Nationwide Effort Launches to 'Draft Newt' Gingrich to Run for President (FR poll: Gingrich #1)

U.S. Newswire ^ | 1/29/07 | Mon Jan 29, 10:48 AM ET

[Jean S]

Contact: David W. Kralik of Draft Newt, +1-202-256-6328

WASHINGTON, Jan. 29 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Newt Gingrich has indicated that running for president would now be "last resort" but that hasn't stopped a new nationwide effort from forming to urge him to run for the presidency.

"Today, we are launching a major nationwide grassroots presidential draft effort, in the spirit of Reagan and Goldwater, to urge Newt Gingrich to run for the Republican Presidential nomination," said campaign founder David W. Kralik.

The "Draft Newt" effort will take advantage of the latest in online political trends by using its web site, http://www.DraftNewt.org as the primary vehicle for grassroots organization. Contributions to the campaign will be used in communications strategies to persuade Gingrich to seek and win the Republican nomination for president.

"Gingrich's entry into the Republican primary will set him aside as the conservative alternative to those currently running," Kralik said. "His bold ideas and energy will raise the standards for all presidential aspirants and help the Republican party work to regain America's trust.

"America offers great hope for those who believe rightly that the world is a very dangerous place. We have real challenges. We have a wonderful country that can solve these challenges. Gingrich has the experience and solutions that our country needs right now."

Draft Newt is the official grassroots movement dedicated to encouraging former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich to run for President. It is not affiliated or authorized by any candidate, party or party committee. It is being spearheaded by David W. Kralik, a former Gingrich aide and veteran of many successful online grassroots political campaigns.

Reporters and individuals looking to learn more about or get involved in the effort can visit http://www.DraftNewt.org

SOURCE Draft Newt

[pollyannaish]

Wow. That is a formidable purse. Do you know who owns the money sweepstakes at this point? I should have been paying closer attention but I have election fatigue syndrome at the moment.

[AdvisorB]

Newt and Condi would be a dream team. I would think that their combined IQ would exceed the combined IQ of any other Presidential running mates in US History.

[editor-surveyor]

First, you have to understand that a president has the power to order whatever he pleases. Clinton's national monuments are a good example of that raw power.

Second, having bee at several events where Rice was the speaker, long before she got to the state department, where she made it clear that she distrusted the common man, and advocated control of things that we take for granted, I cannot trust her in any elected executive position.

[onyx]

McCain has been putting his organization together for years and Rudy looks like he's raising big bucks. I don't know about Mitt's funds, but the others are all way behind.

Some will able to stay in the races on shoe strings --- but they won't have the TV ad campaigns.

[deport]

Thanks..... I just went and looked it up and it's nationwide.....

---

Giuliani..  34
McCain....  22
Gingrich..  15
Romney.....  3
Hunter.....  2

[Jim Robinson]

"Cmon Jim, who do you like at this point?"

From reading all these threads, I'm left with the impression that we don't have a suitable candidate. *Someone* cough, choke, chortle, chuckle, ahem... uh, forgot to groom one. /sarc and LOL

According to our posters the Democrats are unbeatable, mainly because we can't win. LOL! Nothing like surrendering before the battle even commences.

We don't have a single candidate that is conservative enough, they wail, without being divisive (LOL) or is clean enough in his personal life (ahem, as if the dems are), or is good looking, smart, articulate and clean enough to suit Biden, the dems and or the swing voters. And none on our side hit all 12 (a number I just made up) of our basic conservative issues without completely bombing out on at least two or three biggies, and according to most FReepers, none but *their* personal choice has a snowball's chance in hell of beating Hillary Clinton, and NO other candidate but their personal favorite is even electable at all. /sarc snort, chuckle. LOL!!

And all this even though *their* personal choice seems to be favored by just a fraction of ALL the folks who will actually be voting.

So who will it be?

For me, I want to support the conservative who unapologetically meets the most of our traditional American Judeo-Christian conservative values and principles, and unabashedly demonstrates that he believes strongly in God, Liberty, freedom and individual rights as our founders originally intended when they established this great Republic.

One who is dedicated to the defense of our unalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness as was bestowed upon us by our Creator. One who studies the history of man and the world and governments and the founding and history of America and fully understands and is willing to comply with the founding documents to the best of his abilities while resisting the urge to twist the original intent to allow for some unconstitutional program that is "for the common good."

He must believe in a strong national defense and national security. He must be a low tax, small government fiscal conservative.

My own goals include the eventual repeal of the 16th amendment, the abolishment of the income tax and the IRS, and the phasing out and privatization of social security and Medicare. I also hope to eventually see a repeal of the 17th amendment and the return of states rights and local control to the states and the people per the 9th and 10th amendments. So any moves by a candidate who knows and defends the constitution and the history of our founding and the original intent of our founders is a BIG plus to me. A candidate who openly and proactively discusses these issues in public and on national TV and might seem receptive to actually pursuing these avenues to some degree would definitely get my attention.

Also, he has to be a loyal patriot, a statesman, fearless, confident, trustworthy, straight forward and honest, clean of character, wise and knowledgeable on all issues, articulate and a great debater.

He has to have a conservative track record, a national record of accomplishments and must be a nationally known commodity with as few scandals and blemishes as possible (to conservatives, I couldn't care less how blemished he appears to democrats, they're going to hate our guy anyway, might as well give them someone they can choke on).

Now obviously that is going to be a tall order to fill and there is no one out there who will perfectly fit the bill, so I'll have to settle for someone who has as many human weaknesses and frailties as the rest of us. But I think he'll have to at least meet the minimum fiscal and social conservative standards.

And I have full faith and confidence that whomever gets the Republican nod ALL Republicans and conservatives will close ranks behind him to defeat the wicked witch from hell, Hillary Clinton.

May the best conservative win!!

[traditional1]

"Condolesa Rice is not a conservative by any stretch"

The most important thing is a winning ticket, and there are NO conservative candidates in the field that would get my vote.

Rice would secure black voters (not all of them, but a sizeable portion), and THAT is the key to winning.

Giuliani's anti-crime reputation will not sell with black voters, as "profiling" will enter every MSM discussion of him if he is the nominee.

[pollyannaish]

Thanks.

[Al Simmons]

OK. Let's do a real-world translation of the headline for y'all:

"Nationwide Effort to ensure GOP '08 defeat Launches to 'Draft Newt'.."

Hitlery would defeat him. He has no constituent base, has never been elected to anything other than a Congressional seat, has high negatives thanks to decades of sometimes unfair media character assassination, and is so cerebral that he would put most Americans to sleep.

Now I like Newt (other than he appeared to lay down and let the 'Rats do whatever they wanted the last few years of his Speakership - perhaps a 'quid pro quo' to let him serve out his term in office as a settlement of his ethics charges? I have always wondered about that), but electability and Newt are two words that do not fit in the same sentence.

If he runs to move the debate, fine. But anyone thinking he can win the nomination is almost certainly mistaken, while anyone thinking he could win in November 2008 is, well, delusional....

[pollyannaish]

Hey! I'll vote for your guy. The Candidate from Perfect. Sign me up. ;-)

[traditional1]

"According to our posters the Democrats are unbeatable, mainly because we can't win. LOL! Nothing like surrendering before the battle even commences. "

To ignore the facts and reality is what cost the Republicans the House and the Senate, and unless some other conservative candidate comes out of nowhere, the Republicans have lost the White House to the Hildabeast/Obama ticket in 2008 (the alternate VP of her choice would be her old buddy Richardson, but she needs the black vote).

[HeartlandOfAmerica]

I'd vote for Newt before I'd vote for Rudy or McCain.

[pissant]

LOL. Tall order indeed. And I believe that conservatives will rally around the nominee, even if not to our liking. I know I'd rather plug my nose and vote for a dead weasel than for Hillary.

That being said, now is the time to fight OUR battles. The battles for the direction of the GOP. Can we steer it bakc towards Reaganism, or our we to be saddled with big government conservatism forever. Winning the WOT is a paramount priority to me, as well as building up the military from our foolish "peace dividend" days. If the US does not lead the fight to eradicate the islamofascists, no one will. And China is not our friend either. The History of the world demonstates that the strong survive. And survive we must. But it would also critical to me to save the nation from a slide to european socialism and live up to the Constitution.

Right now, Duncan Hunter is the man with the best platform, and solid conservative credentials. Maybe Newt can be the guy as well. But it is incumbent upon us to push the country in that direction, or face a long decline.

[Jim Robinson]

Like I said, I'll enthusiastically promote and campaign for the candidate who possesses/ demonstrates the most of the qualifications that are important to me, and in the very least he must be a fiscal and social conservative.

And my guy will definitely have the qualifications and full confidence that he will win or obviously I won't be with him.

[William Terrell]

I think Mr. Gingrich has been slavering to get back into some kind of power position for years. I don't believe him. If no one were to do anything, he would still run. He just wouldn't have the extra boost from being "talked into" running by "popular demand".

He's wily, for sure, and has a good strategy here. But, in my opinion, once a person gets a taste of the tremendous power and wealth available in national public office, he doesn't quit willingly, and will seek it again at the first opportunity.

I'm sure there are a few that have decided to turn their backs. The great majority that have seemed to leave it have been forced out against their wills. The reason will just be a story spun to save face. Politicians treat their fellow travelers gently and very tenderly.

[dmw]

Sad, isn't it?

[pollyannaish]

Yep, I'm with ya. I wish we had a deeper, cleaner bench. But we'll fight with the people we have, not the people we wish we had.

I believe we may actually end up being pleasantly surprised.

[traditional1]

"And my guy will definitely have the qualifications and full confidence that he will win or obviously I won't be with him."

That's great in theory, Jim, but if no candidate of a conservative nature emerges as the nominee, who will you vote for? Third Party? (we'll have another Perot-like wasted vote?)

If the "hold your nose and vote for whatever Republican there is" happens to be the choice in 2008, I am not sure I would vote for such a candidate IN ANY CASE.

[Jim Robinson]

"Gingrich would NOT beat Hillary."

I'll be willing to purchase a ticket. Let them go 9 rounds, no referee, no holds barred. My money will be on Newt!! Let the debates begin!!

[Thermalseeker]

Newt what historical importance do you place on not getting it on with the hired help while you are still married??

Are you trying to elect a Pope or a President?

It is nieve and unrealistic to expect anyone at national level politics to be lilly white and have no skeletons in their closet. You might not like it, but that is politics in America in 2007 and it is not at all unlike what politics were in 1807 or 1907.