Posted on 02/21/2012 1:55:37 PM PST by Darren McCarty
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reports that Newt Gingrich will not campaign in Michigan in advance of next Tuesday's primary there:
Spokesman R.C. Hammond confirmed Monday night that the campaign is scrapping tentative plans to travel to Michigan at the end of the week ahead of the state’s Feb. 28 primary.
Gingrich is spending Tuesday and Wednesday in the other Feb. 28 primary — Arizona — but that is mostly for the sake of Wednesday night’s debate, and his public schedule will be light.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
I’ve read some of your posts - can’t figure out if you’re for Paul or Obama... Can you give me a hint?
But then who will You & Willard blame it on when Rick WINS MICHIGAN ???
Given the resources he has to work with, it’s probably a good move. May Newt and Rick beat Romney in every primary left.
I am not a Romney supporter, so take your dumba$$ lies and insults and stuff them where the sun doesn’t shine.
Newt usually knows what he is doing. I would not want to play chess with him.
Disagree Newt is playing high stakes poker in Michigan.
If Santorum wins Michigan I don’t care by how much, He becomes the Heir apparent the one to beat.
Newt staying out of Michigan does several things.
1. Saves Newt’s Money,
2. Forces Mittens to Attack Santorum, Newt gets a breather before super Tuesday. Remember voters have very short memories.
Santorum is all in in Michigan. If he wins it will be huge possibly even the nomination. But if he loses he may not recover.
So far Santorum has only won 3 non binding caucus he has yet to win a primary that counts.
ROTFL!! That is perfect!
Funnnnie...especially Lovie :)
So there are so-called “conservatives” who will stay home in November if Santorum is the nominee? And from the moniker ‘Saint Rick’ I take it that this is because they’re offended by his social conservatism and outspoken Christianity. They’re willing to reelect Obama by default over that? I call B.S.
... and then some morons will stay at home rather than vote against Mitt. Go figure.
You do yourself and others a great a disservice not digging into his record just because he's strong on Life or Marriage, positions that don't make him unique in the race.
I never claimed it was perfect, but it's 10 times better than Romney.
So Newt won’t campaign in Michigan...Santorum and Mitt wont debate Newt in Georgia
I see it as an intelligent tactical move by Newt.... he has nothing to gain in Michigan.
Santorum and Mitt won’t debate Newt in Georgia because they are both cowards.
[I know many many conservatives, from tea party to social to fiscal, etc. There is a huge visceral dislike of Saint Rick. He has NO chance of ever being elected because a huge number of conservatives won’t vote for him under any circumstances. Newt is light years better.]
Here’s my outlook. I will never vote for Mitt on religious and political grounds (why vote for someone who will tack hard left the minute he has the nomination and stab us in the back if elected).
I will vote for Santorum, but he has zero ability top inspire and much ability to uninspire. Like being preached to by Mr. Rogers and a lot of RS’s economic ideas are naive.
I will vote for Gingrich because he understands the historical context and that this is a fight to the death. That doesn’t mean I will overlook his flaws, both personal and political, but if men exclusively followed saints into battle, Patton wouldn’t have lead at the Battle of the Bulge. Even Eisenhower had a mistress and wouldn’t be elected. Hell, I’d even give FDR kudos versus Rick on the leadership front.
Anyone who listens to Gingrich’s speaches walks away inspired, not nagged to death.
I'm from Grand Rapids, too. Long ago moved to Iowa, then Missouri, then New Mexico, and back to Missouri.
In recent posts, you said you're Roman Catholic and two decades ago voted for a pro-life Democrat and most people you know are Democrats. So let me guess — you're a West Sider, possibly Polish?
FWIW, I'm a Calvin College graduate (unfortunately — it was already seriously bad when I was attending), and while not ethnically Dutch, am about as close to being Dutch as you can get without being tall, blond, and having a VanderSomething last name. I'm sure I'm virtually the only person in my Ozarks town to own a decorative pair of painted wooden shoes — a gift given to me by my Korean wife who saw them in a store while we were living in Holland and didn't understand the implications of “klompen.”
What do you make of Chuck Yob's support for Santorum and the Amway family backing of the Romneys? As one of my Calvin College professors used to say, “You can explain the CRC by sociology, not theology,” and my guess is that's the explanation for the Amway family support for long-term friends going back decades.
61 posted on Tuesday, February 21, 2012 6:36:14 PM by GOPJ: “I’ve read some of your posts - can’t figure out if you’re for Paul or Obama... Can you give me a hint?”
Here’s a hint.
Based on the name, I think he’s a Dutch guy from a RCA or CRC background in West Michigan who is mad at the cultural conservatism of the Dutch which — in fairness to their legitimate critics — can sometimes approach the full rigors of Pharisaism.
I think he’s mad at the Dutch Reformed and extends that anger to anything that looks or smells like social conservativism. I think that drives his objections toward Rick Santorum.
I’m going to make some guesses that may be wrong, but I don’t think they are.
I think Mr. Van de Koik, like lots of other Dutch people who have left the church or become theologically moderate or even outright liberal in their doctine, continues to be very conservative fiscally and politically. The sociological outworkings of Calvinism, even when shorn of their religious roots, can be very effective, to cite an early American proverb, in making a man “healthy, wealthy and wise.”
There are reasons why New England and Scotland continued to be capitalist economic powerhouses long after they had jettisoned conservative Calvinism. It takes a while to destroy the sociology of a Calvinist culture because it works from a secular pespective.
Am I right, Mr. Van de Koik? I realize I may be totally off base with you, but even if I’m wrong in your specific situation — all I know about you is what I read from you on Free Republic — I’ve seen many similar cases over the years with other people.
Of course, you don’t need to answer if I’ve touched too close to home.
But if I’ve touched too close, don’t lash out at me as an inbred Hollander — I don’t have a drop of Dutch blood, I’m an adult convert to Calvinism, and while I used to be accused of being an honorary Hollander when I lived in Grand Rapids, I’m sitting in the middle of the Missouri Ozarks attending a congregation of the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church, which was historically composed of Scots-Irish Presbyterians from the hills of the Carolinas. So don’t reject what I say because I’m Dutch — I’m not. But as a Grand Rapids native, I do know the Dutch very, very well.
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.
