Q&A: NEWT GINGRICH ('80-20' Odds Dems Will Win in '08...)

National Journal Group ^ | September 14, 2007 | Staff

[wardaddy]

I don’t believe for one second there is an 80/20 chance the dems win in 2008

[bigeasy_70118]

Big fan of Newt’s. He needs to realize he has zero chance of winning. He should just join another campaign as their strategic advisor.

[ken21]

if the # of people on this forum is any indication,

neut’s right.

some nights there are maybe 50 posters and 39 of them are mormons shilling for rombot in their ant piles.

[dawn53]

Gingrich: Yeah. That's my guess. Now, it could change. If you had a [Republican] candidate who could break out and who could say, "Obviously, we need to change pretty dramatically, and the party of trial lawyers, public employee unions, [and] left-wing ideologues probably can't change," and could force Hillary [Rodham Clinton] or Barack Obama or whomever to be the defender of failed bureaucracies, then I think you could see a Republican win next year. But I don't think they can win by passively staying within the framework of where we have been.

Didn't I read that Newt is considering getting into the race...I guess he figures that he's the one who could "break out."

The man is a media whore...watching him is like watching Geraldo...IMHO.

[nonliberalyouth]

Well, if things do not change, then how is Newt wrong? We have been out fundraised, the war is unpopular, and there is a growing populist sentiment in the country. Unless a candidate breaks out, perhaps by laying out a roadmap to success and Iraq, and perhaps by policy wonking in favor of fiscal conservatism, then the Dems are in good position to roll over us in 2008.

Fortunately, Thompson has the potential to be that guy, I would be worried about my 80-20 chances if I were a Democrat.

[TomGuy]

Gingrich: The most tempting thought about running next year is the idea of debating Senator Clinton. That would be fun.

First, you would have to win the primaries, Newt, and that ain't gonna happen.

If you did run and if you did happen to get the GOP nomination, the Dem would win by 90-10.

If your sole interest in running is to be able to debate Senator Clinton because it would be fun, you don't have much to offer.

[Newt is still wanting the base to beg him to run. He has been making the same overtures since the 2004 election.]

[uncbob]

As a political pundit Newt is out of it

He predicted a 25 seat GOP pick up in the house in 98

And don’t tell me about 94

The gun owners and Christian Conservatives came out in droves because of Clinton’s Abortion Policy —Gays in the Military—and Gun Bills

Contract With America, although a great thing, had almost no effect (exit polls showed the vast majority of voters never even heard of it )

[Notary Sojac]

I think part of the difference was that there are no Giuliani-Kennedy bills. There are no Giuliani-Feingold bills. Giuliani is a New York, moderate Republican. But he hasn't gone out of his way to pick fights with the Republican base.

An excellent point, which many of those whose heads explode at the thought of a Rudy candidacy can't quite grasp.

[thefactor]

i’d be careful what people say about newt around here. fred hasn’t announced his VP yet...

[uncbob]

He already proved that his political skills were best at siezing control of the House of Reps, but did not extend to actually running the place.

See my post 27

[uncbob]

I think part of the difference was that there are no Giuliani-Kennedy bills. There are no Giuliani-Feingold bills. Giuliani is a New York, moderate Republican. But he hasn't gone out of his way to pick fights with the Republican base.

Maybe cause he wasn't in the senate

Wouldn't surprise me a bit if he had been if he wouldn't have co-sponsored a Gun Control Bill

[mek1959]

Gosh, I can’t believe the vitriol against Newt. I worked on “The Hill” in the mid-80’s when Newt rose through leadership. To those of us fighting the fight up there not only against Jim Wright, but also against our own Bob Michael (minority leader), Newt was wind in our sails - and yes, he did have BIG ideas. Remember the Contract with America.

After 40 years in the wilderness, Newt marshaled the energy to bring the House back to the Republicans. Has he had missteps - duh; but how about:

Rudi - Gun Control (not usually a conservative issue)
Mitt - Has held, shall we say multiple positions over the years.
Mike H - Didn’t he raise taxes a few times while Gov.
Fred T - Shall we remember his support for McCain-Feingold?

Listen, if Newt jumps into the race, there will be very necessary debates about change - unless you want FDR’s “unimagined government power” to continue. Be mature enough to realize that ALL of the candidates come with flaws - they are human. At the same time, remember that Newt is one of us.

He’s done a ton for his country and the conservative movement. And before I get my head bashed in about his moral life, I don’t support that anymore than you who might accuse me of overlooking it.

Enough said - Newt is not the enemy

[meandog]

Well, if either the Romulan or Julie-annie are our nominees, Newt will be borne out to be absolutely spot on. I cannot see Rudeee winning but one or two states (N.H. or perhaps Maine) and the Mittwitt just one: Utah. Should either get the nomination, it will go down as the largest Republican defeat in history, eclipsing even LBJ/Goldwarter and FDR/Landon. It really won’t entirely be the fault of Rudee or the Mutt, however; no, most of the blame for the defeat can be placed right squarely where it ought to be: on Duh-pee-eew! There’s a silver lining in the dark clouds however—in 2012, after four years of the Chillderbeaste, national humiliation, widespread recession and social unrest; a libertarian brand of conservatism will come roaring back!

[uncbob]

Remember the Contract with America. After 40 years in the wilderness, Newt marshaled the energy to bring the House back to the Republicans.

See my post #27

Newt had to resign after that 98 debacle

[stockstrader]

I would agree with Newt ONLY if the Republican Party does something totally stupid--like abandoning its conservative base (along with with its longly-held, core, bedrock values and principles) by nominating a LIBERAL like Giuliani.

The only way that Hillary can win (with her high negatives) is for the Republicans to SPLIT and DIVIDE the Party.

If you want to SPLIT and DIVIDE the Republican Party WIDE OPEN (while demoralizing the base),,,,

a LIBERAL like Rudy is JUST THE MAN FOR THE JOB!

[Vinomori]

He’s a fat, spoiled, brainiac. No leadership, just brains.

[MNJohnnie]

Well Newt which job in Hillary’s Administration are you applying?

[MNJohnnie]

No the blame can be placed squarely on psuedo “Betrayed Conservatives”, like yourself, who spend ALL your time actively working FOR the Democrat party by hysterically trash talking everyone and everything in the GOP day in and day out.

How about you do us a favor? You spend all your time working FOR Democrats here on FR, why don’t you wander over and JOIN them?

Pretty hard to win any battle when 20% of your team spends all it time sniping it OWN side in the back.

[3niner]

Newt used to think like a winner, but for the last ten years or so, he has been thinking like a whiner.

Newt doesn't seem to understand why so many Republicans loath John McCain. Yes, he's far more conservative than Rudy, but I could force myself to, grudgingly, vote for Rudy, if he was the nominee. I will never vote for McCain.

[MNJohnnie]

Enough said - Newt is not the enemy

Wrong. It not the 1980s. It is childish to be mindlessly loyal to a guy who is busy stabbing the political agenda you CLAIM to care about in the back daily.