Explaining Newt’s Second Surge

Why is the disgraced former House speaker winning Republican votes?

Newt Gingrich surged to win South Carolina (44 of its 46 counties) and closed Mitt Romney’s 23 percentage point lead in the polls because of several solid debate performances where Gingrich convinced undecided voters, some Romney and Rick Santorum supporters, and evangelical Christians that he would be a formidable opponent to President Barack Obama.

The GOP nomination process has been volatile, with candidate after candidate ephemerally rising and then soon after declining (Michelle Bachmann, Rick Perry, Herman Cain, Gingrich, Santorum, Gingrich again). Most conclude this is the result of party members’ dissatisfaction with party front-runner Mitt Romney. Voters whimsically grasp hold of new potential challengers hoping to find an acceptable alternative to Romney only to find that the candidates are not electable. (See Gallup’s Positive Intensity Scores here).

During the January 16 and 19 South Carolina debates, Gingrich masterfully navigated the moderators’ questions to convince voters that he is electable. He made conservatism look effective—look obvious. GOP voters would probably eagerly await a debate showdown between Obama and Gingrich just to watch two master orators compete. Gingrich's debate performances may have in fact convinced wary Romney supporters that another candidate, one who better grasps their values, could beat Obama. This may have been what voters were waiting for; they finally had sufficient justification to give Gingrich their support.

The Debater

Despite Gingrich's many political weaknesses, debating is not one of them: He’s sharp, shrewd, and snarky. For instance, surprising many, Gingrich managed to push himself up onto the moral high-ground amidst allegations that he asked his ex-wife for an open marriage. When CNN GOP debate moderator John King asked Gingrich for his response, Newt lashed back:

I think the destructive, vicious, negative nature of much of the news media makes it harder to govern this country, harder to attract decent people to run for public office, and I am appalled that you would begin a presidential debate on a topic like that … [this] is as close to despicable as anything I can image.

Gingrich again received a passionate standing ovation during Fox’s South Carolina GOP Debate, when Juan Williams asked if Gingrich was “seeking to belittle people” when he referred to President Obama as the food stamp president. Somehow Gingrich turned the question around so he could make a declaration of the American Dream:

I believe every American of every background has been endowed by their creator with the right to pursue happiness … I’m going to continue to find ways to help poor people learn how to get a job, learn how to get a better job, and learn someday to own the job.

Gingrich’s debate performances likely helped him, as the CNN South Carolina exit polls show that of the 65 percent of voters who report the debates were important to their vote, 50 percent voted for Gingrich and 23 percent voted for Romney.

Electability

According to the CNN South Carolina exit polls the most important candidate quality to voters was electability, and among these voters Gingrich won. Forty five percent of South Carolina primary voters said it was most important for the GOP nominee to be able to beat President Obama, compared to the 21 percent who said it was most important that the candidate have the right experience. Only 18 percent said it was most important for the candidate to have a strong moral character, and 14 percent wanted a true conservative. Among those who most valued candidate electability, a majority (51 percent) voted for Gingrich, compared to 37 percent who voted for Romney. In fact, Newt nearly captured a majority (49 percent) of voters who valued a candidate having the right experience as well.

Before South Carolina, Republicans perceived Romney as the most electable candidate, even though maybe not the most likable. This perception was backed up by fact, since most hypothetical match-ups have Romney either beating Obama or losing within the margin of error. In fact, Real Clear Politics found that in January, Romney would lose on average to Obama by 1.9 percentage points, but Gingrich would lose on average by 11 percentage points.

Without considering the effect of recent debate performances (primarily viewed by South Carolina voters) it’s hard to imagine how Gingrich came to be perceived as most electable.

 

Source: Real Clear Politics

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • sarcasmic||

    Southerners are not going to vote en mass for a Yankee Mormon. Period.

  • Gojira||

    Nor someone who doesn't promise MOAR WARZ.

    Newt is a southerner, and a militarist. Therefore, win.

  • Old Mexican||

    Re: sarcasmic,

    Southerners are not going to vote en mass for a Yankee Mormon. Period.


    And will definitively not vote for someone who believes the US should not be bombing brown people with little or no provocation. Period.

  • Rev. Blue Moon ||

    *sigh*...I thought we were past race-baiting?

  • Old Mexican||

    Re: Rev Blue Moon,

    I thought we were past race-baiting?


    Only when the US starts bombing Swedes.

  • sarcasmic||

    Clinton bombed white people.

  • Old Mexican||

    Re: sarcasmic,

    Clinton bombed white people.


    Yes, but that was, what? 16-17 years ago? We're talking about the now, son!

  • sarcasmic||

    That and Persians aren't exactly brown. Arabs are, but Afghanistan has more Persians than Arabs. Same with Iran.

  • Old Mexican||

    Re: sarcasmic,

    That and Persians aren't exactly brown


    They're aren't exactly like Bjorn Borg, either.

  • South Carolina voter||

    You can't fool me, liberal liar. Persians and Ay-rabs is the same, they're both the Muslim race.

  • ||

    Clinton was still racist because he did nothing to protect the Rawandan's from genocide

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    Not the Swedes! They're making some decent cinema nowadays. Bomb the Norwegians instead.

  • Rev. Blue Moon ||

    Setting aside the anal rape, is The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo Steig Larsson Mary Sue-ing?

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    Hell if I know, he's dead isn't he? The first Girl was entertaining enough. The last one stunk. But Let The Right One In was excellent.

  • Rev. Blue Moon ||

    Now it occurs to me that even the anal rape might be part of the Mary Sueism.

  • Moogle||

    Only when the US starts bombing Swedes.

    Let's do it!

  • Admiral McArthur Nimitz||

    We will bomb Swedes or any white people who we perceive as a threat. Really, the U.S. chooses wars based on race? Really? Why didn't the U.S. bomb Rwandans, then? They were hacking each other up with machetes and they were black - a perfect opportunity to bomb some not-white people.

  • ||

    They're next.

  • The Question of Auban||

    I think a lot of people are coming around on foreign policy - largely BECAUSE of Ron Paul. People can have their eyes opened and many are.

  • sarcasmic||

    Whether or not he wins, Paul has injected things into the conversation that never would have otherwise been said.

  • The Question of Auban||

    True - I live in Florida where we have early voting and I have already voted for him. He probably won't win Florida but he does have a fair shot at the nomination. We have already had people drop out who were at one time another ahead of Paul. There is no reason to think it is impossible that Romney, Santorum or Gingrich might drop out soon and change the race once again. Who knows even Buddy Roemer might drop out and that would REALLY shake things up.

  • sarcasmic||

    I don't think Paul can win.
    However I do think the others can lose.

    Santorum because he's a fundie loon, Newt because he's a womanizing prick, and Romney because of the MassCare albatross hanging from his neck.

    That leaves only one guy.

  • The Question of Auban||

    All we need is for all candidates but Paul to lose ....

    That can happen!

  • Donald Trump||

    If you insist.

  • The Question of Auban||

    Yes, I know the bloodthirsty Donald Trump has threatened to run if Ron Paul wins. But somehow I doubt he will give up his TV show. Besides, he would have to open up his finances to actually run - I don't think he wants to do that.

  • k2000k||

    A man whose company has filed bankruptcy multiple times wouldn't eactly inspire confidence in his abilities to govern the nation. He knows that, better to be a media personality blowhard and rack in the extra dough than actually have his abilities measured by the voting public.

  • ||

    Trump could never win. Look at his hair!

  • ||

    Donald Trump (the real Donald Trump) is an egomanical clown!

  • Ted S.||

    Buddy Roemer?

  • Audrey the Liberal||

    Santorum because he's a fundie loon, Newt because he's a womanizing prick, and Romney because of the MassCare albatross hanging from his neck.

    Correction sarcasmic, Santorum is a cracker-eating, papist loon.

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    South Carolina hasn't

  • The Question of Auban||

    South Carolina has lots of military bases and some of them (the civilians) were frightened of losing business.

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    As does Virginia, but that audience was bloodthirsty.

  • The Question of Auban||

    "As does Virginia, but that audience [in SC] was bloodthirsty."

    Yes, it was. I don't have all of the details on how the audiences are chosen but it may not be as representative as we are led to believe.

  • CE||

    I don't have all of the details on how the audiences are chosen but it may not be as representative as we are led to believe.

    After the first South Carolina debate early in 2011, where Ron Paul was loudly cheered, even for defending the legalization of heroin, the people running the debates made sure that debate tickets weren't just available to the general public.

  • The Question of Auban||

    "the people running the debates made sure that debate tickets weren't just available to the general public."

    This does not surprise me. We can't let the serfs cheer those who have the audacity to disagree with their appointed masters!

  • annonymous commenter some guy||

    NPR reported that the debates audience is chosen by whoever hosts the debates.

    In the case of Florida that was the Florida Repbulican party. They claim they chose a representative sample of registered Republicans... but I'm sure there's no way to verify that.

  • FTFY||

    They claim t They chose a representative sample of registered Republicans Romney supporters

  • CE||

    Southerners are not going to vote en mass for a Yankee Mormon. Period.

    Nor will Northeasterners, Midwesterners, or Westerners vote for a Southern class warrior neocon with questionable personal morality.

    Romney (and Paul to a lesser extent), will make a big comeback after Florida, as the race heads to Nevada, Arizona Michigan, Minnesota and Maine.

  • k2000k||

    Agreed but I expect Paul to do exceptionally well in the western states like Colorado, Oregon, California, Montana, Idaho, and Washington.

  • ||

    Agreed. I just can't wait till they get out of the south and get to those states. Right now it's like watching stupidity run amuck.

  • poetry||

    I like the shapes in that last chart.

    I'm really rooting for Romney, here – if Newt wins and then loses to Obomba (as would be likely), the GOP won't have learned a thing. They'll just say, "Shit, we should have nom'ed Willy."

    If they nom' Willy, well, they might realize that radicalism is necessary in the form of a Paul or a Johnson (or some combination thereof, except maybe Paul's Johnson).

  • The Question of Auban||

    If you support Jonson and Paul why not just root for Johnson or Paul?

  • ||

    According to the CNN South Carolina exit polls the most important candidate quality to voters was electability, and among these voters Gingrich won.

    It hurts to laugh this hard.

  • ||

    He was electable amongst them. The poll didn't specify the venue, asshole!

  • Gojira||

    It only hurts because of your diabeetus. Us normals are capable of laughing pain-free.

  • Rev. Blue Moon ||

    OTHERING! MICROAGGRESSION!

    you will refer to him as "handi-capable" from here forward.

  • Gojira||

    I accept your correction.

    But I should point out that I feel microaggressed when being forced to treat my physiological inferiors as equals.

  • Rev. Blue Moon ||

    Now you know what it's like to have walked a mile in STEVE SMITH's furry rapefeet.

  • Gojira||

    STEVE SMITH's a furry, too? Jesus, that guy really has some problems.

  • ||

    STEVE SMITH NOT FURRY! STEVE SMITH SHAVE WHOLE BODY LIKE HOO-MAN!

  • ||

    And that's OK.

  • Paul||

    Mr. SugarFree, that is the sound of electability...

  • Agent Smith||

    ...

  • T||

    Why is the disgraced former House speaker winning Republican votes?

    Half of the population is dumber than average. That's a whole lot of stupid, especially when you consider how ill-informed the 'average' voter is.

  • Miss Molly||

    ^^THIS.^^

  • cynical||

    Only if you take IQ as implicitly equivalent to intelligence. Otherwise, that's not how averages work.

  • ||

    And if you're stupid in South Carolina, you're off the charts everywhere else, except maybe rural Arkansas.

  • Jeremy||

    Except that rural Arkansas is home to some of the greatest businessmen in world history (and a shitty President, Johnny Cash, Bear Bryant, and countless others who dominated their fields).
    Other than that, I suppose we're all rubes.

  • Old Mexican||

    For instance, surprising many, Gingrich managed to push himself up onto the moral high-ground amidst allegations that he asked his ex-wife for an open marriage. When CNN GOP debate moderator John King asked Gingrich for his response, Newt lashed back[.]


    Psha. More likely, King simply threw the game in favor of Newt with that question. Newt wavered more visibly when Paul put him to task for his gung-ho atitude towards war when Newt never served himself.

  • k2000k||

    Yeah Newt didn't really have anything he could say other thank meekly sqeak out: "I wasn't eligible for the draft" As the audience applauded Ron Paul.

  • jacob||

    The NH debate.

    I recall that fondly.

  • Zeb||

    That was nice when for about an hour it seemed like Paul might get the attention he deserves.

  • ||

    Why is the disgraced former House speaker winning Republican votes?

    I'm turning to Occam's Razor to answer that question: most voters are idiots.

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    Most voters are stubborn idiots who cannot bring themselves to admit they were wrong in the past.

  • CE||

    Relentless programming by the propaganda networks that elderly Republican voters listen to all day every day?

  • Tim||

    Newt Gingrich: Asshole.

  • Miss Molly||

    Show me on the doll where Mr. Speaker touched you.

  • Gus||

    I believe he told you.

  • Miss Molly||

    ** rimshot **

  • Ice Nine||

    Yeah, I guess so.

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

  • ||

    Why hasn't Gangrene not washed out yet?

  • ||

    *has

  • ||

    Huntsman was the best candidate by far but he believes in evolution and AGW so he was doom in the Stupid Party.

    (for Ron Paul supporters Huntsman wanted out of the Middle East too but without the nutty Federal Reserve nonsense)

  • The Question of Auban||

    Shrike,

    How much do you really know about how the Federal Reserve was created?

    http://www.ronpaul2012podcast......ll-island/

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    He's not listening, don't bother.

  • ||

    I don't care how the Fed was created and how much influence JP Morgan had then.

    A central bank is vital to run a modern economy. The dollar is king of the hill. People send all sorts of valuable resources for that worthless fiat money.

    If anyone is "winning" on this fiat deal - we are.

  • The Question of Auban||

    "If anyone is "winning" on this fiat deal - we are."

    Who is "we"? What I have been seeing is inflation year after year. Precious metals like gold and silver are far more stable stable in terms of their actual valuable - i.e. how much silver it would take to purchase a gallon of gasoline.

  • ||

    Inflation is way down the list of economic sicknesses. Those who own assets actually like a little inflation.

    Those with fixed long-term loans actually like a little inflation.

    Inflation is modest now and has been since Volcker killed it.

    5 yr notes are yielding .079%. Inflation is short-term dead as a fucking doornail.

  • The Question of Auban||

    Ahh! So you care more about the rich than the poor! I knew it!

    The poor are less able to cope with the effects of inflation.

    I noticed above you used the term "modern economy". As opposed to ...

  • CE||

    Those with cash savings hate inflation. Since most people have massive debt, inflation is politically popular, as long as it doesn't get too far out of hand.

  • ||

    Why does the Rest of the World love our worthless fiat money? And send gob of minerals and energy here for it?

  • Brother Grimm||

    "Why does the Rest of the World love our worthless fiat money? And send gob of minerals and energy here for it?"

    Because if they don't love our fake money, we bomb them.

  • Brother Grimm||

    "Why does the Rest of the World love our worthless fiat money? And send gob of minerals and energy here for it?"

    Because if they don't love our fake money, we bomb them.

  • Brother Grimm||

    Oops, I mean we "liberate" them until they love our fake money.

  • ||

    Sometimes we bomb them with our fake money. Skids loaded with it, transported by the US government.

  • The Question of Auban||

    "Why does the Rest of the World love our worthless fiat money? And send gob of minerals and energy here for it?"

    Truth is many of them don't "love" it but are obligated to the Bretton Woods Agreement Act. Some countries have tried to get off of it like Iraq and Libya - hmmm what happened to those governments??? Iran now wants out of it. Hmmm, what is going on with Iran ....?

  • annonymous commenter some guy||

    @shrike

    They love our fiat money because we are productive as hell. That means we have lots of shit to tax, which means we have lots of ways of paying the debts that fiat money is based on. But what happens if our productivety flags and our currency is no longer attractive overseas? All those dollars come rushing back home.

    You probably expect to be dead before that happens though, right?

  • ||

    Inflation benefits those who own certain "hard" assets and debtors.

    It harms savers, those who don't have much money, and/or certain kinds of investors (bonds, etc.).

    Globally, its pretty much a transfer from the latter to the former.

  • k2000k||

    Bzzz. wrong answer. Shrike. Since the founding of the Federal Reserve the dollar has lost something like 97% of its value. If you bother to look up the value of the dollar from 1792-193 you see that it was virtually unchanged.

  • ||

    But income has grown magnitudes more.

    And purchasing power has grown as well. 1913 was pre-wealth in the USA. With the Fed we have achieved substantial wealth. Wealth matters - not static dollar value.

  • T||

    lmao, of course "income" has grown if the value has fallen.

  • CE||

    A central bank is vital to runruin a modern economy.

    FTFY

  • cynical||

    "A central bank is vital to run a modern economy."

    A whip is vital to run a plantation. Not everyone likes being "run" by some other asshole for his benefit.

  • Number 2||

    How does an adulterer with multiple marriages win support among evangelical Christians, especially those who insisted that the GOP candidates take a pledge of spousal fidelity?

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

  • ||

    Things have changed. Santorum got trounced in the land of Bob Jones U.

    The fundie-nuts may have Bush fatigue too.

  • The Question of Auban||

    Yes, we all have. 12 years of Bush is more than enough.

  • Paul||

    How does an adulterer with multiple marriages win support among evangelical Christians, especially those who insisted that the GOP candidates take a pledge of spousal fidelity?

    The same way the left is able to rationalize their support for Obama. It's political impressionism. Beautiful when you squint hard enough.

  • ||

    He asked for forgiveness, that's how.

    All that matters is that you say the right words and promise to bring about Armageddon with those people.

  • ||

    He was recently baptized as a Roman Catholic. Technically, his soul is without sin. Or so he can claim.

  • Tony||

    There's always a chance Newt could win people over with his chameleonlike demagoguery. Never underestimate the power of demagoguery or the stupidity of the American people. I think Romney is less electable now, and is terrifying the plutocratic class by being the poster boy for the regressive nature of our tax code they didn't want anyone to know about. I'd rather see Romney as the nominee for just this reason. He'd do more to force a conversation about economic fairness than any Democrat could.

  • Obama||

    There's always a chance Newt could win people over with his chameleonlike demagoguery. Never underestimate the power of demagoguery or the stupidity of the American people

    *looks around nervously*

  • Big Media||

    It's all right Obama Big Media will take care of everything, you'll still be lauded as the messiah. Shh...Shhh. Your shaking. Calm down my Big O. My Obama is such a smart Obama, a nice Obama, a brilliant Obama, there is no president like my Obama.

  • 894rhhjfg93h4||

    eagerly await a debate showdown between Obama and Gingrich just to watch two master orators compete

    Obama is a master orator? Huh, I've never recognized that before. Is it some kind of unwritten rule amongst political writers that any black guy who doesn't talk ghetto must be described as having superlative speaking skills?

  • CE||

    I'm all for economic fairness. We could start by lowering the top income tax bracket to match the long term capital gains tax rate.

  • Tony||

    Yeah yeah the world won't be fair to you guys until 10 people have all the wealth and everyone else is chewing on shoe leather.

  • romulus augustus||

    Asshole! It's only two people: David and Charles. Nothing worse than someone who can't get the conspiracy right.

  • Gus||

    Hey Emily, are you paying By Dorothy Rabinowitz royalties for this?

    http://online.wsj.com/article/.....LEFTSecond

  • Old Mexican||

    The poll which shows who is more electable is pretty telling, putting things in an interesting perspective: Of the four, only Mittens and Paul come close to beat Obama according to those polled, and that is by a wide margin compared to Nut Grinchgrich and Prick Rantorum. So why exactly are southern voters even considering Nut?

    It is clear most American voters are just as easily swayed by demagoguery than, say, Latin Americanvoters in Latin American countries. There seems to be no distinction between people when it comes to stupidity.

    Mitt and Paul do discuss the issues, even if from their own perspective, and yet many voters seem to look at totally superficial aspects of the candidates as the basis for their decision. Ok, so the Nut can debate - so what? He only gives lip service to those issues people seem to care about. He pretends to have an epiphany on the Federal Reserve despite the fact he seldom touched the issue, if at all. Rick Perry sounded much more sincere about it during an Iowa debate (where he thanked Ron Paul for 'opening his eyes' on the matter) than Nut. It is clear that Nut is nothing more than a panderer who expediently sheds one political stance for another like snakes shed their skin. His debate skills may be impressive, but his moral compass is much less so. Sad thing, then, that Southern voters will sell their cherished principles for a cheap and expedient plate of lentils.

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    Newt is selling hate of the media and Obama. That's a sure-fire sell in most of the South unfortunately. Newt is giving them what they want, hatred of the status quo with a complete lack of those pesky principles that get in the way of expediency.

  • ||

    I have to agree that Newt only picked up the anti-Fed talk when he saw it as a populist move.

    He is craven in that way. Purely disingenuous. Of course Rick W. Perry tried the same stunt.

  • Obama||

    when he saw it as a populist move.

    *looks around nervously*

  • Big Media||

    There there Obama. My Obama is such a great Obama. They don't realize how special you are, how brilliant you are, you're the best thing since black jesus.

  • Moogle||

    you're the best thing since black jesus.

    No way. Velociraptor Jesus still owns all.

    http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q.....kWJ1_zKrKE

  • ||

    Don't be silly. Plastic Jesus rules!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHf7TD4qwjk

  • CE||

    Exit polls found that about half of primary voters made up their minds just a few days prior to the election.

    This fact alone should deter the media from lavishing early coverage and debate speaking time on the perceived front-runners, but it won't.

  • CE||

    Gingrich also won the votes of those who said the deficit was the biggest issue. Perhaps those voters were unaware that he called Ron Paul's plan to balance the budget in 3 years "too extreme"? Or maybe they just thought he would be more effective in pushing through his paltry reductions than Paul would be in getting even a portion of his major cuts?

  • ||

    I do agree that Ron Paul is infinitely better than the brazen Sweat Hog.

  • Vinnie Barbarino||

    Wut?

  • Jeremy||

    You kilt Epstein.

  • ||

    You're giving them too much credit, CE. It wasn't calculated decision taking into account second and third order effects. More like:

    "Ah lahk the fat boy. Iffen yall are axin' me if I like him on account of that deficit deal, well, sure, why not?"

  • Paul||

    Dumb it down a little and you've got it.

  • ||

    I was trying to be nice.

  • ||

    It doesn't matter who the republicans nominate, they could nominate Jesus Christ and the media would still make him out to be a racist devil incarnate. And I'm afraid the masses would believe the Media, hell it happened once before.

  • CE||

    They wouldn't nominate Him. They booed the Golden Rule.

  • ||

    Thou shalt not kill? What, even Muslims?

  • cynical||

    The Bible is not a suicide pact.

  • romulus augustus||

    There's no accounting for the ignorance of the American voter or the intelligence lurking in unexpected places. E.g.#1 - the poly sci major on Jaywalking who can't name the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. E.G.#2 - the lowly parking garage worker who spotted my RP sticker and said if RP loses he was voting for the Libertarian, Gary Johnson.

  • ||

    I'm teaching overseas, and the Australians that I know here have a better grasp of the issues in this election than my American friends back home.

  • ||

    Democrats are praying Gingrich becomes the GOP nominee, and I don't blame them. Whatever reservations moderate Independents have about Obama and his sorry excuse for a Presidency, they'll still vote for him in November out of their fear of Gingrich.

  • ||

    Prediction time:

    (1) Santorum fizzles after being a non-factor in Florida, can't hang in for the Newt implosion.

    (2) Newt implodes, fades from race.

    (3) Paul hangs in, but can't overtake Romney. Romney gets the nom.

    (4) Europe rolls over. US bottom bounces, barely avoids a technical recession. Unemployment ticks up some.

    (5) Obama and his surrogates run the nastiest Presidential campaign since the 19th century. Doesn't matter, given the weak economy. Romney wins a close race.

    There. I'm on the record.

  • CE||

    That's how I see it too.

  • ||

    "Santorum fizzles"

    (giggle)

  • Let me spell it out for you||

    Santorum is stuck in place. He's stinky, sticky, and going nowhere!

  • ||

    That sounds like a pretty awful chain of events.

    Sadly, it's probably a best-case scenario.

  • ||

    It's probably a pretty good prediction. Gingrich will probably win a few small states before he loses momentum. Santorum will be a non-entity after Florida. While I'll remain a staunch Ron Paul supporter until the end I'm enough of a realist to realize Romney will probably end up with the nomination. Paul's movement will hopefully still be end up powerful enough to influence the 2012 platform and even Romney's choice of running mate. Whether Romney will win I refuse to speculate on at this time. The months between now and November are an eternity in politics.

  • ||

    Disagree on 5. Obama says he'll legalize pot and win.

  • CE||

    Maybe the moon base and Mars conquest plan are helping Newt:

    http://abcnews.go.com/Technolo.....yHIRYFZc1I

  • Let me spell it out for you||

    Newt, like the strumpets with which he surrounds himself, wants to do the nasty in zero gravity.

  • Let me spell it out for you||

    As an aside....Wondering if Callista and I's hair helmet would morph shape in zero gravity?

  • Realist||

    "Why is the disgraced former House speaker winning Republican votes?"
    Because Republicans want to vote for a shit for brains just like themselves.

  • Let me spell it out for you||

    M-o-r-m-o-n-i-s-m

  • Brubaker||

    "GOP voters would probably eagerly await a debate showdown between Obama and Gingrich just to watch two master orators compete."

    With Obama and Gingrich on stage there will be just one master orator, Gingrich, and one master teleprompter reader, Obama. In an honest debate, Gingrich wipes the floor with the community organizer.

  • Let me spell it out for you||

    "In an honest debate" -- i.e. a debate moderated by a pussy in a room full of Mormon hating South Carolina bigots, howling drunk.

  • Let me spell it out for you||

    Coordinated Attack vs. Newt Doesn't Match My Memory
    - Rush Limbaugh

    Too much Oxycontin, big fella?

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Video Game Nation: How gaming is making America freer – and more fun.
  • Matt Welch: How the left turned against free speech.
  • Nothing Left to Cut? Congress can’t live within their means.
  • And much more.

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement