The Implosion of Newt Gingrich

I can think of several reasons to oppose the candidacy of Newt Gingrich for the Republican nomination. From the mismanagement of his campaign thus far to his lack of any real organization on the ground and no money to speak of to his questionable ethics both in his professional and private life, there are numerous red flags being raised warning us of what a Gingrich presidency might look like. Exhibit A, however, is his arrogance and the anger management issues that come with it.

Last night, after losing to Mitt Romney in Nevada, the former Speaker of the House decided not to host a party and give a speech, as is traditional in these cases. Instead, the Speaker chose to hold a press conference in which he attempted to do what he does best; chastise the media and blame his campaign's failure on Mitt Romney's "dishonesty", calling him a "Soros candidate". The episode quickly disintegrated into an episode of a man desperate for any explanation of his poor performance other than his own inability to raise money, earn support and organize a GOTV campaign. Former GOP House leader Dick Armey, now Chairman of Freedome Works, has pity for Newt, but still calls Newt what he is, namely, a sore loser:

Armey said that Gingrich’s criticisms of Romney were not helpful for either the GOP in November or Gingrich’s own campaign during an interview on CNN’s State of the Union on Sunday. “I feel bad for him. I think he’s digressed into a state of taking a second-rate campaign and turning it into a first-rate vendetta,” said Armey

Of course, Newt's problem is not that he's incapable of being president. It's not that he is a poor debater. Nor is his problem that he is not intelligent or an important conservative thinker. Newt's problem is that he's not as smart or effective as he thinks he is, and after two subpar debate performances in Florida people are beginning to figure that out. If Newt Gingrich wants to have any chance of being competitive in this race again, he'd better figure that out for himself, and soon. Politics requires a certain arrogance if you are going to survive in the mine field of elected public life. But it also requires more humility, or at least feigned humility. Newt has neither feigned nor actual humility (which one might find odd for a man on his third wife).

The simple truth is that arrogance, not a determined desire to be president, is what is driving Newt's campaign. His over the top rhetoric as he grapples to explain to himself why he is losing is only making it worse. More from Mr. Armey:

“I thought that last night was really sad for him,” said Armey about Gingrich’s Saturday speech. “Quite frankly again so much of Newt’s whole life is overstated, he overstates the case in such a hyperbolic fashion, it just looks vindictive.”

And that's what it is.

It's time for Mr. Gingrich to take a page out of Mr. Romney's 2008 play book and step aside and make way for the GOP nominee.

Is It "Game Over" For Harry Reid?

The Tusk has mentioned his prospects in this race before, but now it looks like it's all over for Senate Democrat Leader, Harry Reid of Nevada. Polls are consistently showing him lagging behind his two potential competitors, Sue Lowden and Danny Tarkanian. But the surest factor indicating his assured retirement is this:

Though respondents can't decide whom they want to win the Republican primary, they're certain they don't support Reid, the Senate majority leader seeking his fifth consecutive six-year term.

In one general election scenario, 49 percent of respondents picked Lowden and 39 percent chose Reid. In another, 48 percent picked Tarkanian to 43 percent for Reid. That poll, which surveyed 500 voters Tuesday through Thursday, has a margin of error of plus or minus 4.5 percentage points...

...For months the perception of Reid among voters has been fixed, with near 100 percent name recognition and a high number of voters viewing him unfavorably. In the latest poll, 38 percent of voters viewed Reid favorably compared to 50 percent with an unfavorable view.

50 percent unfavorable rating for the one of the most powerful Democrats in America? The most interesting part is that no one really cares who runs against him, the prevailing attitude seeming to be simply "get him the hell outta here." It's about time.

Oddly enough, this particular poll is a bit better than last month's Rasmussen Reports survey (my favorite, and the most reliable pollster out there) which showed Reid with a 54% unfavorable rating, including 42% who have a "very unfavorable" view of the Senate's leading liberal. My money is on the Rasmussen poll, given his accuracy in the past. This is good news for Nevada.

Game Over: Harry Reid Opposes Healthcare Reform Bill

It's the end. At least its the end of the "compromise" healthcare reform bill that was supposed to bring together Democrats and Republicans in a dizzying spectacle of bipartisanship not seen since Pearl Harbor. (I did not say "since 9/11" because I'm convinced a great multitude of Democrats were faking it). But, instead of that, not a single Republican is endorsing the bill and and now Harry Reid, the leader of the Senate Democra majority, says he will join his Democrat colleague, Senator Rockefeller, and oppose the legislation:

WASHINGTON - No sooner than the Senate Finance Committee's chairman released his long-awaited health care bill today than Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said it's not good enough for Nevada.

Reid is concerned about the cash-poor state's inability to boost Medicaid spending as would be required under the bill.

I seriously doubt Mr. Reid is concerned about the welfare of his state. More likely, he is growing increasingly concerned about polls showing that either of his potential Republican opponents would topple him in the general election next year. If that happens it would be the second time in as little as six years the Democratic leader of the Senate has been purged from office. It happened to Senate Majority Leader Tom "Puff" Daschle in 2004. It would be another stunning rebuke of Democrat leadership on this issue and shows us what a lightening rod it truly is.

Since the beginning of this debate, President Obama has chosen to let the liberal Democrat leaders of the Congress manage this charade and the American people are not impressed. When he finally tried to take control of the issue with a speech to the Joint Session he failed spectatularly, with members of his own party saying it has made it even more difficult to reach an agreement. The reason is not that the American people do not understand the complexities of the issue. That's a demeaning and elitist argument the leftists use to make themselves look important and smarter than "Joe Six-Pack". The fact is that a majority of Americans oppose these proposals because they understand them perfectly well. The debate has breached the discussion of just healthcare, and now envelopes a national discussion about the proper role of government in our lives and the social contract between the governing and the governed.

Finally, a debate that actually means something!