It’s official: Bye bye, Newt Gingrich – hello, Mitt Romney

Posted by: ST on May 2, 2012 at 8:09 pm

The Gingrich campaign took its last gasp today – and a Romney endorsement is most likely forthcoming:

Newt Gingrich officially suspended his GOP presidential campaign Wednesday – though it was more like another episode in the long goodbye that started weeks ago.

“It has been an amazing year for me and Callista,” Gingrich, the former House speaker, said at a Hilton Hotel in northern Virginia. “Today, I am suspending the campaign, but suspending the campaign does not mean suspending citizenship. Callista and I are committed to be active citizens. We owe it to America.”
Delivering a roughly 20-minute address, Gingrich vowed to, with his wife, remain “active citizens,” as he looked back on the primary campaign and looked ahead to what challenges remain in America.

But he also declined to endorse Mitt Romney for the GOP nomination — meaning another announcement could still be on the way and potentially giving Gingrich another chance to deliver one of the extended monologues he is known for.

Even so, Gingrich has slowly slipped away from the limelight in the Republican race.
The campaign suggested in March that Gingrich might quit should he fail to win Mississippi or Alabama, but the campaign limped on. Aides then revealed last week that the candidate would be calling it quits – but pushed off the day of the announcement itself until Tuesday, then delayed that announcement until Wednesday afternoon.

Despite not endorsing Romney, Gingrich did make clear that his doubts during the primary campaign about Romney’s conservatism are dwarfed by his concerns about President Obama winning another term.
“This is not a choice between Mitt Romney and Ronald Reagan – this is a choice between Mitt Romney and the most radical leftist president in American history,” Gingrich said.

Well, Mitt Romney was not my first, second, or even third choice. Perry was my original choice, then Newt, and now … well, we have Romney. Not ideal for me by a long shot, but as the old saying goes, we have to go to war with the army we have. I won’t be viscerally pro-Romney because I’m not, but I will always be staunchly anti-Obama. Time to put the shoulder pads and helmets on and get to work, peeps.

Are you with me?

RSS feed for comments on this post.

17 Responses to “It’s official: Bye bye, Newt Gingrich – hello, Mitt Romney”

Comments

  1. Phineas says:

    Lead on, my leader. :d

  2. Chris in NC says:

    Heavy sigh… I’ll pull the lever against Obama. I just don’t believe a word Romney says. He won’t repeal Obamacare, he won’t cut spending, he won’t do any of the things he said he would. The only thing I can hope is that he is Obama-lite with a couple decent SCOTUS picks.

  3. Colleen says:

    We have no choice but to vote for whomever has best chance to defeat current cruddy president and administration.

  4. Great White Rat says:

    Count me on the same page as Chris. I expect that Romney will drive the country over the bankruptcy cliff at 30 mph instead of Obama’s 90 mph. We can only hope that he will make some gestures to the conservative base in the process – Chris’ suggestion of better SCOTUS picks is a good thought.

  5. Drew the Infidel says:

    One thing is certain and that is after the way the GOP hopefuls savaged one another during the “debates” (of which there are too many), voters know a hell of a lot more about them than they still know about Obhammud to this very day. I agree with Newt’s assessment that his winning the Nobel prize with no apparent qualifications is not as big a shock as the US ctizens handing him the Presidency with that same lack of merit.

  6. CZ says:

    Pugsley finally throws in the towel? Good.

    Now take that freaky looking wife of yours and go write some books.

    Just stay away from the media until after the election.

    Please.

  7. Xrlq says:

    If voting against Obama isn’t enough, vote for the most solidly conservative Supreme Court we’ve seen since before the Great Depression, vs. the most liberal one since (and possibly including) the Warren Court. Yes, the stakes really are that high in both directions. Kennedy alone could make that difference. if he retires on President Obama’s watch, we’ll go from a Supreme Court that narrowly upheld the First and Second Amendments in Citizens United, Heller and McDonald to one that would nullify them by judicial fiat. If he retires on Romney’s, then we’ll finally have the 5-4 anti-Roe majority everyone thought we had 20 years ago in Planned Parenthood v. Casey. And of course the same seismic shifts would obtain if any of the liberals retired under Romney or any of the conservatives did under Obama.

    I know what you disappointed Newties are thinking right now: Romney won’t appoint good conservatives cuz he’s a RINO. History suggests the opposite. When it comes to judicial appointments, only party label matters, not moderate vs. ideological. Few would argue that either President Bush was more conservative than Reagan, but Justices Thomas, Roberts and Alito are just as solidly conservative as Scalia, who was the only true conservative Reagan sucessfully installed on the court. Similarly, few would doubt Clinton was more moderate than Obama, but their SC appointees (Ginsburg and Breyer vs. Sotomayor and Kagan) are indistinguishable. The only clear trend is that over the past few decades, both parties have gotten really, really good at picking their judicial nominees. Reagan was the first to try, and he batted .333 (Scalia vs. Kennedy and O’Connor). Bush 41 batted .500 (Thomas vs. Souter) and every President since has batted 1.00. It’s very likely President Romney would too, and virtually certain President Obama would.

  8. Gravelagitator says:

    Nose plugs firmly in place, I’ll “pull the lever” for Romney. One of the piles my dog leaves in the yard would be a better prez than the pile we have in the White House now. Of course, if he chooses Christie as veep I’ll probably stay home.

  9. Wendy says:

    No nose plugs for me – I’ll gladly pull the lever for Mitt Romney – you may not think he is conservative enough, but I’ll repeat my mantra – Perry, Gingrich and Santorum had no chance in more moderate states. In California – I don’t think it would matter it the Republican was left of Jerry Brown – they still wouldn’t get elected.

  10. Tom TB says:

    A second term of Barry Soetoro/aka Barack Hussein O’bama would be worse than any mistakes Mitt Romney could make. This is a critical crossroad for America.

  11. Drew the Infidel says:

    @Gravelagitator–Your dog can create more shovel ready projects than can Obhammud. Agreed?

  12. Carlos says:

    @Gravelagitator: I thought Obhammud WAS/IS one of your dog’s piles in the yard.

    Oh, my bad. He’s a pile from the pig sty.

    And I don’t share the confidence that Romney will appoint a conservative judge to the SCOTUS. All I know for sure is that it wouldn’t be another Ginzberg or Wise Latina, but after those anything is pretty much fair game for Romney. Our only hope there is that he’ll appoint someone who doesn’t automatically side with the Dept. of Labor or EPA in every dispute with businesses. Someone who doesn’t would probably (but not necessarily) tend to be more conservative across the board.

  13. Chris in NC says:

    XRLQ: Two words on W’s SCOTUS picks: Harriet Myers. or how ever you spell her name. No, W wasn’t conservative like Reagan. W is/was Obama lite, or Obama 1.0.

    I am confident in getting good SCOTUS nominees because when Bush put up Harriet, the base and the people forced her out and we then received a great pick. We’ll do the same with Romney. But here’s the rub, as GWR above said, Romney will take us over the cliff at 30 MPH instead of 90 MPH. All the does is gives us longer to see the end coming.

  14. Xrlq says:

    Chris in NC: if you’re going to limit yourself to two words you should at least spell them correctly. It’s Miers, not Myers. No, she wasn’t a good pick, but not for the reason you suggest. She was as conservative as anybody; indeed, she’s the reason he picked Roberts the first time and ended up with Alito in her place the second. Miers’s problem was not ideology, but the fact that like most lawyers (myself included) she simply wasn’t qualified to sit on the Supreme Court. Of course Kennedy wasn’t Reagan’s first pick, either, just the guy we ended up with after Robert Bork’s surname turned into a verb.

  15. Ken66 says:

    I won’t lie. This is a ‘hold my nose’, but I’m backing Romney. Lord knows this isn’t first time I voted against the greater of two evils.

  16. Bob Bishop says:

    It’s strange how it comes to this. The GOP learned nothing in California and have moved to make the same error again, the consequences however, hmmmm. My suggestion is that first folks lean on the GOP and secondly put your money where your candidate is. Perry could have done this, personally I would have gone with Paul, but it is what is is. The focus now needs to be on those who will simply vote against Romney’s money and un-conservativeness and of course there is always that compromising progressive thing. A lot of bad baggage for Nationalists, Constitutionalists and Conservative Independents. Elitism, Arrogance and Progressiveness did in Whitman and Romney has set himself up the same way. Romney will not be changing nor will the GOP, if the largest voter segment is to be brought back to the Republican ticket we are going to have to do the inviting and the campaigning.

  17. Mwalimu Daudi says:

    Sorry, but include me out. The proud father of RomneyCare won’t win in November, and he may also take the chances of a GOP Senate down with him (not that Republican control has proven to be any great prize). But a decent showing by the rich dolt from Massachusetts in November will encourage the “moderates” who have seized control of the GOP to run someone like Dede Scozzafava or Charlie Crist in 2016 – and to sabotage the campaigns of any conservative candidates they can.

    In 2008 we watched the weird spectacle of the Marxist community organizer from Chicago actually being to the political right of Maverick McCain on the issues of taxes and drivers’ licenses for illegal aliens. In 2012 there is even less difference between Mitt Obama and Barack Romney. Both are limousine liberals with an unhealthy itch for welfare state fascism. Why pretend otherwise?

    It is no fun admitting this, but there is a full-blown civil war in the GOP right now, with the “moderates” doing most of the damage to both the party and the country. In 2008 and afterwards the “moderates” concentrated their attacks on Sarah Palin instead of the Democrats. In 2010 they did the same with Christine O’Donnell and Sharron Angle (one similarity among many GOP “moderates” have with Democrats is their fear and hatred of non-liberal women). If the GOP “moderates” have their way this year, Democrats will win the Senate seat in Indiana if Richard Mourdock beats Dick Lugar.

    It’s time to stop chugging down any swill the GOP happens to dish out. A poor showing by Mr. RomneyCare may force the GOP to stop trying to run to the left of Democrats. It makes no difference whether Barack Romney or Mitt Obama wins in November, but a thumping loss as conservatives desert may get the GOP “moderate’s” attention.