Gingrich: GOP ‘Incapable Of Competing’ Against Hillary Clinton In 2016

[irishpatrick]

WASHINGTON (CBS DC) – Despite repeated denials from Hillary Clinton about a possible *2016 presidential run, former GOP presidential candidate Newt Gingrich stated his party would be “incapable of competing” against her and the Democrats.

The former Republican Speaker of the House expressed negativity about his own party’s chances in 2016 with NBC’s “Meet The Press” on Sunday. He said that the combined support of Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton, and a presumably still-popular President Barack Obama would be an unstoppable campaign.

“Trying to win that will truly be the Super Bowl,” said Gingrich. “The Republican Party of today is truly incapable of competing at that level.”
*

washington.cbslocal.com/2012/12/10/gingrich-gop-incapable-of-competing-against-hillary-clinton-in-2016/

---

As I said in a different thread, it might be time to start a prolife party and let things go as they will. Give the people a real choice, and let the nation move into the future according to what they people want.

I am a believer that the Lord allows us to receive what we need, and oftentimes NOT what we want. The truth is, despite all the pain the USA has suffered, people have turned farther away from God (abortion, same-sex marriage, fornication, adultery, living together, low Church attendance, etc.). Until the nation returns to actually honoring and loving God, it really has no positive future–imo.

 

[SamH]

WASHINGTON (CBS DC) – Despite repeated denials from Hillary Clinton about a possible *2016 presidential run, former GOP presidential candidate Newt Gingrich stated his party would be “incapable of competing” against her and the Democrats.

The former Republican Speaker of the House expressed negativity about his own party’s chances in 2016 with NBC’s “Meet The Press” on Sunday. He said that the combined support of Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton, and a presumably still-popular President Barack Obama would be an unstoppable campaign.

“Trying to win that will truly be the Super Bowl,” said Gingrich. “The Republican Party of today is truly incapable of competing at that level.”
*

washington.cbslocal.com/2012/12/10/gingrich-gop-incapable-of-competing-against-hillary-clinton-in-2016/

---

As I said in a different thread, it might be time to start a prolife party and let things go as they will. Give the people a real choice, and let the nation move into the future according to what they people want.

Newt Gingrich thought he was capable of winning in 2012, how well did he predict that?

 

[benjammin]

Wow… really. I’m thinking after Taxes go up, I think the GOP will stabilize and be able to win in 2016.

 

[irishpatrick]

Wow… really. I’m thinking after Taxes go up, I think the GOP will stabilize and be able to win in 2016.

By 2016 people will be used to their new taxes, and they will be used to Obamacare, and they will be used to the new normal of 8-10% unemployment.

 

[_Abyssinia]

She lost the nomination in 2008 because people presumed it was hers for the taking, like a lot of democrats are doing now

If Obama leaves an awful economy in 2016, after 8 years of democrat presidency it is going to be a difficult job for any democrat to argue that people more of the same of the policies which have not worked, but which they want to continue

It is difficult for a party to win consecutive elections 3 times. It happened in 1988 but otherwise it has not happened since the days of Harry Trueman.

Those who are saying the Tea Party is over, republicans have no chance in 2016, consider that after Lyndon Johnson won reelection in 1964 it was presumed the republican party was over and then Richard Nixon won in the next election. It was unthinkabale in 1964 that republicans could win again

I refuse to believe the liberal hype that Hillary Clinton is a shoe in when you consider that she will be she will be 69 in 2016. Ron Paul and John McCain presidential chances were criticized because of their age. She is the most unpopular first lady. She was the architect of health insurance overhaul which ended in failiure. After Bill Clinton’s affair she said the allegations were trying to ‘undo the results of 2 elections’ and a 'vast right wing conspiracy. Hillary Clinton’s popularity in the polls was far lower when she ran in 2008 than it is now because now she removed from the presidency

 

[_Abyssinia]

She lost the nomination in 2008 because people presumed it was hers for the taking, as a lot of democrats are doing now

If Obama leaves an awful economy in 2016, after 8 years of democrat presidency it is going to be a difficult job for any democrat to argue that people should want more of the same of the policies which have not worked, which they want to continue

It is difficult for a party to win consecutive elections 3 times. It happened in 1988 but otherwise it has not happened since the days of Harry Trueman.

Those who are saying the Tea Party is over, republicans have no chance in 2016, consider that after Lyndon Johnson won reelection in 1964 it was presumed the republican party was over and then Richard Nixon won in the next election. It was unthinkable in 1964 that republicans could win again

Hillary Clinton is a washington insider who has got a lot of baggage that will be drawn out by republicans

I refuse to believe the liberal hype that Hillary Clinton is a shoe in when you consider that she will be she will be 69 in 2016. Ron Paul and John McCain presidential chances were criticized because of their age. She is the most unpopular first lady and is only first lady viewed less favourably than the president. She was the architect of health insurance overhaul which ended in failiure. After Bill Clinton’s affair she said the allegations were trying to ‘undo the results of 2 elections’ and a 'vast right wing conspiracy. Hillary Clinton’s popularity in the polls was far lower when she ran in 2008 than it is now because now she is removed from the presidency

 

[irishpatrick]

She lost the nomination in 2008 because people presumed it was hers for the taking, like a lot of democrats are doing now

If Obama leaves an awful economy in 2016, after 8 years of democrat presidency it is going to be a difficult job for any democrat to argue that people should want more of the same of the policies which have not worked, which they want to continue

It is difficult for a party to win consecutive elections 3 times. It happened in 1988 but otherwise it has not happened since the days of Harry Trueman.

Those who are saying the Tea Party is over, republicans have no chance in 2016, consider that after Lyndon Johnson won reelection in 1964 it was presumed the republican party was over and then Richard Nixon won in the next election. It was unthinkable in 1964 that republicans could win again

I refuse to believe the liberal hype that Hillary Clinton is a shoe in when you consider that she will be she will be 69 in 2016. Ron Paul and John McCain presidential chances were criticized because of their age. She is the most unpopular first lady. She was the architect of health insurance overhaul which ended in failiure. After Bill Clinton’s affair she said the allegations were trying to ‘undo the results of 2 elections’ and a 'vast right wing conspiracy. Hillary Clinton’s popularity in the polls was far lower when she ran in 2008 than it is now because now she removed from the presidency

The problem with your points is that the economy is in a mess right now, with many millions out of work. If the economy even improves slightly, that is all it will take. Democrats (today) seem to vote for Democrats no matter the state of the nation. Imagine the speeches Bill Clinton and Obama will make. Imagine the millions who will want Bill Clinton back in the WH. Gingrich is right, it will be a near perfect storm of Democrats that will take an awful lot to overcome.

The other problem is that the GOP brand has been torn to shreds by all the lies the left heaped on it…that will still exist in 2016.

Also, Hillary’s popularity is quite high right now.

I think the time is ripe to go in a new and completely different direction.

 

[epan]

A lot can happen in four years. I don’t think anyone can predict much today about what will happen in 2016.

I suspect that a Romney win would have opened the door for Mrs Clinton to defeat him after one term, and probably win an election in a landslide. But who knows? That is just my guess.

Jeb Bush might be able to step forward in 2016, and give Clinton a run for her money. It’s not known yet how much G.W. Bush has sullied the Bush name with the public. This last election must have been the first one since Nixon’s disgraceful resignation that the previous president was disavowed by his own party.

We need someone who is really charismatic, and truly a visionary leader. We are not in a recession. It is a depression. If you don’t believe that, imagine the 45,000,000 who are on food stamps in the US standing in line at a soup kitchen, as they were in the 1930’s. The only reason people don’t realize that it is a depression, is that our social safety net is keeping people off the streets. But this is not sustainable.

De-leveraging of debt continues with bankruptcies, foreclosures and business failures, while the government goes on a spending spree to try to compensate for cessation debt driven capital which was once flowing into the markets from the private sector. This is not a sustainable model, but it what every government tries to do in these circumstances. It is a panic response, which won’t work over the long run.

My point, is that… If I am correct, then the economic picture will still be bleak in 2016. Nothing much will have changed, just as nothing much changed through the 1930’s. This makes it very difficult to predict what will happen politically in 2016.

 

[irishpatrick]

A lot can happen in four years. I don’t think anyone can predict much today about what will happen in 2016.

I suspect that a Romney win would have opened the door for Mrs Clinton to defeat him after one term, and probably win an election in a landslide. But who knows? That is just my guess.

Jeb Bush might be able to step forward in 2016, and give Clinton a run for her money. It’s not known yet how much G.W. Bush has sullied the Bush name with the public. This last election must have been the first one since Nixon’s disgraceful resignation that the previous president was disavowed by his own party.

We need someone who is really charismatic, and truly a visionary leader. We are not in a recession. It is a depression. If you don’t believe that, imagine the 45,000,000 who are on food stamps in the US standing in line at a soup kitchen, as they were in the 1930’s. The only reason people don’t realize that it is a depression, is that our social safety net is keeping people off the streets. But this is not sustainable.

De-leveraging of debt continues with bankruptcies, foreclosures and business failures, while the government goes on a spending spree to try to compensate for debt driven capital which was once entering the market from the private sector. This is not a sustainable model, but it what every government tries to do in these circumstances. It is a panic response, which won’t work over the long run.

My point, is that… If I am correct, then the economic picture will still be bleak in 2016. Nothing much will have changed, just as nothing much changed through the 1930’s. This makes it very difficult to predict what will happen politically in 2016.

We need only to see what just happened, to have a good guess at the future. If things stay somewhat the same, or if they improve just slightly, the GOP will not win.

I also have zero faith in the GOP. I believe they are trying to moderate their platform in an effort to garner votes, yet that is exactly why Romney lost. Democrats do not water down their beliefs or their platform.

It would be nice, win or lose, to just once vote for a party and candidate that would actually fight for what they believe in. The Dems, as wrong as they are, do that all the time…they are true believers in their causes.

I have no idea what happened to the party who rose from nowhere and helped free the slaves. Today’s GOP is a mere hint of that once great party.

We need a true prolife party.

 

[_Abyssinia]

A lot can happen in four years. I don’t think anyone can predict much today about what will happen in 2016.

I suspect that a Romney win would have opened the door for Mrs Clinton to defeat him after one term, and probably win an election in a landslide. But who knows? That is just my guess.

Jeb Bush might be able to step forward in 2016, and give Clinton a run for her money. It’s not known yet how much G.W. Bush has sullied the Bush name with the public. This last election must have been the first one since Nixon’s disgraceful resignation that the previous president was disavowed by his own party.

We need someone who is really charismatic, and truly a visionary leader. We are not in a recession. It is a depression. If you don’t believe that, imagine the 45,000,000 who are on food stamps in the US standing in line at a soup kitchen, as they were in the 1930’s. The only reason people don’t realize that it is a depression, is that our social safety net is keeping people off the streets. But this is not sustainable.

De-leveraging of debt continues with bankruptcies, foreclosures and business failures, while the government goes on a spending spree to try to compensate for cessation debt driven capital which was once flowing into the markets from the private sector. This is not a sustainable model, but it what every government tries to do in these circumstances. It is a panic response, which won’t work over the long run.

My point, is that… If I am correct, then the economic picture will still be bleak in 2016. Nothing much will have changed, just as nothing much changed through the 1930’s. This makes it very difficult to predict what will happen politically in 2016.

Clinton v Bush, so 1990s. Time to move on

 

[ringil]

PAh.

Americans generally like to change the party in the executive branch after 8 years.

Making predictions more than 4 years away is pretty ridiculous.

I also think that Clinton would be too far along in years to get the votes if she is selected as the Democratic candidate.

I’m just glad we have Obama for 4 more years.

In any case, according to some folks around here, the US isn’t going to exist in 4 years so what’s the point.

 

[ringil]

democrat

Democratic

 

[_Abyssinia]

The problem with your points is that the economy is in a mess right now, with many millions out of work. If the economy even improves slightly, that is all it will take. Democrats (today) seem to vote for Democrats no matter the state of the nation. Imagine the speeches Bill Clinton and Obama will make. Imagine the millions who will want Bill Clinton back in the WH. Gingrich is right, it will be a near perfect storm of Democrats that will take an awful lot to overcome.

The other problem is that the GOP brand has been torn to shreds by all the lies the left heaped on it…that will still exist in 2016.

Also, Hillary’s popularity is quite high right now.

I think the time is ripe to go in a new and completely different direction.

That is why you can not run a campaign purely on the economy because if people presume it gets a better then they wonder what is the point of a new president. 2016 campaign has to be far wider in its appeal and purpose

Republicans will refocus and come back in 2014 and 2016

Democrats want people to vote 3rd party because that I believe decreases votes for republicans. Apparently Jim Matheson’s campaign did it and Mia Love lost and I bet that is not the only example

 

[irishpatrick]

That is why you can not run a campaign purely on the economy because if people presume it gets a better then they wonder what is the point of a new president. 2016 campaign has to be far wider in its appeal and purpose

Republicans will refocus and come back in 2014 and 2016

Democrats use 3rd party to lower the votes for republicans, apparently Him Matheson’s campaign did it and Mia Love lost and I bet that is not the only example

The GOP used to stand for something…that brand has been lost. That is why Romney lost, people new the entire GOP brand is no longer trustworthy.

The GOP used to stand for life, for marriage, for small government, for low taxes, for a strong military, and for states rights. All of that has been watered-down, which means that the GOP has become Democratic Party-lite.

People who stand in the middle, stand for nothing!

 

[Mickey]

If the democrats can create a situation where the majority are employed by the government…African Americans and Hispanics continue to show up at the polls…and single women continue to believe there is a war against them…then the republicans will never win again…no matter who is running on the democratic ticket.

 

[epan]

Clinton v Bush, so 1990s. Time to move on

True. But right now there are no other leaders apparent. Ryan is not a contender. Palin is not a contender. But it is a big country, and much could happen in four years. Nobody would have predicted Obama for 2008 in 2004. Ditto for Bill Clinton, and for Romney, four years prior to their campaigns.

 

[epan]

The GOP used to stand for something…that brand has been lost. That is why Romney lost, people new the entire GOP brand is no longer trustworthy.

The GOP used to stand for life, for marriage, for small government, for low taxes, for a strong military, and for states rights. All of that has been watered-down, which means that the GOP has become Democratic Party-lite.

People who stand in the middle, stand for nothing!

One of the huge problems for the GOP is that the red states are the welfare states. If the size of government is decreased, and taxes are actually lowered, then the red states are the ones which will suffer, for the most part, not the blue states who produce enough revenue to pay their own bills.

This is why I am pessimistic the either party will reduce government spending. In some cases, Federal dollars exceed the states GDP without federal money but some multiples. Those states would be in an even worse depression than they are in now.

 

[irishpatrick]

True. But right now there are no other leaders apparent. Ryan is not a contender. Palin is not a contender. But it is a big country, and much could happen in four years. Nobody would have predicted Obama for 2008 in 2004. Ditto for Bill Clinton, and for Romney, four years prior to their campaigns.

True, yet if someone comes on the scene, they can only get big numbers if they stand for something real.

People like the idea of giving everyone health care.

People like the idea of sticking it to the wealthy and taking their money,

People like the idea of pulling the rich down, and pulling the poor up, so everyone is equal.

In the meantime, 3,000 more babies will be killed today. And, real marriage will be marginalized again somewhere, and somehow, and the Church will continue to face the HHS mandate–and half of all USA Catholics like all of that.

 

[Jeanne_S]

We need a true prolife party.

Amen! This is the task at hand"

 

[irishpatrick]

Amen! This is the task at hand"

I agree–we need to get on this–now!

I have lost my trust in the GOP. We are generational witnesses to millions being slaughtered every year. It breaks my heart and soooo many people (even prolifer people) are so detached from those realities.

How can we ever hope to receive help from the Lord while we continue to kill His innocents?