Gingrich Time

Can you imagine how happy the Obama reelection team would be if they got to face Newt Gingrich next year? True, if they could pick who they face, it would be Bachmann or Cain, but avoiding Romney, or even Perry, would be unbelievably fortunate. And yet, Rasmussen Reports says it's Gingrich time:

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of Likely Iowa Republican caucus-goers shows Gingrich with 32% followed by former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney at 19%. Georgia businessman Herman Cain, who led in Iowa last month, drops to third with 13% of the vote. Texas Congressman Ron Paul draws 10% of the vote in Iowa, while Texas Governor Rick Perry and Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachmann each grab six percent (6%). Former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum draws support from five percent (5%) of caucus-goers while former Utah Governor Jon Huntsman picks up two percent (2%). Only one percent (1%) would prefer some other candidate and six percent (6%) more are undecided.

To be sure, Ras is wholly unreliable and what ax they are grinding is important to know. But how great would it be if Gingrich was the GOP nominee?

< Absence Of Evidence | Downtown Denver: Police Cars Everywhere >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Après Newt le déluge... (5.00 / 2) (#3)
    by Addison on Thu Nov 17, 2011 at 03:33:38 PM EST

    You know, I thought the same thing (5.00 / 3) (#4)
    by Gisleson on Thu Nov 17, 2011 at 03:47:34 PM EST
    about George W. Bush.

    But that didn't work out so well, and the same election thieves are still serving on the Supreme Court....

    Newt Gingrich is WORSE than Bob Dole (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by andgarden on Thu Nov 17, 2011 at 04:25:28 PM EST
    Dole, for example, didn't have his own conference force him out the door.

    Newt is (none / 0) (#16)
    by gyrfalcon on Fri Nov 18, 2011 at 01:29:41 AM EST
    in a class by himself.  Matthews referred to him the other night as a "gaseous cloud," which I thought was an excellent observation.

    Pot calling kettle black (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by BobTinKY on Fri Nov 18, 2011 at 07:39:36 AM EST
    A lot of us thought the same about Reagan in 80 (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by BobTinKY on Fri Nov 18, 2011 at 07:40:09 AM EST
    Wow, they hate Romney that much? (n/t) (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by Towanda on Thu Nov 17, 2011 at 04:06:44 PM EST

    Oh yes, yes they do (none / 0) (#7)
    by andgarden on Thu Nov 17, 2011 at 04:25:39 PM EST
    The problem for Gingrich (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by andgarden on Thu Nov 17, 2011 at 04:29:34 PM EST
    is that he has no money and isn't actually running a real campaign.

    He's very hastily (none / 0) (#17)
    by gyrfalcon on Fri Nov 18, 2011 at 01:30:42 AM EST
    gearing up, though.  He's added something like 18 new staff members to his campaign in the last week.

    Until he gets a 7 figure credit (none / 0) (#19)
    by observed on Fri Nov 18, 2011 at 02:32:55 AM EST
    limit at Tiffany's, I'm not going to take him seriously.

    Ain't (none / 0) (#27)
    by lentinel on Fri Nov 18, 2011 at 10:11:45 AM EST
    democracy grand?

    Just what the founders envisioned.


    You (none / 0) (#26)
    by lentinel on Fri Nov 18, 2011 at 10:10:59 AM EST
    are being very charitable, imo.

    A bigger problem for Gingrich is that he is an overstuffed windbag and everybody knows it.


    Oh, boy. (none / 0) (#1)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Nov 17, 2011 at 03:01:38 PM EST
    The heroin skank Coulter was all over this:

    In addition to having an affair in the middle of Clinton's impeachment; apologizing to Jesse Jackson on behalf of J.C. Watts -- one of two black Republicans then in Congress -- for having criticized "poverty pimps," and then inviting Jackson to a State of the Union address; cutting a global warming commercial with Nancy Pelosi; supporting George Soros' candidate Dede Scozzafava in a congressional special election; appearing in public with the Rev. Al Sharpton to promote nonspecific education reform; and calling Paul Ryan's plan to save Social Security "right-wing social engineering," we found out this week that Gingrich was a recipient of Freddie Mac political money.

    Never.Gonna.Happen (none / 0) (#2)
    by jbindc on Thu Nov 17, 2011 at 03:24:41 PM EST

    Great? (none / 0) (#9)
    by lentinel on Thu Nov 17, 2011 at 05:10:18 PM EST
    The only thing that Obama has going for him is that people who are perceived to be to his right are the ones being presented as an alternative.

    But this, in my opinion, is far from "great". It is tragic.

    Agreed. Tragedy and comedy (none / 0) (#12)
    by KeysDan on Thu Nov 17, 2011 at 07:27:23 PM EST
    all making for sad electoral drama.   The latest to emerge first from that clown car is an ersatz Emmett Kelly: Gingrich on reasons why women should not serve in combat roles:  'females have biological problems staying in a ditch for 30 days because they get infections...men, on the other hand, are piglets, they roll around in ditches and it doesn't matter , men are biologically driven to go out and hunt giraffes.'   On his indiscretions, his love for America made him stray.  Perhaps, his latest wife, Tiffany, has bought his line and he believes that we have too, hook, line and sucker.  

    Well, (5.00 / 2) (#20)
    by lentinel on Fri Nov 18, 2011 at 04:40:07 AM EST
    I must admit that sometimes, upon rare occasions, I have been driven by some unknown primordial force to hunt giraffes. I have not actually done so. But it was a near miss. I was actually in a trance-like state on a public bus on my way to the zoo, when a bump in the road awakened me just in time.

    I also must say that I have had a strange compulsion from time to time to roll around in ditches while making oinking sounds.

    I am glad to learn, via Mr. Professor Gingrich, that these are biological traits. It is something nature intended for me and I need no longer feel ashamed.


    Here we go again or not (none / 0) (#10)
    by loveed on Thu Nov 17, 2011 at 07:03:54 PM EST
     Newt rise and fall will be so quick, if you blink you'll miss it.
     Kiss of death; lobbying for Fanny Mae. He's truly a hypocrite.
     So who's left?
      The republicans want to win. They will not allow the media to choose their nominee.


    Freddie Mac (none / 0) (#18)
    by gyrfalcon on Fri Nov 18, 2011 at 01:31:41 AM EST
    not Fannie Mae.  And he didn't actually do any lobbying per se.

    He claimed they paid him ... (none / 0) (#25)
    by Yman on Fri Nov 18, 2011 at 08:25:04 AM EST
    ... between 1.6 and 1.8 million to be an in-house "historian".



    Newt is the flavor of the week (none / 0) (#11)
    by tworivers on Thu Nov 17, 2011 at 07:17:36 PM EST
    He will be sinking in the polls within 2 weeks, mark my words.  Romney's the nominee.

    Now, if there were some sort of viable third party candidate (Ron Paul?  or alternately, some centrist Republican along the lines of Bloomberg or, dare I say it, Joe Scarborough), things could get a whole lot more complicated/interesting.  

    Speaking of (none / 0) (#13)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Nov 17, 2011 at 07:33:46 PM EST
    Ron Paul from what I have seen his supporters are the most adamant that they will not vote for any other GOP nominee. This group of people really hates the neocons in the GOP.

    Excuse my snarky comment (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by christinep on Thu Nov 17, 2011 at 07:51:15 PM EST
    But, as for the R. Paul followers--the Libertarians whose foremost position seems to be "me, mine, & more of mine" or "I'm not getting involved in anything outside of mine, nor paying for anything outside of mine, so leave me alone"--might well have a tendency not to like the neo-cons nor anyone else for that matter.

    Excuse me again...grrr Libertarians.  Sometimes I think that the rightist religious fundamentalists have more compassion.


    the philosophy of (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by jeffinalabama on Thu Nov 17, 2011 at 08:06:50 PM EST
    selfishness, christine, aint it the truth? I'd say the fundamentalists have lots more compassion. It's in the religious texts of the three religions based on Abraham, and folks do practice it... usually the poor folks who can't afford it.

    Saw it in North Alabama while i lived there... retired folks cooking enough food, fried chicken, vegetables, rolls, to give to other folks who had nothing left after tornadoes. But the world was 6k years old, and all of the other stuff to go along with it. But they didn't preach, they just gave the food to those who needed it.


    That's (none / 0) (#21)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Nov 18, 2011 at 05:49:15 AM EST
    the kind of Christianity I believe in--actions are more important than words. Besides that, talk is cheap. Unfortunately there are plenty of Christians who think that if they just preach and condemn enough they're doing the right work not realizing that they are actually hurting themselves and others.

    If demanding.... (none / 0) (#28)
    by kdog on Fri Nov 18, 2011 at 12:58:21 PM EST
    liberty and as much control over my life is selfish, then I am as selfish as a motherf*cker.

    I'm not a hardcore dog eat dog libertarian, but I'd take a nice chunk of the Paul platform as official policy in a heartbeat...end foreign occupation and aggression, end the drug war, end the bailouts and corporate welfare and institutionalized market-rigging and grift.  What's not to like?

    Granted, Ron Paul's utopia would be a nightmare...but in Paul's utopia we'd have the freedom of a snowball's chance in hell against entrenched money and power...as compared to the absolutely positively no chance the Obama/Gingrich/Romney Oligarch's utopia promises.

    Paul v Obama in a general I think you'd all be surprised at the support Paul would get from left-leaners...he's got more support down at OWS than Obama, I'll tell ya that much.


    this would actually be (none / 0) (#29)
    by cpinva on Fri Nov 18, 2011 at 02:24:11 PM EST
    a progressive agenda:

    end foreign occupation and aggression, end the drug war, end the bailouts and corporate welfare and institutionalized market-rigging and grift.

    the only reason a libertarian might go for it is because it would save them from being forced to be involved with actual human beings. intent does matter.


    Call it progressive, call it libertarian... (none / 0) (#31)
    by kdog on Fri Nov 18, 2011 at 02:39:10 PM EST
    call it what ya want...those are good ideas.  And in the Obama/GOP Presidential Circus, he's the only one selling them.

    Unless Gary Johnson is still in this thing...I wouldn't know as he is more of a media pariah than even Ron Paul.

    Is ceasing to be labeled a criminal selfish too?  Cuz that goes a long way with me.


    Add to your comment, cpinva (none / 0) (#32)
    by christinep on Fri Nov 18, 2011 at 02:46:29 PM EST
    How the R. Pauls of the world would terminate Social Security, Medicare, Medicare, current and/or any future government-aided or sponsored health care, the EPA & environmental regs, the Education Dept., any rules or oversight as to food or prescription drugs, etc.  Dog-eat-dog would be nicer.

    People can get taken in by the siren song of doing what you want.  But, Libertarianism is nowhere near that...it is designed for a non-society in its Darwinism, IMO. (To tell you the truth, even the allure of staying out of all foreign engagements or foreign aid has is allure...until you examine what it might really mean. To start, the meaning would be: No help with any other country--with their people nor starving children, no United Nations or any other collaborative approach to world crises...nothing but me & mine isolationism. Downright ugly...the very antithesis of my-brother's keeper.)


    Would we not be free... (none / 0) (#33)
    by kdog on Fri Nov 18, 2011 at 03:15:50 PM EST
    to have a bake sale and send food to starving Africans, or form an Abraham Lincoln brigade and go fight tyranny wherever it rears its ugly head?

    Is sending your money to crooks in Washington and calling it a day not outsourcing your responsibility to your neighbor to the likes of the Catfood Commission?  

    I'm not sure how I feel about being my brother's "keeper", but I do feel an obligation to help my brother.   I feel like paying my taxes, aka outsourcing my responsibility to my brother, is actually hurting my brother.


    Hmmm. Your statement (none / 0) (#34)
    by christinep on Fri Nov 18, 2011 at 03:40:36 PM EST
    on this reminds of George H.W. Bush's statement about "A thousand points of light." Sorry, kdog, you might have the compassion & skills to help out a brother or a few nearby.  But, if you think there are problems with lack of care today--and there are and, I suspect, you agree--reflect on what would happen if it was all (all, everything, not somewhat) up to whoever felt kindly enough to lend a hand. Curious about how such kindly folk would choose to help or not...because the father & son Paul do not take kindly to civil rights laws & areas of other discrimination.

    Heck, we may have to talk past each other on this whole area of Libertarianism. Your words in so many areas range from fascinating to thought-provoking to compelling. In this area of romanticized rugged individualism, aka Libertarianism, it seems to me that your real concerns about the application of the criminal justice system in this country may have caused a certain romanticizing of a western philosophy that
    is the opposite of broader societal justice & compassion.  (BTW, if I'm not mistaken, father Paul may have "softened" on his complete hands-off approach for government...in the area of a woman's right to choose. Did I hear that Repub Paul is now blurring that hard line? )

    Oh, kdog...I hope that you know my disinclination toward assuming the world is ending, the bottom is falling out, the sky is falling...too much histrionics get to me when so many proposals & actions by candidates for whatever are made to be the most-important-thing-ever.  Admittedly, when considering what Libertarianism would mean & what it would do in our large, expansive, diverse society, I alternate between wanting to scream & cry. The world can be lonely for people; and, Libertarianism would only underscore that.


    Yep... (none / 0) (#35)
    by kdog on Fri Nov 18, 2011 at 03:58:43 PM EST
    the way the mainstream left and right have totally p*ssed on individual liberty in regards to social issues and crime & punishment is what got me interested in libertarianism in the first place.  After deep thought of what I value, realized I cherish my liberty above all else, and somebody taking the "brother's keeper" concept to the extreme of criminalizing my lifestyle choices is hard to stomach.

    Then there are the foreign policy and war issues...with left and right, liberal and conservative, D and R all in agreement about stationing troops in 90+ countries and policing the world...to keep the money flowing and markets "stable", to the detriment of peace.

    I part with Paul on abortion rights...I find a prohibition on abortion anti-libertarian actually.  I also part with them when they get to extremes like no regulations at all for business, no workplace protections, no minimum wage, and other things.

    I think we'd be better served with a dash of libertarianism in the liberal/conservative stew...a balance of ideologies, taking the best of each and leaving the rest.


    Your last paragraph is... (none / 0) (#37)
    by christinep on Fri Nov 18, 2011 at 07:01:47 PM EST
    completely in accord with what I'd want very much to see. Thank you for talking with me on this.

    I think Ron Paul won't go indy (none / 0) (#24)
    by BobTinKY on Fri Nov 18, 2011 at 07:41:29 AM EST
    The GOP has leverage over baby Rand.

    That's true (none / 0) (#36)
    by tworivers on Fri Nov 18, 2011 at 05:01:45 PM EST
    Hadn't thought of that, but I think you may be right

    Jay Leno would have a natural (none / 0) (#38)
    by observed on Sat Nov 19, 2011 at 07:14:29 AM EST
    advantage  in that event.

    one group that would welcome, (none / 0) (#30)
    by cpinva on Fri Nov 18, 2011 at 02:25:50 PM EST
    with open arms (and wallets) a gingrich nomination would the entire stand-up comic community. it would be material manna from heaven.