by Andrew Malcolm
Newt Gingrich, the former House speaker whose political striptease over running for the 2008 Republican presidential nomination went through even more layers of clothing than Fred Thompson, sent out a spokesman today to say that the Georgian had decided not to make the effort this time.
Barely 72 hours ago the 64-year-old Gingrich had announced that a close advisor would depart Monday on a three-week nationwide trek to gauge possible financial commitments and that if he could round up $30 million worth, Gingrich didn't see how he could resist such popular pressure to run.
Today, the spokesman, Rick Tyler, said Gingrich had discovered that he could not legally explore a political opportunity like running for president while remaining head of American Solutions, his tax-exempt political organization. So he was giving up the presidential idea. "Newt is not running," Tyler said.
A master at manipulating the media, even before helping to invent the "Contract With America" that in 1994 won Congress back for the GOP after decades of minority status, Gingrich is an erudite and eloquent speaker who retains a loyal Republican following despite his resignation after Republican election losses in 1998.
A presidential confrontation next year between Gingrich and Hillary Clinton, who so often denounced his right-wing conspiracy, would have been one of the most entertaining in decades. And the debates would have surely outdrawn reruns of "The Simpsons."
The decision's implications for the other Republican candidates seem minimal, except possibly the freeing up of some Gingrich donors awaiting his decision. You can bet that the Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee and Fred Thompson folks are calling them this afternoon.
In public, such as during the Bill Clinton-Monica Lewinsky affair, Gingrich can be one of the most pointedly partisan speakers imaginable. His biting remarks leave scars not easily forgotten, and he'd never make any Democratic Lincoln Bedroom list. Yet out of office, he can also publicly debate prominent Democrats like Mario Cuomo and produce a fascinating evening of bipartisan political dialogue rich in enlightening history.
In person Gingrich's attention to and involvement with those around him is intense, like a college professor engaging students in the hall after a lecture. Win-or-lose, his ...
energy is palpable and he seems to positively overflow with ideas, always pulling yet another piece of paper from his suit jacket with some new plan for reforming the stalemated American political system.
Gingrich has many of the credentials seemingly required to run for the modern American presidency. He has held elected federal office, can draw a media crowd anywhere, has written books, has been divorced and had at least one affair.
In fact, Gingrich's on-air admission last winter to Focus on the Family's James Dobson of conducting an affair while married and even while criticizing President Clinton's affair was what got many political observers thinking Gingrich would seek the party's nomination, getting the dirty laundry out in public and making it old news before opponents could leak it salaciously, a classic defense.
Gingrich has spent the ensuing months in countless interviews offering unsolicited advice from the campaign sidelines to alleged Republican colleagues, at one point calling them a bunch of pygmies. This prompted an outburst from another GOP elder, the normally calm Bob Dole: "I totally disagree with Newt Gingrich. I don't know how he has set himself up as the spokesman for the world."
Each Gingrich interview, of course, provided the opportunity to present himself as an alternative, which he never discouraged. And he appeared at various times to lean both ways -- yes, he might; no, probably not.
The fact is Gingrich has carefully constructed a network of lucrative businesses. He gives frequent lectures and all this publicity in recent months can only increase his reported $40,000 fee. He is a senior fellow at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, writes an online newsletter for Human Events, has a regular radio program reaching more than 400 stations, writes books that provide regular promotional tours and much media exposure and is a paid contributor to Fox News.
Besides the nonprofit bipartisan American Solutions, Gingrich also has a for-profit think tank, the Center for Health Transformation. So he won't be disappearing from the public consciousness.
Basically all of that business would have to be jettisoned for a presidential run that grows increasingly risky at this stage, which was once considered still pretty early and now seems very late. Polls adding Gingrich to the existing Republican field have shown him in the 7%-8% range, a lot better than Ron Paul but behind even the under-financed John McCain. Gingrich himself pointed out the other day the challenge of taking on a multimillionaire like Romney, who can write his own campaign checks.
So this looks like the end of the Newt Watch for now. Should Republicans lose the White House next year, however, there won't be many party leaders with existing followings left standing in the wreckage except maybe this tall Georgia fellow who has been issuing all these warnings and compiling his own fortune, keeps showing up on TV and will still be in his mid-60s come 2010, when the next presidential campaign starts.
Something that does strike the eye, however: Gingrich has said that if he ever did run, he would never make the announcement in such an undignified way as on a late-night talk show, as McCain, Thompson and Arnold Schwarzenegger have done.
So he makes the announcement of not running by sending out a hired hand on a quiet Saturday morning, not the day you normally pick nor the time of day to announce something you want ignored. TV and newspapers have all day to prepare their stories. Now, watch for an "exclusive" interview with Gingrich on TV somewhere early this coming week.
Despite an entire week full of activities by all the other candidates and their travels and attacks and responses and major policy pronouncements, the Sunday newspapers, the Sunday morning political talk shows and the weekend blogosphere will now be full of buzz and chatter about what Newt Gingrich isn't doing. See what we mean about clever manipulation?
Oh, and one other thing: Regardless of the news so casually released on a September Saturday, the deadline for filing for January's New Hampshire primary doesn't come until November.
Andrew Malcolm writes for Top of the Ticket, the Los Angeles Times' political blog
• 
• 
• 
• 
Comments
Why would he run and surely be beaten? And, now he can continue to play the elder statesman and sage on the Sunday Moring Talking Head shows. So of course he's bowing out.
It would have made a fun campaign, though.
Posted by: I'm Still Anonymous | September 29, 2007 8:21 PM
I think Newt is a very smart man...this may be why I think so...he knows when to fold 'em. Could he talk to Mr Bush about doing just that in Iraq?
Posted by: lochnessmonster | September 29, 2007 8:22 PM
Too bad.
A majority of Americans hated this right wing apparatchick. He tried to destroy the National Park System in the 90's as part of his Contract ON America scheme. Check out HR241.
Anyway, every time he opened his mouth the Clintons got more popular.
Lesser Salamander: Wish You Were Here to help elect a larger Dem. majority in 08.
Posted by: C.Morris | September 29, 2007 9:32 PM
A man of great ideas, just the wrong messenger to deliver them.
Posted by: Terry | September 29, 2007 11:02 PM
What on earth made this creep think that he could raise $30 mil. in an already overcrowded field of unqualified candidates in his own party? That 29% will continue to drop. The terrifying thing is the damage this admin can do in the next year.
Posted by: Mrs. Jesus | September 30, 2007 12:44 AM
"Today, the spokesman, Rick Tyler, said Gingrich had discovered that he could not legally explore a political opportunity like running for president while remaining head of American Solutions, his tax-exempt political organization."
Give me a break. Someone explain how no one in this American Solutions did not know this glaring technicality? Or, he knew all along & just decided to tease a few demoralized conservatives just to keep his name from going into the big fade?
If I were The Clintons, I would retract the whole right-winged-conspiracy bs. Conservatives just aren't bright enough.
American Solutions indeed.
Posted by: RomanB | September 30, 2007 12:47 AM
C Morris, as usual you are wrong. In reality, Gingrich has been and continues to be a big contributor and supporter of a variety of nature and animal causes.
Gingrich is an exceptionally smart man and would make a good president. Trouble is he was so demonized by the media and the Demoncrats, that he is unelectable. His marital woes didn't help either, nor do I excuse him of his dalliances.
Posted by: John D | September 30, 2007 1:06 AM
Why would he run and surely be beaten? And, now he can continue to play the elder statesman and sage on the Sunday Moring Talking Head shows. So of course he's bowing out.
It would have made a fun campaign, though.
Posted by: I'm Still Anonymous | September 29, 2007 8:21 PM
You have a bit of an inferiority complex going on there.
Someday you'll find someone who cares about you and then you'll be free to love yourself again.
Posted by: TiaRachel | September 30, 2007 2:31 AM
This is good for the country. We don't need another divider.
Posted by: bill r. | September 30, 2007 8:53 AM
Ah Shucks, Newt not running? Shucks. I looked forward to seeing his fat Republican Jowls repeatedly telling the World how intelligent, how insightful, how wonderful he is. Shucks. We're being deprived!
Posted by: GW | September 30, 2007 10:34 AM
GW, whether or not you like him -- or agree with his politics -- the man is well read and erudite. No objective person would deny that simple fact.
I would have paid to seem him and Hillary in a debate.
bill r, you're right. He's as divisive as it gets and we don't need that.
Posted by: And Yet I'm Still Anonymous | September 30, 2007 1:06 PM
Newt Gingrich - best thing that ever happened to Bill Clinton
Posted by: Terry | September 30, 2007 2:24 PM
[quote]
In reality, Gingrich has been and continues to be a big contributor and supporter of a variety of nature and animal causes.
Posted by: John D | September 30, 2007 1:06 AM
[/quote]
AND YOUR PROOF FOR THIS ALLEGATION IS ... ?
Non-existent as usual.
Posted by: BC | September 30, 2007 3:07 PM
BC, you show me proof of Bush, jack Daniels and cocaine and I'll show you mine.
But here are some links for you, dear:
http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/Newt_Gingrich_Environment.htm
This one, BC, is flattering on Gingrich's environmentalism as well as unflattering:
http://www.loe.org/shows/shows.htm?programID=96-P13-00028#feature1
Come on BC, you start showing some proof!!
Posted by: John D | September 30, 2007 4:52 PM
GW, whether or not you like him -- or agree with his politics -- the man is well read and erudite. No objective person would deny that simple fact.
George W Bush is "well read" and, get this, "erudite?!?" No, I most certainly do not accept that. If he's well-read, he is reading the wrong things and/or deriving the wrong lesson from them.
And erudite??? Does this definition sound anything like President Bush??
er·u·dite /ˈɛryʊˌdaɪt, ˈɛrʊ-/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[er-yoo-dahyt, er-oo-] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–adjective
characterized by great knowledge; learned or scholarly: an erudite professor; an erudite commentary.
"Characterized by great knowledge?" Oh man I'm gonna be laughing about that one for awhile. Remember, this is the same man who brags about achieving a C average in college.
Posted by: Distrust and Verify | September 30, 2007 6:22 PM
John D,
Thanks for telling me that I am wrong; That verifies that I am correct.
Posted by: C.Morris | September 30, 2007 6:36 PM
"George W Bush is 'well read' and, get this, 'erudite'?!?...etc"
Posted by: Distrust and Verify | September 30, 2007 6:22 PM
No, George Bush is an ignorant lump.
You misread.
I was not talking about GW Bush, I was addressing a blogger named "GW" and I was talking about Gingrich -- who is in fact well read and erudite but not very likable.
Posted by: And Yet I'm Still Anonymous | September 30, 2007 7:53 PM
Still Anonymous: You are beginning to learn that those on the Left have a severe reading and comprehension problem.
By the way, Distrust and Verify, Bush reads about two dozen books a year, and we're not talking about My Pet Goat either.
Posted by: John D | September 30, 2007 9:54 PM
Hey Johnny Brownshirt, how are those re-education camps coming? Still thing we should imprison people based on their political views here in the land of the free & the home of the brave?
Posted by: jj | September 30, 2007 10:04 PM
JJ, you should be careful. Since I am a member of the brownshirt clan, perhaps you will be our first kidnapped Leftie to head to the re-education camps. Hmmmm, perhaps not. To be educated you need a brain. You're safe.
Posted by: John D | October 1, 2007 12:09 AM
George Bush is as dumb as a stump. He should try picking up a book at one of his many grade school visits. Truely an imbecile.
Posted by: Force of Darkness | October 1, 2007 3:13 AM
Now that Gingrich is out, Rudy still retains the position of "Republican running for President with the most ex-wives" title.
Posted by: BC | October 1, 2007 11:58 AM
[quote]
BC, you show me proof of Bush, jack Daniels and cocaine and I'll show you mine.
But here are some links for you, dear:
http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/Newt_Gingrich_Environment.htm
This one, BC, is flattering on Gingrich's environmentalism as well as unflattering:
http://www.loe.org/shows/shows.htm?programID=96-P13-00028#feature1
Come on BC, you start showing some proof!!
Posted by: John D | September 30, 2007 4:52 PM
[/quote]
Google returned 731,000 hits for all of the words "George Bush cocaine youth". Here are just a few links on Bush's drug use, & his avoidance in admitting it:
http://www.progress.org/drc12.htm
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-seery/the-bush-cocaine-chronicl_b_37786.html
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/1999/10/18/cocaine/
http://www.cocaine.org/george-bush/index.html
Google returned 90,400 hits for all of the words "George Bush 40th birthday drunk". Here are just a few links from that list:
http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/11/02/bush.dui/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Bush_substance_abuse_controversy
http://archive.salon.com/politics/feature/2001/07/26/drunk/index.html
http://www.jointogether.org/news/headlines/inthenews/2000/bush-drunk-driving-record.html
http://www.johnmonty.com/cotw/cw000624.htm
http://www.republicoft.com/2007/06/11/the-myth-of-a-bush-recovery-pt-1/
http://alcoholism.about.com/od/issues/l/aa001103a.htm
Posted by: BC | October 1, 2007 12:04 PM
BC, sorry but left wing hit blogs are not a legitimate source of information.
Anyway, Bush has fully admitted he had drinking problems. He also hasn't had a drink in perhaps 20 years?
So, BC, you made a claim that a CURRENT function with Bush would include drinking and drugs. Please, then, show where Bush does either today or anytime in the past 20-30 years.
And, of course, there is no proof about Bush doing cocaine anyway.
At the same time, BC, I've been to plenty of parties and places in the 1980s and early 1990s in which lots of folks I was around did coke. I did not and turned it down every time offered to me. But I have come friends that did snort come coke once in awhile. Are they bad people? No. Do they today, 20 years later? No. Do they regret they did? Yes. So, what is the point to your hysteria?
Posted by: John D | October 1, 2007 1:08 PM