Tuesday’s political round-up

July 24, 2007

Today’s installment of campaign-related news items that wouldn’t generate a post of their own, but may be of interest to political observers:

* Newt Gingrich, like most Republicans, apparently isn’t impressed with the current field of GOP presidential candidates. He described the field as “pathetic,” and said those in the race are “pygmies.” He also hinted that he’s still eyeing the race: “If, in mid-October, it’s quite clear that one or more of the current candidates is strong enough to be a serious alternative to a Clinton-Obama ticket, you don’t need me to run,” the former House Speaker said at a breakfast sponsored by the American Spectator. “If it becomes patently obvious, as the morning paper points out, that the Democrats have raised a hundred million more than the Republicans, and at some point people decide we are going to get Hillary unless there’s a radical change, then there’s space for a candidate,” he added. “So you’ll know by mid-October one of those two futures is real.”

* Rudy Giuliani continues to believe that unless Democrats use the phrase “Islamic terrorism,” they don’t meet his personal standard for credibility. Is it me or does this guy sound more and more ridiculous with each passing day?

* Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee “warned Iowans on Monday that if they vote for national front-runners in the Aug. 11 Ames straw poll, it might lead some presidential candidates to skip Iowa in the next election,” the Des Moines Register reports. “Huckabee, who has said he is depending on the Republican Party of Iowa’s fundraiser to vault him into the top tier of candidates, said Iowans should not copy the national polls.”

* Odd report from the WaPo: “The campaign of the late congressman Charlie Norwood (R-GA) treated his supporters to a $63,000 thank-you weekend at a golf resort two months after he died — the same day that the candidate endorsed by Norwood’s family held a fundraiser at the same resort, reports and interviews show.” Hmm.

* And former Virginia Gov. Mark Warner (D) has reportedly begun talking with supporters about re-entering politics and will announce his intentions in September, shortly after Sen. John W. Warner (R-Va.) makes public whether he will run for reelection. If Sen. Warner announces his retirement, Mark Warner will probably run to replace him. If the senator runs for another term, the former governor would run for his old job again in 2009 (Virginia is the only state in the country that prohibits governors from seeking re-election, but they can serve non-consecutive terms.)

“The terrorists are at war with us — whether or not Democrats in Washington and on the campaign trail choose to acknowledge it — and we must stay on offense to prevail.” –Rudolf Hess Giuliani

Rupaul sure is offensive. He has engineered his own campaign of terroristic psychological attacks upon the American People — to exploit and manipulate fear and prolong the psychological trauma upon the American Psyche caused by 9/11. What a disgrace.

  • * Rudy Giuliani continues to….

    Let’s coin the phrase, oh great and exhalted CB. Let’s get it out there right now—today—and start exploiting it:

    RUDYISM: defined as the only cognitive activity known to humans, feral cats, jellyfish, prairie dogs, and rural roadkill that can make George W. Bush appear competent….

  • Raising the quality of the republican candidates by adding Newt Gingrich is like making a funeral more solemn by adding some clowns.

  • “If, in mid-October, it’s quite clear that one or more of the current candidates is strong enough to be a serious alternative to a Clinton-Obama ticket, you don’t need me to run,” the former House Speaker said at a breakfast sponsored by the American Spectator.

    This guy is pathetic- he thinks he’s talking himself up, but no one’s getting on the wagon. I can’t recall how many statements he’s let out, trying to create his own hype, over the past two months, but it’s probably been half-a-dozen. He’s two opaque to realize he’s the only one that sees the glitz.

  • Gee. A cynical person might wonder if Newt is lobbing grenades at his opponents now, before he declares, because he knows he’ll be fair game once he announces his candidacy.

    Not that this would make him a craven little coward or anything.

    they don’t meet his personal standard for credibility.

    NOTE TO DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATES:

    Ask Rud!3 for a list of what it takes to meet his standards for credibility and do the exact opposite.

    Why does this man think any sane person would want to meet his standard for credibility? Oh that’s right, he’s an egotestical, chest-thumping buffoon who labours under the delusion that everyone wants him to like them.

  • …some presidential candidates to skip Iowa in the next election…

    What an f’ing tragedy that would be, eh?

    They make it sound like Iowa’s main industry is catering to presidential primary campaigns, and little else. Like if candidates stop criss-crossing the cornfields, Iowans will lose their major source of income.

  • Who knew Giuliani had a standard for credibility? Can someone ask him if hiring criminals like Bernard Kerik would make a candidate more or less credible? And while you’re at it, ask Rudy if he thinks Saddam hid the WMDs in Iran. That ought to do wonders for his “credibility”.

  • I agree with Steve M. at #11. Newt Gingrich is a real threat– he has the theocon credentials to mobilize the bible-thumpers, and he’s connected enough with big business to appeal to that wing of the party, too. The advantage of the Republican field to date is the fact that all the major candidates would divide the two bases of the party. Gingrich would create no such division in the GOP. With the Repubs united, they could swamp us.

    How does Gingrich fare against Gore in a head-to-head? Just wondering . . .

  • “If it becomes patently obvious, as the morning paper points out, that the Democrats have raised a hundred million more than the Republicans, and at some point people decide we are going to get Hillary unless there’s a radical change, then there’s space for a candidate,”

    Implicit message: “I can’t be bothered to run for President, but I’m so awesome that if no one else can beat Obama or Hillary, then I’ll have to run, because of course I can beat them.” And then the mark is supposed to say: “Wow! This guy is so great, we’ve got to have him, so we can definitely beat them.” Only problem is, where is this groundswell of support? If I’ve heard of anything like that, it’s for Thompson.

    Caped Composer, Steve M.’s link and the CB line he quoted referred to Giuliani, not ot Gingrich. I don’t know how he’s doing against them in head-to-head matchups (can’t say I think he’s probably winning) but there’s a reason this power-hungry, ambitious, experienced, spotlight-loving narcissist who thinks he’s the smartest person in the world and only cares about himself isn’t running for president: he doesn’t captivate people, and the Republicans are looking for someone who can be successful running against Obama or Hillary. This stuff is a no-brainer- of course Gingrich migh win the Republican nomination if he ran, but there’s no push for him to run- because it would be a bad move, electorally, to run him, and nominating him would be a tactics-free move. The inane comment about Hillary not being able to win the so-called heartland on the other thread has nothing to so with anything, by the way, because all Hillary really has to be able to do is get the Democratic voters, and the Dems do not hate women, or Hillary- even with this myth that’s been created, they have enough brains to vote for her.

  • Gingrich is as likeable as having one’s Wisdom teeth removed.

    He’s like someone you avoid at a family reunion.

  • Gingrich would lower the average height of this collection of “pygmies” if he ran. Although, he’s got a stomach you could land a 737 on.

    He’s two opaque to realize he’s the only one that sees the glitz.
    Comment by Swan

    What do you mean by two? Do you mean three?

  • Are average Americans’ values really represented by a man who abandons his wife on her death-bed? I think not. If I was running against him, and was in a debate against him, I would not have a qualm or scruple against looking that guy right in the eye and bringing it up within the first few minutes, on whatever question I could tie it too. Americans really don’t deserve to be represented by a guy like that.

    • Comments are closed.