[Truth]

The ad stating that Gingrich has more baggage than an airline is, unfortunately, true. His personal life has not been one that we would hold up to our children as an exemplary example of a moral person. Wife No. 2 will "sing" on Nightline and the song won't be "I Love You Truly" or "Hail to the Chief".

Still, that isn't my main problem with him. My problem is with his wife (No.3). How can I support a man whose wife has hair that never moves? Is it real or plastic? Have any of you ever seen a "hair" out of place at any time? Absolutely not.

If a hurricane hit Myrtle Beach while she was standing in front of the Myrtle Beach Convention Center, I would bet the convention center blows away before a "hair" on her head moves.

Thus, although I support ABA (Anything but Obama) for president, Newt is a hard sell.

[Wildcatk23]

-.^

[LOOKAYANNER]

I can't support him because he can't win the General Election in November. Romney is the only GOP candidate that can pull in enough independent votes to beat Obama. Like him or not, the Republicans have one choice if they want to have a halfway chance to win back the White House.

[SKINNYPIG]

The two Bush administrations, the current Obama administration and the past three congresses shoulder most of the blame for the current state of our nation and the direction it is headed in. Personally, I can't imagine not voting for ANY GOP candidate left in the race. Or even a democrat if there was one. If anyone out there has faith in Obama getting us headed in the right direction (based on his record up to this point), PLEASE RECONSIDER!

[LWC]

^Don't you wish the President could be recalled, like the California governor.

[RunItUpTheGut]

^
We could always impeach

[LWC]

^Yeah but then they would have to prove something unethical, not just ineptitude.

[OrangenowBlue]

If ineptitude is a qualifier for impeachment then Bushie would have been out on his tushie. If 9/11 had not took place, he would have been a one-termer. As far as Ole Newter, he may be the biggest hypocrite in the history of american politics in every aspect of his business, personal, and political life. Romney is the only one who can beat Obama. Rick Santorum is about as exciting as two drunk turtles screwing. Most people are tired of hearing someone beat the moral drum when they usually turn out to be two faced and hypocritical. Rand Paul has some good ideas but he look likes the chief commandant at a Nazi Death Camp during WWII. Both he and his son have a sinister look in their eyes. I will vote for Romney and probably even Ole Neuter in the general election, not that they impress me, but we need a change.

[vundy33]

President Bush was much, much more competent that people give him credit for.

I've been taking notice of Santorum lately, like him.

Newt..ahh Newt. Really don't care for his past, couldn't care less. He just looks like a Washington guy to me.

Starting to like Paul more. He's just way to radical in his policies.

And Romney, middle of the road master. Meh...

[Hoot Gibson]

^Yeah but then they would have to prove something unethical, not just ineptitude.

Ethical lapses are not enough to impeach and convict a president. With Democrats in charge of more than one-third of the US Senate, proving that a president has committed a serious crime is not enough to convict him in an impeachment trial. Bill Clinton lied under oath in the presence of a federal judge and yet not a single Democrat voted to remove him from office.

Then you must consider the fact that Joe Biden is the VP. Impeaching Obama is not an option. Smart (relative to the VP) and crooked trumps moronic and crooked - and there is insufficient time to remove both Obama and Biden from office.

We are stuck with Obama and if he wins another term after keeping Biden on the ticket, then we will be stuck with him for another four years, or until our government falls, whichever comes first. I am seriously not sure that our government can survive four more years under the "rule" of Obama but many people seem willing to roll the dice.

[LWC]

Ethical lapses are not enough to impeach and convict a president. With Democrats in charge of more than one-third of the US Senate, proving that a president has committed a serious crime is not enough to convict him in an impeachment trial. Bill Clinton lied under oath in the presence of a federal judge and yet not a single Democrat voted to remove him from office.

Then you must consider the fact that Joe Biden is the VP. Impeaching Obama is not an option. Smart (relative to the VP) and crooked trumps moronic and crooked - and there is insufficient time to remove both Obama and Biden from office.

We are stuck with Obama and if he wins another term after keeping Biden on the ticket, then we will be stuck with him for another four years, or until our government falls, whichever comes first. I am seriously not sure that our government can survive four more years under the "rule" of Obama but many people seem willing to roll the dice.

I was kidding about it but you are right, Biden might be one of the few politicians that could be worse, lol.

No Democrats voted against Clinton for obvious reasons that have to do with their own party, but also because he was a good president. I thought so at the time, and it seems America did too. Clinton looks REALLY good considering what preceded and followed him.

[Hoot Gibson]

President Bush was much, much more competent that people give him credit for.

I've been taking notice of Santorum lately, like him.

Newt..ahh Newt. Really don't care for his past, couldn't care less. He just looks like a Washington guy to me.

Starting to like Paul more. He's just way to radical in his policies.

And Romney, middle of the road master. Meh...

I like Santorum and I believe that he would make a good president. I also like and trust Romney. However, I worry about both men's willingess to wage the kind of nasty campaign that awaits the winner of the nomination. Obama has a history of using whatever dishonest tactic necessary to win elections. Early in his career, his operatives managed to leak information (including sealed divoce records over the objections of both divorcees) about two formidable opponents that resulted in their withrawal from the campaign.

As I have said several times, I don't trust Gingrich fully. He speaks conservatism but often behaves like a liberal.

Unlike the other remaining Republicans in the race, Gingrich is a bare knuckles street fighter who will counter punch any Obama attack without taking a poll or convening a focus group. He is one of the great political geniuses in American history and his politial instinct for survival is unmatched in this race.

So, part of me wants to see Santorum or Romney win the nomination but part of me wants to watch Gingrich jabbing at the thin skin of Barack Hussein Obama. Gingrich might lose the election but at least voters would know that they had a clear choice between a socialist and a capitalist. You can bet that Gingrich would not fire anybody from his campaign for daring to speak Obama's middle name.

I think that Gingrich is the man that Obama fears worst precisely because there is no chance that he will let himself become a vebal punching bag. Nor will he be silenced when Obama's media accomplices start playing the race card.

Gingrich is a loose cannon but at least he is willing to return fire. I am starting to think that a Romney/Gingrich ticket would be very effective, with Gingrich playing the traditional role of hatchet man.

[Truth]

Good analysis, Hoot Gibson. Like you, I would like to see Barry and Gingrich one on one. One outcome is certain. Gingrich would be quickly condemned by the media as a racist. That is Barry's trump card. To question him in any way is to be labeled a racist. Gingrich cannot win and the country needs someone who can win and stop the socialist slide.

Both Romney and Santorum are acceptable. However, neither seems capable of or willing to remove their respective pink panties and initiate the type of fight/war necessary to win. If Romney wins the nomination, maybe he will choose Gov. Christie as a running mate. Christie would devastate the senile Biden and clean the arrogant and prissy Barry. Still, the latter outcome would really be the job of Romney and I doubt he has enough toughness to be up to the task.

I'm a realist. It doesn't look good.

Fact of Life: You can always define a male by the way he throws a baseball. We have all seen Barry with his "girly" effort. I would like to be wrong but I suspect Romney and Santorum aren't much better. On the other hand, Christie and Gingrich would pitch in a manner similar to that of Bob Gibson and Sal "The Barber" Maglie.

[Hoot Gibson]

Good analysis, Hoot Gibson. Like you, I would like to see Barry and Gingrich one on one. One outcome is certain. Gingrich would be quickly condemned by the media as a racist. That is Barry's trump card. To question him in any way is to be labeled a racist. Gingrich cannot win and the country needs someone who can win and stop the socialist slide.

Both Romney and Santorum are acceptable. However, neither seems capable of or willing to remove their respective pink panties and initiate the type of fight/war necessary to win. If Romney wins the nomination, maybe he will choose Gov. Christie as a running mate. Christie would devastate the senile Biden and clean the arrogant and prissy Barry. Still, the latter outcome would really be the job of Romney and I doubt he has enough toughness to be up to the task.

I'm a realist. It doesn't look good.

Fact of Life: You can always define a male by the way he throws a baseball. We have all seen Barry with his "girly" effort. I would like to be wrong but I suspect Romney and Santorum aren't much better. On the other hand, Christie and Gingrich would pitch in a manner similar to that of Bob Gibson and Sal "The Barber" Maglie.

I agree with most of what you said but I am very optimistic about Republican prospects in this election. The last president to win a second term with unemployment even close to the current level was FDR during the Great Depression. Most of the Republican attacks so far have been of the circular firing squad type and yet 40 percent of likely voters strongly disapprove of Obama's job performance. The Republican nominee will be very well funded in the general election and once the ads attacking Obama's record, it is going to be a very steep hill for him to climb to reach the White House again.

For example, by election day the national debt will have risen by more than $5 trillion in less than 4 years under Obama. What would candidate Obama have said about such reckless spending? Unfortunately for Obama, we have a pretty good idea and voters will be reminded repeatedly this fall.



If Republicans focus on the economy, unemployment, and the national debt, I just cannot see Obama winning. There is no way that he will win with Biden as his running mate again. It is going to be interesting to hear the reason that Biden gives for stepping aside.

[Truth]

McCain, a terribly poor candidate with no chance of winning, played "kissy-butt" with Obama. He never took him on. He was scared to death of being labeled a "racist".

Hopefully, the nominee this year will have a bit more backbone and the public will be more willing to see through the inevitable media and Democrat charges of racism. You know that will be their approach. what else do they have to use?

Still, in the end, I am worried. You give the voter far more credit for having some degree of intelligence than do I. If you dealt with college students and observed their overall level of intelligence and understanding of the world, you would understand my concern because, sadly, they do vote.

[vundy33]

Honestly, I don't see the racist thing working anymore, or coming even close to working. People know better by now.

[Hoot Gibson]

Honestly, I don't see the racist thing working anymore, or coming even close to working. People know better by now.

:Thumbs: I agree. Obama has worn the race card thin - but that won't stop him and the media from continuing to play it.

[Truth]

I hope you are both correct. However, you can bet the charges will be the automatic response from the media and from Barry's supporters, surrogates, and advocates every time anything negative is suggested about him.

I would hope that all voters with at least a scintilla of intelligence see through the charade. Still, it worked well in 2008 against McCain and even against Hillary. It will be used over and over in 2012 and, regardless of how it sounds, the truth is that many voters don't have a scintilla of intelligence. But they do know who is likely to continue and expand their freebies so that they don't have to consider actually working for a living.

[vundy33]

Yeah, I think they and others will try to use the race card...but it will just end up hurting Pres Obama.

[Bob Seger]

:Thumbs: I agree. Obama has worn the race card thin - but that won't stop him and the media from continuing to play it.

It is only possible to be racist towards 50% of him , maximum.

Does a true racist love the other 50% of him? hmmmm

[WideRight05]

I'll vote for anything, anyone for president - I would probably even vote Steve Urkel if he ran against obama.

I don't know too much about Gingrich...I know him and Clinton were opposites in the 90's...if he makes a deep run towards being the next president his personal life will get attacked often, no question.

And like Truth said about college students in a previous post, nothing could be closer to the...well, truth. Having just gotten out of college, I can tell you that there is a lot of liberal propaganda floating around in the classrooms. Even at the small community colleges like the one I went to for my first two years before I went to the university. And for what it's worth, I came into college leaning moderate to liberal on the democrat side, having been so my whole life before I developed an interest my sophomore year and started studying deeply.

[BillyB]

So, the "Why I can't vote for Gingrich" thread turned into "I'll vote for Gingrich because he's not Obama"? Funny.

[Hoot Gibson]

So, the "Why I can't vote for Gingrich" thread turned into "I'll vote for Gingrich because he's not Obama"? Funny.

Actually, if you read the OP, it is clear that Truth made reference to the primaries. Obama will get almost zero conservative or Republican votes in the general election. Most of us are very serious when we say that we will vote for anybody but Obama.

[Truth]

It is only possible to be racist towards 50% of him , maximum.

Does a true racist love the other 50% of him? hmmmm

Since Barry never refers to being half Caucasian, your question is moot.

There is no political capital to be gained by him by mentioning his "other half".

[Truth]

So, the "Why I can't vote for Gingrich" thread turned into "I'll vote for Gingrich because he's not Obama"? Funny.

BillyB, when November arrives I'll vote for anything but Barry. Than means Romney, Gingrich, or even a squirrel with rabies.

[TheRealVille]

Washington (CNN) -- Newt Gingrich might have led Republicans to their first House majority in 40 years in the 1990s, but the prospect of the former House Speaker becoming their presidential nominee is producing significant GOP angst.
"If he's the nominee, it's a disaster. There is no way to sugar-coat it," said one GOP congressional strategist describing the tension after Gingrich won South Carolina.
"There is a reason most people who know him best aren't supporting him," said a former House colleague still serving in Congress.
Asked why he had endorsed opponent Mitt Romney if he had served with Gingrich for so long, a House Republican replied with a smile, "Because I served with Gingrich for so long."
Those GOP congressional sources and many others spoke on condition of anonymity because they believe Gingrich, who is running against the "Republican establishment," will only turn the criticism into his advantage.
"The less they talk to the better," said one of the GOP sources concerned about Gingrich, "it only feeds into his narrative that the establishment is out to get him."
Romney vs. Gingrich: Rhetoric attacks Romney: Gingrich must return Freddie pay
Gingrich's spokesman R.C. Hammond scoffed at the criticism, noting that the candidate himself said during CNN's debate last week what he regrets most in this campaign is wasting time attacking anyone besides President Barack Obama.
Veteran Republican leadership aide Ron Bonjean said on the record what most of his colleagues would only tell CNN privately.
"Most people on Capitol Hill and in Washington are very nervous about a Gingrich candidacy," he said. "It sends a shiver down a lot of Republican spines."
"You can actually feel the nervousness from Republicans around town that Gingrich could actually bring the craziness back of his speakership from the 1990s. It's everywhere."
Several GOP congressional sources told CNN that it's not only about Gingrich getting to the White House -- Republican leaders worry that Gingrich at the top of the ticket could be a drag on their candidates for Congress and even hurt chances for taking over the Senate. They point to races in Virginia, Ohio, Florida and Nevada as examples of Senate races that could be in jeopardy.
Why? It's mostly Gingrich's reputation as a chaotic campaigner and undisciplined messenger.
The most frequent example: when he called the House Medicare reform plan most Republicans supported "right wing social-engineering."
To be sure, some, like Sen. Jim DeMint, R-South Carolina, who has not endorsed a presidential candidate, dismiss concern about Gingrich.
"I think what we've seen from Newt that people like is willingness to take on the media and to really stand up and fight," DeMint said.
Still, just 12 sitting Republican lawmakers have endorsed the former speaker, while 64 support Romney.
And many former Gingrich congressional colleagues have endorsed Romney. As Gingrich's support began to climb, Susan Molinari even made a Web ad in which she said, "I served with Newt Gingrich in Congress. Newt Gingrich had a leadership style that can only be described as leadership by chaos."
The Gingrich campaign e-mailed a list of 11 former members of Congress who served with Gingrich who are backing him now.
"We had a balanced budget with Newt, first time, only time in my lifetime we didn't spend out more money than we took in," argued J.C. Watts, one of the 11.
Most GOP congressional sources who tell CNN that Republican leadership is concerned about Gingrich also say they doubt he will eventually get the nomination.
"Most members don't expect him to go further," said a senior GOP leadership aide, adding that they don't want to "waste bullets attacking the guy not going anywhere anyway,"
But members are watching Florida very carefully.
"We are not at Defcon 5 yet, but we'll see what happens in Florida," said another one of the worried GOP strategists.
If Gingrich does win, veteran GOP strategists tell CNN to expect pressure on Senate Minority Leaders Mitch McConnell, House Speaker John Boehner and other Republican leaders to call key GOP donors and ask them not to contribute to Gingrich's campaign.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/23/politics/g...index.html

[SKINNYPIG]

The fact many of those republicans that are sitting in Washington right now along with the so called establishment don't want Newt is another good reason to support him. I hope all but two or three of those serving now lose in their next election.

[TheRealThing]

I'll vote for anything, anyone for president - I would probably even vote Steve Urkel if he ran against obama.

I don't know too much about Gingrich...I know him and Clinton were opposites in the 90's...if he makes a deep run towards being the next president his personal life will get attacked often, no question.

And like Truth said about college students in a previous post, nothing could be closer to the...well, truth. Having just gotten out of college, I can tell you that there is a lot of liberal propaganda floating around in the classrooms. Even at the small community colleges like the one I went to for my first two years before I went to the university. And for what it's worth, I came into college leaning moderate to liberal on the democrat side, having been so my whole life before I developed an interest my sophomore year and started studying deeply.

Thank you for that look into the collegiate classroom setting from someone who was there recently. College kids will very nearly believe anything they hear in college. Really, how often would a student challenge the all knowing prof about some issue? The prof, unwilling to appear vunerable, isn't about to take any incoming laying down, he will vigorously defend his position until the upstart is sufficiently subdued. Not that such a scenario would take place very often anyway. No, today's liberal minded college prof knows he has four years to bang away at any conservative foundations which, hapless students under their charge may have brought to school. There, with the aura of near infallibility, and the trappings of authority as a backdrop, profs rule from the ultimate bully pulpit as they address teens and early twenty somethings with their ideas of social justice and liberalism. Very often Mom and Dad in effect, send an empty vessel off to college to be filled by the liberal notions Du Jour.

Americans are naive in general. Most don't question the social agendas of the prospective universities to which they intrust their sons and daughters. Likewise, diehard democrat supporters do so blindly. The "democrats are for the working man" mantra, though threadbare and passe, is the 'Holy Grail' accepted by union and non-union worker alike. Like the liberally indoctrinated college student of our day, good democrats were indoctrinated early in life and, they will not be turned, mountains of evidence to the contrary not withstanding. Blind allegiance to a party stikes me as profoundly ill advised. Even those who accept the laughable theory of evolution, advocate the process of natural selection. In their minds the mindless chaos of random selection produces only good mutations. But, ironically, somehow every democrat is a keeper. No selection process is really neccessary if one is a democrat. All one need do is listen to a democrat speak, they only say the truth and they're never wrong. And, one of their sacred duties is to expose the awful inadequacies of their evil republican counterparts. Anyone else but me find that concept sublimely simple? I mean, think of it, not one good republican among them, not one worthy to govern. Only a democrat will do.

The candidate himself should be examined to see if he is worthy of one's support. If the only qualifier for public service is to declare yourself a democrat, , a democrat amoeba would be qualified to run. Not saying there aren't amoeba out there that could do better than Obama.

Saying that, absolutely ANY of those that remain as the potential republican presidential nominee, when compared to Obama, would be like comparing a super nova to a lightning bug.

[RoShamBo]

This thread has made me realize we need dislike buttons too, come on guys.

For the record, I'm not an Obama supporter or a democrat, didn't vote for Obama in '08.

[BillyB]

BillyB, when November arrives I'll vote for anything but Barry. Than means Romney, Gingrich, or even a squirrel with rabies.

Oh, I believe that.