Take a serious look at Newt Gingrich

.By David Rothschild

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich has long insisted he belongs in the top tier of Republican candidates for the 2012 nomination--even in the wake of campaign staff implosions and embarrassing reports of his free-spending patronage of Tiffany's.

And as Gingrich gains noticeable momentum in the polls, the prediction markets are also starting to take him more seriously. Gingrich's stock in prediction markets such as Intrade has been gaining ground over the past few weeks, but took a sharp upward turn on Monday as the media broke a round of damaging allegations about Herman Cain: claims of sexual harassment dating to Cain's 1990s tenure at the National Restaurant Association, together with reports of campaign fundraising violations.

In the short term, the unorthodox Cain campaign has yet to show signs of flagging in the face of the charges--a new Washington Post/ABC poll shows him essentially tied with Mitt Romney atop the GOP field. But a look at the larger picture via the prediction markets shows that Cain's likelihood of actually winning the nomination is getting smaller each day. The reason that prediction markets have been so skeptical of Cain's success, from the beginning, is that no one has vetted him--meaning that the greater public scrutiny that comes with a higher-profile candidacy would produce unwelcome revelations such as the harassment charges. The insider handicappers who typically participate in prediction markets have also noted that Cain's command of social, economic and foreign policy issues comes across as amateurish.

Cain's recent troubles have created a significant opening for Gingrich, since many GOP primary voters are continuing to search for an alternative to Romney--and since the last vetted anti-Romney candidate, Texas Gov. Rick Perry, is contending with plenty of campaign woes of his own.

Gingrich is now the third most likely Republican nominee--still way behind Romney, but just behind a still falling Perry. Thanks to his tenure as House Speaker, Gingrich is the most thoroughly vetted of all of the potential nominees. Of course, Americans have notoriously short-term memories when it comes to politics; Gingrich resigned in 1998 amid very low popularity following the government shutdowns of 1995 and 1996 and the perceived hypocrisy surrounding the Monica Lewinsky scandal and President Clinton's impeachment. You can still expect his far from scandal-free personal life to be a major issue for the religious right as social conservatives weigh his candidacy going forward.

Yet, despite such baggage, the good news for Gingrich is that the field of likely anti-Romney candidates is steadily thinning--leaving him the likeliest candidate for reconsideration among conservative GOP voters. Ron Paul is a libertarian and while he has maintained consistent support and attracted a passionate following, he has not broken into the mainstream of Republican conservatism. Jon Huntsman has been running as a moderate, gaining no traction with the Republicans. And Michelle Bachman and Rick Santorum have positioned themselves as hardline conservative candidates--in a way that has so far prevented them from garnering serious support outside the social-conservative camp.

MORE INFORMATION ON GINGRICH

Let the Race Begin .... On Your Marks ..... Get Set .............

Mondays with Tony Lee 04.04.11


President Barack Obama launched his reelection campaign with a web video. While at first blush the timing of the announcement may be puzzling because the optics imply that Obama is more focused on politicking instead of being serious about the budget and Libya, I think his announcement this week is a brilliant piece of political strategy. Obama has been getting some unfavorable coverage from the mainstream media, so now that he has officially announced his candidacy for reelection, the mainstream media and the White House press corps will surely put on their Obama jerseys again and give him favorable coverage. MSM men will get tingles up their legs and women will get all hot and tingly over the Big O’s speeches and optics.

With this bias and tilted playing field in mind, it is more imperative for prospective GOP presidential candidates to be effective messengers. I suggest that each candidate listen to 9 innings of legendary Dodgers announcer Vin Scully to learn how to better communicate with voters. 
— Tony Lee

VS COMMENTS

I'm Tired ............

For months now I have been suggesting that CONSERVATIVES should get off their butts and start doing some positive campaigning. It was so much fun just ridiculing Obama and his group. It apparently was much easier doing that than coming up with anything positive, like who to vote for and why.

Now the Liberals are doing the things they do so well. They are selecting critical areas of the political picture, doing just what they have to do to insure that they will maintain control, everywhere that is important.

Biden, Obama, Clinton, and others are being orchestrated by a political conductor who possesses an infinite amount of wisdom on what it is going to take to win what they need to win.

I think, now more than ever, that they are going to pull it off. They are relying on Republican complacency and over confidence, as they have in the past. I have done Blogs, Facebook entries, Emails and on a website, and no one would listen.

I am old, and I am tired. I am now just going to sit back and watch it all happen, and hear their new cry, What Happened In November, and then Wait Till 2012. RIP Liberals.

A TIME TO BE CONCERNED

Obama, Democrats Declare War on U.S. Chamber


Monday, 11 Oct 2010 02:18 PM By: David A. Patten

With massive midterm losses looming, President Barack Obama is blasting the U.S. Chamber of Commerce for accepting foreign donations for its political advertising — a charge that myriad watchdogs and media outlets already have debunked as groundless.

The political battle the allegation has touched off appears to be escalating.

It began at a political rally in Maryland last week, when the president echoed a charge that first appeared in a left-wing blog that the Chamber of Commerce had used foreign contributions to help defray its $75 million campaign advertising budget.

Said Obama: "So groups that receive foreign money are spending huge sums to influence American elections, and they won't tell you where the money for their ads come from."

The Chamber immediately denied the report, explaining that its strict accounting procedures keep foreign and domestic contributions separate.

Denunciations that the allegations appear groundless have spanned the political spectrum.

The New York Times on Monday stated flatly in a news article: "The Democrats have offered no evidence that the Chamber is using foreign money to influence the elections."

On Sunday's "Face the Nation" program, White House senior adviser David Axelrod conceded that the administration has no facts to support its claim, while not backing off on the president's implication that the Chamber may have violated U.S. laws.

When ABC host Bob Schieffer asked whether he had any evidence to support the charge, Axelrod shot back: "Well, do you have any evidence it's not [true] Bob?"

Schieffer's replied by asking Axelrod: "Is that the best you can do?"

The allegations against the Chamber, even as the administration tries to assure job-generating corporations that it is pro-business, appear to be part of a larger Democratic effort to alter the political dialogue in the closing weeks of the campaign.

Max Baucus, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, has asked the IRS to investigate groups, such as the Chamber, that do political advertising. Also, Sen. Al Franken, D-Minn., has called for a Federal Election Commission probe into whether the Chamber is using foreign donations to influence domestic politics.

Also, the Democratic National Committee has released a new ad castigating the Chamber as "shills for big business." The ad depicts a thief snatching a woman's purse in a parking garage.

"They're stealing our democracy, spending millions from secret donors to elect Republicans to do their bidding in Congress," a narrator says in the ad. "It appears they've even taken secret foreign money to influence our elections."

The Wall Street Journal shot back in its lead editorial Monday: "Democrats are unleashing government power to silence their political opponents. Instead of piling on, the press corps ought to blow the whistle on this attempt to stifle political speech. This is one more liberal abuse of power that voters should consider as they had to the polls."

Republicans and business leaders are firing back as well.

Former White House Press Secretary and Fox News commentator Dana Perino tells Newsmax that Democrats are beginning to look desperate in the face of bad poll numbers.

"It sure isn't looking good," she says, "and it gets worse every day. And their desperation and [the] lashing out from the White House is — or should — be beneath them."

"Desperate, partisan attacks are a transparent attempt to distract voters from the issue America cares most about: job creation," wrote R. Bruce Josten, the Chamber's executive vice president for government affairs, on the Chamber website. "Now is not the time for political stunts, as the American people are rejecting politics as usual."

Obama himself appeared to back down somewhat Sunday at rally in Philadelphia, slamming Republicans for being beholden to moneyed interests while stopping short of alleging a violation of U.S. law.

But he did so by raising more questions about foreign influence in U.S. elections.

"They are being helped along this year by special interest groups that are spending unlimited amounts of money on attack ads . . . just attacking people without ever disclosing who's behind all these attack ads," Obama said of the GOP. "You don't know. It could be the oil industry. It could be the insurance industry. It could even be foreign-owned corporations. You don't know because they don't have to disclose."

The latest remarks of Axelrod and Obama appear designed to put the pressure on the Chamber and other pro-business campaign advertisers to reveal which companies are contributing to their ad campaigns. The Supreme Court's January ruling in the Citizens United case allows organizations such as trade associations to run independent advertising for or against candidates — even within 60 days of an election. The advertising can be paid for through anonymous donations.

Companies seek to keep their political activities anonymous to avoid boycotts by left-wing organizations that could hurt their businesses. When Target Corp. recently donated $150,000 of support to a group that ran advertising for Minnesota GOP gubernatorial candidate Tom Emmer, MoveOn.org accused it of being anti-gay and started a boycott petition.

Some analysts say Obama and Democrats appear to be trying to shift the campaign's focus off of the president's policies and the dismal economy.

I think that SLANDER is involved here. "The pot calling the kettle black." DESPERATION, LAST MINUTE TACTICS ................... THEY will do ANYTHING necessary ......... This ADMINISTRATION is a BLACK MARK on this country. Their DESPERATION tactics are beyond comprehension ............... They will stop at NOTHING to get their way ..... I hope the 58 MILLION on SS who WILL NOT get the raise this year are listening ............
VOTE THEM OUT .................... VOTE THEM OUT ....................... VOTE THEM OUT..........
\
IF WE DON'T START WEEDING THE POLITICAL GARDEN NOW THE US AS WE KNOW IT IS DOOMED .....................