New Leadership for the Past
I’ve heard some rumbling in progressive circles that Newt Gingrich was seriously attempting a comeback as a presidential candidate. I didn’t really believe it. But somebody got Robert Novak to write a column touting the former Speaker who resigned in disgrace over his stupendous leadership failures as the man the GOP needs.
Apparently he has “dynamism.” More seriously, the view is that Gingrich offers a “constant stream of ideas, an important commodity in a party that appears to have run short of ideas during the Bush years.”
I’m not really sure how key ideas are to conservative political revival. But what Gingrich offers doesn’t really qualify as ideas. Instead, call them “ideas.” Instead of thinking about ways to solve problems in people’s lives, Gingrich is good at offering ways to package predetermined special-interest priorities as solutions to things that arise. As an opposition gambit, I think this probably works fine. It’s good for raising money, so it ensures that you can stay in the game. And it gives you talking points to go on TV with. Eventually the governing party will screw up, and in you’ll come. But at the same time, the considerable shortcomings to this approach as a governing philosophy is precisely what brought the GOP to this point — it leads to catastrophic screw-ups that prompt massive public disapproval.
55 Responses to “New Leadership for the Past”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
November 8th, 2008 at 11:15 am
it leads to catastrophic screw-ups that prompt massive public disapproval.
What evidence is there for this? Why should ideas from special interest groups necessarily be worse than those from think tanks?
November 8th, 2008 at 11:16 am
I thought “Newt” died in Aliens. I r cornfused…
November 8th, 2008 at 11:21 am
Aren’t all of Gingrich’s ideas and solutions basically
1) Cut corporate taxes
2) Cut the capital gains tax
3) Cut the top marginal rate
Seems like they did all of that, with wondrous results!
November 8th, 2008 at 11:22 am
Can Reagan’s corpse be far behind? Or may be Nixon’s.
November 8th, 2008 at 11:24 am
Re Michael Smith’s question “What evidence is there for this? ”
————-
How about $11.3 Trillion in federal debt? — roughly $9.8 TRillion of which was personally approved under the signatures of the last three Republican Presidents — “fiscal conservatives” Ronald Reagan, George H Bush, and George W Bush.
Good thing Newt kept those “Tax and Spend” Democrats out of power, huh.
And while we’re “getting the government off the backs of the people” , could we also get the Republican Plutocrats off our backs?
You know– the Plutocrats who stole $3 Trillion out of our Social Security accounts, who gave themselves a $2 Trillion tax cut to invest in CHina and who used the other $1 Trillion to [TRY to] give Iraq’s oil deposits to Big Oil.
The Plutocrats whose greed has almost destroyed the US economy and has required us to throw in $1.5 Trillion to bail them out?
I don’t understand all the rants about “terrorists” — the ruling powers of the Republican Party have shown that they are far more evil,malign, and a threat to us than Al Qaeda could ever hope to be.
Plus at least Al Qaeda doesn’t wave the US Flag and claim to be US Patriots while doing everything possible to stab the average American citizen in the back.
November 8th, 2008 at 11:29 am
New Gingrich’s patriotism is about as sincere as his marriage vows.
November 8th, 2008 at 11:30 am
Novak touting Gingrich means that the Republican party has a major leadership problem, to put it mildly. Under normal circumstances, no one with even a particle of common sense in their heads would give Gingrich the time of day, much less suggest he run for president.
November 8th, 2008 at 11:39 am
In defense of Newt, I think he does have some good ideas. , the online database of congressional legislation, was apparently his idea, or at least he pushed very strongly for it.
His judgment, however, is another question entirely.
November 8th, 2008 at 11:42 am
Grr. No preview function. Sorry for the error in the previous post. There’s only one link, to the Wikipedia article for THOMAS, the online congressional legislative database.
November 8th, 2008 at 11:52 am
Gingrich versus a likeable young Democratic President? Haven’t I seen this movie before? How did that all end for Newt?
November 8th, 2008 at 12:15 pm
Why should ideas from special interest groups necessarily be worse than those from think tanks?
Because MattY works for a think tank, that’s why.
Novak shows that certain people didn’t really understand what a “change election” is all about. It meant an explicit rejection of old personalities repeating old, tired talking points.
Both Clinton and McCain ran, in their own ways, a “return to better times of the past” campaigns (McCain trying to rebottle the lightning of his 2000 campaign and pre-2004 popularity). They even tried to recycle talking points from their respective hay-days. They both failed. Promoting Newt as the natural challenger to Barack Obama demonstrates that people still haven’t learned their lessons.
November 8th, 2008 at 12:31 pm
Suggested revision: for “resigned in disgrace over his stupendous leadership failures” read “resigned in disgrace over his blatant corruption and stupendous leadership failures.”
November 8th, 2008 at 12:39 pm
Gingrich/Palin in 20012!!
November 8th, 2008 at 12:49 pm
Well, the GOP are depressed and want to look to past successes – and Gingrich did manage to win a massive victory for the Republicans in Congress. Picking up over 50 House seats in one election is pretty impressive. The Dems have picked up less seats in the last two elections, in a politically toxic climate for Republicans, than he did in 1994 with a fairly popular president.
And they might still have the same general situation in Congress he put them in if Bush hadn’t done such an abysmal job.
November 8th, 2008 at 12:51 pm
Who the fuck cares about the random thoughts of a fucktard like Nazi Novak. Fortunately, he won’t be around in 2012 to pollute the MSM with his asinine nonsense.
November 8th, 2008 at 12:59 pm
Conservatives ought to at least try to come to terms with the fact that the recent financial meltdown COMPLETELY discredited them. A month after the debacle might be a bit too soon to think that they could offer “new ideas”.
November 8th, 2008 at 1:43 pm
Michael Smith Says:
November 8th, 2008 at 11:15 am
it leads to catastrophic screw-ups that prompt massive public disapproval.
What evidence is there for this? Why should ideas from special interest groups necessarily be worse than those from think tanks?
Just because no one else addressed this fundamental misunderstanding of what MY wrote, let me requote Matt: “But what Gingrich offers doesn’t really qualify as ideas. Instead, call them “ideas.” Instead of thinking about ways to solve problems in people’s lives, Gingrich is good at offering ways to package predetermined special-interest priorities as solutions to things that arise.”
This isn’t a claim that ideas from special interests to address certain problems are inherently worse. After all, we’re ALL special interests. It’s a claim that special interests have priorities already, and Gingrich merely offers them as solutions to whatever the problem of the day is. It’s much like: times are good? Tax cut! Times are tough? Tax cut! Times are mediocre? Tax cut!
November 8th, 2008 at 2:11 pm
Being from Georgia and a longtime Newt-watcher, I think his ego is such that he will always consider himself to be a formidable candidate for president.
November 8th, 2008 at 2:13 pm
eh… alright. I see your point
November 8th, 2008 at 2:33 pm
Re: And they might still have the same general situation in Congress he put them in if Bush hadn’t done such an abysmal job.
The GOP was already losing its congressional majority before Bush showed up in DC. The 1998 election was so poor a showing that Gingrich was pushed out the door.
November 8th, 2008 at 2:51 pm
It always fries me when NG is treated like some kind of elder statesman by the Villagers.
When someone so discredited as NG is considered some kind of “great white hope” underscores how devoid of talent the GOP is.
At this point I cannot name a single Republican who has a even a tiny shred of integrity or honesty.
November 8th, 2008 at 3:18 pm
At this point I cannot name a single Republican who has a even a tiny shred of integrity or honesty.
There are a lot of them. But every single one I know voted for Obama – and no longer wants anything to do with the party they remain registered for.
November 8th, 2008 at 3:30 pm
He just whistling past the graveyard.
November 8th, 2008 at 3:40 pm
I haven’t seen any indication that the Republican Party has “run short of ideas during the Bush years.” After the 2004 election, when Bush announced that he had political capital and intended to spend it, he had no trouble coming up with things to spend it on. Matthew Yglesias has it right: What the Republican Party is running short of is new ways to make it appear that its ideas haven’t been discredited by events.
November 8th, 2008 at 4:09 pm
One simple reason Newt wont run – he’s so grossly overweight that he looks spherical. On “This Week” there was a side shot of him sitting at the table and it’s clear Newt’s put on a few since we last saw him. Actually, “running” for office might do the guy some good.
Newt/Palin would look like some short lived sitcom where the fat guy is married to the hot chick. Does this really occur in nature? I don’t see it too much, but who knows.
November 8th, 2008 at 4:36 pm
Dude’s going to be 69 years old in 2012. It ain’t gonna happen.
November 8th, 2008 at 5:15 pm
Since 2006 Newt has been setting himself up as a movement leader or kingmaker; he might actually be smart enough to realize his baggage (among other things) would make him a lousy candidate who would certainly energize the Democratic base.
November 8th, 2008 at 5:53 pm
If Newt is constitutionally incapable of recognizing it, no on else is — Newt’s flameout was the most personal political failure in recent memory until W’s. He wasn’t done in by forces or events outside his control; he fucked up because of his special brand of meanness and hubris. With the hand Newt had to play, any of dozens of competent, reasonably savvy, tolerable human beings even in the republican caucus would have gone from strength to strength. Newt crashed and burned because he was a self-indulgent, self-infatuated asshole, and was widely perceived to be one. That hasn’t changed.
November 8th, 2008 at 7:09 pm
what Gingrich offers doesn’t really qualify as ideas. Instead, call them “ideas.”
But Newty is both a philosopher, historian and futurist. I know because he told us.
bwa ha ha ha ha.
Other than W Bush and Reagan himself, there is no one more responsible for our pathetic, self defeating politics of the last several years than Newty. And, ideas? Gingrich? Please.
November 8th, 2008 at 8:40 pm
Remember when we were reading about the Gingrich-dictated motivational tapes that were being handed out in the ‘94 campaign? We were given to believe that prospective freshman House members were memorizing them on the campaign trail as if they were all part of an Amway cult. Good times.
November 9th, 2008 at 1:15 am
They’re not really ideas per se, but they prove that Newt is a big-picture guy who’s not afraid to offend people he dislikes anyway. Newt is the father of “idealiness”.
November 9th, 2008 at 4:07 pm
I think Novakula is remembering what happened with Nixon, who got defeated in humiliating fashion, went away for a bit to do some writing/image rehab, and then came back to win a presidential election. This looks like Newt’s blueprint right now.
As for who wins, this is how a Newt v. Obama matchup should look:
November 9th, 2008 at 4:08 pm
Sorry, no preview: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZ8eHXFrnQ0
November 9th, 2008 at 6:55 pm
NG will be too old in 2012.
The face of the Repub party is going to have to be younger. That Jindal guy is the one everybody is waxing poetic about, although it seems like he’d have to lose that creationism stuff to get anywhere.
November 11th, 2008 at 8:31 pm
There wasn’t a lack of ideas in the Bush Administration. There were plenty of conservative ideas being advanced, at a blinding pace.
What there was a lack of was conservative ideas that weren’t abject failures.
Every single core conservative principle and reason for existance as an ideology has failed. And they were tested, put into place and given a chance to succeed. And they didn’t.
They failed. Conservatism has failed. It doesn’t realise it has failed. Its proponents lack the intellectual honesty to admit their ideas failed. But no mistake, conservatism has failed in domestic, foreign and economic policy.
December 7th, 2008 at 3:17 am
Since White Fang clawed his way to fame as the serial killer mutt. Folks ’round this way say a dog that kills will continue on that track; Because White Fang displayed these traits I know that it’s a fact. We had a coop with chicken wire
March 1st, 2009 at 4:59 am
viagra
Very interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!
March 5th, 2009 at 7:59 pm
Is there a post on any upcoming movies for 2009?
March 11th, 2009 at 4:13 am
Very interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!
March 12th, 2009 at 10:41 pm
I bookmarked this site. Thank you for good job!
March 14th, 2009 at 4:56 am
Very interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!
xanax
March 22nd, 2009 at 5:52 am
tramadol
I want to say – thank you for this!
March 22nd, 2009 at 10:18 am
buy viagra online
Incredible site!
March 23rd, 2009 at 4:20 am
viagra
If you have to do it, you might as well do it right
March 30th, 2009 at 5:44 am
wiqlatxp mceranbds qlzjbpv zydwxfv ownkjd wpmdu cuxhogrza
April 2nd, 2009 at 4:53 am
It is the coolest site,keep so!
buy cheap viagra
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:59 am
I bookmarked this site. Thank you for good job!
cheap brand pfizer viagra
April 9th, 2009 at 4:42 am
I rarely comment on blogs but yours I had to stop and say Great Blog!! viagra