Do you recall how the media treated Gingrich in the 1990s? It was brutal and it worked. He was one of the most disliked politicians of that time. As I said earlier I’d rather focus on his policy positions and that’s where I disagree with him but the media will be attacking him relentlessly and it will be done in a personal way, count on it.
The liberal media gives those obvious flaws a big pass when it's their own. With Gingrich it will be spewed with venom daily with all the talk and comedy shows playing it up.
You see what they did to Palin? It was very unfair in comparison because they won't have to make anything up about Newt like Russia is across the street remarks, he's given them all the ammunition they need.
This has been going on for as long as I can remember. They tried with Reagan but he was too popular while Carter wasn't so much.
True on all points but it’s still a major deterrent in the way it works to supplement the border patrol’s job. From what I understand the triple layer fence in Southern California is so effective that illegals have been forced to Arizona.
As I said troops would never be permanent, they’re too expensive and would be taken out as soon another democrat or a compassionate conservative got into office.
Why is a fence a stupid idea, they have one around the White House don't they?
A real, triple layer fence unlike troops can't be moved tomorrow depending on the political winds, is cheaper in the long run, acts as an effective barrier to add to border patrol defenses, and sends a strong signal that we mean business.
"I wouldn't lie to the American people, I wouldnt switch my positions for political reasons. Its perfectly reasonable to change your position if facts change, if you see new things you didnt see. Everybody's done that; Ronald Reagan did it. It's wrong to go around and adopt radically different positions based on your need of any one election because then people have to ask themselves, What will you tell me next time?'"
That's rich coming from someone who's as big a flip flopper as Romney.
If you want Gingrich vote for him, he’s not even a moderate by Reagan and Goldwater’s standards imo. I prefer looking at his record instead of harping on his personal life and that itself is bad. But the media besides being liberal loves entertainment and Newt’s past will give them plenty of it. So much so that Obama will win by a landslide.
We heard this in 2008 too from the “moderates”. Vote for McCain you worthless ingrates so that after our “reach across the aisle” maverick wins we can throw you conservatives back in the closet where you belong. How about you do things our way for a change? It seemed to work out well in 1980.
Stop reading other peoples' crap and follow your heart.
With all due respect you're the one who laid it out that Gingrich is the only one you can support. So what are you telling me, don't listen to you?
Actually I'm not giving up but will continue supporting one of the other conservative candidates. However if the majority of the primary voters think like you do then I stand by what I said, Gingrich will be the nominee who can expect to get creamed in the general.
It's too bad if it's come to this because it's only imo but Gingrich will not sell nationally. The story from the Washington Times today was spot on, the democrats and the media will eat him up alive in the general. And he's not even being close to a conservative.
Let's hope if the GOP is willing to sacrifice the presidency then we don't lose the Senate and the House. But Obama will get to get pick the next Supreme Court Justices.
Nice retort, if I don’t get behind your globalist, flip flopping RINO then I’ll obviously be pulling the lever for Obama. I’m sick of these type candidates the “moderates” keep shoving down our throats. And Newt isn’t even that, look at his record, sitting on the couch with Pelosi? Some of us refuse to be bamboozled.
What about Cain, Bachmann, or Santorum? I see the latest talking points coming from Newt supporters that independents, which is a crucial voting block will go for anyone but Obama so why not get behind one of these candidates instead of a liberal, globalist flip-flopper?
Fine if you believe that Obama is so vulnerable that independents would vote for anyone short of Charlie Manson then why put up the most liberal flip flopping candidate next to Romney?
What's Newt's primary slogan going to be: "vote for me, I'm not that other guy you don't like". This is a chance for real conservative to win so let's get one.
Incidentally I don't agree with you, after a daily barrage of Newt's past, which is not the least bit pretty independents and the majority of women will be so turned off to Newt they will hold their nose for the evil they already have, and that's Obama.