tv Newt Gingrich Lays Out President-elect Donald Trumps Principles CSPAN December 14, 2016 2:31am-3:41am EST
case, then are you continually bynerable to penetration someone who is astute at picking up those kinds of divides in the culture? want to s that, i mean, i do not disagree with anything you said but i think as i said whatever side where on i think that people on the left are also more willing and eager to hear things that may not be true or that are slightly jaded than people on the right. i do not think there is not much of a difference. i think the difference in this election was we had someone who is very adept at x voicing the facts and adept at using the tools of dissemination to get his ideas across. >> you had a different response from different parties. do you believe this is a bipartisan problem even if it's been more pronounced in the form
of donald trump? or -- well, i think there have been studies that show something might be getting those numbers wrong so i will get those facts checks but between 70 and 80 percent of democrats trust and that number is from the 20s for republicans and i think a lot of that has to do with the fox news phenomenon, something obama has spoken about. the one thing i would guard against year is over our over -- would guard against here is our over-reading the results. i know that this has been an incredibly dramatic thing that has taken place, but there are a lot of factors. let us not forget -- i forgot the number of counties but a lot of these things that have turned out not to be complete roles, a lot of counties that were previously obama counties into elections voted for trump so he was tapping into something and there's no question it's a phenomenon that there is a racial component.
but i think that is a mystery to say that is the only reason. there are people who really want to change and there are people who didn't really like hillary clinton who are racist or sexist . i think we've got to understand that trump's appeal, a lot of people if you look at the numbers if you look in his , approval at the time of his election, it was 67 percent. there were a large number of people who went into the voting booth disapproving of donald trump and another number who rated him as having a low character by the way, who were cool with that. so the notion that every person who voted for donald trump took the whole package i think is a misnomer and i think that's where it's going to get interesting. >> does that make it more reassuring or less reassuring? mr. thrush: i am not reassured by anything. >> that suggests the job description of president that many voters have in mind is perhaps not the same job
description as presence around the panel or in this room might not have an mind. let's get some more folks into the conversation. yes, i wonder if there is somewhat of a smugness within the washington press looking for validation and what makes me ask that is the washington post articles by mister frank in -- mr. franken for or whatever. >> david farenthold. question: yes, about ... >> he doesn't go by frankenstein. i don't want to be smart. question: forgive me for the mixup of the names but the point is, it was like a bulldog looking for a phone. bone. and he clearly didn't expect to be writing big stories when he first started looking at the
charitable contributions. and harder forr him to track it down and an editor who let him do more tracking to find out that there there there, as it were. but the reporter wasn't going to be rewarded for that story. the people who like trump are going to ignore it and the people who didn't like trump were going to like him less so my point is, maybe you shouldn't be looking for validation when in fact you're doing good work . >> i don't think we were looking for validation and i think the swing component of the electorate were educated whites but it's funny, we were talking about the post swing, post battleground, a lot of democrats were frustrated but the truth was there not a rocksolid party the electorate and that part of the electorate are white, educated voters, all right? there were some that said they were pushed in that direction by
james comey, but we are talking about a great series and a lot of people thinking he should documenting donald trump's history of his charity being distinctly uncharitable so when you say he was finding nothing, he was literally finding nothing because there were no contributions but why should he not have done that? that is precisely the kind of i mean work reporter does. , the other thing about their revolt, we were talking about weapon eyes in fact, farenholt did this clever thing where he had a yellow legal pad and he would like right names on the yellow legal pad. did you think farenholt didn't have a spreadsheet, you're crazy. he had a yellow legal pad and he wrote the names on it. if you think he did not have it on a spreadsheet, you are crazy. they had it on a yellow legal pad and they did that as sort of a way to show they were doing that to check in. it is a perfect example of how to do that. he would do that and it's perfect example of how to do
that. he wrote a brilliant article and the one thing that really moved the numbers was also, he thought it would take. the problem is you had trained warfare, world war i which is a very volatile, small group of people moving back and forth. >> again, to me that's the point. i'm glad you raise this issue of leaving out the smugness parts because this is the best demonstration but it gets back to the basic question of, do we have an impasse or not or and this grand suggestion about how do we need to weapon eyes fact or reporting. i feel that it's not that we've not done that. there are great examples whether the new york times is very aggressive reporting about taxes and many other issues. that succeeded, it succeeded with a part of america that already wasn't going to vote for donald trump. you know what, if you took a
scientific, rigorous survey of even those who were exposed , guess what? probably it was an unprecedented turnout against donald trump if you correlated the boat and readership of those stories. we are living in a country in which people are suffused in a crowd of not only like-minded people on their facebook feeds but also with brands that support the version of truth that they support, it's a cultural choice now that is reflected in our politics and that's what scares me, that's why i'm so scared. mr. thrush: the one answer to that is most people knew that donald trump had screwed around with that.what people do that and except that donald trump, they still voted for him anyway. it's not an issue of not penetrating, people understood that he was an uncharitable guy. they just did not care enough to vote against him. host: all right, all the way in the back. question: i'm john cummings. i have a question on not so much
looking at the past but looking at the present , when the biggest thing on the horizon is precluding the electoral college, why isn't this plastered inside and out? what did the founding fathers intend? what are the responsibilities of it? what trump characterizes as an unfit president, why is this dominating the front page of every one of your things and looked at in every possible angle? host: good question. on one hand i would say the electoral college is getting more attention this year that's gotten since 2000 in some ways. on the other hand, you're right that it is basically foreseen as sort of an antiquated 18th century, it's a residual version, it's an appendix, it's a belly button on our democracy. nobody's really sure what function it plays and so therefore we have not imbued with function. you could argue that the bottom line is the numbers are the numbers here and i don't think there's anybody who thinks that any outcome is going to change . it's something to talk about in parlor rooms, jim is in favor of abolishing the electoral college, are you?
he's a great writer of editorials about illuminating doctoral flaws in our democracy. mr. glassman: no, i am actually to some degree less popular about adding to the number of members of congress in the senses which we used to do and we stopped doing it in the 20s and as a result, the average member of congress represents two or three times as many people as they used to. i am in favor of structural changes as far as the election is concerned such as changing the rules that the commission of presidential debate has which are basically excluding anyone but a democrat or republican. you know i think there's a great , middle in this country that is not represented by the two parties and i think this election shows because of the candidates that each of the two parties split up, the bankruptcy of the party system. but that's for another discussion.
[laughter] this lady here. question: take you. congressionale correspondent for the hispanic outlook magazine and i write a lot about immigration and of course a lot about latinos. i know lots and lots of people who voted for trump. and none of them are angry white men. none of them. most of them are highly educated, internationally speaking women and i think this conversation is just missing it. there are issues. certain issues that really turned them off. it did not matter what his predications were with women.
it did not matter that he was unintellectual. he was saying things about issues that they needed and wanted to hear it and had not heard from democrats and one of them was on immigration. immigration in terms of law and order. not being anti-immigrant. nazi's.ng racist or neo- they want law and order and you never hear democrats talk about laws,ing immigration anything. deportation became like a crime against humanity but the big issue was the supreme court. transit had aama number. the supreme court was the thing. they didn't care as long as he's going to change it and get a scalia type guy. i think the democrats miss that and the press misted to.
>> why do you keep giving me the tough ones? [laughter. mr. thrush:: yes, in fact it was a huge issue, particularly for both bernie sanders and hillary clinton came out against it, the deportation of american minors and by minors i mean most people.and when you sort of crunch numbers in a certain way he had more deportation than any president in history so again, there are sort of differing facts there. susan: i think we probably only have time for one or two more questions. question: stuart brown with one capital. i'm wondering if this discussion is only taking place on the left and when i talk to my clients or friends on the right, they simply don't believe there was any false news out there. they don't think there was any fake news. when i report that there's a 4.6 percent unemployment, they gave
-- say, are you nuts? there are 100 million unemployed americans right now. where you get your information from? if it comes from new york times they say, there you go. if it comes from that department of labor they say, there you go. susan: i think we as journalists worry every day that we are talking to ourselves. this question of insularity. mr. glassman: don't look at me because i'm the right-winger. i served in the republican administration. i voted for a republican for president every year since 1980 except for this time. i'm deeply concerned about what's going on. i don't necessarily, i do not think that donald trump won this election because of fake news, no doubt about that and i think if donald trump didn't even exist, this was still a gigantic problem that needs to be addressed.
susan: lots of hands still up. no, farther back. sorry. question: thank you. my question is, what plans with the media have with respect to handling what i call misstatements or mishandling of the facts and specifically with respect to mister trump, his tax issue. the claim was that he stated whether he did not pay his taxes which implies that he did not paid the proper amount of tax due. if it is reported, he took a net operating loss which allows you to carry it back a certain number of years in. over, he did pay the proper amount of tax, too. that amount was zero. fine. but the allegation was that the statements were made, therefore he didn't contribute to the well-being of the country, etc.
i thought he have obligation to point out he had to forgo the standard deduction just put a couple bucks extra into the pot but that was something that became a central issue, one of the central issues and i think the media has an obligation to treat him fairly. susan: you want to take that one on? >> i would say the reason that became a central issue is people wanted to see his tax returns and had not. that is where that came from. the bottom line is that every single president and a presidential nominee going back to the last several decades has released their tax returns as a part of the campaign. donald trump defined a -- d find a significant one and in fact we are now going to face an interesting question because the president also has historically every year as a matter of course released their tax returns every spring. is donald trump going to find a
way to blow that up? >> yes. [laughter] susan: if we took a vote to am sure we would get that answer. i'm afraid we are just about out of time. i want to thank everybody. i think it's a great conversation and we are leaving so many questions on the table. i hope we will continue the conversation, thank you. [applause] [inaudible conversation]
the book makes a great gift into the holidays. stories of fascinate ling women and how their legacies resonate today. share the stories of america's first lady first the holidays. first lady in paper back published by public affairs is now available at your favorite ook sellers and also as an e-book. now newt gingrich on the future of some donald trump presidency. he talks about trump's recent cabinet choices.
it was hosted by the heritage foundation in washington. [appla >> good morning everyone and welcome to the heritage foundation at the freedom center here in washington, d.c. what a great turnout. i want to thank the media for being here. those who are watching online. heritage members all across the country. what a great opportunity to get together and discuss something remarkable. we all know there has been great upheaval he here. not just in the united states but across the whole world. we sought with the exit. a lot wondering what brexit was all about. it is pretty simple. back. want their country
it was easy to institutionalize bureaucracy. people in other lands and capitals making decisions for them. it was simply sovereignty. we saw that in america with donald trump elected president. people want their country back. he said things like, you do not have a country if you do not have borders. something we were told we could not say any longer as conservatives. we talked about trade agreements working for the best interest of america. he talked about governments working in the best interest of his people. and there are still people here in washington and in the media that do not understand that simple idea. people know their government here in washington is not working in their best interest and we have had leaders for a number of years talking about it. ronald reagan explained it simply that government is not the solution to our problem.
it is our problem. and our speaker today led one of the greatest revolutions for the people in 1994 with his contract america. he did not just ride a wave of public opinion, he helped to create it by showing people and explaining to them exactly what was wrong. they knew something was wrong but they did not know what it was. that revolution lasted while but i'm afraid our republican colleagues did not very through on a lot of those ideas. we have seen this bubbling up a number ofca for years. we certainly sought in 2010 with the tea party. people tired of government invading their lives. tired of bailouts. tired of the government not representing them. in 2012, the republicans lost eight big election. kept going back to the old way of doing things.
i 2014 copies on spring up again as senators and congressmen campaigned to repeal obamacare. to control our borders. all the things consultants said we could not do. this has been doubling up. -- bubbling up. book last newt's night. ." eakout it talks about a little girl, abigail, with cancer. knowing there had been drugs that could have helped abigail, the thing she and her parents went drug people all over the country trying to get the fda to toford the opportunity just try. but they would not. if you look at this government and these agencies and i am sure newt might detail some of that today. if you look at the fda and wonder why they are hurting more people than they are helping, it --because the environmental
is the environmental protection agency hurting our environment more than helping? is education department hurting students? diminishing their opportunities? it is hard to find the government working in the best interest of the people and i think that is what the last election was about. a lot of the media try to cast this as some sort of negative populism but hopefully it is a wake-up call. people who come here to washington take an oath of office to stand for the constitution and represent the people. there is no one who is been more involved in the last several decades than it gingrich. i've seen it up close and personal. what he did in 1994 inspired me to run for congress in 1998 and although he left at the same time i walked in the door, he has continued to inspire and break new ground in a lot of his thinking and ideas and he has worked closely with donald trump
been alast couple years, great advisor and played a key role in helping donald trump navigate the political and environmental. and ad see it gingrich lot of the policies and ideas and we are honored to have him back at heritage. he is a regular. i am proud of him. new to, thank you for joining us here today. [applause] mr. gingrich: we had this vision and a number of things happened and to be back europe this moment i think is exactly right.
this is the third grade effort to breakout of franklin delano roosevelt model. 1980 was the first one. heritage played an absolutely decisive role in the run-up to that election in the administration. the mandate for leadership remains today the best single pre-election development and policy ever done. with over 2000 recommendations policyh over 60% became and with over 250 volunteers around the country based on their expertise, most of whom ended up and lamenting the chapters they wrote. so they walked in with a real understanding of what they wanted to do. in 1992, heritage helped with america.act with i think it is fair to say as we developed ideas over that time, the balance i just, the only balanced budget in our lifetime,
the close work with heritage. again in again, the whole concept of the contract drew much of the strength from working with deep foundation. today, i think your ditches a key source for the trans-pence team for their ideas and for -- team and for-pence their ideas. i was thrilled to be asked to share some ideas with you. i have five key messages i want to go through briefly and then take questions. first, president trump is a unique historical figure worthy of study in his own right. trumpism is a bold and profoundly different way of thinking the needs codification through acting. third, the combination of inner shell and the relentless hostility of the left will challenge the very survival of
trumpism. fourth, millions of americans mpismhave to work for tru to succeed. to develop the ideas, would meet approval of -- and when the approval of school boards, state legislators and so on, all of this is possible but takes an enormous movement. and i want to talk about us. what do people who are activists and to her in this room and similar rooms around the country have to do? overcome the bitter hostility, and make no bones about it, there will be better --tility -- better cost stepr hostility at every every day. defeat what weto
are trying to accomplish. so each of us has to be part of a movement of active citizenship. now, i want to start with what may be obvious but because so many of our friends in the media do not seem to get it i thought i would take a moment. president-elect donald j. trump is a unique american leader. -- people do not really stop and think about how unique. no one, let me repeat. no one has won the presidency without having help public office or served as a general in the military. let us start there. he is automatically unique. donald trump has been a national figure for a much longer time. one of the great times, i just produced any lawn -- an electronic book called "electing ," and part of the joy is
to go back and think, all of the extraordinary people showed up and wrote commentaries in the journal and washington post, they were not just wrong. they were wrong about being wrong. they have learned nothing and i will show you that any minute. you have to realize, donald trump was not just some person who showed up one morning. in 1988 opera asked him if he was going to run for president. in 1988, oprah winfrey asked him if he was going to run for president. he answered, probably not unless the country gets in trouble. was on larry king and he announced he was forming a an exploratory committee. three that for about months and realized george w. bush had locked up the nomination and because he was a rational businessmen who does not money away, he dropped. then, years later, at the
downtown marriott, donald trump was also there. we were there for a conference that steve king and another from citizens united was hosting. it was the coming out party of scott walker who would've been voted by everybody more likely to be nominated then donald j. trump and trump told us and asked us to have breakfast with him. for about 45 minutes, he asked us about the campaign we had waged in 2012, what we learned, what we thought about it. it was clear in that conversation that he was seriously thinking about thinking about it. but this is the first real break point. normally what happens at that stage if you are a normal political ambitious person, you hire three or four consultants to tell you what you should think. they promptly tell you should focus on running money which they will spend on focus groups who tell you should leave and if you spend more money they will
do advertising that will tell you how smart you are because they are smart and they will not tell you to do anything except raise money. [laughter] mr. gingrich: you try that around donald trump and he just runs over you. it is hopeless. i was with bill o'reilly one of the primaryat season and bill o'reilly said to me, why don't republican candidates attack trump? he is clearly the front runner. they need to attack him. i said, bill, donald trump is the drizzly bear in the revenant. -- the grizzly bear in "the .".enant if you get his attention, he will walk over, bite your face, and sit on you. the candidates watch them doing that and say, oh no, not me.
let the bear eat. it is ok, i don't want to bother them. that started with low-energy jeb bush. people forget who donald j. trump is. all of these people in the news media, and this is the major part of the watershed. this is a genuine watershed. there is in old world that is much deeper than just liberalism. there is the post-november 8 world. it real, i tell everybody the trump rally has to be turned into the trump reality. there is a big gap. not figure out, this is a guy who made his entire living marketing to consumers. he thought every day, how do i get you to come to my hotel, my casino, might tv show, how do i get you to buy mai tais?
we were debating one day and he said, would assure vice? i said, you are a better debater than i am because he -- he is a totally different debater than i am. i am not denigrating myself. i am ok. [laughter] mr. gingrich: but he into it's the audience in a way i cannot. intuits the audience in a way i cannot. by the way, jeb bush is a totally fine guide. a friend. the jeb ends up literally running to prove the he is not low-energy. [laughter] mr. gingrich: this is not easy. i am just telling you, one of the great disgraces of the propaganda media we have which all of us should describe the
propaganda media. drop the term "news media" until they earn it. the propaganda media cannot come to grips with the level of talent they are dealing with. you -- i would say to you -- a brief commercial " is available as an e-book. was puzzled. the first breakthrough with me was the fox debate in august when trump and megyn kelly got into a brawl. if you watch after that debate, everybody in the elite, groups groups,ocus social organisms, they talked themselves into positions they did not believe. a key part of what happened in 2016 is they finally had the guts to say, no, that is not true. and people that, while we did
not do was either. laughter] mr. gingrich: i am watching after the debate all of these people pontificating and they are unanimous. there were still 16 other candidates at that point. on the internet, on the various voting things, not just from right wing places, 70% of the people voting were picking trump. i am sitting there as a historian going ok, all of the elites believed this and 70% of the american people believe this. this is an anomaly so large you have to stop in and make you do not know what is going on and that is how i spent most of last year. i would walk around going, well that was weird. somethingand then else would happen. so remember, when i talk about , heident trump being unique
defeated 16 republican candidates. let me repeat this. nobody at the washington post or new york times gets this yet. he defeated 16 candidates, many of whom were first-class candidates. not stupid people. governors, senators, you know, and it was simple. they would show up and say to the audience, i have been a successful governor. because they decided they wanted somebody who would kick over the table. they did not leave washington could be managed. they believed with the gallup poll in which 75% of the people said there is widespread corruption. widespread corruption. 25 million americas according to gallup had dropped out of the class and they were mad. and don't was a general sense that washington was out of the control. 62% of the republican voters were mad at their own leadership. they would say, hello i've been working hard washington and they were thick, that's it. next person.
groupis one particular who in mid-croissant will take your stuff and put it through the shredder while you are watching. it is to moralizing. -- it is demoralizing. the one person even close with ted cruz, who was a princeton debater and a harvard law graduate and had it a great speech on the potential for taking over the table. in addition, he could prove he was prepared to go left of center because he was totally disruptive. people it's a common this is a guy who totally would not work of the senate because he does not been happily through his great speech, donald trump would walk on the stage, kick over the table, and walk off. theoretical speech, kicked over the table. which do i want? then of course, everybody would attack, he once went bankrupt.
the people would say, yes but he is going to kick over the table. or he was married three times and they would say, yes but he is going to kick up with no one in the media could figure this out. he figured out what the country was desperate for. they are not here to accommodate washington. they are here to kick over the table. [applause] mr. gingrich: and let's be very clear about something because i'm watching now and luckily i'm old enough i don't get too angry about it. we use a word that's very harsh, but i will explain it in a minute. the same idiots who failed to
understand trump was going to win the nomination then failed to understand trump was going to win the general election. they are now commenting on trump's cabinet. it would be like having a sports reporter who miss reported a football game talking about how many home runs were hit. you would get a new reporter. all of these people -- you have people out here on tv who have been consistently wrong for two solid years and they get promoted. because their editors were even more wrong. then, they tell us what they think, which is junk. it's important to put this in context. these are the same people who are as wrong about the cabinet as they were about the general election. keep that in mind every time you hear it. we were only wrong about half the time on fox and that was a miracle compared to some of the networks which were not in touch with planet earth.
it was the professional billion dollar clinton campaign on behalf of the inevitable next president who forgot there was an electoral college. trump, who supposed to be an amateur, getting to 270 really matters. as a businessman, we are going to keep score by 270. he said not going to california, i'm not going to new york, i'm not going to illinois. i'm going to get killed in those states but it won't matter. if i carried pennsylvania, wisconsin and michigan, i will be elected. he actually broke the code. [laughter] mr. gingrich: with reince priebus' help, and chairman priebus deserves a lot of credit because he is from wisconsin. they figured out if they walked into milwaukee, the democrats might go to milwaukee.
if they go to minneapolis, the national media would say these guys are so stupid. they think they're going to carry minnesota. i don't know why they are being this stupid. what they knew that no one in the washington press corps and it was minneapolis television covers southern wisconsin. so they were getting all the coverage of southern wisconsin without letting the democrats think about wisconsin. she went off somewhere. by that stage, i wasn't paying any attention. it is the smaller, less expensive trump team that figured out the keys to the american system. particularly the core group toward the end, steve bannon, kellyanne conway, jared kushner who did an amazing job. they were handling the candidate
part of the campaign while reince priebus and others had 7500 fieldworkers having learned the lessons of 2012. it was a synergistic impact of trump on big rallies and on the internet with a systematic rnc, probably the biggest since mark hanna that really came together and we won. at that point, the media went into a state of shock. but the center of all of this, the person without whom it would not have happened is donald j. trump. you have to remember it was his vision of making america great again. it wasn't just that he was a good, articulate guy, he had a message. it was a message the other candidates could not understand and could not articulate. he would say it again and again -- we can make america great again.
he combined two different things -- huge rallies and twitter and facebook. i think he currently has 28 million people on twitter and facebook. as you grow twitter and facebook, you can decide on a tuesday, let's go to tampa on friday afternoon. tweet everybody in florida at no cost. this is why billion-dollar campaigns are not indicative of being smart. go to florida and 30,000 people show up. they all bring smartphones, so they are all taking pictures. he gets out there, he stops, he lets everybody take his picture. what do they do? they put it on facebook, on instagram. 30,000 people becomes notionally
a minimum of 1,200,000 people network, three times the size of msnbc. [laughter] mr. gingrich: because you are drawing media coverage, your rally is on television live for free. the key night was the florida primary. he's selling trump wine, trump water, trump steaks. and he's doing two things. this is the point where mitt romney had been his nastiest, suggesting trump wasn't a real businessman even though he was worth 50 times as much as mitt. we are not going there this week. the second thing he was doing is testing the networks.
hillary starts to speak -- i've never seen this before in american history. hillary starts to speak and not a single network covers her because they understand in the age of the clicker, everyone will leave because they want to see what else trump is bringing out. are you going to get a camel? who knows what he's going to do next? one of my great plays of the campaign was i challenged them to write an elephant into the convention. you have to remember he had an instinct for totally dominating the media. the only other president who has the totality trump has is abraham lincoln. there are several great books on abraham lincoln and his ability to deal with the media. what do you get? you get a thank you tour. there are two really good reasons for a thank you tour. it dominates the media and i
have a theory going back to reagan -- you -- i think romney was -- they were going to talk about romney and trump said that's good. i hope he does rallies for his whole presidency. he draws the strength of reminding himself he's the tribune of the american people. not of washington. it's very important for him to see 10,000, 15,000, 20,000 people and be reminded that he speaks for them and then he has a moral authority nobody in the bureaucracy or congress has. it's very important if trumpism is going to succeed. the only rise comparable to trump is lincoln's rise. this is an almost entirely trump-manufactured rise. it was a continuous application
of intuition and energy. the only other person i know who personally managed that kind of rise was lincoln. trump is now in an amazing place. it's astonishing to me as a historian how the elite media missed all of this. they are so rabid, they're so ideologically committed, so terrified of the future that they cannot stop and ask themselves what is this anomaly? they just can't do it. you see it in today's stories. it is amazing to me how much the elite media and many of the think tanks, not heritage, have attacked trump instead of studying him.
"the washington post" ran a piece on the degree to which trump is pointing an ayn rand cabinet. if you are on the left, she's the kind of person you never read but once saw the cover of the book. [laughter] mr. gingrich: i'm going to come back to that in a minute. somebody sent me an article from the post which -- they are citing it in terms -- i'm arguing he is an anti-john gault. if you look at "atlas shrugged," john gault is a billionaire who withdraws from society because he's so sick of the welfare state and so sick of redistribution and so sick of the idea that creative people are being dragged down by noncreative people. it is both defensive and cowardly.
all of these people are so incompetent that he's withdrawing from the fight. they are going to go on strike and all the creative people are going to refuse to be creative and society will grind down. this might have seemed plausible if you read the "new york times" coverage of the soviet union. where john gault retreats, trump attacks. where john gault goes to a mountain fastness, trump goes to the american people. where john gault withdraws, trump says let's have a movement. john gault says it's over and all we can do is hold up in the mountain fastness, trump says why don't we make an american great again? it's a wonderful civil overlay that says the road to
opportunity is to arouse the american people and with them, take back their country and he is living it out. that makes him, i think, a extraordinary figure. he could have gone to mara largo and that would have been the john gault withdrawal. he could've gone to 15 different golf courses and hidden. instead, he voluntarily decided to go into the public arena -- this is a guy who survived new york media. he knew was going to be vicious, nasty and personal because it had always been that way in new york. he said trying to lead america is worth paying the price both financially and personally. he announced, we can solve our problems, we can make america great again. he went to the american people, aroused their spirit and gave
them hope. trump is an optimist where gault was a pessimist. you attack trump, he immediately counterattacks. that's not a function of personality. he learned with the new york media that you hit back as fast as you can because that's the next edition. you never get by with letting them hit you. show him an opening and he will take it. trumpism is much more than just motion, much more than being active. it is an appeal to the american people. think about the phrases that work. trump is in the tradition of washington, jefferson, jackson, lincoln, roosevelt and ronald reagan. in every case, they believed in
the american people, they aroused the american people and led the american people to victory over entrenched, powerful interests. trump is a combination of andrew jackson, theodore roosevelt and pt barnum. that's the best way to understand him. he is as disruptive as jackson, as energetic as theodore roosevelt, and he sells all day, every day. and by the way, he likes that analogy. he thinks selling is fine. but you ought to be actively out there. i think the victory is much more than a personal achievement. you now have more republican state legislators at any time in history of the party going back to 1854. 34 governors, control of the senate, control of the house.
there is an underlying thing which has been building that started with reagan in 1980 and we renewed it in 1984 and there have been detours when you have had republicans that do not get it. the country below that, there has been a continuous, study migration in -- 25 states have republican governors and republican legislatures. that's why you have to have a movement. if you are in control, what are the principles you're going to apply? we have just begun work. all you have done is won a ticket to the dance. now we have to dance. we have to dance for eight solid years so well that the country elects another republican establishing firmly we have replaced the fdr model and we are now in a time of very different government.
think about the phrases trump used -- make america great again. you can't get more politically incorrect. can you imagine if you walked into a typical ivy league university and said my goal is to make america great again. they would have kicked you out. you are a weird nationalist to do and understand the larger, global nature. that implies some people are not great and we should all be great, so why do we be equally great and we will give out greatness cups to everybody and they can all feel great. this is what trumpism is a rebellion against. [applause] mr. gingrich: then you have the amazing contrast between protect america's borders between hillary's dream as she said to the brazilian bankers of an open border for the entire western hemisphere. so 600 million people can visit when they want to.
trump says fight for trade deals rather than deals that kill american jobs. if you are the elite, you would wonder about why you are doing that because all of those jobs are in the flyover country and those with people you never meet anyway. trump actually believes we should defeat isis. he said we should protect christianity. he said two nights ago that it's ok to say merry christmas again. the endless, vicious, uncaring assaults on the left by things like saying merry christmas are going to drive the country apart. he says we should drain the swamp. a position held by almost everybody except the swamp. [laughter] mr. gingrich: he wants to end the corruption.
gallup reports 75% believe that is widespread. he thinks we should speak bluntly and deliberately and methodically break up political correctness. look at it again and again, these are the course of trump is him -- of trumpism that resonate with people. say i'm proud of the american flag and they resonate. then the current president is talking about why it's ok to not stand up for the national anthem because they might have a need to convey the depth of their unfamiliarity of what is happening and we must -- this country has treated the multimillionaire athletes so badly that they only have seven rolls-royce's and three houses. americans look at this kind of americans look at this kind of junk and say i have two futures. i get weirdness and i get normalcy. to the great shock of the media,
weirdness lost. people came to the rallies not just to see trump, but to hear him. this is why i think trumpism is real. it was -- he's a brilliant messenger but if he sounded like a normal left winger, people would say that is weird. think about the people who were the hats that said "make america great again." i was in a rally shortly after hillary clinton talked about the deplorables and i saw three women wearing shirts that said i'm an adorable deplorable. if you want to call us names, we will wear the name proudly and run over you. i hope they will send t-shirts to hillary for christmas. when the elite media smeared,
what i call the propaganda media smeared trump, the american people cited with trump. "the new york times" was the worst offender among the print media. it's hard to say who is the worst offender among tv because they were so aggressively competing with each other. when "the new york times" printed article about trump's bad behavior toward women and the women says they printed the opposite of what i told him. that's when you realize something profound is breaking in the old order. the old order is getting clumsy and stupid. the genuine revolution was building. the campaign culmination of defining the trump movement and trumpism, and i urge you to read
these two, was the remarkable speech on october 22 at gettysburg where he outlined -- i think it is the archetype and it's worth looking at because it has many layers of ideas and it would be impossible for any reasonable person to read the speech and suggest trump was devoid of policies and ideas. equally important in the long run was his speech and the release of the new deal for african-americans. these two documents represent a blueprint for the next couple of years that is profoundly different than where we have been. now, we see a new phase of defining trumpism in the cabinet selection process. the way he has selected this cabinet is very impressive. he's reaching beyond the
accepted establishment systems. for example, he is willing to assemble a team -- the elite media is so hostile that they cannot bring themselves to stop and take a deep breath and look at what is going on. he is assembling a team no one was prepared for. trump describes, and i recommend to all of you "the art of the deal," still the best single book on how he thinks -- he describes over and over that he wants the best. when he has the right to build the hyatt in manhattan, he wanted to be unique and the best. when he built trump tower, he wanted to be the best. he has this constant drive to be the best. and he is willing to work extra hard to do what it takes to be the best. let's look at the cabinet. general mattis is as good an officer as has served.
he's an intellectual, a warrior, totally patriotic and trump has said in effect, i'm willing to ask for the first waiver since 1950 -- only one waiver has ever gotten a waiver to serve as secretary of state since george marshall during the korean war. trump says this guy is so good i will ask for a waiver. if you look, there has been almost no opposition. this is the guy we could not trust and his first choice was jim mattis. then, remarkably, he picks john kelly, marine general, to be head of national security. he's a remarkable public servant. he lost his son in combat. he's dedicated to serving the country and he is perfectly
prepared, literally the best person in the country if you are serious about our southern border, there's nobody better then john kelly. you could say take those and add general flynn, that's three general, is that too many? not for the american public. the only institution they think is not corrupt, it's the military. and you say shouldn't we replace those guys with lawyers or harvard professors? think about it. this is why the left is in such trouble. kelly will be a remarkable leader and if you read his brief statement, he talks about the end of political correctness. not quite the statement you might have guessed. he knows more about controlling america's border and defeating both terrorists and drug dealers than anybody else i know of in the american system.
then rex tillerson who would be the news media's horrifying example. i want to confess upfront, tillerson has a huge problem. he is successful. being successful in the largest corporation in the world, he has actually been involved with making money. [laughter] mr. gingrich: it's going to get worse, i'm sorry. but the heritage tradition is one of speaking truth. tillerson has gone around the world negotiating agreements with foreign countries. successfully. on behalf of an american company. if you are john kerry -- [laughter] mr. gingrich: or hillary clinton, or the entire state department and your entire career is one of going around the world unsuccessfully negotiating non-agreements, tillerson is horrifying. what if he actually effectively
represents america? what if we get good deals and he's able to explain trumpism to the world? all these foreign people he has dealt with his entire career, they are not going to say you are not going to send rex to see me. he's going to be so well-received around the planet that he automatically changes who people think trump is. they now think trump is smart enough to hire really smart people and he's going to give really smart orders. tillerson has to be attacked by the left because if you can't attack the head of exxon mobil, you need to give up your card in the socialist party and go home. but, he's a remarkably successful -- and even worse, he's an eagle scout. there are various left-wing rallies where you go talk about
eagle scouts and what are they going to do next? that's the first step toward fascism. they wear uniforms. this is the beginning of the militarization of america. they will probably have girls wearing uniforms. girl scout manual from 1913 has girls in uniform and it is a totally patriotic thing. you can get it at the home of the founder of the girl scouts. the old order are deeply worried. now there's tom price. not only did he replace me, he's a great doctor, his wife is a doctor, but as an example of how bitter and unending the media is going to be, the "new york times" manages to write an entire article about mr. price. dr. jill biden is always dr.
jill biden because she is dr. jill biden, but dr. tom price is a medical doctor, by the way is not dr. tom price in the "new york times" because that would imply trump has picked someone for health care who actually knew something about health care. given the left's constant track record of trying to find people who know nothing to get people in charge of things, price is the doctor, chair of the budget committee and a great choice. imagine governor nikki haley. indian-american, small business woman, governor, if only she were a liberal democrat. he has to mildly disappear because if she admitted trump
picked her, it might mean trump is more diverse than they think, so he can't have picked her, so she may as well be ambassador for several years before you ever hear her name. betsy devos, a woman who has spent millions of dollars trying to help poor children. a clear commitment to a new deal for african-americans. even better, dr. ben carson. this guy is amazing. he is a world-class pediatrician, he has spoken twice at the national prayer breakfast, he has written books used widely by homeschoolers, he had a movie made about him called gifted hands. and the news media thinks he probably won't be able to learn