Posted on 11/10/2006 6:24:21 AM PST by divine_moment_of_facts
Welcome to GOP Bloggers' fifth 2008 Straw Poll. Our straw poll last month tallied over 15,000 votes.
Like our last poll, you get to pick which candidates you find acceptable and which ones you don't and you get to choose which candidate is your first choice for the GOP nomination in 2008.
(Excerpt) Read more at gopbloggers.org ...
And anyone who doesn't like Newt should check out "Winning the Future."
"Don't get me wrong, I like Newt. He's a damn fine historian and educator, but he has no political clout anymore and no nationwide support base. We need a relatively young, articulate, solidly Conservative governor with no personal baggage or skeletons in his closet to rally around and to carry the Conservative banner forward in 2008."
You're describing Mitt Romney !!
One divorce, voters will forgive. That issue didn't dog Reagan, Dole or Kerry. But two divorces, with the next wife already waiting in the wings both times, not so much. That's what's going to dog both Gingrich and Giuliani.
A lot of Americans -- and a lot of my friends -- have had what are now called "starter marriages." No kids, little community property, not a lot of complication. Take a Mulligan and try again. But three points define a pattern, and a pattern is harder to overlook.
DO people even get married anymore?
It seems only Gay people want to be married now.
The point of the "personal baggage" comments is that Newt will never be able to run away from his reputation as a hypocrite since he was having his own love affair while demanding Clinton's skin for doing the same exact thing. That's the point here.
Flame away, but my choice right now is Giuliani. He came up in the snake pit of NYC politics and prospered. He brought the city back from the dead and made it back into the greatest city in the world again. And he really showed his mettle after 9/11. I know all about his personal baggage and I disagree with him on several issues but on the big thing, the war on terror, he's our best bet. And he could take the battle right to Hillary's base.
Now, wait just a minute. Anyone posting on FR should know that the impeachment of der Schlickmeister was not about having a "love affair"; it was about perjury.
Yes, it was, but the perjury was a direct result from the Lewinsky affair, and as far as many social Conservatives were concerned, there was no real difference in what Clinton did and what Newt did. That's the sad fact of political life.
I agree that Newt is not the man. His time has come and gone. His speakership was marred by the book deal (yes, Hillary and any Democrat can have a book deal, but a Republican cannot and Newt showed a tin ear by going full speed ahead). Let us see who enters the primaries. I see nothing wrong with going with Romney to gain Massachusetts or Rudy to land NY. Ohio has turned blue so some new states have to go red or GOP is out of luck.
Evangelicals largely already left the battle field. They have felt ignored and have retreated to their churches to do what they do. Their forray into politics has not garnered them much, except IRS tax audits and condemnation for improper meddling and being evil (How ridiculous!).
Here are the requirements for the 2008 nominee:
Giuliani unquestionably fails on point two.
Actually, Newt stayed mostly silent on the sin of adultery, as he was acutely aware of his own. Similarly, Rush Limbaugh dodged talking about talking about addicts knowing he was one. But that's a fine distinction that won't play in an election year.
When "values" are a package neatly wrapped and tied with ribbon, you can't pick and choose which parts to subscribe to. Same thing happened to Bill Bennett, who had never inveighed against gambling, when it turned out he liked to go all-in. His gambling didn't directly mark him as a hypocrite, but it cost him cred with his core supporters who wrapped gambling along with addiction, sexual immorality, and other moral issues into one neat package with a ribbon and a bow.
"Newt has too much baggage for whom? Not me! And apparently a lot of other people feel the same......"
You know, they all have baggage. Allen self destructed, he was the only clean conservative. So I might give Newt a look, at least in the primaries to keep the others honest.
Are there any conservative, self-made billionares out there who want to run for president? Someone who worked their way from the bottom to the top? Someone who knows how to get things done? Are representatives in government sure as hell don't.
I don't think Romney is perceived as socially conservative. Otherwise, he's probably OK. He's kind of an unknown outside of the Northeast, though.
But, I think you underestimate Newt's communicative abilities. He is not "Newt 1996" anymore.
BTW, as to the socially conservative category, just look at Newt's marital history to see where he really stands on that issue.
Newt has the advantage of the experience of being destroyed by the DemocRATS and MSM once, and learning from it.
But, yeah, I thought Allen might be the guy, possibly, but he is going to need a few years at minimum to rehabilitate after that debacle.
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.