That would probably be the consensus from most conservatives, although I personally rank Newt even worse than Romney. I think both of them are self-serving jerks who would run over their own grandmother to get elected, although Romney seems to have a picture-perfect family and have a squeaky clean private life, whereas Newt's "personal life" has been a train wreak (and his fans say if you don't accept that he's sincere about his "I found Jesus" stuff then you're either a bad Catholic or hate Catholics. Please.)
I think Romney has a shot of beating Obama, I think if Gingrich is the nominee it will be a repeat of Kathleen Harris or Christine O'Donnell at the national level. Not only will the Democrats have a field day and make this guy less popular than Darth Vader, but Newt driving away independents in droves could jeopardize many of our close races in Congress. I don't care if he's a great debater, so is Alan Keyes and look at his totals in political campaigns. Under no circumstances should Newt be the nominee, it would be a disaster for the GOP. Just remember you were warned.
If I was evaluating them solely on their "conservative record", (and ignoring the other 90% factors that make up a campaign), then yes, Gingrich is "better" than Romney. But since Gingrich ran in a strongly conservative Georgia district and Romney ran in Massachusetts, he doesn't get any brownie points for that either. (neither does Rick Perry by being conservative in Texas because he needs to be)
>> And if you had to pit Santourm vs Newt in terms of DC experience and political skills its Newt > Santorum.? <<
About even. Santorum was elected to Congress at age 32 by defeating an incumbent in a district that was majority RAT. The RATs redrew the district to make it even more RAT and Santorum continue to win when registered Dems outnumbered Republicans 3:1. He served three terms. That is a remarkable accomplishment. Santorum was then elected to the U.S. Senate by also defeating an incumbent in a statewide race, while running as an apologetic Reagan conservative in a northeast state that is hardly conservative a bastion of conservatism. He was named "most ambitious" of the freshman class by the Washington press and rose to become Senate Republican Conference Chairman. He was re-elected handily even as Gore carried the state and served as a Senator for 12 years before his downfall in the heavily Dem year of 2006.
Gingrich tried to defeat an incumbent Democrat in fairly conservative district, and failed both times. He then finally won the seat in an open race, and it was redrawn to be majority Republican as he won it repeatedly in races against token opponents for 20 years (representing Georgia's 6th from '78-'98). He rose up thru the ranks of the GOP, became whip, and got to be House Speaker thanks to leading the GOP cause in '94 and thanks to longtime GOP stalwart Bob Michell retiring. He proved to be a poor leader from 1995-1998 and stepped down in disgrace after the GOP lost 5 seats in a midterm election that was supposed to be favorable for them.
>> in a perfect world dontcha think: <<
>> 1. Paul needs to be defeated. <<
And he will be, regardless of what happens. He's doing better than he did in '08 but without crossover votes from Dems and Libertarian loons this guy is probably in single digits with actual Republicans. He won't win closed primaries. The GOP is not going to nominate a 80 year old Libertarian kook.
>> 2. Romney needs to be exposed. <<
And he will be, regardless of which Republican is running against him. Plus the mainstream media will be sure that he is "exposed" AFTER he is the nominee.
>> 3. Have it out between Santorum and Newt, best man wins? <<
Iowa and New Hampshire have given us vastly different outcomes and are very different electorates but with the final numbers now in from N.H., one this has proven to be consistent between Iowa and New Hampshire. Of the candidates going strictly after the CONSERVATIVE vote, Santorum gets the most votes (in both Iowa and N.H.), Gingrich gets the second highest, and then Perry is in a distant, distant third. Yet Newt's fans say he's the "front runner" and despite not winning a single county yet, everyone should drop out and throw their support to him. That seems to be a denial of reality.
>> Thats my best case scenario. <<
My best case scenario is Newt and Perry both leave the race (Perry is too much of a doofus to get anywhere, Gingrich is too damaged to "beat Obama"), although outspent, Santorum gets a tea party boost and beats Romney narrowly in the remaining primaries after it becomes a one-on-one fight, and Santorum names Susana Martinez as his running mate at the Republican National Convention this fall.
An excellent analysis.
I do think Santorum could squeak out a win over Romney, but I think it’s more likely he will have some very strong showings at second place and end up as the VP.
The problem I haved with naming S. Martinez is not about her credentials at all, but that it would be a mere ploy to try to pick up moderqate Hispanic voters, most of whom are pre-committed to the Democratic Party. We just have to hope Santorum does not self-destruct in SC, but more likely he will run out of money by the time of FL. Gingrich, I believe, is already finished, as is Perry.
The problem I haved with naming S. Martinez is not about her credentials at all, but that it would be a mere ploy to try to pick up moderate Hispanic voters, most of whom are pre-committed to the Democratic Party. We just have to hope Santorum does not self-destruct in SC, but more likely he will run out of money by the time of FL. Gingrich, I believe, is already finished, as is Perry.