Newt appeared on Center Seat to face the panel Mitt Romney refuses to face (video h/t The Right Scoop):
Steven Hayward at Powerline points out a key point:
Maybe the best part was when Steve Hayes played the infamous TV ad Newt cut with Nancy Pelosi three years ago about the “climate crisis” (about the 6:50 mark of the video). Newt didn’t finesse it: he straight out said, “That was the dumbest single thing I’ve done. . . simply inexplicable. . . it was just dumb.” Not often a politician admits a mistake that straightforwardly.
Now if only Mitt Romney would admit the same for Romneycare.
Meanwhile, Dorothy Rabinowitz writes of Newt’s climb, Why Gingrich Could Win:
His rise in the polls suggests that more and more Republicans are absorbing that fact, along with the possibility that Mr. Gingrich’s qualifications all ’round could well make him the most formidable contender for the contest with Barack Obama.
Update: From Margaret Carlson (h/t @JamesTaranto):
I admit that Newt Gingrich is an unlikely virgin. He’s famously undisciplined — as his multiple marriages suggest. He has little money, was abandoned by his staff and probably never expected to be seriously considered for the nomination. On his way to the recent Bloomberg-Washington Post debate in Hanover, New Hampshire, Gingrich traveled alone, getting his own coffee, carrying his own suitcase and shaking any hand he could grab hold of.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
I continue to struggle with the question about who is the best choice to beat Obama. I’m beginning to warm to Newt as a strong contender in that regard. True, he has some baggage, but he responds very well to comments/questions about that baggage. His response to the question about the global warming commercial with Pelosi is a case in point. Not only did he say the commercial was a big mistake (it certainly was), he went on to note that the earth has been warming and cooling for a very long time and that scientific truth is not determined by a democratic vote. Those are very good points.
He might give Obama a very hard time. In a face to face debate, he would tie Obama in knots. If fact, Obama might be afraid to debate him.
I too am starting to believe Newt may be the guy. And its simply because out of all the nominees he can most effectively communicate the conservative point of view. I think this is going to be very important when it comes down to the debates with Obama.
Look at the latest from Rasmussen in FL:
The latest statewide telephone survey of Likely Republican Primary voters shows Cain with 30% support while former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney picks up 24% of the vote. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich draws support from 19% of Florida GOP voters with no other candidate picking up double-digits. …
In a three-way race between the top three candidates, it’s Cain 35%, Romney 31% and Gingrich 25%.
In a two-way race, Cain edges Romney 46% to 41%. But Cain and Gingrich are essentially tied in Florida, with the former speaker at 43% and Cain at 42%. Gingrich leads Romney 47% to 40% on a two-way ballot.
He is definitely picking up steam. Tonight’s debate is going to be key in building on it.
At first I was for Cain/Newt but now I think it should be Newt/Palin.
Two smart American Pariots. We need to make a decision soon. God help our nation – the barbarians are within the gate!
Sorry,
We agree on a lot but Newt isn’t one of those things. He still is not beating Obama when virtually everyone else in the Republican field either ties Obama or stomps him flat. Newt has negatives that go back decades on both sides of the aisle and is not a true conservative.
I simply do not trust him to return the government to the people. He is the ultimate insider. Yes he is smart, knowledgeable and understands politics. However, he has serious character issues, commitment issues, and I do not believe he would put Americans first. He would think of American interests but only in the context of world issues. If you are not for America First, I don’t trust you.
None of the candidates is conservative enough for me, but that’s not the main issue. Who is most likely to beat Obama is the only thing that really matters. Polls at this point are not real reliable as predictors, so we have to look at other characteristics. All the candidates have flaws and baggage, but who responds well when challenged about those issues? Cain, as much as I like the man, doesn’t seem great in this respect.
I’m not saying Newt is the man; I’m just saying he deserves a second look.
I have had the opportunity to work as a volunteer on a few of Newt’s campaigns and I have always said he is up to the task. Will he be able to convince enough voters that he is the person to defeat Obama is the question that Newt keeps getting up every day to answer and it appears as though he is beginning to get some traction with the voters. I have no problem with Newt as the nominee and just salivate at the thought of Newt having his shot at a one on one with Obama in a real debate. This is why the primary process NEEDS to be long and not front ended! We should want our nominee peaking and the hottest team playing (kinda like the Cardinals) going into the Finals and staying tuned and on topic working through a grueling primary season is good. Remember, politics is a contact sport and is played for keeps. Just ask Herman, I think he has a few stories he can tell you. Hang in there Herman!
I think the Establishment GOP is in panic. Romney is not gaining ground with all the turmoil and it is apparent the anti-Romney crowd is not going to change their mind. Thus, supporting Gingrich makes perfect sense.
Some of us with long memories still remember how he and Dole caved in to Clinton on the government shutdown. We haven’t forgotten his support for Scozzafava over the conservative Doug Hoffman. We haven’t forgotten how he took $300K in Freddie Mac cash to be their lobbyist.
Even his answer to the ad is an execise in obfuscation. His answer is classic, ‘I was stupid to make that ad but the issue of global warming is still good science.’ Thank goodness he wasn’t asked if would support green jobs and green technology.
If I have to, I will support Newt but he is not my first, second, or even 3rd choice.
On Fox last night, I didn’t hear him say global warming is good science. In fact, he seemed to question the science, saying that many scientists don’t even believe the earth is warming and that scientific truth is not determined by a vote. That does seem to be a change from his previous position, but it’s a welcome change. Maybe he finally dug into the issue enough to see the truth.
I think the biggest damage to Herman Cain in the last 2 weeks came from 2 places: the way he (mis)handled the charges against him — and not necessarily the charges – and his dialogue/debate with Newt. Newt is a policy afficianado and it showed. Cain had to work hard just to be in the same ballpark. And this from someone who was strongly pro Cain 2 weeks ago.
newt would absolutely stomp O in a debate. obama only wins when people play by his rules. newt will not lower himself.
That is what I was waiting for from Newt; the mea culpa. He has just raised himself from “hold nose” to “willing to give money if nominated.” If he just admits that the Scozzofava fiasco was a goof, I’ll actively campaign for him.
In the past Gingrich was instinctively conservative. He is just too much the intellectual and and gun-shy from his past treatment, so he overcompensates. As a result, he now bends over too much to appear “reasonable” to people, like Scuzzy, who would rather stab him in the back that shake his hand.
Newt: “That was the dumbest single thing I’ve done. . . simply inexplicable. . . it was just dumb.”
Well… The Dede Scozzafava endorsement is up there, too.
It’s all about the “Vision” thing.
While I have been hard on Newt (especially about that AGW ad with Pelosi), he is the only announced candidate to have any “vision” (Palin and Ryan are the other possibilities). Obama has no “vision”; merely a set of platitudes and spin.
Newt is growing on me, too. More every time I listen to him.
The more I hear Newt – and listen to him, the more I appreciate his vast knowledge base, his bona fide American Constitutional ideals, and his ability to both express well what he thinks and believes, AND his ability to take down false, erroneous, falacious arguments.
He is a master at de-constructing false questions, or loaded questions, identifying false or erroneous premises – then answering solidly, clearly, backing his answers with facts and details. His debate skills would beat almost anyone (I wonder if he could beat Mark Levin? – not that he would ever do so or need to, just a rhetorical question.)
As for Newt’s baggage (which has affected my opinion of him greatly), I think it will not matter much come the final election to most voters, unless the MSM is able to manufacture a false narrative/story, a la the Cain attack: some “ladies” accuse him publicly of unproven, unsubstantiated allegations.
Newt is flawed, just like ALL candidates are. The question will come down to who voters think is the best leader, statesman, AND who can and will beat Barack Obama – both in a debate, and in the Nov. 2012 election.
Remember: it is all about getting the leftist, and, I believe, Marxist- (or at least socialist) ideologue Obama out after 1 term. Otherwise, America as we’ve known it will be irreparable, finished. Barack Obama himself said (paraphrase), “I have more to do! We’re not finished yet!” Those words alone should send chills up EVERY patriotic American’s spine!!
As Newt said: the primary opponent is Barack Obama. Focus, focus, focus.
As Mark Levin said last night (I am quoting and referencing him a lot lately, hmmmm…) “You can’t prove a negative; you can’t prove you DIDN’T do something” – especially when the accusations and allegations are not backed with truth, facts, and eye witnesses.
When allegations come down to innuendo, gossip, and simple she said/he said, it is down to “who do you want to believe.” Being tried by the MSM/”public” and found guilty of a scandal – not a crime, just the innuendo of one – is character assassination, pure and simple.
Pick the target. Freeze it. Personalize it. Polarize it.
That is what the left and the MSM are experts at doing.
The question is: will the “establishment” Republicans and the public fall for it – again?
Excellent analysis!!! Newt seems very adept at responding to attempts at personal destruction that are characteristic of the left and the media (oh, I repeated myself). But then, he may encounter more of these attacks than some of the other candidates.
Another reason to take a fresh look at Newt:
Dust in the Wind: Time for the EPA to Go!.
Pull quote:
The EPA has become a clear example of “bureaucratic socialism”—an ingenious adaptation of European socialism.
Under “bureaucratic socialism,” you get to own your company, but federal bureaucrats tell you how to run it.”
I couldn’t agree more. 😉
I have watched every Republican debate so far (sad isn’t it?) and in every one Newt gave the best answers, was most statesman like, and was not afraid to show the media what he thinks of them. I believe Newt is the most well studied and intelligent candidate in the field. I had hopes for Perry when he entered the race but have since lost that hope. While Newt is not a perfect candidate he is a very good one.
If people want a true right winger who claims to follow the constitution but will also maintain a strong military, then maybe Michele Bachman should warrant a second look. However, I just don’t think she has the mettle to be the most powerful person on earth.
I gave Newt $10.00, I am sure that will send his campaign over the top.
Technically, the acceleration you experience after leaping off a cliff should not be considered “momentum.”
Nominating Newt will be that leap off the cliff for the GOP…
I really want to back Perry, based on his record. I still think he can make a comeback, but he’d have to do three things: 1) Like Newt, run a POSITIVE campaign. He’s not going to recover by attacking Romney. 2) Greatly increase his debating ability. His advisors should be putting him through mock debates daily. 3) Formulate an immigration (ie. illegal alien) policy more in line with R primary voters.
I doubt he’ll do any of the above.
Cain: My main concern is the 9% national sales tax (assuming he survives the current witch-hunt). This is a serious electability problem. The D’s will demagogue this endlessly, and effectively. Retirees, paying very little tax, would find themselves paying a 9% national sales tax. As Biden would say, this is a big f’n deal. I’m a Conservative, and I’m opposed to a national sales tax (or VAT, which it would inevitably turn into) UNLESS it is implemented simultaneously with repeal of the 16th Amendment (income tax).
So, Newt. He’s definitely growing on me. On the couch with Nancy and Dede Scozzafova (sp?) won’t be serious problems for him. Think about how the media is trashing Cain now, then consider what they’ll do when/if Gingrich is the front runner. He’s had affairs with women that work with him (some of whom he later married), while he was married. There’s quotes from some of them about ‘Lewinsky’ requests, accepted, in his Senate office. What might save him here is his honesty and willingness to apologize (which he’s already done, repeatedly). It works – at least as far as defusing the 24/7 news cycle of ‘scandal’. The facts are admitted, the apology is made, there’s nothing more for the media to dig up. The issue is still there, of course, but its not front page every day for weeks.
His ability is really beyond question: he’d be fantastic. I’d pay money to see him debate Obama (assuming O doesn’t run and hide – which he will, as much as possible).
Gingrich believes that CO2 is causing global warming as reflected in the 2007 interview on NPR:
Question: In 2000, candidate George Bush pledged mandatory carbon caps; it was a campaign pledge. What did you think of it at the time? Were you for that?
Gingrich: I think if you have mandatory carbon caps combined with a trading system, much like we did with sulfur, and if you have a tax-incentive program for investing in the solutions, that there’s a package there that’s very, very good. And frankly, it’s something I would strongly support.
It is not surprising that the power of Newt’s ego would have him believe that man can threaten the Earth. Once past this bad assumption, however, he further exposes his bias by agreeing to a big government, big spending solution to a non-problem that can only contribute to a further decline in our economy.
I know, I know . . . anybody but Romney and Obama. This primary campaign is indeed surreal.
Newt can definitely be too clever for his own good. Like Romney, he thinks he can make anything work. The problem is, he should have paused in advance and asked himself: ‘should we be doing this at all’, and answered “NO!”. This is where I appreciate the Conservative instincts of a Palin/Perry/Cain. They may not have the brainpower or the experience, but their first instinct of: ‘wait, the govt shouldn’t be doing this at all’ is invaluable.
Romney, btw, actually signed a climate bill into law as MA governor that resulted in the closure of several coal-fired plants. MA has, from that day ’till now, had to import roughly 20% of its power (up from about 5% before the law took effect) with the expected results in rate increases to everyone in the state. Romney’s position on global warming has still not changed.
Seems odd that we’re waiting for a man who actually wrote a book with the title, “No Apology” to come out and apologize for his positions on Romneycare and global warming. We’ll know he’s absolutely desperate to win the nomination, and in a dead heat with a rival, when he does. But, by then, it’ll be too late.
while now “dumb” to be couch buddies with Pelosi, did Newt disavow his basic contention about man-caused global warming?
I don’t think he did. Moreover, how likely is he then to unravel the EPA regulations stifling this country?
Finding new innovative ways to new energy = Solyndra.