In his concession speech following the Nevada primary Saturday night, Gingrich laid to rest the Romney campaign’s “greatest fantasy” by clarifying that he would continue his campaign all the way to the Republican convention.
“I am a candidate for president of the United States,” he said. “I will be a candidate for president of the United States. We will go to Tampa.”
While it may have quashed Romney’s “greatest fantasy,” it served simultaneously as a reinforcement to Democrats’ “greatest fantasy.”
For those who want a quick and easy re-election for Barack Obama, the ideal outcome of the Republican primary race is to see the president’s supposedly most formidable rival, Mitt Romney, suffer a slow and painful (and scandalized and mortifying) defeat at the pudgy hands of the GOP’s “pneumatically overstuffed” chief narcissist, Newt Gingrich.
And don’t act like you haven’t pictured it: Newt on stage at the GOP convention in Tampa Bay, swiveling his tractor-tire hips as only a fat man can as “Dancing Queen” blares over the loud speaker; his wife, Jackie BattleyMarianne Ginther Callista Gingrich standing next to him, the skin on her face stretched back and tucked neatly under her bullet-proof platinum blonde helmet, eyes aglow like polished silver dollars placed over the shrunken sockets of a corpse bride, bleached teeth clenched around an invisible key to her husband’s glitchy chastity belt loving heart in a smile that only the editors of Cosmetic Surgery Magazine could say with a straight face was “natural.”
Hanging behind the podium, a red, white, and blue banner spells out the core of this estranged congressman’s presidential platform—“Big Ideas, Child Slavery, No Blacks”—as Gingrich humbly accepts the Republican Party’s 2012 presidential nomination, his supporters cheering like drunk pedophiles at a “Little Miss Sunshine” pageant.
Is it that impossible a scenario?
If you look at each candidate’s pros and cons, it’s more than possible.
Presidential front-runner Mitt Romney didn’t make his millions by double-tapping every dog, cat, chicken and hamster on the block, but if there’s even a modicum of truth to the latest 60 Minutes/Vanity Fair poll, he’s fucked—and not in the good way.
The question: “Would you kill your favorite pet for $1 million?”
The answer: “Yes, 11 percent; No, 83 percent.”
The implications: For a man accused of “animal cruelty” after caging his dog to the roof of the family station wagon during a 12-hour road trip in the 1980s, having 70-odd million pet owners in America admitting that they’d rather continue housing an intellectually and socially irrelevant furball than pocket a million bucks is troubling news.