Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Newt in 2012?

In serious conversations among Republicans since their election debacle Tuesday, what name is mentioned most often as the Moses, or Reagan, who could lead them out of the wilderness before 40 years?

To the consternation of many Republicans, it is none other than Newt Gingrich, the former speaker of the House.

Gingrich is far from a unanimous or even a consensus choice to run for president in 2012, but there is a strong feeling in Republican ranks that he is the only leader of their party who has shown the skill and energy to attempt a comeback quickly.

Even one of his strongest supporters for president in 2012 admits it is a "very risky choice." But Republicans are in a desperate mood after the fiasco of John McCain's seemingly safe candidacy.

Republicans seem chastened by the failure of seeking moderate, independent and even Democratic votes. They are ready to try going back to the "old-time religion."

One Republican critic of Gingrich concedes that he has an "unlimited" energy flow and a constant stream of ideas, an important commodity in a party that appears to have run short of ideas during the Bush years. But there is widespread concern about what is described in the party as deep "character flaws" of Gingrich's that would be difficult to overcome in a presidential campaign.

Nobody in Republican ranks, however, matches Gingrich's dynamism.

The consternation among Republicans is concentrated on McCain's failure to capitalize on Democratic flaws.

It would be a rocky road for Gingrich to the nomination, much less the presidency, but there are no other serious candidates inside the party at the moment.

It is clear that Republicans are unanimous in trying to avoid a repeat of what happened this year, and there is a surprising consensus that McCain was going in the wrong direction and was the wrong candidate.

What one GOP critic calls Gingrich's "unlimited energy supply" must be overcome by anyone opposing him. Several old Republican hands feel that Gingrich in 2012 is no more outrageous than Ronald Reagan was in 1980.

What is certain is that Gingrich has the desire and the will. He has a deep-seated ambition. He had not even settled into the House speaker's chair in 1995 when he confessed to me his presidential desires for 1996. That was not to be, but he never abandoned the personal dream and is ready to pursue it now.

By Robert Novak  | November 7, 2008; 12:29 PM ET
Categories:  Novak  | Tags:  Robert Novak  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: The Empress' Clothes
Next: Revisiting One Lawrence Summers Controversy


Newt Gingrich is the one who deeply and permanently alienated me from the Republican party.

Posted by: martymar123 | November 7, 2008 12:42 PM | Report abuse

There can be no greater gift to President Obama's reelection campaign than Newt Gingrich as the Republican nominee (well, Sarah Palin might be a bigger gift, but no matter). Gingrich disgraced himself, the Republican Party and the country during his time as Speaker of the House. His brand of republicanism is passe and would be one more confirmation that the Republicans are a party of the past, not the future, devoid of ideas and vision.

Posted by: pblotto | November 7, 2008 12:52 PM | Report abuse

That would be perfect! He embodies all things Republican: A family-values adulterer; a law-and-order conservative who paid a $300,000 fine for corruption in the House; plus, he's supported by Novak, a patriotic traitor who exposed a covert CIA agent.
Ah, yes, breathe in the lovely aroma of self-righteous Republican hypocrisy.

Posted by: JackTar1 | November 7, 2008 12:52 PM | Report abuse

So Republicans are responding to the message the voters sent them on Tuesday by looking to the past instead of the future. Republicans want to bring back the guy who gave them the "culture of corruption" that voters overwhelmingly rejected in 2006. Voters have made it clear that what America needs is a president who will unite red and blue America, yet the Republican mindset still appears to be "if only we can divide American even further, we can regain power." That strategy deserves to fail.

Posted by: adifferentpointofview | November 7, 2008 12:54 PM | Report abuse

While Gingrich is at least a credible candidate (unlike Sarah "I thought Africa was a country" Palin). And I respect his thoughtfulness on a range of topics, even though I usually disagree with his conclusion.

But I don't really see how that helps the Republicans appeal to the middle. I think he'd fire up the base and the Coulters and Limbaughs would love it. But the Republicans' problems now is they are no longer a national party in the biggest cities in the country. And over the last 15-20 years they've slowly but surely lost the big suburbs around the those cities. Gingrich just reminds voters of the 1990's culture wars (and Clinton wars). Just look at the returns in the VA suburbs around DC, the Philly suburbs, St. Louis suburbs, Michigan suburbs, and even parts of Florida that used to be reliable GOP suburbs. If they continue to lose those areas by big numbers, it doesn't really matter what they do elsewhere.

It all depends on where the country is in 4 years and how successful Obama's first term is viewed, but I think the GOP's best chance is to break with the past and nominate someone like Jindal or even Charlie Crist - who has shown a bit of "maverick-ness" doing things in FLA that ultimately benefit Democratic voters over the last few years.

If the nominate another Neocon hawk who is a hard right social conservative and a devout supply-sider on economics, I don't see how they can win. It isn't 1980...nominating another Reagan disciple in 2012 will result in another loss. But the GOP tends to pick the people who finished 2nd the last go-round, so my guess is Romney, Huckabee, or Palin will be the 2012 nominee. Huckabee probably has the best shot out of those 3 to win nationally.

Posted by: jetrain | November 7, 2008 12:59 PM | Report abuse

"chastened by the failure of seeking moderate, independent and even Democratic votes. They are ready to try going back to the "old-time religion."

McCain did everything EXCEPT appeal to moderate, independent and democratic voters. His choice of Palin, the "socialist" rhetoric, and the usual republican name-calling all worked against him. Even McCain advisors admit he was told "you can run a centrist campaign and lose by 2-3% or run a right-wing like campaign and either win or lose in a landslide.

So what exactly is Novak saying here?

Posted by: rlampe | November 7, 2008 1:01 PM | Report abuse

Why not dig Ronald Reagan up and have him lead the Neoconservative Party to victory? You'd have a better chance with his corpse than Newt's live self of regaining the American peoples' trust and you could bill it as a Second Coming in order to get around term limits.
-- The Last of the Republicans

Posted by: patrick3 | November 7, 2008 1:04 PM | Report abuse


Posted by: Gipper1 | November 7, 2008 1:15 PM | Report abuse

I'm no fan of Newt, and not really of Mr. Novak either. But some of you are just incredibly vile. If some of these posts, like the one from gasmonkey, are within guidelines and remain on this forum, it's a shame.

Posted by: psufan | November 7, 2008 1:30 PM | Report abuse

For a self-confessed shill like Novak, this is quite revealing. I didn't realize Newt had the cash reserves to afford someone like this.

Posted by: dane1 | November 7, 2008 1:32 PM | Report abuse

You can count on Republicans to come to wrong conclusion from their defeat.
Instead of trying to find someone pragmatic to solve the country's problems, they are going to go back to an ideolog.
This is just what the country is looking for.

Posted by: f_raiser | November 7, 2008 1:33 PM | Report abuse

As a moderate Republican I would not vote for Newt Gingrich.

Can't we find a smart Republican who is nice and strong, instead of a mean, ignorant, blowhard like Gingrich?


Posted by: jwallace1 | November 7, 2008 1:40 PM | Report abuse

If the Dems ran such non-contenders as Mondale & Dukakis when their stock was at its low point, Novak's suggestion of Gingrich seems consistent with history.
Although Americans have notoriously short attention spans, it will quickly be brought to our collective attention that 'ol Newt & his "Contract on America" started the legislative mess that the past two congressional elections have sought to reverse.

Posted by: nonsensical2001 | November 7, 2008 1:42 PM | Report abuse

My oh my, Newt Gingrich, the original lemming, as the choice for the GOP in 2012? George W. Bush has left the Republican party on life support. Nothing like picking a candidate that will drive the stake through the heart of the party once and kill it off once and for all.

Posted by: HeddWyn | November 7, 2008 1:54 PM | Report abuse

You conservatives just don't seem to get it. The voters didn't reject McCain for what happened this year. They rejected the Republican policies for the past 8 years. I hope your party selects Newt. It would only prove that once again you want to look back to what you think worked in the past rather that looking forward to the future. Americans are tired of ideals and ideologies of the past that have failed to deal with the major problems America faces. They don't want more of the same.

Posted by: rclab | November 7, 2008 2:00 PM | Report abuse

Gingrich in 2012 will guarantee a President Obama in 2012. All things considered, McCain at 46% was a good showing in a toxic environment.

2012: Gingrich vs. Obama? Gingrich 35%, Obama 65%

2012: Romney vs. Obama? Romney 51%, Obama 49%

Republicans need to get over their exclusivity and realize that Mormons are a fine group of people.

Gingrich in 2012 will be the final nail in the Republican's coffin and will ensure a Democratic supermajority for ten+ years.

Posted by: spam6 | November 7, 2008 2:04 PM | Report abuse

He is a far better choice than Palin! 1,000,000,000,000 times better.

Posted by: rcc_2000 | November 7, 2008 2:08 PM | Report abuse

I have always felt Goldwater and Reagan were too moderate . I might give that pig eyed liar Newt a chance if two things happened . 1. He regained elective office from Georgia and ,2. I sustained a head injury . Number 2 is in no way a disparagment upon you Bob. I bought your books and love you long time .

Posted by: borntoraisehogs | November 7, 2008 2:10 PM | Report abuse

There is a thing called latency, and most politicians gorge on it — it's the delusion that the difference they make is in any way new. On top of it, it is most often called legacy. Well, Novak, your legacy from this moment on is latency — your are lagging behind the political times so far that you see your own rear end. It's the kind of narcissism that unfortunately has no remedy, the kind of convoluted self-interest that serves only one purpose — to keep your paychecks coming in... because your writing now serves up an irony so appalling that is seems too false to be true. People eat that up, people who gorge on the same false legacy. A sad lot.

Posted by: patrick19 | November 7, 2008 2:10 PM | Report abuse

The same low life that left his cancerous wife for a younger woman? The same self important right winger that this time around alienated even people in his own party? The same conservative pitbull that praised Palin and then spoke about her off camera? Yes, that sounds pretty good Bob, let's make him the face of the Republicans, that should completely do them in once and for all.

Posted by: hmmmmmer | November 7, 2008 2:11 PM | Report abuse

Wasn't it John McCain who once described Newt as having lower popularity ratings than Jeffrey Dahmer? That seems about right.

Posted by: mike78smith | November 7, 2008 2:13 PM | Report abuse

Since when was McCain a "safe candidacy", Benedict Novak? The republicans have been behind the 8-ball ever since your boy Bush screwed up Iraq and Katrina. The dems could have run Kucinich and probably won.

As far as Gingrich: I wouldn't vote for him, but he'd keep the campaign interesting. He's a devisive figure, but a somewhat insightful one, so pitching him against Obama's lofty, meaningless rhetoric in a series of debates could make for great television.

Posted by: bill3 | November 7, 2008 2:14 PM | Report abuse

Sorry, but I have to disagree COMPLETELY.'

However, having the Newt, and the Hammer leading the GOP might be a good thing.

But the Office-No!

Mr. Novak, you are another example of what is so wrong for the Republican Party-You all have carried the Torch too long. Your values, though arguably are very Conservative, are often now; Wrong-Headed!

A Classic Example-The DECADES Old, and miserably failed: War on Drugs!

Bushie and Jac-Er, Chertoff, WASTED Millions of Dollars for the Homeland Security;

Right down that same stupid Hole!

Do they feel Illegally Supplied drugs are too Cheap? That they have to kick up more Profit, and boost up the opportunities more?

That Fascist Crusade should already be over! GOD, NEVER said: Marijuana and cocaine are EVIL! Alcohol is Saintly! Cigarettes are next to Heavenly, or that Prescription Drugs are "Godly"!
Wake-up call! HALF the World's Population, begs to differ!

Controlled Substances is an Oxymoron, believed in BY Morons!

Controlled, would be American Producers Producing, and American Business Ventures;


And getting Taxed BIG TIME the whole way!

That Novakula, is the thinking of a Pro Capitalism Younger(Late 40's) Republican!

Many, like myself, are tired of the remnants and vanguards of the greatest Generation, forcing their Old-School WASP Views, all over the Party that needs to oppose SOCIALISM, and just lost to because of said idiiocies!

See, the Republicans were in Control, when I first began SCREAMING:

"I AM NOT A BRAIN DEAD IDIOT! STOP MAKING ME LOOK LIKE ONE"-At my "Representatives" on the World Stage! ;~)

Posted by: SAINT---The | November 7, 2008 2:15 PM | Report abuse

Yea, when the country learns about how Gingrich abandoned his first wife while she was dying of cancer to marry another woman, I'm sure he will just coast to the nomination. Gingrich is a joke.

Posted by: emmaowen | November 7, 2008 2:19 PM | Report abuse

I think the whole Right Wing should plan a move to a new continent of Palin's choice, to start a new country. That should keep them busy for the next 232 years.

Posted by: AverageJane | November 7, 2008 2:22 PM | Report abuse

If Obama has at least a moderately successful administration, no one will defeat him for the presidency in 2012, should he decide to run again.

Posted by: jstevens24 | November 7, 2008 2:23 PM | Report abuse

Hey Bob,

Glad to see you survived the election.

What, no comment about how Bush was such a 'tard that he was beaten by a black dude?

I know your brain is messed up now, but think back:

Remember in your last article how you bragged that Rove told magoo he couldn't pick lieberjew to be VP? Remember that?

And remember how you liked Palin!

Do you still like her and think she'll be perfect to energize the base like you did before the election?


Yes, by all means, bring back the Newt. It will be loads of fun discussing how he was getting BJ's from his friend's wife while HIS wife was dying of cancer AND while he was trying to impeach Clinton for getting BJs. That should be hilarious!

Oh, and for good measure, have Palin be his running mate!

It's good to see a good, solid republotard like you Novak back on the OpEd pages! Spewing stupidity seasoned with hatred.

Posted by: Heerman532 | November 7, 2008 2:26 PM | Report abuse

See, that's the problem with republicans, they keep looking for the next Ronald Reagan (and keep failing in doing so). Come on boys!, Ronald Reagan died years ago and he's history.
Instead, they should look for a candidate who should be allowed to him/herself.

Obama won by not trying to be another Bill Clinton but by being Barack Obama, the democrats didn't limit him by forcing Obama play Clinton or Keneddy for that matter, however, Bush played a wannabe president/cowboy for 8 years while Dick Cheney ruled the country, John McCain played "maverick" (Reagan-inspired) and look what happened.

Posted by: eaglestrk01 | November 7, 2008 2:45 PM | Report abuse

Losers pick losers.

Posted by: Rfgannon | November 7, 2008 2:54 PM | Report abuse

newt gingrich!!!!roflmao.. omg..pleeezzzz..what a gas bag. what a minute, newt for prez, sarah for vp..obama would have no chance.....of not winning all 50 states

Posted by: heybabywhzupp | November 7, 2008 2:55 PM | Report abuse

Great idea Yohack, but I think that I have one better?
Why don't you and the One-Eyed-Newt run for the office? You could call it the two hacks in a pod, tour-de-farce.
Two bodies, one like mind albeit that together, you don't have one full brain. Collective the two of you couldn't blow ourselves up.

Posted by: edeckel | November 7, 2008 3:03 PM | Report abuse

What ever you are smoking, I want one

Posted by: aklein1404 | November 7, 2008 3:05 PM | Report abuse

Novak, back at it heh? You probably think that some people have forgotten your part in all this (can you say traitor, bob?) I'll say this: the gop is the gift that keeps on giving! Yea, Newt in 2012, you betcha.

Posted by: michael5 | November 7, 2008 3:12 PM | Report abuse

Bob your articles just keep on getting wackier and wackier. Don't you think it's time to REALLY retire??

Posted by: buzzsaw1 | November 7, 2008 3:20 PM | Report abuse

It will 24 years since Reagan's was office. It will be 32 years since he was elected.

The GOP will return to that well ad infinitum... and they will continue to loose the Relevancy Test until they turn to the future, not a past that will be a quarter century old. I don't expect that to happen for another 24 years, see you dopes in 2040.

Posted by: Roofelstoon | November 7, 2008 3:27 PM | Report abuse

Gingrich? Holy hell, you guys have real issues if you go back to the hair of the dog that bit you. Denial, I believe the term is.

Posted by: steveboyington | November 7, 2008 3:37 PM | Report abuse

Newt who??

Will you believe me if I tell you that there will never be another Republican president? No, you probably won't. But political parties, like people and nations, do not live forever. When they become irrelevant -- like the Federalists and the Whigs and the Dixiecrats and others -- they die.

I think the most likely scenario is that, having no viable policies or attractive principles, the Republican party will shrivel until it consists of nothing but a few religious extremists and libertarian cranks, while the Democratic party will swell and spread until it totally dominates our politics. Then the Democrats will split over some new worldshaking crisis -- maybe the contradiction between economic growth and ecological survival -- and the political universe will again be bipolar.

Posted by: donnolo | November 7, 2008 3:41 PM | Report abuse

Robert Novak, as always I hope you are doing well, but if you have the brain tumor that your press release said you did, then how are you continuing to work?

Posted by: bbcrock | November 7, 2008 3:47 PM | Report abuse

Only months until Bush is out.

Gingrich was one of the co-founders of the GOP communism that destroyed the US economy.

Along with Rove with his FEAR, HATE and DIVISION politics, and Cheney "Defecits dont matter" Gingrich brough America to Great Depression II.

Most of you NeoConMen seem set on destroying and betraying America.

When Bush is gone there will be nobody to pardon traitors.

Soon the investigations and court cases can begin.

Posted by: walker1 | November 7, 2008 4:22 PM | Report abuse

We jave just come off of one of the longest campaign seasons in the history of the US. Obama just won the white house and has not even taken up residence yet. Already the Republicans are running for 2012? They should be thinking about 2008 and then 2009! I want my congress critter to be in the here and now, concentrating on what they can do for "We the People" - not worrying about who the hell they are going to run in 2012... GEEZ!

Posted by: gjkbear | November 7, 2008 4:25 PM | Report abuse

gluttons for punishment that believe running the United States into the ground is a good thing.

Up until three weeks ago, I thought other WP readers referring to all Republicans as "Fascists" were over the edge. My impression changed when the Conservative Republicans labeled President elect Obama as socialist. Democrats absolutely promote democracy that diametrically opposes autocracy that is integrally entwined within previous socialist governments. These socialist governments include fascist and communist states. Unfortunately, I can't say the same for Conservative Republicans.

Liberty is a progressive Ideal.

Posted by: egalitaire | November 7, 2008 4:32 PM | Report abuse

Gingrich? The GOP's self-destructive streak is much wider than I figured. If that's the Big Plan, it might be wise to concede the election now and save a lot of money.

Posted by: sheehanjc | November 7, 2008 4:43 PM | Report abuse

"deep character flaws" That says it all -- and that is how the Repugicans got this country to where we are now. Policy ain't s**t without the "content of his character". And 52% of the voting public finally realized it!

A newt is an amphibious lizard-like creature like the axolotl that is becoming extinct. May the semi-humanoid Newt experience that fate and the axolotl survive!

Posted by: nadinac | November 7, 2008 4:44 PM | Report abuse

Hey fellow posters don't point out the obvious flaws. Let him guide the Republican party to this scenario. I liked the idea of including Sarah again. The only improvement would be to let Rove run the campaign. Of course I am a Democrat so could be looking at the proposal from a different perspective.

Posted by: LocalReader1 | November 7, 2008 4:47 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Novak: Are you out of your mind??? Much of what is wrong in the country today can be attributed to Gingrich's "Contract on America."

Posted by: ex-Washingtonian_in_NH | November 7, 2008 4:49 PM | Report abuse

With all due respect, Mr. Novak, the McCain candidacy did not even begin to appeal to moderates, independents, or Democrats. Any Republican leader who thinks it did is slipping the surly bonds of reality to engage in ideological fantasy. However, I do feel that it will require the scorching defeat of an unambiguously conservative candidate in 2012 to put the GOP on the road back to sanity and electability, in which case Newt is not a bad choice at all.

Posted by: DeadCenter | November 7, 2008 4:55 PM | Report abuse

Please. Please, please, please, please, please, please!

Posted by: zukermand | November 7, 2008 4:59 PM | Report abuse

Unless the old dog has been fixed, you can count on Newt for at least one major sexual escapade during any political campaign. He and all that "energy" will definitely crash and burn if the Republicans were foolish enough to nominate him.

Posted by: bubbuh | November 7, 2008 5:06 PM | Report abuse

Yeah sure in 2012 Huckabee could get Gingrich to fill in for him as host on his fox channel tv show. Great idea novak.

Posted by: del3 | November 7, 2008 5:18 PM | Report abuse

Gingrich for president in 2008? Get real.

Posted by: Diogenes | November 7, 2008 5:27 PM | Report abuse

Gingrich is another morally corrupt Republican politician. Dare I say that he has flirted with adultery also. First, McCain and now Gingrich? After all of the hoopla over Bill Clinton. Come on guys, surely you have some decent Republicans in your midst.

Posted by: EarlC | November 7, 2008 5:30 PM | Report abuse

And Ronald Reagan was a rotten president, let us not forget that.

Posted by: nyrunner101 | November 7, 2008 5:39 PM | Report abuse

Gingrich does have unlimited energy, mostly jumping from wife to wife.

Don't even think about elevating this loser to a high office again!

Posted by: disunion | November 7, 2008 5:43 PM | Report abuse

Yep, Republicans, keep on drinking deeply that "Old time religion" and continue to watch educated, modestly sophisticated voters abandon a party that's becoming a caricature of itself.

Posted by: rodgersd1 | November 7, 2008 6:03 PM | Report abuse

Oh please run Gringrich against Obama in 2012.... please, please, please, please, PLEASE!!!!!!

Nothing would be better for America...or the Democratic Party.

Thanks in advance!

Posted by: auntiebo | November 7, 2008 6:07 PM | Report abuse

good idea. take advice from Novak. that's going to help.
The real point to be made is that no matter what ideas you republicans come up with, when election time comes, you're going to soil your pants with your campaign tactics. the beauty for democrats is that even if the party were to swear off now, others that you have sponsored won't. Rush won't. He's an entertainer. He doesn't really need you either.

Posted by: michael5 | November 7, 2008 6:21 PM | Report abuse

Don't underestimate Newt -- the Dems actually started promoting "drill here, drill now, pay less" -- a fabulous Newt idea. He's the smartest guy in the room.

Posted by: createsastir | November 7, 2008 7:34 PM | Report abuse

Novak is proposing Newt for President? I didn't know Novak was a Democrat.

I bet Howard Dean would be really, really scared. I mean, Newt has NO negatives.

Amazing to watch the GOP decide that the reason they lost is because they weren't conservative enough.

Posted by: Samson151 | November 7, 2008 7:35 PM | Report abuse

createastir wrote: "Don't underestimate Newt -- the Dems actually started promoting "drill here, drill now, pay less" -- a fabulous Newt idea. He's the smartest guy in the room."

Yeah, the rubber room.

I love these comments. It's better than Colbert.

Posted by: Samson151 | November 7, 2008 7:39 PM | Report abuse

I gotta say, it is WONDERFUL to witness the destruction of the Republican Party. For years and years I felt sorry for them and, truth be told, scared of them. But now, all I feel is a certain joy in the witnessing of their death. May they continue to self destruct and do it before our very eyes. Oh boy, do they deserve to be gone!

Posted by: cms1 | November 7, 2008 8:08 PM | Report abuse

Q: What is the Republicans' dirty little secret? A: The "southern strategy," based on winning legislative offices and electoral college votes throughout the former Confederacy. At its core, it is founded on racism.

If Obama does a good job as president -- not great, just pretty good, like Clinton or Eisenhower -- racism will cease to be a potent political force. The solid South will fall apart like a dropped watermelon. What do the urban and agrarian poor and middle class whites of the south have in common with plutocrats like the Bushes and Cheyneys? Nothing. When they realize that it is in their economic self-interest to join forces with their counterparts in the rest of the country, the Republican party will be a shell of its former self.

Posted by: donnolo | November 7, 2008 8:08 PM | Report abuse

I couldn't agree more, although I was getting sick of Rush's whining in 1994, it was Newt and that "Republican Revolution" bunch that made me lose my lunch! That group also included a fellow named Tom Delay, and I believe Dick Armey, two other nutjobs that hastened my exit from what became the party of the extreme right, and eventually led to George Dumbya!

Posted by: squirebass | November 7, 2008 9:03 PM | Report abuse

I think most of the democrats on here are getting a little delusional. Yeah Obama won, but lets see how he governs. And the republican party has hardly met their demise. It was only 2 years ago that they held all the power. You people sound like Karl Rove with his permanent republican majority nonsense and Obama hasn't even been inaugerated yet.

The American people are generally conservative. Recognize that. Even the democratic presidents of the past 40 years have been of the more conservative wing of their party. If Obama and the legislature get in there and start laying Great Society 2 on us, I will assure you they'll be gone in 2012. Especially considering the 2010 census will move 10 electoral votes and house seats from blue states to red states.

Posted by: bill3 | November 7, 2008 9:49 PM | Report abuse

"D A" Kovak did not learn anything. Newt, Ruddy, Thompson, George Allen,Elizabeth Dole, Paylin, McCain, Hannity and Rush have all been rejected. The country burried the whole lot with the election.

America is moving forward. Thanks to Obama.

Posted by: alvin12 | November 7, 2008 9:57 PM | Report abuse

"Republicans seem chastened by the failure of seeking moderate, independent and even Democratic votes." We were trying to do that? - I didn't notice amid all that "energizing the base" stuff. Great strategy when your base is probably 35% of the electorate, max, with demographics that don't look very promising over time. Federalists,Whigs, _________. And these are certainly great times for a fiscal philosophy of "Deficits don't matter" We'll see how that borrow forever approach works in about 20 years when the Medicare and SS funds go kaplooey (no smirking by any Democrats allowed here - you people refuse to acknowledge any such problems so you can keep Claude Peppering the old folks with garbage about how the evil Repubs just want to take their Social Security away). The sad irony is that our best candidate just might be the other Bush: Jeb. But his brother sure messed that up for him. But Newt? As that great man Jimmy Rabbette once said, "Ha, bloody ha".

Posted by: Labbymalone | November 7, 2008 11:06 PM | Report abuse

Yes. The FORNICATOR. And a moron to boot. What a f***ing joke. Why is it (today's) republicans are so GALDANGED STUPID? Especially this guy. Oh well, at least he can find Mexico on the map.

Posted by: Tomcat3 | November 7, 2008 11:48 PM | Report abuse


Bomb Iran, torture, a wide stance...

The Republican program is transparent and sunshine is a good disinfectant.

Posted by: shrink2 | November 7, 2008 11:48 PM | Report abuse

President Newt!
A caca-phonious roar emerges from Okefenokee.
Pogo and the gang will keep Newt where he belongs, half submerged in the swamp.

No way in hell, is Mr. Family Values getting elected President. He's abandoned more wives than McCain.
You can see Newt's pointed tongue slither in and out of his mouth when he speaks. He could be a Texas Republican: he has Rick Perry's hair and Tom Delay's integrity.
Rush Limbaugh in a girdle. Newt Gingrich would be the headstone on the Republican grave.

Bring Mickey Edwards back. He has the conservative credentials, believes in the Constitution, comes from a state renowned for lynchings and mob violence against blacks just like Newt; yet he voted for Obama. The party of Lincoln forgets that Lincoln put Country above partying.

Posted by: georgepwebster | November 8, 2008 12:07 AM | Report abuse

Gingrich? Simply idiotic. Bloomberg! Obvious.

Posted by: mccurrym | November 8, 2008 12:19 AM | Report abuse

There are about a dozen reasons why Newt Gingrich could never be President. But more important than the fact that he has been repeatedly shown to be a terrible person is this: His political views are really only appealing to about 15% of the electorate. He could be President just as easily as Ron Paul or Dennis Kucinich. And to be honest, he is not as nearly as likeable as those two guys.

Posted by: Scubergmu | November 8, 2008 12:28 AM | Report abuse

Gingrich is a perfect Republican - a dishonest hypocrite who played around with an intern while chasing Clinton for playing around with an intern. Novak loves this sort of sleaze.

Maybe Newt could get Ted Stevens as a running mate and continue the Republican Alaskan connection. And if Stevens is too old for the job, there is alway Tom DeLay - who is also under indictment.

Posted by: MorganaLeFay | November 8, 2008 12:32 AM | Report abuse



Posted by: | November 8, 2008 12:47 AM | Report abuse

Novak's suggestion is so totally and completely wrong-headed that I pray to heaven that Republicans follow it. A hard turn to the right (although I'm not sure how you turn right from right, other than to go left again) is exactly what would drive the party into the wilderness for decades. Yes, indeed! Gingrich/Palin 2012!

Posted by: tmaffolter | November 8, 2008 12:47 AM | Report abuse

Sorry, Mr. Novak. The American Taliban are in control of your party now, and they have spoken. Half-Baked Alaska is the new blank-stare face of your party, whether you like it or not.

Posted by: B2O2 | November 8, 2008 12:49 AM | Report abuse

ROFLMAO. The Republicans debate the selection of a new capo. Newt Gingrich? You'd think it'd be hard to pick a standard bearer when you're not even sure what ought to be on the flag. What's that you say? It doesn't matter because the party doesn't actually stand for anything apart from organized crime?

Posted by: fzdybel | November 8, 2008 1:06 AM | Report abuse

"So, Newt, How's the wife?"

Posted by: hohandy | November 8, 2008 1:09 AM | Report abuse

I used to like Gingrich but then I see that he appears with that idiot Sean Hannity every night. An association with Sean Hannity is worse than one with Bill Ayers. Sean Hannity is the worse person ever to live.

Posted by: Holcombe1 | November 8, 2008 1:10 AM | Report abuse

Oh, my God. All these years I thought you were serious! I never guessed you were just perfecting a comedy routine. President Gingrich??? I say those words to scare hiccups out of people, both Democrat and Republican.

Mr. Novak, you're hilarious!

Posted by: | November 8, 2008 1:13 AM | Report abuse

Gingrich is icky. Nasty history with women, smirky like all those soft-faced neo/uber/cons, sure nobody in the room is as smart as him.

The Bloombergs and George Wills must cringe at the suggestion of that freudian frat-boy turned professor (elite elite elite, eh?) running the country. But since Nixon and Reagan and two Bushes, it's hard to believe there's anything dumb that Americans won't swallow.

Novak had retired, I thought. But he's evidently a stalking horse for the rightwingnuts in his post-retirement iteration.

Posted by: practica1 | November 8, 2008 1:21 AM | Report abuse

This obsession with who's running for president in 2012 is symptomatic of a mental disorder. Since the present president is still here and the next one not even inaugurated, this discussion is, well, sick. Someone get a bucket, quick!

Posted by: washpost16 | November 8, 2008 1:27 AM | Report abuse

Guess what, Traitor Bob? Some of us still remember this clown's "Contract on America" and the hypocracy of going after Bill Clinton for Lewinsky when cheating on his own wife and giving her the divorce papers in the hospital after her cancer surgery. So yeah, go ahead and flack for your toady, Newt...He'll go far...

Posted by: braultrl | November 8, 2008 1:34 AM | Report abuse

"The consternation among Republicans is concentrated on McCain's failure to capitalize on Democratic flaws."

And those flaws are..?

Invasion of Iraq,
1 million lost jobs this year!
Crumbling infrastructure!!

Electing cheney/bush!!!!

Posted by: knjincvc | November 8, 2008 1:43 AM | Report abuse

But this is wonderful!! Bring it on!! I recommend a Gingrich/Giuliani ticket. Obama would win all 57 states!

Obama/Biden '12

Posted by: wkorn | November 8, 2008 2:05 AM | Report abuse

Folks, I'm no fan of Novak, but it's not right to kick a man when he's down with cancer. I wish him well.

On the other hand, I'm also no big Clinton fan but you conservatives out there who trashed him for Monica but keep your mouth shut about Newt--a guy who dumped his sick wife for a bimbo--well, that just makes you a shallow hypocrite. Nothing new there.

Posted by: tmaffolter | November 8, 2008 2:20 AM | Report abuse

I'm still wondering how a covert agent was outed and no one had to answer for it.

The sexism that allowed this to happen is intricately tied to the sexism surrounding Palin's run. Although I disagree heartily with Sarah Palin on many issues, she was treated like dirt by her own party.

I wish a pundit or two would talk about how no MALE CIA operative would be outed in the manner that Plame was, and that further, anyone who outed her is indeed a traitor. I'm at a loss as to how this entire issue has been ignored by the government and the media.

Posted by: readerny | November 8, 2008 2:24 AM | Report abuse

The Republicans too need change. No more Rovian politics, no more Sarah Palin, no more Gingrich, Novak, or Fox News. Anybody over there with a heart as well as a brain? Looks like the Dems have all the good people- I'd advise the elephants to start over and discard the right completely- they simply do not belong in the 21st century. I'll be very happy to let the one party, the dems, right this course.

Posted by: auramac | November 8, 2008 2:38 AM | Report abuse

Is this a joke? Or are the Republicans really so desperate that they would be talking such ridiculous nonsense four years in advance?
Gingrich would be great....for Obama's re-election. Actually, McCain was their only hope. He was the only Republican who could even remotely promise to reform the Republicans. Now that he's out, they really have no one else.
Gingrich? This is satire, right?

Posted by: Arjuna9 | November 8, 2008 2:52 AM | Report abuse

First, I hope you're recovering.

Second, I agree with the "old time religion" remaark. I believe under that dogma a defeat like this requires a human sacrifice.

Now it might be easy to pick Sister Sarah as the logical choice.

But I'd caution all good Republicans out there not to take any chances.

Once can't be too safe and so perhaps six or more sacrifices will be required.

If there's any problem with eating the hearts, drop me a line. I'll front the BBQ sauce.

Bon Appetit, Bob!

Posted by: R49Thomas | November 8, 2008 3:05 AM | Report abuse

Oh yes, let it be Newt!!

Anyone who was paying attention in the 90s figured this guy out a long time ago. He's a narcissistic, pedantic, self-aggrandizing jerk. Is there anyone outside the Republican core who doesn't get this?

Oh, also, he's a world class hypocrite. Impeaching Clinton for adultery at the same time he was cheating on his wife!

I would welcome an Obama-Gingrich match up. They're both smart, but guess who's more appealing?

By the way, all the posters here who are calling attention to Novak's brain tumor, or wishing him dead: you have no taste or class.

Posted by: crm1951 | November 8, 2008 3:26 AM | Report abuse

Gee Mr Novak,

Newt? Are you kidding? How about Cheney and Bagdad Bob 2012?

Posted by: cirrus_nine | November 8, 2008 3:28 AM | Report abuse

OMFG! Too funny!

You and Krauthammer been smokin' the crack?

Posted by: pclement1 | November 8, 2008 3:44 AM | Report abuse

Americans don't have that short a memory. Gingrich is ethically and morally challenged. Also, remember that women vote too.

Posted by: MNUSA | November 8, 2008 4:03 AM | Report abuse

In all fairness to you Mr. Novak I can understand how the GOP might feel about trotting out Newt in 2012. Newt has way too much baggage and is too tainted by partisan politics to ever get elected. Not to mention the multiple lapses in judgement he has made in his personal life. My best guess as a centrist a little to the left is that Romney would be the best shot for the GOP. Its too bad that your party is dominated by wingnuts and religious fanatics which will prevent him from wining the nomination. That is unless the states that are allowed to vote in your primaries first are the more reasoned ones, like say California, New York, you know some of the un-American parts of the Country. Please though bring Newt on the left would like that race.

Posted by: mrqcguy | November 8, 2008 4:26 AM | Report abuse

I just want to express how sickened I am by the comments on this thread. I'm not a fan of Novak either, but brain cancer is an illness I would not wish on my worst enemies. This is absolutely disgusting. I'm not religious, but if there's any justice in the world, there's a special place in Hell for some of the posters on this thread. And if there is a Hell, I'd take it over a malignant brain tumor any day of the week.

That being said, Gingrich '12 is an excellent way for the Republican party to refuse to become relevant. They're going to need some fresh faces to win back the presidency. I don't expect them to win in '12, and I think their best best is to start grooming promising Young Republicans for a run in '16. Of course they need new ideas, but I never liked their ideas in the first place, so I don't have any clue what '16's right-wing superstar would look like.

Posted by: AhhWoo | November 8, 2008 4:27 AM | Report abuse

Try running someone middle of the road and sane.

Posted by: jzelouise | November 8, 2008 4:49 AM | Report abuse

As a Democrat, 'Id love to see the Rs nominate Gingrich. He's damaged goods and he's utterly unelectable. But I suspect that even Republicans may be smart enough to prefer a candidate who can actually contest an election.

The larger question for people like you, Mr. Novak, is why does your party exist? What does the Republican Party have to offer the American people in 2008? Buffoons like James Inhofe who call climate science a hoax? Phony promises to cut government when so much of government spending directly benefits Republican voters and contributors -- and the need for government regulation has never been more obvious? Tax cuts that forced us to borrow trillions?

Forget about who your candidate's going to be. Why are you here?

Posted by: davidscott1 | November 8, 2008 5:31 AM | Report abuse

Looking forward to 2012, I have never seen a party more bereft of obvious candidates. Romney can run again because he's rich, but there's no sign the right will accept him. Huckabee is a likeable fringe candidate but still a fringe candidate. Palin? Gingrich?

You people are in trouble.

Posted by: davidscott1 | November 8, 2008 5:37 AM | Report abuse

"..mcCain was going in the wrong direction and was the wrong candidate."

What Republican would have run better than John McCain, and why? If you people really think you can win contemporary national elections with hard-right candidates, I am very glad to hear that. Nominate them. Please.

Posted by: davidscott1 | November 8, 2008 5:42 AM | Report abuse

Yonkers, New York
08 November 2008

The GOP should have no great difficulty picking the most qualified among wannabes to be its presidential nominee in 2012.

Newt Gingrich would surely be in that short list--but he carries a lot of baggage with him, too much in fact to warrant being the final choice.

When the nomination dust settles, Sarah Palin will very likely by the GOP presidential nominee in 2012. By that time, she won't make the mistake of accepting $150,000 from the Republican National Committee for her to use for clothes, accessories, make-up, pedicure and manicure. She will be using her own clothes, and her own accessories, all bought in Alaska.

Mariano Patalinjug

Posted by: MPatalinjug | November 8, 2008 5:54 AM | Report abuse

Please read the piece on psychopaths in the Nov. 10 New Yorker. Then understand that Gingrich is a psychopath. Then ask yourself why the GOP keeps putting psychopaths up for election. Then understand that the American people have shown that they now recognize the psychopathy of GOP, which tries to win elections by lying, conning, and intimidation through fear. Psychopathy, in other words. Cheney is a psychopath. Palin is a psychopath. Bush, to his pathetic credit, has a few traits of normality and is merely borderline.

Posted by: Aformerjournalist | November 8, 2008 5:56 AM | Report abuse

Why don't the Republicans start cultivating a forward thinking positive candidate. Rather than "The consternation among Republicans is concentrated on McCain's failure to capitalize on Democratic flaws" focusing on the opposition, sell yourselves.
It's like obama said they spent more time talking about him than their plan for the nation.

Posted by: pjhnsn8 | November 8, 2008 6:00 AM | Report abuse

Republican debacle last Tuesday? Hardly. Republicans got 48& of the popular vote - as close to a "dead heat" as possible. Just as the Democratic Party cannot claim a "mandate," the Republican Party cannot wallow in dispair.

President elect Obama has yet to be sworn in, and the Republican Party already begins campaign 2012. How rediculous. Was not the 22 month 2008 campaign long enough?

Posted by: chartwl | November 8, 2008 6:11 AM | Report abuse

Gingrich is even more of a creepy has been than Palin is going to be in four years.

Posted by: SarahBB | November 8, 2008 6:38 AM | Report abuse

Gingrich? That's your best shot?

Cue Nelson Muntz laugh: HA-HA!

Posted by: whirlwind81 | November 8, 2008 6:50 AM | Report abuse

Yes Robert, that is a great idea. I'd much prefer that the 2 major parties be the Democrats and the Green Party.

Posted by: ConsiderThisMyFriend | November 8, 2008 7:01 AM | Report abuse

Briljant, even I as an European see that many conservatives suffer from braindamage. Kristol with his Palin, now this Novak guy. Keep it going guys, maybe America is turning back to a normal country again.

Posted by: ceesje | November 8, 2008 7:04 AM | Report abuse

Why not Gingrich in 2012? Because he is the seed of the cancer that we just cut out.

Posted by: nicekid | November 8, 2008 7:08 AM | Report abuse

Right on, Mr. Novak. Why go with a rank amateur like Sarah Palin when you can have a truly polarizing figure such as Newt Gingrich. Should be good for about 450 Democratic electoral votes. Good choice.

Posted by: marks1940 | November 8, 2008 7:08 AM | Report abuse

A yes here's a line from Pink Floyd comes to mind:

The lunatic is in my head
The lunatic is in my head
You raise the blade, you make the change
You re-arrange me till Im sane
You lock the door
And throw away the key
Theres someone in my head but its not me.

Let's get the old songs out and have a party.

Posted by: ceesje | November 8, 2008 7:09 AM | Report abuse

well, the first order of business is permanently quashing the career of hockey mom. WHY ON EARTH many in the gop want to invest the future of the entire party in her, based on what little we have seen, is BEYOND me. newt is an ideas guy. he is a horrible front man. i think i know who can raise the gop from the ashes, it ain't gingrich, and it sure as heck ain't hockey mom.

Posted by: phosgene | November 8, 2008 7:16 AM | Report abuse

Oh, what a great idea, Traitor Bob.

Palin could trade places with Gringrinch and spew lies, intolerance and hatred on RNC Fox News while O'Reilly masturbates under his news desk.

Posted by: coloradodog | November 8, 2008 7:26 AM | Report abuse

Gringrinch/Stevens 2012

Oh, God, pleeeaassseee

Posted by: coloradodog | November 8, 2008 7:29 AM | Report abuse

If the strategy is to run a candidate who appeals to an even narrower slice of the electorate than Sarah Palin, this is a top-notch suggestion.

How about a Ginrich-Limbaugh ticket? That way we'll all know once and for all exactly how many people form the Republican "base" since the ticket would not attract a single voter who has ever had a moderate thought.

Posted by: exco | November 8, 2008 7:30 AM | Report abuse


Posted by: ohwell | November 8, 2008 7:37 AM | Report abuse

Newt? Heck. We can do better.

How about Attila the Hun?

I hear he's back and looking for work.

Posted by: lennyjazz | November 8, 2008 7:54 AM | Report abuse

Say it ain't so republicans.....there you go again looking to the past instead of the future. Newt Gingrich? The Newt Gingrich? Obama wouldn't even need to put in half the campaign work running against Newt.
The republicans are really grasping at straws here, lurching from one bad idea to another. They need to take a deep breath, look around and realize they will never win another campaign as long as they preach to their shrinking choir. This country has become very diverse and 2012 promises to bring in more young first time voters of a more diverse background. A party that appeals to the religious right and to a predominantly caucasian base has very slim chances of ever winning an election given the shifting demographics. If they don't quickly reinvent themselves, shift from the demagoguery and become a more inclusive party they will be wandering in the wilderness for many decades to come.

Posted by: Wagathuku | November 8, 2008 7:54 AM | Report abuse

Hi, bit of a reality check here. Newt is no doubt the most dynamic Republican around, but this isn't going to fix the GOP's problems. Bluntly the Republican Party is nearly extinct north of the Ohio and east of the Mississippi. In Michigan, for example, Obama not only carried all Greater Detroit (including Macomb county, home of the Reagan Democrats), but he also carried Kent County--Gerald Ford's district--the first Democrat since LBJ to do this. He also carried Hamilton County Ohio (Cincinnati) again the first Democrat to do so in 44 years. This suggests there's a profound alienation in the traditional Republican heartland from a party which is increasingly become more and more "southern." And they think a Georgian firebrand is going to fix this?

Posted by: bfiedleri | November 8, 2008 8:06 AM | Report abuse

Yeah, like I would want the man who went after Clinton for having an affair when he was having an affair at the same time.

Posted by: Chalco | November 8, 2008 8:20 AM | Report abuse

McCain-Palin were only lukewarm in appealing of our baser intincts and instilling fear of the dreaded enemy.
While Gingrich may have some ability in ths field, he may have some good ideas as well.
Why not go all out and have
Rush Limbaugh/Ann Coulter for 2012 . Now that would be a dream ticket with the McCain-Palin ticket being a nice prelude to the real thing.

Posted by: Kingofkings1 | November 8, 2008 8:22 AM | Report abuse

GOP will wander the political wasteland thru 2018 at the earliest. Nominate who or whatever you want, President Obama will crush them like he did McGeezer and his dancing pig.

Posted by: pgiaquinto | November 8, 2008 8:24 AM | Report abuse

newt *CONTRACT ON AMERICA* gingrich?


Posted by: kate_58_58 | November 8, 2008 8:28 AM | Report abuse

"Republicans got 48& of the popular vote - as close to a "dead heat" as possible. Just as the Democratic Party cannot claim a "mandate," the Republican Party cannot wallow in dispair"

Actually, McCain got 46% and Obama got 52%. The electoral vote was 365 to 173, or about 210% more electoral votes for the Democrats than the Republicans. Yes, chartwl, it is time to wallow in despair.

Posted by: judithgelman | November 8, 2008 8:44 AM | Report abuse

Mr. Novak;

Just about the time I believe you can't come up with anything more stupid you surprise me again. Newt Gingrich for President you say. If only you could be right. It would assure the first 16-years in the political wilderness for the Republican Party or more correctly, America's Reactionary Party as in reactionary to the American Revolution itself.

Of course 40-years in the wilderness has been deserved with the election of Richard M. Nixon, Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush.

To be certain, Mr. Gingrich is quickly available to give one more shot to riling up the hicks, hillbillies and evangelicals and he could be master of the Nixon's Southern Strategy and hey, he could even tap Palin again to be chief hick motivator.

Novak, retire would you?

Posted by: explorers100 | November 8, 2008 8:46 AM | Report abuse

Hey're nuts. Why don't you just retire? Sheesh.

Posted by: ObviousToMe | November 8, 2008 8:49 AM | Report abuse

Whoever the Repubs nominate in 2012 will be a sacrificial lamb.
Somehow Newt does not look the part.
2012 is just too soon to expect a GOP victory.
The voters will give Obama 2 terms to try to fix the damage
done by the last 8 years of incompetent Republican leadership.
If the economy is in good shape after that, perhaps the GOP can
win again and run the nation into the ground once more.

Posted by: Jihm | November 8, 2008 9:00 AM | Report abuse

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha. Thanks for the humor, Bob. Please continue to promote the bloviating hypocrite Gingrich as the "new" face of Republicanism for 2012. He is a true representative of the white, bigoted piety in service to oligarchs like Scaife and Coors that the Republican Party has become since Reagan.

In the meantime, the Post would do well to put you, Broder and Craphammer out to pasture. There must be some mildly intelligent and interesting conservatives out there who aren't yet as delusional as you three.

Posted by: RBShea | November 8, 2008 9:04 AM | Report abuse

Actually Novakula, I'd like to "Play" the Dimocrats early. Get them showing their true colors, and set the dialogue!

Let's try promoting Sean Hannity/ Lou Dobbs,

or even more Polorizing(Since above almost sounds GOOD!), Dennis Miller/ Ann Coulter!

That should get some Libbies Foaming at their filthy Mouths! ;~)

Posted by: SAINT---The | November 8, 2008 9:05 AM | Report abuse

Brilliant! Palin could be the presidential nominee and Gingrich could be her running mate, assuming he's off his meds. I can't think of a funnier ticket!

Posted by: cadejo4 | November 8, 2008 9:05 AM | Report abuse

Since everyone including the guy who replaced my windshield the other day has an opinion on where the Republican Party should go in the near and far future, I thought I'd give my twenty-five cents worth since two-cents of reflection isn't worth much these days.
Republicans are good at two things: (1) Eating their own when things don't turn out exactly as they had planned (The Sarah Palin embroglio being an obvious case in point) and (2) Winning elections (until this election cycle)and governing poorly or not at all when elected.
Therefore,they should take advantage of these qualities; see if they can just one more time resurrect this methodology to once again attain their majority role in politics and in dictating our way of life, generally.
In this spirit, this is what the in-shambles Party of Grand Old Putzes should do . . .
Supporting and nominating Sub-Standard Sarah for the highest office in the land is about as no-brainer a move as the content of Ms. Palin's cranium. Remember,there is still 46% of Americans who view Sarah as "one of us". Now, concentrating really hard on voter fraud and intimidation, screwing around with Diebold machinery that would ultimately result in more votes cast for Republicans and sending out a gazillioin official-looking pamphlets informing blacks, students and Union members that the voting date has been changed to the SECOND Tuesday in November would bring that sympathetic electorate vote up to near, say, 49%. An additional 2% could be gained by pointing out to the the fence-sitters, Libertarians and Skin Heads that whoever the Democratic candidate would be is a . . . well, I think the Novaks, Limbaughs and Hannitys would have a really good idea of what should be emphasized here.
So, you see, this is what I think should be done to insure a victory for The Gipper's Army in 2012.
Is this pure genius, or what?

Posted by: hyjanks | November 8, 2008 9:09 AM | Report abuse

Enjoy the wilderness, maybe have Sarah show you how to field dress a moose.

The GOP has done enough damage to the nation. We really don't need you back.

You pilfered America through oil, war, unfettered greed, and a corrupt Justice Department.

now go hide behind your crosses.

Posted by: vigor | November 8, 2008 9:10 AM | Report abuse

Gingrich - Palin in 2012 !


That should just about finish off the Corrupt Political Pornography that constitutes the Republican Party today.

Posted by: RepublicanBase | November 8, 2008 9:17 AM | Report abuse

The man who gave Bill Clinton his legacy (balanced budget, welfare reform, line item veto) would make a great president, however as evidenced by the responses here is totally unelectable. It's sad that the best Republican legislator of the past 30 years has made so many enemies and handled his personal life so abysmally.

Posted by: kilgore_nobiz | November 8, 2008 9:19 AM | Report abuse

Forget 2012 I would like to see Valerie Plame run against Karl Rove in 2016. Novak and Armitage could run the Rove campagin and Plame could tap into Obama's organization for support.

Mark Dodge
San Diego, CA

Posted by: globespinner | November 8, 2008 9:19 AM | Report abuse

Novak, I though you did the country a favor and retired.

Why not Mickey Mouse? He has more revelance to the American people than the Grinch. Gingrich is always hanging around the edges trying to get back in and if I were a Republican trying to change the direction of my party, he would continue "trying to get back in". Gingrich has done almost as much to hurt the party as bush and to crown him as the party leader is pretty much more of the same.

I would how Gingrich just goes away, same as I do for you, Novak.

Posted by: 1ken | November 8, 2008 9:20 AM | Report abuse

Gingrich could best serve the nation by being put into the maximum security prisons to provide for the immoral "lifers" who crave that "manrump".

Posted by: Tomcat3 | November 8, 2008 9:26 AM | Report abuse

It would seem that we have reached a split in the GOP. We have the good ole boys represented by Gingrich and company and then there is the fresh wind blowing through the door McCain opened with his pick of Palin. We have a generation that is out of touch with the America of today. Obama saw it and used it. Palin and Bobby Jindal are it. It is no mystery why a 37 year old Indian gets elected Governor and the same with Palin. They connect, and they deliver. Novak and Gingrich will be having coffee wondering what happened in 2012.

Posted by: 5280sail | November 8, 2008 9:30 AM | Report abuse

Chillary and Slick Willy are sell outs to the Chicago Alinsky-ites. You think the Clintons had skeletons in their closet. You haven't seen anything. Here comes the dirt of the Chicago Way. Jimmy Carter made it possible for Ronald Reagan.

Posted by: circlerj | November 8, 2008 9:32 AM | Report abuse

go "write" ahead, mr. novak, and raise the frightful dead.

sarah palin was enough of a october halloween surprise and "eye of newt" would be a "day of the living dead" for america. a ghoul in clown make-up is what we would get.

did you republicans get enough of a public rebuke last week? gluttons for mockery, pain and ridicule? wasn't sarah "tina fey" palin enough?

really, you jest...right?

Posted by: glenknowles | November 8, 2008 9:33 AM | Report abuse



Posted by: 5280sail | November 8, 2008 9:34 AM | Report abuse

Newt Gingrich is, obviously, a bright man and, in his own way, a progressive thinker.

But, and this is where my Republican party keeps getting it wrong, the single biggest bloc of voters-the moderate middle-will not sign into a far right agenda, particularly on, so called, social issues. If demographic trends keep moving the way they are, the gap between hard core conservatives and the rest of the electorate is going to widen, regardless of how "right" the right might be!

I have been a Republican since I cast my first vote for President in 1964 for BARRY GOLDWATER! but I have seen my party drift to the ludicrous right to a point where I cannot agree with much of what it professes. And, to top it off, when we do have the power, we govern no differently than the Democrats; only the special interest we cater to are different and the way we finance bloated spending (BORROW and SPEND vs. TAX and SPEND) is different.

Recyclying Mr. Gingrich and his ideas which are, by and large, exclusionary will not rebuild this party. Maybe we should blow the whole thing up and approach Mike Bloomberg for a loan to start a really via ble party: A true CENTER RIGHT party which is inclusionary on social issue and pragmatic on spending and national security. Might not please all the whackos on the radical right but it would make for an interesting election next time if we weren't automatically ceding a third of the electorate to the Democrats.

Posted by: bobfbell | November 8, 2008 9:47 AM | Report abuse

Dear Mr. Novak, I am one of the approximately 150 million true Americans who think you are a paid lackey of the conservative neocoms as well as a traitor to this country for your role in exposing in exposing Mrs Plame. I truly do not understand why the Washington Post continues to give you a forum for your misquided, neocom sourced, and often hateful views.

Posted by: PaulofAnnapolis | November 8, 2008 9:48 AM | Report abuse

Gingrich never saw a problem that couldn't be fixed with smaller government. That is his answer for just about everything. We don't need anti-govt ideologues with no respect for the government running the government. We reap what we sow.

Posted by: brillo1 | November 8, 2008 9:53 AM | Report abuse

Well, Bob that's one way to go. Here is another: why not a thoughtful moderate conservative who is not defined by (1) blind ambition, (2) fundamentalist religious beliefs, or (3) Wilsonian desires to remake the world.

Oh, I'm sorry. That means we are talking about people like Obama, the 21st century Eisenhower.

Posted by: rusty3 | November 8, 2008 9:54 AM | Report abuse

Novak makes a compelling case for Palin by suggesting Newt.

Posted by: candorman | November 8, 2008 9:54 AM | Report abuse

If the best idea that some hard right leaner like Novak can come up with for a Republican Party "leader" is Gingrich, that indicates how utterly desperate the vacuous Republican Right Wing is for a viable political identity. Not only is "The Newt" a pathetic scraping from the bottom of the barrel of American politics, he's a scraping from the bottom of the barrel of the entire human race!

Posted by: Doowadiddy | November 8, 2008 9:56 AM | Report abuse

While I agree that Newt Gingrich is a man of intellect and dynamism--a rare commodity for so many prominent spokesmen for the conservative movement--his ideas are now passe'. Limited government, minimal regulation of business, lower taxes on investors and a triumphalist American exceptionalism in our foreign policy--all key agenda items for the conservative era that has now passed--have brought us to the brink of disaster.

I cannot imagine that the next GOP contender for the Presidency, or anything else for that matter, is going to campaign on a return to the fiscal and foreign policies that are directly responsible for the calamitous conditions we presently face.

The GOP must look to the center if it is to survive. For decades we have moved inexorably to the right and we have collided with the brick wall of failure. Now we are moving leftward. The only hope for the GOP is that the democrats will make the same mistake they have made and travel way past that "sweet spot" in the center of the American electorate.

Posted by: jaxas | November 8, 2008 10:02 AM | Report abuse

Newt Gingrich...I have never understood why anyone thinks he is possesses the slightest bit of intelligence. He's one of those people who has to show you how smart he is but comes off exactly the opposite. His books ar pathetic.

Here are some other choices for the GOP 2012:

Larry the Cable Guy
Hank Williams, Jr.
J. C. Watts (the Republican Obama)
Eric Cantor (the Jewish Gingrich)
Todd Palin
Elizabeth (Godfull) Dole
Sean Hannity

Posted by: pdeblin | November 8, 2008 10:19 AM | Report abuse

Yeah, bring back Newt, the architect of the failure of the republican party. The confrontational, win at any cost, style originated when Newt took over as Speaker of the House in the early 90's. Newt, who wrote the playbook on how to use talking point lies and half-truths to try to achieve a "Permanent Republican Majority". Newt, who voted to impeach Clinton for his peccadilloes as he himself was in the middle of an illicit affair. Bring him on!!! He's an even bigger target than Sarah Palin.

Posted by: garyc4 | November 8, 2008 10:22 AM | Report abuse

Why not nominate Larry Craig? He would lock up the airport rest room vote.

Posted by: yeti00 | November 8, 2008 10:24 AM | Report abuse

The biggest problem that the Republicans face is that the current administration has been divisive and has ruled from an ideological base that has dwindled. The only way that the Republicans can survive now as a viable party is to become more centrist. Newt would not help.

Posted by: davidhturner | November 8, 2008 10:25 AM | Report abuse

Gingrich? Another Republican well passed his pull-date. Doesn't the GOP understand that America has changed? The "Contract for America" (best described as the contract on America)is old news, been there, done that and it didn't work.

Posted by: laSerenissima2003 | November 8, 2008 10:27 AM | Report abuse

The arrogance and mean-spirited attacks by the Dems, those in office and the everyday citizen, are exactly why Dems will not be in total control for very long. They never got over the 2000 election and their hatefulness carried on for eight full years. Even now, in victory, humbleness eludes them. The posts on this site just highlight your shortcomings.

Never mind Palin, Gingrich, etc. Focus on now - and what your party can do for the country. It's your moment and your chance. But I have little doubt you will blow it.

Your first move should be to get rid of Pelosi and Reid from leadership positions. Neither bring anything to the table - exept continued hateful and distructive partisanship.

Posted by: wearedoomed1 | November 8, 2008 10:37 AM | Report abuse

Why not Gingrich? You must mean beside the fact that he's a hypocrital, self-promoting, bomb throwing dolt masquerading as an intellectual. Other than that, I can't think of a single reason.

Posted by: pejesq | November 8, 2008 10:44 AM | Report abuse

You can thank Bush & Cheney for destroying the Republican Party! Buh bye, Neanderthals!

It's over ♪♫♫♪♫ it's over ♪♫♫♪♫ IT'S O-O-O-V It's over ♪♫♫♪♫ it's over ♪♫♫♪♫ IT'S O-O-O-VER! ♪♫♫♪♫ ER! ♪♫♫♪♫

Posted by: patriot76 | November 8, 2008 10:44 AM | Report abuse


Hateful and partisan Dens? You are a delusional idiot. We won't be getting rid of Pelosi or Reid, we will be getting rid of the likes of YOU!

What disgusting puke, telling us to be humble. If I had my way you'd all be lined up and shot.

Posted by: AIPACiswar | November 8, 2008 10:44 AM | Report abuse

Novak says...'seeking moderate, independent and even Democratic votes.' I must have missed that part. 'Drill Baby Drill' and 'Welfare for the Rich' are not likely to draw in Moderates and Democrats. He just doesn't get it. If they actually move toward the center they might have a chance. The far right has had its chance over the last 12 years in both houses of the congress up until last year. Plus 8 years in the White House. Their plan has put us back in the hole that Reagan dug for us. Now its time for a more moderate group to bail us out again.

Posted by: RandySorenson | November 8, 2008 10:46 AM | Report abuse

Anyone but Sarah Palin is my opinion.

Posted by: ms_victor | November 8, 2008 10:51 AM | Report abuse

Hey, I alway disagree with you, Mr. Novak, but your ideas are stimulating and I am glad to see you're hale enough to be at it again.

Posted by: chuckgoodwin | November 8, 2008 10:52 AM | Report abuse

As an Obama supporter, I would welcome the little Newt as his opponent. Then we can finish off the political career of this mendacious little sleazeball, and outsource his hypocritical drivel to Fox 'News.'

Posted by: dmaurand | November 8, 2008 10:54 AM | Report abuse

It has nothing to do with far right or far left. It has to do with being lied to one war, education, Justice, homeland security, disaster relief, and taxes.

A hard right party that was simple and honest would probably do well - as we see they just about won this election with the lying imbecile McCain.

But the GOP is neither simple or honest.

Posted by: AIPACiswar | November 8, 2008 10:54 AM | Report abuse

Newt and Palin! What a ticket, the best in Republican intellect together at last.

Posted by: Northernlite | November 8, 2008 10:58 AM | Report abuse

Gringrich? You've got to be kidding! Why is it that Republicans so often go to bottom feeders for inspiration? Gringrich is a pompous fool and an adulterer. His "contract with America" was promptly broken by his own misconduct. If he is the best Republicans can do, then the Democrats are assured a long tenure in Congress and the White House.

Posted by: heuristic77 | November 8, 2008 11:00 AM | Report abuse

Ha!Ha!Ha!Ha,LOL! Doncha get it? Novakula is really just putting you on, in his own inimicable wry, anal way! Next thing he'll be calling for is a Harrity/Coulter ticket for the Repukelicans in 2012!

Posted by: Doowadiddy | November 8, 2008 11:03 AM | Report abuse

YES - Newtie and Palin - Bring It On!!!

Novak wrote:"But there is widespread concern about what is described in the party as deep "character flaws" of Gingrich's that would be difficult to overcome in a presidential campaign."

I'd say that is putting it well - he is one very deep "character flaw" and nothing more.

Posted by: DESS1 | November 8, 2008 11:04 AM | Report abuse

What Novak fails to realize is that the wilderness is where you find new ideas from new faces. Newt? Palin? First comes tragedy, then comes farce.

Posted by: gjcomm | November 8, 2008 11:05 AM | Report abuse

Novak,werent you supposed to go away by now,,your thinking has to be really dim so do a favor and dee dee mau, you can get that translated. Besides palin newt has the worst family values of any wingnut that ever ran for office,,he is qualified as another warhawk draft dodger like most of your party.

Posted by: gonville1 | November 8, 2008 11:07 AM | Report abuse

Yes, why not another Adulterer for the Guns Owned Party of Moron Con Econ Terrorist War Criminals?

Enablers of War Criminals are equally guilty in all their Rapes, Mass Murders, Serial Killing and War Crimes.

Have fun in Eternal Hell, Born Again Bigot Killers!!!

Mission Accomplished!!! Born Again Idiot Bigots and the Cowards with Guns LOSE!!!

Posted by: mawt | November 8, 2008 11:07 AM | Report abuse

Newt Gingrich? LOL! I'm saving this column so I can laugh even more in 2011.

Posted by: simonleonard | November 8, 2008 11:08 AM | Report abuse

Newt Gingrich shows how truly desperate the GOP has become. So now, in all haste, they want to put this 'has-been' out in front as their "NEW" leader. That in itself is a JOKE! He's a 'has-been' and the electorate are beyond those days of sleaze and fear. We have grown and no longer want the likes of Gingrich who was associated with Tom DeLay and that only brings out the corruption that occured during their time in the Senate. No one could tell Newt anything because he thought he already knew everything.

Why don't you just take some real time, go slow and find someone who actually lives and breathes as a human being before selecting from all that DEAD WOOD you are trying to pawn off as "living in the 21st century". Look what happened with McCain when he rapidly chose Palin! She's the JOKE that just keeps on giving!

Posted by: MadasHelinVA | November 8, 2008 11:09 AM | Report abuse

to AIPAiswar

Thank you for proving my point.

Posted by: wearedoomed1 | November 8, 2008 11:15 AM | Report abuse

Yes, take a good long look at the electorate that voted in Obama, at the huge crowds who came to see him speak, at the massive effort all over the country to get him elected. Only Robert Novak could see in this country a populace hungry for Newt Gingrich to come back. Can you spell PAST IT!

Posted by: noGOP4me | November 8, 2008 11:16 AM | Report abuse

Oh good Lord, Newtie will be 69 years old in 2012. Great way to get back the youth vote. If elected, he would again be the oldest person to become president. That worked out so well this time, the Republicans really do need to try it again. And we do know that Newt will really energize the 20% of voters that make up the angry white male demographic. Though I'm not at all sure where the right wing fundamentalists stand these days. Looks like the younger ones drifted to Obama. Oh, well. It's already starting to look like Obama in 2012.

Posted by: jmsent2 | November 8, 2008 11:20 AM | Report abuse

The Republican Party is falling apart like a wet bag of garbage. Doesn’t look like they will reform themselves anytime soon with brilliant advisors like Bob Novak. Hey Bob, America changed forever on Nov. 4. You and the GOP just don't get it, do you?

Posted by: heuristic77 | November 8, 2008 11:22 AM | Report abuse

the man who worked so very hard to derail and destroy my career and profession as a presidential candidate in 2012. BRING IT ON! it would permanently destroy the strain of republicanism that i have come to loathe during my adult life.

Posted by: mdrockjock | November 8, 2008 11:23 AM | Report abuse

Newt Gingrich? One of the most hated men in America -- except by a handful of Americans. I hope the Republicans do choose Gingrich to lead their party -- that will insure a Democratic party victory.
Why does the Republican party only like mean people? Seems like a little milk of human kindness would really help their chances of being reelected.

Posted by: bghgh | November 8, 2008 11:24 AM | Report abuse

First of all...too all those people who are writing some inhuman statements like "...I thought you were dead" you not have ANY SENSE OF DECENCY????

Mr. Novak, I do not agree with your political leanings at all in fact this particular column makes me wonder if you are plain out a hypocrite based on all those things you said about Pres. Clinton's extramarital affairs. Lets not forget Mr. Gingrich's actions during those same times. Its fine by me if the neo-con/far right want to make him their candidate...the moderates and left will slice and dice him on his morality alone. As for Mrs. Palin...I cannot stand someone who spews SOOO much hate and it would be a huge set back for this country if either one of them were to be voted into office. We would no longer be a beacon of Democracy based on Mrs. Palin's and what she represents ideaology. Basically, the republicans need to stay out of my kitchen. I can handle financial socialism but I will not tolerate moral socialism!!!

Posted by: chefra | November 8, 2008 11:29 AM | Report abuse

NEWT is a LEFTIST Home Ivander from the Moynihan wing of the Democratic Party!

As a Social Conservative and a Fiscal Coonservative who is against NAFTA, against globalization, against open borders/amnesty, against Hart-Celler, against H-1B and L1 Visas I definitely will not vote for myself. I felt like I had to take a shower after voting for McCain. I will never do that again. I'll write in Pat Buchanan or Ron Paul next time.

Posted by: Tom22 | November 8, 2008 11:43 AM | Report abuse

From the Austin Lounge Lizards:

I'd like to set the record straight by singing of the Newt,

Where New's are open-minded and are flexible and cute,

A Newt can live in water and a Newt can live on land,

And if you are a different critter Newts will understand.

Newt's are not mean-spirited, they never are unfair,

They are not under-handed and are not afraid to care,

Newts do not have bad haircuts because newts are lacking hair,

But the Newt called Gingrich drives all true Newts to despair.

Gingrich the Newts all blown up like a toad,

So full of himself that he's bound to explode,

Then we can raise up our tails in solute,

A fitting tribute, to that horse's pa-tute,


Posted by: muddywaters | November 8, 2008 11:49 AM | Report abuse

No please run Governor Palin for President and the "Knewt" for Vice President.

It's a sure winning ticket.

Posted by: helloisanyoneoutthere | November 8, 2008 11:49 AM | Report abuse

If Obama's first press conference is any indication of what we have in store, you better make that 2016, or perhaps 2020 or maybe 2024?

The biggest mistake the GOP can make is to think that if they "return to core values" they'll be victorious. In the triangulation between McCain, Palin and Bush, is everything the GOP has stood for outside of Abe Lincoln -- and it was resoundingly defeated.

Here are a few clues:

Trickle-down economics -- nyet.

Lobotomized Christians -- nyet.

Global bully -- nyet.

A rerun of the campaigns of 1936, 1940, and 1944 -- nyet.

Maybe if the GOP were to reach back deep into its soul and reform itself as a pragmatic, progressive (economic and/or social), and respected member of the international community there might be hope.

No amount of lipstick or Neiman Marcus outfits will make Palin, Gingrich or Rove ever acceptable to the American public.

Palin belongs on SNL. Rove belongs in jail. And Gingrich destroyed the best opportunity the GOP ever had toward establishing itself as a majority party.

This is not the future of the GOP, it is its discredited past.

Posted by: ethanquern | November 8, 2008 11:56 AM | Report abuse

please devote ALL your limited energy and expertise on pushing forth another dinosaur for a subsequent election, before the current prez-elect has even taken office.

this lunacy is a welcome continuation of the last prom dance....oh, who could i ask next year, this year's beau stepped on my shoes after puking punch all over my GOP 150k gown.

Posted by: forestbloggod | November 8, 2008 11:57 AM | Report abuse

Already looking past Obama's presidency eh? Not really offering your voice to our new president huh? Yeah just focus on 2012, if you don't want to give the country your honest opinions about issues during the next 4 years - then you're pretty much worthless to the country and as a pundit. I don't know why (after all that has happened to you) that the WaPo hasn't fired you already.

Posted by: glitch83 | November 8, 2008 11:59 AM | Report abuse

It might be that the Republican's need to return a lot closer to the center in order to present a candidate that can win the White House 4 or 8 years in the future.

I consider myself a moderate - I even believe that it's important to look at both sides of a debate. Unfortunately the neocons have turned the Republican Party into a radical religion and the results were failure, both as a government and as a party standing for election.

It's time for Republicans to stop worrying about the far right - they aren't going to vote Democrat. Return to a far more central position and work to regain the trust of the moderate voters.

Posted by: KHMJr | November 8, 2008 12:00 PM | Report abuse

Dennis Miller & Ann Coulter!

The 180% Turn, into the "Right" Direction!

Hey Libbies-YIELD to the RIGHT!

On the serious side, I sort of Like Mitt Romney / Sean Hannity! ;~)

Posted by: SAINT---The | November 8, 2008 12:00 PM | Report abuse

Outside of the GOD Party bubble, Newt actually made a lot of sense.

I saw him on THIS WEEK with George Stephanopoulous and he made quite a bit of sense. More importantly, he didn't sound as idiotically partisan as he did when he was a Congressman or Speaker.

But, anyway, Mr. Novak, I remember you lighting candles all around Ms. Palin, saying she's the shinning light that would help guide the GOD Party crowds into the future.....

Have a quick change of heart, eh? LOL

Posted by: HerLao | November 8, 2008 12:05 PM | Report abuse

"What is certain is that Gingrich has the desire and the will. He has a deep-seated ambition...he never abandoned the personal dream and is ready to pursue it now."

Well, that just about says it all, doesn't it. Personal aggrandizement and blind ambition. And for what? To make the country a better place and solve the people's problems? To elevate his own diminished stature? Or just to resume the bereft flame-baiting culture wars of the 90s?

Go ahead and run him...another fat, old white guy with nothing to offer. But come on, Bobby, could you let Obama actually *BECOME* president first before you transparently start trying to replace him?

Posted by: tellthetruth01 | November 8, 2008 12:05 PM | Report abuse

"But there is widespread concern about what is described in the party as deep "character flaws" of Gingrich's that would be difficult to overcome in a presidential campaign." LOL!!!!!! ALL OF YOU PEOPLE HAVE "DEEP CHARACTER FLAWS" KEEP THEM COMING YOU OLD BUZZARD! LOL!!!!

Posted by: SchmaltzyTheGolem | November 8, 2008 12:11 PM | Report abuse

I have never agreed with you but unlike all those Novak haters above I hope you are doing well and I wish you the best with your affliction. Unfortunately your touting of Gingrich is the death knell for any hopes of that louse to be nominated by the GOP to the presidency. Please continue to support this jerk and I wish you the best of Health !

Posted by: hrrmar1 | November 8, 2008 12:11 PM | Report abuse

Personally, I view Gringrich the way I do the rest of the Republicans that I didn't vote for...being a moderate Republican.

You, Mr. Novak, I view as a traitor -- someone who should be in jail. You should confine yourself to writing nice columns.

Posted by: jwallace1 | November 8, 2008 12:22 PM | Report abuse

Newt for President! Let's sweeten the pot---Tom DeLay for V.P. The "Newt" and the "Hammer". What a combo!

Posted by: gusbokey | November 8, 2008 12:31 PM | Report abuse

I agree with most of the bi-partisan posts herein. Gingrich, like Libby, and the rest of the Office of Special Plans crowd should be hauled in front of the House Judiciary relative to his speech as keynote speaker at the March 5, 2003 Capstone address where Newt effectvely issued the Declaration of War against Iraq.

I will never forget that evening: his words, the chaotic response by America's top military officers - I knew then something was dangerously wrong: I wondered HOW a CIVILIAN could issue a DECLARATION of WAR.

The LA Times was interested in running the Capstone story if Newt attempted to run for the presidency. He decided not to - gee, wonder why?

The irony is that Newt's colleague, Frum, insists that the AEI neo-cons have ALL the answers: from recreating the American family, rebuilding America's military, and restructuring economic/trade policy, healthcare, taxes, and education. They don't. After all, it was they who suggested and pushed to implement the Iraq strategy through a platform built on lies. Then, when it failed, they projected the blame to Bush and jumped ship.

Moreover, Newt's hypocrisy regarding American family life and moral decay ... ...from the man who took $1 million dollars from Sheldon Adelson - owner of the Las Vegas Sands Corp.; you know, the guy who hosts the American "adult entertainment industry's annual show and meeting," to start his newest venture: Winning the Future .... yet another attempt to reframe the tired double-talk that characterizes the neo-con, con-artistry.

These people should listen to their "paleo-conservative founders" and move into the center.

Many AEI "fellows," and hard-liners like DeLay, and most recently, Boehner - need to be watched "like a hawk!"

Posted by: seartangel | November 8, 2008 12:35 PM | Report abuse

Thanks, Bob... I was beginning to think that hypocrisy might have lost its place as the premier family value of the GOP.

You have restored my faith.

Posted by: OldUncleTom | November 8, 2008 12:35 PM | Report abuse

Good thinking, Novak.

Gingrich, another "family values" serial adulterer, left office as the most disliked person in American politics.

Now, it's probably neck-and-neck between Gingrich and Cheney.

So why not the reptilian Newt?

It would certainly show the moral and intellectual bankruptcy of the Republican Party and lead to at least four more years of wandering in the wilderness.

Let's go with it!

Posted by: pali2500 | November 8, 2008 12:39 PM | Report abuse

If the Republican party has any future, it will have to move to the center, and away from any lunacy on the fringe right. It will have to move toward treating other humans with dignity, and away from arrogant self promotion and lording our corporate greed over others. Gingrich is the past, one which fails to understand America's true place in the world, what our promise and opportunity truly are. Any new ascendency by Gingrich will assure the Republian party will increasingly become irrelevant going forward.

Posted by: frednash1 | November 8, 2008 12:41 PM | Report abuse


Posted by: blueyes1 | November 8, 2008 12:42 PM | Report abuse

Oh. My. Goodness. This is amazing..the Republicans have no leadership whatsoever with Tony Perkins and Grover Norquist groveling over at Brent Bozell's house in Virginia and suggesting that Democrats will harm their religous values with hate crimes legislation and now Newt...They are already purging Palin..Romney paid what...$15,000 a vote...holy cow..this is going to be interesting..

Posted by: goodcake4u | November 8, 2008 12:45 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Novak, after you outed a CIA agent working on Iranian weapons of mass destruction, what makes you (or WaPo) think you are qualified to continue this line of work?

Who will you "out" next? Please, step away from the keyboard!

Posted by: PrissyPatriot | November 8, 2008 12:46 PM | Report abuse

"Is your opinion of Newt Gingrich favorable, not favorable, undecided, or haven't you heard enough about Newt Gingrich yet to have an opinion?

Favorable, 16%

[CBS News Poll. April 9-12, 2007]

Posted by: pali2500 | November 8, 2008 12:48 PM | Report abuse

Newt Gingrich is one of the guys responsible for creating such a toxic environment in Washington politics, and largely to blame for the current downfall of the Republican Party. He's ruthless, ethically challenged, and divisive. But hey, if the Rethuglicans want to make the same mistake twice, be my guest. It will only help the Dems. The Republicans just seem to get further and further out of touch.

Posted by: ggwalt123 | November 8, 2008 12:50 PM | Report abuse

Please...Please (Republican Party) let Gingrich run against Obama in 2012. For those of us who worked our a8^5$ off to support Obama it will be a walk in the park..

Posted by: ceo1958 | November 8, 2008 12:53 PM | Report abuse

Newt Gingrich? Hypocrite of the "moral majority" Old-think in an age of new-think? I was going to say he'd be the last Republican I'd ever support, but then I remembered Palin. Both of them should "go quietly in this good night."

Posted by: bweyand1 | November 8, 2008 12:55 PM | Report abuse

Yuck. Ick. Blech.

Yes, the Republicans should definitely choose this repulsive individual as their candidate for president. Maybe Tom DeLay would agree to be be his running mate.

Posted by: Connie3 | November 8, 2008 12:56 PM | Report abuse

Is this a joke?

Posted by: slim2 | November 8, 2008 1:00 PM | Report abuse

Touting a serial adulterer and family values hypocrite like Newt Gingrich to be the next Republican candidate makes me wonder how wise it is for someone with brain cancer like Robert Novak to write a column for a major newspaper.

Quite apart from his disgusting personal history, Gingrich has left reams of speeches and interviews full of nonsensical, never-to-be realized policy proposals for the Democrats' opposition researchers to exploit.

Gingrich's fame rests on his clever exploitation of the cultural conflicts of the 90s to capture the House for the Republicans. It does not rest on his ability to solve actual problems while in office, since he never came up with any solutions for any of the nation's major problems. Many of the problems we are struggling with today -- including energy independence, loss of manufacturing jobs and the spiraling cost of entitlements -- were never really addressed by him or his colleagues. What actual solutions does he have to his credit? Well?

Posted by: | November 8, 2008 1:10 PM | Report abuse

I cannot believe how desperate these Republicans are.

Posted by: sofla | November 8, 2008 1:11 PM | Report abuse

Gingrich can run for our next President but he wont win, he is damaged material. This man has neo-con written all over him,but four years down the line the right is going to be desperate. It would be interesting to see Obama whip his -ss in the next election. The entire Republican party is damaged material.

Posted by: shipfreakbo214 | November 8, 2008 1:12 PM | Report abuse

Bob, I don't think you (or most of the Republicans) get it.

Senator McCain didn't lose because he was a moderate Republican. He lost because he was, not to put too fine a point on it, an uninspiring, boring old man.

And now you want the GOP to a) run FURTHER to the right and b) nominate another uninspiring, boring old man. While it would certainly help if they could get back to fiscal responsibility, if the Republicans keep nominating the same old kind of candidates they will keep handing the Democrats landslide victories.

Posted by: presto668 | November 8, 2008 1:13 PM | Report abuse

That your party thinks Newt Gingrich, Sarah Palin, or any real member of your party leadership since 1994 is a good idea that could help you win a general election shows just how deeply out of touch your movement has become. Maybe you've been blinded by power these last 14 years. Maybe you've just become so accustomed to being elite. But certainly without vision.
This election was a complete rejection of hard right, conservative republicanism, including the character assassination, hate, exclusionism, fear mongering, and politics actually intended to divide us.
Palin and Gingrich are the face of a movement that is old, tired and discredited. Follow them at your own peril.

Posted by: jeffc6578 | November 8, 2008 1:19 PM | Report abuse

The GOP still doesn't get it! You only want to see the world through the prism of white men, small towns and small minds, rather than looking to the future. Like it or not, and obviously not, the country is changing, LITERALLY. The white population, particularly white men, is on the decline. In the next fifty years, we will be a minority majority country and rather than embracing it, the GOP seems determined to live fifty years in the past. The lesson you should have learned Tuesday night is that American wants competency back, not wedge issues, not a glorification of ignorance and simple minded perspective on complex issues. That is not who we are as a nation. We are the nation of innovation, at least we once were. While China and India are growing millions, no billions, of the smartest minds in the worlds, the GOP has embraced anti-intellecualism and trying their damndest to convince Americans that our leaders should be average or below average like the 99.9% of the populice. PLEASE! I'm a proud American who wants my President to be smarter than me. To think otherwise is arrogance of stupidity, and that's what Palin represents.

Posted by: NMP1 | November 8, 2008 1:20 PM | Report abuse

Traitor nominates morally bankrupt crook.

Why in the world would a real Goldwater Republican want to have anything to do with the total slime that have driven the Republican party off a cliff?

Posted by: glenjo | November 8, 2008 1:26 PM | Report abuse

As a Democrat, all I can say to the prospect of either Palin or Gingrish in 2012 is, YES PLEASE!

Posted by: skrut003 | November 8, 2008 1:26 PM | Report abuse

There will be a new face in the Republican party. If Obama does well, he is in for 8 yrs. However, if he proves to be another Carter who was a good man but had little experience, the Republicans will get the White House and Congress back.

Democrats better hope for major improvements in the economy these next four years. History has proven the American people are easily discouraged when it comes to their pocketbooks.

Posted by: ca67klein | November 8, 2008 1:28 PM | Report abuse

Republicans need to get over their exclusivity and realize that Mormons are a fine group of people.

When they get over their "exclusivity" they will become liberal democrats.

Romney would have better luck as a democrat.

Posted by: ricinro85212 | November 8, 2008 1:30 PM | Report abuse

I must be in an alternate universe because I thought Obama won the election and all is right in the world. However reading all the post's on here you would think that the republicans are still in charge.

All of you need to get over yourselves. The democrats control everything now so lets see what they do. Why you guys would get so nasty over a little article just shows who is the party of hate in this country. It really is sad and pathetic how the left is behaving from the prop 8 losers to everyone on here and the politico site.

Posted by: abx44 | November 8, 2008 1:37 PM | Report abuse

Novak, with all due respect, you've demonstrated profound ignorance by even suggesting that Gingrich could be a serious candidate for the White House. You're either completely out of touch, in a state of denial, or perhaps both. Actually, I think the entire Republican party shares in your cluelessness.

Posted by: keybdwizrd | November 8, 2008 1:45 PM | Report abuse

Yes! Yes! By all means! Newt Gingrich!--the one person other than Palin who could guarantee Barack Obama's reelection! Great thinking Novak!

Posted by: monk4hall | November 8, 2008 1:51 PM | Report abuse

Oh Newt, PLEASE run. I can't want to review all the old news clips of him strutting and bragging about how the Republican revolution was going to change Washington. I can't wait to hear about how his was having an affair with his secretary at the SAME TIME he was trying to impeach Clinton over sex. Bring him on!

Posted by: jaynashvil | November 8, 2008 1:54 PM | Report abuse

Why not Gingrich AND Palin? Why be only half-rotten, half-stupid and half-crazy when you can go all the way?

Posted by: raycrossley | November 8, 2008 1:55 PM | Report abuse

America has changed-- lets not go back to the past of failed Regan Bush era policies. A new Generation of Democratic leadership is now leading. Give them a chance to make good on there vision for Change. America awaits the birth of a new Generation of Republican leadership. There is no hope in failed ideas of the current Republican Party. Mr. Novak, come into Egypt and out of D-Nile.

Posted by: gpitts7 | November 8, 2008 1:55 PM | Report abuse

I agree with Novak and disagree with most of the posted commens herewithin.
Newt would be wonderful in the GOP primaries for he is all about big ideas what is missing from all the other would-bes.
The sparks would be flying as the fur would be burning.
Obviously, no chance against Obama running for re-election, but healthy for America's democratic process.

Get in the saddle NEWT and show us your stuff!

Posted by: jgotsch1 | November 8, 2008 1:56 PM | Report abuse

Clearly Novak has learned nothing in the last 8 years. Ideas and ambition alone do not count. Another thing that both doesn't count & wear well is a sense of entitlement as in "it's my turn."
What does count is character-Newt for all his energy, thoughts, drive, & ambition has none. This is a man who was drummed out of office for lack of character when trying to drum another man out of office for a similar offense. One man stayed & one man had to go-the man who stayed was NOT Newt.
Newt "made his bed [should I say he chose it?], & now he has to lie in it." Do not subject the american people to a reprise of that spectacle all over again.

Posted by: nellenews | November 8, 2008 1:58 PM | Report abuse

Newt: that would be perfect - for Democrats. While having listened to him recently you do come away with the impression that he has mellowed and actually thinks, and while I must admit almost always preferring the smart guy, all the problems pointed out above would get in the way, unless. He would have to launch his campaign by claiming to have matured, learned the lesson of bipartisanship, shed his evil ways, etc. It can be done, but he probably wouldn't do it. Too much ego.

He would essentially have to say that he admires everything that Obama stood for (rejecting everything that Newt stood for) and has learned those lessons, but just disagrees with him on policy (heck, half the people who voted for Obama wish he weren't so liberal, but you vote for the whole package).

And if he thinks the lesson of McCain's failure was with respect to moderates was that they shouldn't have tried, he will fail. McCain lost because he lost real moderate Americans while pandering to the far right (we knew that's what he meant when he and Sarah talked about "real" Americans).

My favorite Newt story was the Post article on his date while having an affair. Newt, the supposed conservative intellectual, was ridiculed, first for taking her to the Old Anglers Inn, a nice restaurant to be sure, but kind of trite for a tryst (it's a tourist favorite), but mostly by the leak that he tried to impress her by buying the most expensive wine on the wine list, which any idiot knows is hardly the best, is just there to trap someone who wants to buy it because he can, and would be the last wine suggested by the sommelier regardless of your budget.

That's my lasting memory of Newt on the way out of Washington, being ridiculed for his lack of taste and style.

Posted by: JoeT1 | November 8, 2008 2:00 PM | Report abuse

Novak assumes that there will still be a Republican Party four years hence. That's by no means certain, with the various fragments cobbled together by Karl Rove flying apart. It is exhilarating to imagine a bitter primary with the triad of tested right-wing demagogues -- Palin, Gingrich and the Mittster -- at each others' throats.

Posted by: emainland | November 8, 2008 2:03 PM | Report abuse

The R's have some truly awesome choices for 2012.

There's Palin/Jindal, or Gingrich/DeLay, or Romney/Huckabee, or Thompson/Giuliani, or Tancredo/Kyl or, thinking outside the box, Boehner/Bachmann. Not to mention Jeb Bush.

Any one of these candidates could easily get at least 35% of the vote and no less than 100 electoral votes. But probably not much more.

Posted by: mjshep | November 8, 2008 2:20 PM | Report abuse

You might consider looking at the Republican who ran his own campaign this year using a youth-oriented, internet-based approach (kind of like the campaign which ultimately won), without undue pandering to the uber-wealthy corporatists or religious fanatics. I'm referring to Ron Paul, the only Republican that I, a non-Republican, can name who had a credible, coherent message, actual experience as a legislator, and an apparent absence of overt corruption.

Palin is anti-intellectual and a science denier, labels which the Republicans need to lose. Gingrich is too old and still bases a lot of his stance on being anti-Democrat, even when that is non-productive. Very last-century.

Get real! For the Rs to be a credible force in any upcoming elections, you will need a younger constituency and candidates who can formulate and represent fiscal conservatism without the taint of cronyism, corruption, religious zealotry, and proudly belligerant ignorance which have become the outstanding characteristics of the Reagan/Bush ideologues.

Fiscal conservatism is still a good idea, which is NOT dependent upon "Supply Side" theology. Let "trickle-down" and absolute deregulation go; they have proven to be unsustainable.

Forget about adopting social policies to appeal to tiny constituencies with deep pockets. We have seen that small contributions from a lot of people can offset or trump that. Why not adopt policies which appeal to a broad base of people instead? Individual votes on election day are the ultimate goal, and a broad-based approach would provide a more direct reflection of whether you are attracting the attention and support of a lot of Americans.

Posted by: mgloraine | November 8, 2008 2:21 PM | Report abuse

Election night Republican incumbents old white males, and Elizabeth Dole, All losers, centrist, moderates, and mavericks. Thy went along with democratic ideology on big government, emigration, no regulation for Fannie mae. When all thy had to do was, just say no. The democratic voter could care less about their middle of the road stance, and the republican voter felt betray by them. The election got rid of most of them, and we will weed the rest out. We need people that trust in conservatism, not just old white males, who forget how and why, their in Washington.

Posted by: xthat | November 8, 2008 2:28 PM | Report abuse

Palin, Gingrich, Leiberman, what difference does it make. The Republican party has shrunken and walled itself off from mainstream American political thought so effectively that it will be insignificant and irrelevant for decades to come. Four years from now the question will be whether the Republican Party can even survive.

Posted by: halsusan | November 8, 2008 2:33 PM | Report abuse

How typical. Let's pick someone who can win, not the best person to win. How about spending some time looking for a candidate that exemplifies the BEST of the Republican values and not just a candidate of unlimited ambition.

Mr. Novak, perhaps you should read Cal Thomas.

"Thirty years of trying to use government to stop abortion, preserve opposite-sex marriage, improve television and movie content and transform culture into the conservative evangelical image has failed. The question now becomes: Should conservative Christians redouble their efforts, contributing more millions to radio and TV preachers and activists, or would they be wise to try something else?

I opt for trying something else.

Too many conservative evangelicals have put too much faith in the power of government to transform culture. The futility inherent in such misplaced faith can be demonstrated by asking these activists a simple question: Does the secular left, when it holds power, persuade conservatives to live by their standards? Of course they do not. Why, then, would conservative evangelicals expect people who do not share their worldview and view of God to accept their beliefs when they control government?"

"If results are what conservative evangelicals want, they already have a model. It is contained in the life and commands of Jesus of Nazareth. Suppose millions of conservative evangelicals engaged in an old and proven type of radical behavior. Suppose they followed the admonition of Jesus to "love your enemies, pray for those who persecute you, feed the hungry, clothe the naked, visit those in prison and care for widows and orphans," not as ends, as so many liberals do by using government, but as a means of demonstrating God's love for the whole person in order that people might seek Him?"

If you're going to keep basing your politics on the religious right, as Gingrich has done, then your party will never get it right. It's time to try something truly revolutionary. Render unto Caesar and act like Christians.

Posted by: agolembe | November 8, 2008 2:41 PM | Report abuse

Forget this. Americans will never elect a man who divorced his wife on her deathbed.

Posted by: clarkw | November 8, 2008 2:45 PM | Report abuse

BTW, whatever happend to my favorite, Aspergirl? Why isn't she here celebrating the Republican route?

What? Oh. Nevermind.

Posted by: agolembe | November 8, 2008 2:48 PM | Report abuse

Why not a dream ticket of Gingrich (POTUS) Palin (VP) Gramm (Treasury) and Rumsfield (Defense) maybe throw in David Duke at (HUD) the TRUE conservative dream ticket!

Posted by: misewicz | November 8, 2008 3:09 PM | Report abuse

Why not Tom DeLay? He has nowhere near the intelligence and ethical principles of Newt and therefore seems much more in line with the long-held trend of the Republican Party.

If they can stay out of jail -- a DeLay/Palin ticket will ignite the base and lead to an overwhelming landslide for the Obama re-election bid. Let's not wimp around with an intellectual --- come on right-wing true American dimwits -- go for it!!!

Joe the Plumber deserves nothing less in 2012 than two standard bearers who exemplify the nasty, narrowing worldview that made Novak and company so successful.

And, you'll make George W. so proud.

Posted by: gandalfthegrey | November 8, 2008 3:19 PM | Report abuse

I think your quote before 40 years was optimistic.

Posted by: Billy1932 | November 8, 2008 3:19 PM | Report abuse

if this is the best that novak can come up with, he should return to retirement. of all of the ill-perceived suggestions for the next gop presidential candidate, this gingrich is the absolute worst. he and tom delay began, and bush finished, the meanest, lowest, nastiest form of governing this nation has ever seen. for 14 years that group did nothing but step all over the little people while helping big business and the rich to run amok and drive the country into moral and financial bankruptcy, creating the widest gap between the rich and the poor this country has seen in more than a century. that group had more to do with losing the white house and congress to the democrats than anyone else. novak wants to continue the same old hate-filled gop politics. is he secretly trying to bring the party down to his level and out the window?

Posted by: rapswork | November 8, 2008 3:21 PM | Report abuse

Republican Party of Aparthied. As your holy warrior leader said, forward republicans to the "Ash Heap of History". What a bunch of mickey mouse, looney tunes leaders.

...My apologies to the real artist behind mickey and the looney tunes cartoons, to be compared to Republicans is truly a disgrace, sorry...

Posted by: tniederberger | November 8, 2008 3:21 PM | Report abuse

Newt Gingrich??? You have got to be kidding. Gingrich is a bloated, incoherent, immoral, self serving bag of wind. Just listen to his rhetoric; he's an idiot. His contract on America was a joke, and his ethical lapses forced him to resign from Congress. Novak, please retire.

Posted by: castillomark | November 8, 2008 3:25 PM | Report abuse

Oh yes, run Newt! Please, please, please.

Posted by: BobsNotYourUncle | November 8, 2008 3:26 PM | Report abuse

No way, It has to be Palin in 2012. I enjoyed her candidacy so much this time. Of course, next time, I won't have the fun of seeing the conservatives who salivated when she first turned up disavow what they initially said. I bet by 2012 she will know who is in NAFTA-maybe even what NAFTA is and have read a newspaper at least twice.

Posted by: AndrearKline | November 8, 2008 3:43 PM | Report abuse

Hey, Novak!
Thanks for kicking off the 2012 presidential campaign four years early. Why don't you and your fellow journalists do all of us favor, go back to college and take a course in journalistic ethics. Oh, wait, journalism, ethics, that is an oxymoron.

Posted by: mhodgkin | November 8, 2008 3:44 PM | Report abuse

Joe the Plumber would have a better chance than Newtie.

Posted by: mongolovesheriff | November 8, 2008 3:45 PM | Report abuse


The party of family values runs a candidate who fools around -- for years -- on his dying wife.

Man, the Right truly has no respect for its sheep, I mean, flock, to believe that they'd be that gullible.


Posted by: DickeyFuller | November 8, 2008 3:57 PM | Report abuse

The republicn party is doomed for the rest of the 21st century.

Posted by: truth1 | November 8, 2008 3:59 PM | Report abuse

right, novak. just what the country would need, "mad as hell," Newt. how about a new group of educated and emotionally mature Republicans, instead of these Bush era mess-ups.

Posted by: twin_pin | November 8, 2008 4:07 PM | Report abuse

It has, for many years, been my suspicion that Novak is mentally defective. This present suggestion, that Gingrich could be president in 2012, suggests that he is utterly beyond either help or defense. Dear Robert, you pathetic throwback, have you learned nothing from the past week?

Posted by: stadtbear | November 8, 2008 4:09 PM | Report abuse

My god! Has the Republican party really gotten this desperate? On second thought, the party of losers would be best served by one of the biggest losers of all time. Go for it, gop.

Posted by: nymec | November 8, 2008 4:11 PM | Report abuse

Novak scores again! From the errant pedestrian to the "sub-prime" to the ridiculous. Rooting for Gingrich & Co. is like rooting for the disease.

Posted by: jtmcphee0214 | November 8, 2008 4:17 PM | Report abuse

Didn't Gingrich, the "family values" serial adulterer, have an ethics problem?

Wasn't he the first Speaker in the history of the House to be reprimanded and fined ($300,000) by the House?

Of course, knowing that Gingrich is a crook is probably what attracts Novak to him.

Posted by: pali2500 | November 8, 2008 4:20 PM | Report abuse

Gingrich, like the Clintons, is just so Second Millenium, don't you think? The reason Hillary didn't get the Dems nod was because no one wanted to re-fight the Old Boomer Battles. Palin probably isn't your best choice, but Newt hit his peak in 1994 and has gone downhill ever since. Keep trying. There must be someone.

Posted by: gibsonpolk | November 8, 2008 4:24 PM | Report abuse


Posted by: pbup | November 8, 2008 4:27 PM | Report abuse

Gingrich is a dinosaur. Hell, why not Novak for GOP nominee in 2012. McCain has proven that 70 is no barrier. Novak's conservative credentials are impeccable.

Posted by: mnjam | November 8, 2008 4:29 PM | Report abuse

Yes bring on the slimy Newt or the GOP's Grinch. The Repuglican party will lose even quicker with Newty as its nominee.

Posted by: sperrico | November 8, 2008 4:43 PM | Report abuse

As I believe James Carville said when Gingrich discussed running in 96: "I'd pay his filing fee!"

Posted by: Ricky123 | November 8, 2008 4:45 PM | Report abuse

Gingrich is so 20th century

Posted by: kirsch59 | November 8, 2008 4:49 PM | Report abuse

Please, do bring on Mr. Peanut in 2012. Another 70-yr-old white male republican neo-fanatic. ... When did the Republican party become so delusional???
Take it from me, Novak, after Obama's 2 terms, Gingrich will guarantee 16 consecutive years of Democratics in the White House.

Now, about that issue of treason ... any other covert agents you want to out in your column before you forget their names?

Posted by: davequ | November 8, 2008 4:51 PM | Report abuse

It was difficult to read the shallow, hateful comments to this article. I am a proud Republican, but I disagree completely with Robert Novak's column. I do not, however, find it necessary to insult him or Newt Gingrich. Whatever happened to civility? The Republican party will emerge just fine, but I think the Democratic party has shown its ugliness in the most despicable way. Disagreement on the merits of an issue and arguing for your position is true American politics. The Dems don't seem to understand this.

Posted by: mavcochran | November 8, 2008 5:00 PM | Report abuse

If there is anything that more clearly demonstrates the bankruptcy of GOP ideas and talent, it's the glimmer of an idea that Newt Gingrich should be the GOP candidate in 2012, or ever. But, go ahead, select him; it's no different that if Sarah Palin is at the top of the ticket, except she's easier on the eyes.

To borrow a phrase from Ronald Reagan, or was it G. W. Bush, "bring 'em on."

Gingrich is nothing but a polemicist, who believes his own rhetoric, a combination of the ideology of Ronald Reagan and Grover Norquist, which was refuted, at least to some degree, by the results of the 2008 elections.

Reagan's mantra that the government is the problem, based on a phony, exaggerated image of welfare queens, has been replaced with the recognition that our society is entitled to the benefits of a government that serves the public interest, not the interests of its wealthiest elements; that taxation, no matter how unpleasant, is not a "mugging," as Grover Norquist has described it, and that Gingrich's "contract with America" was in reality a contract ON America.

Gingrich will always be remembered as the jerk who shut down the government in a manhood contest with Bill Clinton, which Gingrich lost, and which cost the GOP House seats and a chance at the presidency in 1996.

Lest one forget the venality of Newt, just listen to a tape of him with Sean Hannity, in 2005, ranting about out of control judges during the imbroglio over the tragedy of Terri Schiavo.

What a picnic that would be for the Dems!!!!

Posted by: bfieldk | November 8, 2008 5:06 PM | Report abuse

Clearly you have learned nothing...
Bring him on...ha!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: Hernandezwood | November 8, 2008 5:11 PM | Report abuse

It doesn't matter who the Republican nominee is. You have seen the last Republican president for some time. There is a ticking time bomb that will kill the Republican Party as it stands now, unless they take actions to move much more to the left. Every year 4.5 million Americans over age 55 will die between now and 2012. This group is a group that favored McCain by a 60-40 margin. They will be directly replaced by young voters who favor Obama by at least a 2-1 margin. Unless the Republicans get out of this quaintly conservative mode, they will become more and more a minority party.

Posted by: majorteddy | November 8, 2008 5:33 PM | Report abuse

Surely the second coming of the Republicans is at hand ! The best lack all conviction; the worst are are full of passionate intensity !

Yes, Newt can certainly lead the ignorant, intolerant lynch mobs of Redneckistan (Old Confederacy + depopulated western states) to another defeat.

It is time that we Republicans took back the party from from demagogues, recists and religious nuts.

Posted by: MJR3 | November 8, 2008 5:37 PM | Report abuse

Novak, (why do we still listen to Novak anyway given his track record.)

Really, Novak has completely ignored the ideological and demographic shifts the country has underwent. Red states aren't reliably red anymore (VA, NC, IN). Also, Is their anyone out there who remembers the Gingrich era in a glowing positive light? This would be analogous to Hillary's run this year. A popular with base but polarizing figure, who reminds people of the past.

In the painful 2004 democratic loss there was one bright spot. Barack Obama. Dems latched on to that hope. The best comparison for the GOP would be the rise of Palin the year of GOP loss, the problem there in is she clearly does not have he background knowledge and the McCain camp "hates" her. But after 4 years in the wilderness who knows what position she will be in. She may actually have learned to speak to people outside her base.

Posted by: case3 | November 8, 2008 5:38 PM | Report abuse

I think youth will be important for the Republicans. Like McCain, Gingrich is too old to run for president in 2012...and like Novak, his values are too much in question to be a viable candidate.

Posted by: halfowler | November 8, 2008 5:38 PM | Report abuse

WOW! That would really be a slam dunk for Obama. No wonder the Republican Brand is so lost.

Posted by: rbraun2000 | November 8, 2008 5:40 PM | Report abuse

Dynamism of Palin and now Gingrich..Is that all you can offer the voting populice? The Neo-con movement of "family values" died during the corruption of the Republican congress. There was talk but no walk.
Bob you are showing your age as McCain did and it is not pretty. We tried it and it failed. Newt had his chance and blew it big time as did those around him did.
The Republican party has become the party of the toilet. Joe the plumber should fix it....Ha!

Posted by: beachbum1938 | November 8, 2008 5:40 PM | Report abuse

Well I have news for you Robert Novak and
the Republican Party as it was Newt Gingrich,George H W Bush,George W Bush,
Dead Eye Dickey Cheney and Mitch McConnell
that so soured me on the Republican Party
that I left it and became an Independent
Voter myself and I will be damned if you
will ever find me voting for that jerk
Newt Gingrich for President or even the
dogcatcher of Apache Junction Arizona.

I fully still maintain that the GOP needs
to get rid of all its neo con extremists
like Gingrich,Bush,Cheney and McConnell
and run more great new people like Alaska
Gov Sarah Palin for President in 2012 instead of old pathetic has beens like
Newt Gingrich, Mitt Romney,Huckabee,Rudy
and John McCain or the Repulican Party
will definitely cease to exist and all the
more so when a worn out old has been like
John McCain cannot beat a ridiculous total
inexperienced and unqualified punk like
fake Messiah Barack "The Wealth Spreader"
Hussein Obama and old gaffer sneering loud
mouth know it all jerk Joe Biden..So GOP
take the hint here or cease to exist!

Posted by: claudinelong | November 8, 2008 5:47 PM | Report abuse

Stunning!!!! -- the biggest one DAY stock market plummet in post-election history, has now turned into the biggest one WEEK stock market plummet in post-election history. Never in history have we found out so soon that we elected the wrong person.

But don't worry, only 1533 days until we can swear in Obama's replacement as the 45th President of the United States of America. Let the count down begin!

Soon to be seen on bumper stickers everywhere...


Posted by: JPVanderbilt | November 8, 2008 5:49 PM | Report abuse

WOW! Maybe you can be his VP!

Gingrich/Novak, now there's a team for the ages...

Sounds like the three witches making up a potent brew..."eye of Newt and eyebrow hair of Novak..."

PLEASE, Newt, RUN! McCain needs someone qualified to take the perrennial loser Bob Dole stigma off his back.

Posted by: JEP7 | November 8, 2008 5:52 PM | Report abuse

Greengrinch as Moses?

Moses committed genocide, lots and lots of it.

We don't need another Moses.

Posted by: lichtme | November 8, 2008 5:55 PM | Report abuse

Republicans must be out of their minds for considering Gingrich in 2012. I guess they're aiming for permanent minority status.

Posted by: smc91 | November 8, 2008 6:04 PM | Report abuse

Gingrich/Palin '12!

This suggestion was paid for by the Committee to reelect President Obama.

Posted by: light_bearer | November 8, 2008 6:05 PM | Report abuse

I don't think ol'Newt will be available next time. He will be too busy erecting his next affair, losing some of that weight again,
coming up with more moving adjectives &
smug expressions. I like the way he
lectures everyone on morals.
Gee, guess he's just not a good choice. Again. How can these guys appear in public w/o dying of total shame & embarrassment?

Posted by: swofwords39 | November 8, 2008 6:05 PM | Report abuse

Does Newt know that Australia is a continent and a country? If so, he can run for President. It seems that the GOP's standard for Presidential nominee are pretty low.

Posted by: cpatwork | November 8, 2008 6:32 PM | Report abuse

For the good of the country and the rest of the world, I hope Barrack does a fantastic job. Gingrich is no longer relevant ;) However, the Republican Party is far from done. Remember just a few short years ago, Karl Rove and his minions had the Democrats down for the count.

Posted by: rjclay | November 8, 2008 6:51 PM | Report abuse

Gingo is Yesterday's Man. His time is Over. You have to find somebody new.

Posted by: RamuR | November 8, 2008 7:03 PM | Report abuse

When you suggest Gingrich you are suggesting that the GOP should hang onto an uncompromising past that thinks only in terms of imposing its view on the world.

Its economics and foreign policies have failed miserably. If the GOP is going to find a dynamic leader then one should wait until he shows his face.

Posted by: robertjames1 | November 8, 2008 7:21 PM | Report abuse

Newt IS Sarah Palin - in drag, of course. hadn't anyone noticed? They're both bankrupt - assuming, of course, that there really are two people.

Posted by: mmery | November 8, 2008 7:33 PM | Report abuse

Palin v. Gingrich? Can't we just forget them both? Please god, make it happen.

Posted by: garry2 | November 8, 2008 7:38 PM | Report abuse

A big, fat, sneering, obnoxious tub of lard in 2012?

Here! Here!

Posted by: julian2 | November 8, 2008 8:01 PM | Report abuse

republicans need to do some bactracking, but way past gingrich and his 'revolution' all the way back to roosevelt.

Posted by: praxitas | November 8, 2008 8:15 PM | Report abuse

Other than the fact that he'll possibly be too old, I think he would do remarkably well. McCain came close, remember. This wasn't a genuine landslide, but a couple of points separating the winner from the loser. And before the financial meltdown, McCain was ascendant, dragging Palin, countless gaffs, and 3 questionable debate performances. Newt is more cerebral, and makes cogent arguments . I don't see past adultery or some weird book deal shenanigans as being deal breakers.

Posted by: scissorpaws | November 8, 2008 8:16 PM | Report abuse

Newt, McCain and Palin have 5 times the brains and character needed to run this country. Obama,Pilosi and obiden are the worst picks in history. AND u will see.....

Posted by: wildnbig | November 8, 2008 8:16 PM | Report abuse

Quite clearly Mr. Novak has been asked by the RNC (or perhaps Gingrich himself) to run this up the flagpole. For all of the glaringly obvious reasons (hypocrisy, ethical lapses, lack of charisma, etc.), the notion of Gingrich as a viable candidate for the Presidency is laughable. Then again, so is today's Republican party. If Republicans actually back this idea, they are in even worse shape than most of us thought.

Posted by: pejesq | November 8, 2008 8:24 PM | Report abuse

Newt, McCain and Palin have 5 times the brains and character needed to run this country..........

That maybe so..but they did not use that 5 times more capacity..did they..?
Must have been all that Koolaide!!

Fei Hu

Posted by: Fei_Hu | November 8, 2008 8:46 PM | Report abuse

Bizarre logic, if you can even call it that. A Gingrich campaign would have to either be "the old Gingrich" or a new one. If the former, well, imagine all the news analyses juxtaposing his statements about character during the Clinton impeachment trial with his own adultery admissions. Imagine the statements about the government not really being necessary when he moved to close it down. And on and on and on.
If, on the other hand, we are supposed to think of a "New Gingrich," well, what would that be? Non partisan, perhaps, and dedicated to a centrist approach? Why not start with someone with no name recognition and build them up rather than having to first undo the existing image?

Posted by: jhherring | November 8, 2008 8:54 PM | Report abuse

Novak is pulling your chain, folks. He is framing the debate by setting your expections so low that any other republican candidate looks good...

You've allowed yourself to be Novaked if you find yourself, in 2012, thinking, wow, this republican nominee looks like a real good pick compared to Newt...

Posted by: Clyde4 | November 8, 2008 9:16 PM | Report abuse

Gingrich would be among the best choices the Repubs could make. He is smart, communicates well and can associate himself with the economics of the 1990's without the Bush baggage. He has his own baggage, but I wouldn't underestimate him.

Of course, the thought that Newt, and his divorces, might be the best his party can deliver, speaks to how deep the Republican troubles are.

Posted by: zcezcest1 | November 8, 2008 9:31 PM | Report abuse

You have to be joking!

Posted by: MsMarTampa | November 8, 2008 9:50 PM | Report abuse

You must be kidding! Newt Gingrich is smart but he is a hypocrite. Republicans, you need to look elsewhere for new ideas and younger blood -- how about Bobby Jindal? You are stale and your ideology is turning off everyone but your far right Republican evangelical base. Get back to the basics and cut out the culture wars -- we're all sick of it!!

Posted by: sharronkm | November 8, 2008 10:00 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Novak,

I am a Republican.

I am socially and fiscally very conservative.

Gingrich is a horse's ass.

He talks w-a-y too much. He never saw a microphone he didn't like. It is no coincidence that his successor, Hastert, smartly shunned the microphone and limelight.

Gingrich absolutely lost me when he tried to pin the Susan Smith tragedy (S.C. woman who drowned her kids) on the Democrats.

Lets take back the White House in 2012 but p-l-e-a-s-e ...... NOT GINGRICH!

Posted by: furtdw | November 8, 2008 10:02 PM | Report abuse

You destroyed our country and then think it didn't mean anything when we took it back? How about we forget the entire GOP for the next 100 years?

Posted by: AverageJane | November 8, 2008 10:31 PM | Report abuse

Wow. You really don't get it! You don't know why you lost.

Posted by: PA_DC | November 8, 2008 10:35 PM | Report abuse

The Economist said it: the Republican Party has fallen victim to Southern-fried moralism. Newt helped administer the drug.

Newt's full of ideas, but he's also very full of himself. Like Bill Clinton, he's sure he's the smartest guy in the room, and if you don't believe him, he'll talk at you till you do.

The legacy of his overhyped revolution: greater partisanship, increased mistrust, marginalization of GOP moderates. In the Senate, the definition of "Republican moderate" is going to be "woman representing Maine."

The real problem for conservativism is that it can't get 40% of the vote without selling its soul to people who are single-issue fanatics. Meanwhile the party of Abraham Lincoln has NOT ONE African-American in the House or the Senate.

Newt's greatest gift to the party would be to shut the hell up, stay the hell away from politics, and let someone else hog the mike for a while.

One thing Newt did get right (from his website, where he's still crowing about having been Speaker): "The Republican party's struggling to get beyond incompetence."

Posted by: NorwegianBlue | November 8, 2008 10:52 PM | Report abuse

Dear Mr. Novak, bill3 and the rest of the detritus left over from the election!
Tell you what, guys, and I'm serious here . . .
You either get on the train now or risk being left behind at the station holding a carpet bag in one hand and a one-way ticket to Palookaville in the other while mumbling to yourselves (in a tone reminiscent of Brando in A Street Car Named Desire), "We could'a been contenders if we would'a gotten more racists, ignoramouses, bigots, and violence-prone sociopaths to the polls!"

Since I'm feeling a bit charitable this evening, I thought I'd give you and other Beaut Gangrape, Sub-Standard Sarah and Old Pathetic Warhorse McCain supporters some tips for the next general election. (Since 46% of "us" voted for your dynamic duo, all you need is a few more percentage points to put the Artic Ice Queen or Mr. Contract on America on top in 2012):
Tip Numero-one-o: Get yourself some pitchfork, tar & feather-weilding maniacs from your list of "true Americans", place them in front of every polling place in America and have them shout, "Kill him!" whenever a student, a black or any "suspicious" looking character gets in line to vote. This ought to get you at least 3 percentage points more votes as obvious Obama supporters run from the scene screaming, in fear of their lives.
Tip numbero two-o: Find that Diebold voting machine mogul guy, give him some cash out of Palin's clothing allowance and have him hire a gazillion computer programmers to alter all the voting machines to register "Sarah Palin" or "Beaut Gangrape" no matter which button is pushed. This tactic should get you at least another 3 percentage points.
Then . . . viola! You're at 52%!
Am I a genius or what, Mr. Novak? How about it, bill3?
As for me, I think I'll climb aboard the Obama Bullet Train and leave the stinking B & O freight "loco"motive to you guys.

Posted by: hyjanks | November 8, 2008 10:53 PM | Report abuse

Gingrich/Palin...those two deserve each other...another victory for Obama...bring it on! On second thought, leave her off, I can't stand to listen to her talk, wink, or lie!

Posted by: alleycattoo2000 | November 8, 2008 10:55 PM | Report abuse



FOX - Take your pick — I no longer watch Bill O’Reilly — not because I believe he share’s Obama’s world view, but because he pandered to Obama and showed no courage at all. He also allowed Carl Cameron to smear Palin yesterdaay — and commended him. Fox has gone from FAIR AND BALANCED, TO DULL AND BORING — EXCEPT FOR ON THE RECORD, WITH GRETA AND SEAN HANNITY’S APPEARANCES.

Posted by: ladya2004 | November 8, 2008 11:28 PM | Report abuse

Gingrich/Palin in 2012! Or if you prefer, Palin/Gingrich! Run 'em in 2016 and 2020 as well! The Democrats, and the American People, couldn't be happier! Follow those lemmings right over the cliff, Republicans: you've earned it!

Posted by: thrh | November 8, 2008 11:40 PM | Report abuse

"He is a far better choice than Palin! 1,000,000,000,000 times better.

Posted by: rcc_2000 | November 7, 2008 2:08 PM "

So is Vlad the Impaler!

Posted by: thrh | November 8, 2008 11:45 PM | Report abuse

The Country needs Novak, Gingrich and Palin, if only to remind us how stupid and vile the Republicans are.

Posted by: thrh | November 8, 2008 11:47 PM | Report abuse

Good to see the Republicans are preparing to rerun the 1964 election, and are already coalescing around their Goldwater. This may help them lock down Georgia, along with Utah, Wyoming, Idaho and... well, that's probably it.

Posted by: RussPiekarski | November 9, 2008 7:52 AM | Report abuse

Yes. Keep it up Bob. Newt would be the one to keep you and the rest of the republican wingnuts in the wilderness for decades

Posted by: polaris11 | November 9, 2008 8:06 AM | Report abuse

Gee, didn't Newt boff his mistress on his desk in his Speaker office as he was trying to impeach Bill Clinton over the Monica Lewinsky affair? Didn't this and other abuses lead to his leaving office? That must be the boundless energy Novac refers to. This is right up there with Novac's idea to out Valerie Plame as a CIA agent. Why are he and George Will allowed to practice journalism after their illegal involvement in political events (Will used Carter's stolen debate prep book to coach Reagan in the debate that turned the 1980 election)? This is the dawn of a new day, let's start by removing and ignoring Novac, Will, Gingrich and the others who so badly damaged the nation. The Bushes? Voluntary exile to some South American pampas would best serve the nation's interests. My favorite sight on election night 2008? The spontaneous crowd cheering outside the gates of the White House.

Posted by: jonthes | November 9, 2008 10:29 AM | Report abuse

I probably shouldn't say this ( since I support Obama ), but if the Republicans are really considering Gingrich or any ticket with Palin, they are only showing their complete lack of knowledge, as to why they lost.

Guys... your positions are no longer popular. And if you choose someone only you like - you will lose. Your version of leadership is not ours.

From the Obama-supporter standpoint, I think, the best ticket for you guys would be Palin-Quayle or Palin-Cheney.

Posted by: wolfi101 | November 9, 2008 10:51 AM | Report abuse

Hey genius, try this: google 'Newt Gingrich' and "I never slept with her" and see what happens.

Posted by: willdamon | November 9, 2008 1:01 PM | Report abuse

Oh, we really appreciate all the concern from the Marxist-Leninist folks, we really do. But, why don't you mind your own business? Vladimir Obama hasn't even gotten into office and his minions are already talking about enacting executive orders which exceed their mandate, like on stem-cell research and off-shore drilling. Keep it up. Gingrich and Palin will skip into office in 2012 arm in arm.

Posted by: contracowboy | November 9, 2008 5:23 PM | Report abuse

I dont see anyway Gingrich wins a presidential race.

Look at recent history. Congressmen dont win elections; governors do. Before Obama, Nixon was the last president who was first a congressman. Both Nixon and Obama won during war-time running against extremely unpopular presidents (Obama ran his campaign against President Bush, not Sen. McCain.)

Gingrich has the age old problem of being in politics too long. He has too many votes that can be used against him.

Opponents will drudge up and distort Gingrich's House votes to say he hates the poor, the rich, babies, the sick, old people, the middle class, members of every race and of course red-heads. He will be responsible for every aspect of every bill passed while he was Speaker.

Of course his "Wouldn't it be nice if the South had won the Civil War" trilogy cant be ignored.

He will easily be portrayed as a polarizing, partisan figure. The 1995 Federal Government Shutdown and the memory of the Clinton impeachment wont help him avoid this image.

Compare this to the "New" politics of Pres. Elect Obama. Obama doesnt actually have to govern with a new type of poltics. Recall he old political axiom, "Perception is reality." When faced with the choice of a bipartisan uniter and a partisan divider, Americans will pick the former everytime.

Newt Gingrich is one of the smartest men of his generation. He also will never be president.

Posted by: kdougl3 | November 9, 2008 5:48 PM | Report abuse

Newt Gingrich would keep me away from the Republican party another election, just as McCain/Palin did this time. I am impressed with Jindal so far and expect to see him on the national stage one day. He does not cause me to cringe and gag at least.

Posted by: lewes17266 | November 10, 2008 5:39 AM | Report abuse

I think you might have a better shot if you get someone from Craig's list.

Posted by: Robert45 | November 10, 2008 6:50 AM | Report abuse

What about Palin in 2012? Wasn't she supposed to be the new face and the savior of the GOP? Ronald Reagan Jr. said in glowing terms that he saw his father reborn when she gave her convention speech. It could be fun to see the Newt and the Barracuda go at it for the 2012 nomination.

As for the analysis of 2008, I would say that Obama will move on to spreading the wealth and the Republicans will move on to spreading the blame. However, I think your assessment is way off. McCain's campaign did not go so badly because it deviated from the "True Way" (in any case, I think Bush/Rove is really the deviation). It failed miserably because it was schizophrenic at its core. The GOP picked a centrist, moderate "Maverick" because it rationally assessed its chances in 2008 and realized that a Bush/Rove type pick had no chance of winning. But then it went totally schizo and forced him to select as his running mate a Bush/Rove retread (Sarah Barracuda, a.k.a., Caribou Barbie) and focused the substance of the campaign on reigniting the culture wars so as to appeal to the Base (al Quaeda). McCain really couldn't be expected to campaign effectively if he was forced to turn his back on his true views. So, if the GOP wanted to stay true to its Bush/Rovian self (even though realizing that it had no chance to win this year), they should not have chosen McCain. Don't blame him. In any case, I believe that appealling to the base was a losing strategy (even if the right candidate had been chosen), as it was obviously going to turn off moderates and independents. Wasn't that entirely clear. Moreover, I really doubt it will be more successful 4 years from now, but if the GOP wants to start emulating the old Democratic strategy of sticking to a losing game plane, that is quite alright by me.

Posted by: marecek | November 10, 2008 7:46 AM | Report abuse

As a native Georgian (the stste not the country), i remember the antics of Mr. Gingrich and his "Contract On America"
I believe "Newton" is the reason partisan politics is what it is today.
Maybe he can get Caribou Barbie to run with him!
Personally, I wouldn't vote for Mr. Gingrich if he were running for dog catcher!

Posted by: tmcn2 | November 10, 2008 8:22 AM | Report abuse

Kinda interesting that Novak brought up the Grinch..!!

IT takes all the wind out of Sarah Palin saying she will be back to run for President in 2012 by presenting a far more controversial figure ... the Grinch.

It is funny too a few weeks ago. Think it was Meet the Press, where the Grinch was aspousing Progressive or Liberal views surprising Richard Reich.

The Grinch is a good name for THE GRINCH

Fei Hu

Posted by: Fei_Hu | November 10, 2008 8:44 AM | Report abuse

Oh good God this proves beyond all doubt
that it is long pass time for looney toons
Robert Novak to retire and never be seen
or heard from again,if Novak is stupid
enough to think Goofy Newt Gingrich should
be the GOP Presidential Nominee in 2012!
So can Novak and confused thinking get any
worse this time one? Gingrich Is A Walking
Disaster Looking For A Place To Happen!

Posted by: Jan1977 | November 10, 2008 10:30 AM | Report abuse

Delay is most memorable as the person who committed the Republican party to the personal destruction of the Clintons and then subjected the country to six year of endless investigations, hearings, special prosecutors and impeachment proceedings.
At the time, Bin Laden was preparing to attack the US but that was considered a "wag the dog" kind of problem for Delay and the Republicans, what was really important was Monicas Blue Dress!
In the end, after of millions of dollars, thousands of man hours and hundreds of accusations, the only thing that stuck to Dollar Bill Clinton was a lie told in a civil deposition regarding fellatio.
and he decided to impeach him anyway...until his popularity rebounded at which point they gave up the entire process.
Four years later, he had his hand in the swift boat fiasco, another tale told by a fool, full of wind and fury but signifying nothing.
Oh yes, by all means let him run. Let the backwards looking among us idolize him, lionize him, deify him as they did with Saint Ronald.
And then let him explain to us why, exactly, he got thrown out of the speakers chair for ethical failings.
Oh by all mean, please do.
Hope your feeling better Bob.

Posted by: dijetlo | November 10, 2008 10:53 AM | Report abuse

Newt is certainly in the vein of ruthless and partisan Republican, the Bush mold. But may be too smart. The more modern version is incurious Sarah Palin.
I don't think we've seen the end of Palin. Judging from her willingness to lie and continue lying during the campaign, I don't think there is a limit to her deceit and planning. Her Machiavellian quotient must be as high as Karl Rove. Consider the Rasmussen poll at the end of October had Stevens trailing Anchorage Mayor Mark Begich (D) by eight points and consider the small percentage of voters, even with Palin running. I would say that a deal is on to get Palin that Senate seat, giving her more exposure there for the next presidential campaign run.

Posted by: hoovjim | November 10, 2008 12:06 PM | Report abuse

That would be insane. Conservatives and Liberals alike have an an interest in there being two strong, vibrant political parties in this country. Democracy thrives on give and take. The Republicans were soundly thumped this year in large part because they trotted out a candidate that is a relic of a bygone era (the 60's), obsessed with refighting the wars of the past. The Democrats won because their guy represents the future.

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and thinking the result will change. Trotting out Gingrich, himself a relic of a bygone era (the 90's), would doom the Republicans to yet another ignonimous defeat. The new Republican motto needs to be: No More Boomers.

Think Bobby Jindal people.

Posted by: Randall2 | November 10, 2008 12:57 PM | Report abuse

I have never voted for a Democrat for president and my first election was 1980. I assure you I will not vote for Newt Gringrich for president. He is divisive, arrogant, and pompous. I have never supported supported him, even at his peak in the 1990s. Democrats just won overwhelmingly on a mantra of change and to think that anyone would see this relic of the past as any sort of savior is outrageous. I don't know who that leader is but the GOP has someone out there who can steer a true center-right winning ideology.

Posted by: centeright | November 10, 2008 2:05 PM | Report abuse

"Whatever happened to civility? The Republican party will emerge just fine, but I think the Democratic party has shown its ugliness in the most despicable way."

Posted by: mavcochran | November 8, 2008 5:00 PM

civility? why don't you ask those three little old bomb-throwers: Atwater, Gingrich, and Rove?

Posted by: mdrockjock | November 10, 2008 2:35 PM | Report abuse

The Republican Party just doesn't get it. To see their problem, one only needs to look at audience footage from their convention and rallies and then look at the latest census projections. If they can't draw anything other than the "Bubba" vote then they are finished as a political power.

Posted by: lou1 | November 10, 2008 4:01 PM | Report abuse

The right wing of the GOP dragged McCain's campaign right down into the mud with their demands and outright threats to defect or stay home. Now they blame his loss on being "too moderate". Cut me a break! It is the vindictive tone of social conservatives and neocons that has poisoned the political dialog in the country and cost the GOP their solid majorities. Getting louder and nastier is only going to delay the inevitable pendulum swing even longer.

Posted by: MarcMyWords | November 11, 2008 8:48 PM | Report abuse

contracowboy said:

Oh, we really appreciate all the concern from the Marxist-Leninist folks, we really do.
You tell 'em cowboy! The GOP should nominate you as their leader!

Posted by: MarcMyWords | November 11, 2008 8:56 PM | Report abuse

Newt's tendency to spout futurisms will keep him out of the White House.

Posted by: Puller58 | November 12, 2008 6:43 PM | Report abuse

Is this scumbag still writing??
This Jews is extremely embarrassed by the existence of such co-religionists.

Posted by: VMR1 | November 13, 2008 11:54 AM | Report abuse

Lest we forget that "those who betray the trust by exposing the names of our sources" are "the most insidious of traitors." One of the few things George Sr. ever said that I wholly agree with.

Bob, Karl, Dick, and George Jr. have brought the term insidious traitor to the very top of Republican circles. Proof that (false) patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel.

Newt had better watch out or he might hurt his reputation by getting too close to these guys.

Posted by: Roger2 | November 13, 2008 4:41 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company