Sarah Palin is right: Newt Gingrich is getting crucified by Mitt Romney's millions

The London Telegraph ^ | January 30, 2012 | Dr Tim Stanley

[2ndDivisionVet]

Sarah Palin has spoken, and she says that the Republican establishment is “trying to crucify” Newt Gingrich. To a large extent, she is right (although Newt probably supplied his own nails).

On Sunday, NBC reported that Romney now leads Gingrich by 15 points in Florida. Mitt is on 42 percent, Newt 27 percent, Rick Santorum 16 percent and Ron Paul 11 percent. Romney’s big lead is made up of typically centrist subgroups: he attracts 52 percent of people who are not Tea Party supporters, 49 percent of those who self-describe as “liberal” or “moderate” and 49 percent of those who make more than $75,000 per year. He boasts a 47 to 26 percent preference among women.

All this wouldn’t be so formidable if Gingrich enjoyed the kind of lead that he enjoyed among conservative groups in South Carolina. But Romney also has a slim advantage among Tea Partiers (36 to 34 percent) and evangelical Christians (34 to 28 percent).

Sarah Palin says that Romney’s momentum is thanks to a coordinated effort by the GOP establishment to deny a genuine conservative the nomination. “Look at Newt Gingrich, what's going on with him via the establishment's attacks,” she told Fox’s John Stossel. “They're trying to crucify this man and rewrite history and rewrite what it is that he has stood for all these years.”

Mrs Palin is mostly correct. TPM reports that Romney and his Super PAC have outspent Gingrich on negative ads by a ratio of 5:1 in Florida. His sudden rise in the polls reflects a pattern established in Iowa: where Mitt spends the most, he performs the best. In South Carolina – a surprise Gingrich victory – Romney only outspent his opponent by a ratio of 2:1.

And so many of Mitt’s ads are blatantly false....

[JohnD9207]

You mean all 4 years Newt governed before his own party refused to vote for him for speaker, and he resigned after an ethics investigation. Oh by the way I don’t suppport Mitt for Brains, but Santorium is the real conservative here.
But show me one photo with Newt on a horse riding with Ronald Reagan and I might buy into his delusions. Or explain his 20 year record of supporting individual mandates for National Health Care Newt style. I do judge him by his acts, around 30 years of them, not 4. Newt has freight not baggage. Newt is a self described progressive, who calls FDR the greatest President of the 20th century.
Santorium is the only Conservative who will not have to hire a PR team to stay ahead of discovery by Team Obama.

[DH]

OK wise guy, why don’t you rattle off the names of all of the other POWs that came back from the war. You can’t, for they were the heroes too but their daddy was not an admiral.

I will await your answer.

[JohnD9207]

I answered your question...too bad you didn’t remember or never knew. Point made. Don’t get sore because McCain was actually a war hero, something you blasted me in Caps for. Should McCain have not flown fighters over Nam because his dad was an admiral? Seems to me with McCain’s connections he should have been sitting behind a desk somewhere, not flying fighters.