Skip to comments.The Case for Gingrich’s Electability
Posted on 12/31/2011 7:30:28 AM PST by TBBT
Its an article of faith among many Republicans that Mitt Romney is the most electable candidate in the GOP field. But its not clear that this assertion is actually true. In fact, if one were going to design a Republican opponent tailor-made to President Obamas liking, that opponent would be uniquely vulnerable to Obamas main rhetorical thrust (making class-warfare arguments), uniquely unsuited to take clear aim at Obamas least popular action as president (spearheading the passage of Obamacare), and uniquely strong in states that are unlikely to matter in the general election race. In all three of these ways, Romney is made to order for Obama while his chief rival, Newt Gingrich, is not.
None of this is to question Romneys potential appeal to moderate voters. Nor is it to deny that Gingrich has more baggage and would be easier for Obama to try to vilify as a conservative extremist. But there is more to winning over moderates than simply running the most moderate candidate, and the truth is that no one really knows whether Romney or Gingrich would pose a more powerful electoral challenge to Obama.
(Excerpt) Read more at weeklystandard.com ...
I’m not convinced there is any truth to the electability of Romney.
This article is spot on. If anyone is voting Romney because they believe he is most electable they are wrong. The one that Obama wants to run against the most is Romney, they have been working on this for over a year. The 99% vs. the 1%, ring a bell? Obama vs Romney, Obama wins.
You cant tall that type of stupid anything.
If you listen to the only people that go on camera in support of Mitt, they can barely articulate an actual reason to back him outside of how “electable” he looks.
Yeah. Since day one, Axelrod and Obama have schemed with the MSM to give Romney basically the kid gloves treatement.
Their nightmare one-on-one opponent: Huck, Pence, Newt, Rubio, Perry, Bachmann, Palin, or Ryan.
Let’s give them DOUBLE hell. Let’s give them Newt/Rubio!!
If a Democrat wants Democrat policies he'll vote for the real thing ~ not a watered down Republican.
The proven technique is to HOLD YOUR PARTY'S BASE and PEEL OFF A FACTION FROM THE OTHER PARTY.
I've suggested that the best way to do this is to take an experienced and generally successful politician (e.g. a Gingrich) who has also been successful in business (e.g. a Gingrich ~ something like $120,000,000 in the bank) and see if he can attract a major Democrat faction.
Currently with only 55% of youth between 19 and 29 employed (and 45% UNEMPLOYED) that's the faction to tag.
The Democrats have nothing to attract unemployed young people just starting out in their careers. Holding a Wagu barbeque really isn't going to do it I'm so sure.
Romney is the one the liberals want to run against and it isn’t because they think they can beat him, it’s because they don’t really care if they don’t...because he’s a liberal. If he gets the nomination, they’re in a win/not really lose too bad situation.
He does have great hair though, you have to admit. Bet he gets pedicures with John Kerry too.
The article point to the possibility of a reverse Bush v. Gore should Romney get the nomination. Because of Mitt’s appeal to some independents & Republican squishes, he may rack up enough votes in states that he would lose anyway - e.g., NY, MA, CA - to win the popular vote, while Obama gets 270 electoral votes & a 2nd term.
Newt scares the bejeebers out of the left AND the establishment for a couple reasons. One, he knows where all the skeletons are buried, on the left and the right. Two, because of what they done to him back in the nineties... false ethics charges, misquotes, fake stories of divorce papers and deathbeds...having him achieve the power of the Presidency might be just the recipe for a little PAYBACK. I hope they wet themselves those backstabbing bastards.
For all practical purposes there are NO moderates. Never have been. Never will be.
That's nutz, a pile of dog shit could beat obummer in 2012 even with the whores and pimps of the msm kissing his halfrican, mooselimb, skinny ass for the rest of the year.
That miserable, slimy, corrupt, communist prick couldn't get re-elected in a one candidate race.
I'd have said what I really think about obummer, but I always feel more Christian on the eve of the New Year, and therefore will go gently on him.
Romney saw all those polls that showed Obama losing to the “generic” Republican and decided to become that guy.
In fact that is all he is. A generic Republican. Nothing of distinction, no baggage, no long-held core principles other than a commitment to do whatever his advisors say he has to do to win (classic VC attitude)poll-driven positions and poll-driven strategy.
What Mitt fails to understand is that Ronald Reagan did not win simply because he had good hair and a nice smile.
Quite true and well stated.
Unfortunately, any woman who has ever been cheated on is going to have to be a rock-ribbed conservative to pull the lever for Newt. For most, nothing else will matter.
yep, Romney is the LEAST electable of all the candidates currently running (well... execept for the lunatic Paul)
Romney would get destroyed just like McCain and for similiar reasons. Remember the press told us then that McCain was the most electable also :) I wonder why they would consistently pick the worst candidate for us? it’s almsot like they want the Democrat to win! *rolls eyes*
And Romney like McCain, Dole, and a long list of losers is anything but compelling. Boring and dull come to mind.
Gee, it’s hard to believe the msm would have any reason to pick the worst candidate for the republican voters. My world is shattered. LOL.
Romney - the generic loser.
They did the same thing in ‘08’ with McCain. Kid gloves, a lot of free air time before and during the primary, and long knives after the convention. I would bet money that Obama has at least a dozen ‘I lost my job because of Bain’ ads tee’d up ready to run as soon as Mitt wins.
Most of us don't see it either.
I can't see him beating hussein. The ObamaCare issue gets neutralized out of the gate with romney. After that, there'll be mormon bashing taken to absurd levels.
Who cares about moderates, it’s Independents that count. They are about 30% of the population, according to Rassmuseen. They’ve called 15,000/month since 2009 for the survey.
What kind of odds are you giving and how much are you prepared to wager, or is this just another of the many gum flappers that float in and out of FR, making statements and then, when called, run for the tall weeds.
I agree. Most women will not trust a man who is determined to be a serial cheater.
In reality, Independents are subject to the same political realities and districting mathematics as the rest of us. The greater polity cares little for your own attempts to classify or categorize yourself.
Active political life occurs within the frame work of parties, or internally within factions that themselves gravitate to the parties.
Our system of single member districts and first past the post election victories ensures that we will have ONLY TWO POLES OF REFERENCE.
If you are a pollster and you really want to see which way things are going you attempt to find out how your samples voted last time. You do that by stealth and trickery ~ just like you do it to discover brand preferences.
The business of political polling in multi-party Europe is probably just this side of Sisyphean ~ and there even the pollsters wait for the electoral results anxiously and are frequently surprised. They can detect only the broadest of movements.
But back to the Independents for a moment ~ they may well be free of direct party affiliation but they still live within the real world of organizations and natural classes that in their turn gravitate to the parties. Getting off the local party mailing lists does little to change your employment, religion, age, location, lifestyle, race, creed, color and so forth. Those factors continue to play an enormous part in how you will behave in the coming elections and there's not a whole lot you can do about it.
Or, they may realize that Newt is just their kinda’ guy, who they’re attracted to, and try to pull that lever over and over and over.
Obama is toast.
“having him achieve the power of the Presidency might be just the recipe for a little PAYBACK”
You have articulated something I have wondered. Is all the negativism from some older members of congress a fear of retribution?
Personally, I don’t think Newt would shell out “payback”; it isn’t good politics and I trully think his “reformed” character would preclude it.
It is funny to watch the old timers squirm. Reminds me of the Bible verse (paraphrase) “the evil flee when no one is pursuing.”