Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Gingrich says campaign 'on a shoestring,' signals he's preparing for Romney nomination
FoxNews.com ^ | April 08, 2012 | N/A

Posted on 04/09/2012 6:59:00 AM PDT by PSYCHO-FREEP

(Snip)

Though Gingrich and Romney throughout January engaged in some of the most personal attacks of the presidential primary campaign, Gingrich said Sunday that the two are at peace with one another.

"I hit him as hard as I could, he hit me as hard as he could -- turned out he had more things to hit with than I did," Gingrich said. "That's part of the business."

Gingrich said that if Romney wins 1,144 delegates and clinches the nomination, he will do "everything I can" to support him going into November.

"We are absolutely committed to defeating Barack Obama," he said. "I will work as hard for (Romney) as I would for myself."

He said he's already spoken with RNC Chairman Reince Priebus about how he can help going into November. "Beyond that ... I'll go back to a post-political career," Gingrich said.

Still, he said supporters are urging him to stay in.

"I do think there's a desire for a more idea-oriented Republican Party," Gingrich said.

Gingrich said he's seeing a "great response" in the upcoming primaries for Delaware and North Carolina, and will "see what happens" in those two states. Despite his comments Sunday, the candidate had recently told The Washington Post that "nothing" could get him out of the race quite yet.

Gingrich said he wants to campaign for changes in the party platform -- namely, to push for domestic energy production, to "stand up very firmly for religious liberty" and to reform the Social Security system.

Romney is leading the field with 660 delegates, according to the Associated Press tally. Rick Santorum is trailing with 281, followed by Gingrich with 135 and Ron Paul with 51.

(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...


TOPICS: Extended News; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2012gopprimary; newt2012; romneysucks; stupidparty
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 161-180 next last
To: Longbow1969
Good post! You laid it out in a way that cannot be argued, although most of the “Huckabee” types here, will surely do just that. But the bottom line is the reality we see today. And ironically, most of them will still argue about that!
61 posted on 04/09/2012 8:28:11 AM PDT by PSYCHO-FREEP (If you come to a fork in the road, take it........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Yashcheritsiy

Rick Santorum is a big-government pseudo-conservative. He has consistently voted to increase the size and scope of government in our lives, just as has the rest of the establishment wing of the Republican Party, of which he is a member in good standing.

“Exit polls aren’t ‘concrete evidence.’ “

Yes, exit polls are the most concrete evidence we do have in terms of voter preference.

“The simple fact of the matter is that a lot of Santorum’s supporters, who may actually believe themselves to be “very conservative,” are actually big-government, semi-socialistic, progressive social gospel supporters. Which means they are not true conservatives.”

Ah, I see. Again, the evidence for this position? Are you saying that only people who believe what you do are true conservatives?

Do you believe that the federal government should protect the unborn the same way that it protects everyone else?

“He has consistently voted to increase the size and scope of government in our lives”

Which is why he supported the welfare reform act? I don’t see it. He’s not perfect, that’s for sure, but he’s on the right side of the line, in favoring lowering government expeditures over increasing them.


62 posted on 04/09/2012 8:28:26 AM PDT by JCBreckenridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: JCBreckenridge
Santorum got a free pass until way after the Fla election. The attacks ads and big money were spent to take Newt out...Santorum was never a threat. Look at the creme de la creme of true conservatives that endorsed and/or spoke highly of Gingrich from Art Laffer to Thomas Sowell. Santorum is NO conservative and after all he endorsed Romney a mere 3 years ago and now he is attacking him.
RS also made very inappropriate comments on the Trayvon Martin case BEFORE the facts were in..what kind of lawyer is he? he also called Staff Sgt Bales a madman before all the facts are in...he is a loser. We know what happened to him in PA and he may lose his own state again.
Well, ‘Stand Your Ground’ is not doing what this man did,” Santorum said Friday morning at a campaign event in Monroe, La. “There’s a difference between ‘Stand Your Ground’ and doing what he did. And it’s a horrible case. It’s chilling to hear what happened, and of course the fact that law enforcement didn't’t immediately go after and prosecute this case is another chilling example of horrible decisions made by people in this process.” (Rick Santorum)
63 posted on 04/09/2012 8:31:11 AM PDT by katiedidit1 ("This is one race of people for whom psychoanalysis is of no use whatsoever." the Irish)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Yashcheritsiy
Vote Republican no matter who they nominate!!!!!

If you don’t vote Republican, you’re a TRAITOR to your COUNTRY, you filthy scoundrels!!!!!

We have lived under a two-party system for over 220 years. You can choose to influence the direction of the country under those fundamental rules of American politics, or choose to ignore those rules and relegate yourself to irrelevancy under the guise of being principled.

I see you chose the latter. I don't hold disdain for you for choosing that path, so long as you recognize what you're doing.

64 posted on 04/09/2012 8:33:01 AM PDT by Dan Nunn (Support the NRA!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: JCBreckenridge
Yes, exit polls are the most concrete evidence we do have in terms of voter preference.

Okay, I can see that what I'm saying is just going over your head.

Thanks for your opinions, they are duly noted.

65 posted on 04/09/2012 8:33:45 AM PDT by Yashcheritsiy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: PSYCHO-FREEP

Santorum wasn’t vetted until very late in the game. He was never considered a real threat.


66 posted on 04/09/2012 8:34:11 AM PDT by katiedidit1 ("This is one race of people for whom psychoanalysis is of no use whatsoever." the Irish)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: JCBreckenridge
[You consider ‘evangelicals’, and ‘homeschoolers’ as part of the fringe of conservativism?] LOL! No, I see Evangelicals and Homeschoolers, as being “Evangelicals” and “Homeschoolers”. They have nothing to do with Conservativsm, other than those types are likely to be Conservative, provided they do not try to force the rest of us into their view of theology as a criteria to being Conservative in the first place.
67 posted on 04/09/2012 8:34:49 AM PDT by PSYCHO-FREEP (If you come to a fork in the road, take it........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: altura
I'm not concerned about the futures of these politicians. My concern is for the futures of the rest of us and our Country.

I have little doubt that Gingrich's role in the 2012 campaign (either willingly or unwillingly) will be remembered as a spoiler for Romney.

Gingrich knows he can't win now. But instead of attempting to consolidate the Conservative vote, he seems to be actively supporting Romney while remaining a declared candidate.

I have to believe that Gingrich is a smart guy. Like the others, they must know that the chances of Romney winning against Obama are extremely slim. I'd bet their strategy is now just to limit the coming shift in power.

There's a vindictive part of me that would like to think these guys (the GOP Establishment) are going to get what they deserve, another 4 years of Obama and the loss of control in the House and Senate. But, the reality is that they (on a personal level) don't have a stake in the politics of the future. Their lives will go on just fine, employed, making great money and retaining their lifestyles. It's the rest of us that will have to suffer.

68 posted on 04/09/2012 8:35:01 AM PDT by Rational Thought
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: no dems

The fact that Newt was on the ballot in all of those places and that Newt votes exceeded the difference between Santorum and Romney in 5 states, 6 if you count WA, as the Paul folks there are now supporting Santorum.

6 states - WA, WY, WI, MI, OH and AK

Alaska: 32.23 R
30.11 S
13.29 G

That’s a perfect vote split for Romney.

Ohio: 37.95 R
37.07 S
14.59 G

Another perfect vote split for Romney

Michigan: 41.10 R
37.87 S
6.43 G

This one was a bit more challenging, but Newt still pulled it out.

Wyoming: 38.99 R
31.93 S
7.83 G

There we go, nice and easy. Another Romney vote split.

So who’s costing who delegates? Yes, Newt is votesplitting and throwing states to Romney.


69 posted on 04/09/2012 8:37:38 AM PDT by JCBreckenridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: JCBreckenridge

if you want Santorum to have any chance at the nomination, we need to keep fighting.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

HELL YEAH!! “Remember the Alamo” Oops.... The Alamo suffered a terrible defeat. My bad. LOL.


70 posted on 04/09/2012 8:37:38 AM PDT by no dems (I've always been crazy but that's the only thing that's kept me from going insane.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Mangia E Statti Zitto

Right. I see.

So you’d personally rather see them have more or less influence?


71 posted on 04/09/2012 8:39:10 AM PDT by JCBreckenridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Dan Nunn
I see you chose the latter. I don't hold disdain for you for choosing that path, so long as you recognize what you're doing.

Let's think a little more broadly.

Are you going to vote Whig this November?

No? Why not?

Oh right, they don't exist anymore.

The fact of a two party system in no way defines what those two parties have to be. I'd be happy with destructing the GOP and replacing it with a conservative party that actually has principles.

In fact, there's a good argument to be made that this should happen to parties everyone in a while - be broken up, shaken up, reformed into something else - just to loosen the hold of party elites who inevitably become entrenched and turn the party into their own personal playground rather than allowing it remain a mass vehicle for large portions of the electorate to express themselves (what parties are *supposed* to be).

The GOP had this happen to them back in the 1910s, and then again in the late 1970s, only the shakeups occurred within the party rather than acting to replace it. The Democrats haven't had this happen to them for a long, long time (arguably since the 1880s), which is why they are so much more entrenched and corrupt even than the GOP-E.

However, anytime the watchword becomes "vote for the good of the PARTY" rather than "vote for the principles that made this country," there's a big, big problem. We're facing that now.

72 posted on 04/09/2012 8:41:43 AM PDT by Yashcheritsiy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: JCBreckenridge

Rick Santorum’s Voting Record:

Chew on this for a while, then counter all of this info with more of your unsubstantiated claims anout Santorum. At least it will keep you honest for a short while.

[As you decide which candidate is worthy of your vote in the primary, Liberty Counsel Action encourages you to review the positions of all of the candidates on controversial issues. Here is Rick Santorum’s voting record on some key issues. Each vote linked to senate.gov roll call record.]

NEA
Voted for taxpayer funding of the National Endowment for the Arts.
Voted against a 10% cut in the budget for National Endowment for the Arts.

Bankruptcy
Voted for a Schumer amendment to make the debts of pro-life demonstrators not dischargeable in bankruptcy.

Defense and Foreign Policy
Voted for the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC).
Voted against requiring the President to certify that the CWC is effectively verifiable.
Voted against requiring the President to certify that that Iran, Iraq, Syria, Libya, North Korea, China, and all other countries determined to be state sponsors of terror have joined CWC prior to submitting the instrument of ratification.
Voted for the START II Treaty
Voted to allow the sale of supercomputers to China.
Voted to ban antipersonnel landmines
Voted against increasing defense spending offset by equivalent cuts in non-defense spending.
Voted to require that Federal bureaucrats get the same payraises as uniformed military.
Voted to allow food and medicine sales to state sponsors of terror and tyranical regimes such as Libya and Cuba.
Voted to limit the President’s authority to impose sanctions on nations for reasons of national security unless the sanctions were approved by a multilateral regime.
Voted against requiring Congressional authorization for military action in Bosnia.
Voted to give $25 million in foreign aid to North Korea
Voted to weaken alien terrorist deportation provisions. If the Court determines that the evidence must be withheld for national security reasons, the Justice Department must still provide a summary of the evidence sufficient for the alien terrorist to mount a defense against deportation.
Voted against delaying the India Nuclear until the President certified that India had agreed to suspend military-to-military exchanges with Iran.
Voted against the Conventional Trident Missile Program

Nominations
Voted for Richard Paez to the 9th Curcuit (cloture)
Voted for Sonia Sotomayor, Circuit Judge
Voted for Richard Holbrooke to be Ambassador to the UN
Voted for Margaret Morrow to be District Judge
Voted twice for Marsha Berzon to the 9thg Circuit
Voted for Mary McLaughlin to be District Judge
Voted for Tim Dyk to be District Judge
Voted for James Brady to be District Judge

Labor
Voted against National Right to Work Act
Voted against Real of Davis-Bacon Prevailing union wages
Voted for Alexis Herman to be Secretary of Labor
Voted for mandatory Federal child care funding
Voted for Trade Adjustment Assistance.
Voted for Job Corps funding
Voted twice in support of Fedex Unionization
Voted against allowing a waiver of Davis-Bacon in emergency situations.
Voted for minimum wage increases six times here here here here here and here
Voted to require a union representative on an IRS oversight board.
Voted to exempt IRS union representative from criminal ethics laws.
Voted against creating independent Board of Governors to investigate IRS abuses.

Guns
Voted to require pawn shops to do background checks on people who pawn a gun.
Voted twice to make it illegal to sell a gun without a secure storage or safety device
Voted for a Federal ban on possession of “assault weapons” by those under 18.
Voted for Federal funding for anti-gun education programs in schools.
Voted for anti-gun juvenile justice bill.

Reform
Voted for funding for the legal services corporation.
Voted twice for a Congressional payraise.
Voted to impose a uniform Federal mandate on states to force them to allow convicted rapits, arsonists, drug kingpins, and all other ex-convicts to vote in Federal elections.
Voted for the Specter “backup plan” to allow campaign finance reform to survive if portions of the bill were found unconstitutional.
Voted to mandate discounted broadcast times for politicians.
Voted for a McCain amendment to require State and local campaign committees to report all campaign contributions to the FEC and to require all campaign contributions to be reported to the FEC within 24 hours within 90 days of an election.

Immigration
Voted against increasing the number of immigration investigators
Voted to allow illegal immigrants to receive the earned income credit before becoming citizens
Voted to give SSI benefits to legal aliens.
Voted to give welfare benefits to naturalized citizens without regard to to the earnings of their sponsors.
Voted against hiring an additional 1,000 border partrol agents, paid for by reductions in state grants.

Taxes
Voted against a flat tax.
Voted to increase tobacco taxes to pay for Medicare prescription drugs
Voted to increase tobacco taxes to fund health insurance subsidies for small businesses.
Voted to increase tobacco taxes to pay for an $8 billion increase in child healh insurance.
Voted to increase tobacco taxes to pay for an increase in NIH funding.
Voted twice for internet taxes.
Voted to allow gas tax revenues to be used to subsidize Amtrak.
Voted to strike marriage penalty tax relief and instead provide fines on tobacco companies.
Voted against repealing the Clinton 4.3 cent gas tax increase.
Voted to increase taxes by $2.3 billion to pay for an Amtrak trust fund.
Voted to allow welfare to a minor who had a child out of wedlock and who resided with an adult who was on welfare within the previous two years.
Voted to increase taxes by $9.4 billion to pay for a $9.4 billion increase in student loans.
Voted to say that AMT patch is more important than capital gains and dividend relief.

Welfare
Voted against food stamp reform
Voted against Medicaid reform
Voted against TANF reform
Voted to increase the Social Services Block Grant from $1 billion to $2 billion
Voted to increase the FHA loan from $170,000 to $197,000. Also opposed increasing GNMA guaranty from 6 basis points to 12.
Voted for $2 billion for low income heating assistance.

Waste
Sponsored An amendment to increase Amtrak funds by $550 million
Voted to use HUD funds for the Joslyn Art Museum (NE), the Stand Up for Animals project (RI) and the Seattle Art Museum’s Olympic Sculpture Project (WA)
Voted to increase spending on social programs by $7 billion
Voted to increase NIH funding by $1.6 billion.
Voted to increase NIHnding by $700 million
Voted to for a $2 million earmark to renovate the Vulcan Monument (AL)
Voted for a $1 billion bailout for the steel industry
Voted against requiring that highway earmarks would come out of a state’s highway allocation
Voted to allow Market Access Program funds to go to foreign companies.
Voted to allow OPIC to increase its administrative costs by 50%
Voted against transferring $20 million from Americorps to veterans.
Voted for the $140 billion asbestos compensation bill.
Voted against requiring a uniform medical criteria to ensure asbestos claims were legitimate.
Voted to increase community development programs by $2 billion.

Spending and Entitlements
Voted to make Medicare part B premium subsidies an new entitlement.
Voted against paying off the debt ($5.6 trillion at the time) within 30 years.
Voted to give $18 billion to the IMF.
Voted to raid Social Security instead of using surpluses to pay down the debt.

Health Care
Voted to allow states to impose health care mandates that are stricter than proposed new Federal mandates, but not weaker.
Voted twice for Federal mental health parity mandates in health insurance.
Voted against a allow consumers the option to purchase a plan outside the parity mandate.

Education
Voted to increase Federal funding for teacher testing
Voted to increase spending for the Department of Education by $3.1 billion.
Voted against requiring courts to consider the impact of IDEA awards on a local school district.

Energy
Voted to allow the President to designate certain sites as interim nuclear waste storage sites in the event that he determines that Yucca Mountain is not a suitable site for a permanent waste repository. Those sites are as follows: the nuclear waste site in Hanford, Washington; the Savannah River Site in South Carolina; Barnwell County, South Carolina; and the Oak Ridge Reservation in Tennessee.
Voted to make fuel price gouging a Federal crime


73 posted on 04/09/2012 8:42:24 AM PDT by PSYCHO-FREEP (If you come to a fork in the road, take it........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Yashcheritsiy

So what do we do? Stay home? I can’t do that.


74 posted on 04/09/2012 8:44:03 AM PDT by no dems (I've always been crazy but that's the only thing that's kept me from going insane.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: JCBreckenridge
So who’s costing who delegates? Yes, Newt is votesplitting and throwing states to Romney.

You're assuming that all of Newt's votes would have gone to Santorum otherwise, when actual polling (not the doodle on a napkin "exit polling" that you seem to like) has said that without Gingrich, his supporters would split about evenly between the other two. Which means that in each and every one of those states, without Gingrich, Romney would STILL have won - and in fact would have won by enough to REALLY be mashing Santorum in the delegate count.

75 posted on 04/09/2012 8:45:12 AM PDT by Yashcheritsiy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: Longbow1969

Fantastic - and depressing - post. Thanks for sharing.


76 posted on 04/09/2012 8:45:52 AM PDT by Dan Nunn (Support the NRA!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: katiedidit1

“Santorum got a free pass until way after the Fla election.”

Ok, and the evidence for this?

“The attacks ads and big money were spent to take Newt out”

Santorum won a state before Newt. This makes no sense to me. Newt finished 4th in both Iowa and New Hampshire and wasn’t competitive in either state. Santorum won Iowa.

“Santorum was never a threat.”

Which is why the Romney campaign said they got their butts whupped in MI, CO and MN?

“Look at the creme de la creme of true conservatives”

Oh yes, I see. Like the Duggars? Michelle Malkin?

“Santorum is NO conservative and after all he endorsed Romney a mere 3 years ago”

So now were supposed to believe that Newt supporters who are now backing Romney when Santorum is still around are more conservative?

I hope you see why this particular argument is no longer relevant. Hey, in the here and now, Santorum is still battling Romney. And here you are supporting Romney.

“We know what happened to him in PA and he may lose his own state again.”

Like in Virginia?


77 posted on 04/09/2012 8:46:22 AM PDT by JCBreckenridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: no dems
So what do we do? Stay home? I can’t do that.

No - just the opposite. Do some heavy lifting. Start organising conservatives. There's still eight months to the election. There's no reason we can't still have an impact on this election, inside or outside the GOP, whichever it ends up having to be.

78 posted on 04/09/2012 8:46:49 AM PDT by Yashcheritsiy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: Yashcheritsiy

“You’re assuming that all of Newt’s votes would have gone to Santorum”

That’s how the votesplitting argument works.

“Which means that in each and every one of those states, without Gingrich, Romney would STILL have won”

It also means that Newt has zero value as a kingmaker, if this happens to be the case that his supporters are evenly divided between the two remaining candidates.

So which is it?


79 posted on 04/09/2012 8:49:31 AM PDT by JCBreckenridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Yashcheritsiy; JCBreckenridge

Newt didn’t even campaign in those States. Yeah, he got some votes from people who could not stomach Romney or Santorum. Otherwise, they’d have stayed home.


80 posted on 04/09/2012 8:50:26 AM PDT by no dems (I've always been crazy but that's the only thing that's kept me from going insane.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 161-180 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson