How did Gingrich convince the voters to overlook the years of political and moral baggage that he brings with him? More importantly, will it work beyond the borders of South Carolina?
As Gingrich has basked in the glory of a very unexpected resurgence of his campaign, it has been interesting that the bulk of the people singing his praises have been the Democrats. James Carville, Paul Begala and David Axelrod have openly praised Gingrich on his win.
And Republican support and praise for Newt's win? It has been eerily quiet. Where are all the legislators who served with Gingrich? If he was the effective leader he claimed to be, shouldn't there be dozens of his colleagues applauding this major step to the White House?
Truth is, only a handful of Gingrich's former House colleagues have endorsed him. A total of 12 sitting Republican lawmakers have endorsed Newt. It should be mentioned that Mitt Romney has 64.
In fact, conservatives in Washington DC are beginning to voice serious concern and angst about a Gingrich Nomination. Sitting legislators and former House colleagues are coming out in opposition to the idea of Newt representing the party.
Today CNN interviewed several of these legislators but under strict anonymity for fear of what they referred to as, "A Gingrich Backlash."
One legislator said, "If he's (Gingrich) the nominee, it's a disaster. There is no way to sugar coat it."
Another colleague who has endorsed Mitt said, "There is a reason that most people who know him aren't supporting him." When asked why he endorsed Romney despite the fact that he had served with Gingrich for so long, his response was astounding. He said, "It is because I served with Gingrich for so long." (click to read full CNN article).
Opposition and silence from the many who served with Gingrich.
This silence speaks volumes about Gingrich's leadership.
***
It is one thing to be an effective "legislator" and another thing to know how to effectively "govern." The only time that Gingrich has governed anything was during his tenure as Speaker. It goes without saying that this attempt to govern ended in disaster when he was forced to resign in disgrace.
In 2008, America also placed a bet on a presidential candidate who like Gingrich, had never governed anything or anyone. Despite Obama's lack of experience in governing or managing anything, the country voted for him. And it was obvious from the start that he was in over his head when for the first two years, he could not even rally the Democratic controlled House and Senate to pass any of his initiatives.
Can America risk another bet on someone with the wrong experience?
To legislate is one thing...to effectively govern is another.
Mitt has been effective at both. He has managed failing systems and restored them to become successful and prosperous. Despite an 85% Democratic controlled legislature in Massachusetts, he led from both sides of the aisle and successfully brought bi-partisan reforms to the state. He balanced the budget and turned a $3 billion dollar budget shortfall into a surplus and he did it without raising a single tax.
This is the leadership that America needs and deserves. We need Mitt's skill-set to help us emerge out of the greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression.
America needs Mitt.
I watched the debate last night. It worries me how Newt slides over issues, or gets angry over the question asked and never really addresses it. If he becomes the Republican candidate we are doomed. Do the American people live behind rose colored glasses? What happened to clear thinking. Thanks for laying things out clearly for us.
ReplyDeleteI love reading your blog. It's sad how many people vote for Newt Gingrich. You just want to say, do your research people! Does this remind us at all of stories in the book of mormon and how easily persuaded people are and how quick they change.
ReplyDelete