Gingrich Warns of Conservative 3rd Patry in 2012

[James]

Gingrich Warns of Conservative 3rd Patry in 2012

Friday, April 3, 2009 8:53 AM

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich warns that conservatives could leave the GOP and form a third party in 2012 if Republicans don’t do more to rein in government spending.

“If the Republicans can’t break out of being the right wing party of big government, then I think you would see a third party movement in 2012, Gingrich said during an address to students at the College of the Ozarks in Missouri.

Gingrich attacked President Barack Obama’s “monstrosity of a budget,” but acknowledged that Republicans are also to blame for the huge increase in federal spending, CNN reported.

“Remember, everything Obama’s doing, Bush started last year,” he said.

Continued...

http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/g...03/199346.html

[240 is Back]

Newt is trying to unite the party, warning of factions and dissenting if this moderate/religious base feud continues. 

And the Ron paul factor cannot be ignored.  A lot of RP guys voted Obama because he was more against the war.

[Hereford]

The problem with third parties is that you always get the "Ross Perot" effect. If you vote for a non-repub or dem, you collectively gaurentee the opposition is going to win.

[tonymctones]

The problem with third parties is that you always get the "Ross Perot" effect. If you vote for a non-repub or dem, you collectively gaurentee the opposition is going to win.

true that which is what has killed them in the past, but something has to be done, should get rid of the dem/rep label just have ppl run as independents never happen but shit it would be nice.

[Deicide]

The problem with third parties is that you always get the "Ross Perot" effect. If you vote for a non-repub or dem, you collectively gaurentee the opposition is going to win.

Times are changing my Mexican hating friend!

[240 is Back]

true that which is what has killed them in the past, but something has to be done, should get rid of the dem/rep label just have ppl run as independents never happen but shit it would be nice.

the "dem/lib" party isn't the one in trouble.

Despite 8 years of demonization by Karl Rove and company, the "Dem/lib" party has the white house, a storng congressional majority, and are winning in opinion polls.

You don't change things when you're in 1st place.

[shootfighter1]

Yeah, and the dems just passed Obama's 3.6 trillion dollar budget which promises huge yearly deficits for the next 10 years.  All republicans and 20 dems were against it in the house.  Passed completely along party lines in the senate 55-46, I think.  Unfortunately, a simple majority was needed.

Where are the blue dogs here???  I guess 20 of them voted no in the house at least.  This is why we shouldn't have such a 1 party majority.  This degree of spending is not good. This budget is irresponsible.

[shootfighter1]

I really wish there was a real 3rd party.  A party that limits government spending, limits to reasonable and necessary taxation, protects individual freedom, welcoms working immigrants but forces them to abide by our rules and laws just as it would be in many of their parent countries, protects the institution of values and family but was moderate (or permissive and allows more freedom) on social issues.  A party that keeps America strong economically and militarily but does not engage in needless battles/wars.  A party that has the gov keep an close eye on the banking industry and big business so they don't take advantage of the people but does not want excessive control for political and redistribution purposes.  A party that above all protects personal freedoms and choice as long as it doesn't harm others.

This sounds like Ron Paul....but we need younger leaders to join with him and mainstream the message (and provide the kind of delivery that Obama does).

[Deicide]

I really wish there was a real 3rd party.  A party that limits government spending, limits to reasonable and necessary taxation, protects individual freedom, welcoms working immigrants but forces them to abide by our rules and laws just as it would be in many of their parent countries, protects the institution of values and family but was moderate (or permissive and allows more freedom) on social issues.  A party that keeps America strong economically and militarily but does not engage in needless battles/wars.  A party that has the gov keep an close eye on the banking industry and big business so they don't take advantage of the people but does not want excessive control for political and redistribution purposes.  A party that above all protects personal freedoms and choice as long as it doesn't harm others.

This sounds like Ron Paul....but we need younger leaders to join with him and mainstream the message (and provide the kind of delivery that Obama does).

Sounds like the Libertarian party...

[shootfighter1]

Sometimes the libertarian party is too hands off though.  There is a need for a strong gov, but not one that overspends, allows the Chinese to finance our country and a gov that continues to limit our freedoms.  Honestly, this administration is going down some dangerous paths if these measures aren't temporary.

[Deicide]

I don't know how many times I have to say this, but you probably would not have seen that effect if Ron Paul had ran independent.  In fact I know it.  He would not have been a republican spoiler.  When you look into his supporters, they truly came from across the board which really made him an oddity in that regard.  That's changing real fast as some of the more divisive voices on the right are latching on to Ron Paul which is quickly turning off progressives that had some interest in Paul.  But as for this last election, when people here said he would have been a republican spoiler, they were absolutely wrong on that.  It's really a credit to Ron Paul that he was able to attract people on the left.  And no, it was not just about the war.  The fact that he checked everything against the constitution was a very popular message across the board.  I know several people on the left who were willing to look past things they didn't like about him for the things they did like.  The atmophere of Bush combined with the feeling of being let down by the dems after the 06 elections all contributed.

Yup.

[tonymctones]

the "dem/lib" party isn't the one in trouble.

Despite 8 years of demonization by Karl Rove and company, the "Dem/lib" party has the white house, a storng congressional majority, and are winning in opinion polls.

You don't change things when you're in 1st place.

hahahahaha pendulum remember dumb ass

hahahah goodness gracious your a ignorant fuck arent you? Dont worry they will lose congress in 10 and barry will more then likely be out in 12...then what will you say

[Deicide]

Sometimes the libertarian party is too hands off though.  There is a need for a strong gov, but not one that overspends and limits our freedoms.

I disagree. I am a bit of a minarchist though. How much government do you want mate?

[shootfighter1]

Less is best for me personally but I don't want to ignore some important gov functions.  We need some taxation for infrastructure and certain necessary programs to help our sick and elderly and to provide bridges to the poor.  Gov needs to be reasonably strong in an international sense to protect us against threats and be respected by other world leaders...to make sure trade is relatively fair.  There is value to organizations like NATO and the G20 summit and value to some of the humanitarian efforts countries like the US and the UK are involved in.  Some libertarians want a real hands off everything approach with gov.  I still think gov has to regulate some things like banking, in which greed can take over and the country is badly damaged.

In summary, a gov that is strong enough to perform necessary functions but not so strong as to waste our money, limit our freedoms and tax us to death!

[Deicide]

Less is best for me personally but I don't want to ignore some important gov functions.  We need some taxation for infrastructure and certain necessary programs to help our sick and elderly and to provide bridges to the poor.  Gov needs to be reasonably strong in an international sense to protect us against threats and be respected by other world leaders...to make sure trade is relatively fair.  There is value to organizations like NATO and the G20 summit and value to some of the humanitarian efforts countries like the US and the UK are involved in.  Some libertarians want a real hands off everything approach with gov.  I still think gov has to regulate some things like banking, in which greed can take over and the country is badly damaged.

In summary, a gov that is strong enough to perform necessary functions but not so strong as to waste our money, limit our freedoms and tax us to death!

Repeal the income tax!

[Benny B]

The problem with third parties is that you always get the "Ross Perot" effect. If you vote for a non-repub or dem, you collectively gaurentee the opposition is going to win.

Yep-yep. I hope Fat Newt leads the charge on some right wing third party nonsense. Obama's going to get re-elected anyway, this will just increase the margin. 

[doison]

I really wish there was a real 3rd party.  A party that limits government spending, limits to reasonable and necessary taxation, protects individual freedom, welcoms working immigrants but forces them to abide by our rules and laws just as it would be in many of their parent countries, protects the institution of values and family but was moderate (or permissive and allows more freedom) on social issues.  A party that keeps America strong economically and militarily but does not engage in needless battles/wars.  A party that has the gov keep an close eye on the banking industry and big business so they don't take advantage of the people but does not want excessive control for political and redistribution purposes.  A party that above all protects personal freedoms and choice as long as it doesn't harm others.

This sounds like Ron Paul....but we need younger leaders to join with him and mainstream the message (and provide the kind of delivery that Obama does).

The "Intelligent decisions" party would never hold water with the racist jesus freaks or the pot-head hippies. 
It's doomed to failure by the very act of being a good idea....

[Hereford]

Times are changing my Mexican hating friend!

When are you gonna run for NY congress bro? 

[Deicide]

When are you gonna run for NY congress bro? 

Never in a million years, I might run a mile one of these days though...

[shootfighter1]

I would definitely consider wiping out income tax and replacing it with a consumption tax....people below the poverty line possibly exempt.
Between all the different taxes we have people are taxed at a much higher rate than many realize.  We usually just talk income tax, but there are so many other ways federal, state, and local gov take $ from us.

[Deicide]

I would definitely consider wiping out income tax and replacing it with a consumption tax....people below the poverty line possibly exempt.
Between all the different taxes we have people are taxed at a much higher rate than many realize.  We usually just talk income tax, but there are so many other ways federal, state, and local gov take $ from us.

True. Taxes suck and so much of it is wasted on crap (such as Iraq and Afghanistan), talk about taxation without representation. Imagine a world where, if you made 50 k a year, you actually KEPT that and all this net and gros crap wasn't there.