Posted on 11/16/2011 7:33:03 PM PST by presidio9
Remember how successful he was at “taking on” Clinton...
after FLA, it is NV ME MN CO
all 4 are caucus states that are gamed to favor MITT.
And geographically, 3 of the 4 are next to MA or UT.
yea, there has to be an alternative scenario that somebody can dream up.
1. Mitt gets beat by Newt in NH and also loses FLA. Somehow if Mitt can get knocked out.
2. Then the race is opened up for grassroots conservative vs. Newt. It could be somebody new at that point, if there is chaos similar to ‘96 when Dole was floundering after NH.
The existance of Mitt puts the emphasis among many gopers .... to build an anti-Mitt coalition, rather than a conservative coalition.
Well, I’m stickin’ with Cain.
not enough people are phoning for him in Iowa. It is so much easier today to call from out of state ... Cain needed to get that done ... a few hundred people could have swung it for him.
Yup backing an individual mandate and shilling for “climate change” with Pelosi=SMART. Uh huh.
I wonder who is better the fantasy version of Perry or the fantasy version of Gingrich? Too bad neither is real cause they both have Mount Rushmore written all over them. ;p
Newk Pingry.
are you fightin illinis going to work on Davenport for Herman?
another thing. Without a Reagan in the race, this self-government thing is a real bummer.
Hmmm...
FANTASY PERRY:
REAL WORLD PERRY:
FANTASY NEWT:
REAL WORLD NEWT:
Nah, my favorite freeper delusion is still this...
FANTASY NICK SARKOZY:
REAL WORLD NICK SARKOZY:
DEBATE MODE Newt :
vs.
DEBATE MODE Perry:
Well - aside from my belief that one of the best things about the “Tea Party” is the resolute determination of most of us, to not suffer leadership that feels the need to make pronouncements for “all” of us ; ) but - Judson Phillips?!
**Memo to Campaign Staff - Not all endorsements are beneficial to the candidate.
As for our motley crew - I think the only candidate that no one has even discussed considering is ol’ Mitt, lol.
FWIW - in the joyous tumult following the 2010 tsunami, one of ours stood and spoke. Reminding us that our newest and most dangerous adversary, would clearly come from within the Republican party, and now, after watching the StateRunMedia, and the EstablishmentRepubs working to direct the process these last few weeks, there has been a renewed determination to think outside the box.
We shall see.
May God guide our course.
Tatt
Really? Please explain.
Could it be that a lot of Newt's legendary "negatives" are based on the lies opponents tell about him?
Ironically, this very statement disqualifies you from Communion with the Catholic faith. Time for confession Billy.
I no longer engage the person who posted to you. However, I'd like to point out a few things: (a) The majority of people supporting Gingrich now preferred some other candidate but will support him if it means we don't get stuck with Romney. (b) This obviously includes Jim Robinson. (c) This post directly contradicts what this person is trying to say. (d) This person's post was a direct copy of an earlier post by me. Unfortunately, the time stamp on mine was later, meaning that Jim was clarifying that he disagrees with the poster. (e) Jim seems like a good guy, and we thank him for this website, but who really cares which candidate he prefers anyway. The point is that he agrees: If it comes down to Gingrich vs. Romney (and it will) he's voting for Gingrich. You poster has stated that he will be rooting for an Obama victory and writing in Palin.
Correct. He likes Gingrich now.
What's to explain? Were you in a coma from 1995-1998 and missed every single time Clinton got the upper hand against the GOP Congress and gloated about it? Newt had an enormous, unprecedented opportunity to change the direction of America and make Clinton a 1-term president and he screwed it up. In Jan. 1995, all eyes were on Newt and his "leadership" as the new Speaker of the House, to see how he'd implement the Contract with America. Newt's first speech as speaker was given the kind of reverence normally reserved for presidential State of the Union addresses and Newt was facing a humbled, meek Clinton with his tail between his legs after his first two years in office had resulted in the first Republican-controlled House in 40 years. Newt was in the driver's seat.
By late 1996, Newt had totally blow it and Clinton was "the comeback kid" again. Newt was totally clueless when the media used him as a punching bag and personalized him as the face of the GOP. Newt lost the PR battle and it was forever blamed on "the Republicans" for the government shutdown even though Slick Willie caused it (bet he had a good laugh over that one). Even after Bubba was caught red-headed, lying about sleazy relationship with an intern half his age and covering it up, Republicans LOST five seats. Of course Newt's "leadership" was tied up because he was having his own extra-material affair at the time when the environment was terrible for Democrats.
It speaks volumes that the man responsible for "the Republican revolution" only lasted 3 years in power whereas a mediocre nobody like Dennis Hastert was plucked from obscurity and lasted almost a decade in the same job. Newt is a terrible leader. Period. If you've forgotten the 90s, I suggest reading Tell Newt to Shut Up! How Reality Gagged the Gingrich Revolution and refresh your memory.
>> Could it be that a lot of Newt's legendary "negatives" are based on the lies opponents tell about him? <<
No more than talks about Arnold Schwarzenegger's big government socialist values and sleazy immoral life were "lies" when the Arnoldbots denounced them and told us to get on the Arnold bandwagon in 2003. Some of us just play closer attention to these guys careers and know these guys are shoveling BS when we see it. I'm against Newt precisely BECAUSE I remember exactly what kind of "leader" he was for the GOP.
>> Ironically, this very statement disqualifies you from Communion with the Catholic faith. Time for confession Billy. <<
Really? Now you're an expert on Catholicism too? Perhaps you'd like to show me where I'm required to believe Newt is a changed man because he says so. Perhaps you are confusing me with Newt's pastor.
Here are the facts about Gingrich's history as speaker: The Contract with America gave Republican House candidates a platform to run on by promising to bring specific bills to the floor within the first 100 days. Not only did it follow through on that promise, it ushered in the first Republican majority since 1953. Either were passed, including one that was vetoed by Clinton and overridden. Two were Constitutional amendments, and would have required a 2/3 majority.
Gingrich only lasted 3 years in power, because liberal were successful in their all-out war against him, and he was seen as a distraction, not because he did not accomplish exactly what he promised.
Really? Now you're an expert on Catholicism too? Perhaps you'd like to show me where I'm required to believe Newt is a changed man because he says so. Perhaps you are confusing me with Newt's pastor.
I am not an expert on Catholicism, but, as a sinner myself, the story of the prodigal son and John 8:7 are two of my favorites. Perhaps the Jesuits ruined me over the course of the 12 years they had me. This much I know: A Catholic who confesses his sins and performs an act of penance is granted full forgiveness by our Lord Jesus Christ. Fellow Catholics are compelled to respect this Sacrament. Now, it is fine for you to state as your personal opinion that Gingrich may not have been sincere in his confession, as that right is guaranteed to you by our 1st Amendment. It is not, however, permitted within the Roman Catholic faith for you to express that opinion "Speaking as a Catholic." If you are having a problem with that point, you need to speak to a priest about it.
Huh? I was under the impression that the failure against Clinton, the cheating and divorces, the endorsement of Dede Scuzzofava, and the 'past' support for individual mandate and "climate change" were matters of historical fact.
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.