It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

New polls suggest Gingrich is unelectable

page: 1
11
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 12:49 AM
link   
And thank god. Gingrich is a total disgusting human being and he's 110% a sellout.

The Chart Democrats Don’t Want GOP Voters To See



Study Says Gingrich Amnesty Bigger Than '86 Blanket Amnesty

Newt Gingrich voting history when he was in congress

Who are the people voting for Newt in primaries? Do they even exist?




posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 12:54 AM
link   


Honestly??

You dont need a poll to figure THAT out!




S&F



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 12:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Vitchilo
 


Dear Vitchilo,

Good. I don't like any of the candidates; but, Gingrich is the worst. He is reported to have said that if he were President and the judges didn't read the law the same as him that he would have them arrested. I would rather see Palin in office then him.



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 12:57 AM
link   
So what do the polls look like for Florida? I am a registered republican, but if newt OR romney get the nomination, it might be the first time since I became 18 that I don't vote.



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 12:58 AM
link   
I don't see that the data says he is "un-electable", but I do see that he is not in favor of being elected.

Definitely not a Newt fan here, but felt that I should point out the difference between being un-electable and not favored.



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 12:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by mileysubet
I don't see that the data says he is "un-electable", but I do see that he is not in favor of being elected.

Definitely not a Newt fan here, but felt that I should point out the difference between being un-electable and not favored.

It means most Americans hate his guts. That means unelectable.



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 01:02 AM
link   
Well.
As a liberal, When Gingrich won the other night
I smiled


I do hope he continues on with his momentum. really cater to the hardcore republicans..that will work fantastic for him. I am sure of it.


Romney -may- give some challenge to Obama. Paul would actually be a hard fight. But, it won't happen. its a 2 man race, Romney or Gingrich. Santorum..no..boring "jesus freak". with no chance..especially in Florida (land of many a retiree jewish whom aren't overly impressed with bible thumpers)



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 01:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by abe froman
So what do the polls look like for Florida? I am a registered republican, but if newt OR romney get the nomination, it might be the first time since I became 18 that I don't vote.


Would be my third time, I couldn't do it for McCain or Dole. Still go and vote though. I voted for all my local races, their may have been a Senate race. Just leave the President blank. I have no problem leaving it open if Romney or Newt get it. The Repubs keep putting up garbage candidates, I'll keep refusing to vote.
I have heard many other Repubs do the same over McCain. The Repub Party still doesn't get it.
edit on 1/24/2012 by mugger because: edit



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 01:05 AM
link   
reply to post by AQuestion
 




Here's his word's on that.

The law of the case not the law of the land.



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 01:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Vitchilo

Originally posted by mileysubet
I don't see that the data says he is "un-electable", but I do see that he is not in favor of being elected.

Definitely not a Newt fan here, but felt that I should point out the difference between being un-electable and not favored.

It means most Americans hate his guts. That means unelectable.


I must have a different definition of unelectable, to me unelectable means that he has failed to meet a prescribed wicket such as: being a US citizen, a bad police record, falsified documents...not that the people just don't like him, which would mean that he wont get elected, but not because he was unelectable due to some disqualifying item.



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 01:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by mileysubet


I must have a different definition of unelectable, to me unelectable means that he has failed to meet a prescribed wicket such as: being a US citizen, a bad police record, falsified documents...not that the people just don't like him, which would mean that he wont get elected, but not because he was unelectable due to some disqualifying item.

If he didn't meet the qualifying guidelines to be President.

He would be Ineligible .



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 01:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tw0Sides

Originally posted by mileysubet


I must have a different definition of unelectable, to me unelectable means that he has failed to meet a prescribed wicket such as: being a US citizen, a bad police record, falsified documents...not that the people just don't like him, which would mean that he wont get elected, but not because he was unelectable due to some disqualifying item.

If he didn't meet the qualifying guidelines to be President.

He would be Ineligible .


Thank you for the correction, I understand now.



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 01:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Seiko
 


Dear Seiko,

His words were even dumber than I thought. He wants to send the US Marshalls to arrest judges. Well, the US Marshalls are responsible for protecting the judges, it is one of their core missions. As for bringing the judges before the congress, they can do that already. Newt is confused, saying that the three branches are coequal and saying that they get to make the same decisions is foolish. Would he allow judges to make the laws and direct the military? Judges don't enact laws, they interpret and enforce them, their explanations are written, you don't need to bring them to congress to question them about them, if you disagreed with their explanation all you need to do is take them to congress and impeach them. He is even more dictatorial than the last two idiots that were president. Peace.



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 07:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by abe froman
So what do the polls look like for Florida? I am a registered republican, but if newt OR romney get the nomination, it might be the first time since I became 18 that I don't vote.


I understand your frustration, but you still have the option of writing your candidate in.

If what you suggests happens, I'll be diligently writing in who I think the most worthy candidate is.



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 10:19 AM
link   
reply to post by Vitchilo
 


Obama is unelectable with a high unemployment number.

Look for Hillary Clinton to arrive around February.
--------
Newt is unstoppable.

The GOP needs a candidate who can give CNN & ABC a bloody nose.

Well, Newt has already done that.

Watch here:
- Newt Blasts ABC & CNN -



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 10:46 AM
link   
I am no Newt fan, but I think you don't realize how much he is appealing to the Republican base right now.

I've heard people talking about how his debate performance makes him the ONLY Repub candidate who could outdebate Obama. And defeating Obama is what the Republican base wants to see happen.

For example, I watched part of last night's debate on NBC (until I fell asleep because I am so tired of these debates). Romney sounded weak and defensive. I don't remember anything Santorum said. While I LOVE Ron Paul, and wish he was winning hands-down, he DOES NOT DEBATE WELL. By that, I mean that he does not WIN OVER undecided voters in debates. While I agree with everything he says, sometimes I don't think he clarifies it well enough to make non-Paulites agree with it.

And then there was Newt...as much as I dislike him, he's the ONLY one who seems like he is in control of what he is saying in these debates. My husband likes Newt (:-[ ) and he is falling right in line with everything Newt is saying. My husband is not a stupid man...but like many others, he is being pulled in by Newt's commanding performances.

So unelectable? I'm afraid not. If this momentum continues for Newt, I think we'll be stuck with him. And, if it comes down to voting for him or Obama, I will hold my nose and vote for Newt. I could make some sort of grand gesture and refrain from voting, but if everyone did that, we might as well go ahead and vote for Obama. As someone who voted for Ross Perot, I just can't throw my vote away again.



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 10:54 AM
link   
reply to post by GeorgiaGirl
 


I watched 5 minutes of the NBC debate.


No cheering allowed. That sounds like a ground rule thought up by George Soros.

Cheering = Freedom of Speech

They all should have cheered anyway. What would NBC do? Kick them ALL out?

edit on 24-1-2012 by Eurisko2012 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 10:56 AM
link   
Newt .. Romney .. Obama .... pretty much all the same. I'm wondering if it's going to matter at all who gets elected. You'll have either an inept corrupt community organizer in office or you'll have a smart corrupt politician. Not much difference .... same junk wrapped in a different package.



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 11:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Newt .. Romney .. Obama .... pretty much all the same. I'm wondering if it's going to matter at all who gets elected. You'll have either an inept corrupt community organizer in office or you'll have a smart corrupt politician. Not much difference .... same junk wrapped in a different package.


Obama = Socialist ( loves class warfare) - divide & conquer

Newt = Capitalist - Free Market Capitalism grows the economy and creates jobs

---------
That's a tough one. Let me think........oh,okay.....lets go with Newt.



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 11:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Eurisko2012
 


You must be joking. Obama is Bush 2, Newt is even worse.

Between Newt and Obama, I'll take Obama all the way.



new topics

top topics



 
11
<<   2 >>

log in

join