You are making it impossible for me to NOT reconsider voting for you in the republican primary. Initially, my opinion was that there was no chance that you win the Republican primary. But lately you appear to be the only one that I have confidence in and dadgummit, I now have to reconsider voting for you. Your performance in the debate last night in Michigan was magnificent! When you put that liberal woman moderator Maria Bartiromo in her place, I jumped off of my couch just like I did when my favorite college football team (Florida Gators) won their national championships. I’m still giddy about it.
That being said, I have to get by a few dumb things you have done over the years. Number one, that stupid commercial with Nancy Pelosi regarding Global Warming. You have answered that for me. Luckily I had the opportunity to meet you in Las Vegas and asked you, “What the hell where you thinking?” You very humbly answered; I wasn’t and further stated that it was one of the biggest mistakes I have made. I accept that and appreciate your honesty.
Second, I had some concern about your stance on the Second Amendment. Once again, I was able to ask you your position on the Second Amendment; you stated “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. PERIOD.” Then you said again and emphasized “AND SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. Nothing to debate there.” Another concern answered. That fully supports my position too.
Three, your position on the healthcare mandate. You said you have decided upon further review that a mandate on healthcare is not a good idea and Obamacare should definitely be repealed. Once again, I am satisfied with that answer.
Four, how you answer the questions that will be raised about your ex-wife will be interesting to me but not a deal killer, as I have two ex-wives myself. I myself have matured and grown enormously since that time as I’m sure you have. You say that you have reconciled with God and I accept that. Nobody is perfect and I won’t hold that against you.
When the Republican Primary process started, I watched and waited to see which candidate would stand out and this is my observation so far.
Let’s start with Mitt Romney. To me he is just a slightly better than Obama. Way too liberal for me. With Mitt, the car is still going to go over the cliff, just not as fast as it will with Obama. He is just as bad as or worse than McCain. So, I only vote for him if he is the last man standing and is the Republican nominee.
When Rick Perry announced, I was really excited and jumped on his train. Unfortunately, he astonishingly fell off of his own train going 100 MPH. Not saying I can’t get behind him again, but a lot of things will have to come together.
Herman Cain. I like him a lot but there is the one “9″ in his 999 plan that keeps me from supporting him. The national sales tax is a deal killer for me.
Michelle Bachman. I really like her a lot. There is almost nothing that she says that I disagree with. I can’t understand why her poll numbers are so low. She is a really good conservative.
Rick Santorum, same as Michelle Bachman. The only difference is, he seems upset that the voters are not taking him more seriously and that may turn some people off. But he also is a really good conservative.
Ron Paul. I agree with about 90% of his positions. I am just not quite the isolationist he is. I would definitely support him if he were the nominee.
Jon Huntsman. He worked for Obama and said Obama is a “Remarkable Leader”. Anybody that even remotely thinks that, gets NO consideration from me.
So, what am I to do? Right now I would say Newt is in the lead for me. What say You?
Jim Marchant
Read more at http://www.RightFace.us/
Moe Lane
PG DeFreese
Victoria Coates
Daniel Horowitz
Dan Spencer
Nice to see someone with some sense
brentjohnson (Diary) Friday, November 11th at 2:25PM EST (link)And I’m not referring to your willingness to take a second look at Gingrich.
It’s refreshing to see someone in the “not Romney crowd” that doesn’t tear down every candidate that isn’t their top pick. The “perfect” candidate doesn’t exist, but there are several good candidates in the race.
I’ve been taking a second look at Newt as well, but I’d like to see how he handles the added scrutiny of being in the lead if he gets there (which seems highly likely with his recent momentum). He’s been getting a few tough questions on the political talk show circuit and seems to be handling it well so far.
Newt Gingrich is someone I can easily support...
APA Guy (Diary) Friday, November 11th at 3:26PM EST (link)Of all the candidates – Romney included – Newt is the one who can tear Obama to shreds on the debate dais and in the general.
I have been a Perry supporter, but I am coming to the realization that he may not be ready for this stage. If he continues to falter, Gingrich will be my choice…and apparently I am not alone:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/11/11/gingrich-moves-into-top-tier-gop-candidates-polls-show/
Gingrich now joins top-tier candidates in new McClatchy-Marist and CBS national polls…
Either is fine with me.
snowshooze (Diary) Friday, November 11th at 3:41PM EST (link)Perry has great ideas on tax reform and immigration..
Well, he has ther ONLY idea on immigration.
I look through debate performance for substance, and Obama has none. I don’t think that Obama will do well no matter how articulate he comes off.
But… my old Uncle always says ” People are stupid ”
So, I may be in the minority. I can tell that is true by just looking at the polls… my opinion of Obama Job Performance and my approval rating have never budged. But they yoyo all over in the polls.
I can agree with most of
volunteerstate (Diary) Sunday, November 13th at 7:15AM EST (link)your sentiments. However, Newt is not so conservative as he sometimes seems. His voting record is more moderate than one would expect. Also, that Marxist RINO he supported in upstate New York when we had a viable conservative running for congress is very troubling to me.
And I hate Gators. grin. Carry on……….
Newt would be
Wayne (Diary) Sunday, November 13th at 9:46AM EST (link)A good V.P. for Perry!
Wayne
“To take from one because it is thought that his own industry and that of his father’s has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers, have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association—the guarantee to every one of a free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it.” – Thomas Jefferson -
Newt is starting to annoy me.
explodinghead (Diary) Sunday, November 13th at 12:16PM EST (link)Initially, I thought it was great that Newt actually took on the moderators in the first debate, but now I am getting annoyed with the recycling of this tactic. I know Scott Pelley was enormously aggravating last night, but I think Newt has now developed a tactic of deliberately looking for someone on the moderating panel to attack, so he doesn’t have to attack anyones policies on stage. I believed he has been playing if safe from the start as he probably thought he could get a VP spot by playing nice.
I was sitting waiting for the inevitable attack to be served up to gain points with the audience, but I don’t think continuing this pattern will help in the long run with the independent voters. It’s starting to make him less likeable to me, especially when he gets flares of real anger mixed in with the retorts to the moderators. It reminds me of the old ,arrogant Newt.
I have other problems with Newts record, and I still think he believes government can have the answers, especially on global warming, and draft-boards for immigration. I used to enjoy listening to his responses in debates and when he focused on attacking Obama, but I wish he would stop the distractions with the war on moderators. Newt knew what he was getting into when he agreed to do the debates. Stop with the whining about the mods, it’s getting old.
I know many people will disagree with me and love the attacks, but I try to think if I am starting to find Newt aggravating, maybe a lot of middle-of-the-road folks will find him unlikeable, especially in the general. He needs to stick to his core competence, with good informative replies and less of the angry flashes that these mods bring out.
See, that's our problem...
haumea (Diary) Monday, November 14th at 5:23AM EST (link)Inability to think outside the box.
The biggest enemy isn’t Barack Obama.
It’s the leftist, Gramscian narrative.
Newt is the only one with both the intellectual capacity and willingness to challenge it. One guy!
And what do people here do? Poop their pants that he will offend someone.
It’s leaving the narrative unchallenged that has led America to the brink.
And you guys still haven’t gotten it.
Still doing paint-by-numbers.
Sigh.
Too bad Newt is also a big government elitist...
nathanalbright (Diary) Monday, November 14th at 5:32AM EST (link)…at least that is one of his hats. And that puts him too in the whole Gramscian narrative as well. Where does that leave you? Doing paint-by-numbers on how to talk conservative but act like a big government supporter when you get sent to Washington? Too often Republican politics is like the right-wing version of “The Sign In Sidney Brustein’s Window.”
Not so fast
jout99 (Diary) Monday, November 14th at 11:05PM EST (link)Newt has been out of the Washington circle for some time. He has had a lot of time to reflect, mature, and develop into a conservative. Or a lot closer than he was back in the 90′s.
Yes he made some blunders way back then. But read what he says today (check out his websites, lots of info there). Big difference.
Besides I’m looking forward to him tearing the boy king apart.
Some of Newts ideas
1bunny Monday, November 14th at 11:16PM EST (link)So what are some of the ideas Newt Gingrich has promoted? Are they even conservative ideas?
* He promoted the return of the Fairness Doctrine.
* He was for a federal individual health-care mandate, the lynchpin of ObamaCare.
* He supports green energy projects [Solyndras] and farm-subsidies.
* Even as late as this year he was pitching for more government intervention in the health-care system at the progressive Brookings Institution.
I don’t find these ideas conservative, not sure he will last through the vetting with the proliferation of ideas he has had over the years. One thing Newt does not lack is ideas unfortunately a lot of them are not in line with conservative ideals. Newt is a great debater, Herman Cain is a great speaker but neither one is a true conservative.
Any other loaded words you wanna throw out there?
conservativeparrothead Tuesday, November 15th at 11:03AM EST (link)You got Fairness Doctrine, Obama Care and Solyndra…
Be honest about the Fairness Doctrine Return, that was 1987, by not putting the year there, you try to throw a loaded word around. When this argument was up in the late Bush early Obama years, he was firmly against it calling it “Affirmative Action for Liberals”. I dont need to put the entire interview up with H&C. Which in 1987, many conservatives were voting for the Fairness Doctrine to be returned, so was Al Gore in 1987 so that obviously wasnt a deal killer for Rick Perry as that is who he was supporting at that time.
Farm Subsidies? You mean the ones that Rick Perry not only supported but PERSONALLY received? Those kind?
Rick Perry supported the DREAM ACT… Conservative???
Unless you are supporting...
conservativeparrothead Tuesday, November 15th at 11:11AM EST (link)Bachman or Paul, everyone else in the race at some point or another can have a point of view, vote, candidate, personal action, etc viewed as not being a conservative.
Whether its as a Governor like Perry, Huntsman or Romney, Senator and Representative from a democratic state like Pennsylvania in Santorum or someone with over 7000 votes in the house like Newt…its easy to cherry pick and say this person isnt a Conservative.
Governor who raises taxes to balance the budget, Governor who signs pro-abortion bill into law, divorced, head of a union, one time supporter of one of the most liberal Presidents in American History….is this person a Conservative? Its Ronald Reagan…
Agree.
themamabear (Diary) Sunday, November 13th at 1:06PM EST (link)I pretty much share your thought process. I was surprised that Newt didn’t drop out of the race when he lost some key personnel from his campaign and I really thought that was the end. Since then, he has impressed me and I have come to believe that he is the one we need for these dangerous times.
The one reservation that I have with him is that while he is conservative in his identification of issues, sometimes his solutions are more “big government” than I would like. My thought is that he can be pressured by the base to go with the small government solution if that situation arises. I don’t see this as something that would happen every week.
This is in comparison to Romney, who I think would constantly be under pressure by the base, and the base would find itself picking and choosing battles to fight with Romney. Romney would also be under pressure from the left to appear “balanced” or “moderate”, and he would cave to that pressure. I really don’t see Newt looking for approval from the left.
Those are my thoughts. I think the next two weeks are going to be very interesting because now that he is rising in the polls, the media scrutiny on him should start to increase (since I believe that the media wants Romney to be the nominee). I think that if Newt handles himself properly, especially where his personal life is concerned, the base will consolidate around him as the anti-Romney nominee. Then it will become a two-man race.
Good luck, Newt!
To put it, bluntly...
haumea (Diary) Monday, November 14th at 5:31AM EST (link)Newt sees the left in our institutions as an enemy, and says so, calls them out.
Mitt – I don’t know if he does or not, and he certainly does not call them out.
Newt is ready to lead the war if we back him up.
But for that to happen we must understand the times we live in, and throw of the mental shackles of conventional political thinking.
voting?
mort Sunday, November 13th at 4:16PM EST (link)You are reconsidering whether to vote for Newt?
Will you be a delegate to the convention, where the votes count?
Yes on Reconsidering and No on being a Delegate.
jcm9079 (Diary) Tuesday, November 15th at 12:14AM EST (link)My point was to convey that I was amazed at myself for reconsidering voting for Newt in the Republican primary. As I mentioned, he did a lot of things I didn’t like. (See this diary I posted in 2009 http://www.redstate.com/jcm9079/2009/06/10/letter-i-wrote-to-newt-gingrich-after-his-face-the-nation-appearance/ ) I had written him off. Not even a consideration. But after his debate performances and my conversation with him in Las Vegas, I am most likely going to vote for him in the Republican Primary. I had the opportunity to speak to him for a considerable amount of time which I appreciated because there were a lot of other people there that wanted to speak to him too. He gave me all the time I wanted. He didn’t have to do that. He could have done what I expected, be real brief and act like he just wanted to be somewhat cordial and move on. I believed what he told me. He looked me right in the eyes when he was speaking with me. I spent even more time talking to his wife Callista and his daughter Kathy. Both were extremely personable and very nice. In addition, his interview with Sean Hannity tonight (11-14-11) further reinforced my feelings.
Perry is the only other candidate that has a chance of changing my mind.
I am a staunch Reagan Conservative. Even though I am registered Republican, I don’t even consider myself a Republican because the establishment RINO wing of the Republican Party dominate and I don’t like them
As far as being a delegate, I don’t even know how to do that. So, I’m sure I won’t be a delegate. But, I would gladly do it if given the opportunity.
how we nominate a presidential candidate
mort Tuesday, November 15th at 5:24AM EST (link)Here in Pennsylvania, by petition, (same process you would use for township auditor or party committee person) you get your name on the ballot for delegate to the national convention in the primary. Once you are a delegate, you are free to vote for whomever you wish at the convention, regardless of the popular vote in the state. So you see, your vote for delegate is far more important than your vote for president. It becomes incumbent, as a voter, to find out which candidates for delegate are supporting the presidential candidate of your liking.
This is only true for the Republican Party – Dems have a different set-up. I am trying to find out how other states do it. I heard IOWA delegates are bound by the vote of their caucus next June. Even in that scenario, Iowan’s vote for president in the primary means little.
The system has merit. Don’t you want your delegate to have the ability to choose after hearing the debate at the convention and discussing platform and policy with his/her fellow delegates? And certainly, you would not want your delegate casting a vote for a candidate that has dropped out or made some terrible blunder since garnering a majority vote in your state’s primary which could have been eight months before the convention.
Newt has a talent for saying what I am thinking..
iidvbii Monday, November 14th at 4:10AM EST (link)But then that’s what makes a successful politician. I honestly love Newt and the thought of Obama trying to come up with a credible reason for pulling out of the last six Lincoln Douglas debates after having the floor shined with his butt in the first is priceless.
” Can’t you just see CBS trying to straight face a never ending cold for Obama??” What a glorious day….
Unfortunately this race isn’t about beating obama. Let me say that again because so many here and else where have lost their way with their hatred of Obama that they are missing the bigger picture. THIS RACE ISN’T ABOUT BEATING OBAMA. This election is about restoring sanity, belief in American ideas and preserving our way of life and liberties for the next generation. Forgetting this truth leads to Romney and believe me folks he is counting on it. How else do you explain a unified media proclaiming Romney our nominee? Think about that for just a second. Hannity and Rachel Madow finally agree on something and what is it that they agree on? Romney is the only republican that stands a chance. Be vigilant, remember what is at stake.
So now we have Newt…. Right on Cue the flavor of the minute. Like Cain and Bauchman we will all fall all over ourselves with his strengths. A couple of weeks from now we will be well informed again I might add why Newt stepped down as speaker. We will be horrified with some of the things he has been up to since and we will have fractured ourselves even further as the most stubborn of us refuse to face facts ( I am talking to you Cain and Paul supporters here) and get off a sinking ship. Mean while Iowa has come and gone and a fractured conservative field will have given Romney a victory. Simply because the numbers split between Cain, Perry and now Newt will make his paltry 20% look huge and we will be one step closer to Obama debating the one guy without a chance in hell of beating him taking the stage on our behalf. I mean really what can Romney attack the guy on? Healthcare, government over reach, cap and trade or perhaps flip flopping positions? I guess they will argue away the election on 36% versus 40% top income rates… Really John Mccain again?
Here’s an idea…. It’s completely stupid but here me out. Why don’t we forego the flavor of the week routine, spare ourselves the pain. Trust me do some research and its there. Think the “mama grissleys” are down on Cain? You just wait until Newt’s laundry starts airing and as an added benefit his background of big government solutions for everything from climate change to healthcare comes out. Really let’s agree that we don’t want Romney and spare ourselves the pain and humiliation of an Obama second term. You think the little prick is arrogance now, just wait.
Let’s do the stupid ridiculous thing and run an actual conservative. Let’s run someone with an actual record of economic success. Let’s pretend this election is about the economy and that we conservatives have someone on our bench that has more than just ideas. But has a record to back it up. What do you say? Let’s run someone who can actually provide a contrast to the failed big government policies coming out of Washington.
Balanced Budget (every year in Texas)- Rick Perry
#1 in job creation (Texas) – Rick Perry
#1 State for business relocation (Texas)- Rick Perry
Year over Year median income growth during the recession (Texas)- Rick Perry
25% of the top high schools in the country (Texas)- Rick Perry
Fastest growing city in the country (Frisco Texas)- Rick Perry
Voter ID Law passed (Texas)- Rick Perry
Sanctuary Cities Outlawed (Texas)- Rick Perry
Loser Pays Tort Reform Passed (Texas)- Rick Perry
Medical Malpractice Tort Reform Passed (Texas)- Rick Perry
Stable Housing Market (People aren’t losing the value in their homes,Texas)- Rick Perry
I could easily continue but do I need to? It’s great to have ideas I mean Hannah Barbara drew the flying car in the jetsons how many years ago? It’s another thing to actually put those ideas into action. I love Newt regardless of his past. But folks this is a seriously moment. He have tried the amateur with Obama, its time to put a serious man in office. A real president with real accomplishments. Someone who has taking the time to earn the chance. It’s time to quit the marketing slogans, sleazy sales pitches and dream chasing. It’s time to elect Rick Perry.
I am David Brown and I approving this message
In the final analysis will our children praise or curse our actions this day?
LOL ... approving this message...
iidvbii Monday, November 14th at 4:22AM EST (link)Don’t ya just hate it when that happens???
In the final analysis will our children praise or curse our actions this day?
I'll second that, iidvbii. What a wonderful idea
pttx333 (Diary) Monday, November 14th at 4:31AM EST (link)you have thrown out there, just willy-nilly. Rick Perry? Hmmm, that’s a different take on the matter. Considering that for a moment … ok … can I ask a question? Did you say Rick Perry? Darnitall, having a senior moment and both hearing aids are going, have out-lived my eyeglasses, oxygen tank is low, walker is way across the room, so wait a minute …
Okay, that might work. I’ll study on it for a spell ……….
Who here at RS disagrees w/ Perry's record?
Common_Cents (Diary) Monday, November 14th at 1:05PM EST (link)Nobody.
Can Perry get this across to the rest of America that doesnt live in TX or read RS, where most everyone’s only impression is through headlines, media sound bites, and debates?
He’s got to be able to sell his better mouse trap because the world will not beat a path to his door.
Obama=Golfer in Chief, Leading from,
behind, the Back Nine.Leaders don’t create movements. Movements create leaders. Get involved. Your future depends on it.
Govt “invests” YOUR tax money for POLITICAL return rather than economic return.
Very True......
iidvbii Monday, November 14th at 1:57PM EST (link)He needs to get his but in gear, quit swinging at the low pitches and get his message out. You are right about that.
In the final analysis will our children praise or curse our actions this day?
It IS about beating Obama
lineholder (Diary) Monday, November 14th at 2:10PM EST (link)The best hope we have of preserving our nation’s future and our way of life here in this country to make sure that a Republican is elected President in 2012 and backing that up with as many Conservatives in Congress as we can get. Period.
If you want to be a purist about it, that’s up to you. But don’t expect it of the rest of us to throw any chance we might have of protecting and preserving what we can of this nation by doing the same.
Small minds say little things lineholder...
iidvbii Monday, November 14th at 3:50PM EST (link)While it is true we cannot right our country without defeating leftists in this case embodied in the persona of Obama. It is not true that defeating Obama automatically rights our country. To do that we need a conservative.
Simply changing the letter behind our statist in chiefs name from D to R won’t do it.
We need to stop the nanny state.
Stop the out of control regulations.
Stop the government choosing economic winners and losers.
Stop the influence creep of government into our daily lives.
Just voting Obama out doesn’t do this. Especially if we replace him with a big government, big spending liberal whose record and messaging so similar to Obama and the left he has to deny its his record and his messaging.
Really get a clue…..
In the final analysis will our children praise or curse our actions this day?
Very funny, iidvbii
lineholder (Diary) Monday, November 14th at 10:50PM EST (link)You can call me clueless all you want to.
I’ve got no qualms with the goals you’ve stated. I wholeheartedly agree with you that these are things we should be striving to accomplish and achieve. (And BTW, there’s a genuine reason as to why I have the moniker that I do have.)
I’m a realist through and through. Republicans only account for approximately 33% of registered voters, and Conservatives account for portion of that 33%. The number of voters who self-identify as Conservatives isn’t that much greater than the number of voters who self-identify as Liberals. Leaving roughly 50-60% of American voters in the middle of the political spectrum.
Our side needs to draw in as many of the 50-60% as we can in order to win against Obama. That’s reality, isn’t it? It’s possible that the most Conservative of all candidates could find a way to engage with that 50-60% and I’m not discrediting that possibility. We’ll just have to see how things go on that matter.
But neither am I willing to throw prudence and common sense to the wind and take a purist stand in trying to dictate that ONLY ONE Republican candidate is eligible to gain our side a win, because it just flat out isn’t true. What’s more, it would be foolish beyond all belief to consider doing so. There’s too much at stake.
If we can succeed in getting a Republican elected, and back it up with as many Conservatives in Congress as we can get, so that we have a strong Legislative influence directly involved in policy development, at this point, I’ll be extremely grateful for even that much. It means we still have a solid chance to turn things around.
I don’t deal in fairy tales. I deal in reality. Head on, staring it dead in the face, watching it closely to see how the situation unfolds.
Just to make it plain, though, I’d rather not have Romney. I don’t trust him.
Like I said, if you want to be a purist about this, that’s up to you. Just don’t expect other people to do the same.
Let me start by retracting my "small mind" comment.
iidvbii Tuesday, November 15th at 1:44AM EST (link)I made a snap judgement of you from your initial response. I WAS WRONG AND I AM SORRY. Not yelling just want to make sure those skimming see it. Obviously from your response above you are not only an intelligent being, but a well reasoned one also. However your wrong in two ways both of which I will detail.
First, as I understand your assertion Americans are more centrist and therefore we should choose a more widely acceptable candidate. I will point you to the 1980, 1992, 1996, 2000,2004 and 2008 elections. What do they all have in common? They were won by non centrist candidates. Reagan, Clinton, Bush and Obama made bold proclamations about there visions. The other thing all these races have in common is the opposition followed your synopsis above concluded the independents wanted someone like them and lost. Consider Kerry in 2004 or Clinton (Hillary of course) in 2008. Both ran as centrist , someone who could reach across the aisle both lost. Do I really need to mention Mccain here. The take away? Americans are passionate and they respond to bold passionate leaders. Your theory is great on paper. It’s wonderfully intelligent its the implementation in the real world that kills it. It’s like dumping a trillion dollars of tax money into government sponsored programs. On paper it looks great, people will goto work building bridges and highways. They will intern buy food and cloths and cars and televisions and the economy will boom. Like Obama’s PHD economists learned, just because it looks great on paper doesn’t mean it translates to real world success as well.
Second, look at the calendar. It’s not November 2012 its November 2011. Not a vote has been cast and already people are discussing settling. Pish posh. As the sun rises today its not a white flag day. It’s a black flag day, no quarter no mercy. This is a red dawn a sword dawn. We have not yet begun to fight and already you are speaking in terms of surrender? Perhaps its my “victory or death” Texas heritage talking but I for one will not surrender the battlefield unfought sir. You can count on that.
I believe Americans want bold leadership cast in bright colors and I intend they should have it. Now no more talk of surrender, take heart and fight as though your children hang in the balance because they do.
In the final analysis will our children praise or curse our actions this day?
Couple of disagreements here...
conservativeparrothead Tuesday, November 15th at 10:45AM EST (link)First with W.
George W Bush tried to run as a centrist who could work with Democrats, he touted his work with Bob Bullock (Dem. Lt Governor of Texas) as proof that he could go to Washington and get things done. He used the phrase Compassionate Conservatism I think in a way to not “scare off” Independents. Think about the themes and campaign promises of that election from W: tax cuts, eduation reform, working in Washington to get things done, no nation building, faith based initiatives, tort reform and prescription drug benefits for seniors. In 2000, a majority of Americans didnt support him as he lost the popular vote.
Clinton – 57% of Americans showed up and voted for someone else without Ross Perot, not sure he wins in 1992.
To me, and weve talked about this in another post, this gets back to the ability to sell conservatism to those people who swing elections, finding issues that resignate with them and selling the conservative viewpoint on those issues. But the sale is the key, which is why Im just not confident in Perry in a Presidential election. His record is a wonderful record for a Governor and with a record like that you would likely be elected over and over and over again. But on a national level, I believe that its too easy to discredit and pick apart to the independent voters, get him on his heels, where he needs to not only articulate the defense of his record but also conservatism, those are tasks on the national level to the suburbs of the rust belt I just dont believe he has the skillset to pull that off.
Ahhh Parrothead you make me sad....
iidvbii Tuesday, November 15th at 4:19PM EST (link)First your “points” above both relate to races with third party candidates. Perot in 1992 and Buchanan in 2000. This makes it impossible to determine what “might have been” without this influence in the conversation.
Perot took a swath of moderate democrats and republicans from the field with his economic and reform message. It is common for republicans to trot out the if not for Perot Clinton wouldn’t have been elected excuse. I personally don’t believe this for a second. HW was a centrist and that is uninspiring. He couldn’t rally his base or energize the non committed. Clinton did both, while neither of us can empirically prove our cases I believe Clinton still wins without Perot for the very reasons I detailed previously.
In 2000 buchanan not only took core rightwing support from W but also scared the crap out of the independents. Further I completely disagree with your contention that W ran as a centrist. Al Gore ran as the status quo candidate, W ran on a platform of economics, social reform and conservative ideas. His compassionate conservative message was tailored to seperate himself from the wild eyed rantings of Buchanan. Again, without Buchanan’s influence W wins.
I am certain you are shaking your head in disagreement right now and we can certainly debate this forever. Each locked eternally in our positions. But don’t let this diminish the weight of my message. Like Christ American voters spew the luke warm from their mouths.
In regards to Perry’s ability to run nationally, this man has WON eight straight in the second most populist state in the union. Are you somehow convinced we don’t have libtards in Texas? Please, our make up demographically is not much different from the rest of the country. We have large black and Hispanics populations , of course I don’t need to remind you of how these folks vote. Perry won his last election in a walk with huge margins. He faced our most popular senator in the primary and then wiped the floor with a successful businessmen and mayor of our largest city in the general.
Perry is up to the task. Take heart.
In the final analysis will our children praise or curse our actions this day?
I disagree in 1992
conservativeparrothead Tuesday, November 15th at 5:36PM EST (link)While HW was definetly a “centrist”, I think that primary season and the convention was really the emergence of the social conservative movement as a voice, it was a “theme” of that campaign, and I think that turned off a lot of fiscal conservative/social moderate (libertarian) voters, which made up the majority of the Perot vote. Matter of fact, one of the things Gingich has mentioned through the years in the Contract with America voters, is that they targeted the Perot voter back to the Republican party, you see no mention of social issues in the CWA.
Go back and watch the debates and the case W was making, he mentioned working with democrats a lot in Texas, he took on normal Democratic causes like education.
Dont forget Nader in 2000, if you combine Gore and Nader vs Bush and Buchanan the margin gets wider as Nader won 2 Million more votes than Pat Buchanan.
Parrothead is that cough syrup I smell on your breath?
iidvbii Tuesday, November 15th at 10:02PM EST (link)Were to start here?
I don’t think any honest person would state that the conservative movement began at the 1992 GOP convention. Most rational people would direct you to Barry Goldwater and yes Ronald Wilson Reagan. I reject this claim of yours outright, put down the bottle it is supposed to be used as medicine not a Tuesday night good time.
HW tried to cloak himself in this movement thus the “theme” for the convention. However his betrayal on key issues not the least of which was tax increases prevented even the simplest minds from excepting this gambit. Think Romney here.
You go on to extend our debate to include social issues presumably to add validity to your Newt reference. Perot didn’t run a social issues platform as you should be aware. He ran on reform and economics a cross platform message. As such he pulled support from across the aisle, as most analyst attest undecided voters vote against incumbents most often. It is relatively easy to see that these voters where at best undecided upon Perot’s entry and by historical trend break against the incumbents anyway. Bingo bango Clinton wins …..
Next you postulate Nader supporters as a 100% gain for Al Gore. Again this is an assumption I reject. Nader had not gone full throated loon in 2000 and ran a reform, anti-establishment, small government and anti-political corruption campaign. As Al Gore represented the “establishment” and “status quo” its kind of a stretch to automatically add his voters to Al Gores numbers.
It is also important to note that W used his working relationship with prominent democrats as a prop to demonstrate he could get his ideas turned into policy. It wasn’t the focus of his campaign as it was for John Mccain. Bush also had an assault from his right with Buchanan. While its not accurate to roll Naders numbers wholesaler into Gores as previously stated the same cannot be said for Bush in this case. Buchanan ran far to W’s right and therefore those voters can be safely assumed for W.
Look this isn’t the point of my original post, nor my follow up with Lineholder. If you wish to continue this debate please find someone else to participate. I truly have nothing else to add to the 1992 versus 2000 discussion. Definitely not trying to be rude here just not a subject I care enough about to continue with.
Further even if I conceded this point. WHICH I DO NOT.. I can still point to Mondale, Dole, Kerry, Hillary and Mccain as examples of my statement Americans do not elect centrist presidents when given an alternative. See Reagan,Clinton,W and yes Obama.
In the final analysis will our children praise or curse our actions this day?
Fine no debate...
conservativeparrothead Wednesday, November 16th at 9:44PM EST (link)But just read my post again, I said “Social Conservative Movement”, not Conservative Movement, Im well aware of Reagan and Goldwater thank you. In 1992, and maybe it was just my perception, but it seemed like the Ralph Ried’s and Moral Majorities of the world were very much out front in the shaping of that platform.
Yes you did....
iidvbii Wednesday, November 16th at 10:30PM EST (link)I did miss that, or it just didn’t register. Sorry, seems every time I use a snarky pun lately I have ended having to apologize. Perhaps I should stop using them.
Clears up the puzzle of the Newt reference for me too.
In the final analysis will our children praise or curse our actions this day?
No worries
conservativeparrothead Thursday, November 17th at 10:51AM EST (link)You got two of the three..conservative movement…you just forgot the third word…but dont worry you are in good company with that kind of mistake.
Scott Pelley...
jbritterjr Monday, November 14th at 12:51PM EST (link)…is still trying to find his spleen, liver, and digestive system, after Newt eviscerated his pitiful, liberal, journalistic soul Saturday night.
and he came back for more
Common_Cents (Diary) Monday, November 14th at 2:21PM EST (link)I guess he is into being punished.
Obama=Golfer in Chief, Leading from,
behind, the Back Nine.Leaders don’t create movements. Movements create leaders. Get involved. Your future depends on it.
Govt “invests” YOUR tax money for POLITICAL return rather than economic return.
I just saw the CNN article with their new poll
themamabear (Diary) Monday, November 14th at 2:23PM EST (link)showing that Newt is tied with Romney. The comments under the article were so jolting because I don’t usually read liberal websites. Boy there are a lot of people out there who hate conservatives! Of course I know this, but when you read their individual comments it’s a bit depressing – and sickening because their “reasoning” is so off. I guess they would have the same reaction to this blog.
Newts money...
conservativeparrothead Tuesday, November 15th at 5:37PM EST (link)The fundraising is picking up too…
His campaign raised 1.4 Million last week and set up a Super PAC.
Newt and Fannie Mae: the attacks begin
explodinghead (Diary) Monday, November 14th at 9:12PM EST (link)I for one would like to know how much of this story is true? If newt gets linked to taking money from fannie Mae in the general he could end up looking pretty bad. From Politico :
“Newt Gingrich’s campaign answers more explicitly the question of whether the former House Speaker lobbied on behalf of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac – something he insisted he never did during the GOP debate in Michigan:
“The Gingrich Group was hired to offer strategic advice to Freddie Mac on a number of issues,” the statement says.
During numerous meetings between the Speaker and Freddie Mac, the statement also notes, “Gingrich advised that a business model that involved lending money to people with bad credit and no money down was unsustainable and a bubble, and that it was dangerous to buy securities made up of these mortgages.”
But in 2008, the Associated Press reported Freddie Mac paid $11.7M to 52 outside lobbyists and consultants in 2006, including “power brokers” like Gingrich.
“Gingrich talked and wrote about what he saw as the benefits of the Freddie Mac business model,” the AP reported as Freddie Mac was pushing back against the Bush Administration’s worry the business was going to go under.
But the campaign doubled down today in its statement: “Speaker Gingrich did no lobbying of any kind, nor did his firm. This was expressly written into the Gingrich Group contracts.”
This, of course, is a prelude to the questions Gingrich will get about his business ties and the now-deflated entity that was known as Newt Inc. should he rise in the polls as the conservative alternative to Mitt Romney.”
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1111/68100.html#ixzz1djYpk2Pd
Unless
conservativeparrothead Wednesday, November 16th at 9:55PM EST (link)Newt’s advice was to give loans to those who couldnt afford it, then to me its a non issue. I think the everyday world might be a little shocked by these figures, but Im not. Consulting firms, advertising agencies, etc…they get big money.
Its like Ari Fliesher and his consultant role where he got hired by groups like the NCAA, Green Bay Packers and even for a while by Tiger Woods. Its like Dick Cheney, do you think he is the CEO of Halliburton getting a $34 Million golden parachute if he wasnt the defense secretary with an expertise in the middle east? These guys leave office and consult and cash in.
Newt Could Be The Choice
dkolonia (Diary) Monday, November 14th at 11:12PM EST (link)Not saying Newt is close to being a Ronald Reagan by any means but who else is there in the bunch that gives us hope that things could really change in DC? Ron Paul has some great ideas but the odds of him winning are very small and even if he did who thinks RP would be able to convince Congress to do the things he proposes?
Newt knows the game and knows how to get things done in DC. Perry would have the same problem as RP and we all know Romney will be like Bush.
We really need change and if we don’t get it the country could go down the drain. Newt is old school but he is saying all the right things these days. Maybe he has learned.
http://www.RightFace.us
Newt is unelectable in the general election....
californiagold Monday, November 14th at 11:22PM EST (link)Too many women would vote against Newt….and his baggage would be exposed big time by the Obama campaign.
The race is between Romney and Perry. Newt is just another flavor of the month.
Im not so sure...
conservativeparrothead Thursday, November 17th at 11:04AM EST (link)You could very well end up being right, but honestly right now, things are such a mess with unemployment, budget, and the deficit that I think someone who makes the case that:
When I was in Washington controlling the legislative agenda we had a balanced budget and unemployment was 4.2%. Plus I think he has some very good ideas about schools and whats going on there that will play to mothers and the fact that he is Catholic and gone through reconciliation for his past may not play well to all, but will soften some of that with many.
I think he has a great shot in the general, get into those Lincoln-Douglas debates, with his ideas and articulation on what needs to be done to truly reform Washington and it wont matter if he was married 10 times and half the papers were served on death beds.
The fact is, the Republican Party has been often losing the womens vote since the early 1990′s, the social conservatism agenda has turned many off, still remember the whole Quayle-Murphy Brown fiasco, but having a flawed candidate, kind of does what Mitch Daniels was talking about in some ways in that it takes some of that off the table in a general. Are the democrats all of a suddeen gonna start talking family values? No because they cant because of their stances on abortion, gay marriage, etc. Is Newt? No…because of his baggage. So it gets back to fiscal issues, government efficiency, jobs, foreign policy – and on that, Newt crushes Obama.
In some ways, his baggage might actually help keep the focus where it needs to be and not turn off the suburban moderates with morality talk.
Newt on Newt's boomlet
Change Jar Conservative (Diary) Tuesday, November 15th at 10:03AM EST (link)I liked this from a CNN article today. Newt talking about his surge:
“This is a wild race, okay? Who knows what the polls are going to be two months from now. I mean, I’m not going to tell you that I’m on the way,” Gingrich said. “The American people are really deeply concerned about our country. They have a real sense that something has to happen. And I think that they’re going to keep pushing until they find somebody who can take the pressure and can withstand it.”
********
Formerly know as “Oz” in these parts
Now that Newt is near the top...
conservativeparrothead Tuesday, November 15th at 3:07PM EST (link)I dont think it would be out of line for someone to ask the President if he would take up Newt on his Lincoln-Douglas debate proposal should he be the nominee. It would be an interesting answer.
Damn Newt
paco12348 Wednesday, November 16th at 4:15PM EST (link)I had to laugh when I read your article. It sums up almost perfectly the way I feel and the route I’ve traveled to end up with Newt. I can say though why Bachmann would never be my pick. She doesn’t check her information before she speaks and she repeats herself so many times on lines that received lots of applause the first dozen times she said them I cringe when she opens her mouth. Santorum seems pretty rigid on social issues but I like his stand on foreign policy.
I want someone that can beat Obama and I think Newt is the smartest one standing on the stage. He knows Washington, foreign policy, is creative and from the first day would hit the ground running. His “baggage” means nothing to me. Obama has handed out so many lies along with his attack dogs, has done so much damage to this Nation and taken us so far down the Socialist Road it will take someone like Newt that loves America to drag us back from the brink. Newt is the only one that can stand face to face with Obama in a debate and come out on top. I like many of the others not mentioned here but against Obama, I fear they could not hold their own. I wish we could roll several of them into one. I would like to see all, but Huntsman in some important job in the new administration. Huntsman is just another Obama.
Wow! Go Newt!
reggie182 Wednesday, November 16th at 4:35PM EST (link)http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/11/15/2503957/poll-gingrich-scores-best-versus.html