Discussion: Trump Booster Gingrich Thinks Ugly Spat Over Wives 'Really Has Hurt Him'

Oh, yeah - Gingrich. Say what you will about him, the man knows wives.

18 Likes

Yep. I guess they brought him in as a kind of expert witness on the subject of oft-married buffoonish narcissists who mistreat women and aren’t all that damn bright.

9 Likes

Trump responded to these critiques on Monday, saying he “never thought he would run for office.”

…as if tRump could keep his thoughts to himself.

What? Trump said something stupid? Wow! I bet that ends his campaign. It has every other time so far.

5 Likes

TPM:

““It sent a signal to women that is negative at a time when his numbers with the women are already bad. …" Gingrich told Hannity. "I’m not sure anybody in the Trump campaign understands yet what a big mistake this is …”

“Callista can’t stop talking about it,” Gingrich continued. “Not only is Trump losing women over this, he’s losing married misogynists like me who are pissed that their wives won’t stop whining about it. It’s driving me nuts.”

10 Likes

Gingrich: wives are things to be discarded when they are older and sick, not talked about in public!

4 Likes

Probably doesn’t help that his top aide is also charged with battery against a female reporter. War on Women. Can we call it a narrative yet?

2 Likes

“Trump Booster Gingrich Thinks Ugly”
Yeah, I agree with that part.

2 Likes

You know what’s really going to hurt him?

Hillary Clinton, that’s what.

8 Likes

Just keep in mind, that Trump has not won a single state with a majority. On the other hand, Cruz has won several of the most recent states with majorities.

But Gingrich is talking more about the general election, I believe. And from that perspective, he is correct. This latest schoolyard dust up is killing him with women, and group that is going to kill him in a general. And that trend will only continue to get worse going forward. Trump will not be able to contain himself once the general election polling starts and shows him consistently losing to a woman. Its just not in his DNA.

So laying a crappy foundation right now with this meaningless little spat is probably the single worst tactical thing Trump could do.

4 Likes

It truly galls Trump to ever admit failure or defeat. Likewise contrition, regret, apologies, and asking forgiveness are anathema. However, I think there is a lot of money behind him (despite his self funding malarkey), and no small number of powerful people vested in his winning the Presidency. I predict he’s going to come as close as we’ve seen to conceding poor judgment and offering Cruz some sort of apology. It’ll be half-assed, devoid of sincerity and have a couple idiotic qualifiers attached, but he’ll do it. Then the fact it was half-assed, devoid of sincerity and had a couple idiotic qualifiers will totally negate the gesture and he’ll still come out looking the brutish lout for his effort.

1 Like

Trumpsters are circling the wagons around him. They say Cruz started it. It was in fact a pro-Cruz PAC that started it,but Ted never smacked that PAC down for doing it that I’m aware of. The spat hasn’t just hurt Trump. It has hurt Trump and Cruz and the entire GOP brand. The spat isn’t over either. It’s still going on.

1 Like

Yes, absolutely. Gingrich is obviously the foremost GOP expert on messaging to the wimminz. One need only look at his own history to see that he should be taken seriously in what he says.

1 Like

Says the guy who handed his wife divorce papers while she was still confined to a hospital bed.

1 Like

is it just me or does it seem it’s been all downhill since the Republican Party wouldn’t nominate a divorced man, Nelson Rockefeller, then it was a big deal to actually elect a divorced man, man-godlette Ronnie, and now thrice married Newt is the go to guy for advice on wives?

1 Like

Election law is byzantine. Candidates and sitting reps run afoul of it all the time. I know there are proscriptions from candidates advising, directing, consulting, coordinating with and possibly even making public statements regarding independent PAC activities. Is commenting on an ad campaign by a PAC with a transparent allegiance to your candidacy allowed? I can see where a candidate could, in a fashion, steer an “independent” PAC in certain directions merely by making public pronouncements about their ads. If you condemned an ad you could likewise express high regard for one you like, no? As in “Hey guys, more ads like that one!!”

“Trump Booster Gingrich Thinks Ugly Spat Over Wives Really Has Hurt Him.”

Not enough.

1 Like

But women LOVE Trump. Two or three have told him so.

I’ll tell YOU what’s ugly.

It’s Newt’s face!