Evans: How Gingrich wins the GOP Nomination

Newsmax ^ | 2/13/2012 | Randy Evans

[katiedidit1]

Hang on to your hats folks! this election could go on for quite sometime.

"Gingrich planners projected that with only 396 delegates chosen in March, no clear frontrunner is likely to emerge until Texas (155 delegates on April 3) and there too the endorsement and help of Gov. Perry is to their advantage." It is a long and winding road until any candidate wins over 1,000 delegates needed to become the nominee.

Read more on Newsmax.com: Evans: How Gingrich Wins the GOP Nomination

[caww]

Santorum knows nothing about running a country let alone a country in peril. How the heck is this guy going to have the time to learn the ropes he’ll need to know to even begin to make the decisions he’ll need to...and where’s his plan? and how does he expect to impliment one. I see little evidence of a man sold out on his own ideas.....should he win he’ll be taking all his cues from others because there’s no way he’s going to take on his feeble shoulders the weight he will bare. No way....he’s not been tried nor tested...and the little he has been he’s shown himself to be a big government guy.....

So what will we have....another Senator, as Obama, who has visions of grandure, who will hit a brick wall he’ll not have a clue how to get around....and while he figures it out the nation will nose dive! No thanks!

Go Newt! GOOOOO!!!!!

[caww]

I understand the need to trounce Romney....but the election ahead is against Obama not Romney. There’s simply only one candidate who can hose Obama in the debates ahead and that’s Newt....Santorum will end up with his knees shaking and his tail between his legs...that’s just how it is.

[Marguerite]

“Santorum knows nothing about running a country let alone a country in peril. How the heck is this guy going to have the time to learn the ropes he’ll need to know to even begin to make the decisions he’ll need to...and where’s his plan? “

http://www.redstate.com/erick/2011/12/29/rick-santorum-earmarxists-and-the-pro-life-statist/

“Rick Santorum participated in raiding the federal treasury as an earmarxist, perfectly happy to pork away on Pennsylvania’s behalf. He did not join conservatives who fought against No Child Left Behind. He did not join conservatives who fought against the prescription drug benefit.

Rick Santorum was part of the problem in Washington. He was one of the Republicans the public rejected in 2006. The voters in Pennsylvania rejected him in 2006 because of his and the Republicans’ profligate ways. Along with Tom DeLay, Rick Santorum led the K Street Project, which traded perks for lobbyists for money for the GOP funded with your tax dollars through earmarks and pork projects.

Sure, you can say 2006 was a bad year for Republicans, but in 2006 Rick Santorum fell 18 percentage points behind his Democratic rival and his defeat and terrible campaign can be linked to the loss of four Pennsylvania house seats.

That was not a defeat for Rick Santorum. It was punishment. He is a pro-life statist and I see nothing in his career since leaving Washington that shows he has changed his ways.”

[Marguerite]

There’s simply only one candidate who can hose Obama in the debates ahead and that’s Newt

I couldn't agree more than I do now!

No one needs to be convinced that Newt is the conservative Republican who can, beat Obama, implement a coherent economic plan, slash the deficit and the budget, liberate the economy from crippling regulation and put America back to work and Americans on a new path to prosperity.

Newt means what he says, and will do it.

[caww]

No one needs to be convinced that Newt is the conservative Republican who can, beat Obama, implement a coherent economic plan, slash the deficit and the budget, liberate the economy from crippling regulation and put America back to work and Americans on a new path to prosperity......Newt means what he says, and will do it.

Yes!!!

[caww]

in 2006 Rick Santorum fell 18 percentage points behind his Democratic rival and his defeat and terrible campaign can be linked to the loss of four Pennsylvania house seats.

I live in Pa and am familiar with that loss. Pennsylvania was fed up with Rick and showed it clearly at the polls. Heck he even fought against Clintons impeachment!! People here have not forgotten and some will not forgive him for what he created....and no amount of excuses we see slathered on FR is going to cut it.

[caww]

Thank you for the link....Santorum isn’t the picture he’s painting....though he attests to social issues conservatives want to hear...he’s not even close when it comes to the role of government....and he will play the compromise role if elected, whatever it would take to maintain his position.

[steve8714]

Nixon was VP. Ford was appointed. Truman acceded to the office during the war, and was a Democrat IIRC. Next?

[steve8714]

How about his dismissive attempt to get Rick to quit the race? I’d say that’s personal.

[steve8714]

Remember all that the Enron guys were the “smartest in the room” and so is our current President.
Newt has ideas, and he should present them to the next President.

[Toespi]

Give me one quote from Newt’s mouth, dismissing Santorum and “getting” him to quit the race. Newt’s mouth, not Santorum’s or the MSM’s interpretation of a response he may have given to the constant questions from the MSM, regarding Santorum stepping down. When asked this question, continually, Gingrich would respond with Rick has to do what Rick has to do, that would be his decision. Wish you people would stop being the MSM’s lackeys.

[steve8714]

January 17th, 2012
04:16 PM ET
Share this on: Facebook Twitter Digg del.icio.us reddit MySpace StumbleUpon
Share

Comments (97 comments)
Permalink
28 days ago

Gingrich urges Santorum, Perry to drop out

Posted by
CNN Political Producer Shawna Shepherd
Florence, South Carolina (CNN) - Newt Gingrich is urging competitors Rick Santorum and Rick Perry bow out of the Republican presidential race so conservatives can rally behind one “anti-Mitt Romney” candidate.

A reporter asked the former House speaker if the former Pennsylvania senator should drop out of the race. “Well I would be delighted if he decided to endorse me,” Gingrich said, but added it was Santorum and Perry’s decision to make.

Tune in Thursday at 8 p.m. ET for the CNN/Southern Republican Presidential Debate hosted by John King and follow it on Twitter at #CNNDebate. For real-time coverage of the South Carolina primary, go to CNNPolitics.com and on the CNN apps for iPhone, iPad, Android or other phones.

- Follow the Ticker on Twitter: @PoliticalTicker

“So I am respectful that Rick has every right to run as long as he feels that’s what he should do, but from the stand point of the conservative movement, consolidating into a Gingrich candidacy would in fact virtually guarantee a victory on Saturday
CNN January 17
Now the foot is in the other mouth.

[steve8714]

He went to the Senate first; that’s what the Dems love above all.
Hell, a haberdasher was elected President. (better qualification, I think, than community organizer)

[Toespi]

No it isn’t on the other foot. Those comments do not qualify for “urging” Ricky to drop out of the race.. But Santorum should have dropped at the time because he was running almost last. At this time, He is nothing more than the lesser of two evils. No matter the spin Santorum has little experience, no solutions, no real message and is in over his head. His support of Spector is all I need to know about him. Do you have any idea the damage Arlen Spector did to the republican party and the country? Rick supported him because that is what opportunists do.

[garjog]

“Nixon was VP. Ford was appointed. Truman acceded to the office during the war”

You argue that since a Congressman hasn’t in recent times won the presidency, that Gingrich lacks credibility.

However, Gingrich was Speaker of the House, or third in line in presidential succession. That shows that he has significant leadership experience.

As the leader of the House, Newt pushed through specific legislation that did more for the conservative cause of reducing government and balancing budgets than anyone before.

Also, just because Americans haven’t directly elected a Congressman to the highest office does not mean that we should not do so.

See Appeal to Tradition Fallacy:

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-tradition.html

[steve8714]

You make assertions without data and dismiss a direct quote. For better or worse, Newt will not be the nominee of the Republican party in 2012. I see this as a wife driven phenomenon. Maybe he and his supporters should “ coalesce” around Santorum.

[steve8714]

Gingrich is Texas dreaming.

[steve8714]

I never said nor implied that Newt lacks credibility. I said the GOP will not nominate him. He’d stand a better chance if he had done something great since his days as Speaker, so he didn’t have to remind people constantly of his acheivements there. He hasn’t.

[steve8714]

My position on Newt’s House problem matches my position on Ron Paul and on Michelle Bachmann, who I much preferred to Newt although in a perfect world she would not have been my choice, either. It’s not a value judgement.

[steve8714]

Why do Gingrich supporters feel the need to marginalize Santorum by changing his name? This is reminiscent of those who named the residue of sodomy after Santorum; a tactic to marginalize without having to state any facts.
In the unlikely event Gingrich wins the nomination, (see my other posts on this thread) he cannot win the general without Santorum supporters. Those treated shabbily will not be enthused. We do not dismiss Newt; we just don’t support him in the primary. We won’t be pushed, and “not Obama” isn’t enough.