Newt Gingrich, Mitt Romney seesaw in South Carolina, New Hampshire polls

Politico ^ | 11/22/2011 | MAGGIE HABERMAN

[Huck]

I agree there is no comparison. Newt advocated for an individual mandate at the federal level, which is far worse than anything Romney did, and much closer to Obamacare.

That's my only point. Newt is as bad and in some cases worse than Romney. But, Newt is the place to go now I guess. Cain, who previously singled out Romney as one of his favorites, got chummy with Newt, so that must mean Newt's ok.

[Dave W]

You are one of only 110 to 120 million voters. Your vote won’t matter anyway, plus as a bonus, I won’t have to read your posts.

[Dave W]

You are free to think what you want. After all, you are one lousy vote. Who cares?

[Huck]

After all, you are one lousy vote. Who cares?

Exactly!

[Fred]

Do you work for politico? No conservative would post thier articles.

[HANG THE EXPENSE]

Well lets see what happens to newts numbers now.South carolina is pissed that doj is holding up the anti illegal immigration law.I bet they tank.Can he really be that dumb.

[American Constitutionalist]

Newt is going to take the Perry plunge down in the polls.

[jmstein7]

Sorry, but this whole debate last night was engineered to hurt Newt - the one the media fears most. All of you here complaining about him are giving the MSM a victory.

Newt was hardly called upon to answer questions - he could have knocked most of them out of the park. The focus was mostly on Paul to make it appear that he is “coming back.”

The few questions he was asked were designed to damage him - an assault by Wolf Blitzer, whom we know came into the debate with the intent to damage Newt.

The bottom line is that, like it or not, Newt is far better than Obama and the best of the field that can actually win the primary. Shhhhhh... don’t tell the MSM...

And, as someone has already mentioned, 25 years is not an arbitrary number... 1986 was the year Reagan granted “Amnesty,” even though he was duped. So, the people Newt was talking about are already legal under Reagan’s law.

[RetiredArmy]

As if I care what you think or do. Good bye and so long loser.

[Impy]

I’m not sure any more where to rank them.

As for electability they both have issues.

Romney is very arrogant too but hides it better. Notice how he smirks at the candidate standing next to him at every debate. He always looks like he’s holding in a scoff.

Gingrich at least was never an outright liberal like Romney. So I like him better, I guess. ;/ Blah.

[Dave W]

I never suggested that you care what I think or do, but your maximum dogmatic crap never works in the real world.

[Vigilanteman]

I think there is a decent chance that Cain can win in South Carolina and said momentum will propel him to a win in Florida, where the nomination is really decided and has been for the last 50 years or more.

Iowa and New Hampshire are over hyped beauty contests. Somewhat worthwhile for winnowing the field of candidates. Less so for choosing the nominee.

[Vigilanteman]

I think there is a decent chance that Cain can win in South Carolina and said momentum will propel him to a win in Florida, where the nomination is really decided and has been for the last 50 years or more.

Iowa and New Hampshire are over hyped beauty contests. Somewhat worthwhile for winnowing the field of candidates. Less so for choosing the nominee.

[Vigilanteman]

We still have an open primary so the Dems could give it to Mitt if they are properly organized . . .

That would be about as likely to happen as electing some guy named Green to the U.S. Senate against Jim DeMint.

A textbook case of South Carolina Democrat organizational skills . . .

[RetiredArmy]

Whatever Earl. You float your boat in the sewer and row on.

[Happy Rain]

You are correct—in 1976 we chose Ronaldus Maximas and Florida picked King RINO Ford.

What were we thinking?

;)