Why Gingrich Will Lose: ‘Newt Wears Arrogance Like a Zebra Wears Stripes’

Posted on | December 6, 2011 | 56 Comments

“It is Newt Gingrich’s turn on the Republican presidential candidate carousel . . . For some reason, the conservative punditry hive mind is collectively suggesting that the carousel may stop with Gingrich on top. Whether it’s their weariness with the poll swings or comfort with a familiar face, I can’t say for certain. It isn’t conservatism. . . .
“Last week, he told Jake Tapper of ABC News that he had the nomination wrapped up. ‘I’m going to be the nominee,’ he said.
“Even his supporters must have gasped when he said that. . . .
“On another occasion, Gingrich explained that he’s not a natural leader, because ‘I’m too intellectual; I’m too abstract; I think too much.’
“Newt wears arrogance like a zebra wears stripes. . . .”
— Yates Walker, “Newt Gingrich’s Coming Fall,” Daily Caller

You can let polls do your thinking for you. You can let the media do your thinking for you. You can jump on a bandwagon because somebody told you that a candidate is the only “practical” alternative to Mitt Romney, or tell yourself that anybody who criticizes Gingrich is a Romney stooge, and that Newt’s the only GOP candidate who can beat Obama next year.

Or you can think for yourself and tell all the pundits and pollsters to go straight to hell.

As for me, I remember October 2009, when Tea Party activists were doing everything they could to help Doug Hoffman win the NY-23 special election, and Newt Gingrich went on TV — over and over and over again — to praise Dede Scozzafava as the best choice for conservatives.

Some friends say I’m wrong to carry a grudge like that, and you may feel differently about Gingrich. It’s a free country and you can believe whatever you want to believe. But I’m a neutral objective journalist, and it is my obligation to tell you this fact: Newt will self-destruct, and the only question is whether that self-destruction will come sooner or later.

There are people praying it comes soon — that’s an objective fact.

RECENTLY:

Dec. 1: The Raven Keeps Calling Newt’s Name
Nov. 28: This Vintage Pin-Up Girl Is Not Endorsed by the Manchester (N.H.) Union Leader
Nov. 27: Newt Gingrich Wins Coveted GOP Primary Endorsement From … Bill Clinton?
Nov. 26: BOOM! Michele Bachmann Publishes Gingrich’s 2004 Pro-Amnesty Letter
Nov. 16: How Bad Is Newt Gingrich?
Nov. 14: ‘You Have to Answer for Santino, Carlo’

Category: Election 2012, Newt Gingrich

Comments

56 Responses to “Why Gingrich Will Lose: ‘Newt Wears Arrogance Like a Zebra Wears Stripes’”

Huggy
December 6th, 2011 @ 3:34 pm

You are exactly right!
Mortimer Snerd
December 6th, 2011 @ 3:43 pm

Wonder what Herman sees in him?
Anonymous
December 6th, 2011 @ 3:45 pm

Asked whether he supports small government or big government, Gingrich stated, “Yes.”

At least that’s the way I interpret the man. The polite arrogance is more an appendage. Sure, it’s there and probably shouldn’t be ignored, but there’s a whole body of work we cannot.
Charles
December 6th, 2011 @ 3:47 pm

Let’s remember Dede was a Republican, until Hoffman drove her out of the party, so of Gingrich’s many faults campaigning for a Republican would have to be scored his least.
Wilbur Post
December 6th, 2011 @ 3:51 pm

Enough of this poll-driven media BS – how about letting the primary voters choose a nominee?
Dave C
December 6th, 2011 @ 4:05 pm

You know what Kos and Newt have in common?

The both endorsed Dede Scavasofdijhaoejava.

Kos himself endorsed Dede over the democrat saying that she was more liberal than the dem.

Hoffman didn’t drive her out of the party so much as the electorate wanted a choice, not an echo. Dede Scovdjiadj;odsava saw the writing on the wall and stabbed the local republican party in the back with her endorsement of democrat.
Professor Why
December 6th, 2011 @ 4:07 pm

Exactly… and the new flavor-of-the-month supported on this site, Santorum, endorsed Arlen Specter… Not exactly the type of endorsement that fills me with any pride, to be sure…
Anonymous
December 6th, 2011 @ 4:21 pm

Smitty:
I like the “against the grain” wisdom here. Wish more conservative commentators and/or bloggers took more of a contrarian approach.

However, with that being said, its true and objective. The implosion is just not a matter of if, but when. This is not a popular viewpoint to have at this moment.
Anonymous
December 6th, 2011 @ 4:24 pm

Here’s my thing, Dave: In 2009, Newt was not a public official, beholden to do the work of his party leadership by endorsing his party’s nominee. He was a private citizen, a free agent who could have done anything he wanted, or done nothing at all.

NY-23 was not just another election. It was the first major test of the Tea Party’s strength as an independent force at the ballot box.

And Newt was trying to kill the Tea Party, attempting to tell these grassroots conservatives that they have no choice except to vote for the GOP candidate, even if that candidate is more liberal than the Democrat.

What part of “fuck that bullshit” is so hard to understand?
Catholics4Cain
December 6th, 2011 @ 4:29 pm

Listen to this ppl.13 min into it-> http://feeds.radioamerica.org/loudwater/rhs/000008242_000_000000011.mp3
Adjoran
December 6th, 2011 @ 4:32 pm

Even if he had just endorsed Dede and left it at that, it would have been forgivable, the sort of reflexive mistake national party leaders often make in local races.

But he made it a crusade not only to put out piles of bull manure about Dede (which swiftly proved to be 100% BS), but he had to talk trash about conservatives who didn’t go along and backed Hoffman instead.

No sense of obligation made him do that. He did it because he wanted to, because the very idea that some conservatives did not accept his word as handed down on a tablet from the mountain offended him. He needed to punish us.

What comes around, goes around, Tubby.
Adjoran
December 6th, 2011 @ 4:34 pm

The difference being that Santorum was under heavy pressure from his President and party leadership to endorse the guy who had endorsed him in his first run, and he didn’t go out and trash Toomey or the conservatives who supported him afterward.

Other than being completely different, yeah, they were the same.
Kellsbells
December 6th, 2011 @ 4:45 pm

I’m pulling out the Irish Spring….somebody needs their mouth washed out!
ThePaganTemple
December 6th, 2011 @ 4:57 pm

A Federal Reserve or Cabinet Secretary appointment, perhaps?
Guest
December 6th, 2011 @ 5:01 pm

I have met Newt on occasion when he was in Silicon Valley working on health care in the late 90’s early 2000’s. I’m a software developer. I just don’t get the “arrogance”. He was nice, polite and smart.
ThePaganTemple
December 6th, 2011 @ 5:01 pm

I think you’re all underestimating Newt. If he goes off the rails, it will be after, not before, he gets the nomination. That’s when it’s most likely to happen, when he no longer has to give a damn.
jwallin
December 6th, 2011 @ 5:02 pm

Stacy; you do good ~~grudge~~ objective reporting.

Though I have to admit I agree.

Newt sounds good but words are wind.

I tend to remember what they does rather than what they say.
jwallin
December 6th, 2011 @ 5:09 pm

P.S. I think its’ HUBRIS rather than straight arrogance.

Hubris ( /?hju?br?s/), also hybris, means extreme haughtiness, pride or arrogance. Hubris often indicates a loss of contact with reality and an overestimation of one’s own competence or capabilities, especially when the person exhibiting it is in a position of power.
Adjoran
December 6th, 2011 @ 5:17 pm

Maybe you should be ‘pologizin’ to Smitty!
Dcmick
December 6th, 2011 @ 5:18 pm

He’s arrogant?

GOOD!

He’s an attitude?

ALL THE BETTER!

He’s apt to take on liberal shibboleths and canards?

MORE POWER TO HIM!

We don’t want any Bush garbage; we don’t want any incoherent pleas “why can’t we all just get along.”

We want an articulate Conservative with so much passion that he has to expend a good deal of effort suppressing his own desires to rip and tear into his political opponents. Because we’ll need that energy when it comes to uprooting an entrenched and arrogant federal bureaucracy.

Arrogant?

Since when do we Conservatives hanker to be championed by a pussy?

Arrogant?

What kind of man do you think it’s going to take to uproot violently an entrenched bureaucracy of arrogant libs on the dole?

Have any of you any idea of what you’re going up against, of what you’re taking on, of what you have to dismantle to get this country up on its feet again?

The size and scope of our problems are such that we NEED a guy with an oversized ego to surmount them!
Dcmick
December 6th, 2011 @ 5:22 pm

There’s something else to it, ———— Toomey affected a wimpishness and a whiny disposition that didn’t play well.

He needed another 6 years to prevail in 2010, because he probably would have lost in 2004.

It’s VERY LIKELY he would have lost in 2004, so don’t go thinking that just because Toomey won in ’10, that meant that he was a shoe in back in 2004.

‘Cause that ain’t the case.
Bob Belvedere
December 6th, 2011 @ 5:22 pm

That’s why he has to answer for Santino.
Mortimer Snerd
December 6th, 2011 @ 5:27 pm

Maybe. Whatever it is, he certainly didn’t wait long to endorse him.
Bob Belvedere
December 6th, 2011 @ 5:28 pm

And what always follows on the heels of hubris?

‘In the Greek tragedies Nemesis appears chiefly as the avenger of crime and the punisher of hubris….’http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nemesis_(mythology)
Anonymous
December 6th, 2011 @ 5:32 pm

Toomey barely won in 2010. It was a squeaker when polls had him up 5-8 pts.

So, you are right to speculate that Toomey would not have won. PA is tough for Republicans, let alone conservatives. One million more registered Dems than R’s here, with a heavy union presence.
Dcmick
December 6th, 2011 @ 5:34 pm

I mean it’s an actual hoot, a real live hoot that our guy would lose to Obama, an arrogant provincial, because he wasn’t HUMBLE enough?

After five years of the metrosexual wandering around literally, not figuratively, but literally sticking his chin up and his nose in the air, and we’re worried that Gingrich is going to drive away votes because he’s not HUMBLE enough.

Have people taken leave of what little sense they have left?

Obama is the MOST arrogant jerk ever to disgrace American national politics, and he’s caused untold damage to America’s economy.

And after that you’re worried that the guy needed to undo and overturn everything that the prick and Pelosi enacted isn’t humble enough?

Losers!

Losers one and all!
Anonymous
December 6th, 2011 @ 5:39 pm

“I remember October 2009, when Tea Party activists were doing everything they could to help Doug Hoffman win the NY-23 special election, and Newt Gingrich went on TV — over and over and over again — to support his party’s nominee instead of a third party spoiler.”

Fixed. No charge.

Look, I don’t like Gingrich any more than you do. I don’t like the GOP Establishment any more than you do. I like the GOP itself considerably less than you do.

But let’s live in the real world.

A long-time Republican politician and former Speaker of the House with Republican presidential aspirations is going to support Republican nominees for office rather than endorsing third party candidates.

Every. Fucking. Time.

Rank and file conservatives don’t owe the GOP loyalty. The GOP has to earn it.

GOP leaders, on the other hand, live or die by party loyalty.

The only plausible alternative Gingrich had to backing Scozzafava to the hilt was to keep his mouth shut from the start of that thing, and like most politicians Gingrich doesn’t know how to do that.
Anonymous
December 6th, 2011 @ 5:41 pm

You are factually correct with your post. However, our side has trouble dealing with the fact that the double standards against Republicans are alive and well.

Yes, Obama can be arrogant and get away with it. Or, a Democrat can be a crony capitalist, not pay taxes, cheat on their wife, fill in the blank …. yet, Republicans and especially, conservatives have a much different measuring stick used by the MSM, which in turn influences the precious Indies.

Its just the way it is. The double standard is not changing. So yes, Obama is arrogant, but its OK, b/c he’s a Leftist.
Jack Okie
December 6th, 2011 @ 5:52 pm

Guest, it’s not just the LSM that has memes and agendas. Santorum is like the kid about whom the next door neighbor says “Such a nice boy!”. If these were normal times, good enough. But we need a smart, aggressive attack dog. I don’t care about Dede, Fanny and Freddy, blah, blah, blah. Electing a conservative Congress will help keep Newt on the straight and narrow.

My sense is that the Presidency is a serious enough job to keep Newt serious. Even if not, I think the over/under still favors Newt. Sometimes its enough just to put the cat among the pigeons.
Elize Nayden
December 6th, 2011 @ 5:54 pm

Toomey and wimpishness? Have you actually seen Doug Hoffman? The guy looks like the caucasian version of Bobby Jindal and is as eloquent as Rick Perry. And he started his Crist-Merkowski like campaign after he promised Scozzythingy to support her. Sorry, I dont like Dede any more than the rest of you, but its not like we missed something impressive with Hoffman.
Dave C
December 6th, 2011 @ 6:14 pm

Sometimes it needs to be said.

Especially with regards to Newt.
Charles
December 6th, 2011 @ 6:41 pm

Then again, the overriding objective was to deprive Nancy Pelosi of her majority, wasn’t it?

Newt doesn’t have to answer for Dede any more than the Tea Party has to answer for Christine O’Donnell.
Finrod Felagund
December 6th, 2011 @ 6:57 pm

Has Toomey forgiven Santorum? I’m guessing not, and that’s another say they’re different.
Finrod Felagund
December 6th, 2011 @ 7:04 pm

Sure, Newt is arrogant. But compared to the SCOAMF, he’s strictly minor league in that department.

In the general, we have to keep the focus on Obama, not our own candidate.
Gerald Seib: 3 Reasons Gingrich Will—and Won’t—Fly « The Rhetorican
December 6th, 2011 @ 7:51 pm

[…] TOM: Why Gingrich will lose: “Newt will self-destruct, and the only question is whether that self-destruction will come […]
richard mcenroe
December 6th, 2011 @ 7:59 pm

OK, I missed something. HAS Cain formally endorsed Gingrich?
richard mcenroe
December 6th, 2011 @ 8:02 pm

That’s Newt in a nutshell. He SOUNDS smart, he SOUNDS tough, he SOUNDS arrogant, but when the hammer comes down, well… Weebles wobble.
Steve in TN
December 6th, 2011 @ 8:18 pm

Newt was trying to kill the Tea Party? Come back to Earth, Stacy.
richard mcenroe
December 6th, 2011 @ 8:22 pm

drove her out? What, with a horsewhip? Or did she just decide being in power was more important than on which side?
Steve in TN
December 6th, 2011 @ 8:22 pm

As Speaker, Newt did more to advance the conservative agenda than anyone since Reagan. Other than that, I guess he’s done nothing.
Steve in TN
December 6th, 2011 @ 8:29 pm

And that opinion runs counter to the factual evidence from when Newt was in office.
richard mcenroe
December 6th, 2011 @ 8:46 pm

You mean when Clinton kicked his ass over the shutdown, his own party threw him out of the Speakership, and then he quit the Congressional seat he had just won?

Which doesn’t even take into account his behavior during his divorce cases.
Mortimer Snerd
December 6th, 2011 @ 8:46 pm

Oops! No, he hasn’t. My mistake. I based my assumption on a report by the Fox TV station in Atlanta that he was going to. However, they were apparently incorrect, and his current position is to hold off on any endorsement for now. My apologies.
Pathfinder
December 6th, 2011 @ 10:22 pm

That’s what’s worrying!
Joe
December 7th, 2011 @ 12:10 am

Newt’s biggest enemy is Newt.
Adjoran
December 7th, 2011 @ 1:58 am

Well, he doesn’t have to answer to his sniveling sycophants.
Adjoran
December 7th, 2011 @ 2:00 am

You miss the point: it was the WAY Newt did it, and the condescension towards other conservatives.
Adjoran
December 7th, 2011 @ 2:02 am

Bend over, then, you will enjoy Newt.
Adjoran
December 7th, 2011 @ 2:03 am

It’s the knives in the back we remember.
Adjoran
December 7th, 2011 @ 2:06 am

For the fiftieth time for those slow on the uptake, it wasn’t the endorsement we resent, but the way he attempted to portray conservatives supporting Hoffman as stupid.

The “party loyalty” argument also fails when you remember Dede endorsed the Democrat and switched parties. Newt was not only wrong about her, forgivable, but an asshole about it, less so.