Skip to comments.Newt Claims To Be More Electable than Rick ... But he is not (Unfavorability ratings will doom Newt)
Posted on 01/17/2012 10:28:06 AM PST by Qbert
Newt Gingrich has told voters in South Carolina not to vote for Rick Santorum because Santorum cant defeat either Mitt Romney or Barack Obama. In particular, Gingrich made an appeal to conservatives: If you're a conservative, just look at the polls. I am the only candidate capable of stopping a moderate from winning the nomination. Indeed, Gingrich claimed, If you vote for Sen. Santorum, in effect youre voting for Gov. Romney to be the nominee because he's not going to beat him. And the only way you can stop Gov. Romney for all practical purposes is to vote for Gingrich. That's just a fact and it's a mathematical fact now.
Well, here's a fact, indeed a mathematical fact: In the first actual vote held this year, Rick Santorum came from behind to double Newt Gingrich's vote in Iowa, and then in New Hampshire, Santorum fought Gingrich to a draw. It's pretty nervyeven by Newtonian standards!for Gingrich to say that mathematics requires voters to abandon Santorum for Gingrich.
As for the polls: In national polls among Republicans, Santorum ties Gingrich. In South Carolina, Gingrich (from neighboring Georgia) is, it's true, ahead of Santorumby single digits. But if were looking at polls (as Gingrich urges we do), theres one important set of numbers conservatives need to keep in mind.
Two national polls conducted in the last few days, by CNN and Fox, asked the core question of whether voters had a favorable or unfavorable view of the candidates. Romney is at 43 percent favorable to 42 percent unfavorable in one poll, and 45 percent favorable to 38 percent unfavorable in the other, giving him an average of a +4 percent favorability. President Obama is at 49 percent favorable to 49 percent unfavorable and 51 percent to 46 percent, for a +2.5 percent average. Santorum isn't far behind, with numbers that would put him within striking distance in a fall campaign, especially given that he's still less well known: He's at 31 percent favorable to 34 percent unfavorable, and 31 percent to 36 percent, for an average of -4 percent.
So, there are three candidates at +4 percent, +2.5 percent, and -4 percent, all well within competitive bounds of one another. Newt Gingrich? He's at 28 percent favorable to 58 percent unfavorable in one poll, 27 percent to 56 percent in the otheraveraging -29.5 percent. Yes, -29.5 percent.
Newt Gingrich should never be underestimated. Perhaps he could even recover from a -29.5 percent unfavorability rating. But its quite a stretch for Gingrich to claim that he has an obviously better chance to win than Rick Santorum, either against Mitt Romney or Barack Obama.
All of Santorum’s ratings taken together show he’s a consistent conservative. You can make some of the same arguments about Gingrich and what he’s supported.
You are so right. Newt is the worst nightmare of the MSM, RNC, and the political leadership in congress. If elected he would have no problem actually doing something to cut the size and scope of the US govt. Until and unless we do that nothing will change. The GOP leadership does not want change any more than the Dems. That is why they are so hell bent on nominating Willard.
Bill Kristol is go-along-to-get-along DC-insider kind of guy, a middle-of-the-road, occasionally conservative apparatchik. He likes Romney for the simple reason that Romney is a reflection of himself and the same go-along-to-get-along DC-insider, middle-of-the-road, occasionally conservative apparatchik-like persona.
Newt has negatives, sure. So does everyone. But let’s reduce this to the basics. If the Tea Party wants to influence the GOP and make it more conservative, more reflective of the values that built America, who does it need to force on the GOP? Who does it need to lead the boarding party that climbs up the side of the DC tax ship in the harbor and throws the boxes of tea (i.e. tax and spend policy priorities) overboard? Mitt the Mild and Middle of the Road or Newt the Knife.
People, this is not a difficult dilemma. It is not a dilemma at all.
As for electability, Mitt is more electable? Mitt is just as electable as the Brooklyn Bridge is sellable. He might attract a small handful more of a certain kind (and only a certain kind!) of independent voter, but his nomination will depress the conservative vote hugely. His nomination will signal the GOP’s willingness to go into the darkness of socialism more slowly, but just as surely. That is all. His nomination will be the second coming of McCain, only worse. And the fallout will be worse.
And you think that weasly little RINO voter, Ricardo Santorum with his crooked nose, is going to bring in the women’s votes?
A powerful, smart, confident MAN is what is attractive to women.
The vest projects a mamas boy who likes to avoid playing softball with the neighbor kids and stay in the kitchen with his mother, so he can lick the frosting from her cooking bowl.
Best take another look at your boy:
Voted AGAINST increasing the number of immigration investigators:
VOTED AGAINST HIRING AN ADDITIONAL 1,000 BORDER PATROL AGENTS, paid for by reductions in state grants.
VOTED TO GIVE SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS TO ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS
Voted to allow illegal immigrants to receive the earned income credit before becoming citizens.
SANTORUM: Trim Social Security now- even if painful.
VOTED AGAINST FOOD STAMP REFORM
VOTED AGAINST MEDICAID REFORM
Voted to increase the social services block grant from $1 BILLION to $2 BILLION
VOTED TO RAID SOCIAL SECURITY instead of using surpluses to pay down the debt.
Voted to impose a uniform federal tax mandate on states to force them to allow convicted , rapists, arsonists drug kingpins and all other ex-convicts to vote in federal elections.
We need a MAN who is afraid of noone.
Santorum needs to drop out for the sake of this country.
It is not a moot point that Romney's superPac attacked first, falsely, and ferociously.
Moreover, Romney lies. He knows EVERYONE in the superPac working for him. They are former staff members.
He also lies about not being able to influence them. The law simply says that Romney can't be in charge of that Pac. It doesn't say that he can't reject what they say, demand they tell the truth, name them by name and call them liars and cheats.
Romney is deception personified: Newt is right to call him a liar. Romney is a liar.
A co-author and architect of the “Contract with America”, Gingrich was at the forefront of Republican Party success in the 1994 congressional election. In 1995, Time named him “Man of the Year” for his role in ending 40 years of majority control by the Democratic Party. During his four years as House speaker, the House enacted welfare reform, passed a capital gains tax cut in 1997,
BooksNonfictionGingrich has authored or co-authored 17 non-fiction books since 1982.
The Government’s Role in Solving Societal Problems, Associated Faculty Press, Incorporated. January 1982 ISBN 978-0-86733-026-7
Window of Opportunity. Tom Doherty Associates, December 1985. ISBN 978-0-312-93923-6
Contract with America (co-editor). Times Books, December 1994. ISBN 978-0-8129-2586-9
Restoring the Dream. Times Books, May 1995. ISBN 978-0-8129-2666-8
Quotations from Speaker Newt. Workman Publishing Company, Inc., July 1995. ISBN 978-0-7611-0092-8
To Renew America. Farrar Straus & Giroux, July 1996. ISBN 978-0-06-109539-9
Lessons Learned The Hard Way. HarperCollins Publishers, May 1998 ISBN 978-0-06-019106-1
Presidential Determination Regarding Certification of the Thirty-Two Major Illicit Narcotics Producing and Transit Countries. DIANE Publishing Company, September 1999. ISBN 978-0-7881-3186-8
Saving Lives and Saving Money. Alexis de Tocqueville Institution, April 2003. ISBN 978-0-9705485-4-2
Winning the Future. Regnery Publishing, January 2005. ISBN 978-0-89526-042-0
Rediscovering God in America: Reflections on the Role of Faith in Our Nation’s History and Future, Integrity Publishers, October 2006. ISBN 978-1-59145-482-3
The Art of Transformation, with Nancy Desmond. CHT Press, November 29, 2006, ISBN 978-1-933966-00-7
A Contract with the Earth, with Terry L. Maple. Johns Hopkins University Press, October 1, 2007. ISBN 978-0-8018-8780-2
Real Change: From the World That Fails to the World That Works, Regnery Publishing, January 2008. ISBN 978-1-59698-053-2
Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less: A Handbook for Slashing Gas Prices and Solving Our Energy Crisis, with Vince Haley. Regnery Publishing, September 2008 ISBN 978-1-59698-576-6
5 Principles for a Successful Life: From Our Family to Yours, with Jackie Gingrich Cushman, Crown Publishing Group, May 2009 ISBN 978-0-307-46232-9
To Save America: Stopping Obama’s Secular-Socialist Machine, with Joe DeSantis. Regnery Publishing, May 2010 ISBN 978-1-59698-596-4
FictionGingrich co-wrote the following alternate history novels and series of novels with William R. Forstchen.
1945 Baen Books, August 1995 ISBN 978-0-671-87739-2
Civil War Series
Gettysburg: A Novel of the Civil War Thomas Dunne Books, June 2003 ISBN 978-0-312-30935-0
Grant Comes East Thomas Dunne Books, June 2004 ISBN 978-0-312-30937-4
Never Call Retreat: Lee and Grant: The Final Victory Thomas Dunne Books, June 2005 ISBN 978-0-312-34298-2
Pacific War Series
Pearl Harbor: A Novel of December 8th Thomas Dunne Books, May 2007 ISBN 978-0-312-36350-5
Days of Infamy Thomas Dunne Books, April 2008 ISBN 978-0-312-36351-2
Revolutionary War Series
To Try Men’s Souls: A Novel of George Washington and the Fight for American Freedom, October 2009, ISBN 978-0-312-59106-9
Valley Forge: George Washington and the Crucible of Victory, November 2010, ISBN 978-0-312-59107-6
Me too....watching him slap down the Juanster last night was the best thing I've seen in a loooong while!
Loved Bret's expression at the end of it....priceless!!
Here's a recap if you want to see it again:
Hey, on second thought, maybe you should change that to Rambino!!!!
It's not going to work Gingrich has always been unlikeable. When he was in office, the Democrats didn't like him, the Republicans didn't like him and the Independents didn't like him. His staff didn't like him. He may be smart and he may be a good debater, but he is not a likeable person.
Obama did not get elected because he was smart or because he was a good debater. However, one of the keys to Obama's election is that he was very likeable, and the polls show this is still true.
If Republicans nominate a person who has one of the most tawdry personal histories in politics and who is a bastion of unlikeability, and who has on numerous occasions cozyed up to the worst of the ultra liberals supporting their progressive positions, they will get what they deserve.
I think this is true too. There were actually only 2 candidates last night that I thought showed the fire in the belly to win, and that was Newt and Perry. Reagan was by all intents and prognostications unelectable too.
Reagan had that same clarity of message as Newt. We need someone with that same ability to articulate and tie everything back to founding principles.
If Santorum was ever ahead of Romney in the polls, I missed it. Three weeks of unanswered negative ads in Iowa against Newt had a large impact on his results. Pointing to Iowa while ignoring this impact, is an intellectually deficient argument.
Bottom-line is it ain't over till the fat lady sings. It's too early for her to be even warming up. This process may have a long way to go. It's too early to count the most articulate conservative out.
I haven't heard anyone do such a good job since Ronald Reagan. Will the nominee be a bold, articulate, passionate candidate, or not? Will we sacrifice a clear message for perceived electability shaped by LSM?
This is a center right country. There is more of us than there are of them. The clear message works every time - an uncomfortable fact that the Rockefeller wing of GOP doesn't like to acknowledge.
maybe SP/greengrinch, in either order, to double down on the ‘unfavorability’ and polorization demographic...???
You've bought the media hype that the Teleprompter-in-Chief is somehow a brilliant, mesmerizing speaker. Americans quickly discovered that wasn't the case when Obama had to make his own statements and couldn't rely on a pre-written script to help him. It's fairly easy to debate Obama, even Bobby Rush and John McCain held their own and came off well. Pretty much any Republican candidate besides Perry will do fine.
This is all from anti-Santorum websites. Nearly all of it taken out of context like Santorum approving to give felons the right to vote. FReepers should not be spreading these lies by lazy reference to clumsy and untrue weblinks. These are libelous charges against Santorum and every thinking person knows.
Go check the recent CNN polling on how Gingrich fares with key demographics. His negatives fall into the cellar. This is not an election Republicans can afford to lose. Part of the reason Romney bests Gingrich is because of the former’s telegenic appeal. Even in the debates for all his bravado, Gingrich does not look “presidential.” He slouches, and whines against negative ads. His ratings fell into dust after the super-pacs went after him. Gingrich shoots his mouth off like the ads against Bain Capital that backfired big time. All this is kindergarten stuff compared to what’s coming from Obama and his super pacs. Wake up and smell the coffee. If Santorum gets the favorite son vote in PA and brings in the Reagan Democrats, its all over for Obama. Gingrich has the $1.6m Freddie Mac albatross over his neck and Obama ain’t going to let go of that.
"I think that if Newt wins the nomination, and people actually watch him campaign, his negatives will drop significantly."
If he can't even hold the lead with (primarily) Republicans in Iowa without becoming completely undone by Romney's minor (relatively speaking, money-wise) hit jobs... then how is he going to hold up to Axelgoebbels and the MSM in the general?
You’re so wrong. Ricardo (RINO vote) can’t possibly win.
Obama would tear him a new one.
NO...I have NOT bought the MEDIA hype.... Santorum is kind of a snooze....he is NO better than McCain (other than policies, of course) who did “debate” Obama, and as I said, he can be easily pigeonholed...
OK, so Newt had a less than stellar moment in responding to Romney in Iowa, and it cost him.
But I think he will be much better prepared against Obama, from whom he will expect the attacks. (I do think he was caught by surprise with Romney. Maybe he shouldn't have been, but I don't think he'll make that same mistake again.)
You think Rick Santorum or Rick Perry will do better? I don't.
Also, this one:
You gonna tell me that Santorum or Perry will be anywhere near this passionate or compelling or articulate? Yeah, right.
He fumbled his chance big time: Romney should've been DOA because of Romneycare, and everything else.
Newt's an extremely incisive, bright guy... but he's like a box of chocolates. And he unraveled because Romney's henchmen knew he has his weaknesses- and they exploited them.
Newt had a wonderful chance when he was in the lead before Iowa to put a fork in him... and what did we get? Very little. Then came the weird, convoluted attacks on Bain, ads about how Romney speaks a foreign language, ads about the dog on the car roof, etc. He had months and months to prepare his attack on Myth Romney, and he squandered it. The only questions is... why?
In a supportive post to Santorum a few days ago I had the audacity (afterall who am I compared to the pinheads he has for political advisors)to suggest he ignore Newt, Perry and Romney and go directly after The Usurping Marxist Onada.
Well guess what? He continues his low key, don’t upset anybody campaign plan. And Newt goes directly for Onada in the SC faux debate. Result: Unabashed standing Os.
Santorum is missing the boat. He may still have a chance in SC, but he must take on Onada. There’s plenty of material and conservatives want to hear it. Onada and his Marxist cronies are the enemy that must be defeated. Who ever does that most effectively will win the nomnination—and the election. It really is just that simple.
As for Newt, at this stage in his life he’ll say anything that will return him to the public trough. Nancy Pelosi owns him. I like what he said the other night, but I don’t believe a word he says.
Bill Kristol and the conserv media have been in the Mitt corner , like Hugh Hewitt for now over 5 yrs. They do not like Newt because he is so wild and unconcerned about the Estab. thoughts and policies of going across the aisle. He is a snit guy but that is what we need now to rescue this economy, our military, give us border protection, allow our domestic energy systems to prosper and to clean up the scandal-ridden Bama Admin. and the AG’s DOJ. Rick and Mitt are fine people but we need a tiger not puppies now.
Regarding win-ability, Santorum is the better bet. Since his negatives are nowhere near as high as Gingrich, the pool of voters he will pull from is much larger. And he definitely looks better than Newt. Most of the pull for Obama was that he looked much younger and energetic than McCain. Like it or not, that’s what voters look for in choosing a President.
THank you. I don’t think I’ll ever get tired of that. And he’s had so many of these moments.
I don’t think I was so excited about hearing a politician speak than when Sarah gave her acceptance speech.
But already Fox etc are diluting it, except Krauthammer who was a true believer tonight. You could tell he wanted to talk at length about Newt, but Bair cut him off.
Then that goofy Kristin Powers says, “I’m actually in agreement with much of what Ron Paul says.”
“Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth.” - Matthew 5:5
“How many divisions does the Pope of Rome have?” - Stalin
You have no idea how much strength, courage and forbearance Santorum has in going forward on principle.
I tell you one thing, no matter what happens, I will never vote for Newt due to the ugliness of his bots.
If your premise is that Obama is such an amazing, brilliant speaker that NO Republican candidate can possibly stand on the same stage as the mighty Obama and do a good job debating him besides the super brainy Newt Gingrich, then you've bought the media hype. Interestingly enough, most of the general public (especially independents) no longer buys this "masterful orator Obama" premise, your portrayal of Obama's dazzling speak skills is right out of the 2008 media script. Most Americans have now seen Obama speak without a teleprompter and realize he's just not that hot at communicating his thoughts to the public on his own.
I've been watching Obama debate since 2000, and if a total zero like Bobby Rush can effectively debate him, then most politicians would be able to do the same (the exception: Rick Perry). Even some dope like Huntsman would have done fine. McCain did fine too, he certainly outmaneuvered Obama on the firing policy questions and there was no debate where Obama kicked McCain's butt (though in the second debate, they BOTH succeeded in putting the viewers to asleep). McCain lost because there's more to elections then how the candidate does during three brief 1-hour debates.
Fieldmarshaldj is right, the Gingrich backers are sounding more and more like Katherine Harris fans on FR who continually blamed everyone else for her problems and would not listen to any negatives about her showing she couldn't win a general election. Just as you've drank the "Obama is a brilliant speaker" kool-aid, the Harris backers heard the "Bush wouldn't be President today if Katherine Harris hadn't changed the game in Florida" so many times they started to believe it. Neither of these premises are true. Obama is not a super smart guy who can whup most people at communicating his ideas, and Katherine Harris did not intervene in Florida and ensure Bush won it in exchange for a cushy political job later on. The voters of Florida "gave" the state to Bush and Harris simply did her job and certified the results to the rightful winner. Obama's not a legendary communicator, and without his teleprompter, is it fairly easy to trip him up. His "amazing" speaking skills are entirely the result of other people (::cough:: *Bill Ayers*) writing speeches for him and the liberal media telling the voters everything that comes out of Obama's mouth will be chiseled in stone someday.
And, of course, using a false premise from the mainstream media to convince conservatives to support your candidate is not a very effective argument.
Are you whinning again?...Most people with any grey matter themsleves recognize Newt’s abilities....to say otherwise is just having blinders in place. Newt doesn’t need a “media hype” tooting his horn...when he opens his mouth it’s quite apparent even to those who oppose him.
I am incensed that you have lumped me here. "cheap personal shots"??? Please!
I gave a measured assessment using my personal and professional opinion. In my opinion, Santorum does not currently carry enough gravitas to win in November. I will not under-estimate the current office holder and this Country can not survive another four years of him. Nice guy that Santorum is, meek is your assessment, not mine, but it is apt (well maybe a little strong).
I'll go with the proven leadership and the person who will not be steamrolled by the democrat machine. Again, my vote goes now to Newt and I personally AND professionally believe he is the best hope in the current field to save this Union.
I'm sorry you feel the way you do...If Santorum were the nominee, I'd vote for him in a second just to help not having another second of Obama as President. I would hope no matter the nominee, you would feel the same way. At least, I hope you'll keep your mind open to the possibility of not helping Obama to another four years.
Ahhh...are you serious? First, let me point out that we are talking about Iowa Caucuses. It's about who has the money to BUY people to show up at each caucus site and "spread the good word about a particular candidate". Good salesmen are expensive and gee, who had the money going in?
Second, it's a primary with only supposed Republican voters. I think the nominee will have ALL of that vote in a general election, don't you think?
Finally, at least what comes right to mind now, is we are talking about a field of 7 candidates...NOT two! When it gets down to one or the other, it's all about who can motivate their people and get slightly more than 50% of the independents to believe that you're better than that "piece of crap" in the other party. Well, who doesn't think Barack Obama is the very definition?
This portion of your post was unnecessary. My assessment stands.
And for the record, I intended "meekness" in the Biblical sense, which is quite different from the secular. Ronald Reagan possessed the same kind of spiritual meekness as Santorum.
No, I'll do a write-in rather than vote for Newt. Good thing there were no televised debates in Lincoln's day. I've read that his voice was rather high.
Santorum is a good fit to be headmaster at a stuffy NE private school, Not president.
I wonder how the latest headline at Drudge will affect Mr. Gingrich’s favorability ratings...
On the other hand, if she claims and it's provable that he perpetrated some form of professional malfeasance, then I will agree, he has no business being President. However, if she comes out and says "Newt was mean to me", or "Newt called me bad names", or some such...So what!
It has nothing to do with his ability to perform the office of President. As a matter of fact, I'd like a President who's a little mean right now. We have some very bad actors both in our government and outside. We need a hammer in the oval office.
Either way- true or not- she’s going to say it’s true, and stand by it. It will be like Politico’s hit jobs on Herman Cain- we still don’t know what was what there... yet it undeniably did massive damage, unfortunately.
It’s not the fact of whether he had an affair or not that’s the issue- it’s the fact that it unfortunately conjures up the image in some people, yet again, of an unstable person who you don’t want running the country. (That’s not my feelings btw- I’m just the messenger here). It’s those “unfavorables”...
I’m pretty sure I know how I would handle this if I were him- he’s a smart guy- let’s see if he figures it out.
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.