Ummm. Let's see. We thought this stupid traitor and The Grifter would never be elected either.
Posted on 03/01/2007 9:38:22 AM PST by CNS
CNSNews.com) - In the first of at least two 2008 presidential straw polls scheduled for release this week, members of the conservative Citizens United have thrown their support behind non-candidate Newt Gingrich.
The unscientific poll of more than 2,500 of the group's members found that 31 percent would vote for the former House Speaker if the 2008 Republican presidential nomination were held today. Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani ranked second with 25 percent of the vote.
As Cybercast News Service previously reported, Gingrich has been critical of politicians announcing their candidacy nearly two years before the general election. He has said he will announce his intentions in September, less than 6 months before the first presidential primaries.
"The conservative movement is thirsty for a leader with Ronald Reagan's vision, passion and unique ability to convey what is great about America," CU President David Bossie said in a release announcing the results. "We want someone who inspires us."
Bossie said the poll "suggests that if he were to enter the presidential race, Newt Gingrich could be the heir to President Reagan whom conservatives are looking for."
The straw poll results come while a similar poll is being conducted at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), the annual gathering of conservative activists taking place in Washington, D.C. Results from that poll will be released Saturday evening.
Gingrich and Giuliani dominated the field of 13 candidates, together gathering more than half of all support. Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney came in third place with 10 percent of the votes. Arizona Sen. John McCain came in fourth with 8 percent.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnsnews.com ...
Another Rudy campaign B-leaguer comes to FR with all the subtley of a belch in church.
Ummm. Let's see. We thought this stupid traitor and The Grifter would never be elected either.
This is Free Republic...you forgot the "sarcasm" tag.
Did I say I didn't like him?
Yea, he's not like Rudy who really has the conservative base behind him. Hardly any Rudy negatives reflected at FR.
Sarcasm tag? You know the rules. ;)
Way to go, JustaDumbBlonde . . . let your passions overrule your common sense.
See how easy it is to avoid having an intellectual discussion? You might have gone down the route of "no, Newt has already taken the MSM's best shot and is still standing" or any of several other coherent and rational arguments that I could think of which would argue against my position that Newt is, fundamentally, unelectable. I'm open to persuasion.
Digger's comment about Newt being able to handle Hillary in a debate is at least a defensable assertion. I think it would be highly amusing to see Hill try to keep up with Newt's new-idea-a-minute approach.
Come on, Newtsters. I'm open to persuasion. But please, ground the persuasion in political reality, not wishful thinking.
The MSM isn't going away, and it opposes much of what we hold dear. Anyone who doesn't think that they'll throw everything they have against Newt is kidding themselves. They'll do that because (in my opinion) they're afraid of him.
And, in my opinion, they will be successful in tearing him down. They're very good at that sort of thing. That's why so many good people avoid getting into politics in the first place (and, conversely, why so many bad people do get into politics.)
No argument here. Each dovetail with my four priorities for what is best for America. Currently, Newt and his policies are known entities. Duncan has yet to show up on the radar screen. Regardless, the two of them would make an outstanding ticket.
My question to myself is Duncan/Newt or Newt/Duncan. I realize this rationale is simplistic, but decisions need to be boiled down to the lowest common denominator.
IMO
I am working on it
Shuddering at the sight of those pics...especially since, back in the day when I was young and foolish, I actually voted for Carter. Ewwwwww! Now, I'm old and foolish, but hopefully, I won't make a mistake like that again.
I'm just so sorry that I didn't understand your brilliant political discussion bait. You make an asinine statement to the effect that you could support Newt if only the media liked him and I comment on same. You are now the political genius just looking for a good argument. Yeah, I see how that works.
He's all of that and much more. He has a great historical understanding and perspective, a knowledge of economics and political science none of the other candidates have.
Having said that, he is completely unelectable under almost any scenario. But if he enters, I hope it is early enough to impact the debate and educate the candidates more. In that respect, his baggage should not be a factor, and the quality of the debates by the candidates will be ramped up substantially with Newt in the fray.
And at this time in 1975, it's doubtful that anyone outside of Georgia even knew who Carter was.
No.
I said I'd support Newt if thought the media wouldn't destroy him, not that I'd support him if the media "liked him."
The media isn't going to like ANY Republican. Ever. They'll just go after some with more gusto than others. I think even Newt knows that, judging from some of his quoted/paraphrased comments recently, such as:
the GOP is in the "early stages of an enormous transition" and suggested electability is an issue for Republicans
and:
“the most likely campaign… is going to be two New Yorkers, one of whom sounds like a New Yorker,”
That's not me saying those things, it's Newt. It sounds like you need to start by convincing him, and work your way down to me.
Haven't you heard? Anybody like Newt who espouses brilliant conservative ideas and has an excellent grasp of foreign policy is not electable. We need a mediocre and boring candidate like Mitt or Rudy in order to truly motivate the electorate to vote Republican. Someone like Newt is only VP material where he can languish in obscurity and his ideas can never see the light of day.
It's true. If you don't believe me, ask the people at the RNC who brought you Bob Dole. They'll tell you.
With today's MSM, every Republican is a lightning rod. And thanks to Bill Clinton, a candidate's private life is no longer an issue. There is no such thing as "unelectible" any more.
I like Newt...but Duncan Hunter, I think, is the more conservative, thus is my top pick.
Isolationist trade policies aren't "conservative."
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.