The EFM Feature
Screen Shot 2011-09-07 at 7.28.25 PM

Over at NRO I offered my take on Newt’s surge.  An excerpt:

Newt’s unmistakeable rise in the polls makes me chuckle. Not because I don’t take him seriously. I do. He’s a formidable opponent — a great debater (as we’ve seen), a big-picture thinker, and a person who’s literally seen everything his opponents can throw at him. If I had a dollar, however, for every time I’ve been told that the conservative movement won’t ever support Mitt because he’s “establishment” and because he’s a “flip-flopper,” I’d be part of the 1 percent. Yet is there a conservative in this race more “establishment” than Newt? The former speaker of the House has collected vast sums of money from from quasi-lobbying activities and has been a fixture in conservative Washington for decades. Newt as an outsider? No way.

Keep reading and you’ll see where I note Newt’s many policy shifts.  If this race really does become Newt v. Mitt, then I suspect the “flip-flop” argument will grow a bit less common.  I conclude my post with this observation:

If Newt Gingrich is to be the “anti-Mitt,” then so be it. He’ll be a worthy opponent and (if he won) would be a vast improvement over the current president. But if he is the anti-Mitt, then I think it’s safe to say that the race will have moved well past arguing about who is (or isn’t) a “true conservative,” well beyond the sometimes inane ideological hair-splitting of early debates and controversies, and perhaps into the much more conventional debate over which longtime conservative leader is best equipped to lead a nation in distress.

Read the whole thing.


Comments and Discussion

Evangelicals for Mitt provides comments as a way to engage in a public and respectiful discussion about articles and issues. Any comment may be removed by the editors for violating common decency or tempting flames.

8 Responses to Newt v. Mitt — Not Exactly Tea Party v. Establishment

  1. Liz says:

    No doubt. Well said. Didn’t think of it that way, but when it comes down to it, real leadership skills and experience are quite comforting at times like this. Nonetheless, I feel Gingrich is another flavor of the month as he has already commenced his steep descent in New Hampshire Polls.

  2. Patrick says:

    I’ve watched a lot of the debates and been politically aware for years, and I’m glad to see that this nomination race is finally winnowing down to Mitt and Newt.
    I’m a Mass resident, liked Mitt as gov, supported him 4 years ago, and am doing so now. But I’ll admit to having liked a lot of what Newt has said in the debates. And he was masterful in 93 and 94, right around the time Mitt was taking on Ted Kennedy.
    For me, the Republican ticket is Romney/Gingrich. Romney knows how to run a national campaign; Newt knows how to have his whole campaign team resign. We can’t take the risk of having him at the top of the ticket. But could you imagine a Gingrich vs. Biden debate? Oh, that would be rich!

    • Terry says:

      Gingrich vs. Biden? Newt wouldn’t just take Biden to the cleaners, he’d take him down to the river and scrub him over the rocks.

  3. Terry says:

    No Perfect Candidate

    This is not about Newt.

    I listened to Glenn Beck today, nit-picking at Mitt Romney over a supposed flip-flop on illegal immigration. I had to ask myself, “Do these people not get it?” What America needs the very most at this time is someone who can pull this country out of the disastrous financial shape it’s in. Currently, there is only person who has the knowledge and skills to do so, and that’s Mitt Romney. Had I been able to, I would have called the show and reminded them that there is no perfect candidate, then asked them what they thought was the most serious problem facing the country today. I’d have been surprised if they hadn’t answered “The economy”. To me, that will be the number one priority the new president will have to work on. I like some of the other candidates, but likable or not, if the economy tanks, it won’t make much difference who flip-flopped on this issue or who is better qualified at solving X, Y or Z.

    I just want to be able to rest easy nights, secure in the knowledge that someone who knows what they are doing is working on getting the economy back to the triple-A rating it used to have: Mitt Romney.

  4. John Brown says:

    If you go out Media Matters and look at how many pieces they’ve done on candidates since Sept 1, you’ll see something interesting. I’ve included Limbaugh for comparison since we know how much they love him:

    Name Total
    Limbaugh 9
    Romney 8
    Cain 8
    Perry 6
    Christie 4
    Gingrich 4

    Santorum, Bachmann, Huntsman, and Paul don’t even appear in their headlines. Seems they like Mitt almost as much as they like Limbaugh.

    Now go to the DNC website. They have 4 rotating images in the header. 2 of those are anti-Mitt ads. The other two are focused on general issues. Hum. If you look at their blog for the last month, they made 80 blog posts. 37 of those—THIRTY SEVEN—are bashing Mitt. 4 bash Perry. 1 bashes Cain. Nobody else is even tagged.

    Folks like Limbaugh and others here are so misrepresenting (or ignoring the facts) on who the left fears.

  5. Wren says:

    Our news media is so bias that the public must read between the lines to get the facts, but here are some:

    In the U.S. during 2011 there were over 1 million forclosures, over 1.6 million bankruptcies, over 47 million on food stamps and over 25 million on unemployment. If we have savings we can’t get a fair return on the accounts while our drugs and health care costs are going through the ceiling.

    As a nation we have over 116.5 trillon dollars in unfunded liabilities, are in debt over 15 trillion dollars, and to pay off that debt it would take 48 thousand dollars from each man woman and child.

    But we can’t even think about paying off that debt, much less try to strengthen the economy because the Senate is controlled by the Democrats who don’t want to stop spending while the House of Represenatives has a Republican majority who don’t want to raise taxes, resulting in a gridlock at every level.

    Since our borders are open to terrorists and our elected officials can’t or won’t fix things we would live somewhere else but even that plan is in question because Latin America is full of drug cartels, Europe is broke, Africa is starving and the Middle East is out of control.

    Now, what’s the matter with getting behind Romney, the only candidate with a proven record that he can beat Obama and hopefully start to get us out of this mess? Why argue the small stuff?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>