EDITION: U.S.
 
CONNECT    

Keli Goff

GET UPDATES FROM Keli Goff
 

Why Politics Needs More Losers Like Newt Gingrich

Posted: 1/9/12 07:48 PM ET

There are so many misstatements, distortions, exaggerations, flip-flops, falsehoods and flat out lies in politics, and particularly in political campaigns, that when a politician displays a rare moment of unquestioned honesty and authenticity, it becomes a major news story. (Remember the obsession with Hillary's near tears on the campaign trail in '08?)

After months of the GOP presidential candidates accusing each other of lying about their own records and about the records of one another, we finally experienced one moment of unimpeachable, unadulterated honesty from a candidate. I'm not talking about the moment Newt Gingrich choked up while recalling his mother, or even the moment he let slip his real feelings about black people and food stamps. In fact I'm not talking about what Newt Gingrich said at all, but what he didn't say. When Newt Gingrich refused to call Mitt Romney for the customary congratulatory call following Romney's razor thin victory in Iowa, he said much more about what he thinks of Mitt Romney than he ever has in any debate. For that I applaud him.

Being gracious in defeat is one of those idealized character traits that we all aspire to (you know, like how we're supposed to say something nice or not saying anything at all) but few truly succeed at. We may say the right thing when our co-worker beats us in that pickup basketball game, or when our boss beats us in that "friendly" game of tennis, but how many actually mean the words, "You played a really great game" or "the better man won today" deep down inside?

And if your coworker won with help from a questionable call or two, or your boss called a certain ball out on match point that looked very in to you (and everybody else), you may want to say a lot of things to them once the game is over, but "good game" probably isn't on that list.

Political campaigns are often filled with one bad call, one cheap shot, one sharp elbow and one foul after another. Yet despite often being more bruising than any contact sport (after all, even football players don't go after each others' families on the field), at the end of play, regardless of what happened on the court you are still supposed to pick up the phone, and call the guy who beat you, possibly by lying about you or criticizing your spouse, to say "Congratulations. I wish you the best." Even though we all know you probably wish he would get hit by a bus.

Though they may have little in common politically, former George McGovern and Gingrich do have something in common. According to the New York Times, after being trounced by Richard Nixon in the 1972 presidential election the former Senator also declined to pick up the phone for the standard concession call to his adversary. He sent a telegram instead. (Click here to see a list of some famous sore losers -- from politics, to sports and entertainment.)

(In light of the Watergate break-in, I might have opted for a singing telegram--delivered in the least favorite musical genre of the intended recipient.)

Don't get me wrong. I realize kids need to be taught the value of good sportsmanship. Frankly, that's a lesson we could all use. But another lesson we can use? Learning to play fair. You can say a lot of things about Newt Gingrich (for instance my 90 year-old grandmother who can't always remember his name calls him the one with "all the wives") but one thing you can't say about him is that he lost in Iowa fair and square. The loss may have been legal thanks to Citizens United, but I wouldn't call it fair. He -- and most of the other candidates -- ultimately lost to Mitt Romney because Romney, and those supporting him, massively out spent the others.

Whether or not the ads unleashed by the Romney campaign, and the super PACs supporting him, were inaccurate (a longstanding Gingrich complaint) is really secondary. If someone is flooding the airways with one message, and that message is drowning out all others, that message will get mistaken for fact -- regardless of whether it is or not.

Gingrich may have lost in Iowa, but he could perhaps take some small consolation in coming close to winning an unexpected new role by default: spokesperson for the movement to get rid of super PACs. Of course, then his opponents would have another example for their attack ads already going after him for his brief love fest with Nancy Pelosi over climate change, which supposedly proves that he's occasionally too nice to liberals to be a true conservative. (Yes I laughed just as hard while typing that as you did when reading it.) But it appears that before embracing his new cause with both arms, he used one arm to signal, "Well if you can't beat 'em, join 'em." A super PAC supporting Gingrich will be spending millions of dollars on attack ads aimed at--you guessed it--Mitt Romney in South Carolina.

Since Romney didn't play fair, I must say that I don't have a lot of sympathy for him regarding what's about to come his way. That doesn't mean I applaud Gingrich's super PAC. I don't applaud anyone, or any entity, that uses obscene amounts of money to hijack our political system. But I do find it refreshing that Gingrich actually took a stand in Iowa and essentially told Romney just what he could do with his win.

And he did it without saying anything at all.

Of course, a singing telegram might have worked too. Maybe a certain song by Cee-Lo Green?

Keli Goff is the author of "The GQ Candidate" and a Contributing Editor for Loop21.com, where an earlier version of this post originally appeared.


 
 
 

Follow Keli Goff on Twitter: www.twitter.com/keligoff

There are so many misstatements, distortions, exaggerations, flip-flops, falsehoods and flat out lies in politics, and particularly in political campaigns, that when a politician displays a rare momen...
There are so many misstatements, distortions, exaggerations, flip-flops, falsehoods and flat out lies in politics, and particularly in political campaigns, that when a politician displays a rare momen...
 
  • Comments
  • 9
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
53 minutes ago(10:11 PM)
The very last thing this nation or this planet needs is more people like Newt Gingrich.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
jsgaetano
Semper Fidelis Tyrannosaurus!
1 hour ago( 9:57 PM)
What I find hilarious is how Newt's SuperPAC filled with his supporters is angry at what Romney's SuperPAC filled with his supporters said about Newt. Moral of the story, as always, is "it's only ok when Newt does it".
photo
demisfine
Often correct, NEVER right.
1 hour ago( 9:51 PM)
Hypocrisy can't be forgiven.
Newt would have been the nastiest, meanest, most prolific negative advertiser IF he had the financial backing Mitt has.
Newt was limited by his lack of funding and his recent conversion to Catholicis­m (more the former than the latter). He wanted everyone to be nice, so as not to write President Obama's re-electio­n ads.
He is no opponent of Citizens United. At least he wasn't, until he was the target of negative ads.
Newt is worried about self-prese­rvation, not this great Democracy.
1 hour ago( 9:50 PM)
I do not recall these concession calls being standard in primaries or caucuses.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
flossophy
Liberalism is not liberal.
2 hours ago( 9:17 PM)
"Whether or not the ads unleashed by the Romney campaign, and the super PACs supporting him, were inaccurate (a longstandi­ng Gingrich complaint) is really secondary.­"

No it's not. 

A 5 second google search will reveal that the Washington Post gave the ads "4 Pinocchios­" for outright Iies and distortion­s... which is a new record for 30 second campaign ads. 
Billybladerunner
Is this thing on....
3 hours ago( 8:19 PM)
Lets be Clear ...the Media is totally jumping the train when it comes to Gingrich ...i thought this article was good and fair to a degree....­but here is an article on what Newt actualy said about Food stamps ....

A reporter on the trail notes that Gingrich frequently says in his stump speeches that he would urge people to demand paychecks instead of food stamps — a talking point that it is not usually met with great alarm by the media. He also frequently says that he would go to the NAACP convention if it invited him. On Thursday morning, the two points came together when he said he would go to the NAACP convention and explain "why the African-Am­erican community should demand paychecks and not be satisfied with food stamps."

Slate's Dave Weigel tweeted a slightly altered version of Gingrich's quote at 9:34 a.m., and Talking Points Memo put it up less than 20 minutes later with the headline, "Newt: African Americans Should Get Off Food Stamps; Demand Paychecks.­" An hour after that, The Daily Beast ran its story with the headline, "Gingrich to African-Am­ericans: Get Off of Food Stamps

Not what the guy said at all now was it..... He's not affraid to go to the NAACP and talk with them ...no other canidate is offering it....He want's to be everyones president , not just a certain class ....
JRsNana
The most important things in life aren't things.
2 hours ago( 9:20 PM)
Believe me. Newt doesn't want to be "everyones president"­. He's a mean, vile man who used that full-out racist remark to get attention. And it worked. The FACT is that there are more white people on food stamps than black people. THAT'S the point. Why doesn't he want to go talk to a bunch of white people and educate THEM on how to get off food stamps, now that he's calling it a teaching moment and he's just trying to help? Because that would be rude. That would be patronizin­g. And when you're pandering to the GOP base you can be as racist as you want to be but you'd better not try to put the white base (that was pretty redundant) in a tizzy and try that patronizin­g crap with THEM.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
opprobrious
More speech. Less Flagging.
3 hours ago( 8:12 PM)
"We may say the right thing when our co-worker beats us in that pickup basketball game, or when our boss beats us in that "friendly" game of tennis, but how many actually mean the words, "You played a really great game" or "the better man won today" deep down inside?"

I'm secure enough to be okay with it. As for Gingrich. Mitt Romney deserves Newt.
2 hours ago( 9:20 PM)
I'm standing up for Newt against ALL of the negativity and falsehoods about him. I applaud his ability to fend off attacks and let downs such as the mutiny played against him in the beginning.

NEWT 2012