22 thoughts on “Gingrich”

  1. Heh. Gingrich is interested in education, which of course, dovetails nicely with various space visions. Maybe Vice President Gingrich would work with Al Sharpton on that!
    .

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/post/gingrich-has-embraced-al-sharpton/2011/11/22/gIQA1yzUmN_blog.html

    [in 2009], Gingrich called into Sharpton’s TV show to wish him a happy birthday and shower him with praise. “I had such a great time going around America with you” to push education reform, Gingrich told Sharpton. “I will never forget it for the rest of my life. You were tremendous on those trips. . . . I watched you speak up with courage and with toughness on behalf of children in a way that all my life I will remember and I will honor you for the way you were willing to take on interests on behalf of children.”

  2. More seriously, I think Gingrich would be a great pick. If Trump picks Christie, the campaign will continue to be about “Mr. Trump”, whereas if Trump picks Gingrich, the campaign might be more about ideas.

    1. “If Trump picks Gingrich the campaign might be more about ideas.”

      That a good point. I tend think Trump campaign has been about ideas
      and I didn’t think Gingrich would be good VP, but I think you correct that there is higher chance the campaign will be more about ideas.
      And if it is, than that good contrast with Clinton.
      Another thing is it will remind voters of Clinton and her history with Gingrich being the Speaker the House during Bill Clinton presidency.

      And Newt as VP would great in terms of national space policy.
      So now I think there number advantages to have Gingrich have a more public face in the election by being the VP.
      Oh, and also the tradition is to have VP debate- which Gingrich would well in- no matter who Clinton’s VP is. And it would be fun to watch.

  3. Until he resigned from office for far less than Clinton was impeached for, Gingrich was an effective representative, and a bull dog for what he believed. I’d love to see him on the ticket.

  4. I’ll be voting for Mr. Trump anyway, as Hillary would be a corrupt, statist disaster and the two recycled liberal Republican schleppers the Libertarians nominated this time around would likely be even worse on national security and border security. But having Newt on the ticket would definitely be a bonus point.

    I’d be even happier if Newt were White House Chief of Staff or National Security Advisor in a Trump administration than if he were Veep, but I’d be happiest if Mr. Trump announced he would be all three. Any boost Newt could give to rational space efforts would be just another welcome bonus.

  5. I’m not a fan. But then Trump isn’t my pick did the top of the ticket, and of the potential VP picks bandied about it the past week, Newt was near the bottom and my preferred bowed out.

    Still, this week’s events have motivated me to go to the polls and vote against Hillary.

  6. Rand two days ago:

    Trump is terrible, and if I had ever expressed support for Trump, you might have a point, but I have opposed him almost every day for months.

    Rand today:

    I’d seriously consider voting for him

    Oh well, another Vichy GOP voter.

    I do hope that if the Democrats ever nominate anyone as terrible as Trump (Michael Moore? Al Sharpton?) that I have the integrity to swallow hard and support the GOP nominee. There are worse things than having the nominee of the other party win.

    1. I didn’t express support for Trump. My opinion of him has not changed.

      I said I’d consider voting for him under a certain circumstance. When circumstances change, I’m able to change my mind. What do you do?

      Surely you’ve never fantasized that I’d vote for Hillary?

      1. Surely you’ve never fantasized that I’d vote for Hillary?

        I took you at your word that you were steadfast in your opposition to Trump. And barring a miracle, voting for Hillary Clinton will be the only meaningful way to oppose Trump on election day.

          1. If you’re in a state that might be close, the only way to not-support Trump will be to vote for Hillary.*

            * assuming no black swan event like one of them dying, or not getting the nomination

          2. I would be very surprised if Bernie ran on the Green Party ticket — he knows that doing so would help Trump.

            Here’s Ken Adelman, Reagan’s Arms Control and Disarmament Agency head:

            “Not only am I not voting for Donald Trump, but also I am not voting for any Republican who endorsed or supported Trump—be it for Senate, House, alderman, or county clerk. And yes, I will vote for Clinton, simply because to not vote, or to vote Libertarian, would be a half-vote for Trump.”

            That’s what steadfast opposition to Trump looks like.

          3. I’ve never claimed to be in “steadfast opposition” to Trump. I’ve said I will never support him. I will continue to never support him, absent dramatic changes in events.

    2. You campaigned for Obama and are voting for Crooked Hillary, you have zero room to complain about anyone voting for Trump or anyone else.

      Who know how Trump would be as President? We know how Obama has done and Hillary has already disqualified herself except we have a corrupt DOJ that wont hold her accountable.

    3. The Democratic Party has already nominated someone far worse than Trump, Hillary Clinton. True, there remains the formality of the convention vote to put the official imprimatur on her candidacy, but does anyone seriously imagine this will not happen? In what conceivable way is Hillary not orders of magnitude more terrible than Donald Trump?

      1. In what conceivable way is Hillary not orders of magnitude more terrible than Donald Trump?

        I’d put it the other way around. She’s been a Senator, Secretary of State and First Lady. She has decades of experience, expertise and familiarity with government service and public policy. Every president in our history has had experience either in national government or leadership of the country’s armed forces. She fits comfortably in that tradition.

        Even setting aside his racism, xenophobia, ignorance, mendacity, authoritarianism, bellicosity and disregard for civil liberties, Donald Trump is the least qualified nominee in modern times. There’s no reason to believe he has the first idea of what to do in office, or even that he would bother to do the job. As Rand put it, he’s terrible, and he’s terrible in ways that the Republic has never before experienced or even contemplated.

        Hillary Clinton, by contrast, is a run-of-the-mill Democrat, like her husband and Barack Obama. Their presidencies did not ruin the country; Bill Clinton left office with most of the country approving of his performance, and it looks like Obama will do the same. There are far, far worse things than another four years with a Democrat in the White House.

        1. She’s been a corrupt Senator, failed Secretary of State and evil First Lady. She has decades of experience lying, expertise and familiarity with manipulating government service and public policy to fill her purse.

          There’s no reason not to believe Trump has intent to actually do some of the things he’s promised (nobody can accomplish all their goals in one or two terms unless they are fundamentally transforming America through executive orders, abandoning the rule of law and using government agencies as their own personal hit squads.

          Trump’s terrible in ways that the Republic that bow down to the media narrative has never before experienced or even contemplated.

          Hillary Clinton, by contrast, is a run-of-the-mill Democrat, like her husband and Barack Obama. Nuff said. You think that’s a persuasive argument?

          Their presidencies did not ruin the country because it has enough inertia built in to slow them down a bit.

          ; Bill Clinton left office with most of the country approving of his performance, and it looks like Obama will do the same. Which is the media narrative.

          There are far, far worse things than another four years with a Democrat in the White House. Sure. Nuclear winter.

    1. The first piece I wrote for my college conservative newspaper was a review of his Window of Opportunity, when he was still a House back-bencher. The book was a trip, and I enjoyed it. I never would have guessed at the time that he’d make it to the House leadership, much less that he’d be a possible VP nominee 30+ years later. His interests were anything but those of the typical successful politician, but he managed to get ahead anyway.

      He made some unusual-for-a-Republican-politician comments about race today:

      “It took me a long time, and a number of people talking to me through the years to get a sense of this. If you are a normal, white American, the truth is you don’t understand being black in America and you instinctively under-estimate the level of discrimination and the level of additional risk.”

Comments are closed.