Fred Thompson Endorses Newt

#26
#26
IBlvNTmWrk said:
The thought that an elected official can upset that many other elected officials, again imo, is perhaps a positive. I tend to believe that most government officials are very complacent and too happy with the status quo of making good money, great benefits, doing very little to earn those perks, and therefore are unwilling to cross the "political correctness" line. There's a reason why many people have made the comment that, GOP or Dem, all politicians begin to look alike... and that's because once they get elected it becomes a culture of osmosis and nobody is willing to rock the boat.
Click to expand...

Newt is your man if you want a POTUS that cannot get along with the GOP or Dems.
 
#30
#30
If they're wanting to screw the economy worse, than I don't see how "not getting along" with the Congress is a bad thing.

Compromise isn't always a good thing.
 
#31
#31
volsforever27 said:
If they're wanting to screw the economy worse, than I don't see how "not getting along" with the Congress is a bad thing.

Compromise isn't always a good thing.
Click to expand...

Because newt would get things done the same way obama and w have. Executive over reach
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#32
#32
milohimself said:
Because newt would get things done the same way obama and w have. Executive over reach
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

You've got a hell of a reach.

I think Newt favors government in a lot of situations, but that's a little too much.

I don't see Newt appointing czars.
 
#33
#33
volsforever27 said:
If they're wanting to screw the economy worse, than I don't see how "not getting along" with the Congress is a bad thing.

Compromise isn't always a good thing.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Those mothers agree all too often, and then play this charade like they never agree. If they didn't agree, then the debt wouldn't be at $16T.
 
#35
#35
milohimself said:
sort of. You could playa drinking game involving every time he refers to saul alinsky. It's gs-esque.
Click to expand...

:Bbiteme:

Do you plan to vote for Rob Cornilles or do you live in another district?


104874_600.jpg



» Nancy Reagan 1995: Ronnie turned that torch over to Newt - Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion

At the 1995 Goldwater Institute Dinner honoring President Ronald Reagan, Newt Gingrich was the keynote speaker. Nancy Reagan gave a short speech on behalf of herself and President Reagan, in which she both spoke warmly of Newt and recognized Newt at the heir to the Goldwater and Reagan legacies:

“The dramatic movement of 1995 is an outgrowth of a much earlier crusade that goes back half a century. Barry Goldwater handed the torch to Ronnie, and in turn Ronnie turned that torch over to Newt and the Republican members of Congress to keep that dream alive.”
~Nancy Reagan
Click to expand...
 
#36
#36
nbakerld said:
He supports cap and trade. He supports(ed) a health mandate. He proposed capital punishment for marijuana traffickers. Dude is all over the map with his ideas. He thinks he's too smart for his own good. He thinks he has a government solution for everything, and I think that is terrifying, and it's definitely not conservative. He is not principled. He is running a campaign based on fluff and sound bites.
Click to expand...

I think it's funny how Newt constantly dubs himself as Reagan conservative. As if we would be getting a statesman like Reagan were Newt elected POTUS
 
#37
#37
For GS (from Politico):

Newt Gingrich better hope voters who lapped up his delicious hits on the “elite media” and liberals don’t read the Drudge Report this morning.
Or the National Review. Or the American Spectator. Or Ann Coulter.

If they do, Gingrich comes off looking like a dangerous, anti-Reagan, Clintonian fraud.
It’s as if the conservative media over the past 24 hours decided Gingrich is for real, and they need to come clean about the man they really know before it’s too late. This is just a sampling of what’s hitting Newt:

• The overnight Drudge Report banner: “Insider: Gingrich repeatedly Insulted Reagan.” The headline linked to a devastating takedown by Elliott Abrams in the National Review, who wrote, among other things, that Gingrich had a long record of criticizing and undermining Reagan’s most transformative policies.

• Drudge also linked prominently to the American Spectator’s R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr.’s similarly harsh takedown of Gingrich over character: “William Jefferson Gingrich.” In it, Tyrrell writes: “Newt and Bill are 1960s generation narcissists, and they share the same problems: waywardness and deviancy. Newt, like Bill, has a proclivity for girl hopping… His public record is already besmeared with tawdry divorces, and there are private encounters with the fair sex that doubtless will come out.”

Drudge runs hundreds of links to stories of all stripes about candidates, but has been seen by Republicans as favorable to Romney in the past.

• Bob Dole issued a scathing statement Thursday that the Romney campaign provided to the National Review in which he said “it is now time” to rally to stop Gingrich, blamed the former Speaker for losing House Republican seats in 1996, and warned that it could happen again, at all levels of government.

“I have not been critical of Newt Gingrich but it is now time to take a stand before it is too late,” Dole said. “If Gingrich is the nominee it will have an adverse impact on Republican candidates running for county, state, and federal offices. Hardly anyone who served with Newt in Congress has endorsed him and that fact speaks for itself. He was a one-man-band who rarely took advice. It was his way or the highway.”

Dole added, “In my run for the presidency in 1996 the Democrats greeted me with a number of negative TV ads and in every one of them Newt was in the ad. He was very unpopular and I am not only certain that this did not help me, but that it also cost House seats that year.”

• Conservatives are circulating a piece written by the editors of the National Review: “The Hour of Newt.” The editors, who have been extremely critical of Gingrich for weeks, waved conservatives off the Gingrich bandwagon. “Gingrich backers say that he is inspiring. What he mostly seems to inspire is opposition.”

• Ann Coulter, the conservative columnist writing on her self-titled website, warns: “Re-elect Obama, Vote Newt!” She, too, gets Drudge promotion, with a column punctuated with this punch: “Hotheaded arrogance is neither conservative nor attractive to voters.”

• Tom DeLay, a top deputy to Gingrich during the Republican revolution of the mid-1990s, joined the chorus of other conservative members breaking their silence about Gingrich’s erratic leadership style. In a radio interview with KTRH, DeLay said: “He’s not really a conservative. I mean, he’ll tell you what you want to hear. He has an uncanny ability, sort of like Clinton, to feel your pain and know his audience and speak to his audience and fire them up. But when he was speaker, he was erratic, undisciplined.”

A top conservative media figure said the flood of attacks reflects a “Holy crap, it could happen” moment in the movement, as Republican leaders began to realize after Gingrich’s South Carolina victory that he could become the nominee, the global face and voice of their party and theology.

“It could happen, and it would be a disaster,” said the conservative, who spoke on condition of anonymity to protect private conversations. “All of us who were around and saw how he operated as speaker — there’s no one who’s not appalled by the prospect of what could happen. He thinks he embodies conservatism and if he wakes up one day and has a grandiose thought, he is going to expect all of us to fall in line behind him.

“There’s just so much risk on so many levels,” the official continued. “Everyone’s thinking, ‘It could really happen.’ He could win the presidency if there’s a way to win with 45 percent — a second recession or a third-party candidate. The immediate worry is him winning the nomination and losing the election, tanking candidates down-ballot. In a worst-case scenario, you could see unified Democratic governance, and we’d be back where we were in ’09 and ’10. It’s insane.”

The conservative media is voicing what dozens of Republican lawmakers, governors and top establishment have told POLITICO in recent weeks in private conversations. Because Gingrich looks like he could win, many of these elected officials are reluctant to go public with their concerns.

As POLITICO reported on Monday, Romney allies are putting pressure on conservatives to break their silence, and do it quickly before the Florida primary, because a Gingrich win would virtually guarantee a very long, divisive race.

A super PAC supporting Romney, Restore Our Future, is running ads in Florida that echo many of the charges mentioned above, especially Gingrich’s claim that he is the logical successor to the Reagan legacy. “Reagan rejected Newt’s ideas. On leadership and character, Gingrich is no Ronald Reagan,” the group’s ad says. Romney himself is hitting on the same themes in speeches, with an edge rarely seen by the cautious former governor.

Gingrich, who has shown a sharper instinct than Romney and the establishment for playing the rawest frustrations of activists, will crank up his Newt vs. the establishment rhetoric to beat back the attacks.

Remember 2010 (Gingrich certainly does): The establishment doesn’t have a great track record in picking candidates and warned primary voters against tapping Sharron Angle in Nevada and Christine O’Donnell in Delaware because they were too radioactive and couldn’t win in the November general elections. The voters didn’t listen, and it cost Republicans the Senate.

Remember 2010 (Romney certainly does): Republicans lost two elections they should have won.
Click to expand...

As for the congressional district, I actually voted for Cornilles over Wu in 2010 but I cast my vote for his Democrat opponent this year.
 
#38
#38
milohimself said:
For GS (from Politico):
Click to expand...

I swore off politico a long time ago and I'm not a big fan of Drudge.

earthworm_newt_gingrich.jpg





milohimself said:
As for the congressional district, I actually voted for Cornilles over Wu in 2010 but I cast my vote for his Democrat opponent this year.
Click to expand...

It's impossible for me to find any rhyme or reason to your voting patterns, did you know his opponent was a big player in covering up for Wu's indescretions?

Who won?

Do you have any clue about whom you will vote for in the upcoming presidential election?

Will you vote in the primary?

2cxdn3t.jpg


newtwest2.jpg
 
#39
#39
gsvol said:
It's impossible for me to find any rhyme or reason to your voting patterns, did you know his opponent was a big player in covering up for Wu's indescretions?

Who won?

Do you have any clue about whom you will vote for in the upcoming presidential election?

Will you vote in the primary?
Click to expand...
I like to vote for the candidate I feel is best. Sometimes, as was the case in 2010, I feel it may be a Republican.

Wu was the rep here for a long time but gained less and less favor with each passing year. Even in 2010 Cornilles ran a respectable campaign against him. Even in the voting guides this year from the most left-leaning of news papers have said ad nauseum that "even Cornilles would have been a significant upgrade over Wu" and a number of them even endorsed him in 2010 (Cornilles is actually a pretty moderate Republican).

As for the "cover up" it's been covered to death here and has been proven unequivocally to be 100% crap. Her husband was Wu's lawyer up until just before the allegations that forced his resignation broke. Once he knew about it, he dropped Wu. That particular firm has donated $33k to the Bonamici campaign this time around, but considering her husband was a partner there, it's hardly surprising. And that's a drop in the bucket compared to the $1.3mil the DNC has spent on her.

The election isn't over yet but word is Bonamici will probably win in a relative land slide. So far equal portions of registered Democrats and Republicans have voted, but registered D's outnumber registered R's 2 to 1, and the independent voters lean Democrat fairly strongly.

As for the upcoming Presidential election, if Gingrich is nominated I will vote for Obama. If Romney is nominated I will vote 3rd party.

Because of the districts I live in are represented on all levels nearly exclusively by Democrats, I am a registered Democrat which grants me more agency to participate in the electoral process here.
 
#40
#40
And to that last picture, a Gingrich/West 2012 GOP ticket is the DNC's wet dream. It would almost guarantee Obama's reelection.
 
#42
#42
i really don't think it matters who the Rs put up on the ballot. gs is all-in regardless and has the cartoons to back it up.
 
#43
#43
Just following up on the special election about my own first district...

Bonamici (D) ended up winning decisively.

I liked this video Cornilles put out about a week ago, though...

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXOV73jf9uY[/youtube]
 
#45
#45
Let's not pretend Obama is the problem you have with the Ds. The D is the problem you have with the Ds.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top