The other day I broke my tradition of not publicly endorsing a candidate in GOP presidential primary by endorsing Newt Gingrich, today I’m happy to report that polls show that while Newt had a rough start with his campaign, he’s starting to gain traction.
After stumbling badly out of the gate, Newt Gingrich’s presidential campaign is showing surprising signs of life — rising in the polls and even attracting rising support from evangelical voters who have long been cool to the former House speaker.
“I definitely think it ends up Newt versus [former Massachusetts Gov.] Mitt Romney at some point after the caucuses and primaries are under way,” said Iowa House Majority Leader Linda Upmeyer, a Republican who has endorsed the Georgian in her state’s key January caucuses.
“Newt will become the major challenger to Romney,” said Polk County, Iowa, GOP Chairman Daryl Kearney. “All national polls now have Newt with a solid hold on third place.”
He cited a new North Carolina poll that placed Mr. Gingrich second to Mr. Romney ahead of former businessman Herman Cain.
Coupling a string of strong debate performance with rising doubts among the party faithful about the viability of Texas Gov. Rick Perry and Mr. Cain, Mr. Gingrich could become the race’s new magnet for Republicans looking for an alternative to Mr. Romney.
I admit that I originally wrote off Newt as being “yesterday’s news.” But things changed quickly as his performances in the debates showed me that he was the candidate I wanted to see go head-to-head with Obama.
“You have to remember that dolf was one of those annoying children who thought because he was naturally gifted in an area that most of them found intimidating, he was better than they, and has always been smug and supercilious.” – Amy
That is the quintessential attitude of a NEWT supporter.
Mathematics/Music/Languages etc. i.e. areas with verifiable skills come to people NATURALLY and not through hard work. They are gifted in areas that Newt supporters find INTIMIDATING. Unfortunately for Americans, most public school teachers are just like Amy. They instill the naturally talented metaphor to K-12 students while in Asia and Europe people are taught that they can get better at complicated tasks by hard work.
Unfortunately for math, other areas which require dedication have an out. Music has an advantage that teachers can tell the little Amy’s of the world that they are talented even if they only practice their instruments a 30 minutes per week. Somehow though, the talented musicians who head off to Peabody or Curtis are the ones practicing 5 hours per day. So when Amy tortures her parents with poor musicianship they nod their heads in praise. When she can’t add fractions they tell Math Class is Tough , just like Barbie used to say.
As for Newt. He is loved by the Amy’s and Matt’s and historians of the world precisely because of his BOLD IDEAS lol. Things that might magically work, if implemented perfectly, in a corrupt world, by the little guys down the chain of command.
Newt is, BY FAR, the smartest, most well versed, most experienced politician of our time, with the most common sense and practical policies, and I will support him 100%, and anyone who doesn’t, is simply mired in the juvenile theatrics that we currently call politics.
Oh, dolf, do try to get a grip for a change. Your shrill squealing about imagined insults is really quite tiresome.
I never said you did not work hard to develop your mathematical aptitude. I am sure you did. And good for you. Your natural aptitude and hard work have gotten you a place at a small mid-level Southwestern university, a grant or two, and the pleasures of being a biggish fish in a cozy small pond.
What I said was that you exhibit personality traits now, in your mid-40’s. which are consistent with and appear to be carried over from a youth of being a smug sanctimonious prig who lorded it over those who did not share his aptitude.
Nice effort to drag in a crystal ball, though. You really do need to work on separating your imaginary ‘thoughts’ from reality, though. You have no way of knowing whether or not Newt Gingrich,supporters, or anyone else for that matter, are INTIMIDATED by your self-defined brilliance. You simply assume that everyone is, and that this is the real reason they avoid you. (It could not possibly be that priggish sanctimonious smugness mentioned earlier, could it? Nope—-has to be intimidation. You just keep telling yourself that.) Yes, children trying to learn a new subject can be intimidated by the task, and I referred to such children, just as youngsters can be intimidated by Shakespeare till they gain the exposure and knowledge to appreciate him. (And the really REALLY pretentious can suss out the most obscure Shakespearean characters to tout their, you guessed it, smug priggish sanctimoniousness.)
But thanks for the spasm of indignant defensiveness. It’s always fun to watch you identify sensitivities.
Ron Paul Gets 89 Seconds To Speak In CBS Debate
Leaked email to Bachmann campaign indicates decision to limit air time for certain candidates was deliberate CBS News policy
Paul Joseph Watson
November 13, 2011
Congressman Ron Paul was a victim of what later transpired to be a deliberate policy on behalf of CBS News to restrict the air time of certain candidates during last night’s Republican debate, after he was afforded just 90 seconds of speaking time during the course of the event in South Carolina last night.
Paul’s campaign reacted furiously to the Texan being limited to 90 seconds in what was a 90 minute-long debate, with Campaign Manager John Tate blasting out an email entitled “What a Joke,” in which he stated, “It literally made me sick watching the mainstream media once again silence the one sane voice in this election. The one dissenter to a decade of unchecked war. The one candidate who stands for true defense and actual constitutional government. Ron Paul was silenced, in perhaps the most important debate of the cycle.”
A scientific study undertaken by the University of Minnesota last month confirmed that Ron Paul had been given the least speaking time out of all the Republican candidates during the debates, even less than the likes of John Huntsman and Rick Santorum, who have routinely been beaten by Paul in national polls.
As Marc Fortier points out, an email inadvertently sent to Michelle Bachmann’s campaign clearly indicates that certain candidates were given less air time as a result of a deliberate CBS policy.
When a CBS staffer referenced how Bachmann’s campaign had made representatives available for an after-debate webshow, CBS News political analyst John Dickerson responded by saying, “Okay let’s keep it loose though since she’s not going to get many questions and she’s nearly off the charts in the hopes that we can get someone else.”
Dickerson’s admission that CBS had deliberately ensured Bachmann was “not going to get many questions” during the debate indicated “a planned effort to limit questions to Michele Bachmann at tonight’s CBS/National Journal Debate,” the Bachmann campaign said in a statement.
Obviously, that policy of limiting air time to certain candidates was also applied to Congressman Ron Paul, despite the fact that he has consistently won straw polls and proven himself as a top tier candidate in national polls.
As we have documented, despite his popularity the establishment media has deliberately downplayed and sidelined Paul’s campaign.
After Ron Paul finished a close second to Bachmann in the highly regarded Ames straw poll, and was subsequently blacklisted by the corporate press, Politico’s Roger Simon said the reason for him being ignored was that “the media doesn’t believe he has a hoot in hells chance of winning the Iowa caucuses, the Republican nomination or winning the presidency, so we’re gonna ignore him.”
“We are in the business of kicking candidates out of the race,” CNN host Howard Kurtz responded.