Don't hit me...

[BEG]

I want to talk about Newt, I do not want him to be our nominee.  I know this won't be a popular thread here on CC but I'm willing to take my lumps. I just hope that this isn't like FR and I get personally attacked.

First let me say that I do love the way he skewers the media and Obama.  His knowledge of history is remarkable.  His ability to respond on his feet is awesome but he makes me highly uncomfortable. I'm afraid of what may come out of him next. Simply put, he is volatile.  Personally I dont really like him very much, and i cant get the sinking feeling out of my head of "when the other shoe going to drop" with Newt.   BUT I will vote for him if he is the nominee, anything is better than Obama.

Now that being said, I have seen people out right attack people who they once respected over their opinions of Newt and totally dismiss news sites that they have relied on for years .  Some seem to forget their own views and questions of Newt before he started running for the Republican nomination. Go over to FR and pick any Newt or Romney thread and see the almost cult like defense of Newt. It's almost as though Ron Paul bots have taken up shop in Newt supporters.   

I have nore opinions on the matter but might keep it to myself for awhile.

[Splashdown]

Romney worries me. Obamacare needs to go. I'm worried that it won't happen under President Romney. Also, he's been running for president for close to 6 years, and he's still missing something. I'm not exactly sure what it is.

Santorum is a good man, but he doesn't have the fire required to be president, IMHO.

Newt's biggest weakness to me is that he lets himself get twisted around by his political opponents. It happened with Clinton, and it's happened with Romney in this campaign. But I like his fire. I also like the fact that he's agressive. He'd be a great VP nominee to a strong conservative president.

Of the three, I'm leaning toward Newt. But I wish Cain could have stayed in.

[CactusCarlos]

I want to talk about Newt, I do not want him to be our nominee.  I know this won't be a popular thread here on CC but I'm willing to take my lumps. I just hope that this isn't like FR and I get personally attacked.

First let me say that I do love the way he skewers the media and Obama.  His knowledge of history is remarkable.  His ability to respond on his feet is awesome but he makes me highly uncomfortable. I'm afraid of what may come out of him next. Simply put, he is volatile.  Personally I dont really like him very much, and i cant get the sinking feeling out of my head of "when the other shoe going to drop" with Newt.   BUT I will vote for him if he is the nominee, anything is better than Obama.

Now that being said, I have seen people out right attack people who they once respected over their opinions of Newt and totally dismiss news sites that they have relied on for years .  Some seem to forget their own views and questions of Newt before he started running for the Republican nomination. Go over to FR and pick any Newt or Romney thread and see the almost cult like defense of Newt. It's almost as though Ron Paul bots have taken up shop in Newt supporters.  

I have nore opinions on the matter but might keep it to myself for awhile.

H5 for starting this thread, for your post, and I look forward to hearing the rest of your opinions. 

[Minky]

I truly believe that conservatives are becoming vicious like you're seeing at FR because we are in such desperate need for a real conservative at the helm. Oh, they tell us they're conservative, but they're not willing to make the moves that will truly benefit America.

Of those available to us, I feel Newt is the most conservative. Plus, I just want to see him shred Obama in debates.

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

Newt says some amazingly stupid shit; ripping on Romney for being insensitive to the humanity of illegals was only his latest in a collection as stunning his RW social engineering critique of the Ryan Plan.

Then again, Romeny keeps saying some stupid crap too. He's as bad as Clinton as far as having 3 opinions for every 2-sided issue. But as I noted before as flimsy as Romney may be I believe he has no intention of presiding over a defenseless, bankrupt US. Pragmatism alone will bring him to heel

Romeny is clean. His "character" has every appearance of being spotless.

However, Romney is so clean he is not a street brawler.

The left will tear him a new one and I fear he will get caught flat-footed.

I fear he will do like McCain and deny his supporters the right to bring-up all the nasty shit that is Barack Hussein Obama and those around him.

The sadistic, cruel side of me wants to see Newt on a debate stage with Obama. The bloodletting would be...glorious. It would end, forever, the liberal pomposity that attends their every smary better-than-you policy proposal.

This is my ambivalence and I defend your sentiments.

[Rebel]

BEG, I don't particularly care for Newt either. Ever since Herman Cain dropped out after he was dragged through the mud by some lying ass women, who have since disappeared, I've been an anybody but Obama voter. BTW, yes, this means even if Ron Paul received the nomination I'd vote for him as much as I think he's clinically insane. That's how bad Obama is. I do not think we'll survive another term with this jackass in office.

[IassaFTots]

I am with the Bunny on this.  I don't like either Romney or Newt, but I sure would like to see Newt flatten Obama in a debate.  

I would like to hear what else you have to say too, BEG.    

[DumbAss Tanker]

I regard Newt as the best of a bad lot, he's flawed with his arrogance but he is definitely a highly-intelligent no-holds-barred fighter with a wealth of experience in how Congressional sausage gets made and how the top levels of the Federal government actually work, unlike any of the others.

I simply do not trust Romney on several key issues and regard his Conservatism as something that would last just exactly long enough to get him elected, and not a nanosecond longer.  While he does stand for a sounder fiscal policy, compared to Obama, anyone would; but, he has zero exposure to foreign or military affairs and I feel he would mistakenly think of the rest of the world simply in terms of suppliers, customers, and competitors rather than realize, as Clausewitz said so eloquently, 'War is a continuation of policy by other means' and there are things at stake for which a business background is not just weak preparation, but could be actually counterproductive.
 
Santorum would have so much LGBT money pitted against him (Which is a lot of money, since not raising kids leaves one with a much higher-than-average disposable income), as well as all the MSM with no pretense of keeping the claws hidden, that I can't see how he could win.  There would be a Gay SuperPAC that would buy all the available airtime for two months before the election to slime him, with the overt support of all the MSM bone smugglers and their butt-bbuddies.  I just don't see how he could possibly overcome that.

Ron Paul has some great Libertarian ideas.  His fiscal ideas are mixed (Some of are good, some not too good, some totally unpredictable in effect - and many of each with no chance of getting through Congress whatsoever, no matter which party controls it).  His views on military and diplomatic matters are so primitive as to make Romney's actually seem sophisticated by comparison, which is scary on both counts.       

[BEG]

I regard Newt as the best of a bad lot, he's flawed with his arrogance but he is definitely a highly-intelligent no-holds-barred fighter with a wealth of experience in how Congressional sausage gets made and how the top levels of the Federal government actually work, unlike any of the others.

I simply do not trust Romney on several key issues and regard his Conservatism as something that would last just exactly long enough to get him elected, and not a nanosecond longer.  While he does stand for a sounder fiscal policy, compared to Obama, anyone would; but, he has zero exposure to foreign or military affairs and I feel he would mistakenly think of the rest of the world simply in terms of suppliers, customers, and competitors rather than realize, as Clausewitz said so eloquently, 'War is a continuation of policy by other means' and there are things at stake for which a business background is not just weak preparation, but could be actually counterproductive.
 
Santorum would have so much LGBT money pitted against him (Which is a lot of money, since not raising kids leaves one with a much higher-than-average disposable income), as well as all the MSM with no pretense of keeping the claws hidden, that I can't see how he could win.  There would be a Gay SuperPAC that would buy all the available airtime for two months before the election to slime him, with the overt support of all the MSM bone smugglers and their butt-bbuddies.  I just don't see how he could possibly overcome that.

Ron Paul has some great Libertarian ideas.  His fiscal ideas are mixed (Some of are good, some not too good, some totally unpredictable in effect - and many of each with no chance of getting through Congress whatsoever, no matter which party controls it).  His views on military and diplomatic matters are so primitive as to make Romney's actually seem sophisticated by comparison, which is scary on both counts.       

I don't feel any more confident with Newt on the matter I highlighted above than you do Ronmey. I just have this great unease that is growing with the thought of Newt as our nominee.  I think the majority of Newt's surge is from people like us who are sick and tired of the "Obama is a nice guy but..." crap. We want someone to bite back, and hard. To eviscerate our opposition and stop them in their tracks. Newt's support seems to be steeped in revenge. All of us have it in us, it's human nature. I just don't want to overlook all the baggage that comes along with Newt. There is a lot there and it scares me what I don't already know. What else is going to pop up between now and election day?

[formerlurker]

I fear now that the crap that is falling out of Newt's closet is going to be a total distraction from the issues that the GOP needs to nail Obama to  the wall over.   Too damn risky.   The old video clips of him attacking Reagan are not becoming either. 

[BEG]

I fear now that the crap that is falling out of Newt's closet is going to be a total distraction from the issues that the GOP needs to nail Obama to  the wall over.   Too damn risky.   The old video clips of him attacking Reagan are not becoming either. 

Yep

[thundley4]

Newt isn't a very likable person, but Romney also comes off as smarmy to me.

[DumbAss Tanker]

Newt isn't a very likable person, but Romney also comes off as smarmy to me.

That is a massive understatement of my own impression of him.

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

Newt isn't a very likable person, but Romney also comes off as smarmy to me.

I was thinking more along the lines of

[Maxiest]

I didn't like Romney last time and I don't like him this time.  Every time I see him I think he should have a main part on Days of our Lives or some other Soap.  He is a Mass. (R), which basically translates to an Alabama (D) in my mind.

So who does that leave me?  Cain was my choice but that's a no go.

Santorum is great but as someone else said, has zero fire in his belly.

I would rather walk or razor blades then dip my feet in salt than have Ron Paul.

So by laws of deduction I am left with Newt.  Is he my picture perfect candidate?  Nope...

[BEG]

Let's do a pro and con list for both. I'll start with Newt. I will add to it as the day goes by.



Newt

Pro
Rabid attack dog
Knowledge of history
Quick on his feet
Knows facts and figures


Con
Rabid attack dog
His some sort of fascination with global warming to the point of actually sitting on a couch with Pelosi
Helmet hair wife
I've heard him speak of himself in third person
Tells fibs at times but all politicians do
Has a thing for Andrew Jackson, FDR and Wilson
Backed healthcare mandate until he backtracked

[Maxiest]

Pro
Has a record in Congress that we can look at
Recored is rated at 90% by the ACU


On a side note:  Reagan admired FDR too for many good reasons.

[Ptarmigan]

I agree with with Bunny and Rebel says. I don't like Gingrich much, let alone Romney. Santorum may have principles, but I think he is more into big government. Whoever gets the Republican nomination I will vote as long as it is besides Obama.

[NHSparky]

Nope BEG, no anger or bluster from me here.  I too regard Newt the best of a bad lot.

But I've said before, and I'll say again, never trust a man who combs his hair with olive oil and a fork.  Despite his trying to paint himself as the outsider and everyone else the establishment candidate, look at his political career.  It has lasted longer than his business one.  Says a lot right there.

And one of the reasons you're not hearing a whole lot from the MSM regarding Mitt is because they're keeping their powder dry.  If Mitt gets the nomination, you best be ready to bet your ass the MSM and Obama (one and the same, I know) will do everything they can to drag the Mormon religion, and Romney with it, through the mud.  You don't think so?

Make Mitt the nominee and just watch.

[Splashdown]

Con:
Got taken to school politically by Clinton, to the point where Clinton gets the credit for balancing the budget and reforming welfare.

[BEG]

Nope BEG, no anger or bluster from me here.  I too regard Newt the best of a bad lot.

But I've said before, and I'll say again, never trust a man who combs his hair with olive oil and a fork.  Despite his trying to paint himself as the outsider and everyone else the establishment candidate, look at his political career.  It has lasted longer than his business one.  Says a lot right there.

And one of the reasons you're not hearing a whole lot from the MSM regarding Mitt is because they're keeping their powder dry.  If Mitt gets the nomination, you best be ready to bet your ass the MSM and Obama (one and the same, I know) will do everything they can to drag the Mormon religion, and Romney with it, through the mud.  You don't think so?

Make Mitt the nominee and just watch.

LOL

[TVDOC]

You folks might want to look this over to answer some of the questions in this thread.....

http://www.conservativecave.com/index.php/topic,68915.new.html

doc

[SaintLouieWoman]

I don't feel any more confident with Newt on the matter I highlighted above than you do Ronmey. I just have this great unease that is growing with the thought of Newt as our nominee.  I think the majority of Newt's surge is from people like us who are sick and tired of the "Obama is a nice guy but..." crap. We want someone to bite back, and hard. To eviscerate our opposition and stop them in their tracks. Newt's support seems to be steeped in revenge. All of us have it in us, it's human nature. I just don't want to overlook all the baggage that comes along with Newt. There is a lot there and it scares me what I don't already know. What else is going to pop up between now and election day?

Newt definitely has baggage, but not quite as much as the Romney slime attacks might indicate. I was really ticked off yesterday when one of the FOX commentators said something about Newt's record, which has been fact-checked and found to be untrue. And this was after their piece that the mud slung was untrue by Romney. I almost screamed.

Being here in Florida before the primaries is infuriating. We get calls contantly, mostly  Romney attack robo calls. The more I get, the more I'm determined to not vote for Romney.

After McCain I feel that the Republicans need to run someone who won't roll over and play dead to the Obama attack machine. I've always thought Newt was bright and innovative. The conditions today call for someone who can think outside the box (sorry for that trite phrase). Do I like everything about Newt? No, but I'm also one who wants to see him rip apart the liberal hypocrisy.

Perhaps Santorum will toughen up in the ensuing debates. He's improved dramatically. I think he's the best man in the race, but not sure he's the best candidate. I guess I'd vote for any of the Republicans over Obama, even Paul.

[Rugnuts]

well BEG its to bad you felt a little apprehensive to share your concerns, especially here. but im glad you did. H5
i agree with alot of what the others have already said.

to me, it still comes down to "the best of four (as of today) bad picks". its too bad there was not the all around perfect candidate.

its no secret i wish paul had a different stance on foreign policy, then i would wear the PaulBot badge with honor. But it is a deal breaker for me. I have become a full on newt supporter simple because, to quote DAT "he is definitely a highly-intelligent no-holds-barred fighter with a wealth of experience in how Congressional sausage gets made and how the top levels of the Federal government actually work" And also because the guy can speak. He makes watching debates interesting!!

because of the choice that needs to be made, i have been thinking lately about the reasoning process for picking a candidate. in particular "should you put more weight on what someone has done in the past or what they say they will do if elected". it becomes an important factor when the two compete against each other. Example romneycare. Mitt did it in Mass. Says he will repeal ObumCare. obviously to get the "R" nod he has to say he will. so how can you weigh on that? Newt has his own examples. I have come to the conclusion to give no thought to what the candidates say they will do if elected, because A: they say what they have to, its obvious. B: there is no way to guarantee they can actually get it done. False hope. (the same reason Dems should walk away from Obummer)

Now i am about to say something that, like BEG, i feel will bring the heat from you guys. (not that my paul support hasnt already done that, lol)

mitt was a governor for 4 years, great. it was massachusetts. getting elected to govern that state gives a man no conservative cred, IMO. but you say he has worked in the private sector! now here comes the heat-seeker.... I do not believe working in the private sector is a good resume builder for presidential aspirations. I tend to believe the job of president is so complex that to elect someone who will walk into it blind, is foolish. I go against the grain when it comes to the "we dont want a career politician, or DC insider". I think its imperative that we do. ITS JUST THAT they should have been fighting the right fight while being a career politician. Like Ron Paul, cough cough. So experience is a big part of why I'm anti Mitt and for Newt.

[SaintLouieWoman]

Rugnuts, your point is well taken. Look at our current pathetic president. I don't think his grand experience as a community organizer has helped with governing our nation. His short career in the Senate didn't help, as he was out running for president almost as soon as he got into the Senate and voted "present" for almost everything. His career as an Illinois state legislator was only useful as far as learning the ways of the Chicago area----to do whatever it takes to get their share of the gravy and to bully.

I think any of the Republicans have more experience than Obama and would do better. Newt has enough experience that he can hopefully actually accomplish something in his presidency---to reverse the course started by Obama. We have to get that camel's nose out from under the US tent.