Image 01 Image 03

Manchester Union Leader endorses Newt

Manchester Union Leader endorses Newt

Newt Gingrich has picked up the endorsement of New Hamsphire’s largest newspaper, the conservative Manchester Union Leader.

This newspaper endorses Newt Gingrich in the New Hampshire Presidential Primary.

America is at a crucial crossroads. It is not going to be enough to merely replace Barack Obama next year. We are in critical need of the innovative, forward-looking strategy and positive leadership that Gingrich has shown he is capable of providing.

He did so with the Contract with America. He did it in bringing in the first Republican House in 40 years and by forging balanced budgets and even a surplus despite the political challenge of dealing with a Democratic President. A lot of candidates say they’re going to improve Washington. Newt Gingrich has actually done that, and in this race he offers the best shot of doing it again.

Readers of the Union Leader and Sunday News know that we don’t back candidates based on popularity polls or big-shot backers. We look for conservatives of courage and conviction who are independent-minded, grounded in their core beliefs about this nation and its people, and best equipped for the job….

We don’t have to agree with them on every issue. We would rather back someone with whom we may sometimes disagree than one who tells us what he thinks we want to hear.

Newt Gingrich is by no means the perfect candidate. But Republican primary voters too often make the mistake of preferring an unattainable ideal to the best candidate who is actually running. In this incredibly important election, that candidate is Newt Gingrich. He has the experience, the leadership qualities and the vision to lead this country in these trying times. He is worthy of your support on January 10.

The other day I said that Newt’s performance at the national security debate, including on the issue of immigration, was a watershed moment in the campaign which must have left Romney supporters wondering if Romney now was a not-Newt challenger:

Newt was the President on the stage last night.  Many Romney supporters who said Newt was just the latest not-Romney must be wondering if Romney now is a not-Newt challenger.

I hate it when someone at Kos agrees with me:

Mitt’s worst nightmare is coming true.  There is now one solid not-Romney, and with Mitt stuck in the mid-20s, we will now start discussing the not-Gingrich.

Update: Here’s Newt’s interview with the Union Leader (h/t John):


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


I agree with their analysis.

Newt was a good leader back when he led congress to get our surplus. One thing to remember he had a smart POTUS in Clinton to work with that saw the light of being more conservative. He would be more than a match for Obama in debate. Perry, I am afraid, would be paralyzed in debate and get blitzed (no pun intended) by the MSM. My pick is Newt! Yes, I don’t like all he has done but can’t find any candidate who shares all my beliefs.

    NbyNW in reply to Hawk. | November 27, 2011 at 1:59 pm

    Will you take a second look at Perry if he continues to improve in debates?

    I think people overestimate Newt’s ability to debate Obama. He’s got a lot of baggage that he won’t be able to talk around when he’s debating a non-Republican in a LSM moderated setting.

It’s a small state, small town newspaper that endorsed MCCAIN last time.

That about says it all.

Sorry, Prof. I understand you like the guy. Me; I don’t trust him and I don’t believe he will be effective in reducing government.

And that’s what needs to be done.

Diddling with the laws and tweaking this or that will not set the country straight again.

we’ve gone too far off the track and it will take some radical solutions to get back. Newt talks the talk but I don’t believe he’ll walk the walk. He’s too much a believer in Republican Exceptualism. To him a Republican government is the answer. We learned from ’93 to ’06 that that’s a LIE.

They STILL can’t defund NPR, PBS or the NEA. They still can’t see the stupidity of voting for billions (that we have to borrow)) for foreign aid to countries that hate us or are ACTIVELY working to undermine us.

It’s a forest for the trees kinda thing. They’re too close to the problem to see it OR THEY ARE THE PROBLEM.

Newt’s been a member of that gang for too long to change that view.

    jakee308 in reply to jakee308. | November 27, 2011 at 10:48 am

    Oh, and Bill Clinton likes Newt.

    I rest my case.

      jakee308 in reply to jakee308. | November 27, 2011 at 7:44 pm

      Then there’s this:

      Eleanor Clift ( of Newsweek and other talk shows) the liberal who’s never right; thinks the media doesn’t like him because he’s right about their bias and “he’ll make a great non-Romney”.

      That banging you hear? That’s one of the last nails being driven into Newt’s political coffin by Eleanor. (it’ll take awhile for the burial to take place.)

      Seems he’s getting a lot of endorsements and has made statements (on immigration) that will have conservatives running away as rapidly as possible.

      I know I am.

    GrumpyOne in reply to jakee308. | November 27, 2011 at 11:07 am

    Agreed with the addition of what Newt’s views on illegal immigration will be his undoing just as it was for Perry.

    Immigration is a deal breaker for me and the only candidates with decent NumbersUSA scores are Bachmann, Cain and (gasp) Romney.

    Folks may fault Romney with his former views regarding this subject but he’s admitted he was wrong and that is a sizable plus for me.

    I still prefer Cain but the DNC and mainstream media saw to his efficient demise.

    Newt’s already inflating his ego, (as predicted), and thus reveals that he is the hack that he has always been…

Reading through the comments for the endorsement on the MUL website, its clear that the factually incorrect story about how Gingrich “served his cancer-stricken wife divorce papers while she was in the hospital” will just not die. Perhaps Prof Jacobson could write a post to dispel that story.

Newt is simply revealing, (once again), his pandering ways.

Illegal immigration is a BIG issue with me due to it’s negative effect on employment by legal citizens AND the ramifications regarding national, (border), security.

I’m a big picture guy and Newt is focused on Newt. Elect him and most of the country will hate him within eighteen months.

We need a leader who inspires not one who divides…

I was a Clinton supporter from the 90’s and supported Hillary in 2008 — switched to Mccain/Palin in the general.

I’m in the ABO camp, but Newt strikes me as someone who will take the gloves off on the media and Barry Soetero. I’m still undecided, considering I loathed Newt in the 90’s and beyond, but as much as I hate to admit it, he is really impressing me. I’m voting for anyone who I think has the best chance of evicting that fraud from the WH.

And for all you with the Clinton hate, grow up, I couldn’t stand GWB, but you know what I would vote for W in a second in 2012 given the 2 choices. You people really have no idea how many demonrats like me are now independents and are on part of the side of deafeating Barry next november. So stop looking at things from just a repub and dem point of view, the dem party of today is NOT the party of the 90’s let alone from JFK or Truman, this is a completely radical far left party now, which is why I and millions like me left the undemocratic party.

We all have the same goal, defeat Barry next november, and have a small limited fed govt that does work for the people, ALL the people, without infringing on their rights as individuals. I’ve been to many Tea party events, many people there are not repubs, many are independents, and most of those are former demonrats — the people with the clinton hate don’t reliaze there are NO conservatives in the undemocratic party now, none, in the past there used to be, but in 2008, the radical far left took over and have been driving the moderates, conservatives out, where do you think they went? Independents.
Conservatives have a bad track of showing how their point of view of limited govt, individualism helps people, helps people acheive their dreams, helps people move up the economic ladder, makes a strong middle class in the US — Clinton was able to do that with his left of center views, I noticed Palin was very good at that, Newt is as well. W called it “compassionate conservatism”, well, when conservatism is explained properly, it is compassionate. I never understood why repubs don’t understand how they are protrayed and why they don’t fight back against it, Palin was successful at it, maybe its the blue blooded cocktail party repubs who cannot do this. Newt is able to do this as well, Romney, not so much. Santorum tries, he comes off looking very mean and uncaring.

No doubt bill Clinton will praise Barry, sadly looks like Bill is more a loyal dem than an american, because what Barry is doing is destroying the very things that make America great. And I cannot support the clintons any longer, even if they ever run again, but looking into the past, I felt Clinton and Newt played a good role in the 90’s, the country prospered, the middle class grew strong, I never gave the repubs much credit in the 90’s, but it was a combination of both.
However wrong is wrong, and the clintons will still bow down to Barry, they are loyal dems, regardless of how much Barry is hurting this country, and that I cannot support. And unfortunately Bill Clinton doesn’t seem to realise when he insults the Tea Party, many of them are supported by dem, even former dems like me who supported clinton in the past, they are not the same forces from the 90’s, they are even bigger than that.

This is not an all or nothing game, except in that either you are on the side of wanting Barry evicted next november 2012, or you don’t. So people want to drudge up things from nearly 2 decades ago, beating up on the clintons, I honestly feel that Barry will squeeze by again and win next year, there seem to be 2 camps those that think barry will be easily defeated, those that think he won’t. I’m int he second camp, Barry will not be easy to beat, especially the LSM covering and coddling for him. The person who has the best chance of kicking Barry out the WH next November should be the repub nominee.

    jakee308 in reply to alex. | November 27, 2011 at 6:47 pm

    Even though I know her past association/history is as Marxist leaning as Barry’s, Hillary would be a better choice than some of the RINO’s on display now as candidates.

    I’m not too fond of her statements about the ME and Israel but I understand she’s playing diplomat and can’t speak her mind fully.

    Still all in all, and like Bill Clinton, I never thought she HATED this country and I never misunderstood where she was coming from.

    Unlike our Republican candidates.

    It’s a sad commentary on the ineffectual or outright malevolence of Barry that many a Hillary supporter pines for GWB and many a conservative Bush voter would have liked Hillary to have been prez the last 3 years.

      WarEagle82 in reply to jakee308. | November 27, 2011 at 7:04 pm

      Funny. Of the pair, I always thought Bill was a narcissistic, military-loathing hedonist whilst Hillary was the true-red, America-hating Marxist ideologue…

I want to add, being in the ABO camp, I would even vote for Santorum if he was the repub nominee, and I cannot absolutely cannot stand santorum, thankfully I don’t see him being the repub nominee; if he was, I’d have a drink, and then go vote for him. LOL.LOL.

I like Newt, he is strong against jihad/sharia and top notch on foreign issues. Newt said Zero could bring TOTUS to help him in debates. LOL Newt would mop the floor with Barry, and it would be a thing of beauty to behold.

Just a suggestion, but I was wondering if there can be posts on how Newt v Romney do in polls in the key states against Barry?

I think that would be very helpful. Or are there sites that do that sort of thing, state by state?

    JEBurke in reply to alex. | November 27, 2011 at 6:42 pm

    Good question! This early, there are not a lot of key state polls comparing how different GOP candidates would fare against Obama — but there have been a few.

    The most recent was a poll sponsored by the Union-Leader and a New Hampshire broadcast station which has Gingrich losing New Hampshire to Obama by 12 points while Romney beats Obama by 3 points — a swing of 15 points toward Romney.

    There have also been polls within the past month of Florida and Michigan in which Romney beats Obama while Newt loses to him. And there was a recent poll of Pennsylvania — one of several supposedly “blue” states that Obama must win again to be reelected. In that poll, Romney wrestles Obama to a dead even tie but Gingrich loses the state by six points.

    Of course, New Hampshire and Florida are key swing states, Michigan would be a hugely important pickup for a Republican, and losing Pennsylvania would doom Obama. All those who ignore the advantage of a Romney candidacy to defeating Obama are begging to give Obama a better chance.

    As we move toward the general and the GOP field winnows down, there will be many more state polls. RealClearPolitics keeps track of ALL such polls and you can see them here:

You’re getting way out in front of yourself, Professor. The Union-Leader endorsement is nice but it is of limited value, as Presidents Forbes and Buchanan can testify.

Also, if there already is one not-Romney, it looks as if Bachmann, Cain, Perry and Santorum did not get the memo. They will all push back hard in Iowa (no one is dropping out before Iowa) so that it remains probable that Romney can either place first or a competitive second in Iowa. Then, Romney is still the odds on favorite to win in NH.

So you have to look ahead to SC, Florida, Nevada, Michigan to reach a point where either Romney or Gingrich begins to pull ahead.

It is still quite early in the primary season. Not a single primary vote has been cast or counted so “front-runner” means very little at this point.

I have only ever voted for one democrat once. But I am tired of the GOP lying to me. And so, I almost didn’t vote for GWB in 2004. I didn’t vote for McCain in 2008. I may not vote for the GOP nominee in 2012.

If the GOP doesn’t offer a real alternative to socialism I will take my vote elsewhere this year and every year until they offer a true conservative. (For the record I would support Bachmann, Santorum, Cain and probably Palin in any combination on the GOP ticket and I would at least consider Perry as a VP on a GOP ticket with one of those 4.)

I simply don’t believe Newt’s suddenly rediscovered conservative positions on issues where he has veered leftward over the past 8 years or so.

Newt is an elitist. He may not be in the same camp as Karl Rove elitists but that doesn’t mean he isn’t an elitist. I find his new-found embrace of conservative principles entirely unconvincing.

The man has no credibility as far as I am concerned. He will say anything to appear as a conservative. But I suspect he will do virtually nothing conservative if he were to win. I wish it were otherwise but I have been fooled by this man before. I’m not falling for it again…

    JayDick in reply to WarEagle82. | November 28, 2011 at 7:24 am

    So, in the likely event that either Romney or Gingrich is the nominee, you will either stay home or vote for a third party candidate? While I admire your principles, the practical effect of that action is a vote for Obama.

    I think this is an unusual election because we are deciding whether our country will go down the European socialist road or pull back from that and return to the direction of free-market capitalism.

    We are truly at a crossroads; Obama must be defeated.

Is there a law that the incumbent has to debate the Republican challenger? And even if the incumbent is legally required to debate, why does anyone think that Obama will participate? Doesn´t anyone else see how he has ignored the rule of law in so many many situations. Does anyone really REALLY believe that Soros´ puppet will actually show up to debate Mr. Gingrich or Mr. Romney or the Republican Candidate Mr. Perry?
As Mr. Gingrich said in prior debate, any of us Republicans on this stage would be better than Mr. Obama. Seems like many commentors here are thinking that Mr. Obama will follow the rules. What if he claims executive privilege and refuses to debate?
Has anyone noticed how the network news CBS and NBC are making fun of Mr. Perry´s and Mr. Romney´s ads by broadcasting Obama´s statements. Brian Williams said that we ¨need to put it in context¨. Soros´puppet!

    WarEagle82 in reply to beloved2. | November 27, 2011 at 6:04 pm

    Of course, there is no law requiring anyone to debate in a campaign. Obama would not need to invoke executive privilege.

    More than likely, should Obama choose not to debate, the MSM would simply declare that GOP demands, terms and conditions for any proposed debate were racist and that Obama couldn’t possibly agree to such demands from obvious racists. Haven’t you been watching?

Good. Gingrich needs to refine his position on immigration with sensitivity to immigrants and natives who have been playing by the rules. But if Newt is the strongest not-Romney, he’s good enough for me. Conservatives in congress can probably work with him to keep him from going too far with wild tangents.

If Newt remains reasonably faithful to conservative principles between now and March, he could get my vote in the primary.

If Newt gets the nomination, he’ll get my support and my vote.

Ya know, it’s just about fish or cut bait time. Do I agree with Newt about everything? No. Will I feel betrayed by him before the first year is done? Yeah, I expect it. But on most things, no. And he has proven as a leader he can achieve big, worthy things.

Can Romney beat Obama in a debate? Probably.

Can Romney compete with Obama in his ‘swagger’? No way. Americans like their leader to have some swagger, proven in numerous studies. Kidding.

Newt can mop the floor in a debate with Obama. And he can compete in swagger.

He Da Man.

Left Coast Red | November 28, 2011 at 1:15 am

As to those who suggest that Obama would duck a debate……he’d be pilloried and ridiculed by the opposition.

No way. There is nothing in the competitive political animal that is BHO, including most importantly his sense that he is the smartest guy – period, that would allow him to forego THE spotlight of political combat.

Left Coast Red | November 28, 2011 at 1:26 am

Almost forgot. Bubba and Eleanor’s kiss of death endorsement? WHY do this? Just makin’ sure you’re awake……