Poll time: Is Newt Gingrich the best choice for RNC chair?
Really?
He crumbled on the behemoth bailout.
He cuddled Nancy Pelosi on Al Gore’s global warming couch.
And he’s played footsie with Hillary Clinton on health care.
Is Newt Gingrich really the best choice for RNC chairman?
You tell me:
***
E-mail or leave your suggestions for the best person for the job.
WaPo looks at some of the contenders.
Update: Michael Steele wants the job.
Ralph Hallow has the scoop.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- This ain’t Hell, but you can see it from here » Blog Archive » Tell me I am wrong
- Political Party Poop
- MishMashZone » Yes! We Need A New RNC Chair!
- Radio Vice Online » Looking for Republican National Committee leadership
- GOP Rumors Have Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R) Versus Former Maryland Lt. Governor Michael S. Steele (R) For RNC Chair | THE GUN TOTING LIBERAL™
- Poll time: Is Newt Gingrich the best choice for RNC chair? « Top Daily Digest Reading
- Michelle Malkin » Newt for 2012? No, thanks.
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Newt Gingrich
Legal Insurrection
» Thanks, Global Warming
Stop The ACLU
» Oops! Now New Zealand NIWA Accused Of Faking DataRiehl World View
» BBC, KGB, Oh My: More On Climate Change FraudJustOneMinute
» The Prescient Joe BidenAmSpecBlog
» A Good Time Not to be a DemocratRiehl World View
» More Climate Change Fraud: Et Tu New Zealand?Ed Driscoll
» Charges Filed In Kenneth Gladney CaseThe Other McCain
» Alan Colmes, having fun at #1
I like Newt Gingrich, and he can do a lot of good going forward if he chooses to.
But he is not the person to lead this movement forward.
He also is on record as suggesting that the First Amendment needed to have restrictions on it.
But if he can effectively raise money, I suppose I might settle.
If he can bring the pro-war faction together with the fiscal conservative faction, I’ll send him some money.
No, he has sold everyone out over the years. I’ go with Tom Tancredo, Duncan Hunter, Ron Paul. A real Conservative.
But that’s me.
Tancredo did vote for the Bail Out, but I’m sure there was some serious arm twisting, as he is leaving Congress. But he has a 98% conservative voting record.
I would like to see Michael Steele.
This is a perfect example of ignoring history, and thus being doomed to repeat it. The war within the GOP has started, and I’m scared to think which side will win.
Saw Michael Steele on Fox News already crumble to the new regime.
Further suggestions needed.
If it’s the Newt that led the 1994 takeover of Congress, then I’m all for it. Someone needs to slap some sense into him about a few things (e.g., Global Warming), but he is a good ideas guy.
No,He’s compromised on too many things and we don’t need another John McCain.
Newt is thoughtful on many issues, but has a proven track record as a waffler with a baggage trail miles long; Kinda like Arnold without the accent; It needs to be someone that has been anti-bailout from day one or they will continue to appear as Democrat Lite.
“Is Newt Gingrich the best choice for RNC chair?”
No.
How about adding Hell No to the list of choices??
Fred Thompson was mentioned as RNC chair. But I think he wants the Presidency. But he might be a great spokesman for the RNC and has the conservatice credentuals.
Newt is one of the Left Coast Republican Elite, otherwise known as RINO’s.He put together the Contract with America and when didn’t live up to it. NO he is not the best! We need somebody that will tell the liberals to go to hell and stay there
That would be conservative credentuals.
I know many don’t like Ron Paul, but he follows the Constitution, which we should aplaud.
I was 100% for the War, but lets face the facts.
1. We had no declaration of war, as prescribed by the Constitution.
2. A war resolution is not in the constitution.
3. Basing the Constitutions of Iraq and Afghanistan on Islamic Law, was our biggest mistake.
4. If we had not gone in under terrible Rules Of Engagement, and had based the Constitutions on Freedom and Equality for all, we may have been done by now.
5. We should have followed WWII, and learned from it.
But we did what we did, we are where we are.
Roin Paul, I agree…But Tancredo? C’mon. Tancredo is just a barking dog conservative. Remember his OVERDUE immigration bill he introduced (to press) with much fanfare? He did not even bother to try getting that into house…Secondly he voted for bailout not once but twice…both the times when it was brought in House…
He can only talk conservative but act whatever suits him at that moment…like a chameleon. Also don’t forget his cuddling with confederate supporting crowd in South Carolina during ‘07 when he was still running for POTUS.
I would say Ron Paul is the way to go…
What we need is someone who will see to it that things like this article are trumpeted loud and clear.
http://washingtontimes.com/news/2008/nov/11/exclusive-obama-deletes-agenda-from-transition-web/
What the article is about is that, “Over the weekend President-elect Barack Obama scrubbed Change.gov, his transition Web site, deleting most of what had been a massive agenda copied directly from his campaign Web site.
Gone are the promises on how an Obama administration would handle 25 different agenda items – everything from Iraq and immigration to taxes and urban policy – all items laid out on his campaign Web site, http://www.BarackObama.com.
Instead, the official agenda on Change.gov has been boiled down to one vague paragraph proclaiming a plan “to revive the economy, to fix our health care, education, and social security systems, to define a clear path to energy independence, to end the war in Iraq responsibly and finish our mission in Afghanistan, and to work with our allies to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon, among many other domestic and foreign policy objectives.”
This is the first CHANGE coming from the Obama camp. This is the change his followers have been waiting for? We need to have a party chairman willing to nail the Democrats whenever this happens.
That’s me too.
The problem with Newt was, while he helped launch the takeover, he compromised himself by allowing his book deal to neuter his leadership in Congress.
I can’t seem to recall any effectiveness on his part to make sure the Congressional GOP stuck to the issues that got them the majority. They easily slid into outspending the Dems and getting caught in scandals.
His leadership is questionable at best.
We need fresh leadership, not tainted by D.C.
The Republicans could have had Steve Largent in the late 1990s but instead decided to keep the old cronies from the past. The Republicans always opt for old cronies from the past: Dole, McCain, Romney, Rumsfeld et al. Republicans always reject guys like Steve Largent who actually know how to win and can relate to people. So expect the RNC to reject guys like Bobby Jindal, JC Watts, anyone who was born after about 1930. Heck, the Republicans will probably bring back Frank Farenkoph, the ultimate Washington inside the beltway K Street lobbyist, gambling industry lobbyist par excellence. Maybe the GOP will ask David Eisenhower to be RNC chairman. The whole gang who brought us the 2008 debacle has to go. How many friends of the Bush family do we have to put up before everyone realizes that new blood is needed? Jindal at the top of the ticket could have beaten Obama. Ditto for JC Watts. But did they ever have a chance of getting the Republican nomination? Of course not.
They just don’t friggn’ get it! No more RINO’s!
I will continue to tape 2 nasty, dirty old pennies as my contribution to this lost party. Of course I give them my 2 cents on why our party is not worth more than the 2 pennies I generously donate to their funds.
I think we need someone new with some new ideas. Newt can’t be trusted any more than K00K McCain can be trusted. Newt talks a good line, but politics is only a game to him.
He was good during the Gingrich Revolution and contract with America in 1994.
However, we need new blood…the old fart GOP party needs to go.
Newt’s sellout on global warming kills it for me.
I would suggest Mitt just for his organization skills if nothing else.
Although I do like Michael Steele too.
Sheriff Joe Arpaio!
As far as I am concerned, I’ll wait out this election cycle. I think a few more of the old Republican wing tips need to die out before I’ll get interested in the GOP again.
no, lets ‘move on’ shall we?
Steele was part of the RNC crowd and is partly responcible for the problems there.
Just no to Micheal Steele as well
Former Maryland Lieutenant Governor Michael Steele is a partner in a prestigious law firm in Washington, D.C.
But he’s hardly out of politics. As chairman of the Republican Action Committee, Steele is responsible for training the next generation of Republican candidates for office. But he hasn’t given up on the current crop, including John McCain.
Steele acknowledges his party has a particular problem with minorities.
“Our party has done absolutely jack to help them, understand and appreciate them. We’ve done nothing,” he said.
He claims to be optimistic about Tuesday’s election, but he’s already thinking ahead to the next race and how he hopes his party will evolve.
Michael Steele, we need new people.
We need an upgrade …
He settled.
I don’t. My last LOTE was in this election. Not *ever, ever* again.
He’s the conservative who proclaimed “Conservatism is dead, we need to get past that!”
Then, Limbaugh called him on it, spent 2 monolog segments, (almost 90min,) explaining that Conservatism is an expression of the Eternal Truths of Freedom and The Constitution.
After that sNewt ran infront of every camera he could find, peddling a lame excuse how did didn’t really mean it like that. Ie, he didn’t really say what he said — but if you heard the live broadcast, which I among many others did — then though he *did* say those words, that wasn’t what he meant!
I suspect it was done CYA after people started de-subscribing from his newsletter, and demanding refunds of donations.
I know the run-around about that… the nice but frazzled sounding young lady there said that as soon as anyone in the office put the phone down it would ring again. Most wanted refunds, and all wanted their names removed from sNewt’s list.
No, if sNrewt is picked, I’ll know that nothing will change. He’ll be on the couch w/Nancy, ankles clasped, lips puckered.
Ron Paul is older than John McCain. He needs to be put out to pasture.
If it means keeping him out of the way of more important tasks (election 2012), and keeping the Ronulans at bay, I vote for Ron Paul.
There are some good things about Newt. Drilling for example. But the fact that he would pal up with Pelosi was just sickening. Does he for ONE MINUTE think she would cave in to a conservative effort like that? Well, she wouldn’t, and it was a huge mistake for him to be involved in that. Act like that force you to negotiate from a position of weakness.
Tip of the iceberg… there would be more Republican compromise to Dem demands under Newt.
Now that you mention that, I also seem to recall J.C. Watts and other freshmen in ‘94 given nothing but lip service from the old cronies and given little of importance to do. They also (along with Bush) squashed a true conservative who was gaining speed against RINO Arlen in the primaries Spector in ‘04.
Even in this election, I heard that Allen West in Florida, touted to be a true conservative, got no assistance from the state or national Republican organizations. Was that the same for Bill Russell in PA?
The old cronies that lead the national and state parties are the problem. They don’t want ANYONE from outside D.C. who will rock the boat and is not part of the blue-blood country club crowd.
The leader of the RNC has to be as RIGHT as Howard Dean is LEFT.
That ain’t Newt.
The problem with Ron Paul is he was a horrible politician (probably a good thing) – but the RNC chair has to play the game. Paul definitely doesn’t play games, if it’s not in the constitution, he’s against it. I would love to see Paul in some sort of chief adviser role, but I think he’d be the wrong choice for the face of the party.
Here’s an example video I posted on the AIG bailout thread. The man has excellent ideas, and a firm grasp of the economy and conservative principles, but the face of the GOP needs to be charismatic and articulate.
I vote for Ronald Reagan. Even in his present condition he’s better than anyone in the current Republican leadership.
None of these weaklings have the strength of character to stand up and defend their values against those who would call them mean, heartless, racist, etc.
Newt, another RINO, had enough of that kind…we need strong, conservatives to rebuild the Republican Party either that or start a new party or join and strengthen the most conservative 3rd party out there. ..Constitutional Party. Remember the GOP was a 3rd party at one time.
I vote for Julies Caesar.
I’m conflicted on this one. While I think Newt sounds good in theory — the “Contract with America” proves he knows what conservative values are — I’m not sure he’d do so well with execution of policy.
Fred Thompson, another name having been bandied about, might be a better choice, though I have the same concerns about his RNC chairmanship as I did with his presidential campaign, i.e. it was far too soft-spoken for present day and times. Whoever steps forward to lead the RNC better have testicular fortitude and a titanium spine.
Now is not the time for a dithering idiot.
Newt Gingrich is a politician. Having been in congress for years he knows how to get things done and sometimes that means playing footsie with the other side. That said, there is no way we are going to get someone far right to head the RNC. That just won’t happen. Look how they are attacking Sara Palin. Gingrich is at least tested as far as the Republican Party is concerned and they would be willing to have him as the leader. Also, the Left HATES him, which is a good thing. He can at least start the process of getting the party back on track.
And what about Michael Steele? Let’s throw in a bit of diversity in the RNC for a change. And give Michael Steele a leg up for 2012, unless he’s gunning for 2010 Senate re-election.
Lets do the same exact thing over in 2012 – maybe well win!
/sarc
Allen West had a respectable showing given that he had no/minimal party assistance. Most people heard of him from a radio talk show host from a station in another county.
This is what I’ve been saying. MoveOn and Kos bought the DNC and now they guide its agenda. We need to do the same. If we contribute to the GOP, we are giving tacit support for the RINO platform. We need a couple of conservative MoveOn type organizations so the GOP can see where their bread is buttered.
How about Michael Reagan? He has the same genuine conservative mindset as his dad, and is not embedded in the DC hack machine.
Plus, I would love to see him get into the political arena.
I respect Newt. That said, he’s old school and had his chances. An earlier comment mentioned Steve Largent… I like that. Michael Steele needs to actually WIN a contest. He’s Conservative -lite… no thanks.
I dunno Fred Thompson is a good speaker for the GOP
So this is your reason for opposing Michael Steele? Kind of proves his point.
I believe Michael Steele is, by far, the best candidate.
The GOP needs a leader that understands that we are at war on TWO fronts: 1)islamo terrorists and 2) democrats. We’ve responded well against enemy no. 1, but have done nothing against enemy no. 2. The primary enemy of the dems for the last 7 years has been Bush, not al Queda, The Dems have succeeded in trashing Bush and the GOP. Thanks to Bush’s “new tone”, the attacks over the last 7 years have gone unanswered, just like Bill Clinton ignored the terrorist attacks in the 90s. And everyone knows where this lead.
Ditto.
Newt is at least 10 times the conservative that McCain is, but he sat on the couch with Peloser and attempted to legitimize a hoax. This does nothing for his credibility.
I’m tired of settling. How about a strong, principled conservative who hasn’t sold out? That would be neat.
The present head of the RNC has been such a secret. No wonder the GOP is such a mess. Sarah Palin is responsible for the 46% vote garnered in this campaign. Without her, the party would have lost in a landslide. No leadership, tactical campaign mistakes and now backstabbing make the GOP totally inept. Good going guys!
Jeb Hensarling
No on Newt! We need fresh blood, not someone who’s comfortable cozying up to Pelosi.
Correction: Bush has succeeded in trashing Bush and the GOP.
How ’bout Rush? Wouldn’t that make the libs scream?! heh
Nope — no Newt. We need someone with a “fire in their belly” to lead this revolution, and I just don’t see Newt being the right choice. I like the suggestions for Michael Steele and Fred(!) — if Fred can get those coals stoked.
We cannot “Outbid” the democrats for blacks. If our whole strategy is simply to give them “more” then we will not be able to sway them.
Blacks are more conservative on social issues. That is how we attract them not by outbiding them with more offers.
Here we go again…
It’s time for high position in the Republican party to be filled and conservatives want it to be one of their own. This is a good thing.
But no one is ‘conservative enough’. Gingrich bellied up with Dear Speaker Nancy on global warming. Tancredo voted for the bail out. Ron Paul sounds like a nut (this is my vote against).
Well, who’s conservative enough? Who’s pure enough? How pure is pure?
Remember, Ronald Reagan (one of our greatest presidents) signed off on amnesty, pulled the Marines out of Beirut and put O’Connor on the Supreme Court. All mistakes to be sure. Would we not want him as head of the RNC? Would we not want him as the nominee of the party (putting aside the 22nd amendment for a second).
My point is simply who has a track record of success and who agrees with conservatives most of the time?
Conservatives let perfect be the enemy of good in the primaries and look who we got to choose from: McCain (a liberal) and Obama (a socialist). Enough Republicans and conservatives stayed home and we got the worse of the two.
Are we going to do it again? Governor Reagan said, “A person who agrees with you 80 percent of the time is a friend and an ally – not a 20 percent traitor.” I think we need to go back to our Reagan roots and start to practice some of his wisdom.
The problem with Newt is that although his thoughts are conservative, he buys into the liberal premises, such as man-made global warming, health care crisis, etc. He says we need conservative solutions in these debates, admiting these hoaxes really exist, rather than fighting the premise. I want to see someone who will have some guts to say that global warming is a natural phenomenon, not man-made and the health care crisis is due to too-much government intervention, etc.
What we need is someone who is absolutely the political opposite of Bush. These traits would include:
Smart
Articulate
Inspiring
Conservative
Hard-Working
Successful
Self-Reliant
Principled and
Honest
Fred is not a great campaigner He doesnt do well at the local level.
But he is a solid conservative and does well in big setting and speaking to core values.
Again I am against Steele because he is parrt of the problem. Michael Steele has already been in the RNC for the past 4 years. He is as much involved in the failure there as others.
I happen to believe that Reagan learned from his mistakes… he didn’t keep slamming his head into the wall hoping that the pain would stop.
I personally don’t expect perfection, but I do expect people to admit when they’re wrong and change their behavior accordingly, and the arrogant tools in charge of the party now just can’t bring themselves to do it unless they’re running for something. This cuts no ice with me.
Newt’s time, and credibility, as a leader has passed. We need somebody else. But, I doubt Newt knows this.
Newt might be what we need in the short term. He knows how to build the party, and despite his oddities lately, he was good at playing defense during the Clinton years. What we need right now is for somebody to expand the party and rebuild the conservative base, as was done in 93-94. He’s the man who has the experience doing that.
So short answer: Newt until Nov. 2010; somebody else after.
In the long term though, particularly should we have the victories that we need in 2010, we’ll need somebody else, better on economic and spending issues, and more stringent about governing as a conservative while in power. Newt’s strength is as leader of the opposition and it hasn’t really translated too well for a Republican controlled government. That’s when we’ll need somebody else to step up along the lines of Romney, Palin, Jindal, or Sanford – maybe even Fred Thompson or somebody entirely new.
The fact is that it will be easier to repair burnt bridges with the far right, libertarian leaning GOP members when the Democrats are in charge of foreign policy. If we can fight socialism as hard as we fight terrorism we shall survive.
How about Gov Palin when her term as Governor is over? We need fresh faces and real conservatives. We need people who aren’t afraid to speak out and tell the truth. We need people who stick to their principles and live them every day, not people blown around by the winds of “change” and the “spirit of bipartisanship.” Is it too much to ask for someone honest?
Enough with the old fart GOP candidates. No more Fred Thompson, Newt or Ron Paul!
Wake up! We need new, younger fresh faces. Take example from the Democrats. Do you seriously think the DNC would’ve been successful with an old timer like Jimmy Carter or a Harry Reid type at the helm? Or some of their older folks? NO, of course not!
We need someone who is technologically up to date, and not technologically challenged. We need someone who inspires, not put us to sleep with the same old, same old tired speeches and methods.
While Obama built a superior network using the Internet and its variety of very simple tools, the GOP was sitting there on their butts using phone banks and direct mail cards.
Welcome to the new century!
GIVE ME A BREAK.
My pick would be Duncan Hunter.
Sen. James Inhoff – (R, OK).
Solid conservative. Voted against the bail-out every time.
ECS
The GOP is once again proving they are out of their minds.
Over at Townhall they have a poll that shows the huge majority of Rs believes they have lost their way and have drifted away from their priciples. And yet, here they go again.
Every time they are handed their head on a platter, they ignore the obvious that we want more conservative candidates, not more moderate ones.
Not only NO to Newt, but HELL NO. The pasture awaits him….
Michelle, you seem to diminish anybody that does not march in lock-step with your views on the world. Gingrich is probably one of the smartest and most capable men that have ever been a part of the GOP. The actions that you referenced in an attempt to bias the vote are all examples of Gingrich playing a very coy game of bipartisanship on issues of little importance (except for the bailout, which leads me to believe that the economy was truly teetering on the verge of an historic meltdown).
I admire you greatly, but have come to believe that you are part of the problem, not part of the solution. It seems that you want an army of little right-wing robots that go around spouting red-meat condemnations of everybody and everything that is not like you. The problem with that is that you may get 20 – 25% of the people aligning with you, but that WILL NEVER WIN AN ELECTION.
I still love you, though.
We don’t stand a chance in 2012 if we can’t stop looking back while trying to move ahead.
Like it or not, those young idealistic kids were screaming and begging for conservative values. Not handouts, and not anarchy. Being ridiculed and shunned send a good number of them to the Obama side of the force.
I seem to remember that Paul was able to pull in quite a large sum of money too, another important consideration.
Again, by the time Obama gets finished with foreign policy, all of them will be back on the same page as all of us.
I know this sounds cliche, but what the GOP lacks is leadership. There is no one out there that has come forward to show us how to unify and get ourselves back on track again.
Selecting old leaders with no new plan is not the way to go. Yes, Gingrich is smart, and at one point a week or two ago, I thought he would be a good pick. Not any more…
When I think of true conservatives, Fred Thompson, Duncan Hunter, George Allen and Ron Paul come to mind — but they’re all pretty low key when it comes to generating enthusiasm. And if that’s key to getting the base fired up and legislators on track, I can’t see any of these guys succeeding, although they should have a pivotal role in this rebirth.
Those who gin up the most emotion are not elected officials — Michelle, Ann Coulter, Rush, Glenn Beck, Mark Levine. Gawd, I think Beck has the Constitution memorized, and Ron Paul is second as far as that goes. So there you go. A conundrum in a desperate time.
I agree that we need fresh faces in the ranks, but I also think we need an experienced general at the helm. That’s probably the biggest attraction to Newt – he was a kingmaker. He has forgotten more than the young players know yet.
That would be helpful for the organization overall. The messenger, however need not necessarily be young, as Reagan certainly wasn’t. He ACTED youthful, and his message was fresh, inspiring, and not the same old rehash of D.C. politics.
Whoever it is must come from outside D.C. if at all possilbe, or at least one who has not succumbed to the D.C. swampgas.
A good point – Historically liberals have been the ones to start wars and sacrifice our blood and treasure overseas in the spirit of “Making the world safe for Democracy”. Woodrow Wilson anyone? I truly believe that by the time Obama’s first term is over we will be involved in yet another war – be it Iran, Syria, Russia, China, etc. My greatest hope from an Obama presidency is a renewed push from conservatives to reinvigorate the party with the ideals it was actually based on.
I have an idea – can we agree it should be somebody who did not support the bailout?
MarcoPolo: AGREED!
I can’t see Newt inspiring a new generation of young voters, and helping to maintain the 30 – 55 year old crowd either.
I like Newt, and I think he could do a good job. However, he’s a lightening rod. The dems and the media would hate him as much or more than George Bush and Sarah Palin combined. Then again, they hate anyone with an “R” attached to their name. But, I think there would be better alternatives.
Did you catch the T-shirt that said, “You bring the shovel, I’ll bring the defibrillator — Reagan ‘o8″?
That’s how I felt…
Nancy Reagan would be better than Barack Obama! We should grant Maggie Thatcher citizenship and let her run! Oh, wait, until Obama shows his birth certificate maybe Maggie can run anyway!
If I’d have seen it, I would freakin well have bought it!!
Isn’t it sad that the best our party offers us doesn’t hold a candle to a dead guy in either issues or oratory?
No more half-assed leadership!!!
I think I’ve been pretty consistent in bringing up this man’s name. He’s desperately needed here in Ohio, but I think he is wholly underrated by the national party and could be just the shot in the arm we need.
Kasich.
Are you kidding? Half-a**ed leadership would be an improvement over what we got for the last 8 years from the GOP!
I don’t want to settle. Look where we are now because many settled.
For their chairman, the Dems picked their failed presidential candidate who has done nothing but spew lies and vitriol. Does it really matter who we pick? The country honestly felt that an inexperienced candidate with skeletons in his closet was better than an experienced candidate based on either race or party. People are going to have to see that their choices in politics actually have an impact in their daily lives before anything will matter to them. It doesn’t matter who we pick until they reach that point.
Anyone the dems and the media hate is good, but you have to have the person they absolutely hate the most as the forward-face of the Republican party. It’s fun to watch their drooling faces contort while they try to contain themselves, so it’s worth it just for that. But, when you’ve got them spitting nails, you know you’ve got the right person.
Just something to consider — while most folks here think Ron Paul’s certifiable, do you remember how he managed to rally college kids and raise money with his message of fiscal conservatism? That was pretty weird for those of us watching on the outside. Just sayin.’
To add to the Michael Reagan suggestion, that’s actually pretty good. I’ve never seen him back down in an argument when he’s up against a dem in a point/counterpoint deal and he knows conservatism.
Sarah Palin would be a far far better choice. Even on yahoo they are reporting that she’s stating they lost because the R’s had lost their way. She gets it.
As soon as the “leadership” quits trying to “play politics” and instead focus on what is right, then they will win and win in landslides. Until then, not so much.
Kasich is running for Governor of Ohio
Not a bad choice. He’s personable and comes across as honest.
The problem is that President Bush has destroyed the credibility of the GOP. The media has portrayed us as old fogeys with bad ideas and McCain played right into that image.
Things need to get worse before they get better and the media needs to move back to the center. We’ll never win with the deck stacked against us.
I agree with thirteen28.
Newt is smart and articulate. I don’t mind him being a lightning rod for the opposition. In ‘94, he exposed liberal politics for the foolishness it is. But if he doesn’t have the stomach to continue to fight for conservative principles, he’s the wrong man.
Not for nothing, any conservative who makes it his/her purpose in life to poke the libs in the eye will, by their very existence, become a lightning rod. If you can’t take the heat, get out of the lightning rod business.
Newt lost whatever credibility he had left after scamming the US in 1994 when he jumped on the casting couch with Nancy Pelosi.
I vote No.
Of course, I’ve long ago washed my hands of the Republicans. Newt is just another one of THEM.
RWR
http://www.rightwingrocker.com
What about Pete Santorum? He’s young and conservative.
Even if I thought Newt was right for the job, he’s too polarizing.
Also, Newt’s the past. He needs to ride off into the sunset.
I don’t think we’ll find an acceptable Democrat for the position, do you?
Wow! Did not know that. I always liked him, and yes, it’s true. He is underrated.
I’m going to keep an eye on this one.