Posted on 05/13/2016 6:35:59 AM PDT by nikos1121
Over the last three months, Trump watchers have noticed that former House speaker and 2012 Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich has been consistently advocating on Trumps behalf in the media, on Capitol Hill, among K Street power brokers, and on social media.
In fact, Gingrich has morphed into Trumps unofficial ambassador for GOP peace and unity, while also seeking converts in hostile territory. Gingrich is the most recognized and respected member of the GOP establishment who is defending the insurgent candidate even as Trump rails against that same establishment. But now, it has become apparent that Gingrich is waging an active campaign to become Donald Trumps running mate.
Validating those efforts, Gingrichs name recently appeared in the pages of the New York Times on a list of Who Might (or Might Not) Be Donald Trumps Running Mate if Hes the Nominee. Which leads one to ask: Could a Trump-Gingrich ticket be a brilliant game-changing winner, or would Gingrich be buying a first-class ticket on the Trump Titanic?
These days, any Trump World speculation is incomplete without comments from Roger Stone Trumps high-profile, long-time, on-again-off-again unofficial consigliere who was called Donald Trumps Donald Trump in a recent Politico interview. When I asked Stone about a Trump-Gingrich ticket he said, Newt has been enormously helpful defending Trump against the establishment and that he should be on Trumps short list.
Most tellingly, Stone told me that Newt is a revolutionary, and Trump is leading a revolution. Curious about Gingrichs reaction to Stones revolution comment and to his name being mentioned on the Times VP list, I reached out to the former Speaker. This is what he said:
It is an honor to be mentioned. We need a new Contract with America to outline a 100-day plan to take back Washington from the lobbyists, bureaucrats, unions, and leftists. After helping in 1980 with Reagan and 1995 as speaker I know we have to move boldly and decisively before the election results wear off and the establishment starts fighting us. That is my focus.
His answer speaks volumes. In the Times article Gingrich is quoted as saying that it would be very hard for a patriotic citizen to say no and that very few people pass up the chance to be a heartbeat away from the presidency. I think its safe to say that Newt is actively developing a new Contract while awaiting Trumps call.
I asked Mark McKinnon, former chief media advisor to the presidential campaigns of President George W. Bush and Senator John McCain to weigh in on a Trump-Gingrich ticket. He told me:
McKinnon also added this perspective:
Its what Bill Clinton did when he picked another young southerner [Al Gore] for his ticket, McKinnon noted. Gingrich may not be your traditional populist outsider he was, after all, the speaker of the House of Representatives but Newt still maintains a patina of outsiderness. If Trump is the embodiment of the populist fantasy of the outsider with no political experience who is thrust into power by an angry electorate with a mandate to turn Washington on its head, right all the wrongs, and make America great again, Gingrich could be Trumps wise sidekick.
Even Trump knows the outsider-reformist mission is next to impossible, and that is precisely why he is quoted in another New York Times piece saying that he wants a VP with a strong political background, who was well respected on the Hill, who can help me with legislation, and who could be a great president.
Now, who does that sound like? Besides Newt, only four of ten others on the Times VP list seem to be open to running for the nomination rather than running away from it. They are retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson, New Jersey governor Chris Christie, Oklahoma governor Mary Fallin, and Alabama senator Jeff Sessions.
For the record, Sessions is the only senator who has endorsed Trump, and is openly advising his campaign. Even though the Times lists Ohio governor John Kasich as a possible Trump pick I made the case for why a Trump-Kasich ticket would make sense back in January that is looking less and less likely with each passing day. But even when it comes to passing legislation and pulling the levers of power, Gingrichs skillset and experience are actually better suited to helping Trump than are Kasichs.
To use a military analogy: While serving on Capitol Hill, Representative Kasich was a mere one-star general. Gingrich, on the other hand, was the five-star supreme commander when, in 1994, he led the Republican Revolution that took back control of the House after four decades of Democratic party rule.
Roger Stone told me that Gingrich is a man who loves public service. And I say, at age 73, he has everything to gain and nothing to lose except maybe his Fox News contract. Even if a Trump-Gingrich ticket were to lose, Newts media profile would have been substantially raised and he could cash in with new television contracts, as an author, and on the speaking circuit.
There are other advantages. We already know that in a no-holds-barred Clinton vs. Trump general-election campaign, Trump will be bombastic as ever. Gingrich, as Trumps running mate, could be deployed to throw policy red-meat back at Hillary and Bill.
Gingrich would be especially effective when the Clintons wax eloquent about their presidential legacy. That is when Gingrich could speak real truth to power because he more than any other person in Washington helped shape the Clinton presidency from his perch as speaker of the House. During those volatile years (a period that culminated in Gingrichs shocking resignation), it was the Clintons vs. Gingrich in political hand-to-hand combat.
Now, more than two decades later, a potential Trump-Gingrich vs. the Clinton Machine matchup has all the makings of an epic battle. Furthermore, if Trump remained weak on policy specifics, speaking only in broad strokes and grand gestures, Gingrich could play wing-man: Trump knows that no one is more versed in the nuances of foreign and domestic policy than Newt Gingrich.
There is an obvious downside, however, of a Trump-Gingrich ticket: With gender issues shaping up to be a yuuge factor in the general election, Newts three marriages are sure to raise red flags that Team Clinton will joyfully exploit. Fortunately for him, since 2000, it appears that he has been happily married to the very accomplished Callista Gingrich.
Still, with six marriages between Trump and Gingrich, one can only imagine all the trophy-wife jokes that would be thrown at the Republican ticket especially given that both men are currently married to stunning women 20-plus-years their junior.
The real question is whether Newt would hinder Trumps ability to attract female voters. Thats unlikely the real onus for attracting women voters will fall on Trump.
But assuming Callista plays an active role in the campaign, she could be a tremendous asset both to Gingrich and to Trump, helping to smooth some of their rougher edges. Gingrich is media savvy and a mega fundraising asset. He is good on the campaign trail and could solidify support among conservatives. Newt and Callista could even help rally Catholics.
Most important, Gingrich legitimizes Trumps candidacy and would refine Trumps somewhat unartful domestic and foreign-policy positions. And if the current general-election polls are correct, and Trump has alienated Hispanic and female voters to the point where the Republican ticket is going to be soundly beaten Gingrich could possibly use some of his own political capital to help minimize down-ballot losses by stumping for endangered Republican senators and members of Congress.
A Trump-Gingrich ticket would send a strong signal that Make America Great Again is not just a campaign slogan but the theme for a new Republican Revolution with Newt Gingrich as its chief strategist.
"Peeking Out From the McCain Wreckage: Mitt Romney"
"Someone's got to say it: IS MITT ROMNEY RESPONSIBLE FOR OBAMA'S VICTORY?"
"Vanity: Team Romney Sabotaged Palin and Continuing to Do So?"
"Romney Supporters Trashing Palin"
"Romney advisors sniping at Palin?"
The best option would be a retired general.
The lack of foreign policy experience will be exploited by the Dems.
But Newt would be ok. Nobody knows the Clintons like he does and he will be motivated for some payback.
I’d rather see Newt as Secretary of State. I think he’s too old to be VP. Trump needs someone who can carry the torch after he’s done. Could be 4 years could be 8. Who knows?
I don’t know. I supported Newt for president, but I’m not sure that he brings much as VP to Trump.
Love Newt!
I agree. Not being an insider, Donald needs someone like Newt.
His VP pick will be a woman.
Best yet
They could probably get along on Trade deals (at least in rhetoric), military adventurism and corruption (political party BS). All the other loony stuff that Sanders brings he’d have to shut up about. Conservatives would be SOOO mad though, I’m pretty sure he’d even lose Hannity
I don’t think brilliant. I think Gingrich is brilliant but goes off on tangents. But the real reason not for VP is lots of Dems HATE HATE HATE him. There will a yuge crossover vote fro Trump. Gingrich will make that harder. If Trump sees value in Gingrich, there are plenty of other ways once he’s in the WH.
Abolutely not. Sanders is off on 90% - way, way waaaay off - have you read his positions??!!??!?!?!
And he hates Trump.
Gingrich would help Trump in the WH, but hurt him at the ballot box.
I think Newt is brilliant and would make an excellent Chief of Staff, for Trump. I mentioned this on another thread....Newt would make mince meat out of the press. What a glorious thing!
“Gingrich I think that at 72 he is too old for the position of Vice-President”
Nonsense. If Newt dies in office Trump can appoint anyone else. This is actually a plus not a minus.
Past VP’s have usually been older than the President.
yessss indeeedee— would be a dream ticket.
[We need someone younger who could be set up as Trumps successor. ]
Agree. That’s why I keep suggesting Duncan Hunter from California. While he is still quite young, he’s been in the House since 2008 (more Congressional experience than Cruz, Rubio, Paul, etc.).
He’s also a combat vet and could be very influential with military and foreign policy matters.
And at 38 years old, will have plenty of life left for 8 years post-Trump!
Gingrich would provide the knowledge of government institutions, conservative ideology and gravitas that Trump lacks. But I don’t know if that is important to voters in a 73 y.o. VP candidate.
Personally, I have always been a big Newt fan. But he has issues with the trophy wife business and some messy divorces in the background.
I say he’d be the absolute best choice in the nation in the role of Chief of Staff in the WH.
See post #35
Well, there is that
I'm just stirring the pot
38 seems pretty young to me. Why does everyone despise the wisdom that comes with older people these days?
noooooooo— no chicks, period.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.