Skip to comments.Of the 'Santorum Surge' (and Gingrich Slide) in Iowa...
Posted on 12/30/2011 1:23:47 AM PST by Reaganite Republican
He went on to say that none of the other GOP candidates can hold a candle to Gingrich's record of 'getting things done in Washington' :
I just clicked the link--1.8% nationally.
I don't think Newt can beat Obama. I wish I didn't believe that.
Thanks Reaganite Republican.
Thank you, SC
If I don’t talk to you have a gr8 New Year
Weak slam on Santorum. He lost 1 race in a terrible year in a deep blue state. Newt basically got shown the door when he was Speaker from a House revolt. That didn't look good either. I will stay with my principles and back Santorum just because he "ticks off all the boxes" for me.
I was watching Morris on Fox the other night. I know a lot of FReepers don’t like him, and his track record can be spotty, but every so often he hits the nail on the head.
Basically, he said Newt is less electable than Romney but real conservatives have a problem with his morality, and Romney seems more electable but people have problems with him also, and Santorum seems to be one of the few conservative choices left.
But he said Gingrich isn’t out, and looks for him to take SC, and feels then that could give him new momentum for FL.
I remember last time around they hit FL like a pack, and then the day before the primary Crist came out with his arm around McCain. And McCain won FL, to my huge chagrin. So while I always disliked Crist, I really disliked him after that.
I'll take Santorum any day over Newt, despite how much you howl about it.
Newt would be even worse than Romney. We better hope and pray the 'Santorum surge' continues to take votes from Newt, because nominating Newt would be a death wish for the GOP.
Eh, Newt would make mincemeat of Obama 1-1. Under any circumstances where a decisive contrast could be shown between the two men, Obama would be irrefutably exposed as the incompetent pretender president he is.
Further, the only real way Republicans can win in 2012, is by articulating a vision consistent with actual American ideals and values, that inspires people to take seriously what these meani.e., we need ‘hope’ and ‘change’, except for real this time. Newt gets that IMO, far more so than any the others.
Above all, if Republicans fail to present an inspiring alternative to how life can be, the electorate will just apathetically tune them out. Languishing under 4 more years of Obama will seem more preferable simply because he’s a known quantity and because the other side wasn’t offering enough compelling difference to justify a shift, so why bother? At which point the war of ideas will be lost for the foreseeable future and the US will fade into a slumber of bureaucratic socialism.
I don’t see this sudden surge of love for Gingrich.
I think too many people are blinded by the anticipation of two debates where Newt wins. Who thinks that’s going to do anything?
I think the American people have had it with Obama. Yet I don’t know if that even matters. The ducks are already in a row—the racism charges, the media helping Obama run a campaign that ignores the first three years of his administration...
I don’t know. I just don’t see Newt doing it. Too many negatives that can be used against him, and too many people over-confident that because he can spout facts viewers will simply vote for him over hopey changey.
In this wussified society of ours, I don’t see it being as simple as some here do.
It’s not about finding an ‘American Idol’ candidate. It’s that Santorum comes off as a weak personhe’s nervous, whiny, insecure, self-congratulating, etc. He may be an upstanding person on moral issues, I don’t know. But he’s not a leader to me, and that’s what actually matters.
Likewise. And 2013 will be even better.
For example, Michelle Bachmann is almost certainly coming to the end of her run and cannot be expected to be considered a factor in New Hampshire and thereafter. Rick Perry will not do well in Iowa nor will he do well in New Hampshire. His persistence in the race can only be a function of deep pockets. Expect him to be gone after South Caroline.
Ron Paul is in the process of being dismantled as a viable candidate for the bulk of the party which had been aware only of his foreign policy deficiencies as these voters now become aware of his disqualifying views expressed about Jews and blacks in his newsletter. Paul will retain his fanatical followers but the rest of the party will regard Paul as purely marginal, his surge is probably already finished and his support will taper off to its irreducible core of fanatics.
Gingrich's lost 20 points in as many days which demonstrates that he is vulnerable to a negative ad campaign, at least when he has no money with which to conduct an air war on paid media. Free media, of which Gingrich is a master, has simply not been able to stanch the flow of blood. Gingrich will not do well in New Hampshire and he faces a make or break in south Carolina. If he does not have money for South Carolina he is probably finished because it appears that he runs out of supporters before Romney runs out of negative ad money.
Santorum is experiencing a mini surge in Iowa as the next and perhaps last conservative hope. Santorum has an advantage over Rick Perry in that he has not been closely scrutinized before by the bulk of the Republican electorate and he has not been rejected as a klutz. It remains to be seen whether Santorum's apparent absence of baggage will make them less vulnerable to the Romney/establishment attacks which are bound to come if Santorum shows signs in the Iowa caucus vote of threatening Romney's position.
Rodney looks like the sure winner out of Iowa and one can expect that to be coupled with a win in New Hampshire shortly thereafter. Therefore, the leader for the nomination is clearly Romney at this point. There are only two threats to Romney, Gingrich who is fading, and Santorum who might or might not be surging. Although these challengers to Romney have little money and will be hard-pressed to win an air war in South Carolina and especially in Florida.
So one can expect the field to be reduced to three, Romney, Santorum, and Gingrich, and probably in that order, at the end of Iowa and almost certainly after New Hampshire. The last place to stop Romney appears to be in South Carolina.
The Carl Rove school structures an election in a way similar to what Obama is doing this cycle, by paring down the electorate to 50% plus one vote in the electoral college. In the process Rove gave Bush (barely) two terms in the White House. The first term, you will recall, was one as a minority candidate because Gore actually exceeded him in the popular vote total.
In the 2004 election, Rove ran on the Iraq war succeeded in nationalizing the election on that basis and increasing Bush's popular vote and electoral vote count. Thereafter, and even beginning in 2004, Rove sacrificed the Republican hold on Congress to his minimalist approach to the campaign. In effect, Bush sacrificed the Congress to maintain the war.
The other approach was demonstrated by Ronald Reagan which is to dominate the game and attract the electorate to a new vision. That is what Obama did in 2008. It was so sweeping that the vast middle of America never looked behind the empty rhetoric of "hope and change" which articulated the so-called vision. But the principle remains, Obama swept all before him with his vision, however bogus.
I believe Gingrich is in the Reagan mold and Romney is in the Karl Rove mold.
I don't know if any Republican has the courage of their spouted-conservative convictions to carry it off. I don't see any of those running--Gingrich included--having the cohesive and COHERENT vision that is needed now. The Republicans running seem to have very ragged, malformed 'conservative' visions that finally are half-baked and thus not what is needed to transform the mess we're in. What is needed is a kind of conservative theory of everything that would indeed transform the mess in Washington. I don't think these candidates have that.
Reagan wasn't a policy wonk but he had the large view that cut through all the pet projects and local-political stumbling blocks these people can't free themselves from. His certainty carried along democrats and republicans and independents, eventually.
I'm not expecting another Reagan. I am expecting intelligent, articulate conservatives who live by their convictions and whose lives embody the values they will bring to the White House.
I don't see anyone like that in this bunch.
Nathanbedford, I hope you had a merry Christmas and have a happy New Year.
I’d vote for Gingrich over Obama or Romney. That’s about as nice a thing as I can say about him.
I wouldn’t vote for Romney on a bet.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.