Subscribe by RSSI’ve had my fair share of problems with half of Newt. Good Newt is brilliant, knows the issues better than anyone and has a mind that smart people would kill for. Bad Newt, tends to say things that make you want to pull your hair out; ‘he said what? He did what’?
Recently, based on a question asked of me, I’ve begun asking the same question of others; “of the current Republican candidates, assuming a major crisis, who would you rather have in the White House; Romney, Cain, Perry or Newt?” Newt wins, often begrudgingly; the winner in yet another non-scientific poll by your humble servant.
Intellectual chops, experience, a great mind and decades spent grappling with issues are important to serious people on both sides of the political spectrum and very much so for the political middle of both parties. There is a comparison forming. Disregarding, for the moment, anyone not polling in the teens the contest is Romney, Cain and Newt. Romney is looked upon warily, Cain is a welcome refreshment to the process but will likely burn out; Newt is verbalizing ideas that more and more people find appealing, thoughtful and in many instances creative. He has been able to find a way to express those ideas relatively simply which is a key to why he’s climbing. It also appears that Newt is winning supporters away from both Romney and Cain.
The latest general polling is in the news and puts Newt and Romney within the margin of error. Behind the numbers, however, is a 61% favorable rating for Newt among Republicans, well ahead of second place Romney at 55%. Also noteworthy is that three months ago Newt was at 7%, now at 22%, just slow and steady. Newt is now fully qualified for the Left’s attack machine which has already geared up.
Newt is refusing to take any guff from the likes of Scott Pelley or his comrades in the MSM, energizing Republicans with the push back. So far he’s been able to strike back, absent the appearance of Bad Newt. Questions based on a faulty premise or facts in error find Newt striking back with logic, facts and just the right amount of ‘attitude overwhelming the questioner, especially the ideologic questioner.
In the coliseum of debate combat, more often than not, Newt’s been the ‘adult in the room’ reminding the others that they’re there to defeat Obama, not each other. Newt has demonstrated the ability to take nearly any question and frame the answer in the context of what the Obama Administration is doing. Newt, the adult in the room! Who would have thought it? Short of Romney landing a punch over individual mandates there have been few if any, direct attacks on Newt from the Republican field, perhaps because he was not considered a serious challenger; perhaps because there is a general assumption that the return fire could be devastating or someone is just teeing up one more opportunity for Newt to be the ‘adult’.
Newt has a checkered marital background, his recorded quotes from days gone by will, no doubt, be reprised in any variety of ads should he continue his rise. But there is also a sense of confidence that he is equipped to turn it around if not humanize himself around his prior flaws. If ideas, experience and knowledge are what America decides to look to, Newt cannot be disregarded in the primaries or in a general election. Okay, he’s not pretty like Romney, Perry, Bachman and Huntsman but as I’ve told my daughters; ‘pretty is as pretty does!’
Is Newt the Conservative, Conservatives are looking for? Could be!
The question, however, remains; can Good Newt keep Bad Newt in the closet? Will a stupid or ill-informed question serve as the red cape for Bad Newt? Can he keep Callista in the background? Can he keep his cool when Callista is attacked, as she will be? Callista could be an Achilles heel to Newt; when she is attacked Newt will see red and Bad Newt will want to come out and play. The rap on Newt has always been discipline, he shows signs of getting some; the question is how much?
Can he continue to trot out ‘Good Newt’? Can he continue to be viewed as the ‘adult in the room’? Can he continue to effectively challenge the premise of ideologically motivated public questioning?
Big questions for a big brain; but hang on there folks, it’s also a big question for a big ego.
Leave a comment »Visit the You Decide Politics Store »
Although I have always been a huge fan of Newt and his out of the box ideas since he was the Speaker years ago, the one thing that makes me very nervous are his lack of funds to go up against Barack Obama. I remember for every one Mccain ad there were 5 Obama ads which was a big reason the president won. He’s ahead of the repubs rasiing funds given his illegal campaining activities on the taxpayers dime. The other absolute horror is if Obama wins this Socialist puppet who is controlled by George Soros and Warren Buffet will be free to do whatever he can to collapse this economy and run a New World Order of Socialism. You think he’s bad now….yikes. That’s why my mind says Romney but heart wants Newt.
FILE UNDER: THIS ISN’T SOUTHWEST AIRLINES!
“Newt Gingrich Receives $1.6 Million as a Consultant for Freddie Mac”
THAT EXTRA BAGGAGE IS GOING TO COST YOU MR.GINGRICH!
D.D.Mao
Did “Newt Gingrich Receives $1.6 Million as a Consultant for Freddie Mac” or did Newt’s group receive that money ? Divided by many people…
Video:
http://www.newt.org/news/.....reddie-mac
Bill:
I see what you are saying but it’s just splitting hairs.If it was a Democrat whose name was on the organization we would rightfully be all over him.In fact we have been denouncing “Crony Capitalism” and how politicians become rich once they get to Washington not long ago on this site.
Newt has enough baggage from when he was Speaker(besides his personality turning people off)without more explaining to do.For someone who’s supposed to be so intelligent I’m disappointed he didn’t expect this to appear when he thought about running.Heck he’ll be lucky to get approved by Congress for a cabinet position if the Republicans take the White House.
When are the Republicans going to learn that the Democrats play hardball when it comes to politics? As I said in another column it seems the Republicans think they can win just by running against an unpopular President.No I can’t see Newt winning the independent vote.
D.D.Mao
We all have our personal opinions. I argued for the bail outs of Wall Street and not Car Companies. Certainly not how Fannie and Freddy was handled. Frank-Dodds bill did not even address F/F, as pitiful as that bill was.
Personal life short comings I don’t take a lot of stock in. A Kennedy can kill a secretary, probable pregnant with his baby, not report to police in a timely fashion, yet flourish in Congress as a icon. Reagan’s immigration plan could of worked if not for Teddy. Newt’s divorces can be overcome.
In congress Newt worked with both sides of the isle and got legislation passed without full control of Congress. Which is the cries we here now. Newt worked to get Contract with America passed. He reduced taxes which gave better results than Bill C. tax increases. Bill C. never balanced budget but Newt DID. Government was made smaller and entitlements were shored up. Last civil rights bill was passed thanks to Newt and the Contract. Newt embodied TEA before there was TEA.
Maybe I am spitting hairs but is embellishing to say he received $$$ 1.6 million. I do my best to be accurate. When condemning barry I try to be pure of heart. Newt never a lobbyist, done when out of office, and from all accounts was true to his beliefs and f/f did not follow his good advise in substance. As I understand it Newt was quiet because of confidential agreement and for some STRANGE REASON Fannie came forward and thus broke agreement allowing Newt to speak. I find no fault with Newt with information I now have.
To your second paragraph, I find his record in House exemperary. He had ability to get things done with Democrats as well. You must explain your belief he could not get approved for a position because I don’t see it.
I don’t know if Newt will be our Candidate but is my hope. I know full well the grind he will go through and positive Newt knows as well. Is no picnic in the park. Obvious there is hope by the surge in polls. Naturally it can come down. Life is not “a box of chocolates”.
If not Newt__ WHO ???
Bill:
As I said to Landreaux “We have our differences but they seem to be in the way things are conducted not in theory.” This goes for you and I also.We both have Conservative views.
I have to say I do look at personal behavior(as opposed to shortcomings)because I think it says alot about the person.By that I’m suggesting “shortcomings” means something you aren’t capable of doing while personal behavior is how you conduct yourself.
I think Mr.Gingrich has a major problem from the start because while Republicans have a favorable account of “Contract with America” the American public perceives his polarizing personality as having a vendetta against President Clinton and was willing to shut down the government because of it thus the “Grinch”nickname.They also remember the reason he resigned was the hypocrisy of him preaching morals and then turning around and having his own scandal.Many of the items you pointed out were true BUT he didn’t have any more to do with balancing the budget back in the 1990’s than President Clinton did.When you don’t have a Cold War to allocate money to along with an economy which was buzzing along with a high tech bubble you can balance a budget.Mr. Gingrich was as partisan as the Democrats when it came to getting his agenda through and he might have slowed the pace of government expansion but he didn’t shrink government.Only Mr.Gingrich can say what he was thinking when it came to not disclosing his receiving money from organizations but to America it looks like just another politician getting kickbacks.And no if the Senate stays in Democratic hands I don’t think he would be approved by Congress(if needed)for a cabinet position but would be scrutinized worst than any Republican nominated Supreme Court judge.
Now I know it’s getting old hearing me tear apart the current crop of candidates but I DON’T FOLLOW the theory that “They might be bums but they’re our bums”.That would only be killing the messenger and putting a happy face on the message doesn’t change the facts.As I said the Democrats play hardball and when you are on top of the Republican polls you can expect to spend a major portion of your time defending your dirty linen.Just ask Herman Cain,Sarah Palin and any other Republican who is a threat to the Progressive agenda and riding the crest of the polls.Progressives may preach civility but they don’t practice it.
Who do I want to run for President? Who I want doesn’t want it.A year ago I was for Rep.Paul Ryan(Wisc.)who NOT ONLY HAD A PLAN FOR AMERICA but IS ARTICULATE ENOUGH TO EXPRESS IT.He could win over the independent voters in a heartbeat and would give President Obama fits during any debates.Yes he has baggage(voted for bailouts)but then so did President Reagan who voted for tax increases when he was governor.I’m not looking for the PERFECT CONSERVATIVE but one who I won’t have to worry which way they lean when the time comes.
But this is just “personal opinion”.
Bob
I no sooner got done responding to Bill’s post than I read about the “Bad Newt”.
At a Thanksgiving Family Forum in Des Moines Iowa yesterday Mr.Gingrich said “The OWS protesters should get a job right after they take a bath”.Now talking like that isn’t going to get him the independent vote many of which sympathize with the OWS stand against Washingtons overflowing with corruption,crony capitalism and self serving interest.ESPECIALLY when it is revealed he took $1.6 million only a few days before and can not in any shape or form be considered a Washington outsider.Talk about being the adult in the room?
Well with Landreaux quoting “Forrest Gump” (Pretty is as pretty does”) and Bill quoting”Forrest Gump”(Life is not a box of chocolates)I’ll close my opposition to Mr.Gingrich with this from Thomas Jefferson:
“A man whose political principles have any decided character and who has energy enough to give them effect must always expect to encounter political hostility from those of adverse principles.”
Bob
D.D.Mao
Was short on time for proper response to all you wrote. Too much quoted material. Sorry.
1. You write “BUT he didn’t have any more to do with balancing the budget back in the 1990’s than President Clinton did.”
“Gingrich and the incoming Republican majority’s promise to slow the rate of government spending conflicted with the president’s agenda for Medicare, education, the environment and public health, leading eventually to a temporary shutdown of the U.S. federal government.[54] Prior to the government shutdown, Congress passed several continuing resolutions for funding, although both were vetoed by President Clinton.[55] When the previous appropriations bills expired, the government closed most non-essential offices. The shutdown became the longest-ever in U.S. history, ending when Clinton agreed to submit a CBO-approved balanced budget plan.[56]”
http://en.wikipedia.org/w.....t_Gingrich
I still stand on “Bill C. never balanced budget but Newt DID”. Clinton was forced. Never happened before Newt.
2.“They also remember the reason he resigned was the hypocrisy of him preaching morals and then turning around and having his own scandal”
A. Newt was re-elect and then resigned. Voters KNEW his “morals”:
B. This source differs with you view:
“By 1998, Gingrich had become a highly visible and polarizing figure in the national public’s eye, making him a target for Democratic congressional candidates across the nation. His national approval rating was 45% in April 1998, although his local approval was undiminished, and he was handily reelected to an 11th term.[75]
Republicans lost five seats in the House in the 1998 midterm elections—the worst performance in 64 years for a party that didn’t hold the presidency. Polls showed that Gingrich and the Republican Party’s attempt to remove President Clinton from office was widely unpopular among Americans.[76] Gingrich suffered much of the blame for the election loss. Facing another rebellion in the Republican caucus, he announced on November 6, 1998 that he would not only stand down as Speaker, but would leave the House as well. Commenting on his departure, Gingrich said, “I’m willing to lead but I’m not willing to preside over people who are cannibals. My only fear would be that if I tried to stay, it would just overshadow whoever my successor is.”[77”
http://en.wikipedia.org/w.....t_Gingrich
3.“Mr. Gingrich was as partisan as the Democrats when it came to getting his agenda through and he might have slowed the pace of government expansion but he didn’t shrink government”
“
Balancing the federal budget
A key aspect of the Contract with America was the promise of a balanced federal budget. After the end of the government shutdown, Gingrich and other Republican leaders acknowledged that Congress would not be able to draft a balanced budget in 1996. Instead, they opted to approve some small reductions that were already approved by the White House and to wait until the election season.[42]
By May 1997, Republican congressional leaders reached a compromise with the Democrats and President Clinton on the federal budget. The agreement called for a federal spending plan designed to reduce the federal deficit and achieve a balanced budget by 2002. The plan included a total of $152 billion in Republican sponsored tax cuts over five years. Other major parts of the spending plan called for $115 billion to be saved through a restructuring of Medicare, $24 billion set aside to extend health insurance to children of the working poor, tax credits for college tuition, and a $2 billion welfare-to-work jobs initiative.[43][44]
President Clinton signed the budget legislation in August 1997. At the signing, Gingrich gave credit to ordinary Americans stating, “It was their political will that brought the two parties together.”[45]
In early 1998, with the economy performing better than expected, increased tax revenues helped reduce the federal budget deficit to below $25 billion. Gingrich then called upon President Clinton to submit a balanced budget for 1999—three years ahead of schedule—which Clinton did, making it the first time the federal budget had been balanced since 1969.[46]”
http://en.wikipedia.org/w.....t_Gingrich
“During his four years as House speaker, Gingrich sometimes opposed President Bill Clinton but he also worked closely with Clinton, in 1996, to limit public welfare, and, in 1997, to pass a capital gains tax cut and, in 1998, to pass the first balanced budget since 1969.”
“A central pledge of President Clinton’s campaign was to reform the welfare system, adding changes such as work requirements for recipients. However, by 1994, the Clinton Administration appeared to be more concerned with universal health care and no details or a plan had emerged on welfare reform. Gingrich accused the President of stalling on welfare, and proclaimed that Congress could pass a welfare reform bill in as little as ninety days. Gingrich insisted that the Republican Party would continue to apply political pressure to the President to approve welfare legislation.[38]
In 1996, after constructing two welfare reform bills that were vetoed by President Clinton,[39] Gingrich and his supporters pushed for passage of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act, which was intended to reconstruct the welfare system. The act gave state governments more autonomy over welfare delivery, while also reducing the federal government’s responsibilities. It instituted the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families program, which placed time limits on welfare assistance and replaced the longstanding Aid to Families with Dependent Children program. Other changes to the welfare system included stricter conditions for food stamp eligibility, reductions in immigrant welfare assistance, and recipient work requirements.[40]
Gingrich negotiated with President Clinton by offering accurate information about his party’s vote counts and by persuading conservative Republicans to vote for it.[39] The bill was signed into law on August 22, 1996.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/w.....t_Gingrich
Article shows a lot of compromise between both parties.
To your second comment, what I heard Newt say HE IS NOT A OUTSIDDER. OBAMABUM WAS AND SEE WHAT WE GOT.
Newt’s “OWS” comment was on target. Polls at first was for group but NO LONGER. Our man who replaced Teddy was for waterboarding. He got elected by Independents. Same I feel can be true for Newt.
Quoting Jefferson. Man who cheated. He had black & white children…
Bill:
Best of luck with YOUR candidate!
P.S. I’ll take a Thomas Jefferson or James Madison over any current politican.
“At no time in the history of mankind has so much intellect been gathered in this building ……save when Thomas Jefferson dined alone.”
John F. Kennedy at White House dinner for Noble Prize winners 29th April 1962
Bob
Just curious…why is Ron Paul not considered a contender in your post?
leesoski,
Ron Paul’s positions on foreign policy make his a non starter as a serious candidate in my humble opinion. I give him tremendous credit for his engagement of the economic issues, he’s been consistently right. I give him further credit as on of the Godfathers of the Tea Party.
But when it get’s to the water’s edge very little of what he has to say strikes me as entirely rational. I understand where he’s coming from but just don’t buy it as a fesiable basis for American foreign policy. In fact I think it’s dangerous.
The temptation toward neo-isolationism is enticing but, in the short term I just don’t believe it will work.
I am for the Newt. But give Paul his due asking for Fed auditing. But for Paul we might not know of the Fed loaning more money to Wall Street than TARP. In addition HUGH AMOUNT OF $$$ to foreign banks. This I wish barry could be impeached for:
“Secret Federal Reserve System data released December 1 reveals that the banking cartel (the Fed and its member banks) bailed itself out to the tune of more than $10 tri”Fed Data Reveals Trillions in Bailouts to Big Foreign Banks”llion in “emergency” funds, with trillions more going to line the pockets of big European and foreign banks”
“The $700 billion Wall Street bailout turned out to be pocket change compared to trillions and trillions of dollars in near zero interest loans and other financial arrangements that the Federal Reserve doled out to every major financial institution,” said self-described socialist Senator Sanders after learning about the Fed data.”
http://www.thenewamerican.....eign-banks
Fed chairman has us sitting on a powder keg with this printed money. Will these foreign banks pay us 50 cent on the dollar or worse. If our money is no longer used as currency of the world watch out. We made good interest on our American companies TARP loan…
Landreaux, I see spelling isn’t one your fortes.
A lot of people dismiss Ron Paul because he dares to say that the Nation of Israel in 2011 should be standing on her own two feet.
As an Irish-American who is a staunch supporter of Israel, I believe Mr. Paul is right. Anybody who doesn’t feel the same way is doing a terrible disservice to Israel.
Vive Kahane !
Mark,
You’re right spelling is not my forte. Hopefully, ideas are!