The group Iowans for Christian Leaders in Government has taken aim at Family Leader head Bob Vander Plaats in a preemptive strike on a potential endorsement of former House Speaker Newt Gingrich. The group also links Vander Plaats to former gubernatorial candidate Jim Nussle, who has had similar marital problems to Speaker Gingrich.
Dear Mr. Vander Plaats:
We are aware that you are preparing to endorse a candidate for President of the United States in the coming weeks. This will undoubtedly be an important decision considering you have the ear of many Christians throughout our state of Iowa. Our group believes that we must select leaders who not only espouse our values, but who live them each and every day.
With that being said, we have serious concerns that your endorsement may be guided, not by prayer and conviction, but by personal benefit and prior relationships. Of which, would seem to lead you toward Newt Gingrich and, needless to say, he is not an acceptable choice among Christians.
These concerns of an imminent Newt Gingrich endorsement stem from the following:
1. Your prior connection to Mr. Gingrich via Congressman Jim Nussle.
2. Your ill-advised track record as it pertains to supporting candidates that lack common moral fiber.
3. Your acceptance of $200,000 which Mr. Gingrich secured for your organizations.
YOU AND MR. GINGRICH SHARE A MUTUAL FRIEND IN JIM NUSSLE
In 2006, Mr. Nussle ran for Governor and asked that you serve as his running mate; an offer your willfully accepted.
In the nineties, Mr. Nussle’s current wife was working for Mr. Gingrich; while Mr. Gingrich’s current wife was working for a committee which Mr. Nussle served on in the House of Representatives.
Furthermore, both men were married when they began affairs with each other’s staff members – all while Mr. Gingrich was leading the investigation into Bill Clinton’s extramarital affair with Monica Lewinsky. This is an unfortunate irony.
More importantly, it points to a willful disregard of personal behavior and you are forever linked to both of these candidates in a way that is unacceptable for many of us who demand Christian leadership.
Which brings us to our next concern.
YOU CAMPAIGNED FOR MR. NUSSLE
As previously mentioned, you joined Mr. Nussle’s gubernatorial ticket in 2006.
During that cycle, you travelled to every corner of Iowa trumpeting Mr. Nussle’s character and his ability to represent the values of Iowans. You did this all the while you knew he betrayed the bond he made to God upon proclaiming his vows to his first wife.
We do not blame you for Mr. Nussle’s indiscretion; however, we do worry that if you went as far as to vigorously campaign for and place your name beside his on the ballot that an endorsement of Mr. Gingrich would not be out of the realm of possibility.
With that said, we fully recognize that you do deserve some credit. Iowa voting records have since shown that you did not vote for Mr. Nussle or in the 2006 election – an indication that even you did not truly believe his values were adequate for higher office.
YOU RECEIVED $200,000 FROM MR. GINGRICH’S EFFORTS
In 2010, Mr. Gingrich helped you secure $200,000 in seed money for one of your efforts.
This is a great deal of money, but we trust that this will not have an impact on your decision as an endorsement which will represent our Christian values.
We do believe hope still resides that you may reconsider your endorsement. You lead an organization that encompasses an affiliate group called “Marriage Matters” and not only did Mr. Gingrich fail to sign your Marriage Vow, he failed to live his life in accordance with the values we hold so dear.
It is by now public knowledge that Mr. Gingrich has been unfaithful to two of his previous spouses, even delivering divorce papers to one as she lay in the hospital from a condition surrounding her cancer. We pray that marriage truly does matter as much as you represent, and not as little as it has meant to the candidates you have supported in the past.
Mr. Vander Plaats, all of our concerns derive from a larger one that your endorsement may be for sale, either for money or for status. Please don’t sell Iowa’s values to the highest bidder. These 30 pieces of silver are simply not worth the weight your conscience will bear as you consider misleading thousands of Christian voters in Iowa into believe Mr. Gingrich represents their values.
If you take nothing else from our letter please remember that “whoever is greedy for unjust gain troubles his own household, but he who hates bribes will live” (Proverbs 15:27).
May your decision be guided by the Lord.
November 29th, 2011 at 2:46 pm
Wow holy crap, a public broadsiding of VanderPlaats…that’s amazing.
If VP does endorse McPherson, it’d be even better for Branstad to endorse Mitt.
November 29th, 2011 at 2:47 pm
Did you hear what these groups in IOWA had to say about Slick Willy Romney?
Bad news for Willard.
VERY BAD
November 29th, 2011 at 2:47 pm
Well, well, a christian group that actually has some backbone.
November 29th, 2011 at 2:48 pm
The honeymoon for Newt has ended. Now comes the vetting.
I seem to remember a post here not long ago that detailed the number of times each candidate had been attacked in a debate. Newt had not been attacked once.
Gee, I wonder if that will change?
November 29th, 2011 at 2:48 pm
Sounds like they want somebody who lives their values
November 29th, 2011 at 2:49 pm
Wow! Way to kick him into the corner. All leaders need reminders like this of who their loyalty SHOULD be to. If we believe in God, then God is first. And in that pursuit, we should seek to honor him. I don’t agree with Mitt Romney on theology, but i do believe that he is trying to honor the God he knows.
November 29th, 2011 at 2:51 pm
Wow, that is quite the letter. I applaud the courage of the group who sent the letter to Mr. Vander Plaats. There are some very harsh accusations in there! Hopefully Vander Plaats reconsiders.
November 29th, 2011 at 2:54 pm
7.
I hope he doesn’t. Vander Plaats has enjoyed way too much influence in Republican primaries due to the size of the evangelical community in Iowa and the fact that Iowa goes first. He is a hypocrite of the highest order, just like Newt, and its great to see him finally getting publicly called on it. I will enjoy more of this kind of stuff being aired over the next few weeks.
November 29th, 2011 at 2:57 pm
Whining aside, BVP won’t be slapping Newt upside the head and none of these folks want Romney.
Meh.
Gingrich has a great chance to win in Iowa.
November 29th, 2011 at 3:00 pm
This reads like it was written by a high schooler.
How big is this group? Are we sure it isn’t some kid in his mom’s basement?
November 29th, 2011 at 3:02 pm
Bad news for Gingrich, at least some of these Evangelicals have a set of ethics, unlike many here who claim to be social conservatives.
Now who do they back? I doubt that BVP will be endorsing Newt now.
November 29th, 2011 at 3:02 pm
10 – I was wondering the same thing.
It’s big enough for Max to front page post it to retaliate against the Newt supporters while he continues his tantrum over the fact that Gingrich is climbing higher and more rapidly than he thought.
Which is to say, not too big.
November 29th, 2011 at 3:03 pm
2
Hahahaha just give it up, bro. You’ve picked how many winners now?
November 29th, 2011 at 3:03 pm
11 – So long as he doesn’t endorse Romney.
And he won’t.
November 29th, 2011 at 3:05 pm
My parents always told me that religion and politics were two subjects that should be avoided at dinner parties or at social gatherings because each in their own way can become highly contentious as they are both so highly personal in character. Mixing the two quite often leads to vitriol and acrimony that can be quite destructive and damaging to both. The Iowa GOP Caucuses and their associated foreplay seem to be a case in point.
November 29th, 2011 at 3:05 pm
14.
No kidding. But if they swing their support to Bachmann or Santorum or don’t endorse at all its bad news for front runner Newt.
November 29th, 2011 at 3:05 pm
Sojourner Truth Says:
November 29th, 2011 at 3:03 pm
11 – So long as he doesn’t endorse Romney.
And he won’t
=====================================================
Your right about that…..
November 29th, 2011 at 3:07 pm
16 – Santorum would be a better bet than Bachmann. Bachmann disqualified herself with “retardation is a result of the HPV vaccine” talk.
November 29th, 2011 at 3:09 pm
Sojourner Truth Says:
November 29th, 2011 at 3:07 pm
16 – Santorum would be a better bet than Bachmann. Bachmann disqualified herself with “retardation is a result of the HPV vaccine” talk.
==============================================
Strong possibility or Perry.
November 29th, 2011 at 3:10 pm
18.
If they were even considering Newt I don’t think they have a very high bar. As long as its anyone but Romney, the guy with arguably the squeakiest clean moral record in the race or Huntsman.
Now what do those two guys have in common? Thats a tough one.
November 29th, 2011 at 3:15 pm
Maybe it’s not even that (aside from a few snipes listed above).
Maybe all that is needed is the guy with the best chance of derailing Mitt.
November 29th, 2011 at 3:16 pm
The impact of an endorsement of Newt Gingrich by Bob Vander Plaats cannot be underestimated. Vander Plaats is the guy who won Iowa for Mike Huckabee. You can put Iowa in Gingrich’s column if this actually comes to pass.
Wow, just wow… This is like a nuclear bomb being dropped in the middle of this race.
November 29th, 2011 at 3:26 pm
If Newt wins Iowa, despite how improbable it seemed just a month ago – that means that he wins Iowa because EVERYONE ELSE DOESN’T WANT ROMNEY.
It means that so-cons, or at least enough of them, and enough of the establishment is so dead set against Mitt that they are willing to elevate someone clearly and demonstrably flawed.
If Newt wins Iowa then Newt Gingrich is the nominee.
November 29th, 2011 at 3:26 pm
More evidence of why I will no longer support candidates propped up by self-described “christian” organizations.
November 29th, 2011 at 3:28 pm
If Newt is nominee, Obama remains Prez.
November 29th, 2011 at 3:33 pm
#23 – Iowa is the unknown because it’s a caucus. SC seems more certain if Newt can pull off a win in IA. If he scores the double then yes I agree he is the nominee.
November 29th, 2011 at 3:35 pm
Not only would a Gingrich nomination guarantee an Obama landslide, it also ruins our chances at the Senate and returns Nancy Pelosi to the Speakership.
Gingrich’s nomination would be the closest thing to political suicide a national party has ever committed.
November 29th, 2011 at 3:35 pm
23.
Huh. What does President Huckabee have to say about that analysis?
Yeah, I’m going to have to disagree with you on that one.
November 29th, 2011 at 3:36 pm
If Gingrich wins Iowa and South Carolina, and Romney wins New Hampshire and Florida, then Romney is the nominee, and by a larger margin than you think.
November 29th, 2011 at 3:40 pm
He has a point about Iowa, though. If Gingrich does prove durable enough to win Iowa, I have a hard time thinking that his strength won’t continue into South Carolina. If he’s not crushed within a month’s time, a couple more weeks won’t help.
Once he’s got Iowa and South Carolina a whole lot of contests are opened up and a lot of conservative lightweight candidates will be out, leaving Newt to collect more of their votes.
November 29th, 2011 at 3:42 pm
28 – If Newt can win, despite all of his baggage, in so-con heavy Iowa, then he is going to win South Carolina.
29 – If Gingrich wins Iowa and South Carolina then your point is moot, because Mitt ain’t winning FL after losing two of the big three traditional states to freakin’ GINGRICH of all people.
November 29th, 2011 at 3:42 pm
30 – Exactly the way I see it.
November 29th, 2011 at 3:43 pm
#29 – Under that scenario the primary is extended, yes, but by no means assures Romney the nomination. Indeed, Gingrich would be the favorite, but a protracted primary might cause him problems.
I’ve asked this before, though. Would it be good for the GOP, and for Romney, if he got the nomination without winning IA or SC? To be blunt, would it not seem that the rules were rewritten for a guy who was not conservative enough to win either of the states each nominee has had to win over the last 30 years.
November 29th, 2011 at 3:46 pm
Max,
Mitt is not winning Florida if Newt wins Iowa & SC.
Take a look at PPP Florida poll that is coming tomorrow. Newt will be way ahead of Mitt..and it only gets worse for Mitt when Cain pulls out in Florida.
Mitt needs to get his ass in my state of MN and make sure he wins it, before we get to Super Tuesday.
November 29th, 2011 at 3:47 pm
34 – You read my mind.
Mitt is already falling. Now assume Gingrich is already going to be ahead in FL tomorrow in polling.
We’re supposed to believe that after winning BOTH IA and SC, Gingrich would lose to ROMNEY in FL?
After FL rejected Romney last time?
I don’t think so.
November 29th, 2011 at 3:48 pm
30.
The one thing people who have followed Newt for years know above all else is that Newt does not wear well. The more of Newt people see the less they like him. This isn’t conjecture its a fact. A long drawn out primary is not going to put Newt in the best light.
Newt didn’t retire from the Speakership, he was driven out by his own people who were sick of his corruption and leadership. He can be petulant, condescending and down right nasty. And this is to his own team.
So far this race all anyone has seen is the congenial guy who was polling at 6% and attacking the msm and Obama. Now he’s the frontrunner and the guns will be trained on him, things like this letter will be more common.
Will Newt stay sunny or will the pounding bring out the old Newt? Time will tell.
November 29th, 2011 at 3:49 pm
It’s getting ugly between these Christians. Getting pretty ugly. Who is CAIR endorsing?
November 29th, 2011 at 3:50 pm
I’d say South Carolina will play dealmaker again.
If Romney does not win South Carolina, it is because a solid alternative exists and that alternative will catapult from South Carolina into dominance in a lot of other contests. Romney will look truly vulnerable for the first time.
If Romney wins South Carolina, there is no candidate that can really challenge him and it’s over.
November 29th, 2011 at 3:52 pm
Boomer,
But now I think we are at the point, where let’s say we see “old Newt”, and Newt drops like a rock..who is to say that Mitt still wins?
Mitt needs to improve his FAV/UNFAVS numbers among the GOP voter…..Mitt is sinking a bit, it is now not just a case of an ABR candidate rising.
We may see a Anti-Newt candidate rise, who’s name is not Mitt,…before we see a Mitt surge.
November 29th, 2011 at 3:53 pm
Obama’s reelection team is going to serve as Newt’s surrogate for as long as he is in the race. Romney has to try and campaign against Obama and the rest of the Republican field while attempting to get to the nomination.
No one else faces that burden because of an obvious fact:
Anybody but Mitt=Nobody but Obama
November 29th, 2011 at 3:53 pm
Hey, it could happen, just like cold fusion or perpetual motion or Willard taking a position and telling the truth about it the next day.
November 29th, 2011 at 3:54 pm
38 – I’d go along with that. The reality is, though, that if Mitt loses Iowa to Newt and is depending on South Carolina to turn it around…..then he is skating on thin ice on a 60-degree day.
November 29th, 2011 at 3:56 pm
34, 35 – You guys are delusional. Romney hasn’t even lifted a finger to go after Newt. He doesn’t need to. Newt’s record speaks for itself. Newt isn’t the problem for Romney. It’s the socon Tea Party ABR’s. Romney will see how far this crowd is willing to drown itself in hypocrisy before he has to point it out. He hopes that they will realize it themselves because there is a chance for blowback if he has to go nuclear. While I’m a Romney supporter, at this point I do hope he goes nuclear win or lose. The worse thing than a lying politician are the hypocrites who line up behind them putting their emotions before their principle.
November 29th, 2011 at 3:58 pm
There’s nothing more futile than a search for moral purity in politics. I find this Christian-on-Christian battle to be laughable, if it weren’t so indicative of the corrosive force the evangelical right has been to our political system.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:00 pm
Someone finally has the guts to tell the truth about Vander Faats in Iowa.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:01 pm
Romney has a better shot at Iowa than South Carolina, which is why I think he is now competing there.
#43 – I will agree to this extent. Someone seems to be telling Romney he does not need to lift a finger against Newt. “He’s another Bachmann or Perry.” Problem is, he isn’t. He has a better resume and list of accomplishments than Bachmann and can debate pretty well.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:09 pm
46 – And a huge list of skeletons, pandering, and flip flopping. You think everyone is going to just ignore that?
November 29th, 2011 at 4:10 pm
Florida has 8 media markets. Gingrich currently can’t afford to play in any of them. It’s a media state and after Mitt wins New Hampshire he will bypass SC and make right for Florida, where he Jeb, Thrasher, Mack and co. will demolish what remains of Gingrich.
Remember, Mike Huckabee won Iowa and came in a close 2nd in SC, and was a distant 4th behind McCain, Romney, and Rudy in Florida.
Gingrich simply doesn’t have the money or the muscle to compete in Florida. It’s not a momentum state, it’s a big money, big organization state.
After Florida comes the Romney landslide in Nevada, followed by Romney-friendly states like Colorado, Arizona, and Michigan.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:13 pm
Good thing FL doesn’t vote until after Iowa and New Hampshire.
Now considering you yourself have written about the large bloc of anti-Mittens sentiment in the GOP primary, what do YOU think will happen to Newt’s fundraising after a win in Iowa and New Hampshire?
November 29th, 2011 at 4:13 pm
47 — Unfortunately, yes!
November 29th, 2011 at 4:13 pm
correction: after a Newt win in Iowa and SOUTH CAROLINA…
November 29th, 2011 at 4:14 pm
47 – They don’t need to ignore it. They just need to conclude that Romney is no better.
That’s a far lower hurdle.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:16 pm
49
After Iowa and New Hampshire will be too late.
Remember, even after Mitt lost Iowa, NH, and SC last time he was still competitive in Florida, and only the last minute Crist endorsement stopped him from winning the state.
There is no Crist-savior waiting for Gingrich. The Bushies hate Newt. That includes Jeb and his proxy, Rubio.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:17 pm
jax,
Mitt needs to improve his own numbers. If Newt falls, who is to say Mitt would win? Mitt’s own FAV/UNFAVS numbers are getting worse among GOP voters. Now you haver Huntsman nibbling at Mitt’s support in NH among the moderate voters.
Mitt needs to cast himslef as the “Outsider-Conservative”
But Mitt needs to focus on Mitt.
You can hope everyone jumps on Newt and bring him down…but it still doesn’t make Mitt the victor in this race.
MEM was correct when he pointed out that Mitt has not created the perception of his supporters rallying around his candidacy. Where are Mitt’s videos showing this?…
Mitt needs to create energy with in his own Candidacy…………Mitt’s problems are not just about Newt….it’s about Mitt himself.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:17 pm
And by the way, McCain was hardly rolling in the dough in 2008.
Gingrich breaking through in Iowa will give him access to cash earlier than McCain’s breakthrough in New Hampshire handed money to him.
And despite outspending McCain every step of the way, Romney still lost FL by about 100,000 votes.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:18 pm
How anyone could support Gingrich when his nomination guarantees an Obama reelection AND a Pelosi return to Speaker is appalling. It’s borderline masochistic.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:18 pm
IS THE ECONOMY STILL THE #1 issue and will it be come presidential debate time after the 2012 conventions?? I don’t know what to believe from Obama anymore…
November 29th, 2011 at 4:20 pm
Let’s see if Gingrich gets vetted now. The voters really don’t know him at all. Let’s see if an education process gets underway.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:20 pm
22. I think you meant to say “overestimated”, since “underestimating” would tend to undermine what you are saying, which perhaps is a bit of an overstatement, which I understand, given the over-the-top influence of BVP with his underlings.
And, to leave all that behind and address what you are saying, methinks there could be a great deal of pressure on BVP to put his thumb on the scale and tilt the game against Romney in Iowa. With Cain out, Perry dead, and no else of much relevance, it’s easy to see a handful of socons colectively playing the role of Huck vs. Newt.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:20 pm
Willard outspent McCain in FL by a factor of 3. All he has to show for it is this lousy t-shirt.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:20 pm
McCain had a huge amount of establishment support and nearly half of the Bush donors on board BEFORE his NH win.
Gingrich has none. He has 1 congressman outside of Georgia, and none of the Bush donors. NONE.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:21 pm
The Economy, where Newt has no experience (he can’t even manage his own money), should be the biggest issue, but it is not at the moment – at least for this news cycle.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:21 pm
Max,
Newt will crush Mitt in FL.
Newt is receiving most of the “old John McCain supporters”…..not Mitt.
Cain leaving this race makes FL a 1-on-1 contest..and Mitt can defeat Newt in FL.
Plus…watch Huntsman’s rise in NH………If Huntsman can rise somemore he will continue on to FL and will nibble away at Mitt in the Sunshine State.
Mitt needs to get his ass in MN…MI…and get ready to regroup after FL.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:22 pm
greg,
Yep, you can bet that the economy is going to trump everything else by a long shot. Next year is not going to be a good year, I’d say return to recession is pretty much inevitable.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:22 pm
60. It was the Crist endorsement that won Florida for McCain. Even in the aftermath of the SC victory by McCain, Romney was leading the polls in Florida, and then Crist jumped in. Endorsements make all of the difference in these early sates.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:23 pm
61 – You don’t know what Gingrich will have. A month ago no one thought he had a prayer.
Who would have guessed a month ago that FREAKIN’ Newt GINGGRICH would have received the UL endorsement?
This whole thing is in flux.
And whether you like it or not, the base is actually going to get a say.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:23 pm
“can” was suppose to be can’t
November 29th, 2011 at 4:24 pm
56 “How anyone could support Gingrich when his nomination guarantees an Obama reelection AND a Pelosi return to Speaker is appalling. It’s borderline masochistic.”
It is about priorities. To the ABR crowd, the re-election of BO is an acceptable outcome, because BO isn’t Romney. Country be damned, ABR is more important to the bigots.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:24 pm
Max, you are making great points, but I think you are still overstating the value of money and endorsements in the Republican primary.
Things are different now. Fox News owns the Republican Party. What they say, goes.
And in 2008, they said “McCain” – with Hannity as the only exception.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:26 pm
Smack
You’re an idiot. I’m sorry but there is no nice way to say it. You are just too stupid to post here. Really.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:26 pm
Sojourner truth,
“A month ago no one thought he had a prayer.”
…ahem……..ahemmmmm….
A month ago Newt got a campaign Manager on RACE42012…..ahem…. I forget his name though….ahem
November 29th, 2011 at 4:26 pm
57 “IS THE ECONOMY STILL THE #1 issue and will it be come presidential debate time after the 2012 conventions?? ”
No, the real issue is ROMNEY and stopping him is the priority. Didn’t you get the ABR memo?
Country be damned, ABR (=BO) full steam ahead!!!
November 29th, 2011 at 4:26 pm
Wow, this BVP issue is a lose-lose for Newt. If he doesn’t get the BVP endorsement, he loses. If he does get the BVP endorsement, it’s now at least tainted, if not radioactive.
Who does BVP endorse if not Newt? Bachmann? Santorum?
November 29th, 2011 at 4:27 pm
Rombots keep saying this as if it is some gospel truth, but it isn’t.
Polling was close in FL all through the month of January.
On Florida Primary Day – it didn’t turn out to be all that close.
You know what I think? I think that Romney lost FL because Romney lost FL.
Romney underperformed his prior polling, just as he did in Iowa and New Hampshire and South Carolina.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:28 pm
Max Twain,
BBBAAAAWWWWAAAAAHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!
November 29th, 2011 at 4:29 pm
62 “The Economy, where Newt has no experience (he can’t even manage his own money), should be the biggest issue, but it is not at the moment – at least for this news cycle.”
ABR is the biggest issue and Newty (Newton Leroy McPherson) is their last best hope.
Country be damned, ABR full steam ahead.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:29 pm
Mass Con
It’s not just about endorsements, it’s about the machine. Florida has one of the strongest state GOP operations in the country, headed up by John Thrasher and other Jeb allies. They are all for Romney.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:29 pm
43 – Gingrich’ resume is spotty after 1995 to now. Gingrich hasn’t been challenged in the debates. He tried to challenge Romney one time and Romney smacked him back down. Gingrich will do all he can to avoid a confrontation especially with Romney. He will try and stay above the fray. He will also try to elevate the debate to focus on Obama but it won’t be enough. Bachmann will go after Newt. Perry would do best to go after Newt but he’s scared of Newt’s “intellect”. Perry also doesn’t have much room. Santorum will do well to go after Newt. Not sure he will. Paul only cares about his stuff. Huntsman will only go after Romney to weaken him in NH. The battle will be between Newt and Bachmann with the others nipping too and Huntsman going after Romney again. The focus will be on how Newt and Romney weather the attacks. Newt won’t do well against Bachmann and the others and Romney will ignore Huntsman. Newt has a tough task. A high bar now. It’s his intellect now and ability to use that intellect against attacks. He has a long history of weakness when attacked. Gingrich only does well when he’s talking down or at people.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:30 pm
74
Well, the Crist endorsement was the final blow, but what really lost him FL was McCain’s lies about Romney’s position on the Surge.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:30 pm
Sojo truth,
Romney hit his mark in IA in 2008..but you are correct about NH,SC & FL
November 29th, 2011 at 4:30 pm
Just walked by the TV in our office and saw the following headline: “Perry flubs voting age. Thinks it’s 21.”
November 29th, 2011 at 4:31 pm
59.
I think you are missing a very important point. As this letter demonstrates, Vander Plaats doesn’t have the influence he used to have. I think it was largely overestimated last cycle because not only was he Hucks state chair he also was very publicly supporting Huck.
But Huck didn’t really need him. He was the perfect combination of religious right and an excellent campaigner. He went from church to church winning over voters himself and really did a great job in Iowa.
There is no Huck this cycle. Bachmann or Santorum are the logical candidates for this constituency but they have proven to be very bad candidates. The only reason Newt is even being considered is because everyone else is not even a plausible not Romney anymore.
Vander Plaats is in a box now. His own base is revolting on him. Not good for him and no guarantee his endorsement will carry the weight everyone assumed it would.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:31 pm
Look, Cain/Huck or Cain/Newt beats Obama/Biden.
Conservatives WIN!
Moderates: Bush Sr, Dole, McCain, and Romney..NOPE!
The reverse works, too..
Huck/Cain or what most folks are now rooting for Newt/Rubio
November 29th, 2011 at 4:34 pm
83
Do you think George W. Bush was a Conservative, then?
November 29th, 2011 at 4:34 pm
54 – Of course he does … but Newt is a terribly flawed candidate.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:35 pm
84 – I think in 2000, George W. ran as a moderate “compassionate conservative” – and LOST the popular vote.
In 2004, Bush RAN as a conservative, and won in the middle of a war against a candidate that reminds many folks of Romney.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:36 pm
Oh lord, Newt/Rubio? Why would Rubio taint his career by being on one of the worst tickets in history?
And besides, ever taken a look at Rubio’s staff? All Romney guys.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:37 pm
Gingrich/Blackburn 2012!
Book it.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:38 pm
63 – Huh? So he is the RomNot hero and being backed by McCain? Huh?
November 29th, 2011 at 4:39 pm
Kavon W. Nikrad Says:
November 29th, 2011 at 3:16 pm
The impact of an endorsement of Newt Gingrich by Bob Vander Plaats cannot be underestimated. Vander Plaats is the guy who won Iowa for Mike Huckabee. You can put Iowa in Gingrich’s column if this actually comes to pass.
Wow, just wow… This is like a nuclear bomb being dropped in the middle of this race
===
That’s right, not in a million years could we see those two hooking up.
I suspected something was up when BVP tossed Cain aside so readily last week.
BUT never this.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:40 pm
jax,
Newt is receiving most of the McCain voters in FL…not Mitt.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:40 pm
If worse comes to worse Rubio may do a Crist against Gingrich to slap back the socon Tea Party and their hypocrisy to reality.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:41 pm
CR
You get dumber by the second! keep it up and you will be as stupid as SOJO.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:42 pm
84.
Of course, that’s why he won TWO terms.
So-Cons, baby!
November 29th, 2011 at 4:42 pm
PPP poll is starting their Iowa poll trakcer this weekend. PPP will poll Iowa every week starting this weekend and will see the movement…..if there is any, going into the last 5 weeks.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:42 pm
MassCon,
Bush presided over huge and fruitless expansions we could go on and on about in the national debt, watched a credit bubble expand and pop and got us to bail out the government-subsidized risky behavior, and expanded entitlements by trillions of dollars in liabilities.
Dick Cheney about sums up the whole mess when he said, “Reagan proved deficits don’t matter”.
According to Dick Cheney I should go ring up thousands of dollars in debt and refuse to pay, since after all, continued deficit spending doesn’t matter.
That whole era was a giant vacation from economics, from history, and from reality.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:42 pm
93.
Rombot,
Polls go ya down?
November 29th, 2011 at 4:44 pm
Watching hardcore Rombots and mushy moderates meltdown is always a highlight of the day.
More polls!
November 29th, 2011 at 4:45 pm
Rubio may never back Newt…..but he will never publically back Mitt. Rubio has people working for Mitt…and may want Mitt to win the GOP nomination, but Rubio will never make his support public (if there is in private)of Mitt…..not to ruin his support among the Tea Party base.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:45 pm
Come on, we’ve seen this movie before. Perry soaring above Romney to crash and burn. Cain? The same thing. Now it’s Newt’s turn. To be fair, Perry and Cain crashed because they seemed dumb. Newt “seems” smart until you start parsing what he’s actually saying.
Newt may pull this off; who knows? But it’s pretty earlier to start getting excited about this high numbers since the vetting has hardly begun.
I was so ticked at Greta last night, saying “we know all there is to know about Newt.” Well, maybe Greta knows, but the American people do not yet have a clue.
Will it matter this time? I guess we’ll find out, but if recent history plays a role…..like I said, We’ve seen this movie before.
In the meantime it’s good to see Christians finally calling other Christians to account. I like what David said in #44: “I find this Christian-on-Christian battle to be laughable, if it weren’t so indicative of the corrosive force the evangelical right has been to our political system.”
These people are not a good force in American politics.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:46 pm
A Gingrich nomination would probably kill the conservative movement as a serious force in this country, relegating it to side-show Limbaugh-entertainment status.
The Angle/O’Donnell debacles already have the conservative movement on life-support, resurrecting the disgraced Gingrich after our party rightly exiled this fool years ago would be the final nail in the coffin.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:46 pm
95.Smack1968 Says:
November 29th, 2011 at 4:42 pm
“PPP poll is starting their Iowa poll tracker this weekend. PPP will poll Iowa every week starting this weekend and ……”
===
……Rombots may want to consider self-banning those weeks.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:47 pm
83,
What are you smoking? Seriously….you need to quit. Cain is already done. And he’ll be endorsing romney when he drops out. Newt is radioactive. You can be with Bachmann, Santorum, Romney or Paul. Bachmann and Santorum can’t win. So i’d so go with Paul…but of course you don’t like that he isn’t a neocon. But stop picking the people that will kill the party.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:48 pm
One silver lining to a Gingrich nomination; we get to turn this site into Race 4 2016 a year early.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:48 pm
101.
So you’ve reach the ACCEPTANCE stage. An important step for you.
Hang in there. You can do this, Max
November 29th, 2011 at 4:49 pm
104.
Fine with me.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:49 pm
Prepping for Newt’s second term is important.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:50 pm
#99 Smack: “Rubio will never make his support public (if there is in private)of Mitt…..not to ruin his support among the Tea Party base.”
Never were truer words spoken by good old Smack. And they don’t just apply to Rubio.
Although I would make a huge distinction between the original fiscal conservative Tea Party and the current Teavangelicals–who will probably make an Obama reelection all but certain.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:50 pm
Or Cain’s!!!
November 29th, 2011 at 4:51 pm
“But it’s pretty earlier to start getting excited about [Gingrich's] high numbers since the vetting has hardly begun.”
The Iowa caucus is a month from Saturday with Christmas and New Year’s in between. It’s pretty late in the game as far as Iowa is concerned.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:52 pm
108.
After we beat Obama, you’ll be welcomed back kindly to the fold.
That’s how we So-Cons roll
November 29th, 2011 at 4:52 pm
Craig
I have to admit, after I danced on your Huckagrave after that fat fool decided not to run, I figured we would be rid of you. But like the mighty cockroach, you have endured.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:52 pm
91 – I doubt that
November 29th, 2011 at 4:53 pm
Nobody is going to kill the party.
Relax everyone.
Mitt is in trouble…but it’s not over.
Mitt needs to forget about IA and regroup in MI & MN.
We have a long protracted battle ahead of us.
But it is nice to see the ROMBOTS finally waking up to the fact that Mitt has nothing won at this point.
Obama is going to crater some more in 2012……..anyone can win this thing….
November 29th, 2011 at 4:53 pm
#111 Truly delusional.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:53 pm
Smack, how many times do we need to go over the problems with PPP. Your infatuation with Democrat polling outfits is almost as bad as Craig’s.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:53 pm
Newt shined on Fox News today.
fwiw.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:54 pm
99 – Dumbest comment of the day.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:54 pm
Cain’s on Fox News tomorrow.
Let’s do the Max dance for that, too
November 29th, 2011 at 4:55 pm
Newt will not will, once everyone else is eliminated except for Romney and Newt, Romney will tear him apart in every debate. Especially those dealing with the economy. Every time Newt dipped his toes and tried to take on Romney, he tore him apart.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:56 pm
Jax, my friend..
Tough day to be a hardcore Rombot, huh?
Your heart says yes, the polls say HELL NO, FOOL!
November 29th, 2011 at 4:56 pm
jax,
Just make sure you take a look at the PPP Florida poll coming out tomorrow.
Oh that’s right…you don’t think PPP polling has been good this cycle even though their numbers get backed up by other polls two weeks later…..today being a good reminder of that.
Mitt can’t beat Newt 1-on-1 in FL….especially if Jon makes it a threesome.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:56 pm
If conservatives are serious about the budget they’ll send the neocons packing pretty fast. They are the only really profligate force inside the Republican Party and need to be brought to heel. We’ll always be pro defense. But it’s a pretty dumb idea to bankrupt the entity you are so aggressively trying to defend.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:57 pm
Smack
Just stop talking. Gingrich is, was, has been a joke since the day his fat ass was kicked out of the House by a party that despised him almost as much as the American people. The word hasbeen doesn’t begin to describe this clown.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:59 pm
Smacks,
WEAK WILLARD can’t win Iowa versus FIVE so-cons either.
5-on-1
It’s a sweet thing here in The Heartland.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:59 pm
Whoever wins Florida is the nominee, just like last time.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:00 pm
#114 Come on, Smack. Romney supporters never believed we had anything won. The nutty know-nothings that have run like a bunch of groupies on crack from one ABR to another have made certain that there has been no premature chicken counting.
Like Morris said last night on FOX: Quit focusing on the candidates and look at the voters. Yikes! Now that is one scary scene.
I am perfectly resigned that the ABR voters will screw this thing up bigtime, falling for one superficial candidate after another. There’s a reason that Romney is the only Republican candidate that beats Obama in the polls, but the stupid, stupid, stupid Teavangelicals don’t seem to want to see it.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:00 pm
jax,
Right now you have gotten yourself in a position in which you need to rip every polling outfit.
It was Rasmussen that first had newt ahead of mitt by 13 in Iowa….
It was Insider advantage that now has Newt whipping up on Mitt in SC and IA…not PPP.
But PPP had the Newt surge correct.
You just don’t have the balls to come out and say you were wrong about PPP.
Ok…fine.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:00 pm
>>Mitt can’t beat Newt 1-on-1 in FL….especially if Jon makes it a threesome.
Ridiculous.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:00 pm
Thing is, if Romney is our guy that is sent to fight Obama, a not insignificant chunk of the party would be fine waiting until 2016.
That’s a fact.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:00 pm
124.
Calm down, Newt’s NOT Huck. Chill out.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:01 pm
125
What’s a sweet thing? Pretend to love Jesus only to rub elbows with adulterers while spitting on Mormons?
November 29th, 2011 at 5:01 pm
PPP polling was actually slightly biased in favor of the Republican candidate in several of the 2010 contests.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:01 pm
I just want to clear this up for anyone who is doubting what I’m about to say:
George W. Bush was a LIBERAL president. He screwed this country and then Obama screwed it even harder.
Bush brought the size and scope of the federal government well beyond previous levels. When he took office, the budget was about even. When he left office, he left a deficit of $700 billion.
He raised spending from about $2.2 Trillion annually, to about $3 trillion annually.
UNACCEPTABLE.
LIBERAL.
He didn’t cut hardly any spending in any department.
He passed Medicare Part D, the biggest expansion of Medicare in 50 years.
He pushed citizenship for illegal aliens.
He didn’t reform the tax code one bit, apart from cutting rates.
He appointed Bernanke.
He passed a Stimulus in 2007.
I’m sorry, but Bush was a liberal president and he sucked.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:02 pm
128,
Jax will find an internet poll from MittCentral in 4-3-2-1..
November 29th, 2011 at 5:03 pm
Dave G assured us just a week or two ago that this race was all sewn up, that Romney was going to be it.
And countless Rombots have spoken of potential VP candidates while asserting that Romney had this thing in the bag.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:04 pm
134 – Okay fine. But no one outside of Rombotland who agrees with you assertion that “Bush was a liberal” is ready to back Romney.
That’s why Romney is where he is.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:04 pm
K.G.
Here is the problem with your comment on #127.
Mitt has done nothing to expand his base…nada…zip.
Mitt did not go to the tea party events.
Mitt did not go to the cattle calls in Iowa…SC.
Mitt has not showed the grass-roots any love over the last 2 years.
To lay the blame of Mitt’s lifeless polling numbers at the feet of the voters is a joke.
Mitt has a problem…it’s not us
November 29th, 2011 at 5:06 pm
Sojourner
What makes you think any of us Romney guys will show up for Newt? I’m fine waiting until after this Gingrich sideshow ends in disaster. The question is will he do so much damage as nominee that there will be nothing left of our party by 2016.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:06 pm
MassCon,
Cheney’s immortal words sum up the whole era: “deficits don’t matter”
As long as the home ATM machine was up and running for everyone, Ron Paul definitely wasn’t getting much attention.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:06 pm
I am sensing a huge Newt backlash in the works. The voters only know the Newt from the debate stage, not the Newt of the last 25 years. The education has not even begun….
November 29th, 2011 at 5:07 pm
Dave Gaultier put up a FPP that deemed Romney the winner……I said….WHAT A JOKE!!!
How many ROMBOTS disagreed with Dave G. on that post?
Go ahead, read the thread.
hehehhehehehehehehehehehhhee
November 29th, 2011 at 5:07 pm
140. But Paul Ryan dabbles in right-wing social engineering. Did you not know that?
November 29th, 2011 at 5:10 pm
Smack
Dave Gaultier was at a disadvantage. You see, he is sane, and when a sane person to tries to predict the actions of insane people, it doesn’t always work. In a world where a former witch is laughed off the stage, Mitt wins. In a world where a former witch is nominated for Senate, all bets are off.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:10 pm
139 – I don’t know that you will.
But come on. After months and months of anti-Mitt after anti-Mitt, it’s abundantly clear that Romney has AT LEAST as much of a problem uniting the warring factions of the GOP.
In fact, I’d submit that Romney has MORE of a problem getting everyone on board for the general election. Romney has shown NO ABILITY to win over Tea Partiers and Southerners.
He essentially telegraphed his intention of trying to win the nomination without Iowa or South Carolina or any of the red states. He made clear that he wanted to go the “NV+FL” route. Well, now it looks like its coming back to bite.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:11 pm
Max,
Go ahead..stay home.
Will win this one without ya.
Don’t even lift a finger for Newt…we got this one.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:11 pm
Greg,
Yes, and Newt would know what that is, being an unabashed fan of debt-based prosperity through his lobbying
November 29th, 2011 at 5:13 pm
#136 If so, that was because they were looking at Romney’s good qualities and not the quality of the voters. Look at their track record, running willy nilly after one fatally flawed candidate after another. Now, I’m sure you will say that it’s because Mitt is so bad they have to go after someone worse.
But maybe they are just a bunch of blind bigots. Now they are running pall mall after Newt because they loooooove the way the Speaker speaks. Never mind that he’s unstable and unethical and has a life-time record to prove it.
Winston Churchill once said: “The best case against democracy is five minutes with the average voter.”
Well, the election of Obama is proof-positive this is true. And the way GOP voters have gone with abandon from one flawed candidate to another is all the proof we need that we are indeed a suicidal nation.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:14 pm
145
I don’t care. I won’t be part of a party stupid enough to nominate Newt Gingrich. I watch us lose winnable Senate seat after Senate seat, and I took it in stride. I watched the Tea Party blow the CO governor’s race in a historic debacle, and I took it in stride. I saw Rudy Giuliani trashed and smeared for his 3 marriages, and I took it in stride. Gingrich as GOP nominee is the last straw, I cannot in good conscience put my country in the hands of such a person or such a party.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:15 pm
132.
LOL!
How’s that hating Christians thingy working out for you lately, Max?
Get ya down?
November 29th, 2011 at 5:16 pm
Smack
You are nuts. Obama’s machine will humiliate Gingrich and tarnish the party for a generation. Way to go, hope you’re proud.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:16 pm
97 CR
That’s funny coming from the guy who has had at least 4 nervous break downs, every time your candidate of the moment imploded.
The only polls I care about are the actual votes. If the polls meant anything Bachmann would be our candidate, no Perry would, no Cain would, No I mean Newt…………..
CR face it, your a hack!
November 29th, 2011 at 5:16 pm
150
Huck’s gone, and will never be President. Workin’ out just fine.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:16 pm
Max Twain,
Is this you taking it in stride?
November 29th, 2011 at 5:17 pm
Newt is a flavor of the month. And it tastes bad. You can only swallow stuff that tastes bad for so long. It will get spit out before New Hampshire. You can take that to the bank.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:18 pm
149.
As we’ll do for those hardcore Rombots who bolt the party for Obama, we’ll welcome you back as well for Cain or Newt’s SECOND TERM in ’16, Maxy
No hard feelings with us So-Cons.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:18 pm
149 – With no support through the south for the presidential candidate (by nominating Romney), the GOP could lose every close senate race south of the Mason-Dixon line.
It doesn’t matter which candidate gets the nomination. The base is too divided and Obama will probably win.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:19 pm
#145 “Romney has shown NO ABILITY to win over Tea Partiers and Southerners.”
And just who has won over the Southerners and TPs? Huh? Huh? That would be Perry and Cain. Sometimes what Peter says about Paul says more about Peter than it does about Paul.
I guess Newt’s doing a good job uniting Teavangelicals in Iowa by giving them $200,000. Is that what it takes? Mammon rather than Mormon?
November 29th, 2011 at 5:19 pm
Here’s my first shot at a Newt Timeline –
You can see that he is a very ambitious and successful person who leaves messes behind everywhere he goes.
A Newt Gingrich Presidency would very likely be marked by scandal, dalliances with liberal ideas, and would end up
rejected by voters in the end. Read through this list of events and ask yourself if you are willing to risk a
Newt Gingrich Presidency.
Newt Gingrich’s Biography
Early Years
1943 Born Newton Leroy McPherson to Kathleen “Kit” Daugherty 16 and Newton Searles McPherson 19 – Marriage lasted several days
1946 Newton’s mother marries Army officer Robert Gingrich, who adopted Newt.
Raised Lutheran
1960 Teenage years in France
1961 Graduates High School in Georgia
1962 Marries former geometry teacher Jackie Battley (she was 26, he was 19)
1965 BA History Emory University Atlanta
1968 MA History
1970 Converts to Baptist
1971 PHd Modern European History Tulane – Thesis “Belgian Education Policy in the Congo: 1945-1960″
Note: No military service during this period despite being an army brat. Interesting…
Early Career
1974 Lost congressional race to incumbent Democrat Jack Flynt
1976 Lost congressional race to incumbent Democrat Jack Flynt
1978 Won congressional race (open seat)
1980 Following affair with Marrianne Ginther, divorces 1st wife (yes, the cancer one)
His campaign treasurer L.H. Carter quotes Newt saying “She’s not young enough or pretty enough to be the wife of the President. And besides, she has cancer.”
1981 Marries Marrianne Ginther
1986 Voted for amnesty bill
House Leadership
1988 Led charge against Dem House Speaker Jim Wright for ethics violations over using book deal revenue to skirt campaign finance regulations.
1989 Became House Minority Whip
1990 House banking scandal: was one of 450 House members engaging in check kiting, overdrafting 22 checks
1994 Contract with America, wrests control of Congress from Democrats for first time since 1954
Reforms included welfare reform, tougher crime laws, balanced budget amendment vote
Did NOT include a ban on insider trading. Why not?
1996 Govt Shutdown, largely due to personal slight by Bill Clinton
1997 84 Ethics violation complaints filed, sanctioned $300K by House Ethics Committee. Gingrich acknowledged misleading Ethics Committee.
inaccurate information supplied to investigators represented “intentional or reckless distegard of House rules” (that’s called fraud in the real world and you join Dodd and Frank)
1997 Unsuccessful attempt to remove Gingrich from Speaker by Boehner and Paxon
1998 Affair with Callista Bisek becomes public after Gingrich criticizes Clinton, has Clinton impeached
Disappointing mid-term elections result in Gingrich resigning speakership
Gingrich Inc.
1999 Formed Gingrich Group as a consulting company (lobbyist), received $1.6 million from Freddie Mac, $30 million from health care group
Gingrich communications manages Newt’s public appearances (as much as $60,000 for a speech), as many as 80 in a year = potentially $4.8 million a year
2003 Supported Medicare expansion act, lobbied for its passage on behalf of health care industry (see above)
Supported Heritage Foundation health insurance plan which was adopted by Massachusetts, includes individual mandate to purchase health insurance.
2008 Filmed television commerical with Nancy Pelosi in support of cap and trade legislation
Supported Bush’s comprehensive immigration reform legislation
Freddie Mac declares bankruptcy, housing market melts down due to poor Congressional oversight
2009 Converts to Catholicism, religion of wife Callista
Presidential Campaign
2011 In a May 15, 2011, interview on Meet the Press, Gingrich repeated his long-held belief that “all of us have a responsibility to pay—help pay for health care”,
and suggested this could be implemented by either a mandate to obtain health insurance or a requirement to post a bond ensuring coverage.”
Blasted Ryan Medicare plan: “I don’t think right wing social engineering is any more desirable than left wing social engineering. I don’t think imposing radical change from the right
or the left is a very good way for a free society to operate.”
June 9 – Senior campaign officials resign en masse.
Sep – Says Dodd and Frank should be in jail for ties to lobbyists paid for by Freddie Mac
Nov – Indicates support for some form of amnesty for illegal immigrants
Campaign Notes: Despite decades of experience in health care industry, Gingrich has no health care plan proposals and still favors an individual mandate.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:19 pm
155 – I know Gingrich is a politician from the 1990′s. But let’s leave Monica out of this.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:19 pm
Nobody’s endorsement should be worse that much fuss.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:20 pm
158 – Complain about the reasoning all you like, but the fact is that southerners and Tea Partiers seem to be gravitating to Gingrich a lot more readily than they ever did to Romney.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:20 pm
#160 – LOL
November 29th, 2011 at 5:21 pm
Maybe. But look what they did to Mitt with JUST ONE AD.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:21 pm
Max,
Yes, I’m proud.
Before the first vote was cast in 2008 in Iowa….I supported Johnny Mac……everyone told me I was crazy..he was never going to win….Juan..Juan…Juan..over and over again.
This time I supported TPAW…..but he lost..no excuses. But before the first vote is cast in Iowa I lend my full hearted support toward newt…when he was at 6% in the polls…..again I was called crazy.
Yes, I’m proud.
But I also know this is far from over…..far from it.
But Newt will defeat Mitt in FL…you and jax have to come to grips with that fact.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:22 pm
152,
RT the oh-so-tough talking Rombot,
Care for some cheese with that whine, my friend?
November 29th, 2011 at 5:22 pm
130.
>>Thing is, if Romney is our guy that is sent to fight Obama, a not insignificant chunk of the party would be fine waiting until 2016.
That’s a fact.
You want to know another fact? The crap you not Romneys have been spewing this election is making it very likely that a good number of Romney supporters will be doing the same damn thing.
And thats a fact, too.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:23 pm
#164 – And as I surmised, Carville said today that ad was tossed out there now because they have better ammunition if Romney gets the nomination.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:23 pm
Sojourner truth,
“Maybe. But look what they did to Mitt with JUST ONE AD. ”
And look at the first TV AD Mitt did to Obama…it backfired…horrible.
I will take my chances with Newt…thank you very much.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:24 pm
“But no one outside of Rombotland … is ready to back Romney.”
For real!?
November 29th, 2011 at 5:25 pm
Its easy to twist words. Its alot harder to twist actions. Newt may have been a firebreathing conservative activist in the 80s and 90s but he’s embraced the compassionate conservatism of the Bush years big time. You can see this in the timeline I have posted. I wonder what happened to Newt.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:26 pm
170 – Uh. That’s not what I said.
What I said was that anyone not predisposed to support Romney who ALSO thinks Bush was too liberal is open to backing Romney this time.
That’s why the “Romney is too much of a RINO squish” argument is as pervasive as it is.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:27 pm
I found it interesting that one of the chief people in the attempted “coup” to remove Gingrich was none other than John Boehner. Interesting…
November 29th, 2011 at 5:27 pm
“I will take my chances with Newt…thank you very much.”
so moral character doesn’t mean _____ to you?
November 29th, 2011 at 5:27 pm
YES!!!!!
YES!!!!!!!!!
YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!!!!!
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1111/69355.html
November 29th, 2011 at 5:28 pm
“But no one outside of Rombotland … is ready to back Romney.”
Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner, folks.
Romney now down to 13 in IA after he received TWICE that in ’08.
As Steve Martin said in PT&A, “You’re GOING the WRONG way, Mitt!”
November 29th, 2011 at 5:28 pm
Boomer,
Now that Mitt has been driven to his knees (just like what happend to J.McCain in July 2007)we will see what he is made of.
This is what Leaders are made for…….”THE COMEBACK”.
It’s easy to continue when things are going your way….but when they are not…that’s when you see leadership…guts…determination.
Does Mitt have what it takes to pull this off?
What say you?
November 29th, 2011 at 5:28 pm
175 – That could cut both ways. We all knew Huntsman wasn’t going to go the distance.
But now he can totally schmooze in New Hampshire.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:29 pm
Anyone ever ask Newt why he didn’t fight in Vietnam when he grew up overseas in a military family? I wouldn’t hold it against him, but would be curious as to his attitude towards the war at the time.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:29 pm
Boomer, The correct answer is no.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:29 pm
#175: LOL
November 29th, 2011 at 5:31 pm
179 – Maybe Newt can just round up all of his illegitimate sons to work on his campaign.
After all, when Romney did that his sons were serving their country.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:32 pm
179.
How’s Romney’s military record? Did he serve overseas or stateside?
And what branch?
November 29th, 2011 at 5:32 pm
Gingrich would probably have to be my second choice by default. But its a long, long, LONG second.
He might be the second best for the Republican nomination, but he does not have the moral character to be President.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:32 pm
Would Newt be the first President to divorce and re-marry in office? Newt tends to re-marry fast when he finds a replacement. A White House wedding would be quite a spectacle.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:32 pm
#179 Newt in the military? Seriously?
The pudgy, self-indulgent, undiciplined, unathletic, unprincipled, can’t do anything but talk Newty?
That would actually make a hilarious movie.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:33 pm
183 Already discussed. Now its Newts turn in the hot seat.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:33 pm
#186 Newty in Nam. Hilarious!
November 29th, 2011 at 5:33 pm
Smack-
>>Does Mitt have what it takes to pull this off?
What say you?
I would have to disagree that Mitt is on his knees because of a couple polls. Mitt just kicked the crap out of Brett Baier who was trying to peddle the same old lies so that made me happy.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:34 pm
182, 183 Lets be fair now. You all have given Mitt a hard time for not serving. Why aren’t Newt’s girls in the military? Newt said his patriotism drove him to f***. That’s a whole lot worse than saying your kids are helping you get elected.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:34 pm
From Politico:
Faith & Freedom Coalition and Mitch Daniels will remain neutral in the primary.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:35 pm
Newt may be the first President to have actually made love, not war. Oh, wait, that was Clinton. At least he didn’t say that it was patriotism driving his libido.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:36 pm
asparagus,
There you go buddy, get it out of your system.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:36 pm
182 – Whoa whoa. I never gave Mitt a hard time about not serving.
I just made fun of him when he suggested that his sons’ “campaign service” was anything like serving in the military.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:36 pm
I’ll say again…
This is Newt’s momentary blip. He’ll crash just like the others.
No reason to panic. Move along, people. Nothing to see here.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:37 pm
asparagus,
Never said word one about Mitt serving or not.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:37 pm
What’s up with Newt marrying his high school teacher? Ewwww!!
November 29th, 2011 at 5:37 pm
Smack, I know. You are one of the good guys. My snark is set to Extreme tonight. I’ll repent tomorrow and it will all be OK.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:39 pm
asparagus,
Understood. Let it rip.
Been there before.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:40 pm
#194 – I always wondered what Louis XVI must have been thinking before he lost his head.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:40 pm
I’d like to see a poll commissioned asking people how long they think Newt was Speaker of the House. I thought it was like 10 years or so. Nope. Turns out it was four scandal-plagued years. Newt got dumped by his own people. He turned the ball over several times, especially going after Clinton for impeachment. But Newts our ABR savior so lets forget about all that.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:43 pm
177 Mitt has what it takes. Oh yeah. You just keep holding tight to Cain and Gingrich, friend.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:44 pm
194 petty petty people. Heaven knows, the military wouldn’t take ol’ doughboy until he sheds a few.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:45 pm
At least Newt marries the people he has affairs with. Isn’t there some dignity in that? If he moves to Iran, he can marry as many as he wants without telling the others.
I’m already tired of this.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:45 pm
Liz,
Never spent a day supporting Cain..he lost me on the first debate when he talked about a Muslim Loyalty Oath
November 29th, 2011 at 5:46 pm
Check this out…
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/post/afternoon-fix-gingrich-says-cain-has-right-to-try-to-recover/2011/11/29/gIQAvfms9N_blog.html
November 29th, 2011 at 5:47 pm
REDEMPTION!!!!!
November 29th, 2011 at 5:49 pm
Keith Price,
Yikes!!!
November 29th, 2011 at 5:50 pm
WashPo can’t stand Newt. I wonder why?????
Oh, yeah.. THEY’RE A LIBERAL RAG, Keith. Nice hit job, fool.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:55 pm
It is appalling that Newt could be President. Its like saying that Sanduski guy might be President in 10 years. Who knows, maybe he is patriotic, too? Patriotism will make a man do almost anything! Its like crack!
November 29th, 2011 at 5:58 pm
#204 Assuming that there haven’t been others that he didn’t marry. Yikes!
Your comment reminded me of the story of when they were trying to seat Reed Smoot, UT, in the US Senate. Anti-polygamy forces were keeping him from taking his duly elected seat. Finally, (I believe) Teddy Roosevelt said, “I don’t see why a bunch of monogomists who don’t “monog” should prevent the seating of a of a polygamist who doesn’t polyg.”
Smoot was sworn into the Senate.
This entire campaign season has been filled with irony.
November 29th, 2011 at 6:00 pm
210 – Now you’re just sounding stupid. You’re comparing Newt to a guy that anally raped a ten year old boy? Really?
This is why its so hard for so many to feel any hint of sadness for the Rombots when their guy falters.
November 29th, 2011 at 6:04 pm
ST,
That’s asparagus’s thing. The dirtier the better is his political mantra.
November 29th, 2011 at 6:05 pm
Wow.
Finally my faith in the judgement of Christians is somewhat restored. It has been stunning to me over the last couple of weeks that so-called “family values” voters who proportedly follow the teachings of Christ could actually be lining up behind the candidacy of Newt Gingrich. While I like Newt personally and think he has much to offer, I simply could not believe that it would be social conservatives that would propel him forward.
Mr. Vander Plaats would truly be a hypocrite if he leads an organization devoted to family, marriage, and traditional values and yet supports a man for the office of President of the United States that has so clearly has failed to live up to the ideal he espouses. Good for this group. It’s about time someone told the truth.
November 29th, 2011 at 6:07 pm
209. YOU just called ME a fool? LOL! HAHAHAHAHA.
I’ll hold up my posts to your posts any time. We’ll let our peers decide who’s the fool. Too funny.
November 29th, 2011 at 6:08 pm
Cain/Newt ’12 (or reverse it)
November 29th, 2011 at 6:09 pm
209. Speaking of fools…
Perhaps you MISSED the fact that it wasn’t the Washington Post SAYING those things. It was a conservative republican who once worked with Newt in the House.
“Fool”. Hahahahahahahahaha Good grief.
November 29th, 2011 at 6:09 pm
215.
Ok, fool…You Rombots do act cult-like, I’ll give you that.
November 29th, 2011 at 6:10 pm
217.
Chill, kid..Out of context is how liberal’s roll.
November 29th, 2011 at 6:10 pm
165 SMACK
McCain won the nomination because the primary was about National Security. He lost because the General Election was about the economy. You seem quite proud to have supported the big loser “from the beginning”
Had Romney or someone else with a economics background gotten the nomination Obama would have had a fight, but not with your boy!
November 29th, 2011 at 6:11 pm
Good ol’ Newt, he never met a wife he didn’t like.
November 29th, 2011 at 6:12 pm
219.
Again, speaking of fools…
How do you parse that statement to suggest it’s out of context.
“Fool”. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, oh my side hurts!
November 29th, 2011 at 6:12 pm
Tim,
Sound familiar?
November 29th, 2011 at 6:13 pm
222.
Link me the video of him saying it, FOOL.
November 29th, 2011 at 6:14 pm
[...crickets...]
November 29th, 2011 at 6:16 pm
218. I’m willing to bet there are plenty of non-Romney supporters on this site that would grade my posts as higher quality and contributes better to the conversation than yours.
Smack and Matt MWS come to mind.
Your posts contribute nothing. You spam and you call names. You’re nasty and vile. Your posts get skipped my the majority of readers, here. You’re a gnat. An annoyance.
And, YOU call ME a fool? L. O. L. !
November 29th, 2011 at 6:18 pm
CR, you’re a fool, and everyone knows it.
Even Sojourner Truth and Casuist know it.
Keith is a respectable poster, and even you know it.
November 29th, 2011 at 6:18 pm
224. Ooh, look! CR learned a new word!!
He’s so excited that I finally stepped in from my boycott to acknowledge him that he can’t stop saying it. “Wow, Keith paid attention to me! Oohh, oooh! I’ll taunt hims some more so he acknowledges I’m a real person. Keith validates me! I’m so excited.”
November 29th, 2011 at 6:19 pm
Thank you, MassCon!
November 29th, 2011 at 6:24 pm
CR. Haven’t found a video, but here are more sources.
http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/11/29/377923/guy-molinari-newt-gingrich-evil-person/
November 29th, 2011 at 6:27 pm
And, this one…
http://www.silive.com/news/index.ssf/2011/11/guy_molinari_says_newt_gingric.html
November 29th, 2011 at 6:29 pm
It is beyond amazing that hypocrisy of this magnitude is tolerated and accepted in any religious community.
Good for the few who speak out.
If Newt wins the Republican Party is dead.
November 29th, 2011 at 6:30 pm
Yes Kieth, we understand how nasty Romney supporters can be. We’ve seen it here on this site all day today.
Name calling and insults do not change the dynamic. Mitt is in trouble, and after watching his interview on Fox, I think he knows it. He’s cracking.
November 29th, 2011 at 6:37 pm
233
We’ll see how Huckabee’s forum goes this Friday and how the final two debates go. Don’t get antsy.
November 29th, 2011 at 6:58 pm
Keith thank you for your posts. There are three bloggers on this site I just think of as…
“The Three Dumb-Egos” I dont bother reading or responding to their comments, but i find your responses and arguements educational.
November 29th, 2011 at 7:25 pm
Waaaaa waa waa. Romney supporters are so nasty. Boo hoodie hoo, that’s why I won’t vote for Romney. To punish those nasty, egotistical supporters.
I keep coming back because I can be a complete baby here and still fit in. I also get cutting edge news.
November 29th, 2011 at 7:57 pm
The mechanics of running a national campaign are about to bite the neuter. It’s not so bad that he’s not doing much in Ohio to qualify by Dec 7. Not much to do. But, Gingrich has until Dec 22 to round up 10,000 signatures and 400 signatures in each of Virginia’s 11 CD. Not so easy to do since they have to be registered Republicans
CraigS
November 29th, 2011 at 8:37 pm
Interesting trip down memory lane outlining why Romney lost in 2008.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/after-2008-romney-works-a-very-different-campaign/2011/11/29/gIQAd2e58N_story.html
November 29th, 2011 at 8:43 pm
I loved the Bret Baier interview. I thought the questions were pretty terrible, but I love Mitt showing some frustration with the dishonest criticisms of him. If you want ask tough questions, go ahead. But don’t give credit to the lies of the DNC and Huntsman. I am happy Romney called him out for what that was.
November 29th, 2011 at 8:50 pm
#238 – Interesting article, though short.
November 29th, 2011 at 8:51 pm
239. I can see why the anti-mitt crowed liked the interview, it was a “YEAH! we got him now!” moment for them. But I also see why the pro-Romney people enjoyed the interview, Romney faced his critisism, called out dishonesty and the willing distortion of his record.
So at the end of the day people who hate Romney, still hate Romney, the people who love him, still love him, and the ones who are undecided still have no clue what to think.
November 29th, 2011 at 8:55 pm
I’m still a bit aggravated that a a man can stare into the camera at millions of American public and insist he didn’t do X, when he did plenty of X. I know, it happens all the time, but his wife seemed so decent this time. That’s why I say, NO ONE who hasn’t been fully vetted this round.
November 29th, 2011 at 9:07 pm
#239 – Spot on Jax.
November 29th, 2011 at 9:07 pm
239. Jax, got a link to a replay of that interview?
November 29th, 2011 at 9:09 pm
#244
http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/special-report/index.html#/v/1301527875001/romney-laying-groundwork-in-florida/?playlist_id=86927
November 29th, 2011 at 9:10 pm
How does a little floating turd like CR get to show his face on this site, act like he’s running the show, and all because he’s latched on to his umteenth candidate.
What scurrilous little weenie.
No shame.
No guts.
No integrity.
November 29th, 2011 at 9:12 pm
#239 – I suspect tomorrow the pundits, right and left, will not see it that way. Romney was not well prepared, evaded a couple questions, and was agitated. The pundits will attribute his performance to his sinking poll numbers.
November 29th, 2011 at 9:31 pm
239 Jax,
Fox just has it in for Romney. I thought the interview was fine and Romney held his ground despite Brett Baier’s somewhat hostile tone and attempts to paint him as a flip-flopper. What I thought was typical for Fox was The Panel (Juan Williams and Jonah Goldberg specifically) afterwards attempting to create the narrative that this was a ‘devastating’ interview for Romney. Clearly, it wasn’t. Cain’s newspaper interview where he couldn’t remember his pre-programmed answer to Libya was devastating, this interview wasn’t.
I just wish somebody, anybody, would report the news without all the spin. I am so tired of Fox’s agenda-driven, dumbed-down news and MSNBC (except Morning Joe)is even worse. CNN ironically might be the best for election coverage.
November 29th, 2011 at 9:54 pm
245. Thanks, Pablo, for the link.
Just watched the interview. Not one of Mitt’s strongest. He just seemed a bit off. I actually cringed during his answer on the flips and the out of context and clipped ads. He really did seem like he was dodging it. Which is strange because I think he’s got very good answers for them.
I also thought he mishandled the question on Newt’s immigration and what he would do with the 11 million.
It seemed to me he was hyper cautious about not letting ANY 20 second sound bite get used against him.
I DO trust that he’s a LOT smarter than me, though, so maybe it was the right thing to do.
I LOVED his response to the question about what issues he’s not in line with conservatives on. Kudos for not taking THAT bait.
I’ve mostly been impressed with Brett Baier, but I didn’t care for his handling of that interview. And, in much of it, his face looked like he couldn’t believe the kind of answers he was getting. If the video had thought bubbles, his would have been, “yada, yada, yada”.
As for a HIT piece… Naw. A good candidate like Mitt LOVES to get the hard questions because it gives him a chance to give great answers. The PUBLIC is wondering these same things and if the interviewer doesn’t ask them, the public can assume the worst.
I didn’t see the post interview narrative, so if they tried to spin it as devastating, they’ve either got an agenda against Mitt or they watched a different interview I did.
Even with my stated misgivings, I think the interview was a + for Mitt Romney.
November 29th, 2011 at 9:59 pm
248. Ci2Eye, I like Morning Joe, and I think Joe, Mika, and Willy are fair. Most of their guests seem to have agendas and don’t seem to give Mitt much slack.
Halperin and Steele are hit and miss. I’d say they’re balanced by being a little anti-Mitt and then a little pro-Mitt, thus creating the balance — rather than just sharing a single, fair and balanced set up points.
Joe won’t let go of the Flip Flop theme, though. He said he loves what Mitt says NOW and that Mitt is most qualified. But, he doesn’t trust him. Joe seems unwilling to look at the flip issues, objectively. He even insists Mitt’s global warming statements were a pandering flip. So, Joe’s not completely playing fair, either.
But, they all seem to believe Mitt is still odds-on favorite to take the nomination.
November 29th, 2011 at 10:09 pm
#249 -YW. I share most of your observations. And I too caught the inappropriate look on Baier’s face. Journalists are so unprofessional these days, trying to be part of the story instead of just reporting or investigating.
Romney needs a better answer to the flip flopping charge. He is clearly frustrated with getting asked repeatedly, which is why he needs a good response so finally people will say “ah hah, now I get it.” Saying, “you are wrong” or “I was misquoted” doesn’t cut it.
November 29th, 2011 at 10:19 pm
251. Pablo, you’re right. Those answers sounds too much like Cain’s answers.
And, I don’t get his frustration. EVERYWHERE he goes, he repeats the same message because he knows a) he’s reaching a different audience; and b) people need repetition.
So, why he would make such a fuss over getting asked it again is beyond me.
November 29th, 2011 at 10:21 pm
#250 Keith Price,
I think Joe is fair. I am not looking for adoring coverage of anybody. I just want them to tell the truth and on Morning Joe, they generally do. They have a wide cross section of voices albeit more liberal than conservative but Joe tends to moderate them well if they start getting too far out there.
The show goes dramatically left when Mika is left in charge. Although I like her and think she’s generally reasonable and thoughtful, she does let the guests drift left when left unchecked.
Joe seems to have flip-flopped a bit on Mitt. First he seemed to be pushing Huntsman then moved towards Mitt and did a great interview with him but lately is more pro-Huntsman. That’s fine by me as long as he isn’t lying like Fox often does and I suspect if Huntsman continues to falter, he’ll go back to Mitt.
November 29th, 2011 at 11:07 pm
CR:
So your kind of So-Cons welcome everybody back but Mormons?
November 29th, 2011 at 11:12 pm
That is fantastic!!! Christians in Iowa……..doing their own research and thinking for themselves!!!! Yes!
November 29th, 2011 at 11:27 pm
“It’s wrong to go around and adopt radically opposite positions formed on your need of any one election, afterwards people will have to ask themselves, `What will we tell me subsequent time?’”
That’s pretty rich coming from Gingrich. I think Romney is graciously waiting if the thing put’s itself down, or if someone else on the field attacks the newt pig, so that he doesn’t have to get his hands dirty. But if it is needed, taking Gingrich down is pretty easy.
December 18th, 2011 at 9:34 am
Romney…really? One would hope that the leader of our country had not dodged the draft THREE times, twice to return to college and once to conveniently be sent to France by the Mormons to do missionary work. Then we have the problem with Americans wanting jobs and Romney is known for co-founding Bain Capital, buying numerous corporations up and then laying off their employees, thousands of people were put out of work thanks to Romney while he made millions. American people better look hard at who has the brains to turn this economy around while being a patriot and creating jobs. Do some research on how Newt worked with Clinton in 1994 to turn this country around. Ron Paul has some good ideas but he can never gain the voters blocks from conservatives, veterans, jewish, etc. Too few voters groups will support him, he is simply not electable and would only allow Obama to return to the White House.