Quantcast

Gingrich Out, Will Endorse Romney


The former Speaker is likely to appear with Romney next week at a campaign event to make a formal endorsement.

Newt Gingrich began taking steps Wednesday to shut down his debt-laden White House bid, setting the stage to endorse one-time rival Mitt Romney next week and rally Republicans behind their apparent nominee.

Gingrich had a friendly telephone conversation Wednesday with Romney and had started planning an event where he would throw his support behind the likely nominee, Gingrich spokesman R.C Hammond said. The pair agreed to work together to unite conservatives against President Barack Obama.

“It’s clear Romney is the nominee and the focus should be on defeating Obama. We should not focus on defeating ourselves,” Gingrich told disappointed supporters in Kings Mountain, N.C., the morning after Romney tightened his grip on the nomination by sweeping primary contests in five states.

Gingrich also telephoned Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus and supporters, such as Texas Gov. Rick Perry, in states with upcoming primaries to inform them of the decision he had been hinting at for days. Perry endorsed Gingrich when he ended his own White House bid in January but later Wednesday posted an endorsement of Romney on his campaign website.




Post Continues on www.csmonitor.com





Tagged with: , , , , , ,
Posted in 2012 Election, Politics
60 comments on “Gingrich Out, Will Endorse Romney
  1. SYLVIAAMA says:

    GOOD

  2. Bruce D. says:

    Rick Perry’s statement:  “American jobs, economic stability and national security depend on
    electing a new president. Mitt’s vision and record of private-sector
    success will put America back on the path of job creation, economic
    opportunity and limited government.”

    • awakenow says:

      Really?  Hmmmm.  Whatever happened to Perry’s economic description of Romney as a “vulture capitalist?”  Of course, this is an accurate description of Mr. RomneyCare, himself.  RomneyCare’s good buds on Wall Street and top campaign contributors are the same banks we bailed out … the biggest campaign contributor to Mr. RomneyCare is Goldman Sachs, whose CEO received record bonus pay as a result of TARP.  

      And, RomneyCare being for “limited government?”  Guess Perry really believes people ARE this stupid!  And, I think he’s got exactly right.   

    • jong says:

       Actually his success was investment not business big difference.

  3. John says:

    If all you know is corruption……..

  4. jong says:

    I will always support Newt.  In this if he feels that we need to first get rid of Obama then work on being more conservative I can buy that argument and will vote for Romney but, with my nose closed.  I just hope that the VP will be Allen West.  I like Rubio but, to me he is not eliglible with the same problems as Obama running.

    • TheChristianSolution says:

      An absolutely corrupt establishment politician endorsing one who does appears neither corrupt nor establishment, only ultra-liberal. Will Newt’s dirty sludge rub off on Romney?  We’ll see.

      • jong says:

         Ah more lies about Newt who actually did something .  Please either put up or shut up anti-semite.

        • TheChristianSolution says:

          Why the anti-Semite slime to this when we are talking pure politics?  You trying to show how slimy you are like the Newt salamander?

    • Ellen_L says:

      why  not Newt as VP?  Just as he was the best man for President, he would be the best choice for VP.

  5. Frank130 says:

    “Gingrich Out, Will Support Romney”

    Ah yes, the true colors (big government Statist) of another supposed GOP conservative!
    Mirror, mirror on the wall, whose are the real small government, Constitution-loving Presidential candidates?

  6. MikeFromNC says:

    Just what we need…one good ole boy endorsing another. Will the GOP never learn the lessons of Bob Dole, John McCain etc. ? I am a conservative – but the GOP is compromising and settling, romney bought this nomination and we will be the ones to pay for his centrist, ever-changing stand.

    • democratsarefools says:

      So you like the other choice better ? There 2 to chose from now. And I guess you think that all of those who voted for Massrom were forced to ? I did not get to vote for my choice; it was not Romney, here in CA, but that is what we have to pick from and it sure is hell is not Obama. Stop the whining and move on.

      • awakenow says:

        There is another to choose.  He stands for your freedoms, guaranteed within what is left of our wonderful Constitution … written by those who understood the horror of an all powerful form of governance, as it seeks more and more control over the individual.  Ron Paul 2012.  

        • democratsarefools says:

           Do not want to be combative, however Mr. Paul lost. Maybe he will be selected for a top economic job in the new admin, but the real objective is removing the current one from his place of power and destroying what we love about the Constitution.

        • awakenow says:

          Ron Paul has not lost the nomination, just as Romney has not won the nomination at this point.  The truth is this.  No one knows the exact number of delegates that either Romney or Ron Paul have.  Why?  Because in many states, the actual delegates to the convention in Tampa have not even been chosen yet.  

          The delegate selection is still ongoing and this process won’t be complete in many states for at least another two months as the final delegates to the national convention are voted on by those who made it to district, county and on to the final statewide delegate election process still to come.  

          The controlled mainstream media has continued to report estimates only, based solely on the outcome of the straw poll beauty contest votes that have taken place.  However, these votes are essentially meaningless because it is really ALL about winning delegates, rather than winning the popular vote in terms of who wins the nomination.

          These are the rules the GOP has had in place for a very, very long time now and every presidential campaign understands them clearly.  Do not believe what Fox News, or anyone in the media tells you.  They simply no not know.  Stay tuned.

        • awakenow says:

          … they simply “do” not know.

        • democratsarefools says:

           Hang on now !!!

        • jong says:

           Paul would not know the Constitution if it bit him in the butt.   His document is the Articles of Confederation his revolution that of France with his violence not that of the United States.

        • TheChristianSolution says:

          Jong, you really are a plant aren’t you.  Ron Paul is no threat to anyone and you are the first attack dog on anything said about him.  Why is this such a big deal to you? 

          And everything you just said is stupid. Whose going to believe any of that?

        • BOTK says:

          You couldn’t have said it better, Jong. I can name quite a few things RP supports that are completely unconstitutional. He only waves the Constitution around to give credibility to his own views.

        • Maybeperfect says:

           Here in Arkansas I have a solution for this problem. I and many others have sworn to vote for nobody but Ron Paul. Period. Whether he runs under a party’s banner or not. If we were to solidly agree to this strategy we could hope for a Paul nomination. Let’s say you totally buy in to the steaming heap of horse apples that he’s only getting 7% of the vote. Ok, well the republicans can automatically subtract that 7% off their total of votes. So Obama wins? no matte, him and Oromney are indistinguishable in a dark room.Same bosses. Obama will be gone in 4 years, Oromney will take 8 to get rid of
            Look at it this way. Since the establishment has been cheating RP at every opportunity, and the democrats have been voting for Oromney in the primaries, so their figurehead will have a shoo in in november, it’s only our patriotic duty to use any strategy available to foil their plots, as long as it’s not dishonest or illegal.
           So that’s the message I’m sending to the lemmings.The ball’s in their court. Are you with me?

    • Maybeperfect says:

       Here in Arkansas I have a solution for this problem. I and many others have sworn to vote for nobody but Ron Paul. Period. Whether he runs under a party’s banner or not. If we were to solidly agree to this strategy we could hope for a Paul nomination. Let’s say you totally buy in to the steaming heap of horse apples that he’s only getting 7% of the vote. Ok, well the republicans can automatically subtract that 7% off their total of votes. So Obama wins? no matte, him and Oromney are indistinguishable in a dark room.Same bosses. Obama will be gone in 4 years, Oromney will take 8 to get rid of
        Look at it this way. Since the establishment has been cheating RP at every opportunity, and the democrats have been voting for Oromney in the primaries, so their figurehead will have a shoo in in november, it’s only our patriotic duty to use any strategy available to foil their plots, as long as it’s not dishonest or illegal.
       So that’s the message I’m sending to the lemmings.The ball’s in their court. Are you with me?

  7. Maybeperfect says:

    Six months ago I told you that a vote for any of these stooges was a vote for Romney who is bought and paid for by the NWO and UN banksters.
     Ron Paul for the United States of America.

    • BOTK says:

      Ron Paul will only bring more leftism of the kind Obama wants: free drugs, free sex, etc. And it’s not like he really cares for what conservatives care about: getting rid of Obamacare and the entitlement system, getting of the education system, … The only thing he really cares about is getting rid of the Fed and forcing his isolationist agenda on the United States.

      • TheChristianSolution says:

        How many times are you going to try to sell this used snake oil?

        Ron Paul does not want a FEDERAL War on Drugs, or a FEDERAL Bedroom Police. These are STATE matters.

        Yes he indeed wants to rid us of Obamacare, the Federal Department of Education, the EPA, the Fed as you said, and our role as the United Nations “Duty to Protect”, “Atrocities Preventor” World Cop.

        What causes ISOLATION is going around the world bullying every national leader who does not have a nuclear weapon. Who besides the United States has been bombing ANYONE around the world in the last 60 years?  Who would trust us with their country? 

        South and Central American Christian countries do not bomb each other. We stormed into Panama with our “Big Stick” policy under Bush Sr.

        Europe has not been bombed since WW2, other than when Bill Clinton bombed Serbian Christians so that poor innocent Kosovo Muslims could rip off part of Yugoslavia for their own.

        Africa?  Who cares.

        Asia?  We were the ones who bombed Korea and Vietnam. Yes, China got into Korea’s Civil War for the communinst after our tough guy President got us in on the anti-communist side.

        Canada, Australia, New Zealand, England you would probably call isolationist, for other than the tiny Falklands Island war, they have kept to themselves. 

        PURE EVIL those Canucks!!!

        • jong says:

          And how many times do you have to be told that your arguments come from lack of  knowledge and logic much like Paul.  Panama was planned under Ronald Reagan and was justified.   Europe was not bombed because of “brinkmanship” look it up.   You Paulbots are just so stupid it makes me wonder if you can walk and breathe at the same time because you certainly can not think.

        • TheChristianSolution says:

          Panama was planned under Ronald Reagan and was justified.

          Planned all right by some forces under Reagan loyal to Bush, but Reagan was the President and Reagan did not invade. You are only speculating what Reagan may have or may not have done if anything at anytime. Facts are that, it was Bush Sr. who invaded. Please look up your history because it is really making you look stupid for me to have to correct you all the time.

          And since we are on the subject. Why did we invade Panama? — The excuse was your Favorite — the War on Drugs.

          But that was all BS, because

          A) There are 5 countries between Panama and the United States.

          B) Mexico is by far the biggest drug imported to the United States and we have never invaded it.

          Oh, you say because Mexico’s government cooperates on our War onf Drugs? Ha! There are thousands and thousands of Mexican federales involved in the drug trade.

          Europe was not bombed because of “brinkmanship” look it up.

          Goes under the catagory of “who does not have a nuclear weapon” Jong.

          What I am referring to is the fact that Italy is not attacking Spain and Austria is not bombing Switzerland and so on.  Geez, wake up Jong. You’re slipping.

        • BOTK says:

          Man, with you liber(al)tarians there’s always gotta be a scapegoat, isn’t there? And it’s always not the real enemy.

          Sure, RP opposes the UN, then turns around argues for international law, a concept that has been opposed by conservatives for centuries. And this argument that Ron Paul is only a non-interventionist not an isolationist doesn’t hold water. He is one of the biggest supporters of tariffs in Congress.

        • Bruce D. says:

           ”Protecting the integrity of the Torrijos–Carter Treaties.
          Members of Congress and others in the U.S. political establishment
          claimed that Noriega threatened the neutrality of the Panama Canal and
          that the U.S. had the right under the treaties to intervene militarily
          to protect the canal.”

        • TheChristianSolution says:

          threatened the neutrality of the Panama Canal

          “Threatened” is not the same as “actually violating” the neutrality of the Panama Canal.

          This is where the new Republican Neo-Cons have gone to these days. If someone “may”, “at some undetermined future date”, “threaten”, “what we call evil”,  then we now say that we have full rights to blow the living daylights out of them.

          A far cry from my cowboy movie days when the bad guy in the shootout had to reach for his gun first.  Heck, with Panama, we are not even talking about a Iranina-like nuclear weapon where we have to destroy them first before they even think about destroying us.

          This abuse of the word THREATENED was the excuse the Jews first used successfully against Christian Americans when they wanted Jewish immigration into the US from Czarist Russia.

          In their Judeo-MSM newspapers, they would plaster endless pictures and stories about Ottoman Turk Muslim atrocities against their Armenian Christian minorities.

          Then, they assassinated the Czar of Russia in the 1880′s and further agitated Russian Christians against them so that there were a few pograms against Jewish villages.

          Lastly comes the Jewish hard sell for Jewish immigration.

          “America, don’t you see the horrific destruction of Christians in Ottoman Muslim lands. Do you not see that the Czar THREATENS to do the same to our Jewish bretheren in Russia?”

          “America, can you not open your hearts to these poor persecuted Jews who are THREATENED by the Czar, and let them migrate to our shores of freedom and tolerance?”

          Of course, comparing Muslim behavior toward others to Christian behavior toward others is pure evil.  Christians are no threat for Muslim-like atrocities. But the typical American was taken in by the heart-tug story of the Judeo-MSM and we opened our shores to almost 2 million non-Christian, Jesus-denying,  unbelieving Jews between 1880 and 1930.  Now they run our everyday life. They control us lock, stock, and barrel, and we let it happen to us.

      • TheChristianSolution says:

        Ron Paul is one of the biggest supporters of tariffs in Congress.

        Great !  I’m a big supporter of tariffs. Why is that bad? 

        The federal government should obtain the majority of its operating capital from international trade, since it is responsible for our international presence. The Feds should not fund itself by going into the States and picking the pockets of its own citizens with the Income Tax.

        High tariffs has many positive benefits for us.

        Tariffs help reverse the level of massive imports (far more than reducing our puny exports)  We developed our competitive edge with our technology and innovation. It made us the most productive people on Earth. Now we just ship that technology and productivity to China for free so the companies can import the goods with minimal labor content. Not fair, not patriotic, and not safe.

        Being more independent would help make America safer, since we would not be subject to international blackmail or international turmoil.  We would not need such a world-traveling military.

        Would give Americans jobs instead of Chinese.

        Would prevent us from declaring national bankruptcy with our trade deficits.

        Would allow the FDA to inspect our food and medicine again, since they would be made here again.

        • BOTK says:

          “Not fair, not patriotic, and not safe.”

          So you don’t believe in free trade? Who defines what’s “not fair” and “not safe”?

          “Being more independent would help make America safer, since we would not
          be subject to international blackmail or international turmoil.”

          International blackmail? Come on.

          “We
          would not need such a world-traveling military.”

          This is again Paulbot-style thinking that if we leave the bullies alone they won’t bully us. It’s been refuted over a hundred times. Our “world-traveling” military is not the cause of international turmoil. The whole idea of “blowback” is just plainly illogical (if it was logical, the terrorists would never have bombed England, Norway, India, and so on. The terrorists hate us not because we’re “over there,” but because their religion requires them do one of three things to non-Muslims: subjugate them under Islamic rule, convert them to Islam, or kill them. But Ron Paul won’t accept that because he lives in a dualistic world where politics and religion never mix.

        • TheChristianSolution says:

          Do I believe in China’s definition of fair trade with a Communist China where they import our entire industrial technological base and give us back shoddy, dangerous, and poisonous products, impovershing our country, and bankrupting it, while importing nothing in return?  Well, I may have to think on that a while longer.

          You OK with this arrangement?

        • TheChristianSolution says:

          Don’t know how old you are, but I remember a time that bombs were going off all over Europe, India and other places, while they were not going off at all here. People here used to never give terrorism a thought.  But then we didn’t have any Muslims here either. Sirhan Sirhan was Muslim, but we didn’t even look at that as terrorism when he killed JFK.

          This is why we have countries. People associate into one country or the other based upon their comfort level.

          We started this country as a Christian nation.  Personally, I don’t see how either Jews or Muslims will ever assimulate into our society without each trying to dominate the Christian base. 

          Before we let Jews and Muslims into America, we steered our own course, we grew into the world’s largest economy, and we got along with each other fairly well – Civil War and our Original Sin of Slavery excluded.

    • jong says:

       Paul is a libertarian not a Republican or a Conservative.  The man has done nothing in 23+ years in the congress and has no sense of the morals and ethics in the Constitution.   He is as bad a Obama.   Obama would give you nothing Paul would give you everything neither is good and both of their methods are very close to each other.

      • TheChristianSolution says:

        If Romney is a Republican, then you are right Jong, Ron Paul is not a Republican.

        Congress has no sense of moral and ethics in the Constitution, but Ron Paul was the lone voice of reason in that cess-pool for 23+ years. 

  8. Bruce D. says:

     Mitt Romney Was Among Top Donors To Immigration Adviser Kris Kobach’s 2010 Campaign Kobach, who is currently advising Romney on immigration issues, is the author of the highly controversial Arizona and Alabama immigration laws.  Today, Kobach told the Washington Post that he expected Romney to rule out any immigration measure that granted any form of legal status to undocumented immigrants.

  9. Nlebischak says:

    If it’s true, it means that the best man was defeated by half-truths, lies and a system that does not want a statesman in office but only a politician. Newt was the one that could have done the job we citizens want, but we bought into the info the media and parties gave us and he lost. Now it’s Romney and Paul, I don’t think Paul can win, but I do know this Paul is a better choice that Romney. I know I won’t vote for Romney, even though the Repub’s say to rally behind Romney, he won by putting out half-truths and lies about others, and I don’t want to vote for a person that does that, we already have one in the White House that does it now. There is only one way I will vote for Romney and that is if Newt is the VP. We’ve had enough of taking what’s given us, while I’m not a big Paul supporter, he will get my vote over Romney the Repub version of Obama.

    • Sheilarae says:

      Not voting for Romney is like voting FOR Obama. If you stay home because “your guy” didn’t get the nomination, you are a fool and you deserve all the really terrible marxism coming from Obama in the next 4 years, and I have a feeling it will be bad. YES Newt is great and I would have paid to see him wipe the floor with BHO in a debate, but even Newt knows we MUST come together for the guy who can beat Obama. That man is NOT Ron Paul and NOT Newt no matter how much we want it to be. So hold your nose and vote for Romney because he’s the only anti-Obama in the race now. I pray that Newt and Ron Paul will advise Romney, and I pray even more that Romney will accept the advice.

    • Ellen_L says:

      One small reason for Romney to choose Newt as VP there are better ones.
      He was beaten only because of negative ads and money.  But perhaps this is too much of a beauty contest focused on non essentials.
      Newt brings a life time of working in anyway he could to make the country better.  It does take a strong ego to think one can, but he has the brains to do the job.  He has the experience in governance that Romney does not – including work in Congress, teaching military courses, adviser on many issues, work to find better medical solutions (see his website for a fuller list).  He has more information in his head than Romney’s advisers can put on a teleprompter.  He also has websites and campaign that can easily turn to the VP position if done soon.
      And he said he’d consider the position.  That takes a statesman’s view point.
      Whatever his earlier thinking, Newt Gingrich is now a statesman who wants what is best for his grandchildren and all the people of this country.  He has the plans and brains to do it.
      If not as President then if Mr Romney wants the best, as VP.

  10. Bill Weston says:

    I realize that we’ll be faced with business as usual with a Romney nomination. A third-party candidate probably will only keep Obama in office. HOWEVER, a strong conservative House and Senate can neutralize whoever is president. Our current “do nothing” congress has done a tremendous service to our country by refusing to compromise any further to liberal ideals. Executive orders are not necessarily law and congress can use them, among other evidence, to impeach a president. Obama is already very close to being impeached. Therefore, don’t lose hope for our country. If one chooses to vote for a third party candidate, their vote will not be wasted either. Any candidate getting over 15% of the popular vote wil have a voice strong enough to influence events during the upcoming terms. In 2004, The Constitution Party nominated Michael Peroutka for president. He carried just over 14% of the popular vote then. Furthermore, the party,et al, was registered in only 31 states. If patriots continue to be ignored, perhaps it is time for a new political, stronger, party.

  11. Ashen Shugar says:

    If he does endorse Romney it PROVES he is and was always a fake!

    Ron Paul is still going strong, FOX is even conceding he has the 5 states victories needed to be on the ballot in Tampa! They media is blacking him out because they are afraid if the people knew the truth they would rally behind him and he would quickly replace Romney as the presumptive nominee.

    Think about it, why are the media NOT telling you about Ron Pauls HUGE crowds that dwarf all the other candidates? Why is the media not telling you about his wins? Why do they think you do not need to know to make up your own mind?

    • TheChristianSolution says:

      Thank you for pointing this out. I was disheartend to learn of Rule 40, requiring the win of 5 States, but I forgot that a win is a delegate win, not a beauty contest win.

      You made my day.

    • TexasJester says:

      So…… Exactly WHICH 5 states did Dr Paul win?

      • Bruce D. says:

         I think people here just say whatever they want to and do not care if it is true or not.

  12. TexasJester says:

    This is why I hate the staggered primary system. I live in Texas – and the primary was decided before I ever got the chance to vote. My choice was Herman Cain first, Newt next. I still think that a Cain/Gingrich ticket (whichever on top) would be the strongest we could have – but I have no choice but to vote for Romney.. I will NOT vote for Dr Paul – that crackpot is so far right that he’s meeting the left in the back! We Texans never did figure out what the rest of you saw in Rick Perry – he ALWAYS runs ultra-conservative, then governs liberal.

    Gingrich/Cain 2012!

  13. TexasJester says:

    I will say this much, though: no matter who the republican candidate is, we MUST unite behind him. We MUST defeat the Obama regime. I have NEVER advocated a straight ticket vote, but this time we need as many (R)s in office as we can get – at all levels, federal down to local. It’s the only way we can stop this high-powered car ride off the cliff. If we can get enough conservative (R)s in office, no matter who’s prez, we can stop things.

    WE MUST UNITE BEHIND THE REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE, EVEN IF YOU DON’T LIKE HIM. The future of our Country and Constitution depends on it.