Another UPDATE (Not so romantic this time):
The Washington Post reports that Newt not only has plummeted in the GOP presidential race but that “he may be the most unpopular person in American politics right now.”
Two new polls show him with “an absolutely atrocious favorability rating”:
A CNN/Opinion Research poll on Monday showed 63 percent of All Americans viewed Gingrich unfavorably, compared to just 25 percent who saw him in a positive light.
And today, a new CBS News/New York Times poll shows a similar split: 54 percent view Gingrich unfavorably, compared to 16 percent who say they feel positively predisposed towards him.
In fact, “those 38-point spreads between his favorable and unfavorable ratings … tie his worst numbers from 1997, when he faced ethics troubles and a GOP revolt during his time as speaker of the House.
An in (fun) fact: “now-Sen. Al Franken joked in 1996 that Gingrich’s ‘favorable rating is only four points higher than the Unabomber.’”
And in [final] fact, “the numbers are worse than any national political figure The Fix could find in recent years — even, arguably, George W. Bush.”
‘Romantic’ UPDATE:
I didn’t need to know this, but since it is “out there” and it kind of fits with the desperate “struggling” Newt Gingrich, here it is.
The New York Daily News, under “Newt Gingrich reveals sexy Valentine’s Day plans for wife Callista...”
Newt Gingrich wants America to know he’s a lover, not a fighter.
The struggling Republican presidential candidate coyly dished on his Valentine’s Day plans for third wife Callista, promising she would not be disappointed.
[::]
“All I can promise is that I believe she will be quite happy,” the ex-House Speaker said to hoots and whistles from the audience.
“I think for the first time in a while we’ll have a private dinner and just hopefully exchange gifts and, you know reconnect a little bit,” he said with a smile.
As I said, I didn’t need to know that, but these “intimate remarks” may “rev up” Callista’s public presence on the campaign trail.
See how Gingrich is doing in the polls.
====
Seeing Newt Gingrich slip — plummet is a better word — in polls, opinion surveys and straw polls, caucuses and primaries, I thought that “Newt Who?” would be a catching and appropriate title for a quick post on the rise and mostly falls of this once bombastic, now meek, Republican front-runner.
But lo-and-behold, when I Googled “Newt Who?” to make sure that I would not be stealing anyone’s brilliant idea, I came upon “About 79,400 results [in] 0.26 seconds.” Wow, that was a rude awakening for me, but can one imagine what kind of even “ruder” awakening this must be for the once grandiose Newt?
Some of the “Newt Who?” pieces have comments such as this one discussing the recent CPAC:
The other presidential candidates saw fit to ignore Newt — even Santorum, who took several unsubtle shots at Romney. After drawing blanks in Tuesday’s election contests, Newt needs to [blah, blah, blah]….But instead of being a tiger, Newt was a pussycat. It makes you wonder how serious he is at this point.”
And this one:
It is hard to believe that as recently as this Monday, Newt Gingrich was still considered to be the alternative to Mitt Romney. But judging by yesterday’s speeches at the Conservative Political Action Conference, Gingrich has become something of an afterthought, at best.
[::]
But not only did [Herman Cain nor Rick Perry] make a case for Newt, both former candidates didn’t even mention his name. Not even once. It’s like Newt never existed. … As he continues to tank in every state and national poll, one wonders how long Gingrich will stay in the race.
Or the American Spectator in “Time for Newt to Do the Honorable Thing,” after reviewing Newt’s abysmal recent polls:
All of which suggests that Newt should consider his own analysis of the conservative split as expressed to ABC. It’s increasingly obvious that he isn’t going to win the GOP nomination.
Even if Gingrich somehow manages to rise from the dead yet again and emerge victorious in Tampa, his record is so messy that the President and his reelection team would certainly beat him like a dirty rug in the general election. Thus, if he cares about the country as much as he claims, and truly wants to prevent the man he calls a “Massachusetts liberal” from winning the GOP nomination, his most honorable course of action will be to fall on his own sword.
Newt’s voluntary departure from the nomination race, combined with an enthusiastic endorsement of Santorum, would give the latter a real shot at beating Romney.
Bottom line: Since there are more or less 79,400 stories on “Newt Who?” there is no need for me to write story #79,401 — it would be just a tad redundant and not original at all.
CODA:
Of course, in the 79,400 “Newt Who?” results there are many duplicates, many “Newt, who [has so much baggage,],” “Newt who [should step aside,]” and other variations. But this is not a scientific article — just satire — and who is counting.
Finally, talking about satire, it is still possible that “Newt Who?” could arise from the dead a third or fourth time and become “Newt who [fooled everyone]”, but then it wouldn’t be satire funny anymore.
