Posted on 01/15/2012 8:39:44 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
Rick Perry says he's going on to campaign in Florida's Jan. 31 Republican presidential primary - no matter how he fares in South Carolina.
All that work for such a dumb picture.
Well, I won’t forget about him. He’ll still be governor of Texas and the best one we’ve ever had.
By the way, what’s with you people coming on Perry threads to say unpleasant things?
Do we need to post links to some of these same (Perry) supporters that jumped into the Palin threads and did the exact same thing you are accusing non-Perry supporters of?
Talk about being hypocritical...
(BTW, CW is the nicest and politest of the bunch)
Actually, I have to correct myself.. some of these Perry supporters were the most vile and vicious in the Palin threads...
My pecking order for dropping out:
Ron Paul (but not going to happen)
Perry
Santorum or Newt
I would like Huntsman to stay in because he would steal a few Romney votes. But he has just dropped out and, IMHO, that will be a plus for Romney.
Bottom line: we need to get to at least a three man race soon or Romney will win. My preference is Newt. I could live with Santorum.
Perry is done. He needs to drop out and his supporters need to quit encouraging him. He isn’t going to win, his continued candidacy only serves Mitt Romney ultimately.
“I assume that you are also calling for the zero traction Jon Huntsman to drop out. Can you confirm? Or is it just Rick Perry you are worried about?”
Just for the record, yes, if I was pushing what you’re pushing, I’d want Huntsman out, as he takes votes away from Romney.
...and it looks like Romney did just get him out.
He was unethical in Congress, has a horrible reputation in and out of the party and is in it for Newt only. That's what I see in Newt.
Newt has never been a registered lobbyist. You're not going to find another politician in this country, either current or former, that doesn't make phone calls to other members of congress about either supporting or not supporting something. That's politics. If you want to label Newt a lobbyist, you're going to have to label every other candidate that way too. They've all made influential telephone calls.
Newt Gingrich has spoken about global warming or climate change, or what the heck ever they are calling it these days. What he NEVER did was take the position that GW was man made or that man could do anything substantial about it. He also NEVER was of the opinion that GW should be handled by government interference. He specifically stated that it should be handled by the free market system.
There were something like 84 ethics charges filed against Newt, and 83 of them were totally dismissed. They finally wore him down to accepting some responsibility for one of the charges and they fined him $300k. The charges were initially made by a democrat that ran against Newt for the house seat, and they were aggressively pursued by democrats. It was politics as usual.
The main reasons that most politicians will express negative comments on Newt is because he refuses to be politically correct and he doesn't play the inside politics games that they all play once they've been there for a while.
Newt Gingrich is far from perfect. He is always the smartest man in the room though. He is a man of ideas, and being such, he is going to come up with some real stinkers from time-to-time. Is every idea that you've ever had a winner? I doubt it.
Now ... I'll ask you again what I asked you the first time and you ignored in favor of repeating the talking points against Newt: What did Newt Gingrich ever promise and fail to do while he was in the house? If you're going to label folks fools for believing Newt, you're gonna have to back it up somehow.
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.