I see that he’s just come back out on top in Iowa, according to Rasmussen. And the NRO is trying to say no to Gingrich and Perry (anybody but Romney)…while Intrade currently shows Romney with the nod at a 67% chance.
Why is he so electable again? The man has only ever won one race, in Massachusetts, and it was as much do to his opponent’s incompetent campaign as anything else. Do you honestly think Obama is going to run an incompetent campaign?
I’m not saying we should nominate Gingrich – but compared to Romney, Gingrich has a record as a master politician who’s actually trimmed government, reformed welfare, defeated socialized medicine plans, and balanced the budget.
Gingrich has accomplish more of the conservative agenda than any person currently running for President. That statement is probably true of all those who have vied for that position since Reagan. The GOP establishment would rather lose the election than have a true conservative win. Gingrich speaks of many things conservatives find problematic yet his actions speak much loader than his words. Gingrich believes the right does not have a monopoly on good ideas. His statement that FDR was the greatest President of the 20th century could be based on his winning the war which was the greatest threat to freedom in human history. If FDR had not supplied the UK, England would have fallen to Hitler. That would have freed up the forces necessary to defeat the Soviets and America would have stood alone agaist the Nazis who then would have the resources of the whole world to fight us with. Including guided missles and jet aircraft. Reagan was a great man, but he defeated Granada, FDR defeated Germany, Italy and Japan.
Unless the country gets even more worse than it is now, Rommy will get his butt kicked by Obi. I would rather have the Newt and or Perry.(really Bachman, but she is not GOP certified) But the GOP is damn the torpedoes, and full steam ahead with their boy Rommy. They think Rommy is a safe bet in that he is your sterotypical politician who can flip and flop faster than you can read these words. Not that Perry and Newt have not all have had ” political awakenings” since this race has begun and changed their tunes considerably. But Rommy is so damn obivious in his flipflops but then again that may be just why the GOP likes him so much. One thing about Ron Paul, that man is consistent in his craziness. But Bachman really did good last nite. And Perry too. And you got to give Rick S credit, the man really trys to stick to his beliefs. But in the end Obama will rip both Perry and Rommy a new one in the debates. When I first saw Obama speak I put my bets on him right then with my friends and won some good money. Many People love to hear that kinda of talk, regardless if its true or not. Picture Obama up there with Rommey thanking him for helping him with his National health care program just for starters. But in the end it may be just that the GOP feels that Rommy deserves the “mercy nod”.
Little early to call it… supposedly Newt just got $20 million contributed to his PAC, just for ads in Iowa (I don’t even know that you can spend that much in Iowa in that timeframe). He could still win it.
(edit, a few hours later): or not. The $20 million was reported as actual news but has been denied by the supposed donor (Adelson).
@Gary G. Swenchonis: ‘But Bachman really did good last nite. And Perry too.’
Yes, Perry was much improved. Did as well as I’ve seen him do. Bachman also did well… interesting thing with her is that I would say she’s at her best on the attack, absolutely ferocious. Total opposite of Romney in that regard – he has people write anti-Gingrich zingers for him and can’t even deliver them convincingly. Uncomfortable going negative and always comes across badly when he does. Does better when discussing policy (where Bachman sometimes comes across a little scripted).
Paul was so-so, not as good as his last outing where he really did well. Hit Gingrich hard early on (as did Bachman), had probably the best answer on the supreme court justices question, but won’t get any love for his answers on Iran.
@bbartlog: Again. No disagreement with me on your summary. And yes many in our room agree that bachman does well on the attack, but she has a tendency to be too whinning, and sounds pleading at times. perry has surprised us all. he has gotten much better. But is he for real? Just like the Newt aas well. I do admire how Ron Paul can rip into some of them. i just don’t agree with his isolationist policy in this world that is so interconnected in everything we all say and or do in so many different ways. And yes Rommy does not do well on the attack. thats another reason/weakness where Obama would roast him in a debate.