TexasCHLforum.com

74novaman wrote:
I don't care who the repubs nominate, the MSM WILL attack them...try to dig up dirt...do whatever they have to do. Remember McCain in 08? He was supposed to have a "good relationship" with the media...how much did that help him out? They talked about his service...then in the next breath speculated that the torture he endured may have made him mentally unfit for the job of CinC.

Thankfully, with alternative media now someone who articulates his ideas clearly at least has a chance to be heard by anyone willing to do some digging.

As for those who don't bother to research...well, you can't help idiots anyway.

Completely agree, the media will attack no matter what. Problem with the alternative media is that the vast majority doesn't pay much attention to them. Even though they may be the most creditable the majority of the public doesn't see them that way and those are the ones who decide the outcome of elections.

It is very true that most don't bother to research and you can't fix stupid but unfortunately, stupid votes and carries elections. Specially true when the rest are divided. I'm very tired of voting for the lesser of two, or more, evils but I can't remember it being otherwise.

wharvey wrote:
It is very true that most don't bother to research and you can't fix stupid but unfortunately, stupid votes and carries elections. Specially true when the rest are divided. I'm very tired of voting for the lesser of two, or more, evils but I can't remember it being otherwise.

So I guess the real question is..how do we win over the stupid people?

Candy?

74novaman wrote:
So I guess the real question is..how do we win over the stupid people?

Candy?

Might work, so may beer. We could do what the democrats do and promise to increase social spending. A larger check each month is a big incentive.

It is funny the skew this thread has taken... A few days ago I was thinking about this same slant on the MSM and their character assassinations of any non-progressive who may pose a threat to Obama. And I was thinking hmmmm I wonder how long it will take to get to Newt now that he is the current front runner... After all he sure has baggage and at one time he was vilified for his actions while Speaker of the House and then last night as I was getting ready to go to work there is was... The CBS news channel did an expose on him and his consultant work for Freddie and Fannie...
They had the slant of how BAD Freddie and Fannie are and how could he associate with them and how he was PAID by them but in the excerpts of his admission of being a consultant he straight up repeated the same thing he has said for the last 3-4 years... It was a bubble and I told them it would pop and the sub-prime lending would not be sustainable. Despite his having the same answers it was an attempt to make it look like he had done something sly and underhanded.

Okay, so NOW if you're not a Progressive and you had dealings with Freddie and Fannie you're evil? What about all the Dems who were shoulder to shoulder, arm in arm with them?!?

Good thing Newt has been (as far as I have seen) consistent in his message and has a thick skin. Hopefully this will continue and the independents will see this for what it is and realize he can give a concise formed and intelligent rebuttal to their attempt at character assassination.

They KNOW who Romney really is and he gets as free a pass as any RINO can get...

Oldgringo wrote:

74novaman wrote: Gingrich isn't perfect (bad personal history/that lovely commercial he did with Pelosi) but he'd get my vote. Though I like the idea of Gingrich/Rubio over Rice. Or even Gingrich/Cain .

Obama got elected with NO personal history OR credentials. Maybe those silly things don't matter anymore?

He was the Health Care Plan incarnate...you had to vote for him to know what was inside.

I must admit I have soft spots for Ron Paul and Gary Johnson, but my crystal ball says that Newt is the only one that can absolutely stomp Obama and throw him, his cronies, and his policies to the curb.[/quote]

Really? You seriously think Newt can and will do that? Gingrich MAY win, but he will be a dead beat, won't get along with either house and ultimately, he'll be a one term loser, like George H.W. Bush. As a conservative, I am first a realist, and Newt is not our man. Let's be clear, neither is any other wannabe running on the republican ticket.

I don't mean for this post to come off as an attack against, it is not. I am very passionate with my views and with the current state of our two party system, I am borderline IRATE! Which reminds me, I think I'll start a new post..

polisci wrote: I don't mean for this post to come off as an attack against, it is not. I am very passionate with my views and with the current state of our two party system, I am borderline IRATE! Which reminds me, I think I'll start a new post..

I do'nt take offense at all. I'm just curious who you think should (actually, "can") carry the vote and remove the Idiot currently sitting in the oval office.

OldCannon wrote:

polisci wrote: I don't mean for this post to come off as an attack against, it is not. I am very passionate with my views and with the current state of our two party system, I am borderline IRATE! Which reminds me, I think I'll start a new post..

I do'nt take offense at all. I'm just curious who you think should (actually, "can") carry the vote and remove the Idiot currently sitting in the oval office.

The more I think about it the more I think it won't matter. Give an alien (the E.T. type) a play by play of what the government has done in the last 25 years (with no opinionated commentary) and try to get him to point out which 4 year periods were given to R and D respectively and watch as he does this

hirundo82 wrote:

mamabearCali wrote:Gingrich/Rice Gingrich/Santorum----works for me. Let me know where to get the bumper sticker at.

Either of those tickets would guarantee Obama a second term. I, and I expect many other independents, would sit out the election rather than vote for either of those.

Really?

Do you care to eat those words?

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_ ... l_matchups
2012 Presidential Matchups
National Poll: Gingrich 45% Obama 43%

Rasmussen Reports wrote:The Newt Gingrich surge has moved him to the top of the polls in Iowa, big gains in New Hampshire and now a two-point edge over President Obama in a hypothetical general election match-up.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of Likely Voters finds Gingrich attracting 45% of the vote while President Obama earns support from 43%. Six percent (6%) prefer some other candidate, and six percent (6%) are undecided.

Emphasis mine....

The wheels have come off the Cain Train, but Gingrich is coming on strong, and each of his debate performances have been nothing short of masterful. He has a real good chance of beating Obama....

....and apparently without any help from you.

Gingrich has got some (political) warts for sure. He has also got guts, intelligence, and some decent ideas. On second amendment issues he seems to be ok in general and a sight better than Romney. So if he gets the nomination I won't be crying.

And here is an excellent analysis written by John Podhoretz detailing why Romney is in trouble and might get thumped by Gingrich......and let it be known that Podhoretz is hardly a rock-ribbed conservative. He was for a long time a registered democrat, and his personal politics seem to be fairly centrist:

New York Post
Romney’s flatline
Behind the Gingrich surge
Last Updated: 9:55 AM, December 2, 2011
Posted: 10:32 PM, December 1, 2011

A Rasmussen poll puts Gingrich 20 points ahead of Mitt Romney nationally; if other polling supports that finding in the next few days, it will constitute a staggering reversal of fortune for both men.

Perhaps even more telling is that in two concurrent polls in the key state of Florida, Gingrich is garnering support from anywhere from 41 to 50 percent of likely Republican primary voters, with Romney in the teens.

If these numbers are halfway real, Gingrich is doing twice as well as any of the other “not-Romneys” — Michele Bachmann, Rick Perry and Herman Cain — ever did.

{snip}......

Under normal conditions, Newt Gingrich could not be a serious candidate for the Republican nomination. But he has a secret weapon — Mitt Romney.

{snip}......

Romney did well in the debates because he couldn’t be pinned down, and knew how to escape the noose when it was dangling over him. Sitting across from Bret Baier in a Florida warehouse, he couldn’t dance around his own ideological contradictions. He was trapped, and he acted that way.

Romney is simply not the natural candidate for a conservative leaning party. Gingrich seems to have overcome those things which caused people to dislike him so much, and he seems to have mellowed with age. He is the intellectual superior of every other candidate in the race. If he can pair himself with a good chief of staff who will offset whatever office-managing skills Gingrich lacks, Newt would make a very good president. Of all the candidates, Romney included, Gingrich seems to be the most comfortable in his skin and the most natural at what he's doing. I am reminded of Ronald Reagan. I like him, when I find the others to be not so nearly likable. Likableness is not necessarily a sign of a good manager, but it is the sign of a good politician, and a good president knows how to play the game well—a quality which Obama, with his imperious nature and demonstrated unwillingness to engage with Congress, is totally lacking.

http://townhall.com/columnists/anncoult ... _now,_when

So now, apparently, we have to go through the cycle of the media pushing Newt Gingrich. This is going to be fantastic.

In addition to having an affair in the middle of Clinton's impeachment; apologizing to Jesse Jackson on behalf of J.C. Watts -- one of two black Republicans then in Congress –- for having criticized "poverty pimps," and then inviting Jackson to a State of the Union address; cutting a global warming commercial with Nancy Pelosi; supporting George Soros' candidate Dede Scozzafava in a congressional special election; appearing in public with the Rev. Al Sharpton to promote nonspecific education reform; and calling Paul Ryan's plan to save Social Security "right-wing social engineering," we found out this week that Gingrich was a recipient of Freddie Mac political money.

By contrast, Republicans came cheap. For the amazingly good price of only $300,000 apiece, Fannie and Freddie bought the good will of former Reps. Vin Weber, R-Minn., Susan Molinari, R-N.Y., and Newt Gingrich, R-Ga.* Former Sen. Alfonse D'Amato, R-N.Y., was even cheaper at $240,000.

[*Correction: After Gingrich admitted last week to receiving $300,000 from Freddie, we found out this week that it was actually closer to $1.6 million.]


Aside from Coulter's take, he sounds way more like a liberal to me than a conservative --a whole list here: http://www.westernjournalism.com/is-new ... dium=email

Excerpts:

http://nation.foxnews.com/newt-gingrich ... servatives

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said Sunday that he strongly supports a federal mandate requiring citizens to buy health insurance

http://spectator.org/blog/2011/03/09/ne ... o-be-faith

Newt Too Patriotic to Be Faithful

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... lenews_wsj

In his Iowa speak-power-to-truth lecture, he even suggested that the government should mandate that all new cars in the U.S. be flex-fuel vehicles—meaning those that can run on an ethanol-gas mix as high as 85%—as if King Corn were in any danger of being deposed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qi6n_-wB154

Nancy Pelosi and Newt Gingrich Commercial on Climate Change

http://www.unelected.org/socialist-of-t ... t-gingrich

In the 1970s, Newt Gingrich voted for the creation of the Department of Education, which is a department that Ronald Reagan wanted to eliminate. A Department of Education was also heavily supported by several early socialists and Jimmy Carter. With programs like No Child Left Behind, it has led to a large decrease in the educational standards in public schools in the United States.

Any of you that think Newt can out-debate BHO should watch this bout with John Kerry, of all people

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 0095835803" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Commentary on it from Powerline, a respected conservative blog

"....in my opinion Kerry outdebates Gingrich. The Speaker holds his own in the initial statements, but once the give-and-take begins (at around the one-hour mark), Kerry begins to pull away. There’s some irony here because Gingrich has said that, if nominated, he wants a Lincoln-Douglas style debate with Obama. Yet it is precisely in the Lincoln-Douglas style exchanges with Kerry that I think Gingrich fares the worst."

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2 ... d-look.php" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Gingrich is a smart guy, "too smart for his own good" like the old folks used to say.

He thinks he's smart enough to fix everything with a program -- just like Obama. Nothing wrong with being smart, until you get so smart you think you know everything.

Remember when Ross Perot wanted to "lift the hood and find out whats' wrong"? Newt wants to fine tune the computer when it really needs to be torn down to the frame and rebuilt.

OldCannon wrote:
For VP - everybody knows Condi is interested, and I think it's no-brainer.

You've got it all right but the VP. After Cheny's last book it is easy to see that she would be over her head as VP which may be why she says she's done with politics.

Newt doesn't go with the flow. He'd do something bold; Trump, a real businessman and uber negotiator. They are getting very cozy. This is building up to be an election where over-powering-the-media will be more important than an underlying message and no one can deliver that better than The Donald.

He didn't wait a New-York-minute in beating Chuck Todd over the head yesterday with Chuck's own mis-leading statements. Someone who can do media combat is needed as a VP candidate. We know Newt can do it and we know Trump can too..a dynamic duo.

Donald and Newt would be a landslide, IMHO