E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSRepublican presidential hopeful Newt Gingrich tells TODAY's Matt Lauer that if frontrunner Mitt Romney were not to win New Hampshire or if it's a very close race, it would be a "defeat" for the former Massachusetts governor.
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich demanded Monday that Republican presidential rival Mitt Romney tell the public more about how he operated as a venture capitalist, saying the GOP can't have a nominee who will be vulnerable to Obama campaign charges of corporate raiding.
Gingrich said he hasn't seen a new campaign film that will be aired by a super PAC in his behalf in South Carolina, a production that faults the former Massachusetts governor as a ruthless corporate raider whose work often led to pink slips for workers.
Gingrich said on NBC's "Today" show that Romney "owes us a report on his stewardship" of Bain Capital in the last several years. In weekend debates, Gingrich and Romney crossed rhetorical swords over each other's most recent past — Gingrich's time as an author and consultant, and Romney's as a venture capitalist.
The Georgia Republican acknowledged in Monday's broadcast interview that his campaign was thrown off stride by Romney's negative ads in Iowa and said he it became clear to him that he had to more aggressively answer the charges made about him.
The former speaker has pictured his Massachusetts rival as a political moderate and a flip-flopper on abortion and gun rights. He said that Romney, as governor of Massachusetts, raised taxes and even tried to hike fees on the blind. Gingrich over the weekend called Romney a liar full of "pious baloney."
Gingrich seemingly has left his "positive campaign" strategy behind in the cornfields of Iowa, where Romney's allies smacked him with a series of negative ads that helped knock Gingrich out of contention in the state's leadoff caucuses.
Now, a super PAC supporting Gingrich has purchased $3.4 million in ad buys in South Carolina, according to Rick Tyler, who is helping lead the effort. The spots, in what is considered a critical state for the former Georgia congressman, are expected to go after Romney in connection with his record in the business world with Bain Capital.
Plowing through New Hampshire before Tuesday's primary, Gingrich is indulging an innate sharp edge that has won him attention — and enemies — from his days as a back-bencher in the House in the 1980s. Now as always, he risks nicking himself in the process.
"Gingrich is doing it the way you shouldn't, which is a mean, nasty, transparently negative attack on Mitt Romney," says Michael Dennehy, the political director for Sen. John McCain's presidential campaign four years ago. "It comes across to everyone now. It helps Mitt Romney's opponents. It's not going to help him."
Some New Hampshire voters are pushing back.
At a health care event in Lebanon an attendee, Peter Miller, lectured Gingrich for "conducting politics as if you were a suicide bomber engaged in hostage negotiation."
Gingrich demurred.
"I think that's a mythology," he replied.
Gingrich knows firsthand that attacks can be effective and risky. He made a career of attacking opponents personally, from House Speaker Jim Wright on down. Gingrich's rhetorical aggression also helped him lead the Republicans to the House majority in 1994. But Gingrich's style left him little goodwill among his own lieutenants. He was forced to resign as speaker after the 1998 GOP election losses.
As a presidential candidate in the 2012 election, he was bloodied in Iowa by millions of dollars in brutal television ads, many funded by a super PAC backing Romney. Once a front-runner in Iowa polls, Gingrich tumbled to a distant fourth-place finish in the state.
Now, Gingrich says that contrasting candidates' records is fair game, but he also has issued a new pledge against slinging mud.
"I don't have the money and I will not engage in the kind of vicious negativity that, frankly, drove me down in Iowa," he said Friday night to an overflow crowd packed into a high-school cafeteria in Salem. "I'm going to fight honestly on the facts and draw the contrasts."
But Gingrich is famous for hyperbole and a lightning-fast response reflex that, deployed effectively, can knock a candidate as robust as Romney.
"The only reason you didn't become a career politician is because you lost to Teddy Kennedy in 1994," Gingrich shot across the debate stage last month, hitting a bull's-eye with his reference to Romney's unsuccessful Senate bid.
Other times, Gingrich's frankness can be harsh.
He has called Romney a "liar" and also said President Barack Obama would laugh at Romney if he were the nominee.
And during a pair of presidential debates over the weekend, Gingrich held little back.
He called Romney "a relatively timid Massachusetts moderate who even the Wall Street Journal said had an economic plan so timid it resembled Obama."
When Romney denied being a career politician, Gingrich chided him: "Can we drop a little bit of the pious baloney?"
It's all left some in New Hampshire — where Romney is close to a hometown boy — scratching their heads.
"Is the purpose to destroy Romney? Very often this becomes a double-sided sword," said Phyllis Woods, New Hampshire's Republican national committeewoman, who also worries that Gingrich could be unintentionally helping Democrats.
"I think there is a danger that the negativity expressed by Newt Gingrich could work against him," she said. "But it's certainly not good for the party as a whole. I would hope people would count to 10 and take a deep breath."
There's a long and storied history of candidates in both parties ripping into each other during primary campaigns only to make up afterward.
Hillary Rodham Clinton regularly attacked Obama four years ago, calling him "a hypocrite," among other insults. Clinton, of course, is now the secretary of state in the Obama administration. Sen. John McCain assailed Romney in the hard-fought 2008 campaign but endorsed him this go-round.
And Sam Pimm, Gingrich's New Hampshire field operations director, said he's heard no complaints from residents.
"I think it's about time people heard the truth about Governor Romney's record," he said.
But Gingrich's problem, other New Hampshire Republicans say, stems from his recent promise not to go negative.
"He was supposed to be the nice positive guy and framed himself that way," said Kevin Smith, a GOP candidate for New Hampshire governor. "It's only an issue because he seems to be going back on his word of running a positive campaign."
Leave a Comment:
Nasty Newt is a hypocrite in addition to being a lying pig!
At least Romney made his money in and from the private sector. Instead of peddling political influence and lobbying like Newt did/does/will do from his time in Congress...
Private sector is always the best (just ask your corner drug dealer or pimp). And Citizens United was the height of brilliance and Constitutional wisdom. Perhaps one should look more closely at how in the private sector did Mitt get filthy rich. You might find that "filthy" is more appropriate than you think.....
Oh please he made his money the old fashioned way working for it stop villifying him for that and keep your focus on the communiy in chief whose dismal record is for more food for thought.
Corporate raiding is not 'working for it'. Corporate raiders take the hard work of generations and loot pensions, send jobs overseas, reduce domestic demand and put our economy into a downward spiral spiral. They are carrion eaters, after killing any sign of life in american companies. They create nothing, just stripping the assets and leaving americans with no jobs and stealing from our pensions.
Well said, Steve. There's a difference between "old fashioned way working for it" and buy-strip-sell. More Carnagies, Chryslers, Gates, Vanderbilts.... fewer Romneys, Madoffs...............
Joisy Bob, Steve
You must live in a fantasy land. Buy-strip-sell is the corporate mantra, not the Romney mantra, even though he may have done the same thing in the name of profit. Where are these corporate saints you speak of??? There are none because that's just the way businesses work in the real world. Just admit that you're jealous of the man because of his wealth. Then maybe you can move on.
btw, most politicians are wealthy beginning with Geo. Washington who was one of the wealthiest men in the US at that time.
Now when politicians make all their money from public service (and we're talking millions with Santorum and especially Blingrich) then you may ratchet up the sleaze factor because of the lobbying and peddling of influence built on taxpayer's money and support...
Romney is a banker, not a businessman. There is a difference. Businessmen create wealth. Bankers just shuffle money around and keep as much as they can for themselves while they do it.
Bain Capital highly leverage most to the businesses they took over. Moving the money off-shore in some cases. Think Gordon Geeko (the movie "Wall Street"). That is how Bain operates. Romney still has a sizable income flow from Bain Capital.
You people are completely ridiculous. Sorry, but people are in business to make money, not take care of people from the cradle to the grave. Without Romney getting these companies on the verge of fiscal insolvency slimmed down and viable long term everyone won especially the employees who were not let go. He SAVED the jobs of many that if the company had folded, and without Romney's investment they would have, they would have no jobs. Some jobs are better than no jobs. And to those kooks who say they went offshore, so what, at least someone has that job, because whether any of you like it our not, borders don't exist in the business world anymore, it's one playing field, and it's called planet earth. Obama would have every single soul in this country working for the government if he had his way, that's called communism.
I agree Newt is a complete hypocrite, and a serial liar.
There's a difference between "raiding" and selling off assets of a NON-PROFITABLE venture and CREATING jobs in PROFITABLE companies. You guys live in a fantasy land where all business ventures succeed and every business grows and creates jobs. WRONG. That's ultimately what Obama wants to do like countries in Europe have tried in the past and FAILED. Oh, but he thinks HE's smarter and can do it better. The concept doesn't work and his ideas are flawed. PERIOD.
@Jersey Bob - If you are including Vanderbilts in that list, you need to go back in history and learn about the creation of the Federal Reserve. That's just plain wrong.
I'm going to take back my statement about Vanderbilts and the Federal Reserve. I know they were a part of the exclusive playground on Jekyll Island (the birthplace of the Fed), but do not have proof that they played a part. I may just be plain wrong.
Bingo Rational One, your 1000% right.
Can you Newt will do anything to become President (once he could taste it)? He would eat his own children if it meant becoming President.
Way to stay positive, Newt.
So I guess you think it's just fine to go into a hurricane ravaged city and sell water for $100 per bottle?
Businesses do have some social responsibility. It's the price to pay if you want to do business in the USA.
"hurricane ravaged city and sell water for $100 per bottle?"
IF THEY COULD GET AWAY WITH IT, DO YOU HONESTLY THINK THEY WOULDN"T???????
NewtISaPIG is a troll.
StoptheCannibals,
Well, let's see who would be hurt...
It's not the seller, right? He's presumably making a lot of money. What about the buyer? Well, he's willing to pay $100 per bottle for water. Do you think you know better what water is worth to him? Would you prefer that he do without the water? Perhaps you'd prefer that he drink bad water and get sick and possibly die. Would that help anyone? Would you feel better about that?
Let me guess. You think that someone should be there selling water for less, right? Yeah, that would be nice, and if there were someone actually willing to sell water for less, no one would be able to charge $100 per bottle, would they? Apparently, it's not as easy as you might think.
So the obvious question is: Do you go around trucking water into hurricane struck areas and sell it for what you think is a fair price? I didn't think so. You'd rather they drink bad water, or do you have a better excuse?
It's called price gouging, which is illegal. That's one of the few reasons sellers don't do it.
The government (local, State or Federal) should come in and give it away until the local utility can provide it the way they normally do it.
Let me guess, you think like Ron Paul and the government should be providing nothing to it's citizens except defense. Even Ron Paul backs away from that idea (now that he is actually taken seriously).
AMERICA CHOOSE
A half black country destroying, socialist, foreigner, elitist, Muslim, racist, God hating, law professor, social activist, ignorant, uneducated in the workings of finance or the world, food stamp king from poor white trash.
The white Pillsbury dough boy (Newt) who is the father of hate speech in politics, divided government and spews revised history every chance he gets, Brags about guiding Reagan on the failed trickle down economy policy while raising taxes 11 times and making speeches about the need to compromise.
2.A white Ken doll (Mitt) believer in magic glasses, race superiority while on his missions when younger, proven failed economic policies, Corporate person-hood, CUTS taxes and RAISES fees the 90% pay like gas, license, equaling 15 new and 36 increases. While changing like the wind.
A white religious fanatic ( Santorum) who claims he wants smaller government but wants vagina patrols, the end of birth control, on your own healthcare,.Thinking he should be the priest in charge to right the moral wrongs of the country and immorality. This is not made up he beliefs the leader of this country should be actively promoting morality, family values roles in American life READ SOME OF HIS BOOK!
A white 60s throwback (Paul) with some great points that need to be discussed. But who believes in a philosophy expounded by an elitist bigot from Hitlers Germany. Believes using the same bathroom as a gay supporter could give him AIDS. Publishes news letters in his name to make a profit then says “I have no responsibility”.
Another white Texan (Perry) who can't put together anything but God, guns, war and drill baby drill.
Another magic glasses (Huntsman) the most qualified Republican but rejected for being patriotic and not doing the party bidding when asked to serve his country. (the party took a line that no republican that wanted a future should take any Obama appointment)
StoptheCannibals quote "You people are completely ridiculous. Sorry, but people are in business to make money, not take care of people from the cradle to the grave. So I guess you think it's just fine to go into a hurricane ravaged city and sell water for $100 per bottle? Businesses do have some social responsibility. It's the price to pay if you want to do business in the USA."
Being from New Orleans I take that rather personal friend. People who sell $100 bottles of water are just scalpers, nothing more. Great analogy selling water after a hurricane, and getting a debt ridden company on it's feet again. Pathetic. Maybe they wouldn't have needed the water if they did like I did, which was follow 48 straight hours every 5 minutes on all radio and TV, plus loudspeakers through neighborhoods which was MANDATORY EVACUATION / NO EXCEPTIONS. Maybe if the idiots who decided to stay till Monday to pick up their monthly check, instead of fear mother nature and respect her power, they might not be needing any water. People seem to forget about that because it's easier playing the victim, and my God does America love victimhood. And don't even start on people not able to get out, complete hogwash. If you asked you were gotten to well in advance. The media was a bunch of liars about Katrina never laying the blame where it belonged, on the idiots who stayed, defying orders to get out, and that is a fact.
Businesses live in this country too, they are your neigbors, and the guy at the end of your street, and they care about you despite you thinking otherwise.
Price gouging is only illegal if someone complains! The justice system (local, state or federal) is too slow to react to this type of problem. The entity doing the price gouging usually gets away with it.
My wife was traveling and had an issue with her car, the station that she took it to charged her 3 times what a car battery should have cost. I called, complained to the station to no avail, found out who the owner was, called and complained to him, with no satisfaction. Called and complained to the state attorney general's office and they were more than reluctant to even listen to what I had to say.
So, I took it into my own hands. I ain't saying what I did, or didn't do, but the glass company got some work out of it, and not just once. Arco station in Vegas, 1998, heh, heh!
Revenge is sweet! Swing 'til you hit something Newty!
Just a note: I have less of a problem with Romney than I do with Christie, the probable fat VP from Joisy. Hey chubby one: Don't try to run public schools like a cut-throat corporation!! Kids will get enough of that crap when they get out of school. Put teachers back up on that pedestal and lose some friggin weight, will yas??
JCB-1236504 I bet the people in Missouri and Kansas that have no job because of Romeny and Bain Capitol whould highly disagree with your opinion.
JCB-1236504 And, corporations are people, NOT!
Corporations are made by people. Treat corporations for what they are, a separate legal entity that has privileges and liabilities that are distinct from the people that run it. A corporation has the ability to limit it's liabilty. A living, breathing person does not. When is the last time you saw a corporation go to jail?
I don't think any of these Republicans are fit for office. They are ALL at war with the middle class, and they ALL have plans on how to keep money OUT of the hands of the American Taxpayers, and let me remind you that it's OUR money in the first place!
Republicans = Tax Cuts for the rich, and Pay Cuts for the middle class!
Obama / Biden 2012
StoptheCannibles,
Price-gouging is illegal only because government busy-bodies rob the people of their personal freedom. I just explained why a willing buyer and seller are both better off if water is available for $100/bottle, and that nobody is harmed, but you and your fellow travellers feel a superiority that urges you to tell others how to live. Time was, few Americans had such shameless hubris. Now the so-called Liberals (the root word comes from freedom - the antithesis of modern Liberal thought) want to run everyone's lives according to their annointed vision of the cosmos.
Since you have no economic justification for your stand (or even a rational justification as far as I can see), perhaps you could at least give a moral one explaining why the erstwhile buyer should sicken or die so that your sense of morality can prevail.
Ron Paul wants to eliminate the IRS, how is that a tax cut for the rich when the rich don't pay income taxes? The IRS is only 15% of the income of the government, WHY do we need it?
You know how to tell when Newtis lying? His mouth is moving. Next is a liar, hypocrite and wife cheater. If he'll cheat on his wives (twice)...what will he do to the voters and the U.S.?
He is already known to screw people over. And that's judging from his record, not his personal life. He hasn't really been doing anything except fatten his wallet.
Romney's Super Pac started this mess and they were just as wrong. Perry is the candidate standing who can restore the country to the prosperity that is part of our heritage. Do for the US what he's done for Texas would be cause to celebrate....jobs, jobs jobs......LOVE IT!
Well Clark,
Interesting view on Perry. It seems too late in the race to turn around his actions. He has already made too many critical mistakes and humiliating errors and has shown his incompetence as a leader and a speaker. Judging from your comment ^ it seems that you are a native of Texas and will listen to anything and everything he says regarding the comparison between Texas and the rest of the country. He seems like the "crash and burn" sort of person- he would last about the first 100 days before letting his egotistic and radical views consume his sliver of goodness and send this country into a panic. Romney, besides Huntsman, seems to be the most ambitious yet fulfilling GOP candidate. Your comment is very vague and has a very bias view.
Obama 2012.
Gingrich risks losing the campaign because he will not 'take the fight' to his opponent - or - Gingrich risks losing the campaign because he is willing to fight for the nomination and attack his opponents. What exactly does everyone think a political campaign is about? You expect Newt to support the 'royal coronation' of an opponent?
Republican polling indicates that the top priority is to defeat Barrack Obama. The Republicans have indicated they want a fight. If the second tier candidates cannot defeat Romney - they certainly will not defeat Obama. If Romney cannot withstand competition from other Republicans - how do you think he will fair in a fight with Obama?
The Republicans are getting exactly what they wanted.
Well I hope the Repubs. enjoy the effects of Citizens United. It's going to be a hornet in their bonnet before this is over.
Nerm,
It's still to early in the race, but I suspect that the point you just made is a possibility, and if it is I will just stay home and not vote and wait for the economic implosion we all know is coming.
Old Mitt has some explaining to do. I sure that he created many many jobs. However, those jobs were created over seas. Also, I want to be clear that I don't like Newt, but I'm glad that he is sticking it to Mitt.
Mitt spent the entire length of the Viet Nam war in France via a string of deferrments.
Along with a lot of other politicians. Newt is a defamation to all good salamanders. He is the personification of all that was and is wrong with old time politics. Since we have no fresh choice that has a hope in hell of winning at this time, I am going to vote for Romney, the lesser of all evils including Obama.
Mitt's PAC can spends MILLIONS in Iowa demeaning Gingrich, but Gingrich can't come back at Romney with the TRUTH. The RNC and it's moderate "losers" RINO agenda, needs to get out of the way of the candidates and Voters.
Willard Mitt Romney is the 1% elitist. Don't kid ourselves. His biggest contributor is the same as Obama's = GOLDMAN SACHS.
The media reports WILLARD MARRIOTT and RICHARD MARRIOTT each donated $500K to support WILLARD MITT ROMNEY. These are Mormon blue-bloods.
Why is WILLARD MITT ROMNEY not able to break the same percentage votes 5 years ago? It's because of his Mormon connections in every state. How will WILLARD MITT ROMNEY operate in the White House? Marriotts, Goldman Sachs, Bain Capital etc etc with a pious twist to it.
Has anybody noticed the increased number of tv ads for the Mormon church? Interesting, wouldn't you say?
"I'm committed to running a positive campaign, and will not resort to negative attacks as my opponent has." -Is there any instance of a politician actually carrying that pledge out successfully? It's always a pitfall, but the real-life Eric Cartman went ahead and said it...
Americans want change? This is the same rhetoric that gets us into same mess all of the time.
After 8 years of Bush, Obama extended most of Bush's policies, including ones that took our rights away.
Look at their records: Romney, Santorum and Gingrich have changed position depending on who's vote they are trying to grab. Is it any wonder that I doubt what their stand will be once in office? Who or what lobby will they "appease"?
So now I hear comments that Ron Paul is "scary"?
I know exactly where Ron Paul stands. I know that he is not reckless and will NOT eliminate Social Security or MedicAid, but that it is something that we should look at long term. He wants nothing more than for Americans to prosper.
I know that Paul wants to bring our troops home. Our service men and women will then put money back into OUR economy instead of foreign country economies. This will also allow our service-people to stand ready for ANY attack on our soil should one arise. If war is required, do so under Congressional Authority. Money that was spent on occupying foreign nations will then be put back into OUR economy and rebuild infrastructure where it is desperately needed.
Furthermore, you always vocally thank our service men and women. They put their lives on the line for our country. How about trusting and giving our troops support since they whole-heartedly believe that Ron Paul is correct in this.
I know that Ron Paul will restore OUR Constitution and Bill of Rights, rights of which SO many Americans don't care about losing anymore. Remember, once OUR rights have been fully TAKEN, it will not matter what debt we have or what we think about marriage or abortion. Those things will not matter anymore.
NONE of the other candidates have even brought up our loss of rights. Not Gingrich, not Santorum, not Huntsman, not Perry. Is that because they are status quoe and intend to keep it that way?
I know where Ron Paul stands on family values. He has been happily married for how many decades now? You argue that Gingrich is "sorry" for extramarital affairs...remember that he was playing around at the same time that he participated in impeaching Clinton for playing around.
If you are SERIOUS about puting our country back on the right path, forget about all of these swaying candidates. Ron Paul's records SHOWS that he NEVER bows to big business or lobbyist, yet DOES want companies, manufacturing base and the American workers to succeed in the RIGHT way, and ALWAYS stays true to our Constitution.
Ron Paul IS electable, IF you cast your vote for him. He is our ONLY honest chance of making America proud and great again.
Ron Paul 2012!
Wow. "Proud", you and most Ron Paul supporters don't actually understand the ramifications of his positions. You say:
"I know that Ron Paul will restore OUR Constitution and Bill of Rights, rights of which SO many Americans don't care about losing anymore. Remember, once OUR rights have been fully TAKEN, it will not matter what debt we have or what we think about marriage or abortion. Those things will not matter anymore."
with Ron Paul's positions, what you think about abortion or marriage or someone opening a pig farm next door will indeed not matter.
I agree. Paul really is the only honest Republican candidate. Honestly nuts!
It's too bad that Republicans only have a choice between bad and worse this cycle.
Why are you ignorant people so scared maybe because Paul's supporters are finally banning together all across this country and will show you people who bash us because you have nothing better to do and have an uneducated opinion on the matter like calling him racist when it was 20 years ago and someone else in his group said it not even him,and if thats all have against him ,witch it is, then i say we have a pretty goodman there.Also calling him a loone only proves that you are a loone for believing the mainstream corrupted media and actually saying what they saylike voting for Obama who just recently on 1-1-12 passed the NDAA,go look it up and tell me what you think . Paul is the last chance we have dont follow what the media wants and these big corporations want, dont be their "sheeple". Stand up for whats right and good and actually american,the constitution and Ron Paul. He isnt racist and he isnt a loone he's all we have left make the right choice and vote for RON PAUL 2012!!.
Well in the scheme of things how I feel about abortion or marriage has nothing to do with the government. Now a pig farm next door, well, I might care about that.
Actually, Huntsman is the only honest and sane candidate and he is the only one moderate enough to be able to win the independents' vote in the general election. That is precisely why the Republicans will not choose him as their candidate. And as a result, that is why they will not win the election. Most Americans are still moderates, not extremists.
Exactly Merlin. Unfortunately, Huntsman is still playing too nice. He needs to go on the offensive and challenge Romney on his positions, or lack thereof, and/or his flip-flopping.
Iowa Caucus did reflect the overall feeling in the country on the candidates - we really don't want Romney, we want the kind of change only Ron Paul is espousing, and Iowa voted for Santorum because we as a country are tired of having candidates rammed down our throats by the media.
Hunstman must place in NH to survive. NH will hopefully end Perry's campaign. And Gingrich must attack and derail Romney. I also feel strongly that Romney's only hope to gain the presidency is to pick Huntsman as a running mate. It will be interesting to see if here is any Ron Paul carryover in NH from Iowa.
Sure, by all means, get a double mormon ticket. That will ensure a loss for Willard even faster. I can see the slogan now: Romney/Huntsman 2012 magical underoos for all!
JustSlapMe-
I would take Romney as POTUS with Rubio(or Christie) as VP and put Huntsman in as the Sec of State. Huntsman's foreign relations would be a huge benefit for the US. And- In 8 years you have a nice succession plan in place!
Honestly- I'm okay with Romney or Huntsman as POTUS. Gingrich and Santorum just have something missing for me- sincerity. I just don't buy into them- though I will admit it took my own research to buy in to Romney & Huntsman. Gingrich says he's a changed man- yet he's still pulling the same old crap he did way back when.
RP & Perry have lost it for my vote. RP has some good ideas- but overall, I'm not at all comfortable with him or Perry.
Willard Mitt Romney is the 1% elitist. Don't kid ourselves. His biggest contributor is the same as Obama's = GOLDMAN SACHS.
The media reports WILLARD MARRIOTT and RICHARD MARRIOTT each donated $500K to support WILLARD MITT ROMNEY. These are Mormon blue-bloods.
Why is WILLARD MITT ROMNEY not able to break the same percentage votes 5 years ago? It's because of his Mormon connections in every state. How will WILLARD MITT ROMNEY operate in the White House? Marriotts, Goldman Sachs, Bain Capital etc etc with a pious twist to it.
JustSlapMe
Ok WHAP!!!
Got your attention? The leaked exit polls of the Iowa caucus had Dr Paul winning by 7 points over Romney, Santy trailing a distant third. The Many news stories that hvae come out that there were vote counting irregularities and the Iowa Gop going on the radio publically describing how and why they were going to screw over Dr Paul and the count came out exactly the way they said it would 24 hours in advance.
This statement, with the evidence easily in hand, (easy google search) begs incredulity!
Santorum was crammed down Iowa's throat because the Iowa GOP bosses didn't want to lose their every four year payday.
You really think we would be having all this bull coming out and the party losing credibility this way if the Dr had won in Iowa like voters said he should have.
I said after the Iowa vote, they succeeded in chopping Dr Paul, but I also think they shot themselves in the foot.
The entire party is now looking VERY unelectable. Dr Paul would like to take us back to the republicanism of the 50's and 60's back to a time when the republicans had a party of honor and principle not a backstabbing power hungry greedy mass of disaffected liberals.
It's hard to say with any certainty what's going to happen in New Hampshire, with the way the media is reporting it. Dr Paul will be hard pressed to hang onto third place, Mitts HAS been hurt, and Huntsman is the new man of the hour who's going to rescue us from ourselves.
Looking very dismal right now... And we have the republican establishment to blame for it.
Newt's attacks on Romney are doing as much damage to his own campaign as they are to the likely Republican nominee. I guess this is okay as long as he gets even and his big fat ego is sated. What a petty and pathetic moron.
SI
Willard Mitt Romney is the 1% elitist. Don't kid ourselves. His biggest contributor is the same as Obama's = GOLDMAN SACHS.
The media reports WILLARD MARRIOTT and RICHARD MARRIOTT each donated $500K to support WILLARD MITT ROMNEY. These are Mormon blue-bloods.
Why is WILLARD MITT ROMNEY not able to break the same percentage votes 5 years ago? It's because of his Mormon connections in every state. How will WILLARD MITT ROMNEY operate in the White House? Marriotts, Goldman Sachs, Bain Capital etc etc with a pious twist to it.
Keep up the attacks on each other in that circle jerks of idiots. Damn this is getting interesting, and fun to watch. Sure hope the price of popcorn doesn't go up.
Indeed! I can't recall such a circular firing squad in any previous election.
It will backfire, but won't affect the result. Romney by 10, then Paul, Huntsman, Santorum and Gingrich.
Gingrich is a Big Capitalist, until it comes to capitalism. Bain is Capitalist Capitalism--risk, loss, sometimes decisions that consolidate (eliminate positions), sometimes make money, sometimes make a lot of money but rarely solely by firing people. Bain took risks, and invested money at the level, that others could have--and did not. Just like Gingrich outbid Huntsman on Friday for the rights to the film.
It's ironic that Gingrich's Super-Pac is bankrolled with at least $5 million just by Sheldon Adelson, a Las Vegas billionaire who make his fortune on others taking risk--and losing. It's capitalism. How many compulsive gamblers--the large numbers but not specific individuals are forseeable--have lost their homes and everything else to compulsive gambling? If Gingrich was keen on leveling with the American People, where was that? As Rick said: "Oops." (In fairness, maybe he was getting to it, but the moderator cut him off).
Gingrich has simply exposed himself as a mean and shameless hypocrite who is desperate. Gingrich will do ANYTHING when he thinks expedient--even now citing, clinging and cloning, again and again and again, the formerly hated, Socialist-mongering, anti-colonialist, welfare-excusing, wealth-distribution promoting, big Government shilling, pro-tax-hiking, job-killing, liberty (First Amendment) bashing, global warming faking, Democrat Party-infesting, wealth-distributing, Bill Ayes-excusing, birth-controlling, gay-forgiving, Peolosi-quoting, food-stamping, class warfaring, toxic spill-opposing instead of deregulating, Obama and tree hugging, brinksmanship-avoiding, gridlock-insulting, protecting taxing and spending, yessing instead of NO-ing, tabloiding, far-lefting, liberal ragging (translated: newspaper of record), The New York Times.
And if Romney says he did a lot of business and some politics, or a lot of politics and a lot of business, SO WHAT? Romney has manners too; to Gingrich, that's farther than Downtown Mars.
Who wants this guy loose with The Button? Iowa, and the NH and SC polls, provide the answer: Callista joined by The Mighty Few.
I'm a techie and I went to Sheldon Adelson's big moneymaker show - Comdex - a lot ... when it was still in business. Another web site had an article recently about technology shows and discussed why Comdex eventually failed. According to them (and I agree completely), it was a textbook case of short term thinking overwhelming good management. Comdex charged vendors stratospheric fees for everything because Sheldon figured he had a lock on the market and he could get away with it. And he could. But the vendors decided, one by one, that they simply couldn't afford Comdex anymore and dropped out. The end result is was that Sheldon got rich, but Comdex died.
This is the kind of thinking that wants to get Gingrich elected.
sig, you are delusional. I read so much derp in your comment my head is spinning. Perry would have rememberd the 3rd agency if only the moderator hadn't cut him off? Not to mention your defense of the corporate raider, job destroyer-and-exporter Romney. Wow, what color is the sky in that world you inhabit?
OneOfTheMany-
You might want to do a little research yourself and look into what Bain Cap. actually did. Yes- they did close or downsize a few businesses- but by and large- they started or propped up start-ups and struggling businesses and- oh my gosh!- made money by doing it! THAT is called capitalism.
FOUR companies went under after Bain bought them- all after a minumim 6 year period AND way after Romney had left the company. Over 400, yes 400,went on to success!! That is a pretty good record! And that is no where near the idea that Bain swept in and shuttered businesses like corporate raiders!!
Oh- and NONE of the jobs that people are blaming Mitt for wentoverseas- not one! Some of the companies that were infused from Bain did send jobs overseas- but Bain Capital did not do it.
Willard Mitt Romney is the 1% elitist. Don't kid ourselves. His biggest contributor is the same as Obama's = GOLDMAN SACHS.
The media reports WILLARD MARRIOTT and RICHARD MARRIOTT each donated $500K to support WILLARD MITT ROMNEY. These are Mormon blue-bloods.
Why is WILLARD MITT ROMNEY not able to break the same percentage votes 5 years ago? It's because of his Mormon connections in every state. How will WILLARD MITT ROMNEY operate in the White House? Marriotts, Goldman Sachs, Bain Capital etc etc with a pious twist to it.
Newtron: You would be better off just attacking Romney in the same way that he has attacked you. Now you sound like a little fat blowhard whining punk!
Yes, Romney is a liar, a fraud, and a serial flip-flopper - but so are you. The best way is to let your PAC sling the mud and you can pretend that you are entirely disconnected from and disgusted with such vulgar activities ... just as Romney has done.
Stop being a little punk - man up - and get others to do the dirty work. This is what PACs are for!
"This is what PACs are for!"
And here I've been thinking that PAC's are whores for predatory capitalists all this time. Silly me!
Newt is in this for just one reason, PAYBACK!, He want's to payback the GOP establishment for gutting his chances by trashing Dr Paul in Iowa, (what they did took 2/3rds of Newt's support in Iowa) He was pissed and vengeance is the only thing on his mind.
Problem is, he's destroying the party's chances in November.
Newt has proven he will take money from anyone. Perhaps Romney should pay him off. Wait, he doesn't need to.
OBAMA 2012!
NDAA and SOPA 2012? Stop the non-sense, please.
Please repugniks, keep focusing on abortion, gay rights, prayer in school,eliminating any sort of heath care for the middle class, worker safety and rights, all that stuff that the average person has made up their minds about, gotten past, and are now concerned with getting or keeping their jobs, paying the mortgage and possibly sending their kids to college. New Hampshire is a small populated state, whose entire claim to fame, is that it has moved its' primary date up as early as possible so that once every four years the rest of the US will remember its there!
Who cares who they choose?
Who cares what a hack who uses silly words like "repugniks" thinks? It's obvious you're still suffering from the two Party psychosis...ingroup/outgroup mental disease...black and white thinking; either/or fallacy.
DemoCrips and RepubliBloods are just two sides of the same thing...organized crime that extorts (taxes) you on the threat of kidnapping (prison) and violence. To root for, or against, either side more than the other shows an fundamental deficiency in your mental capabilities.
Pro individual-
I totally agree with you. I don't unerstand why everybody doesn't see it. Or do they just not want to.
According to Newt and Mitt, neither has seen the ads published by Super PACS supporting them. If that is the case (not likely), they must be CHOOSING not to see the ads.
Why might that be? It seems, among the GOPeaParty, Mizaru is held in much higher esteem than is Iwazaru.
How did we get to the point in this country that calling someone a "moderate" is like calling them a Socialist? The Republicans have shifted so far to the right that moderates are now like communists....incredible. The ultra-right wing views of the Republicans would have been viewed as political suicide 20 or more years ago, but even Goldwater and Reagan would not be viable candidates in the current political landscape. Let's face it America---the Republicans have no solutions to our economic and security issues---in fact, they helped to dig the hole we are in. Remember the 8 long years of Bush 43: lies, endless wars, torture, wire-tapping, and our economy destroyed. And you want to put them back in power again? In my view, religious conservatism had its chance and failed America. Why would we let them try again?
I agree with you about Bush, but if you really look at his record Obama really hasn't been better. What does it look like if you step back and look at they whole picture, what if they are on the same side and they are just wanting us to think they are against eachother. To me it looks like one big agenda that started with the 911 attacks. I am not saying I am right, I am just saying everybody is just eating the "Bleep"they are serving us. It is healthy to think outside the box and question appearances.
Right, Krishna.
As I've watched the talking heads analyze every little detail in this silly season, one detail is never mentioned: Bush ... or anyone in his administration. Cheney? Missing in action. Rumsfeld? Nowhere to be seen. Nobody in the entire group.
Republicans are ashamed of what they did to us for eight long years. We know it. They know it. But the fact is that these are the very same failed policies that they're still trying to push on us - just different people. They didn't work then. They won't work now.
And for all you Party of No true believers out there ... Answer me this: Why don't you see the most recent Republican president in any public appearances during the heart of this campaign?
The only answer is that you're ashamed of him.
Sonia:
Romney is no Bush. I am democrat but not for Obama. Guy hates to talk to any one one to one. Ball players and some old friends are exception groupies.
Friedman said is best that all the solutions proposed so far are suboptimum. When he announced he was federal financing of campaign. He had handshake agreement with McCain to accept fed financing. But when all guilty white people seeking salvation for sinds of their fore fathers started putting money in his basket, he changed like weather. Now the reformer wants to spend Billion dollars to get relected. I bet once relected Michelle will go on round the world trip and Obama will get his swagger back.
Burt if he wins! Romeney is just fine for me.
I actually think watching Newt is very entertaining, I love watching him go after people. It is truly an art form. I think he is very effective, and possibly dangerous because of that. The major reason I would like to see him be the nominee is I really want to see him debate Obama, that would be soo cool. On a practical note, "they" are not going to let that happen. Lets face it "they" are playing the population like a fiddle. "They" already know who is going to win. All the game peices are in place. Have you seen the bills they have been passing lately. Goodbye freedom, been nice knowing you.
Krishna, Gingrich produces sound-bites, but he cannot debate. When confronted with the facts of his own words or the ramifications of his ideas, his response is always an attempt to change the subject.
As for your "they", you'll find most of them here after midnight with their tinfoil hats gleaming in the moonlight.
@ Rick-881466 Thank you for the LAUGH now I gottah clean my keyboard...still LMAO
"Goodbye freedom, been nice knowing you."
Which is why Ron Paul gets my vote. He is a TRUE Constitutionalist. He has vowed to restore our rights, and to abolish Patriot, TSA and NDAA as currently written.
I have not heard a single other candidate, Republican or Democrat, even discuss this issue. Nor will you hear them discuss it during the debates or in the future.
Ron Paul 2012!
A risk for Gingrich? Really? A risk? Let's not be chidlike on this. Newt Gingrich, although he would like to be President, has known all along that he never will be. The only risk I see is that he may sell an additional book or two or get another $60,000 speaking engagement out of it. When the premise of a story is ridiculous so too is the story. Newt is risking nothing as he never had a thing to risk in this case. It is that simple.
Well of course he has vowed them... however I'm sure he won't follow through. How many politicians have you heard or seen who follow through completely with what they say? Close to nobody. Paul is a very ambitious candidate, and I would like to agree with Ray and this whole risking situation. He's running on fumes and is about to break down. He's essentially gambling his next alimony check- a grave he can't dig himself out of. We'll see if he is still running 8 months from now.
The only reasonable GOP candidates remaining are Huntsman and Romney.
However, it looks like Obama will reign supreme on that late November night.
Let's see if he's at it again for 2016.
Riiiight, because every other politician you compare him to has a 30 YEAR RECORD of doing exactly what they say...right?
Stop the non-sense already.
Who funded Newt Cartman's PAC?......Oh, Wait! It was Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac!!
You seem to leve out one other thing Ron Paul will eliminate the US as we know it. Small factor in some people's flawed thinking but a major issue as I see it.
"Ron Paul will eliminate the US as we know it."
Considering the "US" as I know it today consists of:
1. Our military service /men/women are all over the world spending US dollars in foreign nations, bolstering their economy. I welcome Ron Paul bringing our troops back home so that they can put money back into OUR economy, as well as a focused and centralized military force to protect OUR land.
2. Restore our Constitution and Bill of Rights so that we are no longer living under fear, pushed upon us by the corporate elitists who profit by war.
3. Get back to Congressional Authorization before we engage in "war". Right now we are merely "invading" other nations to keep the war machine profitable and rebuilding other nations while letting ours go to rot.
4. Offer us viable and safe methods of addressing Social Security and Health Care (NOT eliminate it).
5. Give me MY voice back regarding education. I have had it up to here having my tax dollars wasted on so-called national testing, red tape and beaurocracy. Cut the middle people/organizations out so that my district can reallocate that money back into modernization and new books.
The list goes on...
So yes, eliminate the US as I know it "today" and restore the basic values and principals as a proud and free nation.
Ron Paul 2012!
Ron Paul would destroy us because of all the terrorists (including Iran)we would let plan our destruction in peace, or because of the unregulated cut-throat corporations killing us with their faulty products, or because of the ruination of young people because of all the unregulated drugs and sex. Any one or all of the above!!
It's a nice Saint Ron Paul fantasy you paulites have but let's get real, shall we????
I agree with most of this. I hope he gets enough deligates and able to negotiate some of the items with Romney.
NewtISaPIG,
You sound like a national defense expert. Perhaps you can help me out. With the possible exception of Iran (let's stipulate that they're nuts and would like nothing better than to be nuked into 73-virgin heaven), why would any country in the world attack us if we brought all our troops home?
Here's the prospective defense policy. You leave us alone, we'll leave you alone. Touch one of our ships at sea and we'll destroy your entire navy. Attack our citizens abroad on peaceful business and all your government building will start exploding in the night. Your power plants and dams will explode in the night, and we'll sieze all your assets in our country.
Where's the downside?
Don't tell me about oil. They can't eat the stuff. They need to sell it. Notice already that we don't force anyone, anywhere in the world, to pump oil or sell it to us. This nonsense about oil is just that - nonsense. Ditto for any other economic retaliation you might propose.
So, where's the downside?
On a military note, we need a leader who gets our troops home- for GOOD. Obama has begun that and, yes, I could see Paul continuing with that. Those other countries need to learn to fend for themselves- we've done it, haven't we? We need to stop parenting those other countries and spending OUR tax dollars. Good move on Obama's part on getting our troops out of Iraq. Bulk up OUR self defense- we'll probably need it soon (anybody else notice that article on China's military taking up the front page?). We need to focus more on our mother land and put Bro's before hoes (us and our fellow allies, such as the UK and some other CIVILIZED western civilization countries). and let the others figure it out by themselves. However, Paul has failed to hit home on other subjects, which makes him a possibly reckless and unguessable candidate.
Good luck, GOP's, because you're going to need it.
Obama 2012.
Obama 2012? Fascist NDAA and SOPA 2012? No thanks. Wake up already.
Economan
I don't believe we had troops in the countries that provided the terrorists that perpetrated 9/11 .Whoops, there's goes your theory!!!! (why do you think these guys (the terrorists) are just a bunch of farmers that want to be left alone?? Must be a paulism...)
It helps the terrorists to think they will go straight to heaven if they destroy Israel and the U.S.A. They have NO problem spreading mass destruction (especially if we just ignore them) because of this idea. Guess you didn't think about this, huh? Ah the perfect Ron Paul fantasy world...
Newt...
Suppose we had had a million troops in the MidEast. So what? How about 10 million? My recollection is that the terrorists were right here in the USA for months/years beforehand. Why don't YOU explain how moving our troops outside our country would have made us safer here? Perhaps you need a few Obamaisms.
Or, perhaps you can explain how killing 100,000 Iraqis made us or them any safer. Are you going with the theory that there's nothing more peaceful than a dead man?
Or, why don't you tell me your plan for Iran. Nuke 'em? I don't think so. We won't even bless the Israelis taking out their nuke plants. How many hundred thousand troops have we had in the Mid-East? How's it working out? Has Iran surrenderred yet? I missed reading about it in the papers.
I'm not quite understanding how killing a few terrorist wannabees in East Camelstan is making us any safer, either. What are they going to do? Build a nuclear-powered camel caravan and invade us? Here's a concept: Let's stop them at the border. It's really easy there and it keeps our troops here.
I still challenge you to tell me how getting our troops killed in some worthless desert makes us any safer here. It seems to me that we've let them kill more people over there (our soldiers) than they did here. We could have cut our human losses in half and our economic losses by 99% ($10 billion on 9/11 vs. $1 trillion for the resultant wars) if we'd done exactly NOTHING in response to 9/11. If it makes you feel better, then drop a few bombs on some camels or your favorite Imam.
"Guess you didn't think about this, huh?"
The U.S. as we know it has already been eliminated. They just passed a law that says they can put anyone they want in jail indefinitely without a trial. Do you really trust our government to use that power responsibly? Because, as you know they have such a great record of using power responsibly. This law, coincidentally was passed just shortly after a law that gives them more power over our food supply. If you look at history this does not bode well for our freedom. Also, I know that these things started happening with Bush and now continue with Obama. We need to stop taking sides like they want us to and join together as a nation against a government that is trying to destroy our country as we have known it. Look at the big picture after 911 they are on the same side and it is not on the side of the people.
I am an independent and would vote for Huntsman in a second. He is intelligent, honest and conducts himself like a president should. However, the republicans will never nominate him because he is not crazy or a thief. I didn't vote for Obama last time but would vote for my dog before I saw these other people in the White House.
Ron:
He is a nice guy. He comes out like a wise guy in school class. In Utah it works well. People like nice guys. But rest of the America he does nto project image and has not hired people who can help wiht his message and perosnality. His Candidacy announcemnet with motircycle in the wilderness of Utah, does not match with when you see him. I have tough time imagining him as President. He is more like Carter without all the assets carter had.
I like President who looks normal. think smart, like to talk to lots of leaders and people and good at it.I like him ot have some rough edges to be nasty and kill the bird if has too without didly dallying about its pro and cons. Get Job done. I think that is ROmney who can get job done
Raj, before you go criticizing Huntsman as the "wise guy in school class", brush up on your own grammar and spelling as well.
What is this a beauty contest, or an election for leader of the most powerful military, economy, and culture in the world?
Christ, if you think looks should have anything to do with it we deserve to end our reign as super-power!
Looks? LOOKS!?!
What a joke most Americans are...you guys make me really ashamed sometimes.
It's called desperation. With all the baggage Newt has, it'll take the Republicans a decade to unravel the truths and untruths and time is of the essence. Bye bye Newt. Your past has forsaken you. And rightly so. You made your bed now it's your turn to toss and turn. Unfortunately Mitt is the best the Republicans have to offer and his enormous money resources will make him the nominee whether the Republicans like it or not. The Democrats are smacking their lips.
Newt comes across as wimpy, whining, & desperate. Newt, you can't take the hard attacks Romney's team, and the (legal) PAC's are aiming at you? Come on, Clinton era....do you recall the barbs back & forth in that day? Reagan era, again, the hysterical rants against Ronald Reagan by the media, by candidates, daily....he took it, & came back, not w/wimpy responses, but, strong leadership. Newt, you were a successful Speaker because you dished it out, & you took it. Now is the time to remind people of that. Not show us you can't take the heat.....and mild heat at that. It's your record, your past, your words. That's all fair game.
I'm not a Romney fan. I will vote for him if that is my choice v. Obama in 2012. But, I don't think Romney is the perfect candidate (Romneycare - one day Mitt, you have to address the legitimate wrongs of this bad law...& stop saying it's just fine, it wasn't, and it isn't)....he's far from it. Romney is getting tested now, to be tougher, to fight harder, to debate better, to look a little more human, a little less perfect. Thanks Newt.
Would you find it harder to vote for a guy named Newt, or a man who is Mormon, whose middle name is Willard? Then again, we voted for a man with a middle name of Hussein....oh wait, few knew that since we were not supposed to mention the middle name - until after he won.
It appears SO MUCH as POLITICS as usual, as long as you don't irrate the Political Party's FRONT RUNNER, chosen most factually by HIS/HER ability to raise money. PERIOD! We NOW have the Republican Leadership thinking more of "WHO" can best raise money for the Party's best interests. Just EXACTLY what the Democrats were HOPING FOR! With this in mind, the Democrats will have a very sizable advantage, and they know that already!
With no one actually knowing who, what or where Mr Romney actually is, execept we do kinow he appears to beleive that HE knows more, suffered less, told by HIS Father of how good he should be, and HE has never wanted anything but a WIN. On the other hand, those of us who have been supporters and voters of the Democrats, NO longer have a choice this year. We either vote for more of the same Corporate ADGENDAS, and simply LIKE IT OR NOT, or try to find another PERSON who advocates for the People and the Country FIRST !! "WE" Democrats WILL NOT HAVE AN OPTION THIS YEAR! We take Mr Obama and his Corporate ADGENDA'S as normal, or try to find another PERSON who thinks of the People and Country FIRST PRIORITY!
Oh c'mon!! Hypocrisy is an ugly, ugly thing. Many of you are sitting here, chiding Gingrich for making truthful, intelligent retorts to Romney. Ugly.....but 100% honest, truthful ads. They are ugly because they are truthful, and the truth hurts. Problem is, I do not remember ANY of you taking the same stance against Romney OR Dr. Paul for their highly dishonest, highly hateful/hurtful ads against Gingrich! Where have you guys been over the last two weeks when they were pummeling Gingrich with false claim after false claim, one half truth followed closely by another? Huh? Where were you then? This is all highly disingenuous of many of you!! Gingrich may be fighting back, but he is doing so with honest (if somewhat brutal) truths, not half truths and conjectures like Paul and Romney have. I've got no problem with folks not liking negative ads. Personally, I despise them. They are often (just like Romney's ads against Gingrich in Iowa) full of half-truths and innuendo. But if you are going to speak out against one candidate's negative ads, then you darn well better speak out against ALL negative ads. If you cherry pick, then you are a hypocrite! Sorry.....the truth hurts.
Uh, DL, I don't believe the SuperPac ads Romney's boys ran against Gingrich were outright lies, but I do believe the ads were malicious in the way they were presented.
Personally, I think SuperPacs are the wrong way to go. They amount to surrogate big guys doing one's fighting for them. They are funded by the true bogeymen of our political and economic culture, Big Money from the plutocrats and corporate power players. And, worse of all, funding for SuperPacs is NOT TRANSPARENT!
We can thank the Supreme Court for paving the way for these abuses, particularly the radical right-wing justices Thomas and Scalia, both of whom believe it's OK for them to legislate from the bench.
And so I find myself rooting for Gingrich (I like underdogs), even though I find him a despicable force in our political culture.
I hope the public eventually grows tired of all the odious attack politics before too many more election cycles go by. And I further hope the public will place the responsibility of the disintegration of our political discourse squarely on the shoulders of where it belongs, the radicals on the SCUTUS who were never elected elected and are accountable to no one.
Right on Brother!
I had to laugh about the "pious baloney" comment, especially when Newt has made his living with his hand in the pork barrel.
If Newt doesn't think calling another candidate a predatory liar isn't negative, then I can understand why his previous marriages failed. A positive comment must have been something like, "No honey, THAT dress doesn't make your butt look big, but don't wear any other ones. They make you look huge."