Author Topic: Newt Gingrich??? (Read 1553 times)

no guns here · « **on:** March 11, 2009, 04:35:54 AM »

Just what conservative republicans need... Another old, white guy to run for President next time. Isn't there someone, anyone that is young, conservative, "hip", "with-it" and electable??? I mean we have to have a running mate for Sarah right?

ngh

gstewart44 · « **Reply #1 on:** March 11, 2009, 04:37:16 AM »

Anyone know anything about Bobby Jindal of Louisianna? I heard him talk on FOX one evening and he seems very likable and articulate.

Dixie Dude · « **Reply #2 on:** March 11, 2009, 04:44:36 AM »

Newt is very well educated, history professor, and ran congress in the 90's, got a balanced budget, and got almost everything going with the "Contract with America". He said last summer, the bailout would not work, we need to "loan" companies money and not just give it to them. He would make a great president I think. Very conservative. So would Ron Paul.

no guns here · « **Reply #3 on:** March 11, 2009, 05:09:53 AM »

Didn't say he wouldn't be a good president. I just think that there has to be someone, somewhere in the USA that would be a more-electable Republican than Newt. Face-it... guys like us are becoming the minority. We need someone that can appeal to the majority better than 70 year old dudes.

ngh

bilmac · « **Reply #4 on:** March 11, 2009, 05:11:23 AM »

Newt is a thinker, sometimes I don't agree with everything he says, but I am willing to conciede that he could be smarter than me. I think he is onboard with the global warming crap.

Tommyt · « **Reply #5 on:** March 11, 2009, 05:26:37 AM »

Palin and Gingrich

thats not to bad

P & D
Progress and Growth
------------------------------
Instead of Obama and Bidin
O&B
Over Lending & Beligerant Bailouts
From the Change People

Questor · « **Reply #6 on:** March 11, 2009, 05:53:22 AM »

Newt Gingrich is one of the few national treasures in the world of politics. And I don't mean just for today, I mean for all of American history. He's a real visionary and he has good ideas and works. He doesn't get the credit he deserves. He's also very articulate and knows how to get things done. I see him as akin to Ben Franklin, in that being president would probably be a waste of his talent. He is seen by many pro-Republican pundits as being inconsistent in his message. I find him to be very consistent. What may make him seem inconsistent is that he will often work hard with people of either party to get something done, like improving education in America. His main focus is American prosperity.

I'm not voting for anyone over the age of 10 named Bobby. He may be a perfectly wonderful guy, but he's a total doof when addressing the US in his sing-song Mr. Rogers manner, as he did in the Republican response to the Obama sort-of State of the Union address a few weeks ago.

In regard to a previous post, we haven't been having much luck lately with non-white, hip, young presidents.

Redtail1949 · « **Reply #7 on:** March 11, 2009, 07:25:19 AM »

I am interested to hear your thoughts about age of a President. Do you feel a 25 year old wiz kid extreamly bright and articulate would make a good one? Or do you feel as I do that with age comes true wisdom? Sure we have had many an old idiot in positions of leadership but do you feel as I do that no matter how bright or promising a person is it still takes the tempering of time and experience to round it all out to have the potential of great leadership?

Seems our nation wants youth and good looks more than a man who has matured enough to handle the job.

Questor · « **Reply #8 on:** March 11, 2009, 07:56:56 AM »

Most of the most amazingly capable top executives I've been able to observe were between 55 and 70. Maturity is a big factor. I've met several of the relatively young executives and most are really good at the one thing that they specialize in. The older guys seem to have greater breadth of knowledge, acumen with people, and good strategic thinking.

jimster · « **Reply #9 on:** March 11, 2009, 11:44:16 AM »

If you remember back when government was out of control having their own bank, writing checks with no money, and generally doing what they are doing now, Newt was a key player in overthrowing that mess back then. I like Newt, always have, seems to me when he left, the republicans slid down the hill and started "reaching out" more often, voting with the other party, and of course now there is not any difference in the two parties that I can see. The Dems were more than glad to have the reps move toward them knowing it would make them meaningless, of course the dems have no intentions of working with them or anyone else of another party, they are out of control once again, the reps are dead, and should be dead after what they have done. I would like to see an independent party come up and leave both major parties in the dust. It's going to be hard to vote for a republican now, knowing they might try to "reach out" again....there is no reaching out in my book. It's seems rather stupid to meet a bad idea halfway...I feel better losing altogether and waiting it out. One thing is for sure...there are a whole lot of people who call themseleves democrats that are pretty embarrassed at their own right now, and a lot of independents that want something much different after seeing this mess.

I give one thing to the republicans when they were strong....they were the ONLY ones to attempt to balance the budget, and THEY had control over what the president would sign. Too bad it didn't last long.

Cabin4 · « **Reply #10 on:** March 11, 2009, 12:12:30 PM »

Newt is okay. I don't know his position on everything and it's been a few years since he was in congress.

He's tons smarter than most of the current gators in the washington swamp.

Questor · « **Reply #11 on:** March 11, 2009, 04:27:18 PM »

Try going to newt.org to see what he's been up to lately.

45-70.gov · « **Reply #12 on:** March 11, 2009, 04:38:24 PM »

i like newt

but too much old school animosity in the country now

but after 4 years of ''CHANGE''

people will want to change back

victorcharlie · « **Reply #13 on:** March 11, 2009, 04:40:42 PM »

I could vote for Newt, but he does have a few skeletons in his closet......

no guns here · « **Reply #14 on:** March 11, 2009, 10:02:22 PM »

Without doubt... the older folks have more experience. My personal preference would probably lean toward someone between probably 50 and 65. Experience AND vitality matter in that job. However, as we have seen in the last few elections, the democrats have made (legally or illegally) HUGE gains in the recruiting of younger voters. Younger voters tend to be more liberal. They also look for someone "like" them. They see all old folks as "old folks with old viewpoints". How could someone who is 70 know what I want at 22, 28 or 35? My point is that Newt, while smart and experienced probably won't appeal to a 25 year old fence-sitter. Obama appealed to some of the younger voters soley on his "youthfulness". They saw a technologically savvy, athletic guy and that was part of his appeal to them. McCain was an "old" guy with white hair. He wasn't up-to-date technically. Through no fault of his own, he didn't use computers, Blackberry's etc. He, due to age and torture doesn't get around very well. Regardless of his mental acumen, he didn't appeal to very many of the general populace under the age of 35.

I think that somewhere out there in conservative-land there has to be a guy who has the "look" and "style" to appeal to younger voters as well as the political viewpoints and record to appeal to the rest of us.

ngh

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #15 on:** March 12, 2009, 02:12:32 AM »

You have the opposite of an " old white guy " now "hows that working for you ?"

myronman3 · « **Reply #16 on:** March 12, 2009, 02:20:48 AM »

Quote from: TM7 on March 12, 2009, 01:44:49 AM

I think Ms Palin's time has passed...she won't be picked again for any national electoral office...maybe chosen for secretary of the Interior or something like that. She was picked by McCain to capture the evangelical and other Christian right vote which will be less important in future elections. She doesn't play well in urban-surburban areas and a comeback by Repubniks will need to capture a handfull of these areas.

..TM7

well i think you are as wrong as you have ever been right there. i wont get into a whole thing about it, we will just leave it as a "time will tell" agreement; if that is o.k. with you.

magooch · « **Reply #17 on:** March 12, 2009, 03:09:33 AM »

By the time this dufus clown we have now gets done with us, anything will look good. Newt might be all right, but he is a little too friendly with people like Hitlary for my taste.

Sarah would get my vote if the election were being held right now, but it ain't and there's a lot of water to flow under the bridge till the time comes. Where's John Wayne when you need him?

Questor · « **Reply #18 on:** March 12, 2009, 03:13:53 AM »

I'm inclined to mostly agree with TM7 about Palin. She is seen as "scary" by many people outside the republican base. If she's going to continue to be in the national spotlight, she needs to start working on those public relations soon.

no guns here · « **Reply #19 on:** March 12, 2009, 03:24:32 AM »

Shootall,
I don't think you are getting my point or my stance. Our current "opposite of an old white guy" ain't workin' for me worth a flyin' red rat's arse... I'd drop him now if we could. I didn't vote for him nor would I ever (unless he had some RADICAL significant emotional event that caused him to change a whole dang bunch). I mean, if he started cutting the IRS and taxes, picketing abortion clinics and was on the front page smilin' and holding an AR with a 30 round mag while standing in a pile of dead prairie dogs, I might think about votin' for him... heheheeee what a picture that would be huh? So anyway, no he doesn't do it for me. The problem is he "does it" for a lot of the younger folks. Now... WHO does the GOP have that would fit more into their mold mentally... who would they see as young, energetic, techno, relevant and yet CONSERVATIVE.

I fully support Palin. I voted for her, not for McCain if you get my point. She espouses most everything that I believe in right down the line. I don't think she is electable right now. As someone said she doesn't resonate with urban/suburban voters. I think she will be a cabinet pick for the next republican president. Now who that will be, I obviously don't know. That's what I'm asking. Not necessarily WHO is the best person for the job but WHO IS GOOD ENOUGH and ELECTABLE?

ngh

bilmac · « **Reply #20 on:** March 12, 2009, 06:02:58 AM »

This is the Limbaugh position ,which I agree with. Conservatives should quit trying to appeal to "swing voters" and squishy democrats and instead just put forth the conservative line. He says most Americans are conservative at heart anyway, they just don't know it. When Republicans pretend to be liberal to attract a bunch of in the middle voters, the real liberal will win every time ie. John McCain. We need a real conservative like Reagan who believes in conservatism and can explain to the "great unwashed" why conservatism is good and liberalism is bad. Newt would be good at that, so would Sarah Palin.

dukkillr · « **Reply #21 on:** March 12, 2009, 06:07:16 AM »

Quote from: bilmac on March 12, 2009, 06:02:58 AM

This is the Limbaugh position ,which I agree with. Conservatives should quit trying to appeal to "swing voters" and squishy democrats and instead just put forth the conservative line. He says most Americans are conservative at heart anyway, they just don't know it. When Republicans pretend to be liberal to attract a bunch of in the middle voters, the real liberal will win every time ie. John McCain. We need a real conservative like Reagan who believes in conservatism and can explain to the "great unwashed" why conservatism is good and liberalism is bad. Newt would be good at that, so would Sarah Palin.

If you go extreme right you'll get about 25-30% of the vote. Every single election is decided by the giant population of swing voters in this country. You may not like it, but that's the fact. You must win them to win an election.

Cabin4 · « **Reply #22 on:** March 12, 2009, 07:01:36 AM »

Quote from: dukkillr on March 12, 2009, 06:07:16 AM

Quote from: bilmac on March 12, 2009, 06:02:58 AM
This is the Limbaugh position ,which I agree with. Conservatives should quit trying to appeal to "swing voters" and squishy democrats and instead just put forth the conservative line. He says most Americans are conservative at heart anyway, they just don't know it. When Republicans pretend to be liberal to attract a bunch of in the middle voters, the real liberal will win every time ie. John McCain. We need a real conservative like Reagan who believes in conservatism and can explain to the "great unwashed" why conservatism is good and liberalism is bad. Newt would be good at that, so would Sarah Palin.
If you go extreme right you'll get about 25-30% of the vote. Every single election is decided by the giant population of swing voters in this country. You may not like it, but that's the fact. You must win them to win an election.

As much as I agree with the numbers aspect of this, the problem I have it that politicians must give up positions to the left in order to win. There has to be a way to bring the constitution and BoR back into the fore front. If the American people can be convinced that these documents should be our guiding principals, conservatives can win. Its a dilemma.

bilmac · « **Reply #23 on:** March 12, 2009, 07:56:12 AM »

Rush is the best/only spokesman we have right now. Since the dems have started attacking him his ratings are going sky high. At the same time the alphabet soup media is dying. There may be reason to hope.

lrs · « **Reply #24 on:** March 12, 2009, 08:44:06 AM »

I like and admire Newt. He ain't perfect, but I would vote for him. I think he would make a fine president.
I could be wrong but I don't think he could win as a candidate for POTUS.
He has a few skeletons in his closet, and he's not very charismatic. He has stabbed a few people in the back over the years, and I think it would come back and bite him.
In the Clinton administration, during the assault weapon debate, some accused him of sending in light weights when we needed some hard hitters.
Rightly or wrongly, during that time, the press crucified Newt with some of the most malicious propaganda I have seen to date.

dukkillr · « **Reply #25 on:** March 12, 2009, 08:57:54 AM »

Quote from: cabin4 on March 12, 2009, 07:01:36 AM

Quote from: dukkillr on March 12, 2009, 06:07:16 AM
Quote from: bilmac on March 12, 2009, 06:02:58 AM
This is the Limbaugh position ,which I agree with. Conservatives should quit trying to appeal to "swing voters" and squishy democrats and instead just put forth the conservative line. He says most Americans are conservative at heart anyway, they just don't know it. When Republicans pretend to be liberal to attract a bunch of in the middle voters, the real liberal will win every time ie. John McCain. We need a real conservative like Reagan who believes in conservatism and can explain to the "great unwashed" why conservatism is good and liberalism is bad. Newt would be good at that, so would Sarah Palin.
If you go extreme right you'll get about 25-30% of the vote. Every single election is decided by the giant population of swing voters in this country. You may not like it, but that's the fact. You must win them to win an election.

As much as I agree with the numbers aspect of this, the problem I have it that politicians must give up positions to the left in order to win. There has to be a way to bring the constitution and BoR back into the fore front. If the American people can be convinced that these documents should be our guiding principals, conservatives can win. Its a dilemma.

In some ways I wish you were right... But the idea that Conservatives always support the Constitution and BoR is sadly inaccurate. Just look around here a bit. It won't take you long to find self proclaimed "Conservatives" who couldn't care less about any right but their Second Amendment. One regular poster even bragged about how he didn't believe in the 4th-6th amendments. A significant portion of posters here can't fathom the seperation of church and state.

A person who understands, and believes in, ALL the rights we are granted is becoming more and more rare.

Questor · « **Reply #26 on:** March 12, 2009, 09:05:54 AM »

About 40% of the pork projects in the 410 gajillion dollar massive spending bill that was just signed into law were Republican initiatives.

Cabin4 · « **Reply #27 on:** March 12, 2009, 10:01:20 AM »

Quote from: dukkillr on March 12, 2009, 08:57:54 AM

Quote from: cabin4 on March 12, 2009, 07:01:36 AM
Quote from: dukkillr on March 12, 2009, 06:07:16 AM
Quote from: bilmac on March 12, 2009, 06:02:58 AM
This is the Limbaugh position ,which I agree with. Conservatives should quit trying to appeal to "swing voters" and squishy democrats and instead just put forth the conservative line. He says most Americans are conservative at heart anyway, they just don't know it. When Republicans pretend to be liberal to attract a bunch of in the middle voters, the real liberal will win every time ie. John McCain. We need a real conservative like Reagan who believes in conservatism and can explain to the "great unwashed" why conservatism is good and liberalism is bad. Newt would be good at that, so would Sarah Palin.
If you go extreme right you'll get about 25-30% of the vote. Every single election is decided by the giant population of swing voters in this country. You may not like it, but that's the fact. You must win them to win an election.

As much as I agree with the numbers aspect of this, the problem I have it that politicians must give up positions to the left in order to win. There has to be a way to bring the constitution and BoR back into the fore front. If the American people can be convinced that these documents should be our guiding principals, conservatives can win. Its a dilemma.
In some ways I wish you were right... But the idea that Conservatives always support the Constitution and BoR is sadly inaccurate. Just look around here a bit. It won't take you long to find self proclaimed "Conservatives" who couldn't care less about any right but their Second Amendment. One regular poster even bragged about how he didn't believe in the 4th-6th amendments. A significant portion of posters here can't fathom the seperation of church and state.

A person who understands, and believes in, ALL the rights we are granted is becoming more and more rare.

10-4 on that!

Maybe I should have wrote conservative with a small C. It's almost like Civil Libertarian may be a better description. Not sure but I do agree that we have to take the constitution and BoR in their entirety.

Cabin4 · « **Reply #28 on:** March 12, 2009, 10:28:15 AM »

Quote from: TM7 on March 12, 2009, 10:05:03 AM

Plus it was McCain who said he would ban earmarks...Obama said only that 'reform' was needed in the process. This has not been reported accurately in some news outlets lately.

..TM7

Come on TM7.... Obama lied and that is all there is to it for me. I actually thought he would live up to that given all the hype in the election on earmarks. Even CNN, has this one listed as a Broken Promise. If he signed the bill and he did, then that means he did not reform on the promise of earmarks.

bilmac · « **Reply #29 on:** March 12, 2009, 06:50:03 PM »

Come on Cabin 4 You knew he was lying when he said it. You can't hold him responsible for lying if everybody knew it was a lie as soon as it came out of his mouth, He is a Democrat after all.