Posted on 02/01/2012 6:47:09 AM PST by montag813
I just heard Newt’s speech after Florida and I have come to realize that Newt is going to win the GOP nomination and be the next president.
I understand that most people think that Romney is most likely, but I do not agree. First, Romney has never shown the ability to get the majority of the votes in any primary. Second, Romney’s win in Florida took place with no actual consideration of Romney’s record or ideas — Romney’s entire campaign was based on the idea that Romney is the only person who can beat Obama. His whole campaign in FL was on attacking Newt. Third, the voting numbers showed Gingrich did very well in the Fl. panhandle, which votes like southern states. This suggests that Gingrich will likely sweep the South.
Gingrich’s problems in FL were easy to fix. Gingrich got off message. Gingrich froze in the face of shock and awe from Romney’s attacks. Finally, Gingrich faced the one state that only Romney had a strong campaign organization in. The fact of the matter is that Romney had to compete in Iowa with almost everyone and lost. Romney had to compete in NH with Huntsman and won. Romney had to compete in SC with Santorum, Perry, and Gingrich and lost. FL was always too big for anyone but Romney to have a strong organization and ad campaign in. Gingrich had the momentum, but Romney had a uniquely large organization advantage for FL.
In future states Romney will continue to have an organization advantage, especially through Super Tuesday, but as the primary goes on, Romney’s advantage will drop as (1) later states even out since Romney is running a campaign like Clinton did in 2008 and his organization is strongest early, (2) as the race goes on voters will develop more solid opinions and organization will mater less, and (3) Gingrich will emerge as the alternative to Romney and will be better organized as people realize he is the only hope for conservatives in this race.
In terms of campaign focus, Gingrich is now developing a new contract with America and I expect he will use that to stay on message and contrast himself with Romney. Gingrich held a vote on all items he promised to and did what he could to pass them for the original contract. That was a promise kept for him. He will have credibility for his new contract and this will contrast him with Romney who cannot be trusted and is not conservative.
In terms of Romney’s shock and awe attacks, it is hard to see Romney get much worse. Romney’s negatives have already shot up, and it is almost impossible to think of what worse things Romney can attack Gingrich for. Romney already used several lines of attack have had blow back, and if he picked those as ‘go,’ it is hard to think he has anything left to fire with. The Romney smear campaign will need to let-up at some time or Romney will completely implode. How long can a campaign be 99.9% negative?
What it comes down to is that Gingrich is a real candidate, and Romney is a pretender. Gingrich has real conservative ideas to fix the problems we are in. Romney has talking points.
Bingo!
If 0bama wins, America loses.
If R0mney wins, America loses.
Just say "no" to abortionist, gun-grabbing, tax-n-spend socialists.
R0mneycare = 0bamacare = communism
Just for the record (the record, remember that?) Newt said he would like to see the private sector shoulder almost 90% of that burden... with incentives and prizes and tax breaks from the government leading their way...
What it has to do with a presidential campaign, is that the Russians are already well on their way per below... and their are serious military repurcusions of the Russians and Chinese eating up the lunar real estate ahead of America. Read up a little on the subject and then voice an opinion...
http://www.myfoxdc.com/dpps/news/russia-us-moon-base-nasa-dpgonc-20110119-to-_17194074
Russia is talking with the US and Europe on plans to create a manned research base on the moon, the head of the Russian space agency Roscosmos said Thursday.
Roscosmos is discussing the possibilities for a permanent moon base with officials from NASA and the European Space Agency, the agency’s chief, Vladimir Popovkin said.
“We don’t want man to just step on the moon,” Popovkin told Vesti FM radio station, according to the Ria Novosti news agency. “Today, we know enough about it, we know that there is water in its polar areas ... we are now discussing how to begin [the moon’s] exploration with NASA and the European Space Agency.”
He said the plan was either to set up a base on the moon or launch a station to orbit around it.
Russia also is planning to send two unmanned mission to the moon by 2020, Popovkin said.”
China moonbase 2002:
http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/5/22/181737.shtml
No problem at all ... I'm glad that I got to read your post.
I have reached that conclusion as well. No Mitt, No Rick.
Since Saint Santo ain’t got a chance and everyone knows it, I figure the Newt bashers on this forum must be all Rombots!
Aren’t “15 million” and “masterful” mutually exclusive terms? One who has 15 miilion doesn’t need mastery and one who has nastery doesnt need 15 million. Unless she meant he was the master of the 15 million...
Thank you, Astronaut, for being what seems to be a lonely voice of reason. I consider myself a conservative, i.e., limited government, lower taxes, individual freedom and responsibility, strong defense, free market capitalism, DOMA and natural resource development with environmental safeguards (I’m all for drilling in the gulf, fracking, building the Keystone pipeline, more refineries and nuclear power plants). I’d love for the “most conservative” candidate to win the nomination and be elected. But whoever wins the nomination, I’ll support them against Obama because I think either Gingrich, Santorum or Romney would be a better president than Obama. I’d consider voting for Paul if I didn’t think his foreign policy views threatened our national security. I just don’t see the sense in giving Obama a “pass” because my favorite candidate doesn’t get the nomination. Sounds a lot like “I’m not going to participate if I don’t get everything I want” thus sacrificing the “less than perfect” to the perfect.
Did you see this?
I am for RP in the primary - A B O in the GE
Do you mean Ron Paul?
OK.
I disagree with you, but I do appreciate your honesty.
Haven’t seen it. Will check it out later. Thanks.
Would you like to bet? The only thing I want in return is an apology for calling me a liar. I am confused as to what evidence you looked at that led you to that conclusion.
I am in NYC. Laura's show is not broadcast here, but you can find her online and stream her show. I listen to her via WYSL 1040 AM in Rochester NY. Her show is broadcast daily 9:00 AM to 12:00 PM. This morning at 9:00 AM she comes on as usual right after the news. She immediately starts to discuss YESTERDAY'S primary in Florida and the outcome with respect to Romney's victory. She then started telling the Tea Party members who were depressed to "suck it up" and get behind Romney and referred people to a blog posted on her website that she had just written. Go to her website, see the blog (center-right) top of page and verify not only what she said about YERSTERDAY'S primary, but you can verify that I accurately posted it earlier in this thread. How would I even know that the blog was there unless she had directed people to it THIS MORNING? The blog speaks to YESTERDAY'S primary.
As I suggested to another poster earlier in this thread, you can find Laura's show streamed online by a variety of stations all over the country. Even at this late hour, I'll bet you could find a station that is yet to broadcast her show. You can then listen for yourself.
There is another option here, but it would probably cost some money. I believe Laura's shows are archived on her website so they may be called up to be listened to. The problem here though is that you must be a registered Laura 360 member which involves a fee.
Here's another: Go to Laura's website, scroll all the way down on the right where she posts her Facebook comments as well as the comments of her listeners and I'll bet there are some listener comments that will verify that she was on her show THIS MORNING.
One last question, what would be my motive to do such as you suggest?
If you are an upstanding FReeper, I know you will apologize.
From Laura's Facebook page:
Janet Carp
What happened to Laura? Suddenly I'm listening to this Arroyo chap who annoys me. She was on in the first segment. Did I miss something?
Like · Comment · 8 hours ago
·
I listened to almost all morning. She had fill in because she had to attend a function at her son’s school.
The facebook entry reveals that she was there this morning for the first segment and this is exactly when I heard her.
You called me a liar publicly on this thread and I still await your public apology.
Are you a stand up FReeper or not?
She in fact was NOT on the first segment. She came back on later for a short time to do an interview with Huckabee.
I do not think that Steve Jobs received massive amounts of money from the government. That is just the first example I can think of.
So you just can’t do it, can you? Says a lot about you, doesn’t it?
You found it so easy to publicly call someone a liar, but are not man (or woman) enough to correct your mistake.
Crawl back under that rock you came out from.
I’m sorry. Let me try again.
With all due respect, “Santorum is nothing more than a pimple on the @ss of this campaign.”
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.