Skip to comments.Cain's backers warily consider Gingrich
Posted on 11/30/2011 1:15:25 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
Republicans who don't want to vote for Mitt Romney had rallied behind the Atlanta businessman, but his campaign has been rocked by accusations of an affair. And the former House speaker has a marital track record of his own.
...Gingrich has vaulted into the top tier on the basis of his performance in televised debates, which have largely driven Republican voter preferences this year...
But an indication of discomfort in some quarters over Gingrich's rise came Tuesday when a new attack on the former House speaker surfaced online from a group calling itself Iowans for Christian Leaders in Government.
...."Newt is famous for being all over the board," Cary Gordon, an influential pastor from Sioux City, Iowa, told the Des Moines Register. "He is admirable in many ways, but I won't back him. I don't trust him."
Cain, for his part, told senior staff members in a Tuesday conference call that he was assessing whether the affair allegations "create too much of a cloud" for his campaign to continue.
.....Grubbs seemed bothered by a statement released Monday by Cain's attorney, Lin Wood, who said a candidate's "private sexual life" is not the business of the public or the media.
The tone of Wood's remarks also dismayed Richard Land, an evangelical leader who is president of the Southern Baptist Convention's Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission.
"What I read into it was, he wasn't denying the allegation, but it didn't involve sexual harassment so it didn't rise to the level of being discussable," Land said. "Mr. Cain is running as the family values candidate, and when you're the family values candidate, you better understand you are asking to be judged by a different standard."
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
......." YOU AND MR. GINGRICH SHARE A MUTUAL FRIEND IN JIM NUSSLE
In 2006, Mr. Nussle ran for Governor and asked that you serve as his running mate; an offer your willfully accepted.
In the nineties, Mr. Nussles current wife was working for Mr. Gingrich; while Mr. Gingrichs current wife was working for a committee which Mr. Nussle served on in the House of Representatives.
Furthermore, both men were married when they began affairs with each others staff members all while Mr. Gingrich was leading the investigation into Bill Clintons extramarital affair with Monica Lewinsky. This is an unfortunate irony.
More importantly, it points to a willful disregard of personal behavior and you are forever linked to both of these candidates in a way that is unacceptable for many of us who demand Christian leadership.
Which brings us to our next concern."..............
Nancy and Gingrich on video together re: climate change . Makes me wanna puke .
Tuesday, Nov. 29, 2011
Campaigning with Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio
Attending a fundraiser at the Tampa Museum of Art
120 W Gasparilla Plaza, Tampa, Florida
Speaking at Conchita Foods
9119 Northwest 105th Way, Medley, Fla.
Hosting a town hall meeting at Rivier College
420 South Main St., Nashua, N.H.
Touring Hilton Head Christian Academy Lower School
55 Gardner Drive, Hilton Head Island, S.C.
Hosting a fundraiser
Speaking as part of the Georgia Republican Party 7th District Presidential Forum
1775 Pleasant Hill Road, Duluth, Ga.
Hosting a “Coffee with the Candidate” town hall meeting
530 Jersey Ave., Jersey City, N.J.
Visiting Newt 2012 Beaufort County Victory Office
1247 May River Road, Bluffton, S.C.
Holding a town hall meeting at The Promenade
1100 Promenade St., Bluffton, S.C.
Speaking at the Port of Tampa
1101 Channelside Drive # 400, Tampa, Fla.
Speaking at a house party at the home of of Mark and Tracy Coen
Giving a foreign policy speech at Hillsdale College
33 East College St., Hillsdale, Mich.
Hosting a town hall meeting at Newberry Opera House
1201 McKibben St., Newberry, S.C.
Its unknown who created the criteria and what it all entails, but the meeting has a large contingent of Bachmann supporters. The reason why this is important is because TheIowaRepublican.com was told that this group has been charged with making a recommendation to the FAMiLY Leaders board before they decide on who they will endorse. When asked why his board of directors cannot make a decision on their own, Vander Plaats admitted that the board will seek the input of others, and added that, Wisdom comes in a multitude of counsel.
Since showering praise on Gingrich in an interview with the Des Moines Register following the forum, social conservatives leaders around the state have been grumbling about what they think is a likelihood that Vander Plaats may endorse Gingrich.
Yesterday, an anonymous letter from a group called Iowans for Christian Leaders in Government distributed an open letter that they had sent Vander Plaats warning him about the negative ramifications that endorsing Gingrich would bring. The letter stated that Vander Plaats endorsement may be guided, not by prayer and conviction, but by personal benefit and prior relationships.
Vander Plaats traveled the state in 2008 to advocate on behalf Gingrichs American Solutions. Gingrich also provided financial support to Vander Plaats effort to defeat three Iowa Supreme Court justices last fall. Vander Plaats also received financial support from the American Family Association and worked with Wayne Hamilton, a key Perry aide.
While Vander Plaats and the FAMiLY Leader are still searching for clarity, there is one thing he was very clear about. The process is more difficult because their goal is not to just find a candidate who can beat President Obama next fall, but this candidate also needs to be able to beat Mitt Romney.
The only question for Vander Plaats and the FAMiLY Leader is, what kind of candidate will best accomplish that goal? A surefire conservative whose core convictions match theirs, or a candidate who already has momentum or has the connections that may pay dividends down the road?
Well, that's what the MSM is certainly pushing. The media is ready for a change of pace and on to the races -- they have the 2 moderates, so they're good to go, the hell with the GOP base.
From yesterday - it looks like only Gingrich had time for Christians.
Touring Hilton Head Christian Academy Lower School
55 Gardner Drive, Hilton Head Island, S.C.
Consider the source: LA Times. Feh!
The LA Times article is basically quoting the religious leaders in Iowa.
Same here. I was for Cain, and can't go with Mittens or Newt. Time to buy some rolling papers and get behind Gary Johnson?
I’m with CAIN until and if he drops out ... otherwise.. buy stock in Rolling papers and join the Paultards!!!
As God as my witness I will never vote for another RINO again! Go Cain! Don’t let them the MSM and 0bama win!
I am coming inexorably to the realization that the 2010 elections where simply the last gasp of the American spirit leaving the nation for good. Between OWS and the emergence of this absolutely pathetic field of candidates, which is being widdled down by an all-powerful mainstream media to two mutually unacceptable alternatives, the country is toast. Stick a fork in it, turn it over, and give it up.
Our children will live substantially less well-off than we ever thought imaginable. I guess this has been true for awhile, but now it's obvious and apparently irreversible. Sigh.
Rick Perry wants to make Washington D.C. as inconsequential as possible in our lives. He wants to (as he has in Texas) create a climate where the economy can take off -- lower taxes, stop over regulating and reform oppressive litigation.
Texas, Austin exception to gloomy retail picture [along with other good links]
[snip] Dynamic Tax Score for RickPerry.org, Inc. Proposal:
Based on the higher GDP estimates forecast by the dynamic scoring exercise, the Perry proposal will not only lead to an increase in overall economic activity and jobs, but will also lead to higher federal revenues in the long term. In fact, the analysis suggests that revenues could be as much as $406.8 billion higher than under the static model by 2020, and could be as high as 19.5 percent of GDP. The dynamic score of the proposal suggests that lower flatter taxes could generate both more revenue than the current tax code, and significantly more economic growth over time. With increasing demands on the Federal government from growing entitlements, higher pension expenses and interest on the debt, it will be necessary to increase the size of the economy and the tax base in order to generate significantly higher revenues. Table 7 shows how the Perry proposals would do this over a seven year period. [snip] Tax Proposal Score PDF
i am sticking with cain...
after this hogwash with the media, he’ll be hell on the libs for atleast four years and when the conservative message starts bringing this country back, four more.
all aboard the cain train and let the liberal whistles whine.
YES WE CAIN!
“YES WE CAIN!”
Neither the poster of this thread nor the ‘Lamestream’ media types who wrote this article can even being to understand the belief, hopes, hearts and minds of people who support a candidate like Cain.
Both have shown nothing but utter disdain for both Herman Cain and his supporters.
That said I suggest that the words of both should be given the weight they deserve which are worth about the same as those that fly across Bammy’s teleprompter.
I guess your remarks are also directed to the religious leaders quoted — which makes up the bulk of the article???
As for your slam at me, I find you (and the others who circulate in packs on FR) easy enough to spot — posters who can’t defend their candidate (or are only here to disrupt the GOP nominee selection) so you smear the messenger.
Thanks for proving my point. As far as religious leaders quoted most wouldn’t know Christ if he stood before them surrounded by the Twelve Apostles.
As far as me slamming you I was merely pointing out to those who would read the thread that you and the writers of the article have history of treating Herman Cain and his supporters with contempt and scorn and therefore they need to read your words with your disdain in mind.
Well, maybe in LA, but probably not in flyover country. Herman Cain having some strange ex-friends is no reason to abandon him as a possible candidate yet.
Is that right? Have I been on Herman Cain threads? I don't need you to lie about me. I do not slam Cain supporters. You are really giving posters a look into your heart.
I really don't get this position. No disrespect intended, but I really have a hard time understanding this. The biggest threat to America as we know it (as many have said in these forums) is the type of leadership our current President brings.
There is no doubt the establishment and MM are giving us the “polished turd” on a platter. We do have time to refuse it, and should do all we can during the primaries. However, once a candidate is chosen we need to jump into the battle and defeat the current threat together. Then we need to hold the Repubs to the fire, and if they bail on conservatism then we begin a new movement for a new party.
Choosing NOT to vote because our “perfect” candidate is not the nominee is to choose to stay out of the fight. If a RINO is selected as the nominee at least we can stall the demise of our nation as we work for a better solution.
Choosing NOT to vote IS a vote for our current President. Campaign now, vet now, struggle for your candidate, but in the end of this process our children owe it to us to stay in the fight. These are ONLY battles now, but the WAR is on the horizon and we need to continue staying in the fight. I cannot see the honor in giving up the fight just because. As many say on these forums it doesn't matter who wins because we are all doomed, that the barbarians are at the gates, maybe so, but stalling tactics have, in the past, proven effective to saving many who would have been lost. A vote for some of these candidates in the general election will NOT be preferrable but it will be a stalling tactic. It's like the movie "Braveheart" where the Scottish army is about to run away and Wallace says, "Aye, fight and you may die. Run , and you'll live... at least a while. And dying in your beds, many years from now, would you be willin' to trade ALL the days,from this day to that, for one chance, just one chance, to come back here and tell our enemies that they may take our lives, but they'll never take... OUR FREEDOM!" Let's not "RUN" away but into the fray and stay frosty!
It’s a sinking feeling of dread. I have it too.
I’ll take Perry over Gingrich, if it comes to that.
Well said, AF.
Problem for me with a Rino will be that I refuse to put the time and energy in that I usually do in presidential campaigns.
Donation directly to candidate? Either not at all or minimal.
And I predict that others will follow suit.
Watch the RNC contributions evaporate in ‘12 and they have only themselves to blame.
IF you'd rather NOT be pinged FReepmail me.
IF you'd like to be added FReepmail me. Thanks.
Newt has profitted, richly, by being on every side of every issue. Even Jack Abramoff says he’s corrupt. And who would know better?
I've noticed that there is no mention of Perry in any news coverage. The reporters will mention Romney & Gingrich (both are establishment candidates) then Bachmann, Santorum & Paul (no money behind them). Cain gets mentioned but it is almost always with a reference to his declining status. It's as though they want to act like Perry doesn't exist.
From what I've seen polling is not going well for Perry either. We really need a good result in SC & FL. If not I'm worried we will end up with the inside the beltway candidate. Right now everyone seems to think Gingrich will beat obama easily but I see a lot of turn offs with him. His personal life. His success as a lobbyist/consultant. His spending big dollars on his wife. Physically he is heavy. His debate skills have been promoted so much one misstep and it will appear that obama bested him. Finally, he gives obama a target for his anti-DC campaign being an inside the beltway guy.
In the end this is my biggest concern with Newt.
The one issue that I won't compromise on is Pro-Life. Because of that Romney and Cain were eliminated early. If any of the other candidates were nominated I would vote for them over obama. Perry is by far the best conservative running. I can look at his record and reasonably expect that his administration would be conservative. Newt might be transformational, but into what?
Even Jack Abramoff says hes corrupt. And who would know better?
I wouldn't trust what some low life criminal says.
Dump the alleged adulterer in order to support the admitted adulterer? Decisions, decisions...
Well there is always Ron Paul at least he is in double digits. Too bad he’s crazy on foreign policy, otherwise he is very good on issues.
I totally get that but (there's always a 'but', isn't there?) He's already done his term in prison so it's not like he's looking to get a reduced sentence or anything.
I have to admit, I've lost quite a bit of interest in the race now. The media has its share of blame, but the bigger disappointment (for me) is us. Too many of us flock behind the flavor of the month candidate. We lose perspective about who has the best proposals, the best record, integrity, focus, and commitment.
We focus too much on likeability, smarts, charisma, and style.
I've been behind one candidate since July. That hasn't changed. I can tell from reading this forum just about daily for 4-5 months that perhaps half the people here have shifted from one candidate to the next, some as many as 4 different candidates.
That's really indicting.
They keep churning out lies and garbage. Cain supporters are NOT considering AmNewtsty, period.
I know, but he is a sleaze.
FWIW, I don't think Newt did anything wrong lobbying for clients after he left office. It's the system we have and it's legal. If he's the nominee I think it will get lots of play because it will feed right into the "insider" image that obama will want to define him as and will hurt him with the public. The same thing with the Tiffany's account. He didn't do anything wrong, but because envy is so acceptable now he will be made out to be a "bad rich guy" because he made money and bought expensive things for his wife.
It would be nice to see Pubs seriously consider the pros and cons of the candidates and how the cons will be used against them. Perry has been hurt by poor debate performances, but that's it! Perry is solid in his personal life. Perry has a solid conservative record. Perry has been Gov of a State with the 13th largest economy in the world and while other states declined TX grew. Yet right now he is not considered our best candidate. Go figure.
I see 2 candidates that have accomplished conservative goals when they were in office, Perry and Gingrich.
Gingrich is the better debater, but has baggage and with him you always have to wonder when he will have his "Nixon goes to China" moment.
Perry doesn't debate as well, but is more than solid in all other areas and has a 10 yr track record to look at.
I'm with Perry. I've given money to him and will do so again. If Newt gets the nomination I will vote for him, but I think we will have lost an opportunity to turn our country back into a republic.
I agree with you about the Tiffany's account. That was none of anybody's business. Pure and simple. But the fact that his former chief of staff could go to work for Fannie Mae and then hire Ginrich's company to 'consult', and that's perfectly legal is a big part of the problem. It's wrong. The legality doesn't matter because the very people who benefit from the revolving door between Congress and K Street are the ones who write the laws. At a very bare minimum it is an abuse of power and that in and of itself is corrupt.
see 2 candidates that have accomplished conservative goals when they were in office, Perry and Gingrich.
Gingrich is the better debater, but has baggage and with him you always have to wonder when he will have his “Nixon goes to China” moment.
Perry doesn’t debate as well, but is more than solid in all other areas and has a 10 yr track record to look at.
I’m with Perry. I’ve given money to him and will do so again. If Newt gets the nomination I will vote for him, but I think we will have lost an opportunity to turn our country back into a republic.
With you 100% on every point!
Your posting history speaks for itself. A look at your heart would be like gazing on a Gorgon.
Which posts would those be in CW’s posting history? I’m curious, as I’ve seen CW the subject of various personal attacks by Cain supporters, but I don’t recall CW going onto a Cain thread to bash Cain’s supporters. Should be easy to do, right, since you’ve looked at her posting history?
Whichever candidate supports a robust national defense; small, non-interventionary federal government; and aggressively pushes states’ rights.... ought to be our candidate.
Nothing else really matters.
Romney, Newt, Cain... none of these believe in that.
I’ve been long saying that the American electorate is ripe for a demogogue. And I was right, just look at Obama.
That said, I didn’t really think that conservatives would fall for the same trap... yet look at the mass of supposed conservatives, flitting from candidate to candidate, looking for their ‘savior’.
First Palin, then Trump, then Perry, then Cain, and now Newt.
Whatever happened to looking at yourself, figuring out what *YOU* believe in, and then looking for the candidate that meets as many of those ideals as possible?
I know that I’ll be voting in the primary for the candidate that supports my beliefs. Which are: strong national defense, small federal government, states’ rights, and creating a favorable environment for economic growth (and jobs).
Gingrich is the better debater, but has baggage and with him you always have to wonder when he will have his Nixon goes to China moment.
Perry doesnt debate as well, but is more than solid in all other areas and has a 10 yr track record to look at.
Im with Perry. Ive given money to him and will do so again. If Newt gets the nomination I will vote for him, but I think we will have lost an opportunity to turn our country back into a republic.
With you 100% on every point!
Exactly my thoughts also.
I’m sticking with Cain as well.