“The answer is yes,” Romney told voters then, and later referred to the measure as a handout.

While he said he does not oppose creating a path for those who serve in the U.S. military to become permanent residents, he also said he doesn’t believe such individuals should be able to adjust their status by attending school, nor should they receive in-state tuition.

Since narrowly winning the Iowa caucuses, Romney has been sending Hispanics mixed messages.

He’s working to woo Hispanics and convince them he’s sincere in fighting for their causes, recently launching TV commercials in Florida featuring Cuban-Americans Diaz-Balart and fellow U.S. Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, as well as his son Craig speaking in Spanish.

But, in South Carolina, he’s also been campaigning with Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, the leading architect behind the tough Arizona-style immigration laws. Even many Latinos who support tougher immigration laws worry such measures will lead to racial profiling because they give broad leeway to law enforcement to stop anyone whom they suspect of being in the country illegally.

“This is all about his primary right now,” said Benjamin Bishin, a University of California, Riverside political science professor who has long studied Cuban-American and other Latino political attitudes.

Jennifer Korn of the center-right Hispanic Leadership Network, which is co-hosting a GOP primary debate and Latino conference this month in Florida, said Romney took a risk in alienating Hispanic voters. But, she added, he’s also made clear he wants to fix the broader immigration system.

“If he explains it correctly, he definitely has a chance to have the Hispanic community listen to what he has to say,” she said.

He seemed to try to do just that during recent debates, saying: “I love legal immigration,” but that “to protect our legal immigration system we have got to protect our borders and stop the flood of illegal immigration.”

That appeared to be enough for Peter Gonzalez, a Cuban-American commercial attorney and fiscally conservative Democrat.

“It’s nice to hear a guy who the media has said is taking a harsh turn to the right on immigration say they love legal immigration,” he said.

Thomas Sowell:

As for Newt Gingrich, his position on immigration is just one of the items in the “baggage” he has to overcome. But what the voters have to overcome is an insistence on a perfect candidate. Ronald Reagan, after all, supported an immigrant amnesty bill, but that did not prevent him from being a great president otherwise.

A Republican Congress would be unlikely to make that mistake again, even if a Republican president wanted to. The big question for 2012 is whether Republicans will win Congress and/or the White House. If Democrats win Congress and the White House in 2012, amnesty is virtually certain, along with other disasters.

Mitt Romney on immigration

Attracting the Best and the Brightest

Newt Gingrich on immigration

Contract with America Legislative Proposal #6: Control the Border By January 1, 2014

I just don’t trust polls. Obama’s unpopular because his actions can’t be concealed by the leftist media the way his background was. Newt is the only candidate bold enough to make it part of the public debate.

Newt is hated by the informed hard left for obvious reasons. They’ll never vote for him. He’s hated by some on the hard right because they choose not to forgive his blunders. These folks would fight through a blizzard to vote for him against Obama. He’s hated by many old RINOs in the congress because he walked over them, made them members of the majority and gave them time in the spotlight. Republicans of the old school would rather be comfortably in the minority role, sitting on committees where they can accept tribute for giving large businesses laws which will make their competitors less competitive. The public doesn’t like these people enough to care what they think. The MSM hates him too, and they will be a problem if we nominate him. These folks are pretty good at what they do and the journolist cabal will burn the midnight oil finding his vulnerabilities. On the other hand, they’ll do the same for ANY candidate we choose.

Something I really like about Newt is that he’s bold. He will say and do things which are politically incorrect. Unfortunately, this makes him a scary candidate to back. He takes big swings at his opponents and this leaves him open to counterattacks, especially when his punches are off the mark (Bain Capital?).

My hope is that Newt can convince the masses of uninvolved folks who are feeling discontent with the status quo to show up at the polls. No other candidate can be as inspiring. None that are running, that is. Once The cancidates are set, I think Newt can convince america he’s worth electing. The polls be damned.



Reagan did amnesty because the democrat congress promised to tighten the borders, a promise they never kept. But on the subject of immigration, there are some on the right that this seems to be the only issue. My question to them is, when did we erase these words on the Statue of Liberty:

Give me your tired, your poor/Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free

Yes, there are people that are here illegally. But the immigration process is broke. Yes, there are people here illegally that have broken laws and these are the ones that need to be deported. Those that have been here, not broken laws, and contributed to society need to be viewed differently.

As for the Romney being electable and Newt being unelectable, I call BS. The democrats had the same issue in 1992 with Clinton. The “bimbo eruptions” pushed Clinton’s favorability ratings down, but in the end, it was the economy and Ross Perot. Maybe AlGor will run third party. Let’s start a petition.


Personally, I don’t want a milquetoast president.  I like Newt because he is the smartest guy in the race.  He’s an idea man.    Everyone makes mistakes.  The global warming position was a mistake.  He has backed off from that position.  I don’t really think Romney is that electable.  The democRats have said they WANT to run against Romney.  They are afraid of Gingrich, just as they were afraid of Palin who was far more qualified to sit in the White House than Obama ever will be.  The one they attack the most is who they fear the most.  DemocRats only know the politics of personal destruction.  They are, first and foremost, socialists.  It’s in their DNA.

Provided he wins, Obama vs Newt, what a crap choice for Americans to have to make.

BTW, did anyone think that Barack Obama was electable?  How did that happen?  A completely unaccomplished empty suit gets elected president.  Only one reason…because he’s black.  Any white candidate with his resume would NEVER have received the support of the democRat party in such a way.  Joe Biden, as dumb as he is, said it right…”he’s clean, he’s articulate”…that’s why people voted for him.  He wasn’t like Sharpton or Jackson.  He was more white than black in the way he spoke, although he can turn the “ebonics” on and off at will.  People voted for him because they projected their hopes and dreams on a blank canvas.  If he can be elected with no history, no anal exam by the media and no accomplishments, other than getting elected to something by clearing the playing field, Gingrich should be a shoe-in.

You guys that are against “social engineering” should check out Newt’s record; his one consistency in office is his narcissistic “big ideas” as the savior of the world. He is as “progressive” as O, and more sincerely a disciple of Teddy Roosevelt. He’s a good debater partly because he’s quick-witted and self-confident, but also partly because THE MAN WILL SAY ANYTHING OFF THE CUFF, even if it’s 180 degrees different fro
what his own published position. Like O, it’s all a cute and fun hubristic game.
Having a great (even sociopathically dishonest) debater in the race is great fun, but if we let our frustrations with O be satisfied by such primal gut reaction, we play right into O’s hands. We frankly need to keep our eyes on the purpose of electing someone who will GOVERN well, and fellers, Newt ain’t that. If he gets the GOP nomination, O will more likely win. If Newt becomes President, get ready for ” big ideas” II (O has given us “Big Ideas I”) along with hypocrisy, contradiction, and ammo for the left to regain Congress in 2014. When that bappens, will you be satisfied re-running fun clips from the old 2011 O-Newt debate? I hope so, ’cause that’s all you’ll have.

I love the “temperament” argument. Totally baseless, often regurgitated just like the argument Reagan was going to push the world to the edge of nuclear armageddon due to his “temperament” or bumbling idiocy. A true sign of desperation.

Oh, before I go, how many points was Romney up on Gingrich before the debate going in to South Carolina? How many points did Romney actually win by? Oh wait. I’m sorry. Romney didn’t win. My bad.
Those polls said……….



yes, I don’t understand those who attack him for having IDEAS, THAT WAS THE MOST STUPID THING I EVER HERD,

THANK GOD  for ideas, otherwise is robots, nothing in between,




Romney is the ideal candidate for the Democrats. He can’t run against Obamacare because he won’t disavow Romneycare. We already know that Obama is going to run on class warfare and a rich white guy who made a fortune on Wall Street is the ideal target. The union led OWS protests were all about battlefield preparation by the Left.

I don’t much like the choices we have, but Newt is the one who is fighting the hardest against Obama and his hand-maidens in the MSM. The independents who bought the hope and change crap won’t be fooled again. Ask them if they would vote for Obama again? I know my brother-in-law, a Perot voter won’t.

DrJ, I hafta disagree with you on this. Newt is highly electable, the SC primary proved that.

How does Mitt, as the nominee stand on the stage with Obama and answer questions about socialized medicine when he can’t even answer a question about his own taxes?

How does Romney, after running for President since 2008 and still unable to get beyond 35% of the vote garner enough support to beat Obama.

Americans will respond to a clear alternative every time, but when faced with the lesser of two evils, more often than not, the incumbent stays in office. He might be one of the “evils” to choose from, but he is a known quantity. In the case of Obama, that just might not work as easily for him, but then again he isn’t going to run on his record. He is taking the Truman campaign tack of running against a “do nothing” Congress. With Reid in the Senate to insure that no GOP led bills are voted on, it makes it easier for Obama to do that.

Newt will effectively counter that, but Romney never could.






if it was an election to beat the opponent it would be easier  , but this is an election to beat an organization of power games for only themselves, so it take a person with demolishing tools and know how to get trough the layers of dormant poisonous materials having been covered  with sugar by the MEDIA ARMED TO THEIR TEETH WITH LIES



Romney would lose in November. Like McCain he’d be sweet and nice to Barack in the debates and the media would applaud him for his “maturity”.  Gingrich will kick Obama in the groin. I want a fighter. I’m tired of the Doles, Bushes, McCains, and Fords.

The media and the left (but I repeat myself) have played down and dirty for years…and they think it’s just fine…when a Republican says anything tough that approaches the truth…we are “racist”.  No more.  I want Newt, and I want him to gouge them in the eyes, kick them where their children came from, and bite off their ears.

Romeny is prissy. If he’s the nominee millions are going to vote third party. But that elects Obama you say??? Nominating Romney elects Obama anyway. I want a war.


 Hey Doc   You and I may have to get a

 To my fellow MARINES Jarhead and Danang 67(I was there in 67) who love red meat Newt; Don’t think he’ll ever fly with a majority of American voters

       Semper Fi  Look for Rubio in 2016

rich wheeler: Don’t think he’ll ever fly with a majority of American voters

Ya know, that’s what you lib/progs tell us over and over. You simply prove the point that Romney is the favored target to beat. I figured that out by the time I had posted that if the bipartisan hatred for Newt was any measure, he was just the guy for the job. All of those, who’s opinions mean the least to me, hate him. LOL

Well, I guess that Todd and Sarah are wrong, Chuck Norris, the majority of Tea Party Patriots in their straw poll,  and the 100 or so TP “leaders” than have endorsed Newt are wrong.  I guess the SC voters are wrong.  And I guess all of us who don’t dutifully fall into line behind another “McCain” moderate candidate are also wrong.  A consistent 66-75% of voters who wanted anyone-but-Romney must also be wrong.

I guess that takes care of the sour grapes headline by Conn Carroll  that “America hates Newt Gingrich”:.  LOL  Of course, I read Carroll’s column yesterday… and it was written two days ago.  Prior to the SC thrashing.  Nor does Carroll provide the dates used for the data he puts in his graph.  But one thing is certain in this topsy turvy primary… nothing is static, and Romney’s coronation has been postponed.

What’s admitted by pretty much everyone is that none of us are thrilled with the political menu of candidates.  But it is what it is, and we’ll have to run with it.  But it’s sure not a time when we go for another milquetoast candidate, as Jarhead says above.

It’s always been apparent that Romney is the Obama heir-apparent preferred choice, by both the Obama campaign and the media. Regardless of the legalities of Bain Capital, having a “fat cat”, as Obama likes to call the wealthy, as his opponent plays perfectly into this strategy.  And even tho hostile takeovers are also legal, and a savvy move for a VC to make money for his investors, you can bet the Dems won’t be parading Staples employees in front of the cameras, but those who lost their livelihood for the other type of deals.

Romney is Obama’s manna from heaven.

Establishment Republicans and pundits?  They must be rolling in their grave.  How dare the voting masses question their McCain replacement.  They are supposed to know best.  They’ve played their best herd mentality cards, building up Mittens as the anointed one who can’t lose.  Funny they don’t want to admit he can’t debate his way out of a corner, even when challenged by his own peers.  Amazing that some say he’s a great debater when what he usually does is not answer the question, and steers it into a realm where he feels comfortable.

Odd that they want to put the quintessential architect of O’healthcare up against the guy who used his plan as the template, just because today he says he wants to repeal it… that only the states should be able to pass a mandate.  Hasn’t anyone figured out that the mandate idea at national or state level is not acceptable to the majority of citizens?  Heritage’s economists made the case for the mandate in the late 80s/early 90s.  Their Constitutionalists have since reversed their official stance… uh oh… someone changed their mind!  How dastardly.

I will still scratch my head in wonderment at those who attempt to distance Newt from the achievements of the Republican Congress in the mid 90s.  I’ve even seen those who are attempting to convince people that Santorum had more to do with the Contract With America than Newt did.  ???

Instead come the anti-Newt talking points… the predictable “run out by his own party” and a “disgrace” portrayal.   Few speak of the Gingrich leadership and accomplishments in the 90s.  Few remember that Newt bucked Bush the elder on his tax increases.  I was listening to Chris Christie trying to push that line today on MTP… saying that Newt has no experience in working to get things done in a volatile climate.


Maybe Chris Christie was too busy with his law firm, or ramping up to his lobbyist career, to pay attention to the accomplishments of the House under Newt, and in tandem a slim majority Senate and Democrat POTUS.  But that statement begs “the suspension of disbelief”. Speaking of “lobbyist”, I guess we can be assured that Mittens, condemning any “lobbyist” – supposedly Newt – as a POTUS means that he won’t be picking Christie as a running mate. Unless, of course, it’s just the usual Mittens doublespeak.

There is no doubt that Newt was hated by not only the Dems, but most of his own peers as well.  Some hated his “big ideas”, and what they considered his arrogant personality.  Others hated him because he flea market bargained with Clinton, and actually came out with deals that were at least better for the right than the left.  No one had been able to get the Dems to accept tax cuts.

During the run up to the 1998 midterms, the Dems were assaulting Newt with the ethics charges, and the Republicans were making impeachment of Clinton a public issue on the campaign trail.  With Dems portraying the Republicans as petty and interfering in Clinton’s personal life, PLUS the public trial-by-media perception that the Speaker was corrupt… even tho innocent of the charges… Republicans felt they had to politically lynch Newt to redeem themselves as a party.

All but one charge against Newt was dropped.  For the last, the investigator thought Newt was guilty, the committee disagreed.  What was decided was to reprimand/punish Newt with the fine in exchange for the Republicans hoping that “scandal” would go away.  It was a political “settlement”. A year later, the IRS themselves concluded that that Newt’s organizations did not violate federal tax laws.

Pity that the Republicans wouldn’t back Newt, just as they didn’t back Cain in this primary from his accusers. But then, they are so busy trying to prop up a candidate they think will appease the Dems.

But I find it really hypocritical that those who went to bat for Palin and her false ethics accusations prefer to just dismiss Newt’s similar path over a decade ago.  Palin is very much like Newt in that she also worked across the aisle to get things done in Alaska, and was hated by both parties for the same method.  Hated or not, both have achievements for their leadership.  Perhaps the Palin’s see that parallel themselves.

No one with an ounce of honesty in them can legitimately remove Newt from the achievements of the mid 90s Republican Congress without completely revising history in order to benefit Romney … but I can see they are going to bring up the same tired political lynching arguments to, once again, make Newt a scapegoat.

But it appears that’s not going to fly this time.  Because America doesn’t have to adore Newt.  What they have to do is trust him to figure out a way to reverse the direction Obama, Pelosi and Reid have set, and not cave in to enormous pressure he will face from both the Democrats AND the Republicans in doing so.  Newt has demonstrated he has not only done that, but he takes all the expected punches standing up.  He’s risen  from the political dead three times now, and been labeled a “pariah” by some.

But it appears that America doesn’t “hate” Newt at all… and they just may like the fact that he’s willing to be assailed, but will still stand his ground. Even the SC Christian voters were willing to put the nation’s economy ahead of their traditional “family values”, throwing their weight behind Newt instead of Santorum.  That revelation is huge for any acquainted with traditional SC politics.

Any GOP nominee is guaranteed to be Obama’s punching bag.  Personally, I think street fighter Gingrich can not only hold his own, but expose Obama’s weak campaign strategy as the redressed hope/change BS that it is.  As they’ve learned, debates matter… and I’m quite sure that Newt  – the walking encyclopedia – will make Obama and his TOTUS look like the whining, inept school boy.

Richard Wheeler


you where there in 67,  now you are here, and complete different scenario for 2012


Gingrich is unstable, he’s nitroglycerin, and Obama;s Chicago Machine knows how to jostle him just right to make him explode at the opportune time.  Even if by some miracle he made it to the White House, it would be a chaotic presidency that does more damage to the GOP that Bush destroying capitalism in order to save it did.

The whole GOP field sucks.  Another hold my nose and vote election…

I’m no advocate fir Romney nor attack dog on Newt, just one who wants the federal government to move toward its enunciated Constitutional structure. Sometimes seems the emotional and competitive investment in races stars to wag the dog. I’m not convinced that, other than his welare position, which was the real success of his Speakership term, Newt us a small gov’t guy; he’s the “big ideas” guy who sees the gov’t as tbe tool to play out his genius on, a classic TR/Wilson Progressive.
Some factors affecting Newt’s SC Primary victory that haven’t been referenced here (not saying oters aren’t also present and more significant):
1) Newt did his groundwork in SC very well;
2) The conservative rebel wing “anybody but Romney” folks;
3) Santorum seen as not ready for the next big stage/step yet;
4) the sheer fun of Gingrich in debate, and the unprecedented prolific debate emphasis this cycle;
5) Free narketers contradicting tbeir own principles in favor of populist class warfare manipulation;
6) Fundanentalist Christians and atheists/agnostics aligning with fear/disgust against Romney’s weird religion (any of y’all go to Boadway this year?);
7) Backlash against the media’s attempt to kill Gingrich with the last minute ex-wife story and the start of the last debate there with it; and
8) Ignorance of Newt’s true big government record due to dominance of the old false Clinton mantra on him as a dangerous heartless conservative.

When a country spends 10 billion and takes in 6 billion per day, grade 2 math will tell you that you are in big trouble. You don’t need 45 illegal czars to figure this out.

Dr. J used what pollsters? PPP, CBS/NYT, and wishy washy Fox.  Last week I saw polls destroyed in a minimum of 3 hours. I trust Rasmussen, Gallup somewhat, and a combination of others. I never trust polls taken from in the tank media. Polls are still estimates.

The people of S Carolina chose their Republican candidate and told the MSM and political experts to take a hike. Let me guess- Romney is losing his huge lead in the polls in Florida. Who looks unelectable now? Why haven’t Paul and the Paultards thrown in the towel?


hi, some nitro will be the right coolaid to be given in DEBATES AND NEWT HAS PROVEN TO KNOW




EL Guapo




oil guy from ALBERTA

HI,  WAS IN IT A GOOD SHOW? AND this is just the beginning,right,

we want more


Re your # 20: Bravo! Well spoken. (The Reply thingie isn’t working.) You think Newt will invite Sarah to be his VP? That would make some heads explode…like Karl Rove’s.

Oh, speaking of Christie, he’s volunteered his services as VP to Mittens. Syncophant!

: ‘Newt is highly electable, the SC primary proved that.’

Did it? He did about as well in SC as Romney did in NH… and Romney has at least done well in all three contests rather than getting two fourth places along with one first. But I don’t think anyone really doubts that Newt can carry the southeast; he’s long been popular there (at one point, before any votes had been cast, he was polling over 60% in Georgia). Now, how do you think he’ll do in Minnesota and for that matter all of the upper Midwest? Confrontational style doesn’t play so well there.

Anyway, he should be able to scoop up all of Florida’s delegates next (and I wonder whether anyone will even try to take him on there). After that I’ll be curious to see whether he has the organization to do well in Nevada, Maine, and Minnesota. If Romney takes all of those then I expect he can beat Gingrich on points in the end; if Gingrich manages to pull off an upset in a caucus state then I’d take it as a sign that he might be able to seize the nomination.


@oil guy: ‘Dr. J used what pollsters? PPP, CBS/NYT, and wishy washy Fox.  Last week I saw polls destroyed in a minimum of 3 hours.’

The PPP polling for SC (their last poll, after the debate and before the voting, 1-18 thru 1-20) was almost dead on. Yes, the guys running the company are Democrats. They apparently still try to do as good a job at actual polling as they can. Of course the broader point that things can change in a hurry is still valid.

How many elections has Romney won?  How many elections has Gingrich won?  Subtract Romney’s number (1) for what ever multiple that is Gingrich.  That is electablity.  Gingrich is a fighter, Romney is a manager.

John Cooper

hi,  I ‘m starting to feel the uplifting movement of hope in AMERICANS, already

paying attention to the race, and IT WAS BECAUSE OF NEWT, PRETTY SOON



John Cooper, actually when Curt followed up my Dec 6th post on the bipartisan hatred of Newt with his own, I had laughingly suggested that if you really wanted to see the heads-that-be whirl, Newt should pick Palin as his Veep.  I figure a Newt/Sarah ticket would push many over the edge…. and that might be worth the price of admission.

But to answer your question, no… I don’t think Newt would offer Palin the Veep slot, but I’m darned sure that Palin would have a spot in his administration.  While she’d be good as Energy Sec’y, I’d say she’d wield more power as the head of the EPA.

And I’d still pay money to see Ron Paul appointed as Treasury Secretary.

Funny that Christie volunteered himself.  I heard him say the “if called” bit, but also stressed he was likely to stay as NJ Gov.  Had he listened to Mittens, stating that no lobbyist is fit to be POTUS, he’d know that Mittens can’t offer him the Veep slot without looking like the hypocrite he is.

Oh, another falsehood, new talking point for Mittens.. that Newt has never owned a business or had employees.  Surely Mittens can’t be this stupid.  Even the Washington Post has had a couple of articles on how Newt went from political flame out to private sector successful entrepreneur.

Newt has had five for profit holdings, and four nonprofits.  Surely health care think tanks, booking agencies, a company that handles royalties, a book and publishing company and his communications company aren’t all one man endeavors with no employees. If so, how did his non profit, American Solutions, continue on without him? Robots in the building?

The non profits also require employees. 

Such a claim is so easily dismissed that it’s embarrassing that Romney would even attempt that direction.  In fact, another WaPo article notes that Gingrich earned $2.5 million in 2009

Among Gingrich’s moneymaking ventures: a health-care think tank financed by six-figure dues from corporations; a consulting business; a communications firm that handled his speeches of up to $60,000 a pop, media appearances and books; a historical documentary production company; a separate operation to administer the royalties for the historical fiction that Gingrich writes with two co-authors; even an in-house literary agency that has counted among its clients a presidential campaign rival, former senator Rick Santorum (R-Pa.).

Separate from all of that was his nonprofit political operation, American Solutions for Winning the Future. Before it disintegrated this summer in Gingrich’s absence, American Solutions generated another $52 million and provided some of the money that allowed the former speaker to travel by private jet and hired limousine.

Along the way, Gingrich has become a wealthy man, earning $2.5 million in personal income last year, according to his financial disclosure form.

Bees #32: “I ‘m starting to feel the uplifting movement of hope in AMERICANS”.

That’s exactly how I felt. Romney won’t turn anything around, but maybe Newt will.

Newt has written 23 books of which 13 have hit the best sellers list( NYT). Whats the Bamster got- 2 books with the theme( you gotta be me) and probably ghost written. Your Clown in Chief has not been vetted and the majority of his policies have been abject failures. I paraphrase Mark Levin- Obama is a low hanging fruit cake.

Have you seen the latest Media ploy? Newt is now a bigot and a racist. That crap is starting up again. Please have some left wing moderator bring this up at a debate.

I do not suggest Newt is anything other than bright. I just think Newt has so much historical baggage and such high negatives that he cannot win. His winning a deeply red state all hyped on Newt pistol whipping a CNN anchor is no indication of the general electorate.  In addition I tend to hold little regard for the left’s advice as to which candidate the GOP ought to field.

Funny ow McCain was ahead of Obama at this point in the polls by the same amount.

Polls at this point of one candidate over another are meaningless.

And wan”t Reagan supposedly un-electable

I have to disagree with this.


I will be happy to be wrong about this.



you said NEWT had  so much historical baggage, and such high negative,

ya hhhhh, and we want to know more of it,

thank you for reminding us,


I look forward to some Obama-Gingrich head to head polls.

drj:  His winning a deeply red state all hyped on Newt pistol whipping a CNN anchor is no indication of the general electorate.

Don’t you think that’s trivializing Newt’s consistent debate performances not only in the past,  but especially on Monday and Thursday, drj?  You assume it was only the responses to Juan Williams and John King that did it? Yes, they got standing ovations – a historic first for primary debates – but  you’re insulting the SC voters if you suggest that two quips, emptying the verbal magazine back at the moderators, was their big reason for supporting Newt.  I’m not guessing that the SC voters are that shallow.  In fact, only 42% of Newt’s supporters said that the debates were a factor in their decision.

In fact, over all, only 13% said debates were the “most important” and 51% saying “important”.  34% said it was either minor, or not a factor at all.

The SC exit poll reveals that electability and the right experience were high in their decisions.  For electability, Newt had 51% to Romney’s 37%.  The right experience for the job had Newt at 49% to Romney’s 34%.  97% of them cited they were worried about the ecomony.

Somehow I’m not seeing taking it to the media as high on their list…

And here’s something that’s going to interfere with the Ron Paul talking points…21% of all those in the exit poll (2381 responders total , or 920 of them) were veterans.  They went 39% for Gingrich, and 32% for Romney.  

Ron “the military supports me more than other candidates” Paul?  14%.  Santorum got more support than Paul did.  Perry was last with 1%, but he dropped out of the primary prior to the vote.

ooops… that’s gonna leave a mark…. LOL Especially in a huge military base state with over 104,000 military personnel.

Here’s another inconvenient fact.  To the question, “Would you support Romney if he were the nominee?”  Just a little over half – 57% –  of Romney supporters said yes, enthusiastically. Seems just a little less than half of them are settling for chopped liver, and don’t mind admitting so. Of the Newt supporters, only 30% would support him enthusiastically.  Another 30% said nope… no way.

38% of Ron Pauls supporters *also* said no way, Jose.  Santorum’s supporters weren’t too thrilled either.

Needless to say, when it comes to SC, Romney is in big trouble.

And it’s become very obvious that Carroll’s little blog ditty is out of date, and that “America” does not hate Newt.



I’m anxious to feel the tingle in my legs FOR NEWT GINGRISH, AT THE END;   like MATHIEW FELT FOR OBAMA IN 2008,   BYE





Ms. Bees   Careful with that tingle Bees. Newt gets word he’ll make you wife #4.

Congrats Pats. Go Niners.


what do they know, they where betting on RONMEY ALSO,

there is the factor unpredicteble nobody can figure,


Richard Wheeler,

great idea, that would get me in the  WHITE HOUSE,

and I would bring my FA friend to help him.

we would call it FA CZARDS



As I have said before, a poll like this means diddly squat.   McCain was up by 10 points or more at the same time in the lastr election.

Basing decision of polls always leads to disaster



beside who else can win OBAMA IF THEY SAY HE CANNOT.



 Bees I’.m sure you’d make a wonderful 1st Lady and you gotta be better looking than Callista.

Dr J. Newt’s negatives among all but the rabid right,and select indies like Mata and J.G., are gonna sink him.Dems couldn’t ask for a better opponent.

Larry’s suggestion that it’s not too late for more electable candidates like Bush,Ryan,Rubio etc should not be dismissed out of hand.

drj, the dates on almost all of those polls (except for the joke we can call Reuters/Ipsos) are all pre the SC primary and this week of debates. Might be nice if you looked at something that was current. But then, that takes time. You’ve seen how those surges can happen in a matter of days. And this is not Newt’s first surge.

You’ll drive yourself crazy if you stare at numbers day by day, and don’t allow the state primary voters to have their say. You also need to start putting polling in context with the latest events. Florida voters who watched the SC primary in the focus groups were an example of how things can turn on a dime. My suggestion is don’t hurt yourself with polls until after the two Florida debates and primary. SC is one primary election. Florida is another. You might want to consider the reception of the candidates based on voters and exit polls, rather than pushing towards Romney with fear mongering by disgruntled Republican water carrier pundits like Coulter and Rubin, and in the tank Republican elected officials.

Are you really so desperately quick to anoint Romney, strictly because you buy the establishment BS talking points, and feel that the voters who are making the decisions are irrelevant?

And listening to rich wheeler or Larry W? Puleeeeze… Rich is about as adept at tarot card reading as Greg is, fer heavens sake. Rich doesn’t want the GOP nominee to win. And if Romney is good for liberal Larry W, that should also give you a hint….

@Mata: ‘And it’s become very obvious that Carroll’s little blog ditty is out of date, and that “America” does not hate Newt.’

All we’ve seen is that South Carolina doesn’t hate him (and I’ll also give you Georgia, Florida, North Carolina, Alabama based on polling and common folkways). Of course ‘hate’ was always over the top; there’s a big difference between having a negative impression of someone and ‘hating’ them.

bbartlog: All we’ve seen is that South Carolina doesn’t hate him (and I’ll also give you Georgia, Florida, North Carolina, Alabama based on polling and common folkways). Of course ‘hate’ was always over the top; there’s a big difference between having a negative impression of someone and ‘hating’ them.

Hey, I wasn’t the one who said the nation of America hated Newt. The blanket observation was made by Conn Carroll prior to the SC primary, and repeated by drj.

Nor did I say that the nation of America collectively loved Newt.

My point is that such a statement is desperately absurd and reeks of a personal agenda to influence primary voters. Fact is, the contenders are in the constant state of flux. One week ago, Newt was pronounced a “pariah” and dead in the water by many. Polls that came in the days after the Monday debate showed him surging. They couldn’t do polls fast enough between the Thursday debate and Saturday’s primary, but everyone was still supremely confident that it would either be Romney, or it would be close. They were wrong.

Some like Newt. Some don’t. And apparently there are starting to be more of the former than the later, while the negatives of the anointed one are on the rise. Not that there are some that want to admit it…

But Stix is entirely correct, and I’m not much of a poll person except the actual elections. The exit polls… which generally have a very wide sampling…. are good to get a handle on why voters chose, the demographics, and what issues they felt were important.

It’s my contention that the purpose of throwing out dated polls is to influence primary voters by political fear mongering, and banking on playing the herd mentality. I think voters should decide the nominee after listening to debates and voting… not by polls.

I remember hearing people say Reagan cannot win becuase he was too far to the right.

Polls at this stage mean absolutely nothing.  The only polls that count are the ones in the primaries and cauki.   The pitting of one candidate over Obama now is meaningless.

We can put up a chia pet against Obama and proibaly win , unless the economy makes a miraculous turn before NOV.

I would take any of the GOP candidates, except Ron Paul, to go against Obama and win.


@DrJohn44: yes, the RCP average has him down about ten points against Obama. Of course Gerald Ford was down thirty points to Carter at one point and only lost by a small margin.

Does anyone know whether it’s normal for a generic Republican to poll better against Obama than any of the actual, specific Republicans? Because that’s what we’re seeing, and I’m trying to figure out whether this is just a normal weirdness of human perception, or whether it’s actual evidence of a weak set of candidates.

1 2 3 5