Posted on 03/16/2012 11:56:59 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
I have known Newt Gingrich for 27 years, beginning at a time when he was relatively obscure except to C-SPAN devotees who saw him chronically criticizing the majority leadership in the U.S. house of representatives (he was a minority backbencher). That continued to the Republicans’ surprise upset victory (much of it designed by him) in the 1994 elections which led to him being elected speaker of the house, and then to his resignation four years later, followed by a decade-long career in speaking, creating public policy think tanks and authoring and co-authoring numerous books on American history.
Mr. Gingrich is one of the few men or women in American politics who is truly sui generis, and it has come to no surprise to those who know him that he would close out his elective career with a serious run for the presidency. That campaign, while not yet concluded, has included some of the characteristic ups and downs, highs and lows, brilliance and blunders that have marked his political life begun almost 40 years ago.
Newt Gingrich’s place in American political history is secure whether or not he wins his party’s nomination for president. It would now appear that he will not be the Republican nominee in 2012 (although in a political year such as this one, nothing is absolutely final until the delegate tally in Tampa).
Twice in this political cycle, Mr. Gingrich’s candidacy was written off, and twice he has re-emerged by force of his ideas, his debating ability and a gritty persistence. One more time, many in the media, both liberal and conservative, have decided his candidacy is over, or to employ a baseball analogy, that a third strike has been called on him, and he is out.
Thus, there are calls for Mr, Gingrich to withdraw gracefully from the contest, and allow Rick Santorum to duke it out with frontrunner Mitt Romney for the remaining delegates. I think nothing would be more inappropriate.
To those who view a presidential nominating campaign as purely a horse race and a clash of personalities, it is logical to call for Mr. Gingrich to withdraw. But there are fundamental flaws in this thinking at this time. First of all, although anything is possible, there is no reasonable chance that Mr. Santorum will be nominated in Tampa. He has had recent success because he was the only remaining candidate who spoke to the social and religious wing of his party, a wing which has felt its issues have not yet been expressed in this political cycle. But these concerns, however legitimate, are not the primary concerns of the majority of the Republican electorate. Nor even more conclusively are they the concerns of the majority of American voters, including the almost one-third who belong to no party and ascribe to no formal ideology. Why should Mr. Gingrich, who has received almost as many popular votes as Mr. Santorum so far, and who represents a much broader conservative view than the former Pennsylvania senator, now stand aside for him?
Secondly, it is a misunderstanding of Mr. Gingrich’s political personality to think he would withdraw at this point without what he would feel was his full contribution to the political conversation in such a pivotal political year.
Without Mr. Gingrich, the debates would have been far duller. Without some of his ideas, the GOP campaign would have been less original. And without his historical perspective, the critical nature of November election would have been less urgent and clear. My point is that, while the eventual GOP nominee may have been determined (Mr. Gingrich will understandably strongly disagree with me on this), the full nature of a potentially successful Republican challenge to President Obama has not been determined.
Count me as one of those who feels that a GOP nomination contest finally settled too early is neither good for the party nor good for the country. It will be apparent soon enough (probably in May or sooner) who the nominee will be. Meanwhile, let the conversation and the debate continue. Mr. Santorum should remain in the contest, as should Ron Paul. I don’t agree with some of what they advocate, but they represent legitimate points of view within their party. And most certainly, Newt Gingrich should remain in the race until he feels he has had his say and presented fully his case.
Mr. Gingrich has made his share of political mistakes, both before this campaign and now during it. He is a volatile personality who appeals to some voters, and turns others off. He is probably now not going to be president of the United States. But the Republican Party, and the Democratic Party, for that matter, have no one with comparable a vision of the past, present and future of this “exceptional” nation among the nations.
So let Newt Gingrich finish what he began. Let history write the truest account of what he has done.
LOL! This is not only laughable, it's hysterical!
Just because you are ignorant of what Gingrich keeps trying to do does not make him a socialist. You're obviously one of these who doesn't understand Newt because you do not see the perspective from history which he takes.
I saw an interview with Newt one time where the interviewer asked him why he talks to the NYT when all they do is crucify him? Newt essentially said in order to make your points you have to convince people. Liberals are people! You can't get a point across by ignoring them.
I don't know if you remember this, but Newt held an (8?) member debate in congress one time on C-SPAN. It was brilliant because it showed the absolute ignorance of liberals about the subject. Newt skewered them!!
Newt is conservative as they come!
Wow. You lie as easily as Obama does.
This is not one of them. Statist apologists and third column activists have forced every constitutional conservative, 10th Amendment committed federalist to withdraw except notably, Newt Gingrich.
I’ll go to the wall before agreeing to support progressives of ANY flavor, like Santorum or Romney. Thank you very much, but no.
Newt should stay in the race. He does scare me, but I do know, acquaintances of mine that are liberal are MORE scared of him.
Newt should stay in. He’s the only one of the 4 who does not have a sissy voice. He could really debate Obalgae - the other 3 hum and haw while trying to think of a response. Newt is straightforward. Newt reminds me of Winston Churchill. We need Newt Gingrich at this time in history.
Who campaigned for a radically liberal Republican and against a Tea party candidate in New York 23?
Who endorsed Specter who then was the deciding vote for Obamacare in the US Senate?
You fail to mention the conservatives worked with or conservative causes helped, because there weren’t any. Al Sharpton, Nancy Pelosi, and Dede Scozzfava aren’t conservatives.
Classic line there!
With 175,000 Newt donors, if each donor gave an additional $200 each (on average) that would be $35 million.
In 1980, I was young enough and stupid enough to have voted for Jimmy Carter. A year into Reagan’s presidency I was sold and I have been a committed Reagan Republican conservative ever since. If have to go back to 1968 to find something on someone, you are really reaching.
Go Newt! If he’s not the heir to the Reagan Revolution then who is?
Gingrich is the dismantler of the Reagan legacy. Why do you hate true heirs like Sarah Palin?
Wait you voted for a Georgian who pretended to be a conservative (at least in ‘76) more than 30 years ago, and you want to make the same mistake again? (technically Gingrich isn’t from Georgia like Carter, he’s from Pennsylvania and France)
Who supported the individual healthcare mandate in the 1990s and said Romneycare was a good idea as it was being passed?
Yes he should!
Voted YES on Balanced-budget constitutional amendment. (Mar 1997)
Rated 100% by the US COC, indicating a pro-business voting record. (Dec 2003)
Voted YES on requiring super-majority for raising taxes. (Apr 1998)
Rated 81% by NTU, indicating a "Taxpayer's Friend" on tax votes. (Dec 2003)
Rated 0% by the LCV, indicating anti-environment votes. (Dec 2003)
Rated 0% by NARAL, indicating a pro-life voting record. (Dec 2003)
Voted YES on constitutional ban of same-sex marriage. (Jun 2006)
Voted YES on prohibiting same-sex marriage. (Sep 1996)
Voted NO on prohibiting job discrimination by sexual orientation. (Sep 1996)
Voted NO on expanding hate crimes to include sexual orientation. (Jun 2000)
Voted YES on school vouchers in DC. (Sep 1997) Voted YES on giving federal aid only to schools allowing voluntary prayer. (Mar 1994)
Voted YES on Approving the presidential line-item veto. (Mar 1996)
Voted YES on limiting medical liability lawsuits to $250,000. (May 2006)
Voted YES on building a fence along the Mexican border. (Sep 2006)
Voted NO on establishing a Guest Worker program. (May 2006)
Conclusion:
Rick Santorum is a Hard-Core Conservative.
That’s leaving you 85 short dude. LoL!
The Problem as I see it with Romney is that he will be such a mediocre President that even if he does win he will be so middle of the road as to “not upset the apple cart” that the economy will not bloom and then in 4 years it will assure that the democrats take back power on the whole meme that the “economy didn’t recover”. Not to mention any GOP president is going to be so damned hated no matter how “moderate” they are. Mittens will get so damned gun shy that he will be ineffective and the MSM and the Democrat controlled media will smell blood and keep attacking him even as he retreats and this will paralyze him to what needs to be done to restore the economy and defuse all of Obama’s horrible regulatory actions.
Newt is going to be hated like hell anyways and HE KNOWS THAT, but he also knows that he will have the people who put him there behind even if the Media doesn’t paint it that way every night at 5:00pm. So therefore, Newt (who thrives on antagonism instead of flinching from it) will take the bold measures to recover the economy despite being thrashed every night on the MSM news channels. In Four years the MSM will be flabbergasted like their were on election night in 1984, because the man on the street will notice the economy improvement.
Mitt is a Flincher, Newt is a Clincher
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.