Tweet
Widely mocked among the media cognoscenti for messy spousal shedding and then seeking the Traditional Values Party’s nomination, could this candidate, as nominee, placate the rabid right wing?
Would he put away his formidable opponent, the Next-Door Neighbor Mormon Governor, in his own backyard to solidify the new arc of his campaign and provide the establishment and the right wing a reason to coalesce behind his nomination?
McCain 2008? Yes, and perhaps Newt 2012 too.
Read what John McQuaid, the publisher of “New Hampshire’s largest and only statewide daily publication,” wrote today:
Readers of the Union Leader and Sunday News know that we don’t back candidates based on popularity polls or big-shot backers. We look for conservatives of courage and conviction who are independent-minded, grounded in their core beliefs about this nation and its people, and best equipped for the job.
We don’t have to agree with them on every issue. We would rather back someone with whom we may sometimes disagree than one who tells us what he thinks we want to hear.
Newt Gingrich is by no means the perfect candidate. But Republican primary voters too often make the mistake of preferring an unattainable ideal to the best candidate who is actually running. In this incredibly important election, that candidate is Newt Gingrich. He has the experience, the leadership qualities and the vision to lead this country in these trying times. He is worthy of your support on January 10.
Now, only one sentence of this is true. Newt has no courage or conviction. He isn’t independent-minded, his views are on offer to the highest Beltway bidder and have been for some time. His core beliefs are on quicksand and his personality profoundly disqualifies him for the job of president. Some people who live near Newt Hampshire have real issues with him:
One of those people is Rachel Maddow, [who] presented a segment entitled “Getting to the Root of Newt’s Loot”, which detailed just a few of the various influence-peddling, “Nigerian prince e-mail, send-me-your-bank-details” schemes that have made Gingrich a very wealthy man.
According to Maddow, “Newt Gingrich’s profession since he got kicked out of Congress under a cloud of ethics charges related to fundraising, his full-time profession has been selling access to himself as someone who is influential because of his time as a public servant. He has been marketing the Speakership of the House for his own private financial gain to anybody who will pay him.”
Newt Gingrich is by no means the perfect candidate.
That I can agree with. Newt may be the most attractive candidate for GOPs — whose last name is not Romney. Which appears to be what the only (and largest!) daily statewide publication is promoting here. The Union Leader, being a next door neighbor, is presumed to know Mitt well. The paper derailed Romney’s expected victory here in 2008 with relentless attacks.
It’s up to Newt Hampshire voters to decide what credence they give this Gingrich endorsement: their largest (and only!) statewide newspaper has picked the eventual GOP nominee only twice since the eighties.
The most recent choice was last round, and it was John McCain. How’d that work for you, Republicans?
Looking back, the Union Leader has only supported two Republican candidates who went on to actually cement the GOP nomination: Reagan in 1980 and McCain in 2008. The Granite State publication endorsed Ronald Reagan in 1976 and 1980, Pete du Pont in 1988, Pat Buchanan in 1992 and 1996, Steve Forbes in 2000 and John McCain 2008.
A quick reminder: less than a quarter million GOP voters cast ballots in the 2008 New Hampshire primary. It’s really just a matter of which candidate peaks at the right moment; the primary is January 10th. And these 2012 voters have been inundated with candidates this time; they take their retail presidential politics very seriously.
Pass the popcorn.
37 Comments
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Teddy!
Apparently the Union Leader is notoriously a hard right Bircherite publication which has never picked a winner in a presidential race. Should be interesting nonetheless. Personally, I still think it will be Romney with an unenthusiastic GOP electorate.
No one seems to remember how Newt left his last government job. Or maybe it’s okay if you’re a Republican.
Newt = Fat, Rich and Lilly white. He ain’t black and he ain’t Mormon.
NH = Pull the lever. He’ll hafta do.
Teddy!
I would not put too much store in a paper which has previously endorsed such stellar performers as Steve Forbes and “Pete” DuPont. I still think that Mittens wins by default after all the others self destruct or are blown out of the water by their rivals. Of course that will lead to an unenthusiastic GOP electorate and hopefully a low turnout. Should still be interesting.
Or that he has been a one man grift machine that puts the Snowbilly circus to shame since being booted out the back door.
Well, yeah, but that’s definitely okay if you’re a Republican. In fact, it’s what they all seem to aspire to.
They see it as the natural continuation of their “public service.” After all, it is exactly what they did while in office.
Teddy
Sure hope that comes with plenty of fresh drawn butter!!
The very idea that the anti-DC Tea Party would gravitate to Newt is absurd. But like his namesake, he’s a chameleon who holds no principled views. He’ll change his spots to match any audience, as long as their an admission charge.
He and Mitt are really quite alike that way; the idea of Newt as the anti-Mitt makes me laugh out loud.
Good evening, all!
*grin* Which brings us full circle, back to the circumstances under which Newt left office…
Main difference is that Newt is a meaner cuss than Mittens could ever hope to be. Even the dog story is one of neglect, not active cruelty.
Newt will either self destruct or bow out. I have seen some folks speculating that he is doing exactly what Palin did at the start of the campaign. His grifting was in decline and he needed to renew the brand, but is not really interested in the hardwork of governing.
Which is one of the reasons I do not think he can beat Mittens in the long term. The big boys do not trust him and will mostly not back him. I keep seeing where he is having problems with fundraising.
That’s what I think is relevant about Newt’s marital indiscretions: they illustrate that he is out for Newt first, last, and only, and doesn’t give a tenth of a damn who else gets hurt. The “big boys” want a candidate who’s out for them, not himself.
They want a servant, not an independent contractor with his own agenda. that is also Mittens strength, as he is one of them.
Bingo. If only Mittens had joined a more mainstream religion, like Oprahism or voodoo, he’s be perfect.
Do you remember the way Maynard G. Krebs said Work?
Just a drive by tonight, to say hiya to Teddy, and your comment inspired me, Doc.
Hi and bye, then.
I just drove across New Hampshire, from Conway to Keene, and along the way I got a look at the number and distribution of political signs. There were lots of Romney signs, and quite a few Perry signs. A few Santorum’s and some Paul signs were along the roads too. Not one Newt sign – not one. Now maybe he can get a local organization going in the next few weeks, but it is hard to imagine how that is going to work among primary voters. New Hampshire voters are famous for insisting on retail politics, and there too, Newt is simply not competitive. In short, Newt says he is running, but he is all mouth and no footwork.
Thanks, but, do you remember?
Dobey Gillis.
heh
Yep. Actually giggled visualizing that coming out of Newt’s mouth.
It’s only hard work if you give a shit. Why not run as long as you can. If elected, even better for the bottom line.
Polls in New Hampshire have Mitt ahead anywhere between 17 and 27 points, depending. Newt’s in a not-very-close second in the polls I glanced at.
Mitt’s problem is he has to win everywhere. He went from not even competing in Iowa to suddenly has-to-win. Which I don’t think he will. NH could be an LBJ situation for him, where anything less than a 20-point margin will motivate the #2 and #3 going into SC.
Where Mitt is viewed as the anti-Christ, as a Mormon.
Oh, good. Glad I gave you a smile.
(Hey, at least the other evildoctor shows up in the morning with a zinger once in a while.)
I just don’t stay up late anymore. Er, I mean, I only stay up to read.
But, I still love you later night guys.
And, Teddy, I’m glad I’m still here too.
But then he would have to actually try to implement some of those policies. Way too much opportunity for disaster there, which hurts the bottom line. Even Newt knows that most of what he is selling is nothing but snake oil.
I have never thought of changing my handle to something with Rectal in it. But, still, sorta interesting.
I know, I’m weird.
Nighty nite.
Yeah. I do not think he has much chance in the South, but elsewhere he may hold his own. I think his salvation comes from the backing of the money boys, who are less than thrilled about the rest of this clown circus, and that the others are even bigger clowns than he is and tend to flame out.
Night!
Think I will toddle off as well. Take care all.
Yeah, it’s been a nice break, but I have to get up tomorrow morning. Peace out, y’all!
Howdy ‘pups.
But the Republican presidential electoral strategy is based on holding the South. Can Mittens pull enough EVs without the South?
Good night, Dr. D., EDP.
How did cheating on one’s wives, rewriting history and giving awards to porno distributors somehow become “conservative values?”
Anyway if you haven’t already seen this, please help keep a fellow lefty/blogger/novelist and his missus and cat indoors during the holidays. Rent day is Thursday. I’ll be willing to send free copies of my novels on request.
Cheating on wives is a long-standing tradition in the upper crust, don’t you know? Actually, it’s a pretty long-standing tradition in most levels of society. Rewriting history is a Republican tradition of the last half of the 20th Century (if not older than that.) And I doubt that Newt knew he was shaking down a titty bar.
jp, sorry about your emergency. You mentioned Boeing at the link. Are you in the NW these days?
sorry to hear about your troubles but maybe this will help you see what is going on. Post it on your blog and know this is just a small window into what has been happening. The FEd managed to limit the audit to just this
The Federal Reserve and the big banks fought for more than two years to keep details of the largest bailout in U.S. history a secret. Now, the rest of the world can see what it was missing.
The Fed didn’t tell anyone which banks were in trouble so deep they required a combined $1.2 trillion on Dec. 5, 2008, their single neediest day. Bankers didn’t mention that they took tens of billions of dollars in emergency loans at the same time they were assuring investors their firms were healthy. And no one calculated until now that banks reaped an estimated $13 billion of income by taking advantage of the Fed’s below-market rates, Bloomberg Markets magazine reports in its January issue.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-11-28/secret-fed-loans-undisclosed-to-congress-gave-banks-13-billion-in-income.html