Pelosi’s not stupid. she’ll let this go until the time is right.
boosting newt’s popularity among republicans is not a stupid tactic
I would say that is...a very not stupid tactic?
Right, maybe it’s some kind of intellectual jiu-jitsu and Pelosi wants people to think she’s afraid of Newt. Wheels within wheels.
It’s not that complicated!
Right, maybe it’s some kind of intellectual jiu-jitsu and Pelosi wants people to think she’s afraid of Newt. Wheels within wheels.
maybe she just wants newt to win the nomination bc she thinks he’ll be easier to beat than romney
it’s not even subtext. she literally says that. “lol i hope newt wins the nom bc he’ll be easy to beat”
But if she really wanted him to win, why would she say she has damaging secrets about him? Unless she wants people to think that she doesn’t want him to win.
which will be a bigger lol when the Dow crashes next summer and Newt is prez, eh?
(just schadening the ultimate ILX rotisserie politics freude)
xp
she wants to foster resentment...that’s the emotion the gop is built on
omigod we’re in a semiotics course.
lol Alfred
“I like Barney Frank’s quote the best, where he said ‘I never thought I’d live such a good life that I would see Newt Gingrich be the nominee of the Republican party,’” Pelosi said in an exclusive interview Friday. “That quote I think spoke for a lot of us.”
Pelosi didn’t go into detail about Gingrich’s past transgressions, but she tipped her hand. “One of these days we’ll have a conversation about Newt Gingrich,” Pelosi said. “I know a lot about him. I served on the investigative committee that investigated him, four of us locked in a room in an undisclosed location for a year. A thousand pages of his stuff.”
Pressed for more detail she wouldn’t go further.
“Not right here,” Pelosi joked. “When the time’s right.”
i think this is meant to be entertaining
Newt paid a $300K fine and was reprimanded by the House (the only time in history a Speaker has been reprimanded) for misuing campaign finds. Add to that his Freddie Mac lobbying and he’ll look exactly like the ‘inside-the-Beltway’ operator the base professes to loathe.
I’m sure there’s plenty other things to add to that pile
But if she really wanted him to win, why would she say she has damaging secrets about him? Unless she wants people to think that she doesn’t want him to win.
― o. nate, Tuesday, 6 December 2011 18:10 (33 minutes ago) Bookmark Permalink
Because you learn to build something good up before you use it? TV shows don’t throw out all their storylines within the first couple episodes—they build to the reveal to make it seem more important and/or hilarious. And when it comes to Newt, it should be pronounced HI-Larious.
honestly tho, newt has like 8 things on public record that could have taken down a politician
on the one hand I don’t doubt that there are more, otoh what would it take to be ‘shocking’? maybe he killed a dude
I think it’s a very real possibility that Pelosi wants the base to be enthused about their candidate and then have him/her get kicked in the nads and leave them with either Romney who nobody loves or, possibly in a fit of pique, someone even easier to defeat like Gingrich.
From my anecdotal experience the Republicans I know are getting dispirited and embarrassed by their choices. They were (even the more rational ones) fighting mad a year ago. Now they’re tired and uninspired. It’s one thing to rail on about corrupt unions and politicians who don’t understand basic (classic liberal) economics but now all their liberal friends are having a field day teasing them about Cain and Bachmann and Gingrich.
well you also know republicans who live in san francisco
honestly tho, newt has like 8 things on public record that could have taken down a politician
Maybe Newt has a bit of the “teflon” gene that Reagan famously had? If so, he may be a more formidable opponent than he appears.
like there are people who are probably isolated from the ‘cain and bachmann are insane human beings’ narrative
Maybe Newt has a bit of the “teflon” gene that Reagan famously had? If so, he may be a more formidable opponent than he appears.
haha – he doesn’t and he isn’t.
honestly tho, newt has like 8 things on public record that could have taken down a politician
on the one hand I don’t doubt that there are more, otoh what would it take to be ‘shocking’? maybe he killed a dude
― iatee, Tuesday, 6 December 2011 18:54 (10 minutes ago) Bookmark Permalink
oh come on, anyone on camera talking to him just needs to answer every question with “ok thats great but didnt you leave yr wife while she was dying with cancer to go be with yr mistress”. every answer. just one time. one time between now and next november. they dont even need new shit. just actually play the old hits.
haha – he doesn’t and he isn’t.
^^^
Newt is a nerd who is pretty awkward/combative. Reagan was an actor.
Reagan’s image was avuncular. Newt’s image is all angry smartass.
This is very much a battle for the soul of the Republican party. Will it defer to its guts or its brains? The smarter Republicans out there know that the guts are notoriously impervious to reason, riddled with fear and loathing and not often appealing to a majority of voters. If you need any proof of what always tacking to the right gets you, just look at the GOP’s standing in California. The last major position they held was by a movie star who parachuted into the governor’s office via a recall, not by way of primaries.
My conservative parents, who after a 2008 filled with tumult and portents of doom, have not paid too much attention to primary season but they were embarrassed by Cain’s non-response to the Libya question and Perry’s fumbling. They have said many times that they hate every option.
This is very much a battle for the soul of the Republican party. Will it defer to its guts or its brains?
Not to be tetchy, Mike, but this is the sort of question TV pundits ask every cycle about both parties.
Reagan’s image was avuncular.
This^^^
The Gipper could smile and tell an anecdote all while his administration was up to no end of mayhem. Newt actually likes being the smartaleck dick.
i don’t feel sorry for conservatives who have no option, or feel like they don’t.
Primary season requires ideological battles; you’re going to see the worst of the party. The GOP has been in a primary cycle since 1988.
This is very much a battle for the soul of the Republican party. Will it defer to its guts or its brains?
as with the Dems, its bowels.
i don’t feel sorry for conservatives who have no option, or feel like they don’t.
I told them as much when Huckabee won Iowa in 2008 and they were filled with croakings of doom: “your party has spent the last thirty years courting people like Huckabee. Now you get what you deserve.”
but this is the sort of question TV pundits ask every cycle about both parties.
You’re right of course. I just think it’s getting worse for them. They have so many shibboleths that are enforced so rigidly, that everybody is in danger of being accused of a RINO for not staying in lockstep with the hivemind. It’s a kind of dictatorship of the idiotariat.
*defecates furiously*
eh I can imagine that newt is seen as ‘the brains’ by some people, and he definitely does his best to promote that image. he drops big words, references history pretty often, etc. etc.
heys guys how do you continue to put up with morbius? that guy is the worst geir-bot in these threads.
they can’t pass up the handjobs
Cuz most of us are in these threads?
well morbs isn’t a crypto racist so there’s that
The Gipper could smile and tell an anecdote all while his administration was up to no end of mayhem. Newt actually likes being the smartaleck dick.
I think Newt plays to the image of himself as the smart-aleck though. He does it with a wink that signals to his base, “Just watch—this’ll really piss them off.” (It doesn’t need to be said that “them” is the elite liberal media.) So he can get away with saying things that would sound harsh or cruel coming from someone else.
but the base doesn’t mind if he sounds harsh or cruel! You’re right though.
i am still clinging to the notion that newt’s erratic assholishness and lack of organization will ruin him and romney’s immense amount of money, inside support, and robot will to be a perfect candidate will last through all of it.
but the crazy surge this close to a primary is pretty wild i must say. he could fuck it up in a month, sure.
maybe there’s some kind of “crazy shit bradley effect” where GOP caucus-goers talk winger game to pollsters but won’t want to go all-out on the day of.
base loves harsh/cruel. independents/“swing voters” do not. ergo Newt is doomed.
the other problem is that Newt can ONLY play harsh/cruel. unlike Dubya, who could muster tearful repentance, macho bluster, and simple-minded sympathy in equal measure, Newt only has one setting: scorn.
yeah, that recent softspoken “morning in america” commercial of his is so hysterically out of character
nlike Dubya, who could muster tearful repentance, macho bluster, and simple-minded sympathy in equal measure
You sure you don’t mean Rod Steiger?
little known fact: Dubya travelled back in time to play the role of Jud in the screen adaptation of Oklahoma!
Looks like this was discussed upthread, but I don’t get Pelosi’s logic—why sabotage the guy you want to win? Unless, as some of you suggested, she thinks this will rally Republicans around Gingrich.
she probably isn’t playing three-dimensional chess and enjoyed the opportunity to lol at gingrich
I wish somebody would start a game of three-dimensional chess with Perry. I think that would be fun.
why sabotage the guy you want to win? Unless, as some of you suggested, she thinks this will rally Republicans around Gingrich.
Dems don’t have a lot of muscle to flex in GOP primaries. this won’t sabotage him. it will have the simultaneous effects of a) probably motivating the base (who hates Pelosi) and will see any attacks from her as vindication of Newt’s threat and b) it will act as a harbinger of things to come for independents/swing voters who may only be starting to pay attention to Gingrich. win/win for the Dems.
let’s keep in mind that like .01% of the american voting population are aware that this event happened
That’s like four-dimensional chess...I’m two dimensions behind, but I like it. (xpost)
“A lot of people agree with me and find it amazing,” Trump said of the eligibility controversy. “It’s miraculous how this birth certificate just appeared.”
He said many people have questioned the birth certificate’s authenticity.
“It’s strange that after years all of a sudden it appears,” Trump mused. “How come there are no records his mother ever was in the hospital?”
He noted there are records of other births in the Hawaii hospital at the time.
“There’s no record of Obama or his mother,” he said.
Trump added that members of Obama’s own family have pointed to different hospitals in Hawaii as being his birth location, and his grandmother reportedly made statements linking his birth to Kenya.
“I have real questions (about Obama’s eligibility),” he said.
I think it might just mean that in the end the base will be depressed. They’ll end up with Mittens after all the others have flamed out and all their enthusiasm has been spent
Huntsman walks back climate change stance. that’s cute... he thinks he’s going to get to go to the ball when Newt shits the bed
(and hell he just might. so that’ll show me)
eh I can imagine that newt is seen as ‘the brains’ by some people, and he definitely does his best to promote that image. he drops big words, references history pretty often, etc. etc.
He even has a bona fide Ph.D.!
it’s not inconceivable w/ the dynamics of this race. I mean I don’t expect him to get the nom, but if you woulda asked any of us “will cain or gingrich at any point be the frontrunners” some months ago, we woulda laughed. he’s trending up on intrade, at 8% atm.
xp
Looks like this was discussed upthread, but I don’t get Pelosi’s logic—why sabotage the guy you want to win? Unless, as some of you suggested, she thinks this will rally Republicans around Gingrich.
Remember when the GOP fervently prayed that Dean would be the nominee around this time in 2003?
bad hair day? trump is having a bad face day
egged on by trump, gingrich will spout something so outrageous that his frontrunner status gets sabotaged. if this debate acutally takes place.
― the deli llama,
lol @ yo name
if this debate acutally takes place.
this debate will not take place.
yeah. it’s really gingrich’s “my dinner with donald” campaign event.
but i love the possibility that, if romney wins the nomination, trump will consider a third-party campaign.
can he have another book ready to promote by then?
wait, of course he can.
he writes his books on the back of restaurant napkins.
“book”
BOOK
it’s amazing how there is such a concept as a “frontrunner” when nobody’s voted, except with dollars
i have voted w/ lols
Romney’s officially out of the Donald debate: http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2011/12/06/us/politics/AP-US-Romney-Trump-Debate.html?hp
J Long
: 12/06/11 15:40
The point that some of y’all are missing w/ regard to what Walsh said (and by some of y’all...I mean the people who give credence to not attacking Obama personally) is that it is extremely hard to attack Obama without fully illuminating what exactly he is (an Alinsky disciple who has very different desires for America than our mostly conservative citizenry does). The GOP will have to attack him for the truth to get any traction because the media will suppress, deflect and attack any gently proffered information.
fuck u prettyboy jason long
Justin* lol
who?
A sage.
it’s amazing how there is such a concept as a “frontrunner” when nobody’s voted, except with dollars
― Dr Morbius, Tuesday, December 6, 2011 3:49 PM (22 minutes ago) Bookmark Permalink
you’re right, why won’t they give gary johnson his time in the limelight?!?!?!?!?!
This is good (from Salon):
Gingrich, who’d agree to sit down for a day-long “Lincoln-Douglas-style debate” with a Teddy Ruxpin doll, is selling himself as a candidate based in large part on his ability to talk. Republicans think Obama talked his way into the White House, mesmerizing voters with his fancy words and soothing tone. And certain conservatives are itching for Gingrich to face Obama in a talking contest. They think Gingrich would destroy him. And they base this impression on the sight of Gingrich dominating interviews with morons like Glenn Beck.
totally true about gingrich’s appeal. but also the fact that gingrich seems to embody/channel right-wing anger in a way romney doesn’t. romney says the right things, but that’s not enough. the right is ANGRY. they want BLOOD.
Indies don’t. I don’t know what Dems want.
We want Newt!
(Even if we’re Canadian liberals.)
legalized weed!
xp
Indies don’t.
indies aren’t deciding the GOP primary race.
It’s hard to know when you mean primaries and general election.
primaries.
This is pretty amazing:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/151355/Gingrich-Romney-Among-GOP-Voters-Nationwide.aspx
One thing does jump out: if you compare the Nov. 2–6 percentages to Dec. 1–5, one reading would be that everybody stays more or less the same and Cain’s 22% migrates en masse over to Gingrich. So I’ll try to remind myself that, in addition to Gingrich’s own vulnerabilities, that 22% might not be the most stable number in the world.
hm:
What’s the scariest news for Mitt Romney in the nearly mirror-image polls out today showing Newt Gingrich rocketing into the lead in Iowa, South Carolina and nationally?
The short answer: the breadth of Gingrich’s support. In all three surveys, Gingrich is not only lapping Romney among the ideologically conservative and religiously devout voters who have resisted the former Massachusetts governor throughout the race; Gingrich is also running step for step (or ahead) with Romney among the less ideological, more secular, voters who have been Romney’s base.
All of this is a big and ominous change for Romney. Earlier he had the luxury of watching the rivals to his right divide conservative voters while he made steady progress at consolidating the party’s more managerial, less ideological wing. For a brief period in late summer, Texas Gov. Rick Perry threatened to reach across the divide—but his poor debate performances quickly deflated his standing with both groups. Now Gingrich, a much steadier (if still volatile) contender than Perry, is not only consolidating conservatives, but loosening Romney’s hold on the more pragmatic and managerial components of the GOP coalition.
In the ABC/Washington Post Iowa survey out today, for instance, Gingrich attracts 31 percent of self-identified evangelicals (who constituted a full 60 percent of the Iowa GOP electorate in 2008), according to results from the survey provided to National Journal. Romney, Rick Perry (and incongruously for a libertarian) Ron Paul all attract 14 percent, with Michele Bachmann at 12 percent. Romney’s deficit with that group is consistent with the findings of earlier polls.
More worrisome for Romney are the results among the Iowa Republican voters who don’t consider themselves evangelicals. Even among that group, Gingrich leads him 27 percent to 21 percent, with Paul at 14 percent and Perry at 11.
It’s the same story in the new Winthrop University survey released in South Carolina. Its sample size is smaller, which means the margin of error is larger, but it points in the same direction as the Iowa poll. In the Winthrop poll, Gingrich leads Romney among self-identified evangelical Christians by more than two-to-one and runs about even with the former governor among those who don’t identify as evangelicals. That’s a formula for clear success in South Carolina since evangelicals there as well comprised 60 percent of the 2008 GOP primary voter.
The story repeats again in the first installment of what will be a daily national tracking poll that Gallup released Tuesday. Overall, the survey placed Gingrich ahead of Romney by 37 percent to 22 percent (strikingly similar to the results of both the Iowa and South Carolina state polls). In the Gallup poll, Gingrich is crushing Romney by two-to-one among Republicans who identify as conservatives and by 47–17 among those who consider themselves supporters of the tea party. But the former speaker runs even with Romney among those who consider themselves moderate or liberal, and those who don’t support the tea party.
Further detail on the survey provided by Gallup underscores the breadth of Gingrich’s advantage. He leads Romney by almost two-to-one among Republican voters without a college degree—again, not surprisingly, since that has been a group consistently skeptical of Romney. But Gingrich also leads by 37 percent to 26 percent among Republicans with at least a four year degree—the group that earlier in the year had served as Romney’s base. The same is true when looking at the race by income: Gingrich leads not only among those Republican voters earning $90,000 or less (by a resounding two-to-one), but also holds a solid 38 percent to 25 percent edge among more affluent Republicans—again, a group expected to provide Romney’s foundation.
Religion fills out the picture: Gingrich’s lead over Romney is about the same among those who term religion important in their lives as among those who don’t.
Romney has all sorts of resource and logistical advantages. But in terms of the range of voters that each man is currently attracting, these results suggest that as of today, at least, Gingrich is positioned to compete in a broader range of states than Romney. All of this will undoubtedly increase the incentive for Romney to find a more effective line of attack against Gingrich in the next round of Republican debates—starting with ABC’s encounter in Iowa on Saturday.
Mitt’s gonna have to kick Newt in his newt sack pretty soon.
Not out till Jan. 31, 2012—if you think a couple of us are too preoccupied with Newt’s future, there’s a publisher out there having seven or eight heart attacks a day.
This may be of interest to no one but me, but I was thinking about how the last time Newt held political office was 1999. The last major-party nominee to have remained outside of political life for that long — not including those who were never in it (e.g., Eisenhower) — was William Jennings Bryan, who won his final Democratic nomination in 1908, thirteen years after he left the House.
Fwiw, the last major-party nominee who did not hold political office at the time — which would be true of both Gingrich and Romney (and Santorum and Huntsman, for that matter) — is Walter Mondale in ’84. Before him, Nixon in ’68.
and the last speaker to gain the presidency was James Polk, I think.
and only one!