Seeing the Manchester Union Leader endorse Newt Gingrich for president I feel a pang of sympathy. It’s easy for me to imagine a situation in which Evan Bayh was being set up as the inevitable Democratic nominee and in which his competitors were all unqualified cranks and quacks. People in the progressive movement would be under enormous pressure not to endorse Bayh, who represents just about everything they hate about the Democratic Party. Progressive opinion leaders would tie themselves into pretzels in their effort to maintain some credibility with their loyal readers. The Union Leader knows that Newt Gingrich is a joke, but they can’t very well endorse Romney. And, so, Gingrich gets their nod.
About The Author
BooMan
Martin Longman a contributing editor at the Washington Monthly. He is also the founder of Booman Tribune and Progress Pond. He has a degree in philosophy from Western Michigan University.
29 Comments
Recent Posts
- Day 14: Louisiana Senator Approvingly Compares Trump to Stalin
- Day 13: Elon Musk Flexes His Muscles
- Day 12: While Elon Musk Takes Over, We Podcast With Driftglass and Blue Gal
- Day 11: Harm of Fascist Regime’s Foreign Aid Freeze Comes Into View
- Day 10: The Fascist Regime Blames a Plane Crash on Nonwhite People
You have to be careful of these symmetrical analogies, although they do help as a kind of thought-experiment to understand the situation of the GOP. But this is an almost unprecedented situation for republicans, and — keeping it real — it’s hard to conceive of anything equivalent with Democrats. The NY Times (isn’t that about as liberal as American newspapers get these days?) endorsing Dennis Kucinich over Evan Bayh? When Hell freezes over.
What this really shows is how fucked up the GOP is.
On the other hand, there is this:
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/189117-tea-party-nation-poll-52-percent-will-vote-f
or-romney-if-he-is-gop-nominee
On the third hand, it’s just a poll taken a year out …
I don’t see how this is “on the other hand.” If 52% of the tea party crowd says they’d vote Romney–only 52%–the GOPis f@#$%d.
Yeah, that would be true…if public opinion polls nearly a year before the election meant anything.
you’re right absolutely on how little they mean. but there are some real structural issues the GOP has that i can’t see a way around.
The fascinating thing watching Newt’s rising is that at first I think he was just the next guy standing in line to get the nod. And then he did what he does best and that’s grab the mic. Add to that the discovery of his role as a lobbyist and he needed to distract big time so he popped off this slew of twisted new ideas which the crowd has apparently been interested in.
For the first time I’m seeing the Rep respond to a leader who is suggesting proactive ideas. Now of course the ideas are whacked but it just shows that the base is tiring of a constant diet of no isms and Newt is tapping into that in a way that only he can do in this field.
It’ll now be interesting to see what the real leaders of the party do with Newt, and if Romney will take heed and start to get his hair messy.
Newspapers aren’t forced to endorse candidates, are they? Some don’t.
Exactly. And, though I guess this will make me look like an idiot to question something posited as obvious, but why can’t they endorse Romney, Booman?
Better yet, wouldn’t they have more credibility if they endorsed no one?
Nature abhors a vacuum – if they endorse nobody then someone else will fill that void and the next election cycle they will be the kingmaker. The paper would never allow for that to happen.
For the same reason progressives couldn’t turn around tomorrow and try to sell you Joe Lieberman as a good nominee. It’s about maintaining your ideological credentials.
And the Union Leader doesn’t have to endorse, but their endorsement has always been highly coveted, so that’s how they stay relevant.
I wonder how many Faux Noise/Beck fans would be able to tell you that the Union Leader is a conservative paper. My guess is that very few would. To them, any media but Faux is liberal. The Union Leader endorsement matters only to Versailles.
Well, and to some conservative voters in New Hampshire (which ultimately is far more significant than Versailles).
I know NH. I mean the nation as a whole.
Why can’t they endorse Willard?
Because, they know Willard best.
LOL
The asymmetry of course is that, on on the left, in our versions of the Union Leader, such as they are, the functional equivalent of Evan Bayh is the inevitable Democratic nominee, and all the other competitors are vastly more qualified than he.
Mittens is hated by the Republican base; the question has always been if the anti-Romney base would unite against him. They had a nominee in Perry and the polls showed their relief in that; but he was to much of an idiot to fake his way through the debates as George W. Bush managed to do. Now, in Gingrich they have a man who can fake his way through a debate, seem smart, and isn’t Mittens. Plus, he’s not Mormon.
I think Mitt is going all in Iowa because he’s recognized that if anyone can get a lift from Iowa it’s Gingrich and still play in New Hampshire for number two and then win in South Carolina and Florida’s tea party put them over the top.
Gingrich, without the money, right now has a possible path to the nomination that is every bit as likely as Romney.
But Newt, like Cain, was never serious. It was all part of a grifter grifting. Does Newt have any organization in Iowa? Is anyone outside the GOP thrilled with Newt being the nominee?
I have to admit that I LOL when I saw the Union Leader had endorsed Newt. Having lived in New Hampshire, I know what that means, and it cracks me up.
Not having lived in NH, I’d love it if you could elaborate.
the Union Leader are the true believers.
period.
there is no middle mush for them.
no point where they seem to be ‘ reasonable for reason’s sake’.
Love ’em or hate ’em, nobody can accuse them of flipping where the wind blows. they are hard-core right wing, but not ‘ I do it because the baby Jesus tells me’, right wing…
they are the LIVE FREE OR DIE right wing
and, they couldn’t even stomach writing the words for the endorsement of Willard. they would NEVER have done it.
The Union Leader endorsement is a significant game changer. When they endorsed John McCain four years ago, it made a significant difference in his being able to carry the state. He was second place in New Hampshire and ended a strong first. If Mittens messes around long enough and doesn’t get serious in Iowa and allows Gingrich to win, he’ll be unstoppable runaway train that will run right over Mittens. Gingrich is a contender.
Thanks. That’s helpful to have some context.
Out of curiosity, if Evan Bayh had become president instead of Obama, what would he have done differently?
Nothing, except kiss Orange Julius’ ass live on TV. And place Wellpoint advertising all over the WH.
Bayh is gone, but his big stash of campaign dollars lives on, along with his influence on the state, if not the national Democratic Party as well. FSM only knows what strings are being pulled behind the curtain.
Why does he still have influence in the state? He shit on Indiana Democrats in the way he left office. He’s never going to be President, or even VP.
As always, “follow the money.”
They all want a handout.
I know I keep repeating this, but why can’t they choose Huntsman? He’s extremely conservative, he’s not two-faced as Romney is, and he makes more sense than any of the other alternatives. He favors eliminating the capital gains tax, and referred to the EPA’s “reign of terror”; if he’s an Evan Bayh of the right, it’s stunning how far the right has gone.
Huntsman is part of the same ‘ cult’ that Willard is