Posted on 04/07/2012 4:39:33 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
MILLSBORO, Del. - At 7 p.m. on Thursday, in the back shed of a firehouse, a presidential candidate who continually concedes he's unlikely to capture the Republican nomination held a rally - and 350 people showed up.
Earlier, Newt Gingrich spoke to more than 150 people in nearby Magnolia. And a day earlier, he greeted a sold-out auditorium that seats more than 400 at the UniversityofNorthCarolina-Wilmington.
The Republicans who come to Gingrich's campaign events, signs in hand and ready to offer standing ovations, are under no illusions that the former House speaker is going to overtake Mitt Romney to become to Republican nominee. In fact, many say they're ready to support Romney if he gets the nomination as expected.
For now, they just like hearing what Gingrich has to say.
"I love the guy," said Linda Creasy of Lewes, Del. "I'd love to see him in there. I think he's the smartest; I think he has the most to offer. He just doesn't have the most money."
....After the speech, Sussex County Republican Party spokesman Duke Brooks said he'll vote for Gingrich in the Apr. 24 Delaware primary. "There's no question about it,"...
Asked whether he holds out hope that his candidate will somehow become that nominee,.."Mathematically, it seems not." But..he finds "interesting" Gingrich's argument that however unlikely, a win in Delaware could reverberate in larger states such as North Carolina and Texas.
"Even if we still can't get the nomination, we roll into.. Tampa with a brokered convention in the offing," Brooks said. "And if we do that, in the long run I think that can only be good for the party because it's going to flesh out a lot of ideas, and a lot of people are going to pay attention to it."
That's Gingrich's message as well...
(Excerpt) Read more at cbsnews.com ...
All true, but the poor guy can’t get a vote to save his life. People like him, but refuse to vote for him.
What is interesting about Newt is that he can explain the complex in very simple terms, with uncommon ease. workers, salt of the earth.
I knew a lot of the folks in that crowd of 350, and they are all kinds of people—farmers, police, factory workers, housewives, professionals, officials, etc.—they had no problem understanding Newt and responding to him.
The real problem lies in breaking through the template the media and the GOP have relentlessly promoted about Newt—the “baggage” if you will—and I think a lot of our folks went for Santorum because he is somehow “cleaner” than Newt-—but Newt is far and away the only one who would be fearless in taking on Obama.
It is up to conservatives in the states that have voted yet to change that direction. Only half the states have held their primaries.
The media wants Newt gone because he is the biggest threat to Obama.
It’s obvious Newt has the most foresight. What needs to happen, which I think will, is Newt needs to show up at the convention and just smack the HAMMER down on the establishment. I mean raise total Cain! Make it a raucous, contentious in your face political brawl!
***********************************************************
And cap it by demanding Romney prove his NBC status with paper work.
I am curious to see what happens when/if Santorum gracefully withdraws from the primary after his upcoming defeat in PA. Could Santorum pledge his delegates to Newt, and then the conservatives in the remaining primary states coalesce around Gingrich’s nomination?
We can only hope...
I should explain myself a little more - in making my comments about appeal by IQ, I'm not necessarily speaking about the complexity of what he's saying, particularly, but the basic appeal itself. Smarter people want to live independently of government interference. This is why Santorum doesn't appeal to the higher end of the bell curve. Santorum mostly appeals to people who want, at some fundamental level, for the government to step in and run various aspects of their and other peoples' lives.
The crowds that hear Newt are self-selected. They may come from a broad swathe of society, profession-wise, but they all have one thing in common - they are all smart enough to want to run their own lives instead of having a left-socialist or a right-socialist run them for them.
For all those who are anti-Bush, please bear in mind that the Bush family has endorsed Willard. And he is also the approved candidate for the GOP establishment and George Soros. Tells you everything you need to know...
This would be awesome! At least if Santorum did this he would have some redeeming, principled, real conservative value!
“Newt is visionary!”
If Newt could have seen past his wazoo, he might have made a viable presidential candidate.
>>is beyond me.
You and Ann Coulter.
Lot’s of things are beyond folks like Ann Coulter. Toffler’s ideas among them. Just another example how, in addition to the fact that she supports Myth, she’s an Idiot.
Santorum is young. If he intends to run again in 4 or 8 years for POTUS he needs to seriously consider doing this. In the meantime he could be actively engaged in building up some more national credentials to bolster himself for the future.
I knew a lot of the folks in that crowd of 350, and they are all kinds of people—farmers, police, factory workers, housewives, professionals, officials, etc.—they had no problem understanding Newt and responding to him.
The real problem lies in breaking through the template the media and the GOP have relentlessly promoted about Newt—the “baggage” if you will—and I think a lot of our folks went for Santorum because he is somehow “cleaner” than Newt-—but Newt is far and away the only one who would be fearless in taking on Obama.
It is up to conservatives in the states that have voted yet to change that direction. Only half the states have held their primaries."
_________________________________
Great post "exit82!"
This could clear up the political baggage. God has forgiven Newt his social baggage.
Does Ryan Now Agree with Gingrich? [And now, here's the REST of the story] “There is a perception lingering about NewtGingrich that he was a critic of PaulRyan's budget plan and therefore a critic of conservative fiscal policy in the House of Representatives. Is that conclusion true? Or is it an oversimplification? Like many misconceptions floating around during a heated political season, it is not true. Let's examine the facts.
On April 5, 2011, Representative PaulRyan, the HouseBudgetCommittee chairman, introduced the Republican budget for 2012. Included in that budget was a premium support model for Medicare. This budget was based on a similar plan previously laid out by Ryan called TheRoadmapforAmerica'sFuture. That document had been a RepublicanParty policy call to change the budget and put it on sound fiscal grounds compared to the Democrats' unwillingness to budget at all and tax and spend into infinity. The Harry Reid-run Senate has not passed a budget for over three years, even though they are required to by law.
Gingrich praised the Ryan plan in an article in Human Events on April 13. He called it the most serious attempt by an elected official to rethink our public finances and the modern welfare state in a generation. That is quite a compliment from a former speaker of the House to a current committee chairman. Using a golfing metaphor, Gingrich celebrated the plan, calling it a Ryan "eagle." Is that comparison a negative critique, or is it commendation? One week later, on April 20, Gingrich in the same space heaped more praise on the plan. He compared PaulRyan to PaulRevere, one of our nation's great heroes, and compared the Ryan Medicare plan with his own previous welfare reform. Why would he disparage something he would compare to one of his greatest achievements? Gingrich later said he would have voted for the plan if he had had the opportunity......”
Video: Newt Rips Gore's 'Facts' To Pieces 2009 Newt testifying on Climate Change before Congress.
Jan 24, 2012 - Byron York, Chief Political Correspondent, Washington Examiner: What really happened in the Gingrich ethics case? “The Romney campaign has been hitting Newt Gingrich hard over the 1990s ethics case that resulted in the former Speaker being reprimanded and paying a $300,000 penalty. Before the Iowa caucuses, Romney and his supporting super PAC did serious damage to Gingrich with an ad attacking Gingrich's ethics past. Since then, Romney has made other ads and web videos focusing on the ethics matter, and at the Republican debate in Tampa Monday night, Romney said Gingrich "had to resign in disgrace."
In private conversations, Romney aides often mention the ethics case as part of their larger argument that Gingrich would be unelectable in a race against President Obama.
Given all the attention to the ethics matter, it's worth asking what actually happened back in 1995, 1996, and 1997. The Gingrich case was extraordinarily complex, intensely partisan, and driven in no small way by a personal vendetta on the part of one of Gingrich's former political opponents. It received saturation coverage in the press; a database search of major media outlets revealed more than 10,000 references to Gingrich's ethics problems during the six months leading to his reprimand. It ended with a special counsel hired by the House Ethics Committee holding Gingrich to an astonishingly strict standard of behavior, after which Gingrich in essence pled guilty to two minor offenses. Afterwards, the case was referred to the Internal Revenue Service, which conducted an exhaustive investigation into the matter. And then, after it was all over and Gingrich was out of office, the IRS concluded that Gingrich did nothing wrong. After all the struggle, Gingrich was exonerated.
I wrote about the matter at the time, first in a 1995 article about Gingrich's accusers and then in a 1999 piece on the Internal Revenue Service report that cleared Gingrich. (Both pieces were for The American Spectator; I'm drawing on them extensively, but unfortunately neither is available online.)
And here is a good bonus article:
The GE Years: What Made Reagan Reagan [Newt said this book explained Ronald Reagan's leadership]
You got Newt mixed up with your Lil Martian.
That is NOT because of Mitt. Newt is a stark contrast to Mitt.
The two wasting the Primary campaign oxygen are Rick and the Nut. If the contrast was between Mitt and Newt, Mitt would only have support from the GOPe. Now because of the muddied up waters by half baked conservatism and libertarianism, Newt’s clear common sense conservatism is hidden.
It’s obvious Newt has the most foresight. What needs to happen, which I think will, is Newt needs to show up at the convention and just smack the HAMMER down on the establishment. I mean raise total Cain! Make it a raucous, contentious in your face political brawl!
Mitt is going to be a disaster no matter what, there is no way conservatives are going to rally behind the doofus.
**
Amen. Newt needs to point to Romney and say, “THIS is what you want? Are you kidding me?? Let me draw some contrasts ... “
Where are the debates? Why did the debates end right when they should have started? Why did Santorum and Romney not want to debate Gingrich prior to Super Tuesday? Where is the outtrage???
A very wise freeper had this to say about what's going on right now. It taught me a lot:
It’s Huckabee bullheadedly plowing ahead of Thompson by sheer belief in his own holiness all over again. The story always starts out the same: Conservatives get a credible alternative to the Establishment front-runner, and he starts getting attacked.
Then the SoCon who stayed under the radar (Huckabee then, Santorum now) becomes everyone’s plan B, because the guy who could have won (Thompson, Gingrich) was unloaded upon by the GOP-E money machine. Then the smug supporters of the upstart underdog all thump their chest and say “NO.....YOUR GUY SHOULD DROP OUT!!”
Then the vote is already split, the credible candidate becomes non-credible because of vote-splitting, and the upstart winds-up in second place because folks trying to beat the Establishment liberal switch to plan B because the smug voters of the only holy candidate make it loudly clear that they’re going to support the holy upstart candidate even if it means the Liberals win. It JUST KEEPS HAPPENING.
In reality, what needed to happen was for Santorum to drop out early, when it became apparent that there was someone who could lead Romney in the polls for a long time, and when it was clear he had a friggin’ LITANY of ballot and delegate issues. Even if it was not Newt at the time (heck, replace Newt with Perry), Conservatives should have united around a single candidate with a full organization and little to no ballot and delegate issues, and there SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN A PLAN B. Conservative should have been forced to STAY united, learn to DEFEND their candidate rather than defect because the rich, Establishment Liberal was able to smear the credible Conservative with overwhelming cash.
If there had been no Santorum, Newt would be leading right now. He would be leading because we would have been united against Romney from day one, and there would have been no defections based on the fact that - by simply running under the radar - someone else rises because they haven’t been unloaded on.
We CANNOT keep doing this. We CANNOT keep Santoruming and Huckabeeing ourselves based on some sick notion of the holiness of a politician. We cannot keep some broke one-percenter in the race because they were able to show well in Iowa after living there for two years and facing almost no attacks because of their low polling. We cannot keep rewarding these guys for throwing Hail Mary passes when we have a chance to defeat the Liberals. No more “shoestring” campaigns, no more one-percenters who surge in time to do well in Iowa, no more long-shot dreams based on the notion that some candidate is the mostest Christianest candidate of them all.
No more Huckabees, no more Santorums. No more long-shots who surge in Iowa. Rule them out before they ruin another Primary season. Santorum was never going to get 1144 delegates - it was NEVER going to happen. The fact that people bull-headedly refused to waver from him KILLED us - and then they turned around and taunted Newt and Perry voters for voting for Santorum in desperation, citing the vote count as if nobody knows what was actually happening. No more Santorums, no more Huckabees. No more long shots, period. ~ TitansAFC
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2861639/posts?page=96#96
None of this, NOT ONE DAMN PART was by accident.
Overload with BS debates, then gone when they would best serve the purpose. Can we smell RNC somewhere in that woodpile with the RINOs and DNC? I am afraid we have been had, folks.
Am still holding out hope Newt will somehow pull off the convention coup, but must admit its a longshot now.
That's a question best asked Santorum... very interesting that both he and Mitt decided to take a 3-day weekend, and Newt is out there campaigning still.
If the following could somehow get written deep in the heart of hearts of every tired, discouraged, disillusioned Newt supporter, we could all get a second wind and soar again...
I plant it in your heart for now. May it grow and may you be blessed. And may God bless Newt.
“Forget what happened before, and do not think about the past. Look at the new thing I am going to do. It is already happening. Don’t you see it? I will make a road in the desert and rivers in the dry land. - Isaiah 43:18
How Perfect! Newt on Fox News on Easter morning...
HAVE A WONDERFUL AND BLESSED EASTER! Take heart, feel His touch, He is with us.
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.