"I'm going to be the nominee," states Newt Gingrich in confidence - Polidicks

[QUOTE](CNN) - Along with his poll numbers, Newt Gingrich's confidence seems to be growing by the day. "I'm going to be the nominee," the former House Speaker said on Thursday. "It's very hard not to look at the recent polls and think that the odds are very high I'm going to be the nominee." His comments, which came in an interview with ABC News, follow a day of good news for the former House Speaker's odds in Florida, an early voting state in the primary and caucus calendar. A new poll puts him well ahead in the GOP presidential race with 50% of support among likely Republican primary voters in the Sunshine State. Meanwhile, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney trailed with 19% of support. On Wednesday, Gingrich said he feels at least 60 days ahead of where he expected to be by now and described his recent surge in the polls as a surprise to his campaign, which nearly fell apart earlier this year. "I would have thought originally it was going to be a 'Mitt and Not-Mitt'," Gingrich said on Fox News, talking about his early predictions for the top two Republican contenders. "It may turn out to be 'Newt and Not-Newt,' and that's a very different formula." But on Thursday, any hesitation Gingrich had about securing the nomination seemed to disappear. Gingrich said he was unfazed by the attacks from his opponents, who are now jumping on his soaring frontrunner status. "They are not going to be the nominee. I don't have to go around and point out the inconsistencies of people who are not going to be the nominee. They are not going to be the nominee." Asked along a ropeline in Iowa about his newfound confidence in predicting his own nomination, Gingrich simply said: "I'll leave it at that."[/QUOTE] Source: [url]http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/12/01/newt-believes-in-newt/?hpt=hp_bn3[/url]

[QUOTE=The Article]"I'm going to be the nominee," the former House Speaker said on Thursday.[/QUOTE] Yeah, [I][B][U]you[/U][/B][/I] are going to be nominated for the Presidency. Okay. :rolleyes:

Gingrich, like Obama, is yet another career politician. I really don't see the point of kicking one out of office if we're just going to shove another one in. And that's assuming Gingrich actually runs a passable campaign, which he probably won't.

[QUOTE=Boba_Fett;33530129]Gingrich, like Obama, is yet another career politician. I really don't see the point of kicking one out of office if we're just going to shove another one in. And that's assuming Gingrich actually runs a passable campaign, which he probably won't.[/QUOTE] So is Obama a career politician or an inexperienced hack not fit to be a politician get it together conservatives

[QUOTE=Boba_Fett;33530129]Gingrich, like Obama, is yet another career politician. I really don't see the point of kicking one out of office if we're just going to shove another one in. And that's assuming Gingrich actually runs a passable campaign, which he probably won't.[/QUOTE] Everyone's been a career politician.

[QUOTE=Boba_Fett;33530129]Gingrich, like Obama, is yet another career politician. I really don't see the point of kicking one out of office if we're just going to shove another one in. And that's assuming Gingrich actually runs a passable campaign, which he probably won't.[/QUOTE] There are a bare handful of people in the federal government that are not career politicians. Hell, universities have "Political Science" as a major. It's a legitimate career these days. [editline]1st December 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=OvB;33530161]Everyone's been a career politician.[/QUOTE] And everyone here is a ninja, it appears :v:

[QUOTE=Zeke129;33530147]So is Obama a career politician or an inexperienced hack not fit to be a politician get it together conservatives[/QUOTE] It's become pretty clear hes a career politician. And if he truly isn't he's doing a very bad job at not making himself look like one

[QUOTE=Zeke129;33530147]So is Obama a career politician or an inexperienced hack not fit to be a politician get it together conservatives[/QUOTE] Obama's certainly a career politician regardless of his experience. He's spent his whole life studying about how to tell others what to do, and he, like Gingrich, lacks any real extensive experience about working a blue collar job. If you look at Obama's history, his most distinguishable career besides being a US senator was being a community organizer for Chicago. The problem, in my opinion, is that the people running the country are so distant from the actual working-class Americans. If they've never experienced life as an average person working a real job, then how are they supposed to understand how to run the country? Again, this is just my two cents.

that's quite irrelevant. obama's done a better job than gingrich ever could have done and a better job than mccain ever could have done. my personal pick was always ralph nader anyway.

[QUOTE=Boba_Fett;33530265]Obama's certainly a career politician regardless of his experience. He's spent his whole life studying about how to tell others what to do, and he, like Gingrich, lacks any real extensive experience about working a blue collar job. If you look at Obama's history, his most distinguishable career besides being a US senator was being a community organizer for Chicago. The problem, in my opinion, is that the people running the country are so distant from the actual working-class Americans. If they've never experienced life as an average person working a real job, then how are they supposed to understand how to run the country? Again, this is just my two cents.[/QUOTE] With an education in political science and economics?

[QUOTE=Boba_Fett;33530265]Obama's certainly a career politician regardless of his experience. He's spent his whole life studying about how to tell others what to do, and he, like Gingrich, [b]lacks any real extensive experience about working a blue collar job.[/b][/quote] Well good thing he's vying to be president of the united states, and not a millwright. [QUOTE=Boba_Fett;33530265]If you look at Obama's history, his most distinguishable career [b]besides being a US senator[/b] was being a community organizer for Chicago.[/quote] Why would I look "besides" a political background when determining the political aptitude of a potential politician? [QUOTE=Boba_Fett;33530265]The problem, in my opinion, is that the people running the country are so distant from the actual working-class Americans. If they've never experienced life as an average person working a real job, then how are they supposed to understand how to run the country?[/QUOTE] Same reason I know about things that happen in foreign countries despite not actually being there - people smarter than me with first-hand knowledge report on it. In the case of a president, they hire advisers. And I'm pretty sure Obama had a job before becoming a senator, he wasn't born into politics.

[QUOTE=NoS4A2;33530297]With an education in political science and economics?[/QUOTE] Politics and Economics are both things you can get a degree in yet utterly fail at because they both deal with the fact that people just can't be predicted.

Does nobody remember he divorced his wife so he could marry a staffer he was fucking WHILE he was speaker? And later divorced her too?

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;33530323]Politics and Economics are both things you can get a degree in yet utterly fail at because they both deal with the fact that people just can't be predicted.[/QUOTE] You can say that about pretty much any degree. There actually is a science behind politics and economics. [editline]1st December 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Used Car Salesman;33530353]Does nobody remember he divorced his wife so he could marry a staffer he was fucking WHILE he was speaker? And later divorced her too?[/QUOTE] that's only bad when a democrat does it

[QUOTE=Zeke129;33530365]You can say that about pretty much any degree. There actually is a science behind politics and economics. [/QUOTE] I would think that if there were an actual science behind it, it would be more effective. Also, can't say that about history. It's already set in stone what happened, can't be predicted wrongly :v:

[QUOTE=Zeke129;33530319]Same reason I know about things that happen in foreign countries despite not actually being there - people smarter than me with first-hand knowledge report on it. In the case of a president, they hire advisers. [/QUOTE] Obama's cabinet is overwhelmingly composed of people with almost no experience in the private sector.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;33530323]Politics and Economics are both things you can get a degree in yet utterly fail at because they both deal with the fact that people just can't be predicted.[/QUOTE] While that's mostly true, the average person would have a much harder time adapting to such situations compared to say, someone who has studied for countless hours and has seen the general pattern that people tend to follow. Raising taxes on the rich tends to be favored. Ending benefits programs tends to be frowned upon. We don't surprise everyone as often as you might think.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;33530384]I would think that if there were an actual science behind it, it would be more effective. Also, can't say that about history. It's already set in stone what happened, can't be predicted wrongly :v:[/QUOTE] History, or what we see of history, in the west is extraordinarily one-sided. It's set in stone what happened, but a big part of history is examining the implications of the past and we're seeing increasing efforts to misconstrue the facts to push political agendas.

[QUOTE=oldeskoolfan;33530414]While that's mostly true, the average person would have a much harder time adapting to such situations compared to say, someone who has studied for countless hours and has seen the general pattern that people tend to follow. Raising taxes on the rich tends to be favored. Ending benefits programs tends to be frowned upon. We don't surprise everyone as often as you might think.[/QUOTE] And yet, the rich are untaxed and benefit programs end.

[QUOTE=Boba_Fett;33530392]Obama's cabinet is overwhelmingly composed of people with almost no experience in the private sector.[/QUOTE] What's this based on? I'm sure someone could painstakingly get the names of everyone Obama has hired and then go through their backgrounds one by one, but that wouldn't be practical. Is there a list somewhere?

[QUOTE=Zeke129;33530426]History, or what we see of history, in the west is extraordinarily one-sided. It's set in stone what happened, but a big part of history is examining the implications of the past and we're seeing increasing efforts to misconstrue the facts to push political agendas.[/QUOTE] That's just the past 100-150 years. The rest of history is so far in the past that it's mostly unaffected of today's events. The Roman Empire did not affect today's political clashes in southwest Asia and the world's focus on it.

[QUOTE=Boba_Fett;33530392]Obama's cabinet is overwhelmingly composed of people with almost no experience in the private sector.[/QUOTE] And a good politician needs experience in the secondary or tertiary sectors of the economy? Primary seems fairly unlikely, but that kind of requirement just seems unnecessary.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;33530432]And yet, the rich are untaxed and benefit programs end.[/QUOTE] And that's mostly the fault of the GOP. Public opinion must, quite like science, be a "leftist conspiracy." Numbers don't mean jack shit to a republican unless it's positive and flowing into their bank account.

[QUOTE=oldeskoolfan;33530535]And that's mostly the fault of the GOP. Public opinion must, quite like science, be a "leftist conspiracy." Numbers don't mean jack shit to a republican unless it's positive and flowing into their bank account.[/QUOTE] There are GOP with political science and economic degrees. Sciences are suppose to be universal, right?

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;33530554]There are GOP with political science and economic degrees. Sciences are suppose to be universal, right?[/QUOTE] And there are psychology majors who believe being gay is a choice and environmental science majors who think global warming isn't man-made. Having a degree in something doesn't mean you'll use the knowledge you acquired to get it.

The nominee to be the biggest womanizing politician in US history after he cheats on Mrs Gingrich the third with future Mrs Gingrich the fourth [quote]Does nobody remember he divorced his wife so he could marry a staffer he was fucking WHILE he was speaker? And later divorced her too?[/quote] He did that twice

[QUOTE=Zeke129;33530591]And there are psychology majors who believe being gay is a choice and environmental science majors who think global warming isn't man-made. Having a degree in something doesn't mean you'll use the knowledge you acquired to get it.[/QUOTE] End result is equal to what I said - it's useless.

[QUOTE=Boba_Fett;33530265]If you look at Obama's history, his most distinguishable career besides being a US senator was being a community organizer for Chicago.[/QUOTE] I just looked, he was a professor for twelve years.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;33530630]End result is equal to what I said - it's useless.[/QUOTE] But what Zeke is saying is that there is science behind it even if the degree means nothing. Just because some people with said degrees chose not to learn anything doesn't mean they all do

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;33530630]End result is equal to what I said - it's useless.[/QUOTE] It's the politicians following ideology instead of science who are useless Economically speaking, it's easy to see what works through testing and repeating Every country is a point of data See what works and do it dummy politicians, nobody should care if you're a "free market libertarian" if that economic system has never been proven to work