Gingrich Isn't Going to Be the GOP Nominee

The arguments for why Herman Cain won’t be the Republican presidential nominee, even if he’s popular, are straightforward. He has little history with the Republican Party establishment and shallow relationships with GOP activists on the state and local level. He lacks an on-the-ground campaign in the early primary states, and he’s devoted his time to states like Alabama—irrelevant to the nomination contest but a fine venue for selling books. Indeed, Cain’s upcoming visit to Iowa—the state he has to win or do well in to have a shot at the nomination—is his first since mid-October. Serious candidates tend to spent a lot more time in “make or break” states.

At the moment, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich is surging in the polls. In the latest survey of Republican voters from NBC News and The Wall Street Journal, Gingrich earns 22 percent support, a 5 point increase from his previous performance. The reasons for his newfound popularity aren’t hard to grok; the once-ascendent Herman Cain is embroiled in a sexual-harassment scandal, and Rick Perry has alienated consevatives with his complete inability to articulate a complex thought. That conservatives would leave Herman Cain for a thrice-divorced serial adulterer is a little unexpected but makes sense given the dynamics of the race, in which conservatives are desperate for someone to stand against Mitt Romney.

But Newt Gingrich isn’t a serious candidate either, and if you want to know why, take the previous explanation for why Cain isn’t a real candidate, and swap the names. Like Cain, Gingrich has done few of the things necessary to building a viable campaign for the presidential nomination. Large chunks of his time have been spent outside of the three early primary states, where his organizations are threadbare. He has $300,000 cash on hand, compared to the millions raised by Romney and Texas Governor Rick Perry, and has few endorsements from Republican Party activists and lawmakers. According to Mark Blumenthal’s poll of “power outsiders,” only 20 percent say they stand a good chance of endorsing the former House Speaker.

All of this is to say that you should ignore the noise. Like Bachmann, Perry, and Herman Cain before him, Gingrich is basking in the spotlight generated by a desperate conservative movement. As soon as it becomes clear that Gingrich is a terrible choice for facing Barack Obama, they’ll turn their attention elsewhere.

Photo credit: Jamelle Bouie


Conventional wisdom, conventional wisdom, conventional wisdom, blocking and tackling until the convention. What would happen if the Republican convention became an actual convention? With enough dissatisfaction, the "madness of crowds" and a united Tea Party wing, wouldn't it be at least a possibility that Sarah Palin might be drafted in a deadlocked nomination process? After all, four years ago no-one had ever heard of her and she was only one heartbeat away from the Presidency. She has no more negatives, really, than any of the people the conventional wisdom says are unelectable. And I think it would be typical of Palin to avoid all the pain of the primary campaign, and typical of the media to swoon over such a 'bold' move on her part.

What planet have you been living on ??? Palin's career in politics is OVER. She would be the worst possible candidate to face Obama. She would lose in one of the worst landslides in history. (Even Palin must have been aware of this. She decided not to run and surely because she knew she would lose.... and do so very badly.)

Interesting opinions - straight from CNN et. al. What are your facts to support this?

Palin quit her job as governor of Alaska to start a reality show. (To put icing on the cake, the show was canceled after one season.) The campaign ads write themselves. Why on earth would the delegates turn to Palin in the event of a brokered convention? She has no contacts within the GOP establishment--and in a brokered convention, the establishment is supreme. She'd be a terrible candidate. She has shown no willingness to make a serious run. She has a hard core of followers who will stick with her no matter what, but everyone else turned away from her years ago.

I could see a brokered convention drafting Mitch Daniels, or even Jeb Bush, although to be honest it's much more likely they'd come together around the Mittster. Palin? Never.

(Don't get me wrong, I wish they would. But then, I'm a Democrat. The only reason I want Palin on the Republican ticket is that Obama would chew her up and spit her out.)

I would never underestimate Sarah Palin. Should the convention become deadlocked, which is highly unlikely, I can see Palin's name coming up very early on as a alternative and highly viable candidate. Mrs. Palin loves nothing more than the spotlight and attention and I can easily see her, if not accepting the nomination, at least giving the appearance of serious consideration. Should such a situation come about she would have weathered all of these ridiculous quasi-debates without spending time, money or energy and could be quite unbruised to head into the fall campaign without the battle scars of all of the current crop of candidates. Do I think that will happen? Highly unlikely as I see the convention opening with knowledge of whom they will be nominating. However, I would never assume anything when it comes to Sarah Palin.

Palin was never "a heartbeat away from the presidency." There was that small issue with an election to win first.

"Like Bachmann, Perry, and Herman Cain before him, Gingrich is basking in the spotlight generated by a desperate conservative movement. As soon as it becomes clear that Gingrich is a terrible choice for facing Barack Obama, they’ll turn their attention elsewhere."

The advantage for Mr. Gingrich is that there is "elsewhere" towards which movement conservatives can turn their attention.

-- MrJM

Yes they will turn to someone that actually stands a chance to defeat Obama.... and that is not Newt.

Nor Ron Paul. LOL!!!!!!!!!!

If anyone can beat Obummer, it is Newt. Which planet are you living on?? Polls show 60% of the public disapprove of how he is handling the economy, 86% of those polled believe the economy is in bad shape and as far as his overall performance, 47% disapprove of the job he is doing. And, according to a curent CBS News poll, the numbers by party concerning Congress isn't good with the poll indicating only 9% of participants approving of the work being done on the Hill. The numbers by party concerning Congress are fairly close with 82% of Dems & 78% of Reps disapproving of the work being done in the Senate & the House. The poll was conducted 11/6 -11/10.

I disagree with you Mr.M.........I have had Newt in the middle of the bulls eye from day one. Cain is a very strong man and even David Axelrod could not take him down with his neighbor, but Cain is not as sharp all around as Newt is. This is one debate I would really enjoy seeing. Not saying Mitt could not hold his own.

Where are they going to turn their attention?

I agree with your thesis, but important to get facts right. Newt is twice divorced, thrice married.

And this disqualifies him to be CiC how?

Give Newt another year or so and he will be thrice divorced.

"As soon as it becomes clear that Gingrich is a terrible choice for facing Barack Obama, they’ll turn their attention elsewhere."

And just what are you basing your opinion that he is a terrible choice? Don't tell me you are buying the bs about his divorces disqualifying him.

Newt has a record that the tea party detests and not only is he the ultimate Washington insider, having been Speaker of the House, but he then moved on to become a lobbyist. While Gingrich might be appealing to some factions of the GOP he is not appealing to an even larger segment. Member a big part of Herman Cain attraction was that he was not a politician - obviously a title Newt cannot run from. And one of Romney's biggest problems with building a larger support base is that he, like Newt but on a smaller scale, is a politician, insider and has a record of flip-flops.

I don't think Herman Cain will get the nomination, either. However, I do take a bit of issue with one of your reasons, "lack of organization in early states." Cain, to be sure, is an unconventional candidate in that he is a wholly owned subsidiary of Americans For Prosperity and would have the advantage of an extant campaign operation through the various Tea Party factions associated AFP.

As for Newt... well the guy is a pretentious blow-hard who knows how to deflect issues and change the subject to one of his liking. That will work well for awhile as the GOP struggles to find an "Anyone but Mitt" candidate to go against Obama. Fortunately, the only viable candidates to the Tea Party's liking are Bat Shit Crazy and will send moderates and independents running away in horror.

Are you out of your mind. Gindrich would eat Obama a debate Why? Becausehe would use facts. Obama would do mas he wlways does try to fillibusteras he always does when he is trapped into answering a accusation he cannot without lying. Newt would bring up all of the failior of Obamas administration, his excessive use of Ecexutive Privelige, recess apointments in order to circumvent Congress, his appointment of Czars with questionable statistics and reputions. And last but not least his tendency to exaggerateand out and out lie.
Newt has an encyclopedic memory of facts and the Truth.

jonrod, you made my day. Newt by far is my choice without a doubt.

I can sense from the quality of your prose that you are a true intellectual, in the mold of Newt Gingrich himself. It is easy to see that you have not been fooled into believing that Barak Obama is deep thinker in any way. It is a shame that more citizens do not have your elevated power of perception and analysis. You should contact Mr. Gingrich. I'm sure he would jump at the chance of having you be part of his election team.

The irony of Gingrich is that whereas he is an establishment politician, corporations can't predict what he's going to do and therefore can't control him. Obama is a hack politician, an ideologue to be sure, but still a ward healer from Chicago. This election substance will triumph.

This might come up: His first marriage, to his former high school geometry teacher, Jackie Battley, ended in divorce in 1981. Although Gingrich has said he doesn't remember it, Battley has said Gingrich discussed divorce terms with her while she was recuperating in the hospital from cancer surgery.

Circumstances at times force individuals to make difficult choices. Only God can judge him, not you or anyone else for that matter.

And he dumped second wife while both having an affair with an intern (his current wife) and was advancing impeachment proceeding against Clinton for ... having an affair with an intern. Newt has serious problems with the "value voters" that even Tony Perkins says might be impossible to overcome.

Somebody, anybody, please please please find me a candidate I can actually vote for – not this manure pile of losers and sycophants!

Newt is whats known as a Giant Killer or in Obamas case, has forgotten more than the "O" will ever know about Government ...

Every candidate running has flaws.Newt is the most talented,educated with the most political experience and expertise of all. So what, if he is divorced? Divorce stats are greater than marriage stats.Get a grip people, if we do not get Obummer out of office we are doomed.Furthermore look at all the flaws that are already in the WH and its administration.God Bless America and its people.

his experience is all bad and his expertise is all wrong. he's the talking, pillsbury doughboy who got old. nope, sorry there, daffy, no cigar for you. better get used to cussing obama for four more years.

I would love to see this guy debate Obama. He is one who is just as long winded as Obama. The big difference would be Newt is a very well informed man on any topic and Obama is full of hot air. I watch this guy and have to laugh, he loves to hear himself talk about nothing............:) :) :)

right celia, add an ill in front of informed. and i assume you love, as we all do, to watch and laugh as the newtster bloviates on and on about how he knows nothing.

Yes I believe at the convention if only newt and romney are 1, 2. There defenitl;y will be a chance for Huntsman. That will not work, because Mitt will lose only because he is a Mormon. I do not belive there will be enuf. fools even in that convention to nominate Palin. Of course she may be placed from Alababa or some thing, not even Alaska!
It is very sad that people blame Obama for all the ills, that Bush brought about including 2 wars, which he vehemntly tried to resolve with no help from Reps. So people think before you vote. Thereis none other than the President who can lead this nation from this dep sh..t and who ever is elected from the field will continue to face the same problems. I hope Americans hve the courage to throw out useless bench warmers from Congress and elect responsible wise young men and women who will concentrate on saving the naytion and not their re election.

of course newt can't win the presidency. none of the republican't rum-dums can do that. but as they try to out reactionary, hypochristian each other they prove to the american electorate majority that obama, as wimpy, wishy-washy as he is, is still a better leader in his sleep than they.

so, we have four more years of misery until a true leader, of hopefully a third, progressive party, reveals himself to help lead us to sanity.


By your remarks, it is obvious that you believe in the Dems and by your admission "four more years of misery" which implies you are willing to accept 4 more years of insanity.
Hopefully Americans will step up to the plate and make a distinctive change in this coming election. God Save America!!!!!

Newt has the morals of a (at a loss of words -- who has the lowest morals - I tried to think of a comparison and none seem to have less). The GOP has produced a bunch of totally unqualified candidates and now the Republicans are acting like Romney who changes positions as quickly as a weathervane in a New England hurricane.

My message to Carlos is being directed to you.
Be careful whom you slander and be careful what you wish for.

Gingrich will never win the election. Remember when Bush was running they said it came down to which candidate you'd want to have a beer with? Gingrich may be smart, but he's a dick. No one would want to have a beer with him.

Be careful whom you slander and be careful what you wish for.

It'll be mittens. Cons hate Obama so much, they'll hold their noses and vote for him, Mormon or not, if they believe he has the best chance against him, and polls so far say he does. I may be wrong; it may be a replay of '08 when mittens hit the bigoted South Carolina evangelical wall and the other southern Bible Belt states followed. But, this time, I think they'll swallow their bile, hold their noses and go for the Mormon dude. Women in the general election won't go for Newt. The female factor would be his biggest stumbling block. Polls say that a plurality of women can't stand him. Cons always say that polls aren't reliable. Well, when it comes to what women want, we're pretty set in our ways. We intensely dislike a man that has a history of leaving his wives for newer models.

As I see it Newt's biggest problem, aside from being one of those much hated DC insiders, is that he doesn't want the nomination as much as he should or as much as his wife wants it. Gingrich has become so dispassionate that he has become boring - something that seldom was the case before. His lackadaisical, almost casual, way of campaigning shows every indication of a man who lacks the fire in his belly. I haven 't a clue where most of America would stand on a Gingrich candidacy but from my vantage point it not only isn't going to happen I don't see Newt caring much either way.

You need to be logged in to comment.
(If there's one thing we know about comment trolls, it's that they're lazy)