Gingrich says Bush, GOP to blame for defeat

Atlanta Journal Constitution ^ | 11/09/06 | TOM BAXTER

[Just A Nobody]

basis = bases

Needed more coffee.

[demkicker]

I agree. Newt has one of the most brilliant political minds of our generation. Big effin deal that he's been divorced twice and made mistakes himself! No one is without flaws.

[ElPatriota]

"If the president had decided to replace Secretary Rumsfeld he should have told us two weeks ago," Gingrich said. "I think that we would today control the Senate and probably have 10 to15 more House seats. And I found it very disturbing yesterday in the press conference, the explanation that the President gave....

You know, in light of the fact we lost the elections and thinking ahead to 2008... Newt started getting into my head. There is no question this is a smart man!... He has start attraction, I've seen it myself a couple of times here in Washington where he has spoken. BUT comments like this makes me think twice about him....

I happen to think GW handled Rumsfeld resignation? the right way...if GW had announced it before the election, it would have appeared like a desperation move. It would have trigered a tsunami with the MSM...and at the end, he would have been crucified one way or the other. So.. in fact... he did it JUST RIGHT...with the pulse of surgeon...

The elections were lost... and before the Left got their motors running to claim Rumsfeld's head... he stepped down, and for practical reasons, Rumsfeld is GONE! OUT OF THE PICTURE! (I am glad form Rummie!... he needs the rest).

Summary: -- GW gets 10 for excellent execution and I DON'T AGREE WITH NEWT!... and moreover, I wonder if this is the guy we want for president... I have my doubts.

[ElPatriota]

start = star

[ElPatriota]

...Newt is a decent guy, but any man who has 2 ex wives shows he is lacking in commitment and responsbility, therefore I would never vote for him....

You know, I remember back... I used to like Newt SO MUCH :) that I hated him for doing whatever he did (don't remember exactly what it was..) to get himself thrown out... sometimes brilliant people do the most basic stupid things... :)

[SirJohnBarleycorn]

I have nothing further to say to someone that basis their argument on polls. (spit)

I respectfully suggest you did not understand my point on the use of polls.

I did not advocate governing on the basis of polls.

But polls, properly conducted, are useful to learn whether your message is getting through.

As an example, let's say President Bush goes around the country, in campaign stop after campaign stop and in every speech screaming to the hills that "unemployment is only 4.4%" and "the deficit is declining".

Yet proper polls consistently show that, after all of these speeches, most voters believe unemployment is a big problem and the deficit is rising.

Wouldn't you agree that Bush's message on unemployment and the deficit FAILED?

And don't you think it would be useful to Bush to actually KNOW that he didn't get through to voters and needs to find a way to get the message across more effectively?

[Wuli]

I wrote the RSCC last year and told them they no longer had my $upport in any form, and that I was encouraging every Republican I know not to support them.

I think the offical national Republican orgs have NO place interfering in the state GOP primary elections for national candidates - it is always a lose-lose propostion, in which no matter who wins the primary they have already damaged the winner.

If they support the winner, then they create disaffection from many in the state GOP who voted against the winner and resented their interference. If they support the loser in the primary, then their campaign against the winner has already contributed to the Dim's campaign against the winning GOP primary candidate. The primary campaigns can be contentious enough within the the state alone. When the RSCC and others get involved, people in the state can feel like others are trying to take the choice away from them. Thus, no matter what they feel about the final candidate, they often are less enthusiastic about voting for a choice for which their role was diminished in the primary.

We need a GOP pledge that orgs like the RSCC ONLY operate in the general election campaigns of the GOP candidates that the primary or party convention process nominates. When the fight is fair among the state GOP itself, it is easier to put that fight behind them and support the winner.

[George W. Bush]

I think they learned we're onto their liberal tricks, recruiting and funding the Chafees and such. The RCCC lost all its congressmen (lib types). The RSCC found out that no one trusts them now.

I think the GOP is going to have to publicly account for what those two branches have done or no way do we trust them again.

Bad enough to recruit and support liberals but even worse to meddle in state primaries and then vengefully vow never to support conservatives like Graf and Laffey. They even ran commercials to destroy Laffey's chances to win.

[mo]

thanx:)

[Just A Nobody]

I think the offical national Republican orgs have NO place interfering in the state GOP primary elections for national candidates

Exactly right!!! I have been saying the same thing.

[Brimack34]

I blame the Media and Loosertarians.