Conventional wisdom is that the Republican presidential field is set, and that it is much too late for a new candidate to enter the race.
In years past, that would be absolutely correct. Over the last few decades, dozens of primaries and caucuses have been shoe-horned into the opening weeks of the election year, with the tendency on the Republican side for the front-running candidate to score a quick knockout.
But next year, the arrangement of the primary calendar is much different. It is less condensed at the front, much more loaded with events at the back, with the prospect of a viable, late-starting candidate quite real.
This is not to say that it will happen, but simply to note that it could. Such a scenario could not have unfolded in 2008, when the early January events were followed in short order by an early February Super Tuesday vote-fest that involved nearly half the country.
But the elongated layout of the nominating calendar this time provides the opportunity for a late-starting candidate to emerge. Should Mitt Romney stumble badly in the January events in Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Florida, another establishment Republican could enter the race in early February and still compete directly in states with at least 1,200 of the 2,282 or so GOP delegates. Many of them will be up for grabs after April 1 when statewide winner-take-all is possible.
Similarly, should non-Romney alternatives led by Newt Gingrich, Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry fall flat in the January contests, there would be time for the conservative wing of the party to find a new champion to carry its banner through the bulk of the primary season.
By Rhodes Cook, Read More Here:
Please share this post with your friends and comment below. If you haven’t already, take a moment to sign up for our free newsletter above and friend us on Twitter and Facebook to get real time updates.
Follow @WestJournalism
About Breaking News
Loading ...
Of course Joseph Farah, founder of both the Western "Journalism" Center and WorldNutsDaily, is doing his best to bring down Newt: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?29373…
I am glad somebody is after all the paparazzi I mean the MSM is supporting Newt and that tells me that Newt is not the candidate I want to run this nation Ron Paul 2012. The so called MSM doesn't report the news like it used to, the MSM spins the news to candidates it favors and attempts to slur a candidate it doesn't like, That is one reason I support Ron Paul. The MSM attempts to persuade the viewers who to vote for, but I am an informed voter and my choice for POTUS is Ron Paul 2012.
"the MSM is supporting Newt"
Me, too–for entertainment purposes, of course.
Salamander, er I meat Newt, has had 40 years to learn how to work the system. Meanwhile Paul has spent 30 years to figure out what's wrong with it. Non stop war and the Fed are what need to be eliminated to save us. I know Paul does not attend the Bilderberg meetings and is not a member of the CFR like most of them like Newt. My only fear is that O's billions will propagandize any GOP runner. If that doesn't work then massiver voter fraud should do it for him. 2012 should be "the year of infamy". I hope we will survive it.
I am grateful for all the attacks on Newt, regardless of source…Since he advocated "curtailing freedom of speech" leaving us with NO freedoms, he is way too far left of the left!! Go to youtube and put in Gingrich, curtailing freedom of speech, perhaps you can find the original speech!…There is a lot on it there!!
Newtie has been selected as the "designated loser," just as Juan McAmnesty was chosen for the task in 2008. The globalists want the USURPER for another term so he can complete the task of "taking us down." They know Newtie comes with a ton of baggage and, as a progressive, establishment Republican, conservatives will not vote for him. He has undoubtedly been promised future "goodies" in return for his cooperation.
Des Moines Register – "Republicans would take a giant step backward by choosing Gingrich": http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20111209…
National Review – "A Choice of Two Temperaments": http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/285083/choic…
WHO'S NEWT? http://giveusliberty1776.blogspot.com/2011/12/who…
… and, most recently, he has proposed giving 30 MILLION Illegal aliens amnesty as long as they pay a small fine and can "speak English" — thus opening the door to ANOTHER 100 MIILLION, or more, family members! Good Bye America.
“If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.” – Thomas Jefferson
Whether it's flip-flopping on TARP, supporting the individual mandate that served as a model for "ObamaCare," joining with Nancy Pelosi in support of the global-warming crowd's radical agenda, or making millions off of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as they helped destroy our economy, Newt Gingrich is trying to pull the wool over our eyes.
He's what is called a "counterfeit conservative." Here's an ad so you can hear Newt in his own words explaining his record of supporting liberal policies: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Jzi3HBCS2M
Another Big Surprise About Gingrich on Gun Rights & The Second Amendment:
http://gunowners.org/gingrich-mixed-record.htm
http://www.nationalgunrights.org/the-inconvenient…
Gingrich Explains His Support for Individual Health Mandate – From the Glenn Beck program 12/6/11:
GINGRICH: I am for people, individuals, exactly like automobile insurance, individuals having health insurance and being required to have health insurance, and I am prepared to vote for a voucher system which will give individuals on a sliding scale a government subsidy so it will ensure that everyone as individuals have health insurance.
President Obama on the individual healthcare mandate, August 2011: “(Obamacare) should not be controversial… the individual mandate’s important… It’s just like your car insurance…”
While in Congress, Gingrich co-sponsored 418 bills with Pelosi: http://dailycaller.com/2011/12/06/while-in-congre…
Gingrich Supported Rockefeller Over Goldwater: Barry Goldwater’s 1964 presidential campaign was arguably the most important in the history of the American conservative movement, leading to the “Reagan Revolution” in 1980 and it continued to have a significant influence on the Right well beyond that particular election. Where was Newt Gingrich in this fight? Supporting Nelson Rockefeller:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embed…
The “Principled Leadership” of Newt Gingrich
“I am not inclined to be a supporter of Newt Gingrich’s having served under him for four years and experienced his leadership. Because I found it lacking often times. There’s all kind of leaders, leaders that instill confidence and leaders that are somewhat abrupt, leaders that have one standard for the people that they are leading and a different standard for themselves. I will have difficulty supporting him for president of the United States.” — Senator Tom Coburn (R-Okla.)
“We had to push Newt because he wanted to cave in… Those of us who told Newt, ‘If you don’t fight for a balanced budget and don’t fight for these tax cuts and don’t fight for the cuts in committee chairmanships, etc., etc., that we promised we were going to do, we are going to kick you out’ — those 10 or 15 or so, every one of them — Tom Coburn, Matt Salmon running again in Arizona, all of them. They may not be saying it publicly, but privately they’re sending me e-mails every day going, … ‘How many times does Newt have to teach these people he’s bad for the conservative movement?’–MSNBC host and former U.S. Rep. Joe Scarborough, part of the “Republican Revolution” of 1994
Via the The American Spectator’s Quin Hillyer:
Former American Conservative Union Chairman Mickey Edwards was even blunter:
“I’ve known Newt now for thirty years almost,” says former congressman Mickey Edwards. “But I wouldn’t be able to describe what his real principles are. I never felt that he had any sort of a real compass about what he believed except for the pursuit of power.”
Any of the above would be better than the current one. This week Barry and the Democrats are saying the follow lie. "The Republican Congress does want to give the middle class a tax cut" Really? Lets explain what this payroll Tax cut is. First it is a break from paying into the Social Security fund. That does not exist anyway because some idiots decide to merge it with the General Fund. They are stealing from Peter to give to Paul. I have worked 40 years of my life and between myself and the companies I have work for have put 150,000 plus dollars into this SCAM. Now to address the lie. The Republican are for this and just want it paid for plus this is being toted as a "Jobs Bill", they want a pipeline for oil to buy from Canada, (Instead of from a Middle Eastern country or Venezuela whom hate us for making them so rich, silly isn't) . Then on the left they insist on paying for it with raising the taxes on the "Rich", that is going to include raising taxes on small business owners because most of them file the profits from their business as income. Now I am as smart as Barry or got a free education from three different collages so me asking why don't they just cut spending in Washington? Do you know why, because the Democratic Party has no friends in business and need their base for the next election. Who is their Base, you may ask. Easy "Freeloader" like there leader Barry whom got a free education by using what ever citizenship he needed to scam the system he is currently in charge of.
So they will lie to keep power or get power when in fact they got no plans to improve the economy except drain money from the private sector, instead of draining that swap Negative Nancy thinks is just full of Republicans.
So it is ANYBODY but Barry for President in 2012.
After thought; Sorry Ron Paul is nuts and should not be given the Commander and Chief Job, Maybe a Cabinet post but not the keys to the "Football" Noooo Nooo Nooo. We will be defenseless and every country that we kicked their butts will seek us out. This unfortunately is a dangerous world and has been since the beginning of time, and will remain the same until the end of time. Currently Iran is building a Nuclear weapon and Congressman Paul said it like Martha Stewart "That's a good thing". No Ron it is not a good thing. THis is bad really really bad. Watch> QQ.
I shall now duck and cover from the Ron Paul fan club here.
Ron Paul is NOT for weakening our defense .. he is for stopping our OFFENSIVE wars around the world and building our DEFENSES with the savings. You truly need to stop listening to the bought-and-paid-for talking heads on the MSM.