Posted on 12/04/2011 7:31:58 PM PST by raccoonradio
BREAKING: Sources tell FOX 5 News that Herman Cain will endorse Newt Gingrich Monday for the GOP Presidential Nominee
You aren't blogging from a prison cell, by chance, are you?
“Remember that nature rewards persistence over brilliance.”
Good point. Gingrich has been both persistent & brilliant. I guess he’s a winner on both fronts. ;)
thanks for posting that and the ping.
I went back to 1960. 44?
VP nomination is better than anything.
Was the Presidential Nominee ever the VP or VP nominee?
1960 - Nixon yes, Kennedy no (1 of 2)
1964 - Johnson yes, Goldwater no (1 of 2)
1968 - Nixon yes, Humphrey yes (2 of 2)
1972 - Nixon yes, McGovern no (1 of 2)
1976 - Ford yes, Carter no (1 of 2)
1980 - Reagan no, Carter no (0 of 2)
1984 - Reagan no, Mondale yes (1 of 2)
1988 - Bush yes, Dukakas no (1 of 2)
1992 - Bush yes, Clinton no (1 of 2)
1996 - Dole yes, Clinton no (1 of 2)
2000 - Gore yes, Bush no (1 of 2)
2004 - Bush no, Kerry no (0 of 2)
2008 - Obama no, McCain no (0 of 2)
“Gingrich Camp: No Cain Endorsement on Monday”
“WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Former pizza magnate Herman Cain will not endorse former rival Newt Gingrich for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination Monday, contrary to a media report, a spokesman for Gingrich’s campaign said...”
http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/gingrich-obama-cain-endorsement/2011/12/05/id/419977
It’s just one of many polls.
This one shows Ron Paul is the most electable, followed closely by Romney.
The others are way behind.
What’s the big deal?
Gingrich just isn’t particularly electable, because he doesn’t appeal to any segment beyond Registered Republicans.
Spot on.
Many people don't realize that, even though Newt was relatively new to DC when Reagan came in - he was fast recognized - much as the new Congressman, Col. West now is - as being head and shoulders above the crowd. He therefore had the ears, early on, of the makers and shakers.
Some of the campaign/debate tactics that were successful for Reagan are straight out of Newt's playbook.
The more I listen to and watch Newt, I get the feeling one forever famous line that Reagan uttered so forcefully and successfully may have been Newts. ("Tear down this wall!." It's the kind of in your face statement Newt would/will make. Remember that when Reagan got the original speech from his speech writers - they demanded he take that sentence out. Inflammatory and not diplomatic, etc. Reagan always went over his speeches personally and deleted/added his own ideas. I wonder if Newt didn't have some influence in his leaving that line in there, much to the consternation of the 'experts"? It is so Newt.)
People, even Freepers want to concentrate on his 'baggage.' They forget that Reagan was divorced and remarried and even more - he had been a democrat! for decades. Imagine if Newt had THAT in his background.
As for me, the 'baggage' Newt carries that, to me, is what we need to concentrate on is his totally successful years as House Speaker! He reigned in spending - and balanced the budget 4 years in a row WITH A DEMOCRAT house! That's never been before or after in our lifetimes. His actions resulted in putting millions back to work. Name one other politician that actually carried through on his campaign promises.
He went in with a 'Contract to America" and carried through every point - and in record time. Again, unheard of.
He knows how to get things done...and quick.
We need a president that can hit the ground running on Day One. WE do not have the luxury of time for a pres. to 'get up to speed.' It's too late to get up to speed after you've gone over the cliff.
you opine “Newt is lying when he states he has changed his position on AGW. He is just pandering for votes. He is like most D.C. Pols.
Look up his recent interview on Levin’s show. It’s painful to listen how he “wants” to still believe in the “crisis” of climate change. No hint from Newt of the absolute fraud of the AGW cabal.
I am certain, if elected, he will push carbon reduction and other AGW measures. “
******************
Guess you haven’t followed closely enough?
Here is Newt testifying IN 2009 - re glowBull warming at the House Energy and Commerce Committee.
“Newt Rips Gore’s ‘Facts’ To Pieces “
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G7VUg7nG3lw&feature=related
Name ONE other person, let alone another candidate, that has been so strong denouncing Gore and gang? (I won’t wait. I like breathing.)
Re Your “opine”: Opinions, BTW, are just that. there’s often a wide chasm between opinion and fact.
It’s interesting to keep track of Newt bashers that continuously post nonfactual ‘facts’ against Bush - even after being give the truth. Now that’s dedication...but disgusting.
Hey dude, you want to believe that being selected to be a VP on a ticket is a big deal then go ahead and believe it all you choose to. It doesn't hurt my feelings any in the least nor am I impressed any in the least either. I contend it is more of a consolation prize designed to appeal to a particular segment of a party that the top candidate has little or no chance of attracting nor swaying.
At least that is the common perception out there. I contend the position garners very little real support in the end. At least the VP does do a valuable service. The country does need someone to attend state funerals and perhaps be the pooper scooper after the horses pass by. But the VP has little if any power and as a general rule has less influence of much of anything. The VP is only as useful as the President permits.
That's mrs riverdawg’s term for Newt, as well.
ahahaha - been there, done that.
Some of the substitutions spell check comes up with are hilarious...and could be quite embarrassing, for sure.
Moral: NEVER TRUST SPELL-CHECK - LOL
Oh, it could be that the day is wrong.
I think that what he did 15 years ago in Congress is one thing and what he has done the last few years is something else entirely. Since 2008 I remeber Newt supporting Scozzafava over Hoffman, calling the Ryan budget right wing social engineering, sitting on a couch with Nancy Pelosi to fight AGW and supporting a health insurance mandate. I don’t know about you, but I would call any Republican who acted that way in the last few years a RINO.
He’s addressed those issues of your concern and these do not make him a Rino....here’s a good post by our own Jim you might consider in comparing Newt and Romney..which looks to be the choisces coming out of the latest polls etc...I thought this well states where Newt stands in that respect.....
.....”Newt is a pro-life, Reaganite. As Speaker, he was a dynamo against the socialist democrats (that’s why they hate him). Newt’s accomplishments: the contract with America, passed welfare reform, tax cuts, balanced the federal budget, helped usher in and maintain the Republican majority and the long-lasting Reagan economy, blocked most of Clinton’s socialist agenda. We could’ve used someone like Newt against Obama.
Romney was a liberal progressive. Aligned himself with Kennedy and the left. Romney’s accomplishments: advocated for and signed socialist/fascist RomneyCare, taxpayer funded abortion, gay marriage, liberal judges and appointees, complete destruction of the Republican brand in Massachusetts.
I know which of these two I’ll be supporting and it won’t be Romney. Romney is the establishment’s progressive love potion. Newt is the antidote.
111posted on Monday, December 05, 2011 11:02:34 AMby Jim Robinson(Rebellion is brewing!! Impeach the corrupt Marxist bastard!!)
That is all good. It contradicts his many speeches on the matter since that testimony. My biggest worry is that he will cave to leftist environmentalists. He has a close association with many on the left when it comes to environmental issues.
In his book, A Contract with the Earth Newt explicitly states that "carbon loading" is a cause of Global Warming. I heard with my own ears Newt on Levin painfully trying to hang on AGW. It was disheartening.
Believe me, I would want nothing more to believe Newt is truly going to take on the EPA and the left on AGW. I just don't think he will. I will be happy to be proven wrong.
As I have stated, Newt would be someone I could vote "for." I will not vote for Mitt. The bottom line is that Newt would be infinitely better than the Marxist.
Remember this blurb from the Kerry-Gingrich debate on Global Warming:
Kerry didn’t know quite what to do with his agreeable opponent. “I’m a little confused about sort of where Newt comes from on this,” he said at first. Later, Kerry tried to switch places with Gingrich, branding him a big-government liberal. “You know, this is a huge transition,” he exclaimed. “You actually want the government to do it. I want the private sector to do it.”
By the end of the debate, Lincoln/Kerry was embracing Douglas/Gingrich as a global-warming ally, saying things such as “What we need to do is what Newt just said.”
“I’ll lay odds if Newt Gingrich and I were responsible for making this happen, we could get in a room and in a week, we’d come up with a program and make it happen,”
He hasn’tbeen persistent in marriage. It seems he has a short attention span.
Switching up here, grasping at straws a little? Reagan wasn’t too persistent in his first marriage either. Was there a better president in our lifetimes? Let it go man.
I am also stunned... My Dad, who has been a democrat FOREVER, will vote for anyone but Obama. He will vote for Newt if he wins the nomination... his words.
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.