When sometime in the next three to six weeks, pundits write Newt Gingrich’s 2012 political obituary, they will wonder why the seasoned politician hasn’t learned from his mistakes, indeed from mistakes made in the current campaign.
Considered an als0-ran for the better part of the campaign lat year, he zoomed up in the polls last November and December, largely due to his focus on the issues in the debates. His second chance.
His rise, however, met by a barrage of negative ads from the Romney campaign (and the Romney Super-pac), Newt’s poll numbers plummeted. In Iowa, he finished 16,000 votes behind Rick Santorum and Mitt Romney — and even 10,000 votes behind Ron Paul. “Voters,” Byron York wrote at the beginning of January, “who once supported Gingrich but have now turned away from him say that his hot-tempered response to the ads, rather than the ads themselves, simply turned them off.”
He finished fourth in New Hampshire — 74,000 votes behind Mitt Romney.
When, in South Carolina, he stopped whining, attacked the media and focused on the issues, he saw his fortunes reverse. He had a second second chance. He beat Romney by 75,000 votes in South Carolina.
Knowing how Romney had reacted to his rise, he should have anticipated the attacks — and realized that whining about negative ads hadn’t helped him in Iowa — or New Hampshire. The whining even earned him a rebuke from Rush Limbaugh. And so he squandered his second second chance.
FROM THE COMMENTS: V the K makes a good point:
I’ve repeated, ad nauseam, that Obama’s 2012 campaign will be a rerun of Harry Reid’s scorched Earth, demonize the opposition campaign of 2010. But it struck me this morning that Mittbot runs the risk of running a Sharron Angle campaign focused entirely on the flaws of the incumbent without articulating a clear alternative vision; a compelling reason for voters to vote for his agenda.
. . . which Sonicfrog counters:
Nope. Unlike Angle, Romney’s been in charge of things, has ample experience being an executive, and, most important, will definitely NOT run on his religious beliefs or say he was chosen by God to run.
So let’s see. To get Newt’s goat, all you have to do is attack him a little. Then he’ll get ugly with his outrage, not being able to rise above it, losing people’s support on his own. Seems like a real weakness, for a politician; something the Obama crew could play easily, if Newt were Obama’s opponent in November.
I like how the establishment Republicans kept saying….”you never know when Newt is gonna IMPLODE, never know what he will say.” Then what does Mitt H W Romney do less than 24 hours after a Fla victory, he’s caught saying he basically isn’t worried about America;s poor. Geez. I know about the full quote I know what he meant to say, but you see what happens when you’ve got a rino Republican trying to pretend he’s a conservative. Only 5% of the delegates have been chosen. Mount up tea party, still time to
man up.
Then why depict it as anything different? But to me, it seems like the media is covering for Romney, because they are at least bothering to explain his side of the controversy. Yahoo’s headline all day has been “Romney: Remarks taken out of context.” They would never do that for, say, Palin or Ron Paul. To me, it supports the idea that the media wants Romney, because he is (they think) safely a Big Government, non-Tea party type… just what the media likes.
So, Newt or Willard Mittens… I will reluctantly vote for one of them (over Obama), but I don’t like either of ’em. “Sux to be me.”
Here’s Romney’s inarticulate, rookie gaffe:
http://www.breitbart.tv/romney-not-concerned-about-the-very-poor/
For someone who insisted he can be elected, he stuck his whole leg in his mouth precisely because the MSM will pounce on his words.
Many years ago a man found a Mississippi River paddle-wheel driven steamboat on a sand bar. He patched it up and got it to float. Then he worked on patching up the rusty boiler and restoring the ancient engine. Finally, he decided to fire up the boiler and see if it would hold pressure. Soon, he had a head of steam, so he engaged the paddle wheel which began to move slowly and inch the old steamboat forward. It was all so exciting that he blew the whistle and blew the boiler to pieces.
That’s Newt. He gets a little forward motion and he immediately starts talking about his second term.
Helio – that was clever.
the media will assist Mitt H W Romney like they did ole McCain until the real contest begins. Then it’s all in for the Democrat.
And the Republican lacking the conservatives fire, loses badly.
I hope that Newt doesn’t drop out of the race. Damn the media and his former colleagues for dropping him.
I’ve repeated, ad nauseam, that Obama’s 2012 campaign will be a rerun of Harry Reid’s scorched Earth, demonize the opposition campaign of 2010. But it struck me this morning that Mittbot runs the risk of running a Sharron Angle campaign focused entirely on the flaws of the incumbent without articulating a clear alternative vision; a compelling reason for voters to vote for his agenda.
Nope. Unlike Angle, Romney’s been in charge of things, has ample experience being an executive, and, most important, will definitely NOT run on his religious beliefs or say he was chosen by God to run.
Don’t get me wrong, I think Mitt is a less than spectacular candidate… Actually, he stinks. But he’s no where near the horribleness that was Sharon Angle. She got beat by Harry Reid…. HARRY FREAKING REID!!!!!
In the case of Romney, he’s won 9/25 elections; it’s not a good record at all. He’s not the most electable either since he cannot articulate an alternative vision from Obama. Romney’s nomination is not a sure thing since he does not have the Conservative base.
All right then, explain to me, in three bullet points without reference to Obama, what Mitt Romney’s Vision for his presidentiary is.
•
•
•
*I ll do for America what I did for Mass…
*I won’t embarass Republicans like a lot of those conservatives like Newt, Sarah and Cain will.
*I’ll carry Michigan (but lose MS AL GA)