Time For Some Clarity (0.00 / 0)

First off let me say how ironic that the comment link I clicked to post this was located directly under a small ad for Newt's newsletter. LOL

OK that said let's set things straight. Last Sunday Newt put it out there for the world to hear that if supporters would pledge $30 million for his campaign, that he would be "compelled" to run.

Well in the last 6 days his phone didn't ring, his voice-mail was empty, and his phone calls were not returned!!!

So of course this was a "legal" decision. Who in there right mind would give up being chairman of a PAC so they could be President? Too bad, that is exactly the type of  clarity and judgment we needed in the WH. [/snark]

Howard Dean. Aren't you just kicking yourself for leaving DFA to your brother so you could head the DNC? What were you thinking? LOL

---

by: talex @ Sat Sep 29, 2007 at 15:37:35 PM CDT

VS Clinton (4.00 / 1)

My two cents: The Republicans hand the war in Iraq and the situation in Iran off to Hillary.

In 4 years--who comes to clean up but the same person they sent into clean up after Clinton 1.0--Newt.

Watch. 4 yrs from now. You heard it here first.

We won the Battle. Now the Real Fight for Change Begins. Join MoveOn.org and fight for progressive change.  

---

by: bluethunder @ Sat Sep 29, 2007 at 16:02:10 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Heh--see my comment below (0.00 / 0)

Just remember that history never repeats itself in quite the same way.

The liberal soul shall be made fat. He who waters shall be watered also himself. (Proverbs 11:25)

---

by: kovie @ Sat Sep 29, 2007 at 16:16:30 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

That probably is the plan (0.00 / 0)

Problem for the Repubs though is that Hillary will not let them get away with it. Neither will Bill.

Hillary is a fighter who is also articulate. Love her or not you can't take those two attributes away from her. And just picture Bill 2.0 being just as in your face and honest as he was in the Fox interview with Wallace telling it like it is.

Nope. No matter how hard the Repubs try to hang Iraq on Clinton and no matter how bad things go in the interim there the Clinton's are going to hang this on Bush and the Repubs every chance they get and not hand them a prayer in 2012. That is why you will not see a premature pullout from the mess the Repubs left. We have to make Iraq and the world right again so there is no question who can lead. That is why those who are now complaining about some open-ended 2013 debate remarks by the three front runners are not looking very far down the road. A premature withdrawal would only suck us back into the region and likely hand the Repubs a gift of a chance in 2012.

I know some don't see that right now because they are too invested in their position. They are the mirror image of Bush. Bush can't leave Iraq because he'd have to defer to the facts of a need for a different point of view - we all know that. The Left can't change their position because they would have to defer to the facts of a need for a different point of view - and most in their heart of hearts know that. That, and what would they have to fight for if accepting the facts?

I'll say this over and over again: When you are a full time activist the need for activism can cloud your thinking. The result is 'activism for activisms sake'. History is proof of that. That is why over zealous activism rarely accomplishes it's goals. In the last four years name four things the Left has pushed for that actually came to being that they had an active hand in accomplishing. Other than fund raising to get some newbies elected you would be hard pressed to name anything else. But a little change in temperament may have altered the results and accomplished some worthwhile things.

---

by: talex @ Sat Sep 29, 2007 at 16:38:31 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

This is a lot like 1964 (4.00 / 1)

With Gingrich playing the Nixon role, gently testing the waters to see if he has a chance, and when he realizes that he doesn't, and that his party will likely lose the election, decides to not enter and sets his sights on the next election, when he predicts that the Democratic incumbent, wildly unpopular and bogged down in various crises, will be vulnerable to a challenge, and he'll be the most viable one. It worked for Nixon in '68, and might work for Gingrish in '12, depending on what happens between now and then, of course.

Everyone who hasn't yet should go out and read Rick Pearltine's Before the Storm, about the Goldwater revolution, the '64 election, and the formation of the modern conservative political movement. The parallels between then and now are fascinating, with today's Goldwater being some cross between McCain, Rudy and Thompson (Goldwater wouldn't stand Romney, just as he couldn't stand his dad George). Let's hope that just as this movement started out with a buffoon, it will end with one. Not that they haven't all been buffoons, but today's crop take the cake.

Good luck in '12, Newt. You won't be missed.

The liberal soul shall be made fat. He who waters shall be watered also himself. (Proverbs 11:25)

---

by: kovie @ Sat Sep 29, 2007 at 16:15:01 PM CDT

It's a little early for this... (0.00 / 0)

But I have to wonder who we will see coming back in the next 2 rounds.

If he doesn't get the nomination-- Mitt will be back.
Same with Obama I think.

We won the Battle. Now the Real Fight for Change Begins. Join MoveOn.org and fight for progressive change.  

---

by: bluethunder @ Sat Sep 29, 2007 at 16:18:45 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Most of them have at least one go (0.00 / 0)

I doubt Edwards has another shot at it without doing something else in between, whilst Biden, Dodd, McCain, Thompson and Hunter would all be too old to be considered.

Most of the other candidates on both sides, particularly those in electoral office, could probably make a decent attempt in 2012. Probably in 2016 for that matter (although Giuliani will probably find that basing your campaign on 9/11 will be a little bit tired by then.)

That said, I really doubt Gingrich will be the nominee in 2012. If anybody wants to take the mantle of insanely rightwing congresscritter running for the presidency, it'll be somebody much younger. Maybe Mike Pence.

Forgotten Countries - a foreign policy-focused blog

---

by: Englishlefty @ Sat Sep 29, 2007 at 17:42:47 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

The Jeb-ster!!!!! (0.00 / 0)

Do you really think Jeb is not gonna go for it in 2012?  He signed the original PNAC letter(So Bill "William the Bloody" Kristol loves him).  The fundies love him.  He's been governor of a pretty big state.  And if Hillary wins the presidency, don't you think the wing nuts will want to try and take her out after one term?  That ain't gonna happen with a chump like Mike Pence.

---

by: Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle @ Sat Sep 29, 2007 at 19:38:15 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

it would be interesting (0.00 / 0)

to check how much Gingrich is paying himself out of his PAC... otherwise why would this be an issue for him?  I'm thinking of the Linda Chavez scandal.

New Jersey politics at Blue Jersey.

---

by: Hopeful in NJ @ Sat Sep 29, 2007 at 16:31:39 PM CDT

is it really a PAC? (0.00 / 0)

I can't find anything at the FEC site.

New Jersey politics at Blue Jersey.

---

by: Hopeful in NJ @ Sat Sep 29, 2007 at 16:56:34 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Funny you'd mention this (4.00 / 2)

That is actually a key difference between progressive and conservative bloggers when it comes to giving advice to the opposing party. Conservative bloggers would frequently offer concern troll advice saying that it would hurt the Democratic Party if Ned Lamont defeated Joe Lieberman in the 2006 Connecticut Senate primary. However, you knew they never actually believed that, since they all actively supported Joe Lieberman. By way of contrast, I, and I imagine several other bloggers, would have helped shove the Republican Party over the egde, and helped out Gingrich's campaign.

  Back in the fall of 2003, when the Howard Dean campaign was at its peak, the right-wing concern trolls were swarming all over "advising" us that Dean would be a "disaster" for the Dems. I opened an account at a right-wing blog and tried to encourage other members to send money to Howard Dean "in order to help the Democrats commit suicide by nominating him".

  I was banned within a day.

"We judge ourselves by our ideals; others by their actions. It is a great convenience." -- Howard Zinn

---

by: Master Jack @ Sat Sep 29, 2007 at 17:41:53 PM CDT

A Republican who cares about doing things legally? (4.00 / 1)

I sure didn't see that coming.

---

by: CardboardBox @ Sat Sep 29, 2007 at 18:26:36 PM CDT

A dream has died (4.00 / 1)

I've always thought Newt was the Ideal Republican candidate to run against -- probably the most ill-disciplined & candid politician of our time.  Newt was so candid that he expressed every bad idea that came into his head and he also thought more with his...uh...reproductive organ than any other politician.  Anyway, a longtime dream has died.

---

by: howardpark @ Sat Sep 29, 2007 at 20:44:02 PM CDT