Skip to comments.For Gingrich, it's all math
Posted on 02/05/2012 11:11:09 PM PST by VinL
In a meeting room at the Palazzo hotel in Las Vegas over the past week, Newt Gingrich mapped out a detailed strategy that would keep him in the presidential race all the way to the Republican convention in Tampa, Fla., in August.
The crux of the former House speaker's new plan is math: a complex analysis of each state's delegates, how they're awarded and how many, reasonably, Gingrich can expect to win...
The winning candidate needs 1,144 delegates to claim the nomination..... Gingrich's team has studied the convoluted rules. Using targeted phone lists and targeted mail and focusing on more conservative areas, even in states such as Massachusetts and Vermont that Romney is expected to win, he hopes to pick up enough delegates, one by one, to make it to the convention.
According to two operatives close to Gingrich who requested anonymity to speak freely about internal discussions, the campaign will focus heavily on Georgia and Tennessee, which vote on Super Tuesday, March 6, as well as Alabama, Mississippi, Missouri and Louisiana, which vote later in the month....
Gingrich also has three surrogates who will begin campaigning heavily this month: former senator and presidential contender Fred Thompson of Tennessee, former congressman J.C. Watts of Oklahoma and Texas Gov. Rick Perry. All three have significant followings among conservative voters, particularly evangelicals, whose votes could be crucial in the South....
Gingrich is also focused on early voting - making a stop this week in Ohio, where early voting is set to begin in advance of Super Tuesday.
His strategists are also lobbying Fox News and ABC to add debates to the schedule between now and March...
(Excerpt) Read more at concordmonitor.com ...
Anyway, this article was the only non-attack I could find on Newt. I edited it for space-one may wish to hit the link to read the full article.
It’s not a good sign if Gingrich has gone from trying to win the nomination to hoping for, at best, keeping Romney under 50%+1 for a brokered convention.
Hey Chris— you might check out Dowd’s piece. Here’s what this ingrate Castellanos offered:
“Catellananos weaves the common tale of a “great but frustrated” man: “The first wife, and often the second, do not grasp his brilliance or grandeur. The starter wives try to confine him in their small world. But his drive to fulfill his gargantuan potential is too powerful. He rebelliously breaks conventions.
“Then he finds the muse who sees him as he sees himself. He is a man of history and belongs to something larger. She agrees that his rejections have been the fault of the audience. They cannot stare into a light so bright. She directs and channels him, saying, ‘This is what you have to do to achieve your destiny.’
“Now he is unleashed. The best and worst of him have been fed and watered.”
What a creep!
I’m tellin ya. Don’t mess with a genius!
How’s that different?
What is it with these people?
It’s Alinsky....remember Newt mentioning the name.
There is some of the dope on Alinsky and the Romney connection here:
His first wife was his high school Geometry teacher. Today she would be in jail.
His second wife has a thick FBI file that states she’s “mentally unstable”. She would be in prison, if there hadn’t been a plea bargain.
All the article is doing is applying Alinsky step #12. Trying to separate Newt from his base. Doesn’t matter if they lie or cheat as long as the outcome is achieved.
Newt and I are on the same page, under the circumstances, if it includes any and all things pointy and sharp-tipped, aimed squarely at the RINO Establishment and their socialist prop Romney. Brokered convention, bring it on. Imploded Republican Party, please pass more of that.
We all know what kitchen sinks are for, and it’s time to prove we know also how to lob one.
Newt is just the one to lead a revolution for an encore.
Then he finds the muse who sees him as he sees himself. He is a man of history and belongs to something larger. She agrees that his rejections have been the fault of the audience. They cannot stare into a light so bright. She directs and channels him, saying, This is what you have to do to achieve your destiny.
That sounds like Obama, with his wife coming along later after his ‘other’ relationships.
And looks like the angry media is trying to get Newt into another tic for tat fight while keeping him off his strong message and making his base feel weakened to his strengths. Praying real hard for Newt to remain wise and be above their traps. I am not leaving his side. I have never seen people so manipulative like they have been with Newt.
oh, she is a creep.
Actually, I was talking about Catallanos, but her, too. I get the impression she doesn’t like men folk very much. -:)
Take a look at the other piece I just posted, it’s kinda interesting.
Night Christie, night all.
RINOs coming out of the woodwork... thats a good thing..
Should be registered and noted who they are...
Would never have figured Army as a Romneynoid..
Who doesnt know Romney is flaming moderate..
more debates...yippee....newt..if 18 aint done it then 4 or 5 more wont either
nonsense. Newt has just as much reason to stay in as Romney and more than Ron Paul or Rick Santorum. This really ought to be a two person race at this point and as far as most of us are concerned, it is.
Put the repugnant snarkiness of Maureen Dowd aside to contemplate the hard truth of this observation. The hard truth is that women viscerally dislike Calista Gingrich.
Gingrich's gender gap might well be the final obstacle which deprives him of the nomination. In my view Bitch Dowd is correct, Gingrich always suffered from a gender gap and his wife aggravates it. She compares unfavorably on television with Mrs. Romney.
Full disclosure: I'm early Gingrich supporter and I am very little preoccupied about where he is put his little wee wee in the past.
Heck, the Dems criticized Bush’s wife, the perfectly inoffensive Laura, precisely because she was inoffensive. On the other hand, Obama’s extremely unpleasant wife was no barrier to his getting the Dem nomination.
I don’t think people vote for the wife and family anymore.
Speaking of which, have you seen a photo of Romney’s sons? They all have crazy eyes and faces with that wierd Mormon-missionary blankness. If people do vote for the candidate’s family, I don’t think they’re going to want to vote for that pack of oddities.
What happened with Florida? will Newt pick up any delegates?
Meet the Stepford candidates...
Prayers for Newt’s success as he tries to combat the lies and attacks against him.
Some candidates spent the last 4-6 years running and/or getting ready to run for President, preparing fundraising and organization, or camping out in Iowa for a year. Only one found that there were no candidates suited for the extraordinary time that requires extraordinary measures (instead of just "managing the decay" by slightly shifting and moving around government priorities and money) so it's hard to blame him for not having quite the organization and money in place to run a fully national campaign that's competitive in every state... Then, it's all about managing the limited resources and getting the most delegates with the least amount of money and effort, i.e., it's all about a cost-benefit analysis (which would be a good thing applied to government, laws and regulations).
That means leaving certain areas and/or states to volunteers and without much/any financial and logistic support - when the cost-benefit of getting another percent of the vote that may translate into 1 or no extra delegates shows it's better to allocate the same resources somewhere else. For example, not being on the ballot and wasting any time in Missouri primary, because it doesn't allocate any delegates anyway, later caucuses in MO do.
Like it or not, but the headlines, the tone of the coverage and words not spoken but attributed to candidate affect the perception of the campaign and. correspondingly, the votes. It is generally better to let the PR surrogates make the case, but not being able to rely on [or, like Romney, buy] many surrogates, Gingrich has to do some heavy lifting himself. Newt was brutally honest and transparent, perfectly dissecting and answering the "process" questions during the Las Vegas press-conference. It was a great venue to lay out the facts and put to rest some planted rumors from campaign of lies. And once again, as in NH debate, he repeated a warning, to paraphrase, "If you stop telling lies about me, I won't [have to] tell the truth about you." (Romney Must Get Personal Over Bain Capital Attacks - FR post #3 / IBD, 2012 January 12)
As expected, it resulted in the usual meme of Newt's "whining," "excuses" and "being negative" from the usual quarters by the usual suspects.
Now, about the money and donors.
Sheldon Adelson and his family control 55% of Sands (LVS) or little more than 400M shares, so if the stock moves up or down $1, they get richer or poorer by $400M. To put this in perspective, $40M would account for just 10% of that, and to date the family donated to Gingrich campaign and the PAC about $11M. Besides their lifetime help to conservative causes and Israel, they obviously think that Newt's governance (as practically the only viable candidate who advocates a government which is drastically smaller in size and scope) will benefit the economy, which will lift all boats, rich and poor. It is, obviously, not driven by the expectation of government favors (crony socialism or "crapitalism") because it would be significantly cheaper, more effective and lower-profile to
buy donate to Congress-critters for that purpose.
Most of Romney's money go to raise unfavorable numbers of his opponents, but do nothing to raise his own favorability numbers with conservatives and within general electorate.
In this respect, it's very interesting to see and contrast the list of large Romney and Obama donors:
Ref: Private-Equity Rallies Around Mitt Romney's Dodd-Frank Cure - BL, by William Selway and Martin Z. Braun, 2012 February 03
Mitt Romney relying heavily on small group of super-rich donors - WP, by Dan Eggen and T.W. Farnam, 2012 February 01
In Romney's Super PAC, the Hedge Fund Mavens Come Out to Play | FEC Filings Detail Contributions From Rich Supporters - ABC, by Matt Negrin, 2012 February 02
Big Political Donors and What They Want - CNBC / AP, by Stephen Braun, Jack Gillum and Richard Lardner, 2012 February 03
One of Mitt Romney's strongest assets as the GOP presidential front-runner is also a potentially serious liability in the race: his heavy reliance on a small group of millionaires and billionaires for financial support. A quarter of the money amassed by Romney's campaign and an allied super PAC has come from just 41 people, each of whom has given more than $100,000, according to a Washington Post analysis of disclosure data. Nearly a dozen of the donors have contributed $1 million or more. ..... < snip >
Ten people gave Romney's PAC Restore Our Future $1M and one gave $2M, which accounted for 40% of group's $30M haul. Big donors for Romney campaign / PAC include Bill Koch (Oxbow Carbon, $1M), hedge fund investors Paul Singer (Elliott Management $1M), Robert Mercer (Renaissance Technologies, $1M), Julian Robertson (Tiger Management, $1M) and John Paulson (Paulson and Co., $1M).
Robertson's Tiger Management is the largest international hedge fund in the world. John Paulson's donation is particularly interesting, since he is a Democrat, who made his name by using then relatively unknown CDS (credit default swaps) to bet short against the insurance and financial institutions, making over $5B in 2008-2009 during financial crisis.
Romney's PAC also received a larger share of donations than his competitors, between 25% and 30% of its total.
< snip > ..... [Paul] Singer was instrumental in the New York effort to allow gays to marry. His gay son married his partner in Massachusetts, where Romney was governor. "This is not someone who believes in these issues in spite of being conservative," said Ken Mehlman, a former Republican National Committee chairman and re-election campaign manager for George W. Bush, who came out as gay in 2010, worked with Singer on the marriage effort and saw Singer as recently as a couple of weeks ago. "He believes in it because he's a conservative." ..... < snip >
Another interesting donor to pro-Romney PAC is Consol Energy (CNX) ($150K) of Pennsylvania, because Rick Santorum had a consulting contract with them ($142K, August 2010 - August 2011) Santorum Becomes Millionaire in Six Years After U.S. Senate Loss - BL, 2012 January 05 / Romney Goes 'Establishment' as Gingrich Looks to Take Down Frontrunner - FR post #48, 2012 January 05. They probably think that at this point it's wiser to "invest" in Romney than Santorum.
Obama got almost half his campaign cash from "small" donations of $200 or less, but this is more than entire Romney's campaign cash. Romney did particularly badly with lower income voters, among suppressed turnout in primaries. Obama has 445 "bundlers," mostly from Hollywood, Silicon Valley and New York.
Obama's WS donor list has shortened significantly since 2008, but he increasingly relied on Silicon Valley and Palo Alto investment community ("Wall Street of Technology / Silicon Valley") to replenish his coffers.
It seems that Newt Gingrich, with his vision of importance of technology (e.g., privatization of space exploration) could give him a distinct advantage within generally libertarian wealthy science and technology community, compared to "undertaker" Romney.
Very chilling! he is literally buying the White House! we are watching America being sold in front of our very eyes.
“A quarter of the money amassed by Romney’s campaign and an allied super PAC has come from just 41 people, each of whom has given more than $100,000, according to a Washington Post analysis of disclosure data. Nearly a dozen of the donors have contributed $1 million or more. “
Read about Newt’s childhood..it was very sad. He is truly a self made man and a genius. Romney is buying his way to Pennsylvania Ave. Few donnors that are multi millionaires at his side. What do you think the payback will be?
Excellent read. Many good points.
Nice post. Newt needs surrogates to go negative on Mitt. Looks like Rick and Gingrich have called a truce. Newt’s always been a strategist, perhaps working together, the 2 conservatives can cut Romney down.
Newt’s first wife was his high school Geometry teacher. Today she would be in jail for taking advantage of her position of authority. Have never heard him say a bad word against her. She is the mother of his children. He could trash her he doesn’t. He and the girls seem very close.
Wife number two has an FBI file that states she’s “mentally unstable”. Even when she was trashing him, He didn’t personaly attack her. Just stated the truth.
Mom was a Daughtery from Donnybrook. Biological dad was a MacPherson bet their relationship was an Irish battle field.
Have never heard him speak badly of either one. Certainly they weren’t the ideal role models.
He is fortunate to have found the partner he has and have a “normal” relationship at all.
WOW! Thank you so much, CutePuppy. I’m late answering my pings because I’m busy on our FReepathon thread. I’m pinging myself so I can easier find your excellent information.
Thank you again!!!!
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.