Gingrich email: Obama’s gonna win

Ouch.

Then again, Paul Ryan is also looking for another job.

Yesterday, an email was sent out to the Gingrich email list informing people that Obama was going to win and that it was time to start looking at 2016.  Buh bye, Mittens!

The email, titled “What’s really at stake this Tuesday …” came from Gingrich Marketplace and went out to people who’d given their contact information to the Gingrich campaign when the former speaker of the House was still in the presidential race. Bygone candidates, such as Gingrich and Herman Cain, regularly rent out their email address lists to advertisers.

“The truth is, the next election has already been decided. Obama is going to win. It’s nearly impossible to beat an incumbent president,” advertiser Porter Stansberry wrote in the email to Gingrich supporters. “What’s actually at stake right now is whether or not he will have a third-term.”

I think a lot of Republicans are writing their “why Mittens lost” emails today.  And a lot of Romney staffers are writing their resumes.  But rest assured the 1% Romney staffers will get another huge bonus after they lose.


Follow me on Twitter: @aravosis | @americablog | @americabloggay | Facebook | Google+ | LinkedIn. John Aravosis is the editor of AMERICAblog, which he founded in 2004. He has a joint law degree (JD) and masters in Foreign Service from Georgetown (1989); and worked in the US Senate, World Bank, Children's Defense Fund, and as a stringer for the Economist. Frequent TV pundit: O'Reilly Factor, Hardball, World News Tonight, Nightline & Reliable Sources. Bio, .

Share This Post

  • http://www.rebeccamorn.com/mind BeccaM

    He may have, but if so I haven’t seen it.

  • http://adgitadiaries.blog-city.com karmanot

     Same

  • http://adgitadiaries.blog-city.com karmanot

     Same here.

  • http://adgitadiaries.blog-city.com karmanot

     Same here. I have to enter the e-mail address every time. Maybe Ablog is accommodating this glitch to filter the rush troll events that have occurred recently. In any case, it’s a pain and annoying. What has John said about it?

  • http://www.rebeccamorn.com/mind BeccaM

    Let’s be clear here, because it seems like a great many people aren’t reading the post very closely.

    Newt Gingrich didn’t send out that email. What he did was his usual money-grubbing in that he rents out his mailing list to advertisers. One of these advertisers, Porter Stansberry, sent the email. He’s not directly associated with Gingrich or his campaigns.

    Does it make Gingrich look bad by association? Sure. Was he directly responsible? No.

    Just sayin’. Best we be clear here and not come across like idjits.

  • hollywoodstein

    Wow, Grinch telling teh truth.  I see a crack in the space time continuum.   Wait, no, it’s in his self interest, all is well with the world.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=854715033 James Andersen

    “What’s actually at stake right now is whether or not he will have a third-term.”

    I have a prediction: Obama will never win a third term as president. Just a hunch.

  • emjayay

    Thanks. But can they stall a Supremes nomination, filibuster or no, until the term of another president and another Senate? Senate rules, none of which I’m pretty sure are in the Consitution, are so arcane. I guess there’s nothing about “speedy” in advise and consent. Which isn’t defined either. And the Senate is (theoretically) Democrat controlled and will be next term. Any serious Senate rules and procedure experts out there?

    Anyway sorry to say, but there’s an good chance that Ruth isn’t going to get through the next four years as a SC Justice. And, if Obama is reelected, hopefully a couple of old overweight guys on the Supreme Court won’t either.

  • emjayay

    Thanks. But can they stall a Supremes nomination, filibuster or no, until the term of another president and another Senate? Senate rules, none of which I’m pretty sure are in the Consitution, are so arcane. I guess there’s nothing about “speedy” in advise and consent. Which isn’t defined either. And the Senate is (theoretically) Democrat controlled and will be next term. Any serious Senate rules and procedure experts out there?

    Anyway sorry to say, but there’s an good chance that Ruth isn’t going to get through the next four years as a SC Justice. And, if Obama is reelected, hopefully a couple of old overweight guys on the Supreme Court won’t either.

  • Mfree283

    Stansberry gets away with murder. In a recent public podcast he made fun of people with foreign accents, blasted affirmative action and used the phrase :”f—king ni–ers.” at 11:16 in the audio at the link below. It is even in the transcript you can download! Downlload the audio and transcript before he “disappears” them and tweet this to everyone you know.
    stansberryradio(dot)com(slash)Porter-Stansberry(slash)Latest-Episodes(slash)Episode(slash)120(slash)Why-Oil-Is-The-Next-Revolution#

  • emjayay

    Thanks. But can they stall a Supremes nomination, filibuster or no, until the term of another president and another Senate? Senate rules, none of which I’m pretty sure are in the Consitution, are so arcane. I guess there’s nothing about “speedy” in advise and consent. Which isn’t defined either. And the Senate is (theoretically) Democrat controlled and will be next term. Any serious Senate rules and procedure experts out there?

    Anyway sorry to say, but there’s an good chance that Ruth isn’t going to get through the next four years as a SC Justice. And, if Obama is reelected, hopefully a couple of old overweight guys on the Supreme Court won’t either.

  • emjayay

    Thanks. But can they stall a Supremes nomination, filibuster or no, until the term of another president and another Senate? Senate rules, none of which I’m pretty sure are in the Consitution, are so arcane. I guess there’s nothing about “speedy” in advise and consent. Which isn’t defined either. And the Senate is (theoretically) Democrat controlled and will be next term. Any serious Senate rules and procedure experts out there?

    Anyway sorry to say, but there’s an good chance that Ruth isn’t going to get through the next four years as a SC Justice. And, if Obama is reelected, hopefully a couple of old overweight guys on the Supreme Court won’t either.

  • emjayay

    Thanks. But can they stall a Supremes nomination, filibuster or no, until the term of another president and another Senate? Senate rules, none of which I’m pretty sure are in the Consitution, are so arcane. I guess there’s nothing about “speedy” in advise and consent. Which isn’t defined either. And the Senate is (theoretically) Democrat controlled and will be next term. Any serious Senate rules and procedure experts out there?

    Anyway sorry to say, but there’s an good chance that Ruth isn’t going to get through the next four years as a SC Justice. And, if Obama is reelected, hopefully a couple of old overweight guys on the Supreme Court won’t either.

  • ezpz

    Oops, I see I put this on the wrong thread. I THOUGHT I had posted on the Bush v. Obama thread. Oh well…

  • Naja pallida

    Bush’s third term has already taken place.

  • Naja pallida

    I wish I could disagree with you.

  • http://www.rebeccamorn.com/mind BeccaM

    I’ve seen that happen a few times as well.

  • http://www.rebeccamorn.com/mind BeccaM

    Same exact thing here.

  • A reader in Colorado

    Something else also happening to me (I use Chrome).  When I refresh the page, the first thing that comes up is a totally unformatted page of gobbledygook – that is, the text of the comments all run together, style elements exposed, etc.

    Then, after a moment, the page refreshes with the style elements intact.

    This never happened before this other problem.

  • A reader in Colorado

    I go to Disqus itself, and I show as logged in, but when I come here, on the same browser, it shows me as not logged in.

  • http://www.rebeccamorn.com/mind BeccaM

    Seems like nearly everyone using Firefox or Chrome is encountering this problem. I’ve filed a support ticket with Disqus.

  • http://www.rebeccamorn.com/mind BeccaM

    I’ve sent in a detailed support ticket, and upon their return query, a longer one complete with screenshots.

  • A reader in Colorado

    I don’t know whether Obama or Romney are going to win the election, but in either event, George W. Bush will win a fourth term.

  • condew

     Maybe he’s referring to Romney as a third Bush term.

  • A reader in Colorado

    Same thing is happening to me.

  • condew

     I wonder if there was more to the troll tsunami than just obnoxious posts.

  • A reader in Colorado

    On the other hand, you have to appreciate the humor value of the blogs in 2015 saying, “Which do you want, Hillary Clinton, or the Lord of Darkness, Father of Lies!  – no really, the PRINCE OF DARKNESS” and having people not know which one to want.

  • condew

    (This is the second day in a row where Disqus seems to be really screwed up and won’t let me log in, then posts with my normal identity.  I’ve tried 2 different laptops.)

  • condew

     Like his mentor, Bill Clinton, Obama will screw up his second term so badly that no Democrat can get elected in 2016.  Our only consolation is we might get 4 more years of inaction before the next Republican sells us all into slavery.

  • http://buddybest.tripod.com/index.html BuddyNovinski

    “a third term”? Doesn’t Newt, the great historian know that his party pushed through the idiocy known as the twentysecond amendment?  Dah, I didn’t know that, Fred: – Schrub.

  • A reader in Colorado

    Good to see you too ez.   Yeah.  I should have said “nothing about obstruction.”, sorry I was unclear  Since we have It’s a great way to let Republicanesque legislation coast through while leaving anything remotely less than Satanic rot.

    Since it’s Harry I’m-Really-Not-Deliberately-Letting-This-Stuff-Go-I’m-Just-A-Well-Meaning-Incompetent Reid, we will certainly have the “mistake” of not addressing the filibuster go again for the 3rd time in a row, and once again we will be treated to the idea that nobody could have predicted Republicans would filibuster everything except what they want. 

    I too would like to see them do “nothing”, except as you know, we have Republican minority rule in the Senate.

  • condew

    I think Newt Gingrich is Evil incarnate, so it surprises me that on this one thing we do agree.

    If Romney were to win, what would it say about us as a country?   Romney could not have shown more disrespect for this American election if he had defecated on stage.  Any serious candidate has a reason they want to be the President, Romney treated it as a beauty contest, he had no reason to want the job other than self aggrandizement.  Any serious candidate has a position on every issue, with some reasoning backing up that position, and unless some major world event affects that position, he sticks with it; Romney: no position, no reason, no sticking to it.  All Romney had was a rather clumsy sales pitch.

  • ezpz

    Well said, as always, Reader. Good to ‘see’ you.

    You said: “…when the Democrats continue to do nothing…”
    To that, I would add the word “good” because doing ‘nothing’ would probably be better than the harm they are likely to do with the pending “Grand Bargain” which is a fait accompli.

  • A reader in Colorado

    Welp.  Worry not, ez. The election is over in 4 days.

    The Great January Hangover is coming, when the Democrats continue to do nothing, Republicans continue to obstruct, and the country either goes flying off the Fiscal Cliff or there’s a Grand Bargain waiting to be engineered by Obama and agreed to by Boehner that strangles ordinary Americans and lets the wealthy off scot free again (’cause that’s just the way Obama rolls).  This will be called “necessary to keep the country going”.

    In New Democrat Speak, this is called “cornering the Republicans”.

    I wonder how demonic the demonic force will have to be in 2015, that the Democrats will run against, to assert that they are our only choice.

    Perhaps the Democrats in order to keep the White House then, they can convince Lucifer Himself, Beelzebub, to run for the Republicans.

    Because after what this country will look like, with Obama continuing to try to compromise with the Republicans at every turn, they’ll need Satan Himself to run against.

  • ezpz

    I didn’t realize Bush was running for president again.  Better than Bush – what a pathetically low bar.  Trying to promote your guy in this context reeks of desperation.

  • http://www.rebeccamorn.com/mind BeccaM

    Off-topic Disqus troubleshooting update (11/2/12, afternoon): Login error is not related to recent Java update. Unable to log in on this site — and so far, Americablog.com only — using both Firefox and Chrome. Internet Explorer 9 seems to work okay.

    The other theory I had was perhaps it might be related to the legacy Disqus format, but then as I was looking for information related to Java versions, I stumbled on ComputerWorld and an article by Michael Horowitz, and guess what? They use the same older version of the interface, and I was logged in just fine there. So it ain’t that either.

    When I try to log in here via the Disqus pop-up window and enter my Disqus credentials, I click OK — and it just disappears. If I try to log in via Google, Twitter, or OpenID, the pop-up seems to accept the credentials, then goes back to a Disqus authorization link window with three spinning gears that never goes away.

    It ain’t 3rd-party cookies because I accept them. Although I have ad blocking software, I don’t run it here. I do some NoScript filtering, but even when I turn it off completely, Disqus login fails. Heck, Firefox safe mode, which means no add-ons at all, also won’t allow Disqus log-in here.

    Other weirdness observed: Twice now, I actually was logged into Disqus here and able to post normally. Once was last night, the other time was about two hours ago in the Bush/Obama hurricane response post. But upon revisiting the site and/or page refresh, the active login went away again.

    I’m fairly technically savvy, but not a web internals expert, but it seems to me that there’s an information exchange between Americablog and Disqus that is not happening when the site is accessed using certain browsers. And it’s something that broke only a couple days ago.

    Anyway, as I mentioned a few times now, here’s the workaround for folks who do have a valid Disqus login: Enter your post as normal. Click the “Post as …” button. The Guest user will be selected in the pop-up. Enter the email address you used to sign up for Disqus. I always enter my normal username (BeccaM) as well but I don’t know if that’s required. Click the button to submit your post. If you had editing privileges before, you will be able to edit your post directly, but only until you refresh the page. The only way to re-edit after that is to go to your Disqus.com dashboard and edit your post over there.

    Same deal with issuing Like votes. You’ll have to do it from the dashboard, and it’ll only work for posts in reply to your own and for people you happen to be following.

  • Mighty

    I don’t count this as a “won” election until after the votes are counted. People seem to forget all of the voter suppression that has been and still is going on. All I have to say to this is get out and vote. I already did.

  • http://www.rebeccamorn.com/mind BeccaM

    Nope, that wasn’t it either. Neither Java 7 update 9 nor downgrading to Java 6 Update 29 did anything. Still have to post as Guest.

  • http://www.bloomsburyreview.com Webster

    Will someone *please* fix the Disqus link on here??!!

  • nicho

    Newt’s nuts — what more do you need to know?

  • http://www.rebeccamorn.com/mind BeccaM

    I gave in to curiosity and tried Chrome as well. No dice. Internet Explorer is the only one that correctly shows me as logged in to Disqus on this site.

    FWIW, I did an automatic Java update just a couple days ago, going to Java 6 update 37. Could be related, not sure but it’s worth a shot, so I’m running some experiments.

  • FLL

    One reason for the recent screams of political apocalypse by right-wing types has been demographic changes in Texas, which have increased the Mexican-American population and could very well turn Texas blue by 2016. If this were to happen, it would be extremely difficult for the current brand of Republicanism to win a victory in the Electoral College. To woo a significant number of Mexican-American voters in Texas, a Republican candidate would have to be both less racist and less homophobic than the current crop. It’s no secret that Hispanic voters poll significantly highly than the national average regarding support for marriage equality and gay rights in general. The only demographic that polls very slightly higher (perhaps 1% higher) are white ethnic Catholics. The near future could be a political doomsday scenario for NOM, Family Research Council, etc. Their only recourse would be to declare an independent Republic of Wingnuttia—maybe somewhere in northern Idaho—with Newt Gingrich as their president.

  • FLL

    Inflation has not been a major problem in the current economy. However, I worry that too many of these far-right types are becoming unhinged and will start hoarding aluminum foil, which will drive up the price of aluminum foil at the supermarket. They’ll all be out there making their tin foil hats and sending the price of aluminum foil through the roof.

  • neonnautilus

    The poor saps on the far right truly believe he will take over as a
    dictator.  I’ve read somewhere that such a rumor is circulating among
    the idgits on that side. 

  • neonnautilus

    Trying chrome now

    Update: chrome doesn’t work either. Had to do what beccaM said and sign in as guest, which is how I got in disqus with FF.

  • Deano

    I think they are referring to another Democrat being elected president in 2016 that will carry on policies from the Obama administration

  • http://twitter.com/Danielb48 Daniel Beerthuis

    Presidents are eligible for third terms now? 

  • http://www.rebeccamorn.com/mind BeccaM

    This has been the case for a few days now. On this site and this one only, many of us regular commenters can’t log in to Disqus. At first, Firefox seemed to be the common element, but now more are saying this problem is beginning to spread to other browsers.

    I was able to log in via IE two days ago, but I hate that browser. And I’m not willing to load up Chrome or Opera…so the only solution is to post as Guest, but fill in the Disqus-registered email address, which for whatever reason means Disqus recognizes us 2nd hand as our regular selves. The downside is the edit function goes away on the post after a page refresh and Like doesn’t work at all.

  • http://www.rebeccamorn.com/mind BeccaM

    To address your last point, as Naja Pallida notes above, the craziest CTs assume the Republicans would just stand there and wring their hands or, in the case of John Boehner, weep like a child. We’ve already seen them willing, indeed eager, to risk debt default just to keep their Bush tax cuts and to slash at social programs. Blocking judicial nominations is small potatoes compared to this, and they’ve been doing it at a rate never seen before.

    Ginsburg could’ve resigned in July and the Senate Republicans would have insisted that any replacement nominee vote take place after the election. Hell, I’ve said before that even in the event of an Obama re-election, I could easily see any SCOTUS nomination stalled indefinitely in the Senate — especially since I have no faith whatsoever that Harry Reid will go for any filibuster reforms.

  • http://www.rebeccamorn.com/mind BeccaM

    Purity Of Essence, baby.

  • Outspoken1

     Can’t log into my Disqus acct from Firefox. Have not tried IE.

  • neonnautilus

    disqus is squirelly today

  • Naja pallida

    The one basic problem with all these theories, and including the birther theories, is that it first and foremost requires that the Republican party and all of its backers and laywers to be completely and utterly impotent. Incapable of doing anything but drooling and crying as Obama magically asserts his powers over us all.

    No one would ever let someone of either party circumvent the 22nd Amendment. Nor has war, historically speaking, ever stopped us from holding an election. It is scary what desperation makes some people resort to believing.

    Remember, fluoridating drinking water was going to be the downfall of civilization.

  • emjayay

    I stick to only reading Yahoo News comments conveniently located on my homepage to check up on current ignorant redneck opinion. Actually reading a wingnut site, while no doubt fascinating, may lead to a need for antidepressants. Or a higher dose of what you are already on. Maybe just more martinis.

    Oh, speaking of depression, you forgot how Bill and Hillary definitely had Vince Foster murdered. You remember, the guy who Bill knew from kindergarten and Hillary worked with for years who they brought with them to DC.

    If both Obama and Biden quit, does that make Hillary president, and thus the incumbent for the next election?

    If (no no please no) Romney wins, will Obama have time to appoint someone to the Supreme Court if Ruth Bader Ginsburg wisely immediately quits?

  • emjayay

    It sounds like the message wasn’t really from the Newt, but from someone he (never being one to pass up a buck no matter how ethically challenged) rented the email list to?

  • kingstonbears

    Hey, I’m the fat guy and I’m not singing yet.

  • http://www.rebeccamorn.com/mind BeccaM

    We’re dealing with people increasingly unhinged from reality itself. Over in the Wingnuttisphere, where a decade ago they were spinning conspiracy theories about chemtrails, black helicopters, and FEMA re-education camps, now their latest happy horseshit CT is that Obama will, at some point in his 2nd term, resign. This puts Joe Biden in the Oval Office, and Biden then picks Obama as his replacement VP. Then Biden resigns, making Obama president again for the remainder of the term. The kookier ones posit this could allow for a fourth or even lifetime term for Obama.

    Now, never mind the 22nd Amendment. Or the fact the U.S. House of Representatives which, last I checked, was in GOP hands, would muster enough votes to allow this to happen. Or the Supreme Court which undoubtedly would find issues with the whole crazy scheme… Of course, when this is pointed out, then they’ll say that Obama wouldn’t bother with the House and simply assert emergency powers to make it all happen.

    The other theory goes that Obama will simply cancel elections due to some national emergency, and some of the usual Wingy sites were already spinning their alternative CT in the run up to Hurricane Sandy’s landfall. So now that’s another common meme — a weather related disaster, or sudden war with Iran, or a deliberate gov’t release of some disease or other — there’s no end to the crap they’ll believe and spin into elaborate Rococo castles of paranoia, fear, and loathing.

  • Canyon2

    I do not give 2 cents for anything Gingrich says, but I agree with Carey about getting out the vote and as Carey said, “it ain’t over till it’s over”.
    I personally will not feel good about this election until the results are announced and Obama is the winner.
    Too much can happen with the stunts being pulled to prevent our citizens from voting.

  • http://www.facebook.com/CC1965 Carey Reelectobama Chaplic

    don’t buy any of this they are just trying to make it so dems don’t vote fuck them go vote regardless it ain’t over till it’s over

  • Naja pallida

    I’m sure he’s suggesting that any successor to Obama will continue his policies. Though, with the other stupid shit they’ve said in the past, it wouldn’t surprise me at all if they really thought Obama was going to try and stay in office for a third term.

  • samiinh

     “What’s actually at stake right now is whether or not he will have a third-term.”  What is he suggesting?  That Obama will become a dictator and remain in office, much like Putin in Russia?

  • Naja pallida

    No, what is at stake right now is whether George W. Bush gets a fourth term.

  • brown recluse

    The way he speaks of Obama’s chances in 2016 adds credibility to his prediction of a Romney loss in 2012

© 2014 AMERICAblog News. All rights reserved. · Entries RSS