-
Obama’s Drone War
May 23, 2013 | 7 comments
-
How Long Is This War?
May 20, 2013 | 15 comments
-
Next: The Benghazi Select Committee
May 13, 2013 | 94 comments
-
Nobody Died in Watergate
May 9, 2013 | 148 comments
-
Benghazi Bullchips
May 6, 2013 | 184 comments
Loose Canons
Why Is Newt Still Rising?
For the same reason Mitt Romney continues to sink.
After Saturday night’s Iowa debate, I’d bet $10,000 that Mitt Romney has sunk himself. Well, I might if I had an extra $10,000 lying around, which I don’t. But after that debate, and more than a week of relentless attacks on him, why is Newt Gingrich still rising and Romney still sinking?
Gingrich’s staying power has the Washington cognoscenti frustrated. When the Romney campaign launched its attacks on Gingrich, there was a flood of seemingly coordinated press promoting the attacks. In response, Gingrich had two New York press avails, looking friendly and presidential. And, in a now much-reported conference call with his staff, the former Speaker ordered them to avoid going negative.
The political consultants working against Gingrich seem unable to absorb facts or adapt their ideas to them. One of the biggest criticisms of Gingrich is his inability to organize staff and run a campaign. Karl Rove wrote what was supposed to be a devastating criticism of Gingrich’s leadership deficiencies in the Wall Street Journal last week. Rove said, among other things, that Gingrich had failed to qualify for the ballot in both Missouri and Ohio and that the former House speaker had little or no organization in Iowa.
Rove’s article would have been devastating but for one fact: it wasn’t true. Gingrich has, for example, qualified in both Missouri and Ohio. His Iowa staff is strong and getting stronger by the hour.
Gingrich’s key staffers have been with him a long time, and know their man well. The consultants who resigned loudly earlier this year weren’t the Gingrich insiders. The veteran staff — with a few new additions — is also proving its worth hourly in dealing with the media.
Another reason Gingrich isn’t fading is Mitt Romney. Let’s face it: Mitt Romney is the Republican version of Al Gore. Even people who are predisposed to liking him can’t seem to get there. Romney is supposedly more electable than Gingrich, at least according to the Inside the Beltway crowd and the major media.
Really? Liberal pollster Peter Hart’s focus group, asked to pick a family relationship to Romney, labeled him “black sheep,” “fun neighbor,” “cousin,” “second cousin,” “dad that was never home.” The same group labeled Gingrich “grandfather,” “father,” “my favorite uncle,” and “uncle who keeps bringing home different wives.” Is grandpa less electable than the dad who was never home?
In the Saturday night Iowa debate, Texas Gov. Rick Perry again challenged Romney on the statement in his book No Apology that the Romneycare law in Massachusetts should be a model for the nation. Romney denied the book said that. (Perry was referring to a sentence in the hardback edition which said that the “Massachusetts Model” achieved portable affordable health insurance for everyone and “We can accomplish the same thing for everyone in the country, and it can be done without letting government take over health care.”)
Romney’s denial was sort of true. That sentence was removed in the later paperback edition. Romneycare, we must recall, was the biggest reason the Wall Street Journal editorial page said a few months ago that Romney would be a better running mate for Obama than an opponent.
When Perry raised the issue of Romney advocating nationalizing the Massachusetts system, Romney said it wasn’t true and held out his hand to dare Perry to bet $10,000 on Romney’s truthfulness.
In 2010, according to the Iowa Department of Human Services, the median income for a family of four in Iowa was $61,657. How many Iowans — or Americans outside of Iowa - would bet $10,000 on anything? Probably the same number as who will vote for Romney.
While Gingrich remains positive, the media eagerly await what they believe is the inevitable act of Newtonian self-destruction. They seize on anything he says that doesn’t sound like something they hear around their newsrooms and try to make a feeding frenzy out of it. Yes, it could still happen. But the odds are against it because what Gingrich has been saying is what a lot of people are thinking.
When Gingrich said that school kids, especially those in poor families, could work in schools to learn the habits of reliability and earning, the media jumped on him. But people understood that Gingrich was right. Young Americans don’t have the work ethic of their parents or grandparents.
Gingrich told the Occupy Whatever kiddies to take a bath and get a job. Those aren’t the words of a wild man. They’re what most working Americans think when they see the Occupy Whatever rabble.
When Gingrich said that the Palestinians were an “invented people,” the media — and the Palestinians — thought the feeding frenzy could start.
About the Author
Jed Babbin served as a Deputy Undersecretary of Defense under George H.W. Bush. He is the author of several bestselling books including Inside the Asylum and In the Words of Our Enemies. You can follow him on Twitter @jedbabbin.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (24) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Jed Babbin
More Articles From Loose Canons
http://spectator.org/archives/2011/12/12/why-is-newt-still-rising
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- The Demise of Money and Credit
- Screwtape Talks Turkey
- We Have Her Example
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Dan| 12.12.11 @ 9:29AM
Good idea!
Peppermint Tea| 12.12.11 @ 11:11AM
I'll go with the idea that Mitt isn't it...but Newt? He might be a good 1 year president until he decides he can turn his presidency into a personal power trip. Dang, I think I'll vote for Ron Paul.
SUBVET| 12.13.11 @ 12:00PM
RON PAUL = BARRY REELECTED
Babu G. Ranganathan | 12.12.11 @ 4:12PM
Look, for the record let me say that I am an Indian-American and a Christian. Having said that, let me say that Gingrich was wrong about the Palestinians. There is too much to say here. I recommend that you read my article "Second Coming of Christ Misunderstood" http://bgrnathan.blogspot.com/.....stood.html
CFOI| 12.13.11 @ 1:09PM
Sorry Babu but you are wrong. Your blog posting is nothing more than replacment theory that is theologically in error.
Newt has, once again, spoken the truth and, by doing so, upset the politically correct among us. Too bad that you can't handle the truth either.
If you truly are a Christian you should pray long and hard about what you posted. Remember, eternity is a long, long time and if you keep that viewpoint you will be spending it in the smoking section.
Not a place a true Christian wants to be.
Mrs.Vito| 12.13.11 @ 4:26PM
What have you been smoking? You've just wasted 20 seconds of my time reading your idiotic post! Next time try John Lennon or Ravi Shankar.
Trish| 12.13.11 @ 5:45PM
Total pap in your blog re the second coming. That is the same warmed over replacement theology that parades as the Gospel. I haven't noticed 1,000 years of peace with Jesus on the throne since the 1st century.
I totally agree with Newt. Someone has to have the guts to tell the historical truth. Good for him on this one.
Mazzuchelli| 12.12.11 @ 4:28PM
Newt! Newt! Newt!
PT, Paul ain't it either. Don't waste your vote. I wasted mine several elections ago on the little Texan. Regretted it since.
MissouriConservative| 12.12.11 @ 10:43PM
Just like for magicians and comedians, timing is critical. Unfortunately the latest polling data shows today that as Gingrich is getting vetted by us the voters. Just like Perry , Cain and others, we take a look and find them lacking. Newt was up 21 points on 11/30 by Rasmussen, then it slid down to 13 on 12/5 by Fox News and today Gallup shows it down to 10. Now I didn't learn the new math, but when a lead goes from 21 to 10 it indicates Newt is coming up lacking. His claim of $300,000 for being a historical consultant, now actually closer to 1.6 million shows he was at the feeding trough just like the rest. We Missouri and Iowa farmers know which pigs are greedy at feeding time.
Santorum correctly called Newt out saying you treat the Soviet Union, an enemy differently than you do a friend. It is called horse sense. Like asking your best friend (if you want to keep him) before you date his recent girlfriend.
I was glad to see ABC correct Perry over the Romney book, using both editions. Perry was smart not to take the bet. No gamble for Romney in that. Also recognizing that Romney took a $1 a year as governor salary and none with the Winter Olympics, you get the feeling that he is not a career politician, but someone who wants to give back. He is not the perfect candidate, but a lot closer to Herman Cain as a common sense businessman.
Lastly, Perry did nail down one good thing to think about. Not once, but twice Newt broke his marriage commitment. When push comes to shove, who or what else would he compromise.
Gingrich is just another slick snake oil man and we ain't gonna buy it.
Ben Blankenship| 12.13.11 @ 12:27PM
Who else except Newt? What other GOP worthy can combat Obama point for point? No one. Newt wins because the others can't match him. He's unusually intelligent, mature and ready for such a demanding position. He'll whip Obama's butt. So he's had woman trouble. What bigshot hasn't, if the truth be told?
TrueBlue| 12.13.11 @ 1:52PM
Given the number of divorced and remarried couples in this country, let alone the single parents that never got married in the first place, why do people keep harping on Newt for this? It's because he's a Republican, if he was a Democrat this would be a non-issue. At least he has admitted to his past mistakes though, which is more than I can say for most public figures.
Doug| 12.13.11 @ 8:45PM
"We Missouri and Iowa farmers know which pigs are greedy at feeding time." Indeed, Iowa, home of the ethanol subsidy, knows all there is to know about greedy pigs!
RonRonDoRon| 12.13.11 @ 1:38PM
Gingrich needs two things, both as a candidate and as a president (if he gets there). First is to strengthen (or develop) the internal censor that, before he speaks, will tell him when to wait and think it over (or to say it in a way that doesn't quite make people's heads explode). The difficulty would be doing this without crippling one of his strongest points - his ability to pop opponents's balloons (of misinformation, sloppy thinking, general BS, etc) the second they're floated.
Second is to have close advisers to challenge his ideas strongly - as devils advocates, even if they agree. To challenge both his ideas and his ways of stating them. (Maybe he already has these, I don't know.) Sycophants and yes-men he doesn't need. The difficulty here would be to avoid devolving into focus-group blandness. (But somehow I don't think that's likely with Gingrich.)
TrueBlue| 12.13.11 @ 1:46PM
Mr. Babbin, can we get a page reference for Romney's medical care line in his hardcover please?
Mrs.Vito| 12.13.11 @ 4:35PM
Excellent article, Mr. Babbin. I couldn't agree more withyour assessment of the incredulity of the Republic establishment of Newt's popularity. I read, with disgust, the Karl Rove piece in the WSJ. Its sickening when the RINO Prom King & Queen (Karl Rove & Ann Coulter) run to every FOX news show to blather and nit-pick our candidates! Any one of them is better than Obama!! Rove & Coulter have misplaced their reasoning, and they are losing respect from 'fly-over' conservatives like me when they continue to do this. I'm all for the vetting process, but let's remember who is the real enemy of this country.
TrueBlue| 12.14.11 @ 12:46PM
Is it bad that anyone Rove hates I tend to end up liking more?
Jack in Wi.| 12.13.11 @ 4:55PM
Everybody is dumping on Newt, from his old colleagues, to the conservative intelligencia. He is unfit for the office and every one who has ever known him can see it.
adlai gingrich| 12.13.11 @ 5:48PM
I usually vote along party lines for my representatives in congress, but for President, I just just want the best person to win, the best leader. Newt supporters should ask themsleves, do they seriously want this man to represent the United States of America?
My support for Romney over Newt is similar to the reason that I liked George W Bush over Al Gore in the 2000 election. I remember watching a debate between Gore and W and being impressed with how articulate the former VP was, and that he seemed to be the more intelligent of the two. (This was befor he revealed himself as a global warming idiot). On points, I'd have to say he won the debate-- but he did not win my vote. I never regretted my choice of the less articulate Texan. Despite all the ridicule heaped upon George W during his presidency, I always felt that, when we really needed him, he did right thing. I think history will be very kind to him. I trusted him, in a way that I'll never trust intellectuals like Gingrich. (BTW, re electibility, Newt's supporters should read up on another political brainiac, see under Stevenson II, Adlai).
I stuck with Republican nominee in the 2008 elections, but if Newt is the guy this time around, I will consider, and I'm serious, voting for Barak.
Trish| 12.13.11 @ 5:54PM
He is not my first, second, or third choice. However, I LOVE his moxie. It was so refreshing to hear his response to Pelosi's threat about revealing his 'secrets'. Did he go on defense? Heck no, he basically told her to bring it on. People are attracted because we are looking for someone with BALLS!
Conserdude| 12.13.11 @ 6:50PM
I'm unhappy with Romney and don't trust him, but Gingrich is a way bigger disaster looming if GOP primary voters give him the nomination. Mr. Babbin willfully ignores Gingrich's flaws and vulnerables, which are many; one need look no further than Quin Hillyer's superb columns on this website.
Nite| 12.13.11 @ 6:59PM
Newt would make a good Secretary of State. President not so much. I remember full well all his scandals and stupidity. He is not someone I want as GOP President. Governor Rick Perry is a much better choice with a strong record, one wife, staunch conservative, and dependable. Others may disagree, so you are certainly free to vote for your choice.
TrueBlue| 12.14.11 @ 12:52PM
Perry suffers from an unfortunate problem not of his making; the general population of the country does not want another Texan for president. Not Perry's fault, but nothing he can do about it. Too many people have swallowed the MSMs ranting on GW to support Perry in the general election.
I think he would make a decent president with the current Congress, and he could even be a good president with a full conservative Congress to point him in the right direction. Also, a downside of evangelicals in government, from a fiscal standpoint, is that they tend to lean left when it comes to a few social issues. They want to help people so they try to get in programs that help that homeless or the "underpriviledged" and right now the country cannot afford it. I have no problems with helping people in need, but government shouldn't be involved anywhere in doing so.
Thetruthwillsetufree| 12.14.11 @ 9:25PM
To answer the question, I don't have a clue why Newt is rising. He was an embarrassment to his own party when he resigned as speaker. His activities since leaving office and working as a "historian" are questionable to say the least. It's all good though. It appears this "surger "is about to reverse directions .....it's already showing to the point the MSM cannot keep it under wraps any longer or lose what tiny bit of credibility they have left. Karma is gonna get ya in the end.
Mark in LA| 12.15.11 @ 7:18PM
He is rising becasue the Republican establishment wants anybody but Paul. That's why they have paraded their chain of clowns. When one starts to falter, another has to be ready to take the reigns, so the idiot voter doesn't spend any time researching and continues to listen to the MSM or these web sites. Once it was obvious Perry was done and Cain was falling, Newt was given his marching orders just like Huckleberry Hound in 2008.
Newt's apparent rising in the polls is due to the massive push by the corporate media. The brain dead see a parade and want to be part of it. However, with Newt, the longer you are around him, the more you notice some kind of awful stench. It just takes awhile to figure where it is coming from.