From the Tuesday edition of the Morning Jolt, a look at the latest potential headache for Republicans…
Say What? Glenn Beck Would Prefer a Ron Paul Third Party Bid Over Newt?
Uh-oh: “Glenn Beck said this morning on his radio show that if Newt Gingrich is the nominee and Ron Paul runs third party, he’d consider voting for Ron Paul over Newt Gingrich, and he hates Ron Paul’s policies on the Middle East.”
Bryan Preston is in disbelief: “Beck notes that he hates Paul’s Middle East policies but, gun to his head, he would consider Paul over the “progressives” Romney and Gingrich. There’s much more about Paul to oppose than just his MidEast policies, particularly for someone like Beck who has done so much to promote “9-12″ thinking on terrorism. Ron Paul is a Truther. His 1990s newsletters run straight off into racism and anti-Semitism. The only thing a Paul third-party candidacy would do is re-elect Barack Obama. And if Paul thinks he may have someone of Beck’s influence behind him, he’s that much more likely to bolt once the GOP nomination goes to someone else. Glenn Beck is playing with fire.”
Playing with fire? Well, Beck has been known to pour gasoline every now and then.
The Ace of Spades is pretty furious: “The Rodeo Clown really wants Obama to stay in office, huh? This, of course, will encourage Ron Paul to do what he probably is already inclined to do. Wonderful. Apparently some among us talk a good game about the crucial need of removing Obama from office, but sort of have a kind of Battered Wife Syndrome, and just can’t quit the big lug. Some of us are apparently going to work our very hearts out to make sure the batterer who gives our lives meaning remains president.”
Nice Deb is ready to quit Beck, declaring that he has jumped the shark: “I’ve always been inclined to like the guy – but no more. No more. I can’t see how any right-minded, self-respecting Republican can have anything to do with Glenn Beck at this point. He’d throw Israel under the bus over Gingrich?
Unbelievable. I understand that politics gets a little heated at times, and we have our little disagreements over candidates – but this? This is crazy and suicidal. Beck has a large audience, and I hope to heck most of them leave him over this. I can only hope (and pray) that Ron Paul has enough love for his country that he not do this.”
…As for how Newt thinks of Beck’s criticism, he said Monday, “ I don’t know,” Gingrich responded to the charges, laughing. “It depends on what standard you’re using, you know? The fact is that I balanced the budget for four consecutive years. And we did so while cutting taxes and increasing employment so people went back to work, they left welfare, they left food stamps, they left unemployment, they left Medicaid. Who else has a record of that level of achievement? I worked with Reagan in ‘79, ‘80. I worked with Reagan for 8 years in defeating the Soviet Empire. I think those are relatively conservative credentials.”
Wait, I though Newt was supposed to "unite and energize" the Conservative base!?
Yes, Beck is being very foolish and irrational. If Newt is the nominee, I will vote for him, he will lose, but not because I didn't vote for him.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIn all fairness, Glenn Beck didn't say he would "prefer" Ron Paul over Gingrich, only that he would "consider" voting for Paul if Gingrich was the GOP nominee. There's a significant difference there and frankly I agree with him. I would also "consider" Ron Paul in that circumstance although I suspect that I would still (unenthusiastically) pull the lever for Gingrich at the end of the day.
All this hyperventilating over what Beck said is pretty ridiculous. He's doing a great service to the GOP by pointing out NOW how bad a candidate Gingrich would be for the Republican Party and for America. The reason this country has gotten to such a bad state is BECAUSE people for far too long have been convinced to vote for the most electable Republican instead of who they think would do the best job. How much longer are we going to nominate Bushes, Doles, McCains and Gingriches??
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseUnfortunately, Newt is just an older, fatter verion of the last big government Republican George W. Bush. sigh
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseNo - neither Newt or Mitt will lose to the One. The unemployment rate will start to climb now that people saw the rate decrease - believing foolishly that jobs are to be had and so initiating new searches for work.
As the election gets closer and the electorate begins to get more involved all the indicators will work against Obama. And as he has to speak more - his Kansas speech didn't fare so well it appears - everyone will be reminded why he deserves nothing more than defeat come November 2012.
Obama's only chance is a legitimate third party candidate from the right.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI was a little shocked when I checked out The Blaze a couple of times and discovered Glenn saying this, and bashing Newt ... Ron Paul is a perennial loser, he's too radical and he's marginalized, he can't win. It's amazing how silly, quirky and judgmental people can be .. Newt has the credentials, he's not perfect, but he an whip Bozo and he can roll up his sleeves and get right to work... he knows the ropes, doesn't have to stumble ... wake up, America.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseEven Beck knows exactly what Gingrich is.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseA "truther" is generally someone who thinks that "9/11 as an inside job," or that "Bush knew and let it happen." Ron Paul's "gleeful" comment, while despicable, is not "truther" material.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAs an independent, I sometimes stumble upon a post like this and I wonder what I am missing. Why is Newt such a golden child compared to Paul?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseFrom what I can tell, any of Newt's former colleagues are being visceral about his leadership abilities. He was in with Freddy and Fanny, and on the personal side he's cheated on his wife. This is the ideal Christian conservative?
And compared to Paul, with his weariness to drag us into a pre-emptive war, unwavering on every principle, pro-life, and actually willing cut big gov., why are conservatives so averse to him? He is the embodiment of conservatism.
Peter13, I was unaware that 'full bore hypocrisy' was a 'principle'...fact is, Ronpaul never met a chunk of Washington pork he didn't like; so much so that he's long been known as the 'king of earmarks', his modus poerandi? first, attach expensive earmarks to bills he knows will pass-second, once he's got the votes counted and knows it's a 'done deal', vote AGAINST the bills; third, claim to be against pork while bringing home the bacon. it's a cynical scam, but he knows the devoted Paulbots, even if any of them can un-fog their minds long enough to grasp the concept, will simply do one of two things: deny it, or spin it...
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse