Palin Helps Romney Win Alaska

Posted on Comments

WASHINGTON, Pennsylvania
Mitt Romney has a powerful ally in his effort to win the Republican nomination: Sarah Palin, who told a Fox News reporter last night that she voted for Newt Gingrich.

Gingrich got 1,834 votes in the Alaska caucuses, giving the former House Speaker 14.2% of the vote, good for a fourth-place finish behind third-place finisher Ron Paul (3,105 votes, 24%), runner-up Rick Santorum (3,762 votes, 29%) and winner Romney (4,225, 32.6%).

Gingrich also placed fourth Tuesday in caucuses in North Dakota (962 votes, 8.5%) and Idaho (940 votes, 2.1%), and the primaries in Vermont (4,608 votes, 8.1%) and Massachusetts (16,756 votes, 4.6%). Gingrich placed third in Ohio (14.6%), Tennessee (24%), and Oklahoma (27.5%).

Gingrich’s vote total in Alaska was more than four times as large as Romney’s 463-vote margin over Santorum. In Ohio, Gingrich’s third-place total (175,375) was 16.7 times larger than Romney’s 10,508-vote margin over Santorum.

In related news, Texas Gov. Rick Perry — who quit the presidential race Jan. 19 and endorsed Gingrich — was still on the ballot in Ohio, as was former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman, who dropped out Jan. 16 and endorsed Romney. Between them, Perry and Huntsman got 13,843 votes in Tuesday’s Ohio primary.

UPDATE: This post seems to have stirred some anger from people who think that my summary of Neutral Objective Facts was intended as a personal disparagement of Sarah Palin.

Of course, I would have enthusiastically supported Governor Palin, had she seen fit to run for president — see my coverage of her Labor Day speech in New Hampshire — but she decided against it. Another source of anger about this post was expressed by my young friend Jamie:

How come you hate Newt so much?

I replied in the comments, but given the rage reaction this post seems to have provoked, I’ll quote my reply here:

I don’t “hate” him, Jamie. But as a presidential candidate, Newt is utterly implausible. There is simply no way in hell a twice-divorced Republican, married to his former mistress — with whom he had an extramarital affair in the midst of the Clinton impeachment scandal — is going to be elected president of the United States.
Not going to happen. Period.
Gingrich’s rhetorical skills are admirable, but his biography makes him unelectable. This is just the reality of politics, and people who would like to ignore Newt’s biography are simply deluded.
It’s not a matter of policy or ideology. I don’t accuse Newt or his supporters of being insufficiently conservative. They are, however, insufficiently realistic about what it takes to succeed in presidential politics, and their admiration for Newt the Great Debater is blinding them to the unavoidable obstacle to Gingrich’s candidacy. Newt is wasting time and money (and his supporters are wasting their votes) on a campaign that was doomed from the outset.
These are, I assert, Neutral Objective Facts. You may dispute the facts, but I guarantee you that Newt Gingrich will not win the GOP nomination.
Not this year. Not ever.

This is my summary of what is, rather than my personal opinion of what ought to be, and I understand that many people wish that Gingrich’s debate skills were sufficient to offset the liabilities of his biography, but they’re not.

It seems that the online world has become a place where we are so accustomed to people expressing opinions that we have become prone to regard simple statements of fact —e.g., “Newt Gingrich will never be elected president, nor nominated by the Republican Party for that office” — as if they were merely opinions, which might be argued out of existence.

Having supported a lot of long-shot underdogs over the years, I recognize why people might vote for a completely hopeless candidate like Newt. But when the hopelessness was so obvious before his campaign ever began, it ill behooves Newt’s supporters to disparage the motives of those who are guilty of no sin more grievous than stating Neutral Objective Facts.

125 comments

  2. When you voted for Ron Paul in Virginia, Smitty, you voted strategically. Are you saying that Sarah Palin’s support for Gingrich is not also strategic?

  3. How come you hate Newt so much? I think Newt is the best debater, has the strongest track record, and the most likely to bring about a reduction in the size of the government without allowing Iran do bomb the shit out of everyone it hates. I haven’t heard any compelling evidence that Newt isn’t who he says he is.  I have, however, heard numerous compelling arguments that Rick and Mitt are not the limited government candidates that they claim they are.

  4. In Ohio at least, polls indicated that Newt’s support would mostly go to Romney if Newt dropped out.

  8.  Newt’s running third.  He’d have to surge just to catch Santorum, let alone challenge Romney.

    Does anyone still seriously think, in the wake of Slutgate, that running a serial divorcé as the GOP candidate is a survivable strategy?

    Newt talks tough, but  both his Congressional record (shutdown, impeachment, unnecessary resignation from the House) and his marital history (uncontested divorces once the judge ordered him to cooperate with discovery) indicate that when the crunch comes, he’s a quitter.  He’s great leading a mob, not so much standing and fighting.

     He’s a smart guy, he says, he can do arithmetic.  If Newt cared about this country as much as he likes to shine us on he does, he would have thrown his support to Santorum and no one with a straight face would be talking about Romney’s inevitability now. 

    But he hasn’t.  This is not patriotism, it’s arrogance.  Newt’s not running a campaign at this point; this is a simple hate-f*** of the party that refuses to recognize his self-declared greatness.

  9. Perhaps if Santorum supporters would give Gingrich supporters a reason to vote for Santorum instead of haranguing them and telling them that they’re really voting for Romney, they might be a bit more persuasive.

    I voted for Newt Gingrich yesterday, and if my only choice had been between Santorum or Romney, I wouldn’t have voted.
     

  11. I am disappointed that Romney still has a shot. Millions to 1 negative advertising blitz to take down true conservatives for a RINO. Do you people really think he’ll overturn ObamaCare? Do you really think he won’t be destroyed by Obama for his Mormonism? The guy afraid to call Obama a socialist. I’ll hold my nose and vote again for the RINO nominee but I am thoroughly disgusted. 

  12. Fin, we’ve posted videos up the ass with Santorum saying exactly what he believes, you’ve watched Santorum chew the hide off Romney in multiple debates, he’s left his campaign for the welfare of his family and seriously, you can’t see one thing to like about him?  Have you not watched any of that?

  13.  Of course he won’t overturn Obamacare.  But he won’t be destroyed for his Mormonism.  He’ll be destroyed for having a lousy jobs and tax record of his own, for sucking up Federal money while condemning others for earmarks, for being a job-killing 1%er who’s ‘not worried about the poor’ AND for being a Mormon.

  16. I’ve watched plenty enough of Santorum to get a measure of the man.  He’s just another Big Government conservative with an emphasis on social issues.

    In case you haven’t figured it out, both of those are reasons for me to vote for someone else.

     

  18. And she said why she did. Newt Gingrich has the best plans for Alaska’s interests. He’s talking about energy and getting the price of gas down. He held a tele townhall on energy in AK.

  19. And her recently released emails – bringing the count now to 58,000 pages of emails, incidentally – shows that she voted for Huckabee in 2008.

    I’m sure you can get another headline article out of how Palin threw the 08 AK race to Romney, too.

    I dare you.

  20.  Fin, that’s at odds with his voting record according to every single group that ranks consercatives.  His con cred is solid… and he never shared a couch with Pelosi to hawk us cap and trade.

  24. Do I really need to recap Erickson’s take-down of Santorum’s Congressional record?

    Apparently I do.

    Voted against National Right to Work Act
    Voted against Real of Davis-Bacon Prevailing union wages
    Voted for mandatory Federal child care funding
    Voted twice in support of Fedex Unionization
    Voted against allowing a waiver of Davis-Bacon in emergency situations.
    Voted for minimum wage increases six times here here here here here and here
    Voted to require a union representative on an IRS oversight board.
    Voted to exempt IRS union representative from criminal ethics laws.
    Voted against creating independent Board of Governors to investigate IRS abuses.
    Voted for a Federal ban on possession of “assault weapons” by those under 18.
    Voted for Federal funding for anti-gun education programs in schools.
    Voted for anti-gun juvenile justice bill.
    Voted to impose a uniform Federal mandate on states to force them to allow convicted rapits, arsonists, drug kingpins, and all other ex-convicts to vote in Federal elections.
    Voted to mandate discounted broadcast times for politicians.
    Voted to allow illegal immigrants to receive the earned income credit before becoming citizens
    Voted to give SSI benefits to legal aliens.
    Voted to give welfare benefits to naturalized citizens without regard to to the earnings of their sponsors.
    Voted twice for internet taxes.
    Voted to allow gas tax revenues to be used to subsidize Amtrak.
    Voted against repealing the Clinton 4.3 cent gas tax increase.
    Voted to increase taxes by $2.3 billion to pay for an Amtrak trust fund.
    Voted to allow welfare to a minor who had a child out of wedlock and who resided with an adult who was on welfare within the previous two years.
    Voted to increase taxes by $9.4 billion to pay for a $9.4 billion increase in student loans.
    Voted to say that AMT patch is more important than capital gains and dividend relief.
    Voted against food stamp reform
    Voted against Medicaid reform
    Voted against TANF reform
    Sponsored An amendment to increase Amtrak funds by $550 million
    Voted to use HUD funds for the Joslyn Art Museum (NE), the Stand Up for Animals project (RI) and the Seattle Art Museum’s Olympic Sculpture Project (WA)
    Voted to increase spending on social programs by $7 billion
    Voted to increase NIH funding by $1.6 billion.
    Voted to for a $2 million earmark to renovate the Vulcan Monument (AL)
    Voted for a $1 billion bailout for the steel industry
    Voted against transferring $20 million from Americorps to veterans.
    Voted for the $140 billion asbestos compensation bill.
    Voted against requiring a uniform medical criteria to ensure asbestos claims were legitimate.
    Voted to make Medicare part B premium subsidies an new entitlement.
    Voted against paying off the debt ($5.6 trillion at the time) within 30 years.
    Voted to give $18 billion to the IMF.
    Voted to raid Social Security instead of using surpluses to pay down the debt.
    Voted to allow states to impose health care mandates that are stricter than proposed new Federal mandates, but not weaker.
    Voted twice for Federal mental health parity mandates in health insurance.
    Voted against a allow consumers the option to purchase a plan outside the parity mandate.
    Voted to increase spending for the Department of Education by $3.1 billion.
    Voted against requiring courts to consider the impact of IDEA awards on a local school district.
    Voted to make fuel price gouging a Federal crime.

    Yeah, tell me again how conservative Santorum is, cause I’m not buying it.

  26. Time for Santorum to drop out.  He lost badly last night.  Though the Santorum-biased media won’t tell you that.  My gosh, he got absolutely clobbered in Idaho.  Beaten to a pulp in Alaska.  A week earlier Romney romped in Arizona. 

    Wuz up with dat?  Romney wins all the libertarian states.  Yet, there’s no headlines anywheres “Romney winning libertarian voters”

  27. I can’t believe what an issue some choose to make of Newt’s climate change 180… I thought it sounded viable -if not inevitable- just a few short years ago too

    He as much as apologized for the couch bit, too- this is a specious argument imho

  28. How come you hate Newt so much?

    I don’t “hate” him, Jamie. But as a presidential candidate, Newt is utterly implausible. There is simply no way in hell a twice-divorced Republican, married to his former mistress — with whom he had an extramarital affair in the midst of the Clinton impeachment scandal — is going to be elected president of the United States.

    Not going to happen. Period.

    Gingrich’s rhetorical skills are admirable, but his biography makes him unelectable. This is just the reality of politics, and people who would like to ignore Newt’s biography are simply deluded.

    It’s not a matter of policy or ideology. I don’t accuse Newt or his supporters of being insufficiently conservative. They are, however, insufficiently realistic about what it takes to succeed in presidential politics, and their admiration for Newt the Great Debater is blinding them to the unavoidable obstacle to Gingrich’s candidacy. Newt is wasting time and money (and his supporters are wasting their votes) on a campaign that was doomed from the outset.

    These are, I assert, Neutral Objective Facts. You may dispute the facts, but I guarantee you that Newt Gingrich will not win the GOP nomination.

    Not this year. Not ever.

  29. Actually, Finrod, in describing that as “Erick Erickson’s takedown,” you err: That’s the Rick Perry campaign’s oppo-research file on Santorum, which Erickson published.

    The Perry campaign  thus lives on in a sort of shadow existence, I guess.

  33. Fail, rosalie.  A reason to vote against Romney is NOT a reason to vote for Santorum.  Or did you not read anything that I wrote?

  34. So who’s the last Senator to lose their last Senate election then go on to win the White House?

    That ain’t happening either, and that’s also a Neutral Objective Fact.

    Social conservatism ain’t what’s going to win this election; unemployed people aren’t going to vote based on abortion, contraception and gay marriage.
     

  35. Stacy, yeah, Newt’s somewhat implausible.  But at least he won his very last race for office back in 1998.

    Your boy Rick LOST his Pennsylvania Senate race and LOST bigtime, by 19 points. 

    And now he wants to be our national nominee?  Hell, the guy couldn’t even muster enough volunteers to make the ballot in Virginia.  How hard is it to get 10,000 signatures?  That’s nothing!!!  The Libertarian Party of Oklahoma just turned in 56,0000. 

    Santorum is a  Pathetic campaigner!  Nice guy and all, but horrible at running political campaigns.

  36.  Meh. You were spot on with the post on Mitt’s religion, but I think you’re nuts on this one. Anyone’s marriage/divorce record hardly matters anymore, yes, even to Republicans, and Newt is uniquely qualified to turn questions along these lines against the questioner, see the video of him eviscerating David Gregory on contraception this past Sunday. Now, I don’t think Newt’s got a third surge in him, but this as the reason? Poppycock.

  37. Stacy, tell me this.  Why hasn’t Santorum ONCE addressed the issue that we GOP volunteers want to hear about?  Why he lost that Senate race?

    Unless he addresses it, and addresses it soon, grass roots Republicans will continue to hold him in suspicion.  And I don’t want to hear any crap about “it was a bad year for Republicans overall.”

    Yeah, Rick, you could use that line if you lost by 4 or 5 points.  But you lost by friggin’ 19!!! 

  38.  Hey, I think you’re completely right about Newt. I just think a senator who’s made his career about being an outspoken champion of social conservative issues is just as doomed in a general election (and lost his last reelection bid by 17 points). But I’m one of those boring Romney supporters, so what do I know?

  39. I feel the same way about Santorum, completely unelectable, not because of biography, but because of his absurd positions on social issues that even the hardcore Religious Right would find objectionable. (since when has birth control among married couples been a real political issue?  Or Methodists not being real Christians?)

    Santorum losing his last election by 20 points should give you a clue that he’s a non-starter.  Once Santorum decided to become Father Coughlin, PA voters tossed him on his ear  If he narrowly lost reelection in 2006, that would be one thing, but he’s an epic train wreck waiting to happen.

    Santorum is selfish for keeping this thing going, the delegate math is too big an obstacle for him to overcome.  Since everyone is SO confident Obama will win, why not push Santorum to tee himself up for 2016?

  40. I believe he did already address it, but I’d list three factors, none of which apply this time:
    Wrongheaded support of Specter – its about the judges.
    By several accounts, he wasn’t in his district enough that season.
    2006 was simply the worst year in a long time for GOP incumbents.

    I have other concerns about Santorum, such as populist economics vs Newt’s supply-side, and a little more saber rattling than is healthy.

    That being said, he’s solid, consistent, and wysiwyg.
    I love Newt’s rhetorical skills, and his willingness to take the fight to the enemy, but Santorum’s focus on the enemy (Obama and his little cousin Mittens) is pretty good, too. Also, as time goes by, Santorum sounds less whiny and petulant, and Newt sounds more so.
    It may be time to switch, and let Stacy claim credit.

  41. For example:
    “I’ll enforce the Tenth Amendment” – huh?
    “I’ll replace the EPA with an Environment Solutions Agency” – and it wouldn’t morph into a bureaucratic and officious overlord? (see Vogon – bureaucratic, officious, callous, and green)
    I think Newt gets the big picture, but some of the details are a little scrambled :-/

  42. It’s unlikely he’ll even reign in the EPA – he believes in AGW, and he can’t quite hide it well enough. See Peter Ferrara today (spectator.org).

  43. ” “Newt Gingrich will never be elected president, nor nominated by the
    Republican Party for that office” — as if they were merely opinions,
    which might be argued out of existence.”

    Stacey, that is an opinion. It doesn’t meet the definition for a fact. It’s not like saying, “If I drop this hammer, it will float.” Anyone can hold up a hammer, let it go, and prove you wrong. I seem to recall someone saying “We’ll never have a black (or half black) President.” That was true too… until it wasn’t.

  44. No questioning his policy recipes. Frankly he sounds like I did about five years ago when he talks about tapping US resources, results always being ten years out for the last thirty years (Dems excuse), balance of payments, relieving pressure on the currency and treasury…..

  45. For that matter, the last person to win the Presidency while having lost their most recent non-Presidential election was Richard Nixon, who lost the California governor’s race in 1962.
     

  46. If divorce disqualified presidential candidates, we never would have had Ronald Reagan as President.

  48. Well, Santorum has done his best to piss off libertarians; it’s no wonder he’s tanked like a dunk tank dummy in states more sympathetic to libertarians.
     

  49.  It’s a fact, Jack.  Gingrich has had the most strongly and consistently negative ratings of any American political figure for over 16 years.  He is absolutely toxic to women and independents. 

    He was thrown out of the Speaker’s chair by conservatives for his poor leadership.  And he blew his lead in the polls with poor debates – the one advantage he supposedly had.

Comments are closed.