The Rage of Newt

Nice job, interesting diary. (0.00 / 0)

Why do you think the Republican base is so prone to responding to this type of rage-and-anti-"elite"-based (not to mention not-so-subtly racist) appeal? Are those characteristics inherent to the "right" in general, or was what happened last night more specific to South Carolina Teapublicans?

Follow me on Twitter.

---

by: lowkell @ Sun Jan 22, 2012 at 12:13:44 PM UTC

Everyone's angry. (0.00 / 0)

Thanks.

I think there's a pervasive anger around the globe, driven by frustration at economic stagnation and limited economic opportunity. From Russia to Egypt, people seem angry just about everywhere.

In America we've got big protest movements on the right and on the left -- not mention Ron Paul's angry-youth-fueled protest candidacy, which has scored creepily good double-digit wins in all three early states.

The conservative variant of all this populist anger is exactly what animates Gingrich voters. In South Carolina, Gingrich was able to channel this anger. He's a creature of the right, and he was playing to an audience has a unique ability to viscerally connect with.

So to answer your question, which is exactly the right question be asking after last night's results, I think that Gingrich has the momentum and the rhetorical agility to remain the vessel of choice for conservative animus.

Now, Gingrich definitely has baggage. So I think that the right paid media from Romney's campaign could disqualify Gingrich in the eyes of conservatives. Sheldon Adelson might have more to say about who wins Florida, and the GOP primary, than anyone else.

---

by: Sherlock @ Sun Jan 22, 2012 at 18:19:38 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Thanks, that's very helpful. (0.00 / 0)

As for Florida, I'm thinking that Gingrich doesn't need to win it, just come respectably close to Romney. If Gingrich DOES manage to win Florida, despite his big money disadvantage (although Adelson could change that, I suppose), then Romney's in deep, deep trouble. Which would be fine with me, because although there are plenty of angry people out there, in the end I don't believe that anger alone, certainly not channeled by a messenger as deeply flawed as Newton Leroy, can beat Barack Obama - or even come close - in November. To the contrary, I think if Newt's the nominee, this could be a big Democratic victory, as in winning back the House, holding the Senate, and reelecting Obama easily. Let's hope.

Follow me on Twitter.

---

by: lowkell @ Sun Jan 22, 2012 at 19:25:35 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Great point. I hadn't considered (0.00 / 0)

what a narrow miss in Florida would mean for Gingrich, but you're absolutely right. If he plays the expectations game properly, a second-place finish would still be seen as a significant victory.

And I do so hope he wins the nomination. His 27 percent nationwide favorability is awful juicy.  

---

by: Sherlock @ Sun Jan 22, 2012 at 19:43:23 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Better odds but higher stakes (0.00 / 0)

This isn't all upside.

If Gingrich and his -35% favorability spread are at the top of the Republican ticket in the general, there are much better odds of a Democratic blowout. On the other hand, if despite our best efforts something goes horribly wrong, the stakes are much higher. Gingrich is quite a bit crazier than Romney, and I don't want to see him elected.

Don't get me wrong: I'm salivating at the prospect of Newt Gingrich as Republican nominee, just as much as everyone else here. But it's not an unadulterated good.

---

by: will @ Mon Jan 23, 2012 at 16:27:51 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Are you really sure Romney would be any better than Newt (0.00 / 0)

as president? I'm not at all. As far as I'm concerned, either of them would be horrible, so let's root for the one that's easier to beat!

Follow me on Twitter.

---

by: lowkell @ Mon Jan 23, 2012 at 16:35:59 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I sometimes wonder! (0.00 / 0)

I sometimes wonder if John King didn't deliberately pitch Newt a "softball".  He had to know that Newt would be expecting this and would be cocked and primed for it.  He was and he knocked it out of the park.  What does it do and who profits?  It gives "legs" to the Republican primary which if Romney had won would have been essentially over, or at least less interesting than it now will be.  It gives the main stream media and especially the 24 hr talk shows something to blather about ad nausea.  It gives the right wingnut pundits, who are a circus in their own right, something to really ramp up about(read Rush Limbaugh and ilk) and for the 24 hr media to breathlessly cover their every utterance.  All in all, it was a wonderful thing for the 24 hr media, their pundits, their owners and their bottom line. I know this sounds like conspiracy theory but you have to wonder why would you ask that question, in the manner it was asked, first pop out of the box ,to a guy, unless he was brain dead, had to know it was coming and would be prepared for it. Just wondering.    

---

by: Bumble Bee @ Sun Jan 22, 2012 at 16:48:53 PM UTC

Definitely a softball (0.00 / 0)

I think you're right, especially about the way the media uses moments like this to increase ratings and profits. The FOX news moderators have been particularly adept at getting candidates to fight with each other and create really entertaining TV. And you bet John King was happy Gingrich attacked him on national TV.

But there's no conspiracy here, really. Just a bunch of TV networks fighting over advertising dollars. But that I'm unpersuaded that such behavior is hurting America.

I think King definitely pitched Newt a softball question. That's standard journalistic practice -- the issue alone is so poisonous, there's no need to twist the knife. Besides, it's only decent to let the guy respond to a potentially career-ending charge.

Only when you prevaricate, a la Romney's tax returns, does the questioning get tougher. And Gingrich definitely knew the pitch was coming, and was ready with a show-stopping answer.

What's so impressive to me is that Gingrich and his team made a very ballsy call about the mood of conservative voters, and got it exactly right.

---

by: Sherlock @ Sun Jan 22, 2012 at 18:31:06 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Fundamentally, Romney is NOT a conservative, not (0.00 / 0)

of that movement, not one of them at all. Thus, it's not surprising that he doesn't understand the "mood of conservative voters," and why he keeps getting it exactly...wrong.

Follow me on Twitter.

---

by: lowkell @ Sun Jan 22, 2012 at 19:26:54 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Exactly right. (0.00 / 0)

Romney is a hollow messenger for the kind of hyper-partisan rhetoric the right desperately wants to lap up.

---

by: Sherlock @ Sun Jan 22, 2012 at 19:39:05 PM UTC

[ Parent ]