Newt is considering running
- Thread starter Mott the Hoople
- Start date
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
Chris Christie.
I don't think Palin would accept second billing any longer.
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
Paul Ryan.
Annie
Not So Junior Member
and that orange had what to do with these apples?
Newt Gingrich would make an excellent VP to any ticket...not sure he could win a presidential election; his past personal life would make for too much fodder.
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
I think you underestimate Newt. He's a shrewd politician. I just don't think he has what it takes to beat Obama.
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
It didn't stop Clinton or Reagan or W. I think with adequate funding to build a politcal campaign on a national level Newt would be hugely popular with the right wing of the party and would do a reasonable job of selling himself to moderates and independants. That's his achilles heal though. Can he do that better then Romney? I doubt it. Newt would appeal well to the southern base. He wouldn't play so well on the west coast, the North East or the Great lakes region. Newt was out of office during the Bush years and that is a significant advantage for him as he doesn't have the lead anchor around his neck of having enabled that bafoon Bush. He's one of the few Republican insiders who can say that.
I still think the party has a very good man in Romney. They just have to get those reactionaries in the south on board that the world won't come to an end cause they voted for a Mormon.
At this point Reagan was about to have his numbers sore significantly as his tax cuts caused a rapid increase in employment numbers that caused unemployment to be at about 5.4% by the end of his second term...that ain't looking likely for Obama. Under Reagan, income to the treasury grew from $500 billion a year to almost a trillion by the time he left office (Congressional Budget Office.) And you can't account for this with inflation, because it was very low. The gap between rich and poor did not, in fact widen. Both the poorest and the richest economic quintiles had their income increase by about 12%. The other three quintiles also saw economic improvement. The basic problem of the left is they think the poor can't be helped unless the rich are punished. Reagan disproved that nonsense. And BTW, charitible giving, in constant dollars rose from $64.7 billion in 1980 to $102 billion in 1989. It was hardly a decade of greed and selfishness.
For the best ever break down of the Carter/Reagan/Bush/Clinton era
Okay then flip flop it, that would be even more funny...
He ended up being very popular... My point is that poll numbers are irrelevant.
The republicans are kinda SOL from todays perspective. They have two choices, go with a Tea Party radical and loose the mainstreem voat or go with Romney and loose the sourhthern Christian vote....
Maybe someone will emerge as a middle ground that is acceptable to both wings of the party, but I dont see it. The Republicans have gotten too polarized within there own party to rally around a single presidental canidate. To me the dynamic is looking good for Obama in the next presidental.
At this point Reagan was about to have his numbers sore significantly as his tax cuts caused a rapid increase in employment numbers that caused unemployment to be at about 5.4% by the end of his second term...that ain't looking likely for Obama. Under Reagan, income to the treasury grew from $500 billion a year to almost a trillion by the time he left office (Congressional Budget Office.) And you can't account for this with inflation, because it was very low. The gap between rich and poor did not, in fact widen. Both the poorest and the richest economic quintiles had their income increase by about 12%. The other three quintiles also saw economic improvement. The basic problem of the left is they think the poor can't be helped unless the rich are punished. Reagan disproved that nonsense. And BTW, charitible giving, in constant dollars rose from $64.7 billion in 1980 to $102 billion in 1989. It was hardly a decade of greed and selfishness.
For the best ever break down of the Carter/Reagan/Bush/Clinton era
I belive Obama is "about" to have his numbers soar. It will start some time about a year and 3 months from now.
Based on what indicators? His numbers are driven by economic realities...not your wishful thinking.
Based on the FACT that we are emerging from a terrable recession, the worst ever except the depression.
Americans are not dumb and they will see that from where we are coming from, we have come a long way in 3.5 years.
Also the Republicans will fail to nominate a viable canidate.
70% of independednts are likely voting conservative...you can't get no more mainstream then that. BTW most independents support the TEA party ideas of limited and smaller government. As often as you like to say TEA party folks are "radical" just does not make it so.
Many former Republicans left the Republican party in the last three years, its no suprise to me that they are still conservative.
C'mon, Annie. That is a dishonest argument.
I could have told you we'd hit 10% unemployment, no matter who took office & what policies they used. No one was about to turn the rate of firing on a dime.
The point is that the economy has turned; we have gone from shedding jobs on a large scale, to seeing the first signs that companies are hiring again. That is my only point. It is ignorant to suggest that we are in a worse place today than we were in the beginning of 2009.