Skip to main content

Christie, Cuccinelli and the real divide in the GOP

By Newt Gingrich
November 6, 2013 -- Updated 1458 GMT (2258 HKT)
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
  • Newt Gingrich says Tuesday wasn't evidence of moderate-conservative split in GOP
  • He says the real split is between forward-thinkers and those buried in the past
  • Christie offers voters a fresh approach to government and Cuccinelli didn't, he says

Editor's note: Newt Gingrich is a co-cost of CNN's new "Crossfire," which airs at 6:30 p.m. ET weekdays, and author of a new book, "Breakout: Pioneers of the Future, Prison Guards of the Past, and the Epic Battle That Will Decide America's Fate." A former speaker of the House, he was a candidate in the 2012 Republican presidential primaries.

(CNN) -- The very different outcomes for Republicans in Tuesday's two big gubernatorial elections, in Virginia and New Jersey, underscore the most important divide in the party today. But it's not the one everyone thinks.

The conventional reading of Chris Christie's sweeping victory and Ken Cuccinelli's loss Tuesday is that they bolster the "moderates" and undermine the so-called "extremists" within the party. Voters of all types -- 93% of Republicans, 66% of Independents, and 32% of Democrats -- cast their ballots for Christie, this view holds, because he demonstrated himself as "reasonable," worked with leaders on the other side of the aisle, and distanced himself from the far right of his party.

According to this view, Cuccinelli lost (although more narrowly than expected) by playing to the "fringe" of his party and associating himself with the tea party. His failure is supposed to hold a lesson for Republicans nationwide: Desist with the Obamacare fights, acquiesce to President Obama and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, and quit nominating candidates who speak for the tea party.

Newt Gingrich
Newt Gingrich

It's easy to understand why this reading of Tuesday's results appeals to Democrats and to the media, who love the narrative that Republicans are being cannibalized by extremists within their ranks. It's even easy to understand why it appeals to some establishment Republicans in Washington who are comfortable not rocking the boat and who resent the influence of the party's grass roots.

It just doesn't happen to be true. The campaigns that ended Tuesday night didn't illustrate the moderate-conservative divide within the party so much as the divide between representatives of reform and those of a failed status quo, between the future and the past.

To understand why Cuccinelli lost and Christie won, think back to another election, one year ago. In the final presidential debate between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney, the most memorable line of the night came from Obama, who tagged Romney with "the foreign policies of the 1980s ... the social policies of the 1950s, and the economic policies of the 1920s." What did Obama stand for? It was his one-word campaign slogan: "Forward." He cast the election as a choice between the past and the future.

As a conservative, of course, I thought that characterization was false. But because the Republican campaign focused much more on tearing down Obama than on building up the party's own positive ideas, it did stick.

The Cuccinelli campaign was a little like watching a rerun of the same movie. To voters who are fed up with "more of the same," he offered few new ideas to break out of the current mess. And without much of a positive vision for the future, it was easy for the Democrats to reprise the themes of 2012, painting him as backward-facing, almost anti-modernity.

Although Cuccinelli managed to grab the mantle of reform in the closing days of the campaign as the Obamacare disaster continued -- a move that narrowed what one poll found was a 15-point gap last week to just two points in the final vote -- it wasn't enough. For too many voters, he had come to represent an unacceptable past because he failed to offer ideas for a better future.

Christie's campaign, on the other hand, was positive, hopeful, and can-do. But it was not, as some have suggested, evidence that being moderate or conciliatory helps Republicans win elections. I doubt anyone who voted for Christie on Tuesday thought they were voting for business as usual in New Jersey, or for someone to be friends with the Democrats in Trenton.

As the governor said in his speech Tuesday night, "When we came to office four years ago, we ... said that people were tired of politics as usual; they wanted to get things done. And we promised we were going to go to Trenton and turn it upside down. And I think we've done just that." He was elected to knock heads, not to make nice.

And he did: Christie took on the teachers' unions, got property taxes under control, and reformed the state's pensions. He shook things up, and New Jerseyans just voted overwhelmingly to keep shaking. They're sick of the breakdown in their state government (as well as in Washington), and they want someone with practical ideas to fix it. As an aggressive reformer, Christie represents the future they want -- real change. If Cuccinelli had run on real change in Richmond, we might be having a very different conversation today.

In my new book "Breakout," I draw a distinction between "prisoners of the past" and "pioneers of the future." This, I think, is the greatest divide within the Republican party today -- the divide between those who think the party needs no new ideas, no positive message, and no fundamental change on the one hand, and those who want to be aggressive about breaking out to a better future on the other. It has less to do with whether people are "moderate" or "conservative" than with what they think political leadership requires.

We saw Tuesday night which side the voters are on.

Follow us on Twitter @CNNOpinion.

Join us on Facebook/CNNOpinion.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Newt Gingrich.

ADVERTISEMENT
Part of complete coverage on
December 19, 2014 -- Updated 1022 GMT (1822 HKT)
President Obama has been flexing his executive muscles lately despite Democrat's losses, writes Gloria Borger
December 18, 2014 -- Updated 1951 GMT (0351 HKT)
Jeff Yang says the film industry's surrender will have lasting implications.
December 18, 2014 -- Updated 2113 GMT (0513 HKT)
Newt Gingrich: No one should underestimate the historic importance of the collapse of American defenses in the Sony Pictures attack.
December 10, 2014 -- Updated 1255 GMT (2055 HKT)
Dean Obeidallah asks how the genuine Stephen Colbert will do, compared to "Stephen Colbert"
December 18, 2014 -- Updated 1734 GMT (0134 HKT)
Some GOP politicians want drug tests for welfare recipients; Eric Liu says bailed-out execs should get equal treatment
December 18, 2014 -- Updated 1342 GMT (2142 HKT)
Louis Perez: Obama introduced a long-absent element of lucidity into U.S. policy on Cuba.
December 16, 2014 -- Updated 1740 GMT (0140 HKT)
The slaughter of more than 130 children by the Pakistani Taliban may prove as pivotal to Pakistan's security policy as the 9/11 attacks were for the U.S., says Peter Bergen.
December 17, 2014 -- Updated 1600 GMT (0000 HKT)
The Internet is an online extension of our own neighborhoods. It's time for us to take their protection just as seriously, says Arun Vishwanath.
December 16, 2014 -- Updated 2154 GMT (0554 HKT)
Gayle Lemmon says we must speak out for the right of children to education -- and peace
December 17, 2014 -- Updated 1023 GMT (1823 HKT)
Russia's economic woes just seem to be getting worse. How will President Vladimir Putin respond? Frida Ghitis gives her take.
December 17, 2014 -- Updated 0639 GMT (1439 HKT)
Australia has generally seen itself as detached from the threat of terrorism. The hostage incident this week may change that, writes Max Barry.
December 12, 2014 -- Updated 2020 GMT (0420 HKT)
Thomas Maier says the trove of letters the Kennedy family has tried to guard from public view gives insight into the Kennedy legacy and the history of era.
December 15, 2014 -- Updated 1456 GMT (2256 HKT)
Will Congress reform the CIA? It's probably best not to expect much from Washington. This is not the 1970s, and the chances for substantive reform are not good.
December 15, 2014 -- Updated 2101 GMT (0501 HKT)
From superstorms to droughts, not a week goes by without a major disruption somewhere in the U.S. But with the right planning, natural disasters don't have to be devastating.
December 15, 2014 -- Updated 1453 GMT (2253 HKT)
Would you rather be sexy or smart? Carol Costello says she hates this dumb question.
December 14, 2014 -- Updated 2253 GMT (0653 HKT)
A story about Pope Francis allegedly saying animals can go to heaven went viral late last week. The problem is that it wasn't true. Heidi Schlumpf looks at the discussion.
December 14, 2014 -- Updated 1550 GMT (2350 HKT)
Democratic leaders should wake up to the reality that the party's path to electoral power runs through the streets, where part of the party's base has been marching for months, says Errol Louis
December 13, 2014 -- Updated 2123 GMT (0523 HKT)
David Gergen: John Brennan deserves a national salute for his efforts to put the report about the CIA in perspective
December 12, 2014 -- Updated 1426 GMT (2226 HKT)
Anwar Sanders says that in some ways, cops and protesters are on the same side
December 11, 2014 -- Updated 1439 GMT (2239 HKT)
A view by Samir Naji, a Yemeni who was accused of serving in Osama bin Laden's security detail and imprisoned for nearly 13 years without charge in Guantanamo Bay
December 14, 2014 -- Updated 1738 GMT (0138 HKT)
S.E. Cupp asks: How much reality do you really want in your escapist TV fare?
December 11, 2014 -- Updated 1828 GMT (0228 HKT)
Rip Rapson says the city's 'Grand Bargain' saved pensions and a world class art collection by pulling varied stakeholders together, setting civic priorities and thinking outside the box
December 13, 2014 -- Updated 2310 GMT (0710 HKT)
Glenn Schwartz says the airing of the company's embarrassing emails might wake us up to the usefulness of talking in-person instead of electronically
December 12, 2014 -- Updated 2233 GMT (0633 HKT)
The computer glitch that disrupted air traffic over the U.K. on Friday was a nuisance, but not dangerous, says Les Abend
ADVERTISEMENT