Natalie Gonnella
Follow Natalie on Twitter
Although Newt Gingrich's official entrance into the 2012 race this week stirred up the media, the former Speaker has received mixed reviews from voters, politicians and pundits.
While a number of conservative lawmakers immediately backed Gingrich's campaign (Texas Congressman Joe Barton was the first Republican to show support, and Iowa Senator Chuck Grassley has also offered praised), of the eight House Republicans from his home state of Georgia, only half have endorsed his bid.
Although he's an intelligent and highly recognized candidate, he has one of the lowest Positive Intensity Scores among the 2012 field and an unfavorable rating trailing only those of Sarah Palin and Donald Trump. He faces a steep climb to secure voter support.
He also faces a steep climb to secure the support of commentators. His announcement prompted more critical than supportive reflections. Here’s a look at what some conservative columnists have said about Gingrich’s presidential ambitions:
During an online conversation on the New York Times Opinionator blog with Gail Collins, David Brooks said of Gingrich’s presidential pursuit:
You may be skeptical of the G.O.P. field now, but they will woo, and you will resist; they will woo, and you will resist; and at last stout ardor will win fair heart…You’ll see, by the time this is over, you’re going to say nice things about one of the Republicans, at least.
I’m not sure it will be Newt, though. He loves his ideas powerfully but not long. He has 14 world historical ideas per hour, two of which are good and the rest of which are around the bend. Sources of mine who worked in and around the speaker’s office still marvel at his ability to disorganize any operation. When it comes to management he has the power of the Harvard Business School except in reverse, and that will be his undoing.
In his column in the New York Post, John Podhoretz weighed in on Gingrich's bid, noting that:
While he may understand the kinds of hot-button issues that get to people, what he does not understand is how he, Newt Gingrich, comes across to people. The answer: not well…Newt Gingrich never received more than 100,000 votes in his life. He'll never be president. The only positive way to frame his foolish bid is to quote the rueful lyric from "Thanks for the Memories," Bob Hope's signature song: "You may have been a headache, but you never were a bore."
Adding later in a short post referencing his NYP column on Commentary Magazine's Contentions blog:
Self-discipline is the one thing all successful presidential candidacies have in common. It’s not, to put it mildly, an aspect of Gingrich’s character.
Responding to a NYT Editorial, and also Podhoretz’s column, Commentary’s Jonathan S. Tobin blogged yesterday that:
I agree [with John] that Gingrich has virtually no chance of being elected president. But if you read today’s New York Times editorial denouncing Gingrich, you may walk away feeling a mite more sympathetic to the former speaker.
Because Gingrich has no critical sensibility, as John points out, the stupid things he’s said during his career tend to outweigh the smart things he’s said and tried to do. He’s also a hopeless flip-flopper, changing his mind about a host of issues such as global warming and intervention in Libya, at a moment’s notice.
During an interview with Matt Lauer on the Today Show, Karl Rove commented:
I don't think he jumps to the top of the pack by the simple fact of getting in it because he is so well known and I think his numbers reflect that, being that the knowledge that people have of him. He could earn his way into the top tier, though, and that's what's going to be interesting about this contest.
Chicago Tribune columnist Steve Chapman said of Gingrich's 2012 announcement:
Ever been stuck on an airplane or at a dinner party next to a humorless, opinionated know-it-all who won't shut up? If you enjoyed that, I imagine you'll be voting for Newt Gingrich. And I'm guessing you won't have much company.
Gingrich is a fount of ideas, most of them not nearly as good as he thinks, but he is sorely lacking in some qualities Americans like to see in their presidents: sober judgment, a bit of humility, personal charm. Gingrich has none of these...George W. Bush got elected in 2000 partly because he was more likeable than Al Gore. Gingrich makes Gore look like Ken Griffey Jr.
And in March, George Will implied via his Washington Post column that Gingrich (like others) didn't stand a chance:
Let us not mince words. There are at most five plausible Republican presidents on the horizon - Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels, Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour, former Utah governor and departing ambassador to China Jon Huntsman, former Massachusetts governor Romney and former Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty.
So the Republican winnowing process is far advanced. But the nominee may emerge much diminished by involvement in a process cluttered with careless, delusional, egomaniacal, spotlight-chasing candidates to whom the sensible American majority would never entrust a lemonade stand, much less nuclear weapons.
Comments