Posted on 11/19/2011 1:28:19 PM PST by jessduntno
Reagan and Gingrich (from 1980)
In his 1980 debate with President Carter, Ronald Reagan famously said:
"...I think when you make that decision, it might be well if you would ask yourself, are you better off than you were four years ago? Is it easier for you to go and buy things in the stores than it was four years ago? Is there more or less unemployment in the country than there was four years ago? Is America as respected throughout the world as it was? Do you feel that our security is as safe, that we're as strong as we were four years ago? And if you answer all of those questions yes, why then, I think your choice is very obvious as to whom you will vote for. If you don't agree, if you don't think that this course that we've been on for the last four years is what you would like to see us follow for the next four, then I could suggest another choice that you have.
In an August 26, 1980 memo to Reagan advisers Evans, Laxalt and Kemp, Newt wrote:
When Carter in the debate has a nicely sounding statement on the economy or anything else, Reagan should not answer Carter or discuss the details of Carter's statement. Instead, he should look straight into the TV camera and say:
"You measure in your pocketbook whether or not what he's just said has been true these past four years. If your life is better, you should vote for him; he is the President and he's responsible. If your life is worse you should vote against him; he is the President and therefore he's responsible"
(Excerpt) Read more at bessettepitney.net ...
Huh? McCain is a burned out moonbat.
Gingrich is a historian and gifted with his organization and presentation skills.
As for the baggage mantra...
Thanks. I did see your listing of the rest of the speech to Matthew Fuller. Just watched them all, as well as the 5th part again.
I’m no stranger to Newt, and I’m forever amazed at the depth and substance of the man, his effortless delivery, and his clarity of thought.
It’s great to see an American give a speech in full support of America and Americans. There has been such a void.
Depressingly so. Even worse, after they have been presented with proof that refutes many of the lies, they continue to post the lies...which shows a dishonesty that is disheartening in FR.
“Depressingly so. Even worse, after they have been presented with proof that refutes many of the lies, they continue to post the lies...which shows a dishonesty that is disheartening in FR. “
Amen. I can’t see why they keep at it. They bolster the point being made; we need someone who can win and candidates with people who are so depressingly weak of reason can not possibly win.
It’s a far cry from a down to earth populist like SP, for whom I would have cheerfully voted, to the 5-6 that have become the new flavor of the week.
I don’t think you need to be the smartest one in the room to be President - although it might not hurt - but you need to at least be able to attract a following who will ask you whether or not you’ll believe them or your own lying eyes.
I just don’t see anyone who can hold Newt’s coat in this present field. The debate this afternoon was another masterful instruction on how to shine more brightly than the others without once using “I” or “me” or doing other than stating some simple truths about his accomplishments.
Which are, lest we forget, enormous.
No, I haven”t seen the others. Thank you both for posting these URL’s. I will definately watch them.
Nah, you’re the one who’s slipping—Orgy’ candidate IS Obummer. :-)
Well, THAT answers a lot...
Good...it should do well then when he's up against Obama's ego...will prove to be the greatest debate in history...two seconds Obama goes down to the count.....in fact the clock has begun ticking already!
Not so sure about that part.
Before Reagan even kicked off his run (which everyone knew he was going to do), he was rounding up endorsements and building a grassroots campaign.
He (and republicans today should learn from this, its amazing how a lesson from several decades ago can be forgotten) was working on building from the bottom up, from local congressional seats, and local races up to governors and senators. Reagan understood that the future starts out at the bottom and rises up, and he did his best to cultivate it (in large part because the establishment had a stranglehold on so many higher ups in the party).
I'm not saying anything regarding Newt, but its very possible that Reagan and his staff may not only have read this, but spoken to Newt and numerous other politicians either in office or running for office at that time.
I don't know about that, Mitt Romney has done well, in fact, in a debate with Obama, I think Romney could even out liberal him, lol.
Actually I shouldn't have put that "lol" there, I honestly am a bit frightened by the fact that Romney, on certain issues, does a better job, explaining, articulating, defending and supporting the lefty point of view then Obama does. Thats scary, thats very scary.
Regardless of who wins, one thing is certain, Romney can not be the nominee, the difference between him and Obama is not ideology, its competence. That said, I think Newt is the best thinker and debater on the stage, and in a debate, he'd destroy Obama.
Magic 8 ball moment. When so and so says this you answer with this, sure, you just need to know in advance they are going to say that. But you may have found Perry’s problem, he is waiting on someone to ask the right question so he can give his recorded response.
Thank you for posting all 5.
Just listened to them all.
I wish everyone could hear this.
Part 5 is my fave.
You are spot on the money.
I was living n California when Reagan ran in 1976 and back home here in New Eng, for his 1980/84 runs. I worked on all three campaigns.
I tell you, election night, 1980, was one of the highlights of my life.
the day before, Dan Rather and ilk were saying the election is going to be 2 to 1 against Reagan. They were all furious over a call-in poll the republicans had run where everyone in the country could call in and vote.
Millions did - (not the few hundred that the usual polls are based on - and picked to skew). The results? Two to one for Reagan.
The left went apoplectic. They screamed it was unbalanced as the ‘rich republicans’ could afford to make multiple calls. (It cost .50 a call. It was long before cell phones and most phones were rotary. I remember about wearing my finger out for 2 1/2 hours to get through ONE TIME.
But Dan Rather was right. The vote WAS 2 to 1. He just wasn’t right about the winner. LOL
Hey, a thought just flitted across my mind. What if that phone call poll was Newt’s idea. Might we see that again? I always thought it was brilliant, by passing the pollsters and their “skewing”. Maybe we’ll see it again.
Bump for later viewing.
How’s That Workin’ Out For You? | Barack Obama (ft. Ronald Reagan)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OvawHUvpvWc
...and all without the use of a teleprompter...
I smile just thinking about the little panty waste - and I mean his brain - in the WH going one to one with Newt.
He reads well. That's about it. He can't even speak to school kids without his 'prompters.
The Emperor!
the photo makes me ill. His Carpet, his podium, BOTH teleprompters. He takes up half the room.
President George Bush visits a classroom,
I love you but it is pantywaists.
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.