President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Kamala Harris

(R) Donald Trump

80%↑

20%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) V. Archuleta

98%

2%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Marshall Dawson

95%

5%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Hurd

(D) Adam Frisch

50%

50%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(D) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank

(D) River Gassen

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) John Fabbricatore

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen

(R) Sergei Matveyuk

90%

10%

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

52%↑

48%↓

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
December 26, 2011 08:06 PM UTC

Newt's Longshot Gets Longer?

  • 25 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

The Los Angeles Times updates over Christmas weekend:

Newt Gingrich’s campaign, having failed to meet the ballot requirements for Virginia’s Super Tuesday presidential primary, announced Saturday that it will ask his supporters to write in his name instead.

But Virginia law does not allow write-in ballots in primary elections.

The failure to get on the presidential primary ballot in the state of Virginia, where he lives, looks bad more than it is functionally bad for Newt Gingrich–who would certainly have the opportunity to show momentum before Super Tuesday. But the “looking bad” part is the last thing Gingrich needs as all eyes turn to the Iowa caucuses set for next week. ABC News:

“I think this race right now – unless somebody changes the dynamic in Iowa – is a race between Ron Paul, Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich, all of whom have tremendous baggage and all of whom a majority of Republicans have worries about. But it’s going to be one of the three of those,” Republican strategist and ABC News political contributor Matthew Dowd said on “Good Morning America” today.

Much like in Colorado, where otherwise-confident Mitt Romney campaign organizers are really only sweating a Ron Paul “marring” of caucuses they’ve otherwise enjoyed a lock on organizing, the Paul campaign is a wild card in the Iowa caucuses: although we wonder if these Jim Welker-style newsletters in Paul’s past will deflate, if not Paul’s core supporters, the ability for the campaign to produce a large non-activist turnout. Romney and Paul are well-organized on the ground to turn out supporters, and Gingrich has focused his resources on Iowa–apparently a little too much (see: Virginia). If Gingrich can win in Iowa, he gets momentum he’ll need to survive his expected trouncing in New Hampshire’s primary a week later by Romney.

From there, Gingrich’s campaign lives or dies based on his ability to quickly organize expensive field operations in many states. In many places he’s going to run directly into a wall of groundwork that Romney has laid in places like Colorado–primary and caucus states alike. Setting aside Romney’s tepid embrace by the GOP, and unfulfilled desire for a viable alternative, Newt Gingrich simply hasn’t demonstrated the skills or the resources to mount a campaign on the scale required to win a presidential nomination. That’s the perception he must change.

While Romney has the resources to win, he needs to stop earning that tepid embrace.

Tweet
Share

Comments

25 thoughts on “Newt’s Longshot Gets Longer?”

  1. Because I think he would absolutely melt down in the general, something Romney is unlikely to do (I discount Paul as a serious candidate for the general election).

    That said, I don’t think Romney can generate enough enthusiasm within the GOP or among independents (regardless of how “closet partisan” they may be) to get elected barring some sort of disaster between now and the general election.  

  2. A pity…for him. There are no more debates between now ahead of Iowa caucuses, and he’s incapable of taking control over a news cycle. Every day there’s either more bad press or further exposure of what an asshole he is.

    CNN just scooped everyone after obtaining documents from Gingrich’s first divorce, along with quotes from former friends who think he’s an asshole for how he treated Mrs. Gingrich #1.

    On top of which, Ron Paul has a mad on for Gingrich, and is happy spending money on ads attacking Gingrich’s “serial hypocrisy.”

    And it’s still an amateur hour operation he’s got after screwing up the Virginia deadline, and then demagoging about what a victim his is. Even worse, his campaign advisers are going on facebook saying Newt analogizes it with Pearl Harbor.

    http://www.mediaite.com/online…

    Thousands of Americans died in the attack on Pearl Harbor, and unlike Gingrich’s filing deadline, they didn’t know it was coming. Failure to get your shit together on time does not equal heroism.

    My lord, what an asshole!  

  3. Newt is already dropping like a stone in Iowa and looks pretty stupid calling for a write in campaign, not knowing that there isn’t any such thing allowed in his own state of residence. He has always struck me as the stupidest “genius” going.  I mean just look at his Obama/Kenya nonsense. That completely inaccurate garbage is from a “brilliant” historian? Seriously?

    Paul can’t survive with the fresh publicity for the many virulently racist items sent out in newsletters under his name with any but his usual tiny little band of diehard supporters.  Not that he ever had a chance to do more than make some noise.  The rest have all been stick a fork in it done for a while.

    Looks like, even though nobody seems to be very enthusiastic about him, Romney’s the only one left standing.  Will TP diehards rally to one or more Perot like candidates to make a point?  Will such a candidate be joined by the Donald in search of more fuel for the quickly fading  celebrity status that keeps his main source of income, his reality show, on the air?  Will Obama and the Dems be smart enough to build on their non-caving  and jump all over the messaging op they’ve been handed?   Will 2012 be as different from 2010 as 2010 was from 2008?  Hang on.  Here we go.

    1. I don’t know whether you are old enough to remember what Gingrich did in the 1980’s and 1990’s, but if you’re not, I’ll tell you.  The guy literally brought Congressional Republicans back from death after 50 years in hell.  And he didn’t do it overnight.  He spent years and years building to better Republican candidates for Congress.  Giving them a resume (from City Council to County Office to State Legislature.)  He trained these candidates for years on end.  He got control over the message of the GOP and nationalized it.  He won one of the largest upsets in the history of American politics when the Republicans captured Congress in 1994 and the House which they hadn’t controlled in over 50 years.  The guy is strategic, he’s knowledgeable, he knows how to run a national campaign and he can be disciplined if he wants to.  Further, older Republicans who tend to dominate Republican primaries and caucuses remember what he did.  People literally compare it to Moses leading the Jews out of Egypt.  I don’t know that he’ll win because there is no one yet on his campaign who has shown s/he can control his mouth.  But, he has the ability and always has.

      1. “You are what your record says you are.”

        Gingrich may have HAD the ability, but based on the record of his campaign to date, he does NOT have the ability to run a national campaign – for whatever reason.

      2. Also the baggage that followed. Newt never intended to be President this time around. He’s a huckster making a great living. He’s down to 14% in Iowa. He wouldn’t have screwed up Virginia if he really had ever been serious about anything but selling himself and his books. Newt is the last person on the planet who wants Newt to be the GOP pick for 2012. And he knows he wouldn’t have a snowball’s chance in hell.

      3. the fact is, Newt has brilliantly disguised his intentions and goals better than anyone since . . . Sun Tzu?

        How soon the simple minded forget?  The fact is nothing, I repeat — absofreakinlutely nothing, ever has or ever will sell better to teh GOPers than victimization. Nothing!

        Right now Newt’s desired stock us way, way up and his chosen future is bright;  a laughing, celebratory Newt and Calista are probably banging on a large pile of cash and Tiffany’s charge-slips as I write . . .

      4. I remember Gingrich’s great deeds of the 80s and 90s. He is not the firs person better at teaching folks what to do/not do than to do it himself.

        I do tend to agree with those who ponder that Newt never intended/thought he’d be this successful but was on a hype tour for books, media and personal appearances. Hence, the VA thing, he never thought it would be important.

        Imagine the criticism he’d be making of Mitt if Mitt was in this position, something like “unprepared to lead”.

        1. The continuing theme with Gingrich is that he is the dictator. He decides what is right or wrong. He decides what is true and what is false. He decides who shall live or die.

          That he and his campaign decided not to gather signatures is his problem. Not the Republican party of Virginia. Yet – he is telling the Republican Party and the state of Virginia that he is more important than their laws and regulations.

  4. If it were not for the liberal media, and gays getting married and – well just about anything you can think of that is not a traditional Republican value Gingrich would be on the ballot.

    Not enough signatures just shows that propaganda about him being a compulsive adulterer and divorcer, along with being a bastard in his daily life made the Republicans doing the count to fall to liberal thought and not add enough extras for him to make the ballot.

  5. related to some of the truth of Newt’s first divorce filed after his records were finally discovered where a retired county clerk had stashed them to prevent their theft(?)

    1. Everyone seemed to think Gingrich was immune since we all knew the story, but it’s so much worse than we imagined. He really seemed to think that because nobody could find the divorce records, he could just lie about it at will.

      Here’s the direct link.

      1. Sleeazy and weak.

        If only he was a governor from Arkansas instead of a a former Congressman from …some other southern state.

        He’s a weasel and while stinrging together a bunch of words might count for “smart” in some circles, iy only works for Newt because of the others in the field.

        I feel sorry for #1.  #2 and #3 knew exactly what they were getting into.  #4 might not even be alive yet, so she might not know.

        1. even reading about the guy. In spite of what Craig notes above, in spite of him working with Clinton on issues like welfare reform, balancing budget, etc. it is hard to see that the guy has a record of doing positive stuff in an ongoing way. And, he claims way, way too much credit for what he did play a part in.

      2. another classy affair (pun intended)

        August 1981: Marianne Ginther and Newt Gingrich married. By 1997, rumors were already swirling about Newt’s next series of extramarital affairs.

        1993: As was later revealed in the course of Newt’s second set of divorce proceedings, Newt began a long-term affair with Callista Bisek, a Republican Congressional staffer 23 years his junior.

        May 1999: Newt told Marianne of his ongoing affair with Callista Bisek on Mother’s Day – shortly after Marianne was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis. She was visiting her mother in Ohio, and told Esquire in 2010 that Newt had invited Callista to their house for the weekend she was away. Initially, he asked Marianne to simply tolerate his affair.

        June 29, 1999: Newt filed for divorce.

        April 2000: Marianne and Newt Gingrich finalized their divorce.

        August 18, 2000: Callista Bisek and Newt Gingrich married.

        http://www.rawstory.com/rs/201…

        To all those chiding me for not taking Newt seriously enough…  The other woman, Callista, is never going to pass muster as first lady material.  Never. Men are allowed to fess up and be forgiven by the religious right.  Adulterously unchaste women? As a role model in the white House for young Chridtian girls?  Forget it.

        He would have been better off sticking with good old not young or pretty enough in the first place, for presidential aspirations. The fact that he asked number 2 to just tolerate number 3 shows he had some awareness of what the effect would be on his future ambitions. His having an emotional age of about 14 got in the way.

        Sorry, Ali, wherever you are out there.  Your “uncle” is a dirt bag.

        1. there’s probably still time to secure a new, improved First Lady before Super Tuesday . . .

          After further thought, deadline or no, why wait? . . . Marry First Lady #4 tomorrow and convert to Mormonism . . .  

    1. but it’s clearly not a credible source . . . this screed would have us believe that there are REPUBLICANS who routinely give short shrift to the sanctity of balloting and election requirements.  Well, I for one, and ArapaGOP for two, aren’t buying into these fetid lies and putrid distortions.

      It’s Pearl Harbor or vindictive partisanship that’s happened here,  . . . I’m not sure which . . . ArapaGOP can probably explain . . .  

      1. You are almost as good as Libertad 2.0.

        TPM isn’t the source, they quote an original story from Ballot Access News.

        So, in Virginia the Republican Party is in charge of verifying the signatures. Apparently in the past, they just accepted any random 10,000 signatures scrawled on the petition (sanctity of the vote?), but then a Republican candidate got screwed by a primary opponent with a bunch of fake signatures, so he demanded that the signatures be verified, not just accepted.

        Perry, Bachman and Santorum failed to get enough verified signatures, also.

        Can this be Gessler’s smoking gun on election fraud!?

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

102 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!