Okay Conservatives, What Do We Do Now? Gingrich?

An unpopular incumbant president and a terrible economy ought to spell C·A·K·E  W·A·L·K for the Republicans in 2012. But picking a candidate to run against Obama is so far problematic to say the least. There is a power struggle going on between the GOP establishment and the more conservative wing of the Party. And, the Left Stream Media (LSM) are doing all they can do to support the GOP establishment by pushing Mitt Romney to win the nomination.

The first candidate to challenge Romney was Rick Perry; but he didn’t last long. Then Herman Cain, a businessman, put up what looked, however unlikely, to be a strong and growing challenge to Romney. Now Cain is mired in controversy and we should know in a short time whether he can survive the controversy or not. If we assume that Cain goes down in flames, we conservatives are left with Newt Gingrich and Ron Paul as our only viable options to Mitt Romney.

I, as most of you know, am supporting Ron Paul. However, unless something changes very quickly, it doesn’t look like Paul is getting enough traction to challenge Romney in the primaries.  So, unless the unforeseen happens, that leaves Newt Gingrich as our only other alternative to Romney.

Before talking about Gingrich, let me share my opinion on Romney. I know that the GOP establishment and the LSM and some conservative pundits believe tha Romney may be the only candidate that has a shot at unseating Obama.  I DON’T BELIEVE IT! On the contrary, I think Obama’s best shot at reelection would be if Romney was heading the Republican ticket. I believe that Romney is the one candidate that Obama could handle very nicely in one on one debates.

If my opinion of Romney is right, what are we going to do about Newt Gingrich?  We all know that Gingrich has a lot of baggage and I don’t intend to rehash here today. We also know that as soon as his polling begins to challenge Romney, the LSM will attack him without mercy. Assuming that Gingrich is our last best chance to have a more conservative option to Romney, we conservatives have to decide whether we will support Gingrich in spite of his baggage or accept that Mitt Romney will be the Republican nominee.

If I can’t convince you all to get behind my choice of Ron Paul,  I would recommend that you do get behind Newt Gingrich; baggage and all. In my opinion, Gingrich will destroy Obama in one on one debates and he has the ability to connect with the swing voters. I would ask you to read this Wall Street Journal article by Dorothy Rabinowitz. She also thinks Newt Gingrich could win.

Well, that’s what I’m thinking. What are your thoughts?



69 thoughts on “Okay Conservatives, What Do We Do Now? Gingrich?

  1. I think it is too soon to make up my mind. Gingrich looks better, but I still like Cain, and Paul to a certain degree. We still have plenty of time, and I for one will not rush into any decision!

      1. Jim, I just don’t see Romney winning, the man was a loser before and I think that he still is! I see Gingrich way before Romney, and Cain before him as well. I know that there are a lot of liberal elite Repub. who would like Romney, I just can not see it happening!

  2. Its a year until the election. A lot can and WILL dramatically change between now and then.

    If the economy improves then President Obama will likely get reelected.

      1. Affirmative on that. It appears like many people are under the impression that cause and effect ceases to exist in economics, and it’s all about “consumer confidence.”

  3. I wrote a post after Gingrich said Paul Ryan’s Path to Prosperity was right wing social engineering in which I said Newt was, and should be, done. I’m re-thinking that. I’ve actually started to like the guy, mostly because I’ve listened to his policy positions. He’s creative and he seems to understand that the Federal Government needs to shrink and that what makes this country great is not our social programs, but our capitalism.

    Check this out on his website: http://www.newt.org/21st-century-contract-america

  4. @azleader,

    You said:
    “If the economy improves then President Obama will likely get reelected.”

    Looking at that statement outside the box, so to speak, I disagree. Right now the Obama Administration is coming under serious fire- Fast and Furious, Occupy movement, gaffe over Netanyahu, ObamaCare’s constitutionality, etc. New Camelot is crumbling. I can see the distant possibility of im getting re-elected, but…unless the American people are witless and ignorant sheeple, it ain’t gonna happen.


    I appreciated this article. You made a good point about Cain. If he survives this controversy, he is the most Conservative candidate in my opinion. If, however, he does not, then what? Hmm. Perhaps Gingrich will rise to the challenge. No, let me rephrase that: perhaps the Conservatives will elevate Gingrich.

    I also fully appreciate how you differentiate between the GOP puppets and true Conservatives. So many people get that wrong. 🙂

    You presented some good food for thought, to be sure. I’m still with Cain. I plan on him winning the nomination, as you probably do regarding Ron Paul. If our guys don’t get it, what will either of us do? Food for thought, indeed.

    1. Oh, and for public record, allow me to say that even though I am in Cain’s corner, he ain’t the smartest guy on the stage. That title belongs to Gingrich. Definitely. Gotta give credit where it’s due, after all.

    2. All the things you mention about the the wheels coming off the Obama Express is true. Collectively they would normally be enough to derail the Obama train.

      But, at the risk of kinda sorta quoting a liberal, “It’s the economy, Stupid!” That rallying call is what propelled Clinton over an incumbent George H. W.

      1. @azleader,

        It’s kinda a shame, isn’t it, that as Americans we can be manipulated simply on the premise that we want a government that uses our money to get our votes.

        By this rationale, if Obama promises to give us more of our own money back to us, we will be okay with him for another 4 years. I mean, as long as I have money in my wallet, (my money, mind you), and the government promises to let me have more of it than normal, it’s all good.

        Like I said, shame.

        I fear you might be correct. If indeed the economy bounces back on Obama’s watch, it will satisfy the ignorant and give the puppets reason to further glorify their Messiah. When will we, as Americans, finally realize it isn’t about money, but about principles?

        Thanks for chatting with me, azleader!

  5. Gingrich was on Fox the other night and explained th ” Paul Ryan’s Path to Prosperity was right wing social engineering ” statement. It was taken very much out of the context of what he was saying, and not at all what he said. At least Gingrich can make a complete thought pattern. Just saying as for now, he would be my beat. At the last Tea Party gathering he was the overwhelming favorite.

  6. It just happens that by coincidence we have named Newt Gingrich as the source of “The Refreshing Admission of the Electoral Year” in our Blog.

    We also happen to believe that either, Gingrich or Romney, would beat the socks off Obama in a Presidential Debate when time comes. They will also do the same as far as explaining economic ideas and exposing why President Obama is an economic illiterate.

  7. Bunkerville: Gingrich’s Ryan statement was not taken out of context, but I also don’t think he meant it to come out that way, to be fair to Newt. It was another case of his flamboyant language getting ahead of him. Intellectuals do not make good leaders, but if Newt got the nomination I would vote for him over Obama.

    I’ve heard Newt polls badly among women (serving a wife recovering from cancer surgery and cheating on here can do that to a candidate.)

    I actually caught myself today considering the possibility that Ron Paul could actually take off. He is the only candidate that simultaneously could capture the anger of both the tea party and OWS (There are a log of mainstream people who don’t pay close attention who say OWS has a point).

      1. The Paul problem is not his policies. He sort of comes off as a crazed little elf. I know that’s shallow, but there definitely seems to be a cap on the number of people who will follow a crazed little elf. Those followers will be zealous, but there’s a cap. The zealousness of a lot of his followers is also a drawback for many. For example, an acquaintance of mine who believes in every cockamamie conspiracy theory imaginable is also a Ron Paul supporter. Between the crazed little elf thing and the nut-jobs that many of his most ardent supporters seem to be, I think it’s difficult for mainstream conservatives (by which I don’t mean the big government Washington GOP elite, but the middle America conservatives) to rally to the guy. Perhaps Dr. Paul could figure out a way to get his thinking into a more palatable presentation… a mind-meld with a Romney, perhaps. Or a transplant to Perry, who seems to need one anyway.

  8. Don’t count out Ron Paul. He has the best organization in Iowa. Most Republicans said they could change their minds before the primaries. Most of them aren’t paying that much attention yet. A win by Ron Paul in Iowa, which is very possible, could cause a domino effect.

    I don’t understand why Ron Paul is the only one that people feel they must agree with 100% of the time. When it comes to other candidates, conservatives will say that they don’t have to agree with anyone 100% of the time. I just don’t get it. Let’s vote for the only man who predicted the economic crisis. The man is an economic genius. It’s what we need!

  9. I swore off of Gingrich a long time ago, but he is looking more and more appealing. He has baggage, but one of the reasons he has baggage is because he’s been around for a while. I’ll vote for Gingrich.
    Paul has dedicated supporters, but voters outside his base don’t care much for him. Libertarian ideas need a better champion.

  10. I’m not a “Paulbot”, but I have voted for Ron Paul before and I would vote for him again, at least in the primaries if I thought he had a chance of winning the nomination.

    This election cycle, I had been leaning towards Cain, but his recent troubles and the way his campaign handled the scandal gives me pause. I’ve always liked Gingrich, but his baggage makes him seem less electable. My thinking is that Newt is positioning himself for a cabinet position, perhaps Secretary of State. He obviously can’t be Cain’s VP running mate if Cain gets the nomination.

      1. I guess I was wrong. They can be from the same state, but …here’s an explanation I found;


        Yes, but a quirk of the Twelfth Amendment says that they can’t get the state’s electoral votes if they are:

        The electors shall meet in their respective states and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves

        That’s usually interpreted to mean that they can’t be from the same state, but it technically allowed, though it sets a higher bar for that ticket.

        That would have made an enormous difference in 2000. Cheney’s Wyoming residency was kind of dubious, though courts decided it was valid. If they had decided he was really a Texas resident, like Bush, the election was so close that it would have gone the other way.

        But the 12th Amendment was written when people moved more slowly, and it was hard to change your state of residence. At this point the restriction is a mere technicality, though like the electoral college itself it’s a technicality that can warp the outcome. With people being able to move across state lines so easily it’s a technicality that’s pretty ignorable.

  11. This is gotten muddier than i ever thought it would. While we have to remember that Gingrich is an establishment guy, he is better than Ronmey-by several hundred light years. And, he would utterly crush Obama in any debate. The man is scary smart, and was smooth as glass in his debate with Cain. He consistently seems to be above the fray in any GOP debate. If he can avoid self destructing, he might pull out the nomination.

  12. I think its funny seeing people say Establishment Candidate X is better than Establishment Candidate Y. It’s like saying Mike is a better fry cook than Ted. They’re paid by the same special interests and the program, much like fry cook procedures, is laid out. The only one who’s not is Ron Paul, that’s why they’re pulling every dirty trick in the book against him.

    If the Mafia kills over a million bucks stolen, what do you think the Federal Reserve Banking Cartel is going to do when someone even threatens to cut them off?

      1. I’m at the point where I stopped “choosing” and take my toys and go home. I’ll vote Constitution Party. The reason they get away with this two party game is that they control us with fear of the other side winning. Well the decades have proven that the state wins no matter who wins the elections, so I’m voting Ron Paul or the Libertarian/Constitution Party guy. It’s called not being insane “doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results”. And there are a WHOLE lot of other people out there who are thinking the same way.

  13. One thing not mentioned here is the obvious effort the MSM is making to get Romney the nomination. Why is that? Is it because he is nearly as big government left as Obama, so if they can’t have Obama they will take Romney? Or is it because they think Obama can beat Romney? Either way, their actions almost endorsing Romney as the Republican winner from the beginning has bothered me. I think Gingrich would wipe up the floor with Obama in a debate. What I heard today is that if Cain starts going down and Gingrich starts rising, MSM will begin the destruction train to go after Newt. Personal attacks are the forté of the left…so who knows what will be dredged up. I do think Newt knows his own personal baggage well enough that he can do favorable mea culpas. I also read someone’s piece that said Obama runs against no one, instead he “clears the field.” Well, someone is going to run against him, so unless he calls off the election or starts assassinations, I’m not sure he can pull that off. Gingrich has stated several times that Bernanke will be fired forthwith if he were elected. Not sure what the Federal Reserve would do with that.

    My leaning is toward Newt, baggage and all. But some folks who like him are going to have to start stepping up with some $$$ backing or he will not have enough to make the big play for the White House. We’ll see….

    1. Romney is Obama sans some color. A total RINO. It’s a moot point. Cain will survive. I’ve been researching these “allegators” all night. Wrote a nice piece about them.

      I almost want the country to vote for Romney so that we can get this mess over with. Romney might just be the frosting on the cake.

  14. Perry and Cain were the anti-Romney alternative and when Cain falls (I think he will shortly) I think it will be Newt who capitalizes as the anti-Romney candidate. I dismissed Newt at the beginning because of his baggage but I do have to admit that he is winning me over. He has remarkable debates and I wouldn’t mind seeing him debate Obama, he would destroy him.

  15. I am coming to this discussion late, but let me chime in. As you know, Jim, I am also supporting Ron Paul. However, I think it would almost be worth letting Gingrich run, just to see him debate Obama. That wouldn’t be anywhere close to being a fair fight. Obama wouldn’t stand a chance.

      1. Gingrich vs Obama debate….It would be SWEET revenge to see that! My hope would be Gingrich would put on the gloves and not try the “we can work with democrats” nonsense. At this point, I want blood drawn…figuratively. Sorry, that sounds so visceral. Just that the damage from the left is so bad at this point, I’d like to see some justice on the national stage in the way of complete humiliation.

  16. Since finally the conversation took a turn towards my early contention I would repeat a short version of it: “Gingrich or Romney, would beat the socks off Obama in a Presidential Debate when time comes.”

    The amount of substance that they can bring will overwhelm the teleprompter of Obama. They are the only ones that can expose the ridiculous tax-math and deficit-math of Obama.

  17. It’s terrible that it’s come to this, obama is roundly and rightly loathed by most Americans now. He lied to them and is forcing a soft-fascist ideology down their throats.

    Once obama revealed himself for what he really is, this was always going to be the republicans game to lose. Would you believe it, those bloody idiots are choosing to lose.

  18. 5 months ago, I thought Gingrich’s campaign was a goner. But he’s hung in and risen in the polls. I’ve always been partial to Bachman, but she can’t even get close to double digits. Ron Paul is the only one that is a true constitutionalist. One thing is certain, ANY of them would be heads and tails above Obama, and to be perfectly honest, a much better president that Bush, as well.

    1. Remember that Gingrich is a Agenda 21 guy. From supporting Global Warming to the Federal Land Grabs to the GATT treaty, he’s been working with the UN and global collectivists, just as Obama is doing.

  19. The more I listen to Gingrich, the more I like him. He’s the brightest guy in the room at all of the debates. No need to rush to a decision quite yet, but I like what I see and hear.

  20. Frankly, based on his record and what he has said in the debates, I am not sure that Gingrich is any more conservative than Romney. Gingrich has consistently betrayed social conservatives in the past, and to the distress of conservatives who actually believed in him he had more than his share of flip-flops and lack of follow-through when he was Speaker. Currently, he plans to balance the budget primarily through cutting waste and modernizing the government. However, neither of these ideas will really deal with the problem. He wants to cut taxes, but has not shown where this will be offset in budget cuts. His plans to replace Obamacare would actually increase government spending on a boondoggle which he called brain science. Indeed, much of his plan involves new programs and new spending–he is simply betting that the economy will improve to the extent that it can generate the revenue needed to pay for his projects. (http://www.newt.org/contract/legislative-proposals)
    I am also not really sure that he is as good a debater as people think he is. He has not been really cross-examined. He lied on the question of his role in Freddie Mac, but was fortunately there was no follow-up question. When he was pushed on not wanting to give a 30 second reply, he came across as petulant and unreasonable. He only appears good on stage because the other candidates are so absolutely poor at debating.
    He just does not appear to be much of a conservative alternative to me. He is an establishment player who very much thinks in establishment terms.

    1. He’s not Tea Party conservative but I do think he is much more conservative than Romney. Gingrich is first of all a politician and as such will bend the way the wind is blowing. So, If he were the nominee, we would want to make sure the House and Senate were as conservative as possible.

  21. “there definitely seems to be a cap on the number of people who will follow a crazed little elf.” LOL I don’t know who commenter Pat is, but he/she is Spot On.

    Ron Paul looks good on paper, but in person . . . crazed little elf. Also, why does he attract so many conspiracy-theorist type supporters? I get reservations when I read over at Reason.com, from David Harsanyi:

    “Paul isn’t a traditional conservative. His obsession with long-decided monetary policy and isolationism are not his only half-baked crusades. Paul’s newsletters of the ’80s and ’90s were filled with anti-Semitic and racist rants”

    The “end the fed” stuff has never been big on my list of gov’t probs, anyway. It’s one of those issues that’s so hard to understand or even get interested in, that I figure, hey. Let’s just work on re-educating our society on the ills of socialism and merits of economic liberty, maybe fix social security and the tax code before we get to the monetary policies.

    Mitt has got to go. When the MSM and all the “independents” are pushing someone, you know to run screaming in the other direction. Whether Cain or Gingrich is the best choice, I am undecided. Both have very good things to say. Gingrich has baggage. Come on dude, didja HAVE to sit on that couch with Pelosi and sell Global Warming??

    cheers and best to you

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s