PDA

View Full Version : So How Does Newt go from 8% to 24% in NH?



Molon Labe
12-01-2011, 09:15 AM
the guy has NO money. 2.5 to 2.9 mill to be exact. Perry and Romney have the war chests.

http://elections.nytimes.com/2012/campaign-finance#canda=newt-gingrich&candb=mitt-romney

Because He's a media creation is my take.

In ONE month did everyone just lose their minds? How many times are Republican voters going to change their support. I hear everyone talking about how the scandals and slip ups haven't changed their minds about their candidate (ala Cain, Perry)....but something is changing someone's mind. Are people really that influential by what the media says that they just change candidates like discarding poker cards?

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2012/election_2012_presidential_election/new_hampshire/election_2012_new_hampshire_republican_primary


From the Summer it has been Pawlenty, to Bachman to Perry to Cain to Gingrich....with Romney holding steady.

Discuss.

noonwitch
12-01-2011, 10:05 AM
Whatever Gringrich's negatives are, he always comes across as smart in interviews. He knows the issues and can make a strong case for his position on them.


I'm not a huge fan, but he would be strong in debates against Obama.

Arroyo_Doble
12-01-2011, 10:14 AM
the guy has NO money. 2.5 to 2.9 mill to be exact. Perry and Romney have the war chests.

http://elections.nytimes.com/2012/campaign-finance#canda=newt-gingrich&candb=mitt-romney

Because He's a media creation is my take.

Why would you think he is a media creation?

His name is well known and the debates have been a very big factor in the Republican nomination so far. By all accounts, he has done well in those debates.

Starbuck
12-01-2011, 10:23 AM
He's done well - extremely well - in the debates. The media didn't just make this up; I saw it. And I'm one of those people who said, "Newt, just go away!"

I was a Cain supporter. The media didn't create the various charges of moral and sexual misconduct. In fact, the media exposed some of the accusers as flakes. But Clinton's bimbos were flakes, too. That's what you go to when you simply want to dally around.

Gingrich's staff left him because he didn't want to go out and campaign and shake hands. He wanted to do it some other way, and he may have been right. We'll see.

Mitt could get things done from the White House, but what things! I have more confidence in Newt at this point to push the country in the direction I want it to go. And the media didn't create that.

Molon Labe
12-01-2011, 10:39 AM
Why would you think he is a media creation?

His name is well known and the debates have been a very big factor in the Republican nomination so far. By all accounts, he has done well in those debates.

Right....then why wasn't he pulling double digits upon initial entry into the race?
He's been in 8 debates.

A:
Because he wasn't getting good press until about 3 weeks ago. Because the Republican party does not like what their previous love interests have done with their 15 minutes of fame.

DumbAss Tanker
12-01-2011, 10:47 AM
He's done well - extremely well - in the debates. The media didn't just make this up; I saw it. And I'm one of those people who said, "Newt, just go away!"

I was a Cain supporter. The media didn't create the various charges of moral and sexual misconduct. In fact, the media exposed some of the accusers as flakes. But Clinton's bimbos were flakes, too. That's what you go to when you simply want to dally around.

Gingrich's staff left him because he didn't want to go out and campaign and shake hands. He wanted to do it some other way, and he may have been right. We'll see.

Mitt could get things done from the White House, but what things! I have more confidence in Newt at this point to push the country in the direction I want it to go. And the media didn't create that.


+1. I think you have the right of it.

Arroyo_Doble
12-01-2011, 10:48 AM
Right....then why wasn't he pulling double digits upon initial entry into the race?
He's been in 8 debates.

A:
Because he wasn't getting good press until about 3 weeks ago. Because the Republican party does not like what their previous love interests have done with their 15 minutes of fame.

Huntsman got amazing press when he entered the race and it hasn't done him any good.

There has been an internecine conflict in the Republican Party since September of 2008. In 2010, the Tea Party faction gained the upper hand. This nomination will be the culmination of that fight and it doesn't matter who it is for that side as long as it isn't Mitt Romney. Newt just happened to be the next in line.

txradioguy
12-01-2011, 11:13 AM
Right....then why wasn't he pulling double digits upon initial entry into the race?
He's been in 8 debates.

A:
Because he wasn't getting good press until about 3 weeks ago. Because the Republican party does not like what their previous love interests have done with their 15 minutes of fame.

It's...IMHO part of a media cycle to try and pick our candidate for us. The one that will be easiest for Obama to beat.

First Bachmann was in the lead and the media had her built up as the front runner...then chooped her off at the knees...then Perry...same thing...they harped on weak debate skills....despite the fact we have a current President that can't put together a cohearent sentence without a teleprompter.

Then Cain...and right on cue out come sketchy and vague allegations and suddenly the MSM labels him "unelectable".

Now it's Newt's turn in the barrel.

The one person that has remained unscathed is Romney...and there's a reason for that.

The LAST peson any Conservative wants to see at the top of the GOP ticket is the very person that the MSM is going to...at the end of the day...declare the only GOP candidate that is "electable".

Starbuck
12-01-2011, 11:28 AM
Huntsman got amazing press when he entered the race and it hasn't done him any good.

There has been an internecine conflict in the Republican Party since September of 2008. In 2010, the Tea Party faction gained the upper hand. This nomination will be the culmination of that fight and it doesn't matter who it is for that side as long as it isn't Mitt Romney. Newt just happened to be the next in line.
Wasn't Michelle Bachman actually next in line?
In the minds of the various Tea Party organizations she must have been. Remember when the press always referred to her as "the darling of the tea Party movement"?

Arroyo_Doble
12-01-2011, 11:36 AM
Wasn't Michelle Bachman actually next in line?
In the minds of the various Tea Party organizations she must have been. Remember when the press always referred to her as "the darling of the tea Party movement"?

I meant next in line after Trump, Bachmann, Perry, and Cain. I never considered Christie one of theirs.

For my part, I thought Perry would be their (the Tea Party faction of the Republican Party) candidate. But he proved to be inept on the national stage. But he was often inept at the state level as well but not so much as to be defeated.

SaintLouieWoman
12-01-2011, 11:42 AM
Huntsman got amazing press when he entered the race and it hasn't done him any good.

There has been an internecine conflict in the Republican Party since September of 2008. In 2010, the Tea Party faction gained the upper hand. This nomination will be the culmination of that fight and it doesn't matter who it is for that side as long as it isn't Mitt Romney. Newt just happened to be the next in line.

That part is true.

Also Newt appears as the only grown up in the room. His intelligence stands out. Maybe the ordinary folks have more confidence in someone with a functioning brain than in someone who is a "bystander". Trump was exactly right the other day when he tagged Obama with that appraisal. We need someone who doesn't just vote "present".

Molon Labe
12-01-2011, 01:08 PM
Huntsman got amazing press when he entered the race and it hasn't done him any good.

There has been an internecine conflict in the Republican Party since September of 2008. In 2010, the Tea Party faction gained the upper hand. This nomination will be the culmination of that fight and it doesn't matter who it is for that side as long as it isn't Mitt Romney. Newt just happened to be the next in line.

Huntsman can be added to my list as well. He was the flavor of the week at one time.

Look at this: A comparison of media vs internet of Huntsman, Bachman and Gingrich.

The only one of these who represents anything close to grassroots and not a media creation is Bachman.

http://www.google.com/trends/viz?q=newt+gingrich,+jon+huntsman,+michelle+bachma n&date=2011&geo=all&graph=weekly_img&sort=0&sa=N

http://www.google.com/trends?q=newt+gingrich%2C+jon+huntsman%2C+michelle +bachman&ctab=0&geo=all&date=2011&sort=0


do you understand the term Manufacturing consent?

Arroyo_Doble
12-01-2011, 02:04 PM
Huntsman can be added to my list as well. He was the flavor of the week at one time.

Look at this: A comparison of media vs internet of Huntsman, Bachman and Gingrich.

The only one of these who represents anything close to grassroots and not a media creation is Bachman.

http://www.google.com/trends/viz?q=newt+gingrich,+jon+huntsman,+michelle+bachma n&date=2011&geo=all&graph=weekly_img&sort=0&sa=N

http://www.google.com/trends?q=newt+gingrich%2C+jon+huntsman%2C+michelle +bachman&ctab=0&geo=all&date=2011&sort=0


do you understand the term Manufacturing consent?


I understand. You will not meet many who distrusts the Media more than me in that regard.

But it may be more of a function of the Media paying attention to the so-called horse race more than pushing a candidate. Below is a trendline link at RCP and Newt's rise in the polls appears to coincide with the rise in stories. It looks to be in tandem, to me. And Huntsman never got anything out of the positive press.

The Link (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/republican_presidential_nomination-1452.html)

Tipsycatlover
12-01-2011, 02:16 PM
Fox has Gingrich at 38% this morning.

The surge is attributed to two things. One, his stellar performances during the debates. He was never ruffled, never gaffed and was in control at all times. Second is his attacks against obama have been contemptuous, reducing him to a petulent chlld. "Yes you can have your teleprompters, take two".

Odysseus
12-01-2011, 02:24 PM
Huntsman got amazing press when he entered the race and it hasn't done him any good.

There has been an internecine conflict in the Republican Party since September of 2008. In 2010, the Tea Party faction gained the upper hand. This nomination will be the culmination of that fight and it doesn't matter who it is for that side as long as it isn't Mitt Romney. Newt just happened to be the next in line.

Except that this fight has been coing on a lot longer than that. The Republican Party began seeing a conservative/establishment split in the 50s, with the Taft/Eisenhower factions. The establishment still ran the party, as demonstrated by Nixon's candidacy in 1960, but by 1964, the conservatives managed to nominate Goldwater. Nixon beat out the conservative candidates in 1968 and appointed another moderate, Gerry Ford, to succeed him after his first Veep, Spiro Agnew (actually considered a liberal Republican at the time), resigned due to scandals. Reagan was the first movement conservative elected to the presidency (he united the evangelicals that Jimmy Carter had alienated with libertarian economists and conservative Democrats and former Democrats who were turned off by their party's leftward tilt), and his sop to the party establishment was GHW Bush, his Veep. Bush was challenged from the right in 1992 by religious conservative Buchanan, and the 1996 primaries were a fight between the establishment candidate, Dole, Buchanan and Steve Forbes, who was the libertarian conservative candidate. The 2000 campaign had GW Bush, who presented himself as a conservative, against John McCain, who was the establishment choice. In 2008, McCain defeated Romney (who ran to McCain's right) for the nomination. The Tea Party is just the newest name for the grassroots of the Republican Party, except this time, they have appeal that goes beyond party lines to independents and even a few Democrats.

The real difference this time around is that the establishment picked their candidate early, and they haven't wavered from Romney. Meanwhile, none of the conservative candidates has appealed to the majority of the party's non-establishment for long enough to produce a solid majority. Perry made a splash when he announced because his economic conservatism, defense positions and strong evangelical ties made him appealing to most of the Reagan coalition. When he crashed and burned in the debates, the Republican electorate splintered again. If you think of the Republican primaries as a means of reestablishing the Reagan coalition, you see that Bachmann, Perry and Santorum divide evangelicals, who usually vote as a bloc, while Gingrich picks up the policy wonks), and Cain appeals to economic libertarians who are more driven by his personal narrative and record in the private sector. Until one of the other candidates unites the Reagan coalition, Romney will hold a slim plurality, but the moment one of them drops out, the others will move up and Romney's numbers will remain static. After that, it will be a race to see if Romney can win with his 25% before enough other candidates drop out and their support falls in line with whoever is left.

Molon Labe
12-01-2011, 03:01 PM
Fox has Gingrich at 38% this morning.

The surge is attributed to two things. One, his stellar performances during the debates. He was never ruffled, never gaffed and was in control at all times. Second is his attacks against obama have been contemptuous, reducing him to a petulent chlld. "Yes you can have your teleprompters, take two".

Is that Nationally? The only thing that matters right now is accurate polls out of Iowa NH, and early primaries like FL, and SC. National polls are irrellevant and suck nuts.

Bloomberg DesMoines register poll was less than 1-2% off for all primary candidates in 07'.

Stay far away from Fox and the msm.