General Question

skfinkel's avatar

Is Newt's win in SC good or bad for Obama?

Asked by skfinkel (12877 points ) January 21st, 2012

Would Newt be the candidate Obama would wish for? Or would Mitt be is preference to run against?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

21 Answers

wundayatta's avatar

Honestly, I don’t think it matters. I think Mitt is a bit more predictable. The main thing about Gingrich that worries me is that his philosophy doesn’t make sense, so I can’t predict his position on anything. I don’t believe he believes what he says. He’s a kind of pragmatist who is purely political. He is a tactician, and so anything he says, I don’t really believe. I don’t know what he really thinks.

Mitt is very similar to that. He has changed and moved right for similar reasons. Mitt seems more reasonable and Newt is a rabid politician (I don’t even know if he’s really right wing). But they both change depending on the wind. Which means I have no idea how they would be as President.

I guess either one would be equally bad compared to Obama. I don’t see any advantage to Obama in having one or the other as an opponent. Newt is a better attack dog, but I don’t know if that will really help him in the general election.

So, yes. Newt’s win is good or bad for Obama.

Paradox25's avatar

Good because I think that Mitt the chameleon has a better chance at beating Obama than the newt. Realistically though I don’t see Romney beating Obama either way. Personally I think that Ron Paul would have the best chance at beating Obama compared to any other Republican but most conservatives would never give him enough votes to win the Republican nomination anyways.

Aethelflaed's avatar

Newt can’t win the general election. I don’t think Romney would beat Obama, but I think it’s much more likely that Romney would beat Obama than that Newt will. Aside from all of Newt’s past baggage (which, even for a career politician, is a lot…), Newt has a tendency to “go rouge” in a big way. At least Romney isn’t giving late night comedians material like this.

Imadethisupwithnoforethought's avatar

It is very good for Obama. The longer the Republicans fight, the more they will get nasty. Eventually they will drive anyone who was sympathetic to them away.

LostInParadise's avatar

I hope Gingrich and Romney tear each other apart. If they need help, here are my two slogans against them. Against Romney: Romney is not the solution. He is part of the problem. Against Gingrich: Do you trust this man to be president?

The volatility in the front runner status indicates that the GOP just isn’t into any of the candidates. It is a really weak field. Against a strong candidate, Obama would probably lose. Against any of these jokers, he stands a good chance of being re-elected.

submariner's avatar

As has been said above and probably will be repeated below, it is good for two reasons;
1. The longer the GOP primary drags on, the better, and
2. Gingrich is a weaker candidate for the general election because he will not attract moderate independents and because liberals who are lukewarm about Obama will vote for Obama rather than risk letting Gingrich win. On the other hand, he is wilier and more charismatic than Romney, but on balance I still think Gingrich’d be weaker.

zigmund's avatar

It’s great. Romney is going to be the candidate, and the more support other candidates get, the more disaffected voters that will stay home in November becuase “their guy” isn’t on the ticket.

SavoirFaire's avatar

I think we should remember that the last time there was an inevitable candidate, it was Hillary Clinton. And the last time there was an extended primary predicted to destroy the winner’s chances in the general election, we got the current President of the United States of America.

That said, I agree that none of the Republican candidates seem particularly viable outside of the walled-off world that is primary season. Gingrich winning South Carolina prevents Romney and Santorum from gaining momentum, which certainly cannot be bad for Obama.

jrpowell's avatar

The only thing I can think is that all the good Republicans didn’t want to waste money and be labeled a loser so they are waiting until 2016 to run against Hillary.

This group makes a clown car look electable.

marinelife's avatar

Newt will not last.

zigmund's avatar

@SavoirFaire: In what way was Secretary Clinton an inevitable candidate? Most of the high powered Dems I know never thought she’d do as well as she did…

And by ”...got the current President…” I assume you mean “elected the candidate the citizens of this country felt was the best person for the job.”

SavoirFaire's avatar

@zigmund She was considered inevitable by the same people declaring Romney inevitable. That’s all I’m saying.

zigmund's avatar

Well we fooled them, then, didn’t we?

SavoirFaire's avatar

And they may be fooled again. We’ll see.

ETpro's avatar

So far, this entire Republican primary process has been a wonderful windfall for Obama and his reelection hopes. Ti’s been a traveling clown show, and it has exposed the ugly underbelly of the bigotry and insanity that now typifies the Republican base.

filmfann's avatar

Mitt and Newt (which sounds like a cartoon) will bash each other, weakening the survivor for Obama to easily thrash. This win for Newt is a win for Obama.

Qingu's avatar

I’m more scared of Romney. Independents might actually buy the bullshit about how his private equity experience translates into job creation.

I consider myself pretty cynical, but even I have enough faith in the American public to not elect a complete fucking scumbag like Gingrich.

mattbrowne's avatar

It’s very bad for America in general, even if it helps Obama. It tells the whole world that the Republican party can’t find a well-educated intellectual reputable candidate, capable of running the most powerful country in the world.

More conservative and liberal European politicians lose the confidence that America can be a reliable partner mid-term. Even conservatives over here don’t consider most candidates in the primaries to be conservative. They consider them to be nutcases. Really. What’s the matter with the Republican party? Why can’t they nominate a reasonable person?

ETpro's avatar

@mattbrowne I hope that this current reactionary, facist/corporatist Republican Party is melting down and will be replaced with a sane and hinestly conservative or progressive party. Perhaps a true Libertarian party will emerge. But the Republicans of Tea Party types are not conservative at all. THey are revolutionary regressives and seem to be in love with stupidity and see lies as truth and down as up. In the past, when political movements got lost ins such a wilderness, they quietly faded away like the Know Nothings..

It is disturbing, though, that there are so many Americans who will cheer for bigotry, naked aggression against nations that have never attacked us and pose no threat of doing so, hypocrisy and disdain for logic and the rule of law.

mazingerz88's avatar

Good. Definitely. If you saw Gingrich’s SC victory speech last night, you would have no doubt that he is going all the way, using his hate and deviousness to harness the people’s own hate for Obama as his ticket to get the nomination. The words “stupid” and “incompetent” will fly out of his mouth every chance he gets.

But if and when he gets the nomination, which would be depressing since it goes to show that Republicans are willing to reach down and grab shit from the toilet just to have something to throw at Obama, chances are this shit, err…Gingrinch, might hold his venom back a bit for the independents.

He is shrewd enough to know that if he does not stop demeaning Obama, that would rally and inspire Obama supporters who might have been otherwise disenchanted by the President’s performance.

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.

This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.

Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther