Time for Newt

Sorry Doug, I couldn't disagree with you more than I do on this one.

People, especially the ones in the "Bible belt" will never forget or overlook the baggage in his personal life.

And how many times has his campaign imploded - this year alone? His own people don't seem to like him or the way he runs things.

He talks like a Constitutional conservative a lot, yet when he was Speaker of the House, how many times did he turn around and stab us in the back? Just to please and appease the Clintons or other Dems??

He's a slick politician, stop listening to what he's saying right now, look up his track record, and seriously - rethink this.

And I would echo that. He sounds good now, but harken to his past:

http://www.asmainegoes.com/content/newt-gingrich-declares-potus-2012?page=1

We need someone who can beat Obama. I'm not so sure that is Newt. He has an awful lot of baggage.

Newt can't carry red states in the south and is at 5% after starting at 15%.
Romney has a terrible human rights record and paved the way for Obamacare.
Cain was on the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve which disqualifies him for political office.
Perry recruits alien criminals to go to college in Texas and taxes Texans to pay for it.
Huntsman favors Red China.
Santorum is steady between one and three percent of Republicans.

Which leaves;
Ron Paul
MIchelle Bachman, presently at 7.4% of Republicans. She has stood fast to the principles she ran on when she was elected as far as I know.

Ron Paul has won elections for decades. He is principled and experienced. He wins in the South. He understands Rick Perry. He would bring our troops home from places where they are not needed. I wish the pundits moderating the candidate forums would turn his mike on now and then. It's time to dust off my 4 x 8 foot Ron Paul sign and read his book, "The Revolution" again.

Put up your sign, read the book and be confident that Ron Paul will never be elected President of the United States of America. He has some interesting ideas and his stance of foreign policy is admirable but the American electorate will never vote for him despite what some polls would say.

I'll support the GOP nominee whoever they are...every GOP candidate is flawed- but every single one is a vast improvement over this Obamanation.

I'm supporting Romney.The health care plan in Massachusetts is consistent with federalism, which Obamacare is not. That element of federalism is the basis for the Supreme Court challenge. If Justice Kennedy agrees, SCOTUS will have as large a role in Romney v. Obama as they did in Bush v. Gore.

When Romney wins the nomination, he'll pick a conservative as VP- either Rubio or Bachmann is my guess.

it won't be enough. We went down that road when the progressive, McCain, picked Sarah Palin. We have learned to spot a progressive a mile away. Just remember Romneycare and his human rights record.

Now a Palin/Nugent ticket would attract some support. God, guns and rock and roll.

As governor of Massachusetts Romney appointed viros to top state jobs. Douglas Foy, former head of the Conservation Law Foundation, had a lead role in his cabinet.

I recently discovered that Romney supported (and still does?) turning private property in rural western Massachusetts into National Forests.

Henry Simmons said about Newt, "when he was Speaker of the House, how many times did he turn around and stab us in the back?"

I seem to have forgotten these back stabs, could you recall one or two for us?

Also I have heard Newt repeatedly criticized for having baggage. I suppose baggage refers the fact that he had extramarital affairs and has been married three times I think. So instead of saying baggage It would be more fair to say he's been married three times. He's very far from a saint, but I don't think any saints are available for the presidency. I don't think it is likely, but if he were to become the Republican nominee, I would certainly vote for him.

I would too. Better Newt than Romney.

I miss Jack Kemp. He understood our problem.

I am not sure it is Newts' time, even though he is probably the smartest one on stage.
Baggage and alot of it not really , just real messy baggage that is hard to wish away ,remember our many discussions here about character!!

Is the electorate ready to compare the baggage of the "O" old and new and go to Newt ?

His Mass. experience is to me overblown and over analyzed given the political situation in that state.

I am not sure Newt could be the leader needed in the position ! Really Newts' real place is in the Congress!

I think the conservative credentials would win out the Bible Belt, when the other option is Obama. Unfortunatly, in a media driven culture, Newt doesn't have the charisma to draw people in.

Newt Gingrich is no ordinary lout. Newt Gingrich is a contemptable lout. Cancer? See ya! MS? See ya!

Reverend . . I mean Speaker Gingrich: "I found that I felt compelled to seek God’s forgiveness. Not God’s understanding, but God’s forgiveness. I do believe in a forgiving God. And I think most people, deep down in their hearts hope there’s a forgiving God.

It's the voters, Newt. You'll need the voter's forgiveness . . woman voters and the like.

Gingrich on issues

Note the double standard: a liberal's past should not be held against him/her. A conservative's past is always held up for scrutiny, and if somewhat ignoble, held against him/her. Bill Clinton's past didn't count. No one truly knows Obama's past. And look at the conversations that abound regarding all of the current republican candidates. Everything is held against each of them, by conservatives and liberals alike.

When all is said and done, I'll vote in the general election for the republican running against the democrat (presumably Obama).

Of the republican candidates, the wisest is either Gingrich or Paul, IMHO. Cain is smart, strong, presents well. I"m not in favor of the 999 plan, though. Giving the feds a new tax platform is never a good idea, no matter how well intentioned.

Bachman's values and ours (my wife and I) are in complete alignment, but Perry seems to have acquired her initial traction.

Perry and Romney have similar strentgths and weaknesses. Romneycare and his enviro views make me cautious of supporting him, although he always looks and sounds both wise and presidential. Perry's softness on illegals (tuition comes to mind) makes me cautious on him. He has, though, significantly increased the Texas law enforcement fight to repel the invasion across the 1,200 mile Texas/Mexico border. That is in is favor.

Paul - great ideas on many fronts, but perhaps too isolationist? Just not sure.

I like the guy.

Newt

Notice in the video that he is not reading from notes or a script.

I have been ignoring the circus sideshows called debates, But I like Newt. I think he can win against Obama.

Newt Outlines the 21st Century Contract with America

Newt was the only one in the debate that acted like a Statesman!

In a crisis ( and we are in one), voters in America have put aside the usual litmus tests ( a boring, safe looking guy, usually taller than the other one, who lies well) and voted for actual competence. Newt is the smartest, most experienced, most ruthless guy we've got in the primary. How ruthless? Well, he served his dying wife with divorce papers - in the hospital.

That might even be a plus by this time next year - I mean, who else can you trust to do whatever it takes? Plus he's a demagogue and idea meister nonpareil.

I'd say we dump the Seven Dwarves and go with Snow White. Just keep Newt away from the apples

Roger Ek said "I miss Jack Kemp." Mr. Ek's tongue must be buccally embedded.

No thanks. I think he's a man of low personal character and I think that he's a narcissist not unlike our current President.

Doug,
I don't like Newt, I don't trust Newt, and I believe he is nothing more than a professional poli-tick-cian, blood sucking liar.

As much as I hold you in esteem, if the ticket was Doug Thomas, President/Newt Gingrich,VP, I would have to with hold my support for fear of the day that you would turn around in shock with the knife in your back, Et tu Newtus?

I think he's a man of low personal character and I think that he's a narcissist

nothing more than a professional poli-tick-cian, blood sucking liar.

Don't you just hate it when folks hold back on their criticism:-)

These are actually points in Newt's favor. He is running for President of a Republic of blood sucking narcissists. The same idiots who elected Obama. At least Newt has a sense of history, and actually WANTS the USA to come out on top. Unlike the current incumbent.

I agree with what Thraysbulus said...Newt wants the USA to win.... What I like about Newt is when he is posed a question he has more than a sound bite for an answer....The rest of the field seems a mile wide and an inch deep as the saying goes. Not so with the Newtster, I can overlook the personal baggage...... if the criteria for leadership in this country is/was sainthood we would have never become an independent country.

Okay Newt isn't perfect, none of them are, who's better? Tell me how your candidate has a better plan to lead us out of this mess we're in. All I'm hearing is candidate X or candidate Y is better than what we have now and that's just not good enough.

Isn't it time we stopped voting for the person we think has the best chance of winning, and vote for the person who we think will do the best job?

Doug Thomas: Isn't it time we stopped voting for the person we think has the best chance of winning, and vote for the person who we think will do the best job?

I've been saying that for years!

There are numerous threads here which go into the pros and cons of presidential candidates, and in fact, I have once again started donating money to the Ron Paul campaign every time someone denigrates him without offering reasons for their statements.

(For those of you who keep PMing me who cannot understand what I'm paying for: it's "Ron Paul is a nutcase," as opposed to "Ron Paul is a nutcase who says that we were attacked on 9/11 because we upset the Muslims." The first example would merit a donation, which the second would not.)

So, to get this straight: Are you asking for our opinions as to who would make the best candidate and why in this thread?

When you get over 50 how many single people have never been
divorced or have been in a long term relationship that ended less
than harmoniously?
The question is: can the person do the job?

We have people teaching the English language who do not know the parts of speech or grammar. The word "teacher" should be considered as a verb once in a while. The same holds true for for an engineer. He should be able to engineer. A broker should be able to broker. When it comes to being President of the United States, that person will lead the executive branch and be Commander in Chief. He should be able to execute a plan and be able to command the armed forces.

On December 22, 1993 I was on a business trip to Newfoundland. A recently elected Minister of Parliament approached our table. He was acquainted with my guest and I was introduced to him. The Minister said that it is always good to do business with the U. S. and asked me what I thought about the recent election. The man was a Liberal. How could I answer this man honestly? I had only a moment to formulate a reply:

“In my experience, Canadians and Americans both are good, honest, hard working people; and I do not think they so much need to be governed as they need to be served.”

The Minister stepped back. Everybody looked surprised. The Minister said, “That’s a great thought. I’m going to use it in my next speech.”

Our citizens have been misled to the point that the selection of office holders to serve us has become like a lottery. We gamble to determine who serves us. Those elected do not regard it as an honor to serve. They regard it as a right to rule. Harry Truman drove back to Independence following his term as president. Calvin Coolidge drove home too. There were two men who understood their proper roles.

As Bullseye said, "The question is: can the person do the job?" The present occupant of the White House simply cannot do the job. He does not know how to the do the job. He is the first president in over a century not to submit a budget to Congress for approval. We are limping along as we extend the George Bush budgets while the fed prints trillions of dollars out of nothing. An honest attorney general would investigate that scam, but Eric Holder is busy smuggling illegal weapons to drug cartels in Mexico.

Our government is broken. We need somebody with the brains and will to fix it. Ron Paul has the answers. He has the will. He does not have the money to overcome the mainstream media who love our present situation and who facilitated our loss of freedom. Maybe somebody else who is younger will emerge, but one thing is sure; The solution to our problems is NOT Romney.

Roger,
Romney was in line to take the reigns from his father at American Motors.
If he couldn't get that job done with absolute control, how could he solve
the problems he would face as President of the US?

The solution to our problems is NOT Romney.

That much I agree with..But Ron Paul ??? Nope..Between the nutty things he has said in the past and the actions of his cult like following he isn't even on my radar screen nor will he ever be...Though I'm still somewhat undecided , I'm leaning toward Newt as well...Or atleast giving him a second look..I still wish Palin had run...It will be interesting to see who she gets behind , if anybody in this lack luster field...