Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Our party needs a Newt Gingrich!

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread		 This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
Dawgs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 08:25 AM
Original message
Our party needs a Newt Gingrich!
In 1994, Newt was the head spokesman for the Republican party. He was the face and voice for the party. When he spoke, it was reported everywhere. The sheep listened and agreed with everything he said.

Who is our Newt Gingrich?

Right now, my vote would be for Feingold. He's not Dean, the Clinton's, or any other controversial voice. He's plain spoken, intelligent, and produces great sound bites.

Are there others? My only criteria is that it be only one. Too many voices keeps the Democrats looking unorganized.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
...of J.Temperance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 08:27 AM
Response to Original message
1. 'Um could I suggest
George Clooney :loveya:

Hey, a girl can dream can't she? :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BobBoudelangFan69 Donating Member (171 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 08:30 AM
Response to Original message
2. Absolutely Not! Need People Of Integrity And Honor.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dawgs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 09:26 AM
Response to Reply #2
9. I didn't say we need Newt Gingrich!!
I said we need a single face and voice to spread our message. Right now, the media will report on anything Bush or Cheney say, but not necessarily on any one Democrat.

Geez, do some of you people ever read past the subject?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HereSince1628 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 08:31 AM
Response to Original message
3. Not. We need to get back to basic Democratic Principles.
That alone would give the appearance of unity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
...of J.Temperance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 08:37 AM
Response to Original message
4. Being serious now...I nominate John Edwards
John Edwards has a nice aura about him, he's intelligent and handsome, he has a good grasp of the issues, he already has a good message of "Two Americas" and because he's not in the Senate anymore, he could devote his time completely to being our representative.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robbedvoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 08:57 AM
Response to Reply #4
6. Yup. Another fast talking salesman. But we need honest people, NOT
Newts , Limbaughs, kkkkarl's or delays. or else, I am outta here because I'm sick of crooks and BS-ers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
...of J.Temperance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 09:05 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. Could you perhaps explain to me how John Edwards isn't honest?
The majority of people LIKE John Edwards and they see him as a decent human being, with compassion and integrity.

So, could you specifically explain to me why you think John Edwards isn't honest and you're NOT allowed to mention the Iraq War vote okay? Can we for once just think OUTSIDE of that narrow box?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robbedvoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 04:24 PM
Response to Reply #7
14. "This time all the votes will be counted"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
...of J.Temperance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 04:41 PM
Response to Reply #14
17. Jaysus, is THAT all you can come up with to bash Edwards?
Tut tut.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chimpymustgo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 09:05 AM
Response to Reply #6
8. Buh-bye. Edwards as a good message and vantage point. Feingold has been
on the Patriot act/ surveillance issues. We've got strong voices out there. We need to unify around a message.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
...of J.Temperance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 01:59 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. So you like Edwards I take it? I like Feingold too by the way
But I think Edwards is now free of the confines of the Senate, so he can just let rip when we need him to you know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ewagner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 08:55 AM
Response to Original message
5. Yes, I agree
We need leadership.

Strong

Unwaivering

Moral

LEADERSHIP
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
More Than A Feeling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 09:30 AM
Response to Original message
10. If Feingold is secretly Newt Gingrich, be afraid!
:silly:

All kidding aside, I agree. Normally, wouldn't it be the defeated presidential candidate?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ksec Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 02:04 PM
Response to Original message
12. The Dems were unorganized much worse a few years back
You couldnt get three of them to agree on one issue. They are notoriously independent which leads to the look of many voices. Look at votes recently. Most are unanimous on some important issues. Thats a good sign and a spokesman is a good idea but who? I vote for Wes Clark.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RB TexLa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 02:04 PM
Response to Original message
13. Actually we need something like Gingrich's politics school

I think it was a two or three week seminar type thing on campaigning for people new to congressional races. Was really in depth, I've heard. Largely about message and effectiveness.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftofthedial Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 04:38 PM
Response to Original message
15. It ought to be Kucinich.
or maybe Conyers.

They actually talk and act like Democrats.

But the "leadership" of the party is in bed with the repukes and afraid to piss off King George.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
goodhue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 04:40 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. Indeed
Kucinich or Conyers. Alas speaking truth to power is not the media's cup of tea.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Sat May 11th 2024, 06:03 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC