My 2012 GOP Primary Endorsement

I have been blogging since March of 2003. My political activism led me to launch Blogs For Bush in November of that year, and it was a very successful blog.

I enjoyed blogging then. As a conservative new to political blogging, it was nice not to deal with a contentious primary. I am not a big fan of primaries, as too often egos and ambition result in Republicans fighting like they are on stage with Democrats.

In 2008, we had a primary, and I made no endorsements. I had my preferences, but I felt that it was better to remain publicly neutral in the primary for the sake of my readership.

Now, here we are, with another presidential election on horizon. I promised myself early on I would once again refrain from making a public primary endorsement. This was partly because I felt neutrality was best for my readers, and because I have been genuinely open minded about the slate of candidates.

But, things have changed. I have watch several debates, and each time one candidate stands out among the rest. One candidate has consistently demonstrated an ability to keep his on the correct target. Only one candidate has shown an incredible depth of knowledge and experience that is genuine and  honest, and unmatched.

This will likely be my last presidential primary as an active political blogger, and even though I previously promised to remain neutral, I feel that there’s just too much at stake in this election to not throw my public support behind the candidate I feel should face Obama in 2012, and who has the best chance of winning.

That candidate is Newt Gingrich.

those who doubt Newt’s chances of winning the nomination, his campaign sent an email out to supporters earlier today, informing them that “A poll of likely Iowa caucus-goers this week has Newt surging ahead of Mitt Romney by three points.” Newt’s momentum in other early early primary states as well. Clearly, Republican voters are giving Newt a serious look. His performance in tonight’s debate was another impressive performance by a man who not only has a wealth of knowledge on all the issues, but he’s smart enough to not to be played by the media.

Primaries bring out the worst in Republicans, and not just the candidates, but the voters. Newt Gingrich has not only impressed me with his intellect and command of the issues, but also with his ability to stay above the fray. In this election, he’s consistently been the epitome of class and intellect. He’s the man I want to see face Obama next year.

Visit Newt’s website. Follow his campaign on Twitter. Join him on Facebook. Donate to his campaign. We can win if we unite.

Newt Gingrich and Matt Margolis, CPAC 2009

61 thoughts on “My 2012 GOP Primary Endorsement

  1. mitchethekid November 9, 2011 / 11:44 pm

    Personally, I don’t think he will get the nomination for a variety of reasons but with that said, I think these Lincoln Douglass style debates he has set forth as a challenge would be fascinating. Think what you will about Obama, the man does have a razor sharp intellect and a calm demeanor and I think it would be a great opportunity for the American public to get an education Go Newt!

  2. Darrell Crane November 9, 2011 / 11:56 pm

    I couldn’t agree with you more, Matt. I have been in support of Newt all along and tonight’s debate pretty much sealed it for me. I loved the way he played with the media, tonight. I am hoping, as America sees more of Newt, that he will indeed be the republican nominee. And then I will pay money to watch him debate NoBama!

  3. doug November 10, 2011 / 12:10 am

    Not a bad endorsement, however, he will be my second choice, assuming there is a more conservative viable candidate otherwise. Jeb Bush, Sarah Palin, Cain……the potential list is getting smaller. The media will destroy Newt, however, if there is anyone out there that can will himself to victory despite the odds against him, it would be Newt. Still, he won’t be as good as President as you might assume. Like Romney, he is more apt to be a technocrat supporting a large federal government, than a Palin or a Cain. Still, I would like to see the Newt of the ’90s in charge.

  4. bagni November 10, 2011 / 1:35 am

    nice shot
    can see why you lean towards his newt’ness
    (please spring for a sport coat next time…you’ll look more pro)
    too bad newt as the nominee would ensure another term for you know who
    but i imagine his love em and leave em attitude would certainly attract mattneo’s vote

    • Amazona November 13, 2011 / 3:52 pm

      baggi, people who actually get involved in politics, instead of coyly assuming infantile personas online to post infantile non-comments, who attend gatherings like CPAC, do not do so to try to impress such as you with some strange idea of “professionalism”. Very few at CPAC, other than the speakers and moderators and officials, wear suits.

  5. Cluster November 10, 2011 / 8:41 am

    I am with ya Matt – last night’s debate performance was another impressive outing for Newt, and currently it’s still between Mitt and Newt for me. I also think those two would make a strong ticket. Newt’s answer to rising tuition costs last night was brilliant, and a good example of how we need to start thinking differently in this country. Democrats are stuck on stupid, and insist on 20th century governance, in the 21st century, and it’s just not working. We seriously have to reform tax codes, entitlements, health care, and education, and it will require some adult like, serious conversations, of which liberals are completely incapable of. Somehow liberals still believe that taxing the rich will resolve our problems – like I said, stuck on stupid.

  6. js03 November 10, 2011 / 9:38 am

    so in the end…when we endorse a candidate that refuses to stand up for the constitution…and demand that congress and our courts resolve Obama’s eligibility to be POTUS>..what makes us think that Newt will follow through on all those starry eyed promises that he is making…

    certainly…the last “contract with america”…was breached in the 2nd year out…he knows what to say…but when it comes down to following through with those commitements…he is just another career politician…

    he endorses federal interference in the health care system
    he endorses the failed federal department of education
    he endorses the failed federal department of energy
    he endorses the failure to demand proof of eligibility of the putative POTUS
    his representations describe piling on ever more federal power and regulation over the american citizen and private business
    he wants to dismantle the EPA, yet he plans on making a new federal agency to replace it with even more power

    while claiming that we are in a war against islamic radicals….he fails to recognize that these so called radicals are doing exactly what the koran tells all muslims to do…and he understates this by refusing to recognize that as it exists in sharia compliant islamic nations whose total populations celebrate the actions of these radicals…making the movement orthodox instead of fringe…a complete underestimation of our true, self proclaimed enemy…

    • Cluster November 10, 2011 / 10:21 am

      ..was breached in the 2nd year out…he knows what to say…but when it comes down to following through with those commitments…he is just another career politician…

      Please understand that Newt was just one of hundreds of congressman – and one congressman can not dictate the direction congress takes. His ideas and vision are spot on and as POTUS he will carry more weight to see his policies through. But if Newt is the nominee, I anticipate that you would stay home, preferring instead to allow a leftist regime to further destroy the country, all because Newt doesn’t fit within your narrowly defined ideal. We will see how that works out for you

      • Green Mountain Boy November 10, 2011 / 10:42 am

        The speaker of the house has no power to set the agenda? He yeilded to the will of the rest of congress? He let himself be run out of congress without a fight?

        When did he grow a backbone? The minute he decided he wanted to be president. Welcome to the club.

      • Cluster November 10, 2011 / 10:54 am

        He did set the agenda, it was the body of congress’s job to follow through. He still only had one vote.

      • Amazona November 13, 2011 / 3:56 pm

        Oh no, oh no, oh no….Newt WAS Congress, and anything Congress failed to accomplish was a Newt failure.

        Just like the President can control abortion.

        You really need to try to keep up, Cluster. Sometimes you act like the Presidency is not a position of total power, like being the Speaker of the House does not convey total control over the other 533 members, and like real political power does not lie in the states, where Senators and Representatives and governors are elected and where state legislatures make state laws.

  7. Fredrick Schwartz, D.S.V.J., O.Q.H. [Journ.] November 10, 2011 / 9:51 am

    Nice endorsement but . . .

    You know Newt won’t get the nomination because he is “damaged goods” among Christian Conservatives and women. In all honesty Conservatives would rather complain about Obama for four years and pray Palin or Bush or some other hard line Social Conservative emerges as a clear front runner in 2016 against an unknown and open Democratic field.

    • neocon1 November 10, 2011 / 4:47 pm


      nice anti Christian slam SCHWARTZ now run along to the gay thread.

    • Cluster November 10, 2011 / 10:25 am


      Welcome back – it’s been a while. I see that you still feel that you have your finger on the pulse of conservatism, which is ironic considering you still have yet to grasp the core concept of the ideology.

      • Fredrick Schwartz, D.S.V.J., O.Q.H. [Journ.] November 10, 2011 / 10:46 am

        I make no claim to have my finger on the pulse of Conservatism.

        Those were your words. I do believe that I understand Conservatism, as it exists in 2011 enough to read the tea leaves though. Romney is a Mormon and Conservative Christians don’t trust a Mormon to be conservative enough to assert their values from the Oval Office.

        They question Romney’s views on abortion, immigration, health care, deficits and on and on. What’s not to understand? Some will hold their nose to get rid of Obama whom they preceive as a Socialist and vote Romney. But they know they will be disappointed when the deficit increases and the debt grows just as much as it did during the Bush years.

        Gingrich won’t do any better on that front in the current global economic climate. Where does that take the TEA Party base? Herman Cain? No, it takes them to a relaxing four years of listening to Rush and reading Drudge and hoping for salvation in 2016.

      • Cluster November 10, 2011 / 11:27 am

        Staunch Conservative Christians are a minority in the GOP, and you’re forgetting the purely fiscal conservatives, such as myself, and independents, who will break hugely in favor of either Newt or Mitt, mainly because Obama is such a spectacular failure. And the base of the TEA party is fiscally minded, and they will definitely not tolerate four more years of progressive insanity.

      • Amazona November 13, 2011 / 4:01 pm

        Freddie may actually believe that all conservatives are as politically superficial and easily distracted as are the Pseudo-Libs who support the Left, or he may just hope this is so.

        But he also shows a remarkable lack of knowledge of Christianity, which is based to a great degree on the concept of salvation—of the sinner becoming saved, of the recognition of one’s sins and errors and the commitment to be a better person.

        Redemption is a core belief of Christianity, and to believe in redemption and salvation one has to believe that sinners can repent and come to God, confess their sins and seek to sin no more.

        But thanks for the Leftist effort to try to tell conservatives what the Bible teaches—it’s always quite amusing.

  8. Green Mountain Boy November 10, 2011 / 10:54 am

    “Romney is a Mormon and Conservative Christians don’t trust a Mormon to be conservative enough to assert their values from the Oval Office. ”

    Absolutely wrong. Romney Mitt has shown by his words and actions that he is not a conservative. That is why christian conservatives such as myself will not waste a vote on him. Glenn Beck is a mormon and a christian conservative and would get the vast majority of the non mormon vote easily.

    Hope? Hah. Thats for establishment repubs and thier small tax breaks.

    • Fredrick Schwartz, D.S.V.J., O.Q.H. [Journ.] November 10, 2011 / 11:06 am

      There are millions of conservative voters that just don’t trust his religion. I do agree with you that he isn’t conservative enough for the base. However, he was the head of Bain for 25 years and he does know how to run a corporation successfully. Most conservatives, as you say, won’t let his flip flopping go and that’s a bigger number than those anchored to the religion issue. Romney is too mercurial in search of popularity with the establishment.

      • Amazona November 13, 2011 / 4:05 pm

        Cluster November 10, 2011 at 12:09 pm

        Frederick is a 20th century “thinker” in a 21st century. He is irrelevant.

        There. Fixed.

      • Green Mountain Boy November 10, 2011 / 11:30 am

        “There are millions of conservative republican voters that just don’t trust his religion.


        Conservatives could care less about Romney Mitts religion. Sooner folks learn that the better. The religion issue is brought up mostlyby establishment excuse makers preparing the blame game for after the 2012 elections.

        Republicans and conservatives are two different things. As far as I am conserned, the quicker the rest of the conservatives out there shed thier alligience to the GOP the better.

        In a way the donkyrats are right. The GOP is the party of no. No opposition that is.

      • doug November 10, 2011 / 11:57 am


        Are you trying to tell us that having someone believe that they can be the almighty ruler and require freedom loving Americans to purchase insurance against their wishes is a Mormon thing? I know a whole lot of Mormons that I like immensly, and not one of them thinks it okay for an elected head of government to force one to buy insurance or else pay a fine….yet they support Romney.

        It seems to be that the only bigotry going on in the GOP side is the other way around, Mormons supporting a Mormon candidate at a rate that could only mean there is bigotry there. However, I do see that for the general population of the GOP, a higher percentage is supporting Romney than the percentage of Mormons in the GOP, How can that be?

        Stop playing the religion card, it’s as ugly as playing the race card.

      • Cluster November 10, 2011 / 12:09 pm

        Frederick is a 20th century thinker in a 21st century. He is irrelevant.

      • dbschmidt November 10, 2011 / 1:56 pm

        I would have to say, but this is just my opinion, that a great many of the TEA movement folks are fiscally conservative but not necessarily politically Conservative. I started out as a Dem years ago that voted primarily GOP, became a GOP’er but they left me as well, whereas I have become a Libertarian politically and never looked back.

        That and I have never once (in three plus decades of voting) considered a candidate’s religion in the equation and the only time I have even heard about it being a factor was with JFK being the first Catholic.

      • cory November 10, 2011 / 3:50 pm

        “That and I have never once (in three plus decades of voting) considered a candidate’s religion in the equation and the only time I have even heard about it being a factor was with JFK being the first Catholic.”

        You don’t think people accusing Obama of being a secret Muslim is a factor?

      • tiredoflibbs November 10, 2011 / 5:57 pm

        Freddy’s here because it is another slow day at the echo chamber…the pitchfork.

        Actually, it is not an echo chamber any more. You need some of the other drones to respond to their “journalism”.

        Right now, there are ZERO responses to the vast majority of them. Those that do respond are indeed echos of the original post – like wally’s NO SUBSTANCE.

  9. bardolf November 10, 2011 / 3:07 pm

    Cain is gone after the scandal. Perry is gone after his bizarre performance. Newt is old goods and has no chance.

    Dear Tea Partiers- Your GOP nominee Mr. Fiscal Conservative, Obamacare version 0.8 creator Mittens. The odds of B4V surviving for 4 more years are looking slim.

    • neocon1 November 10, 2011 / 5:29 pm


      JFK in todays world would make RR look like a socialist.

    • neocon1 November 10, 2011 / 4:52 pm


      and you should go to aljezerrahiloveislamandiran.

    • doug November 10, 2011 / 5:14 pm

      Right, we are going so far to the right that we have completely forgotten that in our history we should be moderate…..after all it was only 50 years ago that we people were required by law to purchase health insurance or else pay a fine. It is only 100 years ago that the federal government decided to bail out the auto industry with billions of dollars and in turn take over individual companies in that industry and use millions of taxpayer dollars to compete against private industries that refused to accept the government terms. And 150 years ago it was custom in this country for the government to set the salaries of CEO’s of private businesses.

      Maybe we are getting too far right wing as history shows that our opposition to the current climate is way out of line with the history of our country, I guess we should consider nominating Mitt Romney as he is more in line with what our country has historically stood for.

    • neocon1 November 10, 2011 / 4:50 pm

      fredschwartzPutz = a formerly banned forker for calling Ama a C#*T

    • neocon1 November 10, 2011 / 6:14 pm

      Reggie Love, Obama ‘body man,’ to leave White House by year’s end

      word has it he will be bwany fwanks new “body man”
      paging larry sinclair…

    • neocon1 November 10, 2011 / 7:53 pm


      GINGRICH: I love humor disguised as a question. That’s terrific. I have yet to hear a single reporter ask a single Occupy Wall Street person a single rational question about the economy that would lead them to say, for example, who’s gonna pay for the park you’re occupying if there are no businesses making a profit? (applause/cheers)

    • neocon1 November 10, 2011 / 7:58 pm

      Happy Birthday United States Marines

      236 years of history ^ | today | me

      OOH RAH…….
      Semper Fi
      all my brothers

    • neocon1 November 10, 2011 / 8:07 pm

      one for AMA

      The Marines I have seen around the world have the cleanest bodies, the filthiest minds,
      the highest morale, and the lowest morals of any group of animals I have ever seen.
      Thank God for the United States Marine Corps!

      Eleanor Roosevelt, First Lady of the United States, 1945

      LOL :)

      • Amazona November 13, 2011 / 4:08 pm

        For ME? Awwww, that is soooo sweet.

  10. Jack in Chicago November 11, 2011 / 1:10 am

    You guys are so screwed. Say it with me kids: “I love Mitt.” Repeat that: “I love Mitt.” Again. “I love Mitt.” LOUDER. “I LOVE MITT.”

    Get used to it, boys and girls. Because Romney…flip-floppy, liberal, Obamacare Romney….HE is your nominee. And there is NOTHING you can do about it.


    • Cluster November 11, 2011 / 7:31 am

      You know what I find absolutely hilarious is a liberal mocking the possible GOP nominee Mitt Romney, when IN FACT, Mitt is infinitely more qualified, and tremendously more accomplished than Obama could ever hope to be. So if Mitt is the nominee, we can at least take comfort in knowing that maybe someone with some actual real world experience will be in the White House.

    • neocon1 November 11, 2011 / 8:13 am

      jackhoff in chicago


      one good religious family American (rino)

      One marxist, muslim, kenyan, doper, who never ran a lemonaid stand.

    • neocon1 November 11, 2011 / 12:42 pm

      jackhoff in chi

      better than barry yelling I love larry and bwany

  11. Cluster November 11, 2011 / 7:57 am

    The Occupy protestors, otherwise known as Obama’s base, are getting more and more unhinged and violent. These extremists, which comprise the main constituency of the Democratic Party, are so completely stupid that they present a danger to themselves, and are even attacking the vaunted public union members they confess to care so much about. Just three short years after the immaculation of Obama, liberals have lost all sense of reality, of course they had a tepid grasp to begin with.

    • cory November 11, 2011 / 5:30 pm

      “These extremists, which comprise the main constituency of the Democratic Party”

      [Citation Needed]

    • neocon1 November 11, 2011 / 9:12 am

      Cain – Newt a winning ticket

      • Cluster November 11, 2011 / 9:17 am

        Could be

      • neocon1 November 11, 2011 / 9:53 am


        IF Cain survives the bimbo eruption (likely) he will be bomb proof as a black man.
        Newt will be in second seat a much safer position, yet can be the front man brains of the outfit after the election.

    • bardolf November 11, 2011 / 11:55 am

      In many ways, Gingrich would be better-suited as an intellectual ombudsman of the GOP race than as a candidate himself; he has more baggage than Queen Elizabeth II on a road trip. But the hour is late and the pickings are slim. — National Review

    • tiredoflibbs November 11, 2011 / 1:44 pm

      Uhm, Velma, that would apply if obAMATEUR and the looting democrats were looking at ONLY increasing taxes on those who make over $1million, BUT his proposals have included those who make over $250K – that includes small business owners.

      All this time obAMATEUR has been saying “millionaires” and “billionaires” to the drones who so easily fall for the class warfare gimmick. But on the actual legislation, he has redefined “millionaires” and “billionaires” to be >$250K ($200K if you are single).

      So, who is lying? Not Boehner……

      Sadly, I see the class warfare talking points in your posts constantly. Why are you so gullible to fall for this old socialist tactic?

      • neocon1 November 11, 2011 / 4:49 pm


        the dumber, of dumb and dumber.

      • cory November 11, 2011 / 5:39 pm

        Just as an FYI, when people refer to “millionaires” they don’t mean yearly income, they mean accumulated wealth. Most people making over $250k a year for any length of time do become millionaires. You also have to have income significantly higher than $250k for an increase in the top tax rate to affect you significantly; at $250k you are affected not at all, and at $300k, a 3% increase in taxes only costs you $1,500 a year. You have to get to a pretty hefty income before it makes a serious difference, at which point you probably are talking almost exclusively millionaires.

        Also, people like to talk about small business owners, but this is take home pay, not a corporate tax. If a business owner re-invests in the business, it is exempted from this tax.

        Combine all that and the narrative of the poor guy who is barely in the $250k bracket and needs the money to support his small business becomes a fairy tale. It sounds ridiculous when Mark Levin whines about it on the radio, and it sounds ridiculous when you parrot him.

  12. Amazona November 13, 2011 / 4:12 pm

    I enter every election cycle expecting, based on experience, to find myself becoming less and less impressed with people I started off liking, and more and more impressed with people I didn’t really expect to find all that interesting.

    So this year I have cooled on Romney, and Perry, and find myself paying more and more attention to Gingrich. Oh, I always liked him, but I did kind of tend to see him as yesterday’s news. But the more I see of him now, particularly in comparison to the others in the race, the more impressive he is.

    I like that he admits his mistakes, and I agree with him that the only way to avoid making mistakes is to not do anything. (Such as consistently vote “present” without taking a stand.) I’d much rather have a leader who has ideas and the courage to try them out, and who learns from his mistakes when they don’t work.

  13. SpySmasher January 26, 2012 / 4:05 pm

    So you endorsed Gingrich, who can’t win. Better change your slogan to “Defeat is not only an option, it’s a certainty.”

Comments are closed.