When’s the last time the candidate was *chosen* (selected, not elected) at the convention?

Has any candidate ever un-suspended a campaign? (I can’t help but think Pawlenty at least, and maybe also Perry are questioning …)

Mew

nt

we will again. The machinations required to fool the voters is not within me any longer…truth from the heart…

I think Newt would do well even in a strong field. He has such an impressive national record, has such bold policy proposals, and is so knowledgable and articulate that he could compete with anyone. In a stronger field, there would at least be a more substantive discussion of the issues though. Mitch Daniels, while I admire his policies, is too timid and inarticulate to win (just watch his jon stewart intvw) Jeb Bush is a Bush, way too soon. Paul Ryan is terrific, but I fear he does not explain complex issues in a succint enough manner. Christie would be good, even though I’ve lost respect for him for caving to establishment. Let’s stick with Newt, he has been running a disciplined campaign and is a brilliant politician and would be a highly effective, conservative president.

If Palin doesn’t jump in, then I’m with Newt. I would walk through ice and snow to vote for Palin. She’s a fighter, just like Newt. The Big Headed Ignorant Gop Leaders don’t like her anymore than Newt but she has no baggage. If the so called “leaders” bring in anyone else I’ll still vote for Newt.
In fact here’s my gut feeling: Barack Obama is not the only one we need to get rid of; the Gop leaders also need to go. They have outlived themselves and no longer represent the base.

on RedState is typified in Erick’s post:

Mitt has a whole chest full of flaws that will be exploited by BHO and Media. (Mitt’s money from “bailouts” is a liability.)

But Newt’s only enemy is what he’ll do to himself. (But Newt’s money from Fannie and Freddie isn’t?)

Sigh. The focus should be on constraining the candidates as best possible, no matter who the R’s nominate and if the president is elected we are going to be faced with an unreliable president. (Still much better than being faced with BHO as president.) Romney can be constrained by forcing him to ID what he’ll do specifically – there should be a post on RS “What Mitt Romney needs to do to establish a foundation for conservative support” – or similar. I’m not sure how you constrain Newt’s propensity to jump on the next intellectual fad – but it’s doable – a promise to do these three things before he looks at another idea, etc.

Of course I think Perry could have been the candidate we agreed on – Mitt’s executive experience and temperament – with better success executing in office, Newt’s ideological pros – but without the personal and intellectual baggage (e.g. Nancy Pelosi add). Too bad Perry got bad advice on how to run a campaign.

As the GOP Establishment has opposite goals than the GOP base, compromise seems impossible. What has happened since 1928 has been the Base accepting Establishment candidates (i.e., surrendering), except for ’64 and ’80. The thing is that the Base looses whether the Establishment candidate wins or looses, because he doesn’t represent Base interests. The Establishment has gotten further from the Base every election, until the elastic can stretch no more. Romney (and all the other RINOs) are tokens for the Establishment in the power struggle for control of the GOP. Newt is the place-holder for the Base. That’s why which one wins doesn’t matter. All that matters is that the Base take over the GOP, or found a new party that they can control. The GOP Establishment is now closer to the Dem-Left than to its own Base.

We should probably all just go to sleep, and wake up in November, in a glorious new world…

Because it’s all so simple and uncomplicated.

How about we just have a BROKERED CONVENTION and pick Paul Ryan? Why are you all so against it?

Is it because you’re conservatives, you dogs?

That’s an incredibly naive statement, especially since the Republican establishment wants Gingrich to disappear ASAP. The establishment isn’t going to sit back and do nothing. They may not succeed in derailing Gingrich entirely, but he’ll be tarred in a way no other GOP candidate ever has. You can bet on that.

Meanwhile, Newt hasn’t even yet secured the nomination, and you’re already predicting he’ll win the White House. What Romney did to him in Iowa is a mere “trial size” of what Obama/DNC will attempt this fall. If you think female and Independent voters will just ignore their noise machine, think again. Freddie Mac. Individual mandate. Sitting on Pelosi’s lap. Right-wing social engineering. Overlapping marriages. Gingrich will present a target-rich environment for the James Carvilles of the world.

Romney isn’t the most attractive alternative, but there seems to be much less dirt on the guy. That’s what the Republican establishment has settled for, and I’m 80% sure they’ll have their way by August.

CAN Newt get elected?

If most conservatives and Republicans were pretty sure that the answer is “yes,” Newt would already be way ahead. The fact that he isn’t proves that not enough “R’s” can honestly say “yes” to that question.

This isn’t that complicated. Newt will defeat President Obama this November because Newt’s economic policies are smart, his reforms are what people agree with & his energy plans are precisely what people are looking for.

I agree that is what he should be campaigning on, however he’s spending way too much time complaining about this, that and the other, wasting time trying to destroy a fellow Republican after having made a lot of noise about getting along with his colleagues.

Also, the press can spin all this appearance carp. If he sticks to issues and has his facts straight, they can’t spin them away. Substance will beat “hope and change” because it can be understood as real by voters if articulated properly, and one thing Newt can do extremely well is articulate.

These are 70-30 issues in a nation that’s 2:1 conservative to liberal. What’s difficult about that?

What’s difficult is that Newt’s unfavorable/favorable ratio is about 50/25, and another 25 don’t care. He has to convince a huge majority in the Republican camp because, if he can’t change those ratios, he’ll get no effective help from independents. If we nominate Newt, we will be counting on his ability to get every last Republican and conservative voter out to vote for him and to convince a lot of the “don’t cares” to come down on his side.

I don’t know who Erick is hoping will step forward (some of you are probably saying “Don’t you read what he writes??? It’s clear.”) I’m not that regular a reader in recent weeks, so no, not clear to me. But all the names that were floated earlier in the year have their own problems. Had they stayed in, we’d be talking about those problems right now.

Previously, I’ve written that we need a candidate who is conservative, articulate (coherent), compelling, convincing, and credible. Just to add a couple more C‘s, I threw in competent and having good character. I submit that none of our candidates have an overabundance of all of these characteristics (I can’t help myself!) so now we have to compromise (see?) Still, three of the four stand up pretty well on most of the criteria. (Aiyeee)

To hear some folks tell it, we can’t win unless we pick A. Others tell us that we can’t lose unless we pick A. Now Erick is telling us we can’t win with either A or B, but we need X to come in from the cold, and we don’t know who X is or if he even wants to feel the heat in the kitchen.

for the analysis and i totally agree
also if the rinos in washington dont like him then he is my guy

i want a fighter and hope gingrich leans on the tea party repubs

also newt is not liked by the msm and that is another reason to vote for him

They were so in the tank for Mittens, they pushed out the good candidate, Rick Perry.
So now the elite, fox, some of the conservatives can just choke on what they have brought about trying to push us not Romney folks around.

I have been thinking the same thing and personally I snicker at this whole article. I think I said something like this was going to happen when the only conservative, small government candidate was blacked out and none of the conservatives with a platform even would come to his aid that they were going to regret it and sure enough that is what is happening…cause the ones that are left are not going to beat Obama…they are not enough contrast from Obama….Mittens will not be able to stand up to the criticism that Obama will pour on him and Newt will blast away with all guns blazing but will go down also to Obama. Rick Santorum just isn’t ready to be President and Ron Paul we won’t even go there. I was listening to BBC and it just amazes me how that people from other countries can see so much clearer than people from our own country. This reporter was saying that the Republicans had just committed suicide by rejecting the last really conservative candidate and here he has the best record, blah, blah to run against Obama. I thought yeah tell me about it.

I am still grieving over the early demise of the potentially best candidate we had since Reagan.

Having had time to think about it – I conclude that when Perry entered the race his opponents were far more prepared for him than he was for them. The assault on Gardasil, the mischaracterization of his immigration policy, the comments that “he reminds people of GWB”, etc.

the left wing media knew how “dangerous” he would be to them, and they didn’t want him to get traction. the pro-Romney Beltway Republicans knew he was a real threat to Romney’s candidacy.

I agree that he gave them too much material to trash him with. but it is also true that outside RS the real Big Kahunas of the Conservative Media just stood by while he was destroyed and never stood up to him. Rush FINALLY had a great testimony AFTER he left the campaign.

So we are left with this. I think this entire discussion is a bit looney. It presumes to think for the rest of the electorate. Erik seems to be saying that he is okay with this thing being decided in smoke filled rooms as long as he is one of the ones in the room.

Let the process play out. Let the candidates make their case – address their weaknesses. Let some other candidate jump in if they feel they have something to add. But lets NOT all be the smartest guy in the room and “pick” someone we in the abstract think might be good. EVERY one of the so-called “top tier” people I hear mentioned have significant flaws which the bloodthirsty media would be only too happy to feast on.

Let the process play out. Connecticut votes later this spring.

for saying that. Yes, when conservatives that have the microphone sit back, and allow a complete trashing of a good candidate, you will wind up with “unelectables” every time. The very same thing happened in 08, and is why we wound up with McCain. So much goes for the “when conservatism is on the ballot, it wins every time.” That went out the window long ago, and the author of that comment still hasn’t gotten that message, or felt no need to further it. Imagine that, after only three contests, there isn’t a conservative left on the stage.

Perhaps we can convince R. Perry to re-enter the race. Now that the Smallish, liberal states are over, and we are starting to enter the real Conservative states, we can get a little forward momentum for the only real Conservative.

BTW….. isn’t this the same Erick that demanded Rick Perry drop out and endorse the very same Newt he now calls “unelectable”? I mean sure it was a long long long time ago, last week. Now he is suggesting what? He shouldn’t have? Newt was never electable? Now that he is winning and leading the polls he says he can’t win? WTF? I think its time someone starts drug testing Erickson he is becoming completely erratic.

…again: there’s nothing we can do about that now. We go to war with the party we have.

(1) No one “Trashed” Rick Perry into quitting. Rick Perry would be the first one to admit that his debate performances cost him dearly in terms of performance at the polls. The conventional wisdom is that debates don’t influence elections. That simply is not true. Ever since the Kennedy/Nixon debates they have been powerful influences on voters. Debate performance brought Governor Perry low and Debate Performance saved Newt’s bacon.

(2) Neither Newt nor Mitt are “Unelectable”. But, as Erick so eloquently point out, that can be arranged and by attempting and, to some degree, succeeding at gutting one another in this knife fight of a primary campaign, they stand a good chance of doing exactly that.

That said, November is a long way off; an epoch in political terms. If a clear winner emerges before the Convention in Tampa then the obvious loser owes it to the party and to the nation to capitulate and then fall in behind the leader and drive the barbarians out of the gates of the city.

While I prefer Newt’s firebrand, bomb-throwing style to Mitt’s Eastern Liberal establishment go along to get along, EITHER of these men are vastly superior to the Commie-in-Chief that now occupies the White House.

Besides, if Newt is the nominee, there’s a pretty good chance that Rick Perry will be his running mate making him the obvious successor to Newt IF that comes to pass.

Perry was my pick all along. He has 10 times the political skills of Newt or Mitt. He needed to start studying about 6 months earlier.

Perry utterly misunderstood how his position on instate tuition for illegals was perceived by the VAST majority of the country. He sank his own campaign entirely on his own.

That single issue derailed his campaign. Sad really, because he could have fixed this so easily, but he failed to do so. I really wish he had gotten the message. I really wish that those of you who had access to his campaign had gotten the message. Instead you lecture those of us who could see this coming about the integrity of your guy.

Had Perry listened to the primary voters on this issue, neither Santorum nor Gingrich would still be in this race. He did not, and we are left with what we have. Don’t blame everyone else, Perry blew this entirely on his own, and I for one am very sorry he was so tone deaf.

Perry 2016————>

was a realitvely bloodless nomination win that allowed him to continue his “non-threatening” middle of the road, competent technocrat general election strategy from Iowa through November.

Of course, that is no longer an option and the once-gettable swing voters now largely view the Republicans as scary idealogues, high-jacked by the extremist tea party.

I am sorry sir but indeed the elders picked McCain because he was “more electable” and he ran the worst campaign in history. He ran against a one term NO NAME Senator from Illinois, had tons of ammunition he could have used, looked dated, did not excite the base and LOST! Sorry he indeed sir could have won. In fact, Obama was massively flawed. McCain stunk!

2012 with his record? Obama is totally vulnerable! As for Newt, yeah he has flaws but I am sorry he knows the Gravity of this Election and I think he has learned some valuable lessons. It is funny, his tax plan plays into what Obama’s Class Warfare? Sorry I totally disagree! See you fall for the MSM populism and fall into the trap to play it safe and stay with moderate, do not rock the boat, do not be bold and offer a CLEAR DISTINCTION with Obama! Wrong!

People like you could never been successful getting Reagan elected. You are so blinded by your fear. American Exceptionalism is exactly what the US needs. The similar feelings from 1980 is prevalent all over in the year 2012!

Obama tells us America is in decline (Carter), high unemployment (Carter), high energy and gas prices (Carter), misery index high, (Carter), Americans need to accept less (Carter), home ownership falling (Carter) and bigger government (Carter) and taxes going up (Carter).

The parallels are striking wake up! Obama is most often compared to whom?? Carter!! Mitt is a dud! Newt has tapped the sentiment that Reagan did back in the 80s….and I am sorry NO ONE thought he could win…An actor, not smart, clueless and not endorsed by the Establishment, which at the time backed G HW BUSH! Newt is not Reagan I agree but he has some very strong instincts and unique abilities.

Newt can indeed win…Obama already just handed him a MASSIVE line of attact….The Keystone Pipeline!! My goodness Obama vetoed a major job creator for UNIONS!! which could open that door for Newt….and reduced reliance on foreign resources of oil and energy….another beautiful door opened for Newt! not to mention all the capital investments!

Obama pandered to environmentalists…..which are far outnumbered by the people who would have benefited from jobs, capital, building and lower enegy costs!! Obama is weak!

Newt if he articulates Conservatism and does so well…He can indeed win!!

nt

I don’t think the establishment destroyed Perry as much as Perry destroyed Perry. Sadly, his “brain freeze” during the debate was lethal. I wish it weren’t so, but…

To bad, Gov Perry was the best! Your right, the people who should have united around him did not…..This is just bad politics, and arrogant manuvering.

the Presidency.

Perhaps we should focus on Sentate and congressional races??

moosepoop!

No way I’m giving up the ship yet – what are you the captain of the Concordia?

There are hundreds of thousands of voters out there – independents, moderate Dems, – people who know d@mn well that they are NOT as well off as they were 13-and-counting trillion dollars ago, and are smart enough to identify Obama’s ‘lingering Bush economy’ / ‘it’s too soon to see my results’ excuses as the BS that they are. No piece of Democrat ad campaign fantasy will be able to overcome fiscal reality.

Just as conservative voters are searching for anybody but Romney/Newt here, there will be plenty of desperate Americans searching for anybody but Obama to vote for in November. The 50/50 current poll results reflect a larger name recognition gap than has been taken into account, and chances are, a worse jobs/housing/energy/everyday inflation price environment than the one that prompted scores of voters to jump ship in 2008 will have the same effect in 2012.

The smartest and probably falsest meme being planted by Dems today is not one of polity, it the one that says Obama is infallible and terrorizes us into apathy. That apathy – NOT fielding the perfect Republican candidate (as if O. was ever the perfect candidate himself !) is the biggest danger we all face.

but I think you will be proven correct, clintonformccain. Erick summarized it correctly. Newt has no chance, and Romney will succeed in making it closer.

Believe me, I hope we are both wrong on this, but I suspect come November conservatives will look back and wonder what the heck we were thinking.

You live by the sword, you die by the sword. If Gingrich is fatally flawed because of his popularity ratings, what does that make Romney? They’re within the margin-of-error of being similarly unpopular, except that we’re on old ground with Gingrich and all-new terrain for Mittens. In other words, Mitt has more room to fall.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/2012-presidential-campaign/poll-romney-s-unfavorability-skyrockets-20120124?mrefid=election2012

… Gosh darn it, people just don’t like Newt Gingrich. In fact, he provokes visceral dislike. Now, some may think that is an admirable quality, but it’s really not a great thing in Presidential candidate.

I, for example, dislike him so much, that I have changed the channel or hit the mute button every time I’ve seen him on TV for nearly 20 years now. I literally can’t stand to hear his voice. He is a pompous windbag and makes no effort at all to conceal it.

Newt has a HIGH familiarity rating and his unfavorables are high (mid- to upper-50s).

People viscerally don’t like the guy. He’s arrogant and condescending and spiteful. I don’t like milquetoast (Romney), either, but I’d take milquetoast over petty, nasty, and hypocritical.

I don’t know if it’s possible, but I wish someone else would get in. I was hoping against hope for DeMint or Coburn. Heck, I wish ERICK would get in. He could unite the GOP and probably win it easily. Please, GOP. Give us a better choice — an ELECTABLE candidate. I’m scared (literally) of getting another four years of the empty-suit-in-chief.

which Romney or even Obama could claim they are fighting for. Issues do not equal candidates.

and about three hundred comments…we’re not an inch closer on agreeing on anything. I’m not even sure we’re in agreement on what we’re fighting for or against. It should be simple to define that much, shouldn’t it? I mean…can’t we all at least agree that we should fight to protect and preserve our nation, or to stand up against socialistic destruction of our economy, or something of significance. Too little clarity of thought with no sense of direction or purpose and way, WAY too much interjection of personalities involved in the election.

So where do we go from here, realistically? I hope you know, Erick, because I’m not sure any more. And I’m not all that certain any one else is either.

All it would have taken is a competent nominee, with a credible track record, who can offer hope for the economy, run a professional caliber campaign, and not scare people.

Don;’t confuse Republican primary voters in the most Republican state in the country with the demographics of the swing state voters who will decide this, and every other, Presidential election.

If we’re going down, let’s at least go down fighting.

Santorum is a social conservative and that is where his conservatism end. He screams establishment republican b/c of his record. He does not have the experience we need to run this country. I would vote for Romney over Santorum.

Kinda like Romney.

Santorum has zero chance of winning a national election, which is about the same chance he has at winning the Republican nomination. He’ll be forced to drop out after Florida, similar to the way Rick #1 was pressured out of South Carolina.

You obviously no nothing about either the Tea Party or Santorum.

The driving force behind the Tea Parties is smaller government. Santorum’s whole career has been about enlarging government. If you think he’s a conservative, you need a dictionary and a really good shampoo because your hair is brown and icky.

I would be a happy camper if Jindal jumped in (if it’s even possible at this point).

..notext..

so let’s remember it’s a primary. This happens fairly often- they beat and bloody each other to get the nomination. Then, someone is chosen with plenty of time to make the necessary case against Obama. It will happen, but we have to get through this first. Remember the ancient history that is 2008 and the nastiness in the GOP and Dem primaries. We political junkies get caught up in the process sometimes and fail to see the larger picture. One way of the other this is sorted by summer with a few months to take it to Obama and all that stuff- Boeing, Keyston XL, Solyndra, the A-10- comes out. There is a ton of it and it will get hit hard. But first things first.

and who was the best candidate for jobs? They blew it and now we are all going to suffer. Obama is just doesn’t care if America goes down the toilet. Yep, the best conservative job candidate and he was rejected cause he had some oops moments in debates and so who cares about jobs or the economy..lets just elect someone who is a good debater, Now we are finding out that Mittens isn”t a good debater himself and that Newt is a good debater but we need someone who isn’t going to blow up when he can;t contain his ego. I am so disgusted.

And look what we did to him. No wonder no conservatives don’t have the courage to come forward. We allow MSM, conservative pundits and FoxNews to tell us the most electable is unelectable.

Far beyond what we can do here.
Dr. Bob might be able to refer you…

nt

Every one that gets named has pretty much said no to running already. They didn’t want to then, and won’t likely change their minds. It’s like Kristol and his Mitch Daniel’s drumbeat. The man said no, his wife doesn’t want it, he won’t bother. Christie said no, Jindal has ruled it out. Can we draft Fred? He doesn’t stay busy enough selling reverse mortgages.

I have said the same thing about up thread. How come a few days back Erick was encouraging Perry to get out of the race and endorse Newt? That is what I would really like to know??? And now suddenly Erick doesn’t think Newt can beat Obama either.
What a mess.

Why are the House and Senate being tied to the Presidential nomination with Newt or Mitt any more than they would have been, say, if Bachmann was the nominee? Or Cain? What is so special about Mitt/Newt/Newt/Mitt that they have special coattails to change the outcomes in the individual House and Senate races?

So, whoever wins the Presidency brings on a bunch of down ticket people on his “coattails”.
I vote specifically for each office, by candidate. Many, many people just pull the party lever with no serious thought of the down ticket people they just voted for.

I’m usually more than happy to send a message. However, I don’t think the ends justify the means in this case. I fear we can’t survive four more years of the community organizer — and this rally around Newt makes Obama all but inevitable (IMO). Romney’s not great, either, but Newt is palpably loathed by a wide swath of the electorate. Besides that, he has a tendency to self-destruct.

He’s an ex-Senator of little accomplishment who rode the wave pandering to the so-cons in the 90s and then got demolished in his reelection bid. That’s the problem — the whole field is collection of lightweights and clown candidates. Good grief, only two of them even managed to get on the ballot in Virgiinia and one of them is crazy as a hoot owl. If you step back for a little perspective, it’s a train wreck.

The GOP only has one credible candidate who actually has a national campaign, a track record to run on, and so forth. But, the base can’t stand him. Nothing would surprise me. Heck, it wouldn’t surprise me to see Ron Paul get the nomination.

What’s your point?

You’re being very selective with your statistics.

Not only does one poll have Newt and Romney both within the margin of error (both polling 48 to Obama’s 50) but another poll ( I believe Rasmussen) has him and Romney at roughly the same favorability right now.

And why are citing polls from January 14th – before Newt’s second surge?

His numbers have changed pretty dramatically since then.

as to the comparison to Sarah Palin — while in many ways that’s a compliment to Newt – he doesn’t have the same areas of vulnerability. Palin came onto the scene as a virtual unknown (at the national level) she took a couple of interviews with journalists determined to bring them down and the media was able to paint her as not very well informed and generally not ready.

That is not a charge that’s going to stand against Newt. and – unlike Sarah Palin when she came onto the scene – Newt has a very long record in national politics – that’s a plus and a minus but it does mean the media won’t be able to define him for most people.

Are you a Romney shill or an Obama shill?

“forget our record– just look *how* bad a Republican administration would be for the middle class.”

“forget our record– just look *how* bad a Republican administration would be for the middle class.”

Why is it too late since voters are only now realizing they’ve been had, for one or both be able to unsuspend his campaign?

Legally speaking, the logistics of someone new would be difficult. Besides the horrendous perception of a party in national chaos when candidate are already limping out of South Carolina, they’ll limp through Florida, there would be a three way race killing each other and killing the party’s chances.

the conventional wisdom is there isn’t time for the vetting process with someone new.
Soooooooo what about Perry? He’s been thoroughly vetted.Three times if you don’t count this last time.
He has a team already, he knows what they did wrong before, he knows what to expect now in the national waters and his backers would probably give to his campaign again(knowing what they know now, with the current crop).
What about the saying “What’s old is new again”. It could work here.
Perry would’ve been obama and his team’s biggest headache. He thinks they have won by eliminating him. Let’s prove him wrong and somehow get Perry back in.Just think how horrified they would be. After all the horror he has made us live through it be so nice to return the sentiment.
I can dream can’t I?

candidates are in their 2nd or 3rd year of service in the governorships or congress. The “R” bench is strong but the current starting lineup really sucks.

is because they likely have issues they don’t want the national spotlight on. The vetting that goes on at the state level is nothing at all like what happens in a Presidential election.

Exactly correct.

In 2008, the GOP was on it’s knees, directionless, and on life support. The Base of the Republican Party became energized to bring change to the GOP and take a principled stand against big government, coney capitalism, and the reckless spending of both the Bush and Obama administrations.

Establishment Republicans now want to return to business as usual, with the only difference being that the old machine will be run by “reliable” Republicans. That has been their intention from the start. This primary will show if they can achieve their ends with money and media connections.

We cannot afford four more years of Obama, no matter how much we need to teach the GOP establishment a lesson. As bad as an establishment candidate is, at least we have a chance with them. We have absolutely no chance with Obama – none, nadda, zero, zip, a big fat goose egg.

It is a better strategy to balance an establishment candidate with a conservative controlled House and Senate.

They were just appealing to different demographics — Obama to upscale voters and minorities, Clinton to blue collar and women. There wasn’t a lot of policy difference in their stated platforms or between their target audiences.

Newt and Mitt are incredibly different on ideology. Mitt believes that the prez is a ‘nice guy’ who is over his head and needs to step down. Newt says he’s a dangerous socialist who must be conquered. Those aren’t anywhere in the same ballpark.

If they were closer together on approach/ideology, I’d agree with you — they would rile up the base and then the winner could unify the pre-energized coalition. Here, we’re just getting more and more fractured.

Some more concrete data: Hillary and Obama maintained their favorability ratings through the spring/summer of 2008. Newt and Mitt are both driving the other’s favorability way, way down.

The Perry thing played itself out months ago. Let it go. The gaffes were not only destructive to his credibility within the minds of Republican voters (He went from 32% to under 10% in two months) but Independents wouldn’t have liked him either.

You can’t say unusual things like, “We ought to put troops back in Iraq,” and expect that swing voters will flock to your campaign.

but I just get disgusted when I hear him say that FDR was the greatest President of the 20th century or his fawning over Woodrow Wilson and Teddy Roosevelt. He seems to gather some of his inspiration from the early progressives and it just bothers me.

At least Newt will put up a fight. After 4 years of GWB hiding under his desk and Mclame refusing to criticize Obama, republicans are just looking for a fighter.

What about winning 2012? Or is that just for Romney supporters?