Is that the best Newt can come up with?
Ok, you oppose same sex marriage and so do I. But, we really want to tell people to go vote for the other guy? God forbid this loose cannon becomes our candidate.
I thought it was refreshingly honest. Can you imagine what Romney would do for this gay DEMOCRAT’s vote?
He’s probably become gay for at least one night to get the “gay” democrat vote...which will never vote for him anyway.
Newt avoided the “zinger” follow up by this guy and didn’t waste time with someone who clearly isn’t interested in voting for him. He’s better off spending his time with people who will vote for him.
and what are you willing to do or compromise on to chase this guys vote?
gay marriage perhaps?
gay sex ed?
gays as a protected class with affirmative action?
Either we become liberals, or just tall them to go vote for obama and stick to principles.
On this one- go Newt.
Who is your choice for the GOP nomination indianrightwinger?
Just curious.
More straights that homo’s, he said the right thing.
I’m not sold on Newt, but I agree with his answer. You can’t please everyone and you can’t please queers who’s political stance is “what’s in it for queers” as it were. Pandering doesn’t work.
Okay, what does Rick Perry say to the same gay guy who comes up to him and asks, “What are you going to do for the gays?”
We're getting one side of the story, and probably from a liberal plant at that. I'm sure Newt's answer was a bit more involved than reported or else that the guy asking the questions was confrontational, perhaps rude, and so finally Newt tells him to just go support the other side since it's obvious you're never going to agree with me and that you never were interested in having a genuine discussion in the first place.
“Is that the best Newt can come up with?
Ok, you oppose same sex marriage and so do I. But, we really want to tell people to go vote for the other guy? God forbid this loose cannon becomes our candidate.”
Here, I’ll explain it to you. When a democrat comes up to you trying to get you to pander to him so he can say “Look at the mealy-mouthed republican try to pander to me!”, you tell the democrat to go take a flying leap.
Gingrich is not a "loose cannon." He made his position very clear on this subject. People in the real world do not want to vote for a namby-pamby, gutless wonder who dodges, zigs and zags on issues like most politicians.
Furthermore, the gay/lesbian population votes for democrats anyway, so Gingrich has nothing to lose from the queer community; and Gingrich will most likely pick up more votes from straight voters.
Because he told a Democrat to go ahead and vote for a Democrat. You make no sense what so ever
Geesh....the guy is a GAY DEMOCRAT!!! he would NEVER vote for a Republican......EVER! Newt didn’t pander!!
Homos aren’t people
You really think that guy was ever going to vote for anyone other than the Democrat?
I agree it would have been a better choice to have said something about how he had plans that would benefit ALL Americans, including this man. He could have made some comment about sexual pasts not being a big issue for him, given his own sordid choices in the bedroom. Perhaps that would have disarmed the man.
Of course, it’s all from the questioner’s point of view, and it likely is not accurate. Rather than asking a general question as the article reports, perhaps he more specifically focused on same sex marriage. In that case, gingrich’s answer would be more appropriate in context.
And I wonder at the tone of the questioner’s voice. If he was shrill and confrontational, that could have brought up personal animus Gingrich has over his sister’s public betrayal and whatever behind the scenes rancor may exist between the two. I’m sure his sister has berated him with the ‘pot calling the kettle black’ argument, and nobody likes to be publicly reminded of one’s shortcomings.
If he thinks the president should/could do something for him, he still should be in diapers...we aren ‘t electing a baby sitter...glad newt was honest...to say anything else would be pandering and the guy is better off voting for the other guy if he needs a diaper change...
Go watch the video. His answer is lot better than they are revealing.
“But, we really want to tell people to go vote for the other guy?”
If those people are going to vote for the other guy come hell or high water, then why not? We should pander to them like RINO’s even though we’ll never get their vote anyway? That just suppresses conservative turnout.