Posted on 02/06/2007 3:18:16 PM PST by Jean S
I'm afraid Newt cannot win the Presidency in 2008 -- he's too polarizing. However, I'd like to see him run in order to publicize his ideas. He is a very good ideas man.
Ping
The problem, though, is that when Newt talks, he talks way too much.
Also he has too much personal baggage.
Newt has appeal to conservative die-hards such as Freepers. Does he have appeal on a personal basis to muddled moderates? No.
Whoever the GOP chooses, the Dems and MSM will seek to demonize. Newt is a big fat juicy demonization target for the Dems. They would love it if the GOP chose him.
I'm afraid Newt cannot win the Presidency in 2008 -- he's too polarizing. However, I'd like to see him run in order to publicize his ideas. He is a very good ideas man.
Like I am running a "Draft Nader" campaign.
But not because I think that he'll win, quite the opposite.
Gingrich said he first hoped to influence the presidential race by providing candidates in both parties with his "solutions" to problems such as health care, energy, education, national security and immigration.
Excerpt from: http://election2008warroom.blogspot.com/2007/01/gingrich-may-not-run-for-president.html
I have to admit I'd rather support Hunter than Newt.
You are right! Forget Newt, and Rudy? Fuggedaboutit. V's wife.
You would think everyone would learn these lessons by now...
1. Most of the electorate are sheep willing to be lead.
2. All your baggage out is an asset! No surprises in the 11th hour.
3. You have much time to compose a gracious and clever answer to any "supposed" baggage.
4. The media can be made to look foolish with proper planning.
Sometimes he's a bit off-kilter with regards to strategy, but there's no harm in expressing ones opinion.
Let's have a full field of GOP candidates BUMP TO THE TOP
so that all the good ideas can be brought forth and debated and all the lousy ideas can be refuted!
Newt's got my vote.
Duncan does not seem the type to wine and dine with media and dem types.
Newt is a pretty serious thinker.
Newt would be my first choice. I'd like to see some reliable polling numbers to see how he'd match up vs various Rat candidates, though.
But I think he's making a big mistake by putting off a decision to go forward. Other candidates are lining up the experienced campaign workers and the big money donors.
I think it's ridiculous that campaigns are starting earlier and earlier. JFK didn't announce until January, 1960.
They best get cranking..... The first Primary debate for the Republican contenders is Apr. 4, 2007 in New Hampshire.... Getting a very early start this cycle.
CNN showing a new poll with [I think I have the numbers correct]
New Hampshire
McCain .. 28
Giuliani.. 27
Romney .. 13
Gingrich.. 9
Though Newt is articulate like Reagan:
1) He had 4 years to close the border, and did nothing.
2) He had 4 years to balance the budget, and did nothing.
3) His "Bohemian Grove" connection http://www.nationalreview.com/11sep95/newt.htm will hardly light a fire under the Christian vote.
4) Other assorted baggage mentioned by other freepers.
I'm ready to run with some fresh blood that is not a proven failure.
He has a Q score lower than Hillary. It would be political suicide.
Sorry, bud, number 3 blew ALL your other arguments out the window.
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.