Ahead of Nevada’s exciting caucuses today, former New Hampshire Gov. John Sununu and two Nevada Congressmen, Mark Amodei and Joe Heck, held a press conference call yesterday for Mitt Romney. The topic? Newt Gingrich Is An Unreliable Leader For Nevada.

To listen to audio of the entire call click here.

Highlights:

Gov John Sununu

Fmr NH Gov John Sununu

“Good afternoon. I guess it’s just about afternoon there too. So thank you all for joining us. I’m strongly supporting Governor Mitt Romney for president. I have a slight bias toward governors and former governors because they, I think, bring some experience of managing bureaucracies to the table and I think dealing with the legislative bodies in order to get what is often necessary, bipartisanship that is necessary to get legislation. I call it the ‘Ronald Reagan formula.’ I think Ronald Reagan was a great president because he had tremendous experience as Governor of California.

But beyond that, I am extremely concerned that Newt Gingrich, who is now the likely competitor in this primary process to Mitt Romney, is absolutely unreliable and frankly, from my direct experience, is untrustworthy. I’ve had to deal with the former Speaker Gingrich when I was chief of staff for the first President Bush and I found out that what Newt Gingrich would tell you in the morning he would probably change in the evening. Al Simpson put it very clearly in an interview with the Boston Globe; Newt Gingrich lied to the President of the United States. Peter King, current Congressman King, has made it clear that he doesn’t trust anything Newt Gingrich says. Senator Coburn from Oklahoma, former Congressman Susan Molinari, former Congressman Mickey Edwards, former Congressman Vin Weber, all these folks were part of his leadership team. And each one of them has, in their own way, has explained why they feel he is unreliable, both in terms of being erratic, both in terms of changing his mind on issues, both in terms of coming up with a contradictory idea the next day and finding him very incapable for staying focused on issues. Gingrich likes to talk about his big ideas. When Newt Gingrich talks about big ideas, I take ‘big’ as being a synonym for cockamamie because half the stuff he comes up with is unrealistic and undoable at a time when we’re dealing with huge budget deficits, when we are expressing concerns about $15 trillion, $16 trillion debt. He is talking about a trillion dollar program to go to the moon. There are appropriate times to have ideas that are new and different. This is not a time to spend a billion dollars going to the moon. Most of the ideas he has are designed to be self-aggrandizing. This is a man who cares more about his ego than he does about anything worthwhile for the country. And I am absolutely scared to death if someone says to me that this is a man who might win the nomination to run against Barack Obama.

I do want to touch on one item that former Speaker Gingrich raised at one of his meetings today. He played a video attacking Mitt Romney on the basis of a chance comment that Soros made in an interview. Soros was talking about people running for president and Soros suggested the similarity between Mitt Romney and the current incumbent in the White House. If I were Newt Gingrich, I would be self-sensitive to doing something affiliated to that because it would remind people that Newt Gingrich sat cheek-to-cheek with Nancy Pelosi in an ad that was funded by a group that Soros paid for. So in that sense, it was Soros’ money that put Gingrich on TV. And I think that is a clear definition and an underscoring of the fact that on issues like cap-and-trade, Newt Gingrich is not a conservative, certainly in throwing Paul Ryan under the bus as he did on the entitlement reform package that Paul Ryan talked about, Newt Gingrich is not a conservative, and frankly, Newt Gingrich’s principle philosophy is enhancing himself. I’ll stop there and let Joe and Mark have a few words here.”

Congressman Joe Heck

NV Rep Joe Heck

“Thanks Governor Sununu, this is Joe Heck. You know, I never worked directly with Speaker Gingrich, but I’ve heard a lot of things from former Congresswoman Barbara Vucanovich, who remains a very respected conservative leader in Nevada. And Congresswoman Vucanovich described the Speaker as too arrogant and cocky to be our nominee. And to me that says a lot. I’ve been a supporter of Governor Romney for a long time and, in fact, I may have been the first elected official to endorse this election cycle. Why am I endorsing Governor Romney? Simple, on the economy and jobs, there’s just no other candidate with Governor Romney’s economic know-how and experience in the private sector for proven leadership. And in Nevada, which has suffered more than any other state under President Obama’s failed economic policies, Nevadans are looking for a leader with a plan to grow the economy and in my opinion, that leader is Governor Mitt Romney. Mark?”

Congressman Mark Amodei

NV Rep Mark Amodei

“Thanks Joe. I’m not going to repeat anything the Governor or Joe said, but I’m going to give you two more pieces of the puzzle that I think are important, specifically in Nevada. Nevadans have been treated to the politics of division for the last three years under the Obama administration. Heck and I can tell you whether it’s in this primary, there’s a lot of people expressing a lot of respect for the Governor on how he has used a lot of restraint until recent when he basically had to come out and point out some things. But Mitt Romney has demonstrated he understands governing is a team sport, and that means bringing people together, not slicing them up for sport. That’s number one. Number two, that’s of particular importance to Nevada, especially when you’re talking about comparisons. Mitt Romney went through the presidential process four years ago and continuing from then until present, he’s got a deep team in Nevada. What that translates to, when you talk about the problems that Joe talked about, economy, jobs, resources, all those sorts of things, he’s got a deep bench in Nevada so he’s well-informed and he’s taken the time to get himself well-informed and build those networks: both north, south and rural in the state of Nevada and that makes him unique in this race.”

The American Spectator’s R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. provides a perfect follow-up to yesterday’s conference call – specifically to Sununu’s comments:

“Exit Newt”

Read more…

For the last four days, I have been meaning to publish a short video clip of an interview I saw on CNN, the night of the Florida primary, after the polls had closed (trust me, this is NOT stale). Ever since I first saw Ralph Reed on television many years ago, I have always admired his intelligent, insightful political analysis. Anderson Cooper interviews Ralph Reed, who is President of the Faith and Freedom Coalition, seeking his expert insight as to why so many voters of faith chose Governor Romney that day in Florida. In my opinion, this two minute video clip is the best piece of video explaining why Governor Romney is on his way to becoming our next President of the United States. If you do nothing else today, please take 2 minutes to see this video clip! (thank you to a good friend for directing me that night to watch this interview):

PLEASE — PLEASE — PLEASE — WATCH: ***** RALPH REED Interviewed *****

A few of his better quotes:

“An across the board sweep!” — “He split the evangelical vote with Gingrich” — “He won the Catholic vote by 26 points with two Catholics on the ballot!” — “He won women by a huge margin!” — “Very impressive”

[by the way, the FOX election coverage did not even compare with CNN's coverage, which was the most professional overall election night coverage that I have seen in many years]

Many of you may be visiting this site for the first time to learn more about what makes this guy Mitt Romney tick. You may have heard him refer to our “Creator” a few times in his speeches, especially when referring to the source of American rights. Many people do not know that as Governor, he worked closely with leaders of many different synagogues, churches, and faiths. You may be wondering why so many evangelicals and Catholics are lining up to support and promote the candidacy of Governor Romney for President of the United States. What makes this guy tick?

FIRST TIME VISITORS TO MITT ROMNEY CENTRAL:

***** Read the courageous speech by Mark DeMoss: CLICK

***** An evangelical’s words to Mitt Romney skeptics: CLICK

***** Deep South evangelical’s journey to Mitt: CLICK

***** Moral authority lost by Gingrich (by evangelical): CLICK

***** Letter by 5 ambassadors to the Vatican about Romney: CLICK

***** The Window to Mitt Romney’s Soul (a woman): CLICK

***** Open letter to Evangelicals — by an Evangelical: CLICK

***** POWERFUL CNN article — Why Evangelicals should dump Gingrich: CLICK

***** What does Mitt do with his free time (he has some) to serve others?: CLICK

***** Book on why Evangelicals should back Romney (by Evangelicals): CLICK

***** Major affirmation of Romney’s pro-life credentials: CLICK

Would you like to keep up on all aspects of the Republican campaigns this year? I highly recommend that you take 10 seconds out right now and subscribe to MRC (it really takes only 10 seconds). Go to the top right corner of this website, find the T-shirts, look below the shirts box and you will see this question: “Want MRC Delivered to Your Inbox?” and just below that is a tiny box to type your email address. If you subscribe, you will only get one summary update a day and you WILL NOT receive any spam mail. Find out why so many people are talking about Mitt Romney Central and you too will soon be able to educate your friends on the race.

“When you have read the Bible, you will know it is the word of God, because you have found it the key to your own heart, your own happiness and your own duty.” — Woodrow T. Wilson (1856-1924) Twenty-eighth President

,
To see some GREAT political cartoons by Michael Ramirez …………….
,
Read more…

In the 24 hour news cycle, the story of the day has been Mitt’s comments to CNN in the early morning after his Florida win. While I think even the most ardent Romney fan would admit that this could and should have (and will be) phrased more adeptly, the liberals have taken and run with the partial quote that he’s “not concerned with the very poor” … It looks worse in print that in the context of the interview:

Mitt cares deeply about the poor, and his actions speak louder than words. How many “journalists” have bothered to mention that Mitt has given over $7,000,000 (SEVEN FREAKING MILLION!) to charitable organizations in just the last two years? Records from before then show the Romney’s consistent giving millions upon millions to organizations that care for the poor. By contrast, Joe Biden gave only $3690 to charity in an entire decade … that’s PROOF of someone that doesn’t care about the poor. From 2001-4, the Obamas made nearly a million dollars, but donated LESS THAN 1% of that income to charity.

Or what about when Mitt gave cash out of his pocket to the lady in South Carolina who said God guided her to follow Romney’s campaign bus to find help to keep her lights on? The EXACT SAME CNN REPORTER (Soledad) even reported about that a couple of weeks ago … does she have no memory?

Mitt doesn’t care about poor people? Demonstrably false and easy to debunk (and this is without even delving into fact that Mitt, as a Mormon Bishop for several years, dedicated much of his time to caring for the poor in a very “hands on” fashion). If Obama and team push this theme it will come back to bite them. Mitt’s done more to care for the poor than any snarky reporter or any of his political rivals.

Recall Vic’s post from a couple days back that highlighted Romney’s life of service and included the following YouTube:

Additionally, Brit Hume on Fox News today adroitly argued that anyone who wants to “make hay” or be offended by this out-of-context quote wouldn’t be voting for a GOP candidate anyways. I’d have to agree.

In my opinion the VERY BEST article of the last 10 days, that best articulates why Newt Gingrich cannot be President of the United States, is by Dr. Jerry L. Walls. Rather than take up a lot of real estate here with his quotes, I highly recommend you set aside five minutes and click here to read this OUTSTANDING editorial:

JOHN NEWTON, NEWT GINGRICH AND THE REAL ISSUE FOR HIS CANDIDACY

“Fidelity is the sister of justice.” — Horace

“True happiness… is not attained through self-gratification, but through fidelity to a worthy purpose.” –Helen Keller

Here is a list the scandals that have involved Newt Gingrich in the last week. As you read this list, ask yourself if this man would be fitting representative for our country as president of the United States.

1) Gingrich’s second wife, Marianne Gingrich, reveals on ABC News that Newt asked her for an “open marriage” so he could continue to have an affair while remaining married. 

2) After the “open marriage” allegation, Gingrich stated in his defense that he “offered several witnesses” to ABC news who could counter the allegations but that ABC news “wasn’t interested.” A few days later, Gingrich then admits that he lied and that he never offered counter witnesses to ABC.

3) Forbes magazine reports that Gingrich very possibly is a tax cheat and that he didn’t pay all the necessary taxes for 2010. Gingrich owes up to $69,000 in taxes to the IRS.

4) Politico runs a story that proves conclusively that Gingrich supported and praised the model used by Freddie/Fannie to make home loans. This model allowed for “subprime” mortgages to be used widely in the U.S. and eventually lead to the housing crisis. Politico’s story contradicts Gingrich’s many claims that he was simply a “historian” for Freddie/Fannie and that he warned against the model. 

5) Countering Gingrich’s recent claims that he was Ronald Reagan’s greatest supporter/follower, many insiders to the Reagan White House wrote that Gingrich “repeatedly insulted Reagan”and said that Reagan was responsible for America’s moral “decay.” Newt goes on to say thatReagan’s policies were “flawed” and “insufficient” to counter the spread of Communism and the Soviet Union. 

6) A new video of Newt Gingrich is uncovered that shows Newt in 1985 bashing Ronald Reagan saying “the Reagan administration has failed” and that “Harry Truman has accomplished vastly more in foreign policy in five years than Reagan in the same amount of time.” 

7) At a recent rally in Florida, Gingrich said “I never criticized Clinton for having sex with Lewinski.” That is truly an astonishing thing for Gingrich to say. 

8. In an interview with CBN, Gingrich says that his many mistakes, like being a serial adulterer, makes him look more “normal and relatable” to people.

9) Joe Scarborough served in the House as a Republican during Newt’s time as speaker. Scarborough writes about how Newt passed the Contract with American and then fought with the GOP to break key provisions of that same contract. Scarborough also brings up how Gingrich “compared Reagan with Neville Chamberlain, dismissed Reaganomics as flawed and called Reagan’s approach to the Soviet Union an utter failure a few years before the U.S.S.R. was relegated to the dustbin of history.”
 

10) In 2007, Gingrich said that Spanish is the “language of the Ghetto.” Fact-checkers have verified that Gingrich has given several explanations for this comment but he has never really apologized for it.

11) Aside from the scandals, there are also just plain “Zany” comments made by Gingrich. In a speech in Florida recently, Gingrich vowed to create a “permanent colony on the moon by the end of his second term in office.” And that colony will “become the 51st state in America.”

12) Former GOP presidential nominee, Bob Dole, issues a stinging anti-endorsement of Gingrich pointing out that hardly anyone who served under Gingrich has endorsed him.

Did I forget anything else that happened in the last week or so? Those are just the scandals I could think of off the top of my head. Just imagine what the Democrats could do with a list like this. And remember, that is only last week.

What relevance does this photograph have to what I have written below? Nothing. I include it here because 1) I love photography, 2) Every photograph tells a story and I like this story, and 3) This photograph from last year, around Christmas, is the best one I have ever found depicting the next President of the United States of America. How cool is this shot? I wish I could claim this photograph as one I had made!

What about last night’s debate? Mr. Gingrich is discovering firsthand, the cool, steely determination of executive authority. The alpha male of the Republican presidential candidates is clearly Governor Romney.

What we witnessed last night is called “command.” Governor Romney possess leadership command. Need I write more?

And Gingrich? How long must Americans continue to provide a forum for an undisciplined, pompous, chest-beating, name-dropping Washington insider to pontificate? Do Americans really want a President that has spent the last half of his life in self-promotion and self-love — who is still “maturing?” The two million dollar “historian?” Someone who might awaken the day after his coronation as President and decide to build an island in the Atlantic ocean so he can claim a 51st state for his legacy?

Contrast Mr. Gingrich with Governor Romney. Until this week, Governor Romney’s demeanor has been that of a confident, but modest gentleman — secure in the confidence that comes from decades of extraordinary accomplishments in leadership — beholden to no one. Some have mentioned to me that his style has been humble; a possible reference to his Christian upbringing in which the virtue of humility is considered above almost all other human character traits. “Well, let me tell you this” (to quote Newt). Governor Romney had enough of the Gingrich “baloney” last night and decided to put Mr. Humpty Dumpty in his place. One of the best examples of that moral authority was Governor Romney’s response to Gingrich’s immigration attack — Gingrich appeared to cower, afraid to even glance in the direction of Romney as he pierced him with one dagger after the next (Governor Romney’s height advantage helps too).

Why does Gingrich keep whining about “attack ads?” This week Gingrich has begun to flail. He does not want to take on a defensive posture, so he jabs at the wind with his weak, empty attacks, resorting to personal labels such as “Liar!”, “Wrong!”, “Desperate!”, etc. (complete irony). Governor Romney’s message is meant to resonate with Americans who are thoughtful; thinking.

Gingrich’s message is directed to the lowest common denominator; those that will believe anything he says or to those that want to believe the pander (lunar colony). Hence, if he says that Governor Romney voted for a Democrat, it is like Pharaoh Ramses declaring, “Let it be written! Let it be done!” All are to then fall in line behind Gingrich. Why can he not just answer to truth?

He demanded that Governor Romney release his taxes. Done. Romney demanded that Gingrich release all the secret files supporting his ethics sanctions. Deflection. Everything about Gingrich is deflection. Even when he has no good answer in the debate, he talks by complimenting the competitors – deflection by flattery! Gingrich is a master of the cunning. You can even see it in his countenance.

Pre-Iowa, the PACs promoting Congressman Paul and Governor Romney were generous with Gingrich by letting up when Gingrich tanked after a few days of truth letting (revealing a mere 1/100th of his laundry). Frankly, they should have flattened Gingrich right then and there to end his political career before he got a second wind to promote anti-capitalism.

If Gingrich were to leave the race today, he would best be remembered for his liberal rhetoric and the damage he exacted on the Republican Party. He feigns surprise as more truth is revealed. It is no fluke that just about every staunch conservative is coming out against Gingrich, except the entertainers (Limbaugh / Hannity — those who profit most by liberals in the saddle).

AN ASIDE — DEBATE TRIVA: Did any of you notice some subtle details from the debate? As Blitzer announced the names of each candidate, only one candidate clapped each time: Governor Romney. Two candidates sang the Anthem: Senator Santorum and Governor Romney. Most of the candidates often dissolve to the casual in addressing one another by first name. Governor Romney almost always refers to the others with the respect they deserve by their mere presence in a presidential debate: “Senator Santorum, Speaker Gingrich, Congressman Paul.” Note: People often refer to Governor Romney as “the most presidential…” referring to his appearance. It is called “command presence.”

As a political hack, I have followed the details of campaigns since the Iran hostage crisis. What we have witnessed these past weeks in presidential politics in unprecedented. I saw part of an interview on O’Reilly last night with Ann Coulter that I think summarized what has seemed absolutely clear to me for months. O’Reilly was pressing her to opine as to why the avalanche of major conservatives pummeling Gingrich. My quoting her probably is imperfect, but in effect she said, “I think it is because they are seeing that Romney is running as a moderate and will probably govern as a conservative. Gingrich is talking like a conservative, but may govern as a liberal . . . “ She said Gingrich might wake up one day and decide he was serious about a lunar colony while the debt keeps escalating!

We probably posted to this Ann Coulter article already, but I love this paragraph from her article yesterday titled, RE-ELECT OBAMA: VOTE NEWT! (a must read)

Gingrich may have spent his entire life in Washington and be so much of an insider that, as Jon Stewart says, “when Washington gets its prostate checked, it tickles [Newt],” but he is deemed the rebellious outsider challenging “the Establishment” — because, again, “the Establishment” is anyone who opposes Newt.

And this:
Read more…

If you’ve been over to Drudge Report or listened to Rush Limbaugh (today’s transcript) in the last 24 hours you’ve seen/heard a few clips of Gingrich bashing or distancing himself from Reagan/Reaganism. If Newt hadn’t been wrapping himself in the robes of “The True Reagan Conservative” and taking co-credit for all of Reagan’s accomplishments in debates and on the stump then I guess this wouldn’t seem so hypocritical. Megan Kelly, Fox News anchor, said that in one speech Newt referred to Reagan/Reaganism over 50 times.

Well, this NEW video below is the most damning to Gingrich’s claim to be a true Reaganite than anything I’ve ever seen so far:

Newt’s been running around for months giving Mitt grief as the “Massachusetts Moderate” because, in a 1994 debate vs Ted Kennedy, Mitt said “I was an Independent during Reagan-Bush, I’m not trying to return to Reagan-Bush” (the context was spending and fiscal policy … unfortunately these were definite weaknesses for Reagan and Bush). Would you say that “turnabout is fair play” here?

Newt is undergoing a hyper-speed “death by a thousand cuts.” I felt the tide turning around 48 hours ago and stated here that this was the beginning of the end for Newt. I honestly didn’t think it would come this fast, but I’m not complaining.

Newt and his fans I’m sure will blame Romney and his team for this . . . but that’s not the truth at all. Newt tried to build a skyscraper campaign on a toothpick foundation. He’s spent his entire career spouting off on every issue (most of the time on both sides) and now he’s “SHOCKED” that he’s being held to account for his own words. He’s practiced scorched earth politics his whole career, and burned plenty of bridges in the process. Fewer than 10 of the congressmen that served under him have endorsed him (Mitt has over 70 congressional endorsements . . . and more coming), a telling sign that Newt is plenty capable of losing his clout and influence all by himself … no reason to blame Mitt. If Drudge can take out Newt in 2 days, just imagine what Obama/Reid/Pelosi could do to him with the mainstream media cheering all the way along. Getting rid of Newt as a potential nominee is a service for which ALL Americans should be grateful!

Florida’s U.S. Senator Marco Rubio chimed in big time for Governor Romney yesterday: This is what we call “goodwill” having been earned after a lot of hard work for another candidate:

“Mitt Romney is no Charlie Crist. Romney is a conservative, and he was one of the first national Republican leaders to endorse me. He came to Florida, campaigned hard for me, and made a real difference in my race.”

Guess who did this kind of work for candidates after his first presidential campaign and loss? Ronald Reagan. This has rarely been discussed this cycle, but there is a reason Reagan’s coat tails brought in so many conservatives with him. After he lost the 1976 nomination to Ford, Reagan campaigned hard for many U.S. senators, congressmen, and governors. That goodwill mattered, big time.

PROOF that Newt Gingrich, the entertainer, demands an audience for validation:

This New York Times article contains a video in which he calls Governor Romney “dishonest” and calls him a liar.

In an interview with the morning show “Fox and Friends,” Mr. Gingrich said NBC’s rules amounted to stifling free speech. In what has become a standard line of attack for his anti-establishment campaign, Mr. Gingrich blamed the media for trying to silence a dissenting point of view.

“I wish in retrospect I’d protested when Brian Williams took them out of it because I think it’s wrong,” Mr. Gingrich said. “And I think he took them out of it because the media is terrified that the audience is going to side with the candidates against the media, which is what they’ve done in every debate.”
[...]
Mr. Gingrich’s performance in the debate in Tampa on Monday night was far more muted. Critics noted that he seemed to be off his game. The National Journal, which co-hosted the NBC debate, compared Gingrich to “a stand-up comedian whose routine suffers without echoes of laughter egging him on.”

Mr. Gingrich clearly noticed something was off, too. “We’re going to serve notice on future debates,” he told Fox. “We’re just not going to allow that to happen. That’s wrong. The media doesn’t control free speech. People ought to be allowed to applaud if they want to.”
[...]
At debates during the general election, which are governed by rules set by the Commission on Presidential Debates, the audience is told to remain silent. “No cheers, no applause, no noise of any kind,” as Jim Lehrer reminded them in 2008.

Gingrich’s Use of Saul Alinsky:

The Dough Boy of GOP reaction has apparently decided he can win it all by making Alinsky the central figure of the 2012 campaign. Every time Gingrich opens his mouth, out comes pronunciamenti like “the centerpiece of this campaign…is American exceptionalism versus the radicalism of Saul Alinsky.” (Fox Nation 1/21/12) or “Saul Alinsky radicalism is at the heart of Obama.” (CNN 1/22/12)

If this were not silly enough, harken to Rudy Giuliani on the TV upbraiding Gingrich for acting like Alinsky: “What the hell are you doing, Newt? I expect this from Saul Alinsky. This is what Saul Alinsky taught Barack Obama.”
[...]
In Congress, Gingrich made a name of sorts for himself the time he groused about being asked to deplane from Air Force One’s rear door. He wanted to come down the front steps, where the Marine guard throws you a salute and people on the wrong side of the velvet rope strain for so much as a smile. Gingrich likes to run with the overdogs, with the megas — the mega rich, the mega powerful, the mega glorious.

Alinsky spent his life with the have-nots and the have-not-enoughs. He hated to see people kicked around, but he didn’t entertain Captain America fantasies. He didn’t want to wear a cape. Instead, by organizing people, he wanted to insure that every man and woman could have their own cape.

WHAT ABOUT CHARITABLE GIVING COMPARISONS? Why the fuss over Romney’s wealth?

Make no mistake; Newt Gingrich is a very wealthy man. I have seen estimates of net worth exceeding $70 million. Here is how they stack up in charitable giving:

Romney (2 yrs)…..$7 million / 16.7%

Gingrich……………….$81,133 / 2.6%

Obama (’07)………$240,000 / 5.7%

Biden (10 yrs)…….$369.00 / 0.3%

Biden (2010)………$5,350 / 1.4%

Gore (1997)……….$353.00 / 0.000002% (guesstimate)

~Addendum from Ross
Check out a short video about Mitt from Celeb Life below the fold. Read more…

NOTE: Specific Endorsement Count by Candidate & Names: End of Post

Any one endorsement for a presidential candidate, in and of itself, is not generally considered that important in the long-term. However, how that endorser supports the candidate over time and the number of endorsements of stature can have significant influence. Every endorsement is a huge vote of confidence by the person putting their name on the line, in public (consider those who do not endorse candidates at all — there is a reason they don’t step up)

I have been giving a lot of thought to the large number of endorsements Governor Romney has compiled week in and week out. Gingrich sees this “voting” and he attempts to blunt their importance by referring to these as “the establishment” supporting Governor Romney.

Nonsense.

No matter how you cut it, almost EVERY one of these endorsers knows both Gingrich and Romney; some better than others. Very few of these choose Gingrich. By the way, I have yet to hear any close friend of Gingrich or any colleague of his (that worked closely with him for years), ever say anything positive about the man as a leader (besides his ability to speak well). Why is that? I only hear negative things said of him from those that know him well.

Yesterday’s Opinion section of The Wall Street Journal discusses this important topic:

Do endorsements matter? Politicians certainly think so, and they spend loads of time courting party elites and opinion-makers. So far, though, 2012 has shown how the politics of anointment and appointment can fail.

South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley flopped mightily in trying to deliver her state for Mitt Romney. Evangelical leaders held a summit to get the Palmetto State to back their new choice, Rick Santorum, but he fared much worse than Mr. Romney. Newt Gingrich knows the feeling—New Hampshire’s supposedly dominant Manchester Union Leader newspaper huffed and puffed for Newt and got him less than 10% of the vote.

But it’s easy to cherry-pick examples to prove the folly of endorsements. In some circumstances, they can make a substantial difference.

Throughout American history, presidencies have been created by the laying on of incumbent hands. Thomas Jefferson effectively passed the presidency to his friend and confidant, James Madison. Andrew Jackson handed his populist democracy off to an unlikely dandy, Martin Van Buren, in 1836. Few would have imagined the studious and portly William Howard Taft as president until Theodore Roosevelt picked him in 1908. More recently, George H.W. Bush might not have been elected president without Ronald Reagan’s blessing. Madison, Van Buren, Taft and Mr. Bush all got their predecessor’s third term—when popular, presidents have extraordinary powers.

What about little-known state legislators and local sheriffs? Even low-level backing can attract the cameras and generate a positive story. But this can backfire if candidates overplay their hands, as Jon Huntsman did when his campaign hinted at a “major” announcement in Florida. Speculation naturally centered on former Gov. Jeb Bush. Not quite. Mr. Huntsman got only his son, Jeb Jr., and the media’s letdown showed in the coverage.
[...]
Even more than Democrats, Republicans typically nominate a candidate that party elites support. In “The Party Decides,” political scientists Marty Cohen, David Karol, Hans Noel and John Zaller analyzed endorsements made prior to the Iowa caucuses in presidential primary contests from 1980 to 2004. They found that the candidate who had won the biggest share of endorsements won the eventual nomination in nine of 10 competitive contests (the exception was Democrat John Kerry in 2004). On the GOP side, the eventual nominees all won a strong plurality of endorsements.

Not surprisingly, given Mr. Romney’s position as the front-runner and the fear that many Republican officeholders have of sharing a ballot with Mr. Gingrich or Ron Paul, the former Massachusetts governor has a long lead in endorsements from elected officials. According to the Capitol Hill newspaper Roll Call, Mr. Romney has the backing of 72 members of Congress, versus a combined 17 for the other candidates.

This is good news for Mr. Romney. Mr. Gingrich is attempting to stir the populism of the GOP base by railing against “elites,” but many voters welcome guidance in intra-party contests. In a general election, voters have the invaluable short-hand cue of the party label. But in a nominating contest, all candidates have the same party label. How to choose just one? Differences in personality, background and policy help, but so does a candidate’s association with other well-known party figures. People want to puzzle out which candidate comes closest to their kind of Republican or Democrat.

Non-endorsements can send powerful signals to voters as well. For decades, leading Southern Democrats practiced “golden silence” in presidential years, refusing to endorse their party’s presidential nominees. This was a green light to voters that it was acceptable to support a Republican for the White House. In 1960, President Eisenhower wanted Vice President Nixon to succeed him, but he damaged Nixon’s campaign when asked what major decisions in his administration Nixon had influenced. “If you give me a week, I might think of one,” said Ike. The comment ended up in one of John Kennedy’s TV ads.

Could non-endorsements end up mattering in 2012, too? Despite decades on Capitol Hill and four years as speaker of the House, Mr. Gingrich has only 11 congressional endorsements, five of them from Georgians.

[emphasis added]

CHECK THESE TWO SITES FOR MANY SPECIFICS:

Endorsements for the Republican Party presidential primaries, 2012

RACE 4 2012 — Endorsements as of January 20, 2012
,

*********************************************************************************
* * * * PELOSI: Gingrich as President: “THAT WILL NEVER HAPPEN” (below fold) * * * *

Was there an important speech last night? I heard something about the POTUS speaking. Oh well, I missed that one.

Now that I think about Newt walking out onto the debate stage the other night, he actually walks like a duck! Do you remember that profile shot from behind the curtain, looking out toward the audience as Mr. Gingrich walked out? He sorta waddled.

In all seriousness . . .

Monday night, Gingrich told the us that he was merely acting as a concerned “citizen” in all these jobs he has had earning multi-millions of dollars. Right. Again, what do we know? We are all simply naive.

A number of sources yesterday checked into whether Mr. Gingrich used his influence inappropriately. Here is what we find from CNN‘s Truth Squad. You judge:

The New York Times also reported last month that the world’s largest insulin maker, Novo Nordisk, had hired Gingrich to help “position itself as a thought leader” to raise awareness about diabetes.

Former Colorado Rep. Marilyn Musgrave told CNN last month that Gingrich called her at the height of the 2003 debate urging her to vote for the bill.

“Newt called me to vote yes,” said Musgrave, who is now director at the anti-abortion Susan B. Anthony List.

“He asked for a yes vote on a Medicare prescription drug benefit,” she said. “Dick Armey” — a former House majority leader — “called me and wanted a no. But I had already made up my mind to vote not to expand an entitlement that we were going to have to pay for down the road.”

Musgrave, who is neutral in the presidential race, said she was not sure if Gingrich was technically “lobbying” when he called her, because she did not know if he was working for anyone else at the time.

“All I know is he wanted a yes,” Musgrave said.

Musgrave was one of 19 House Republicans who voted against the plan, which passed 220-215.

Two other Republicans who served in Congress at the time, Arizona Rep. Jeff Flake and Idaho Gov. Butch Otter, told the Des Moines Register last month that they interpreted Gingrich’s actions as lobbying.

“He told us, ‘If you can’t pass this bill, you don’t deserve to govern as Republicans,’ ” Flake told the paper. “If that’s not lobbying, I don’t know what is.”

According to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, the bill is projected to cost nearly $1 trillion from 2010 through 2020. The price tag for Medicare Part D was added to the nation’s deficit.

“It was a huge entitlement” that left the insurance and drug industries as big winners, said Uwe Reinhardt, a professor of health economics at Princeton.

[emphasis added]

Read more…