Posted on 11/08/2008 3:09:11 AM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
In serious conversations among Republicans since their election debacle Tuesday, what name is mentioned most often as the Moses, or Reagan, who could lead them out of the wilderness before 40 years?
To the consternation of many Republicans, it is none other than Newt Gingrich, the former speaker of the House.
Gingrich is far from a unanimous or even a consensus choice to run for president in 2012, but there is a strong feeling in Republican ranks that he is the only leader of their party who has shown the skill and energy to attempt a comeback quickly.
Even one of his strongest supporters for president in 2012 admits it is a "very risky choice." But Republicans are in a desperate mood after the fiasco of John McCain's seemingly safe candidacy.
Republicans appear chastened by the failure of seeking moderate, independent and even Democratic votes. They are ready to try going back to the "old-time religion."
One Republican critic of Gingrich concedes that he has an "unlimited" energy flow and a constant stream of ideas, an important commodity in a party that appears to have run short of ideas during the Bush years. But there is widespread concern about what is described in the party as deep "character flaws" of Gingrich's that would be difficult to overcome in a presidential campaign.
Nobody in Republican ranks, however, matches Gingrich's dynamism.
The consternation among Republicans is concentrated on McCain's failure to capitalize on Democratic flaws.
It would be a rocky road for Gingrich to the nomination, much less the presidency, but there are no other serious candidates inside the party at the moment.
What's clear is that Republicans are unanimous in trying to avoid a repeat of what happened this year, and there is a surprising consensus that McCain was going in the wrong direction and was the wrong candidate.
What one GOP critic calls Gingrich's "unlimited energy supply" must be overcome by anyone opposing him. Several old Republican hands feel that Gingrich in 2012 is no more outrageous than Ronald Reagan was in 1980.
What is certain is that Gingrich has the desire and the will. He has a deep-seated ambition. He had not even settled into the House speaker's chair in 1995 when he confessed to me his presidential desires for 1996. That was not to be, but he never abandoned the personal dream and is ready to pursue it now.
Gingrich isn't going to be and shouldn't be a candidate for all the reasons you and others state. That doesn't mean he should be relegated to some think tank. He would be a great RNC chairman because he would be involved in tactics, which is where, I think, he can shine.
What we need is someone in his or her forties who can debate and communicate with depth and style. We can't run a blank slate; by 2012, Obama will be well-defined, whether by crafting or by actions he took because circumstances required he take them. We have to run someone against what he is at that point, someone who can provide a solid option--conservatism that is demonstrably better than what he offers/offered.
Not sure who that is. But I don't think it's Sarah Palin.
RE :”It would be a rocky road for Gingrich to the nomination,...”
While I respect him greatly, he is very smart and revived the party 93-94, he had a flaw in that democrats with lots of help from the media were able to successfully demonize him in 1995, and revived Clintons after failures of 1993-1994. (BTW: republicans never thought of demonizing Pelosi in 2007, DUHHH). Newt would say something we would agree with but in a way the libs could characterize as being extreme,over and over, It was how Clinton regained his job approval rating (GWB never thought of trying that, DUHHH). So Newt who is now a regular on FNC and Hannity needs a lead role that is not easily demonized,NOT PRESIDENT!
Nope- he betrayed us on global warming. He crossed the line. No more compromisers. ...and he’s been there too long too.
Nope- he betrayed us on global warming. He crossed the line. No more compromisers. ...and he’s been there too long too.
We NEED a guy who has been TESTED... and that’s Newt
No. If we nitpick on EVERY ISSUE we will lose, and get a TRUE RINO leading the party. We NEED to be practical.
Newt has a role to play in articulating the conservative movement message. President? No way.
No to president. He’s damaged goods in that capacity. Yes to chair of RNC where ideas matter. Look who the dems have. Howard Dean. Newt can certainly do better than Howard.
Yeah, thats all we are talking about here. We need a party leader.
Agreed.
Actually I do too, lol. I was skimming a bunch of articles, and I thought this was the one about Newt for RNC chairman.
No thanks. The RATS would run that Gorebull warming ad with Newt setting with Stretch Pelosi 24/7 until the Republican base barfed.
I think he’d be excellent for the RNC, but I’m not sure he’d be a great presidential candidate, simply because they already got him to fold on something that he really should have ignored (the book issue). They will bring that back to haunt him, along, of course, with the divorce issue.
But he’s a very fine thinker, dynamic, articulate and experienced. I think the global warming idiocy will go away and was just a passing fancy. And perhaps he learned from his earlier disastrous experiences that you can’t ever trust the Dems and that you really have to be prepared to fight. Whatever he does, I think we should see more of him.
He was misplaced as Speaker, and his negatives are such -- stoked by a loathing media -- as to debar him from national office. Women universally hate him: the "Newt was mean to his dying wife" stories are current and will instantly strike him dead if he tried to come back nationally.
Best he can do is the Senate.
There are others: Pence, Jindal, Palin. Especially Sarah -- whose rep needs emergency defending and repair right now. The liberals hate her guts and rightly fear her, so they are continuing to savage her while she's down.
Dogs.
Except of course for Governors Sarah Palin and Bobby Jindal. Even Petraeus might be an interesting candidate after he resigns from the military because of Obama's repeated attempts to undermine the War on Terror.
You can only do that if you own the Nightly News and the front pages of four or five major "papers of record" e.g. The New York Times. You need a certain critical mass to your echo chamber -- you need an echo chamber -- to make those kinds of things happen.
No! I loved Newt back in the day, but now I’d rather see him running the RNC than be a Presidential candidate. Republicans either like losing or they don’t know how to clean house so that they might win again. Newt was good with that “vision thing” and knew how to win. Does he still? The RNC is clueless.
A few problems? Now that’s and understatement! Newt wimped out and supported the bailout. That alone disqualifies him. Some of us also remember that he also supported the prescription drugs boondogle, probably the most significant expansion of the welfare state since LBJ.
GINGRICH FOR RNC CHAIR ... NOW.
We cant wait for 2012. We need his articulate leadership NOW.
I think Jindhal would be a better candidate for Pres. in 2012.
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.