If Gingrich is the answer, Tea Party has failed

Boston Globe ^ | 120111 | Joshua Green

[Politics4US]

The Tea Party didn’t exist in 2008 when Hunter ran, and Palin did not have historically negatives, unless you believe CNN polls. She was doing well in the polls without even declaring.

[cripplecreek]

but with these kind of people on the side that is supposed to save America... we are doomed.

Nothing like watching the army retreat by walking backwards, then claiming that they aren't retreating.

People can claim the tea party isn't dead all they want but there are plenty of examples that prove it to be true. In Ohio, the tea party didn't show up for the union vote. In Michigan we lost a good state rep to recall for the same reason. In Wisconsin things aren't looking so good for Governor walker.

A couple months back I talked to my congressman. He told me that he has concerns because the tea party support evaporated after the election and the unions and left were right there waiting for it to happen.

As far as I'm concerned, people who don't want to clean up their own party are no better than the left. In the Michigan first district race to replace Bart Stupak, FReepers told me that Jason Allen would be fine if he defeated Dan Benishek because both were republicans. They didn't have the courage to acknowledge that Allen introduced the bill to force unionization on home care workers. Now we're hearing rumors that one of his GOP co sponsors of the forced unionization bill will challenge my conservative congressman. I'm sure the useful idiots of the right will be there to remind us that it doesn't matter which republican wins.

[PALIN SMITH]

"I love the way you people say that as if he changed his mind and settled there. The problem is that he changed his mind repeatedly and in one case, in a matter of 4 days. "

Oh....and he has warts between his toes......

We never changed our minds did we?

Listen.... I'm not a "you people"!!

You can google me to see what I've done in the past three years.

I stepped way out of my comfort zone to follow a calling.

I only want the best for MY country.

I think our future is ours to create.

We've got to get out of our status quo straight-jackets.

Perhaps this time Gingrich is not the status quo candidate.

There aint no saints in politics.

[6ppc]

Give me a break! Boston Globe making pronouncements on Tea Party success or failure?

Really getting sick of the Newt bashing that is going on. Choices are shaping up to be Obama, Mitt or Newt...which one would be the best for the country? IMHO Newt is a no-brainer selection from that set of choices.

[cripplecreek]

“Listen” LOL

You people are always so self superior but never have the courage to acknowledge your own retreat.

[Minus_The_Bear]

Gingrich has nothing to do with the Tea Party.

He attacked Paul Ryan's plan... who didn't even cut enough.

He supported global warming both with Pelosi and with his 2007 book "A Contract With The Earth."

He supported TARP & and the bailouts.

Now, somehow he is against all those things... just like Mitt.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Noot is unreliable. He has let us down before. And I don’t buy the Catholic conversion. It’s a cynical political maneuver.

[not2worry]

Actually, I am a Herman Cain Supporter.

I just thought it was an accurate and effective 150 second spot on Newt. Just spreading the Message about Newt, regardless of the messenger -

The Truth About Newt Gingrich -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CWKTOCP45zY&feature=youtu.be

[PALIN SMITH]

One of the most brilliant arguments I have ever read on Free Republic.

I totally agree!

[not2worry]

A MUST SEE FOR EVERY FREEPER-

The hypocrisy of Newt Gingrich in Newt's own words.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CWKTOCP45zY&feature=youtu.be

I am a Herman Cain Supporter, but Ron Paul is getting the truth about Newt Gingrich out in a 150 second spot!

[Colonel_Flagg]

It’s going to take a long time for the Tea Party to do its work. We are fighting against the most solidly entrenched, best-funded political machine ever devised by man — on both sides of the aisle.

To assume that the Tea Party has failed if we nominate a liberal like Romney or Huntsman, a lukewarm “conservative” like Gingrich or a candidate with warts like Perry is ridiculous. Even grass roots need time to take hold.

[PALIN SMITH]

"“Listen” LOL You people are always so self superior but never have the courage to acknowledge your own retreat.

YES....LISTEN, IF YOU DARE!

[nathanbedford]

Candidly, I had expected a somewhat more critical reaction so I am thankful for your note. Let me return the compliment, I find yours to be a brilliant reply. :-)

[onedoug]

Well, at least I didn´t use my wimpiness to make money.

[CharlesWayneCT]

I found this snippet of an article from 1995:

The planned House vote took Schumer and other gun-law advocates by surprise because Gingrich (R-Ga.) has twice promised and twice put off a repeal vote this year. Gingrich has been loath to bring the vote up because polls show the measure is popular with the public.

But Gingrich bowed to the large block of freshman lawmakers, congressional aides said. The speaker agreed to the vote in exchange for consideration of an anti-terrorism bill that is disliked by the freshmen and many conservatives because of civil liberties issues.

Oh the good old days, when Newt was making deals to bring up a measure conservatives wanted but he didn't, by holding them hostage to vote for a measure he wanted and they hated.

[Servant of the Cross]

IBTCAER. Outstanding analysis NB, as always. The election is about saving the Republic. We are in a war. And it is in its middle stages. Gain, even if only incremental gain is not only essential, it is critical to survival.

In war terms, I thought it was put well by FReeper C.Edmund Wright …

Successfully take the beaches, then you can figure out how to take Berlin.

and in medical terms, if the U.S. is the critically wounded patient …

Stop the bleeding, because you can’t repair the wound until you do.

[Jim from C-Town]

‘If what you say is true... then we just need to cancel our elections and let you frigging decide for us.’

If only that where the case, however, I am not running for President. Since I am not on the ballot, I would suggest that you, as well as others, get out and work for whomever you have decided is best. Of course you MUST chose someone who is running. Otherwise, you are delusional.

You can chose from Romney, Gingrich, Paul, Cain, Bachman, Santorum, Perry, Huntsman, or G. Johnson. That or Barack Obama. You can choose to vote for Obama by default by either writing in a candidate, or going third party. There is no law against stupidity, the popularity of Rap music and Democrat politicians proves that.

Regardless, spare us you hollier-than-though ramblings and empty rhetoric of never voting for (fill in the blank) and work for that person you believe is best suited And has had the guts to enter the race!

I for one would be happy to vote for Bachman, Santorum, Cain, Perry, Gingrich, and would reluctantly vote for Romney in the general elections if it comes to that. In the mean time I am looking at all the candidates and want to make sure BHO is not reelected. The future of myself, my children and my country demands that he is defeated.

[BillyBoy]

>> Rasmussen: Gingrich 45%, Obama 43% <<

Rick Perry was winning the GOP nomination by a landslide a few monthes ago. Hillary was beating Obama by a landslide for the Dem nod in 2008. Heck, pre-economy tanking, McCain/Palin was ahead of Obama/Biden by a far bigger margin than the Rasmussen poll gives Newt (which is no better than a statistical tie against a President with a lower approval rating than Jimmy Carter)

Newt is unelectable, plain and simple. The general public's perception of Newt is far more negative than any of the Republicans (except Palin, but she's not running) Whether that's Newt's own fault or a media character assassination is immaterial, the fact remains that Americans just plain don't like him. When over 60% of the general public loathes a politician, he's DOA. Obama's only prayer of being re-elected is have a Republican opponent that people despise even more than him, and Newt certainly fits the bill. There is so much dirt on Newt that if he nominee, Obama will have endless material to run negative ads to the point where Darth Vader is more popular with Americans. Nominating Newt is a death wish for the GOP. Don't say you weren't warned. (my efforts to warn the Kathleen Harris worshippers here that nominating her for the U.S. Senate would be suicide for the Florida GOP were ignored as well and dismissed as "media smears". She then went on to win the nomination and couldn't even get 40% against a weak Dem in November)

>> However, ignoring the fact that it still wouldn't mean the "Tea Party" 'failed', let's suppose you're right about Newt; who's your answer? <<

I haven't endorsed any particular candidate, but I've said it over and over again -- the only decent conservatives in the primary field are Michele Bachmann, Rick Santorum, and Herman Cain. Are they all long-shots to win the GOP nomination at this point? Yes. But if you nominate any of the other candidates, you'll have a mediocre politician as the GOP standbearer and make it easier for Obama to be re-elected. That's the bottom line.

I rate Newt even worse than Romney. I don't think either of 'em have integrity and would make a decent President, but Romney's personal life looks like a choir boy next to Newt.

>> E. Pluribus Unum: And I don’t buy the Catholic conversion. It’s a cynical political maneuver. <<

Having meet the "new" Newt face-to-face in 2007, I agree with E. Pluribus Unum's post. Judging from what I saw in person, he's the same old arrogant narcissist he's always been. For such a proud "Catholic" convert, he sure seems to spend all his time kissing up to evangelical protestants in a state that has just as many Catholics.

[aSonofThunder]

I think he’s a McCain type candidate because he has held many of the same positions that Obama has held. The problem with McCain vs Obama was that you were essentially voting for the same person just with a supposed difference on foreign policy, which didn’t turn out to be that different.

Why go vote when there isn’t really much of a choice?

[Servant of the Cross]

Having meet the "new" Newt face-to-face in 2007, I agree with E. Pluribus Unum's post ...

For the record, Newt Gingrich converted to Catholicism in spring 2009, several years after the point at which you 'judged' him.