Posted on 12/08/2011 7:14:36 AM PST by Berlin_Freeper
He has surged to the top of the polls, having been crowned the latest Tea Party favorite by the movement’s rank and file. Newt Gingrich’sappeal is not universal among Tea Party conservatives, but for now he is their anointed warrior, boosted by his string of fiery debate performances filled with irreverent quips.
As Gingrich courts the group that will be so crucial to his success in Iowa and beyond, Gallup’s latest poll of registered Republicans and Republican-leaning independents has him winning 47 percent of voters nationally who say they support the Tea Party movement. (More than half of Republicans consider themselves Tea Party supporters.) A month ago, Gingrich garnered 18 percent of Tea Party support, behind Herman Cain and Mitt Romney.
“Obviously, he’s really kind of taken over among that group,’’ said Jeff Jones, the Gallup Poll’s managing editor. “They’ve been casting about, looking for someone who is a better fit for them than Romney is. It looks like everyone’s had their chance and basically squandered it, so that leaves Gingrich.’’
(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com ...
Maybe but I believe it to be accurate. Newt is surging not because he is the most qualified candidate in the race, far from it in actuality but more of the 'last man standing' by happenstance. Sad, truly sad. To me it goes to show how bad (as in pathetic) things are in the Republican Party today. How low it has sunk.
And 30 second debate sound bytes are what we should be basing our vote on?
For the record, I’m voting for Bachmann in the primary, and if there is no Tea Party candidate in the general, I’ll be writing in Sarah Palin.
Tea Partiers don’t vote RINO. Ever.
Prescience belies Obama-like hubris.
Your Free Speech is going to cost you dearly under a RINO Presidential administration.
As a Tea Partier and relaively new to the world of politics. I got interested some 5-6 yrs ago, I can say that I know enough about Newt to know I won’t be voting for him.
Newt and the Tea Party have nothing in common, I question the notion of Tea party Support.
Not this Tea Partier, unless I have absolutely no other choice.
>>“Maybe that’s the plan. The GOP elite hate the Tea Party.”
>And, Newt betrayed the TP in 2009. My hunch is he’ll do it again.
Newt is a serial betrayer — both in private and in public.
I understand the desperation leading to good people gravitating to Newt. But I promise you, if Newt gets any kind of power, the backsliding, liberal big govt tendencies he has will all come slithering out of the woodwork.
Newt Ping!
LOL. I think we've done enough waiting for Sarah to make up her mind. And I don't think most TEA Party people need anyone to tell them what to think.
There have been so many statements made on this thread that I would like to respond to. I’m glad Newt is uniting the Republican party and the Tea Party. The Republican party gets more conservative and the Tea Party gains power and we hopefully avoid a 3rd party strong enough to keep the democrats in power.
I am a member of the Tea Party and have participated in many Tea Party events localy and nationally. I’m a lifelong Republican and have participated since 1964 when I first voted. I consider myself a conservative, Tea Party, Republican and don’t consider myself a naive newcomer and I fully support Newt. I know what Newt did for Republicans, Conservatives and the Country.
My wife has supported Newt from day one, I hesitated knowing Newt had baggage and I had high hopes for a super hero as pure as the new driven snow would appear, I had thought it would be Perry. A leader did rise, Newt, just not as pure as the new driven snow, I’ll take Newt, warts and all.
A good search term would be “Environmental Solutions Agency”
Being a little bit progressive is like being a little bit pregnant.
Since I consider myself ultra conservative, your response is incongruos.
Are you contending that the Federal Government has no role in environmental protection? If so I would love to hear your reasoning? There is a full body of laws and regulations regarding environmental protection. Are you advocating abolishing all of them? Or alternatively freezing them as is? If neither of these, what mechanism do you propose for eliminating costly, ill advised, restrictive and needless regulations?
Aside from presenting an inaccurate and needlessly denigrating attitude I thank you for actually providing the answer to my question. Where upon I did search "Environmental Solutions Agency." The available information was limited, however it did include quotes from Newt.
Regarding the EPA,
"What you have is a very expensive bureaucracy that across the board makes it harder to solve problems, slows down the development of new innovations."
He further commented that:
"We need to have an agency that is first of all limited, but cooperates with the 50 states."
Unless you advocate a total Laissez-faire approach to protecting the environment, what is your problem with an agency that is limited and cooperates with the states? There were additional quotes from his spokeperson indicating the agency should cooperate with business in identify solutions to environmental issues. Is that a problem?
If my mind were already made up, I would not take the time to compose rational questions. You have an opportunity to affect my opinion by providing rational responses.
Obama, McCain, Gingrich: Same circus, different clown.
I'll stay home.
You may not have a home if you give Obama four more years.
Not me.
Unless another candidate can prove to me they can beat the powerful demagogue Obama by beating the supposedly hapless Newt and Mitt, this conservative Tea Party supporter and 13 year FReeper is going to vote for Newt Gingrich.
That's the truth. It might take Gingrich, Romney, McCain, etc... six years to accomplish what Obama can do in four.
Under those circumstances, maybe Obama's the better choice. Let's get it over with. An addict usually has to "hit bottom" before change (you can believe in) actually occurs.
Newt was speaker of the House, so his record should be limited to actions taken by the house. The fact that the Senate (which was actually under Republican control) was non-cooperative and President Clinton used the threat of Veto lavishly, is not a reflection on the beliefs or convictions of Newt. Newt was more than just good intentions. He was nearly 100% on getting promised items to the floor of the House for a vote.
You are wrong. Sarah will endorse Newt because as she always talks about Republicans not slamming each other, Newt practices her message. He has not criticized any GOP candidate even Paul and that has to take some real personal self-control.
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.