Gingrich Consulting Draws Skepticism; Romney’s Background, a Divided View
Email
Paul Sancya/AP Photo
Neither Mitt Romney’s nor Newt Gingrich’s private sector experience is playing particularly well with the American public, although Gingrich’s consulting work draws far more criticism than Romney’s background buying and restructuring companies.
Americans by a broad 54-24 percent in this ABC News/Washington Post poll hold an unfavorable opinion of Gingrich’s work as a consultant for companies with an interest in federal policymaking after he left elective office. The division on Romney, while not positive, is much closer: Forty percent see his work experience negatively, vs. 35 percent positively.
Both do far better in their own party, especially Romney. Fifty-eight percent of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents express a favorable view of his business experience. Many fewer leaned Republicans, 44 percent, rate Gingrich’s experience positively; indeed nearly as many see Gingrich’s consulting work unfavorably, 40 percent, as favorably.
Nonetheless that’s a substantial improvement for Gingrich. This poll, produced for ABC by Langer Research Associates, finds that positive reactions to his work experience among leaned Republicans have improved by 15 points since mid-January, while negative ratings have dropped by 11 points, from 51 percent. So while he still trails Romney in work-experience ratings, the margin has narrowed.
Across the political spectrum, these views are far more dim. Sixty-six percent of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents have an unfavorable opinion of Gingrich’s consulting work. And while Romney’s business experience is less unpopular, still more than half of leaned Democrats, 53 percent, see it negatively, vs. 22 percent favorably. A substantial 25 percent are undecided.
The two have been going after each other hammer and tong on the subject in Florida, which holds its GOP primary today, with Gingrich accusing Romney of having invested in banks that foreclosed on homes in the state, and Romney criticizing Gingrich’s consulting work for mortgage giant Freddie Mac.
There are ideological as well as partisan differences in public views. Self-described “very” conservative Americans divide on Gingrich’s consulting work, 44 percent favorable, 40 percent unfavorable — a weak score given Gingrich’s efforts to appeal to this group. Among “somewhat” conservatives, 54 percent see his work negatively, about the same as it is among moderates.
Negative views of Romney’s work background are 11 points lower than Gingrich’s among very conservatives, and a broad 20 points lower among somewhat conservatives.
Intensity of opinion is another difference. There’s a slight negative tilt in “strongly” unfavorable vs. strongly favorable views of Romney’s experience restructuring companies, 19 percent vs. 12 percent. For Gingrich it’s a much wider margin, with views strongly negative by 24 points, 31 percent to 7 percent. Part of the reason is a particularly strong negative reaction to Gingrich’s consulting work among middle-aged and older adults, 40 and up.
Romney has a different challenge — broadening the appeal of his work experience beyond higher-income Americans. Favorable views are a bit higher among people with incomes of $100,000 or more compared with those earning $50,000 or less, 43 percent vs. 33 percent.
METHODOLOGY — This ABC News/Washington Post poll was conducted by landline and cell phone Jan. 25-29, 2012, among a random national sample of 1,005 adults. Results have a margin of sampling error of 3.5 points. The survey was produced for ABC News by Langer Research Associates of New York, N.Y., with sampling, data collection and tabulation by SSRS/Social Science Research Solutions of Media, Pa.
Best Commencement Speeches of 2012 
Joe Biden Recalls Death of Wife, Daughter
And Obama’s private sector experience?
Posted by: newcountryman | January 31, 2012, 7:57 am 7:57 am
“And Obama’s private sector experience?”
He wasn’t a lobbyist or a corporate raider. People apparently do not like those two professions at all.
Posted by: A Cynic | January 31, 2012, 8:53 am 8:53 am
Obama has NO experience at anything…except at finger pointing.
Posted by: darla | January 31, 2012, 9:05 am 9:05 am
Obama was a community organizer, a lawyer, a professor, a senator. Sounds like good experience to me.
Posted by: Sandy | January 31, 2012, 9:15 am 9:15 am
As opposed to one that was Speaker of the House and the other a Governor…Trumps the community organizer and lawyer and professor, etc…
Posted by: david | January 31, 2012, 9:23 am 9:23 am
As a republican I will neer support Mitt Romney he is a fluke! John Kerry all over again- What does he stands for? HeS more liberal than the current president! We coservatives need to stand up and show Florida that our vote will not be taken by other insider with no CORE!! Mitt Romney has a mouth full of Lies, Lies and more lies!! As a christian I will not feel right with my heart to vote for a man that made millions on the backs of others…Mitt Romney is a lier…..Talk about being European- with is SWISS accounts- Lets vote! NEWT!
Posted by: Mark | January 31, 2012, 9:28 am 9:28 am
As opposed to one that was Speaker of the House and the other a Governor…Trumps the community organizer and lawyer and professor, etc…Posted by: david | January 31, 2012, 9:23 am.
Why? And even if you could make a compelling case, look at them today. On the Right, a former lobbyist and former Speaker, or a former governor and former corporate raider. On the Left, a sitting president with 3+ years experience AS president. Experience as president trumps everything the clowns on the Right bring to the table.
Posted by: A Cynic | January 31, 2012, 10:06 am 10:06 am
A Cynic, “a sitting president with 3+ years experience AS president.” And with one wife – family nor gleeful about firing working class Americans … for profit.
Posted by: newz4i | January 31, 2012, 10:22 am 10:22 am
Cynic you are comparing apples to oranges. Compare experience BEFORE anyone is elected to the whitehouse. Obama loses hands down
Posted by: david | January 31, 2012, 10:26 am 10:26 am
Present!
Posted by: newcountryman | January 31, 2012, 10:42 am 10:42 am
It seems to me what Romney did, raiding and disemboweling companies was FAR more damaging to the USA than Gingrich’s work with Freddie Mac on how to better “brand” themselves to Congress. Romney hurt a lot of REAL people, directly and unapologetically.
Posted by: tom b | January 31, 2012, 10:42 am 10:42 am
Obama has more experience? What! That’s down right preposterous!
Posted by: newcountryman | January 31, 2012, 10:49 am 10:49 am
Jen, Retired. That’s my excuse:>) But I work on the weekends.
Posted by: newcountryman | January 31, 2012, 11:01 am 11:01 am
It seems to me what Romney did, raiding and disemboweling companies was FAR more damaging to the USA than Gingrich’s work with Freddie Mac on how to better “brand” themselves to Congress. Romney hurt a lot of REAL people, directly and unapologetically.
POSTED BY: TOM B | JANUARY 31, 2012, 10:42 AM —-You do know that those companies asked for Bain’s help to become profitable….I guess not….
Posted by: Brian | January 31, 2012, 11:17 am 11:17 am
Gingrich was disciplined in January 1997 by the House of Representatives for an ethics violation and he resigned in disgrace. Even his Republican colleagues thought he was divisive.
He then set up shop in Washington, D.C. to lobby for programs like the un-funded Medicare prescription plan, national Health Care, and consulting for Freddie Mac. Unbelieveable.
But today’s Right Wingers now see this as good “job experience” and Newt is somehow “forgiven”? It’s CRAZY. The Republican Party has crumbled into a sad disaster and this man should be no where near the Presidency.
Posted by: green.goddess | January 31, 2012, 12:42 pm 12:42 pm
Nitmit never had any private sector experience, he was born with a golden prong up his butt. His old man gave him everything he wanted or needed. Nitmit never had a position in anything where he was subordinate to someone else. His main goal was to buy out companies, then wring them of all profits, then sell them to get that profit and, if workers lost their jobs, too bad. That’s the extent of Nitmit’s private sector experience. Gingrich is the same way, in college never worked a day to help pay for tuition. It was his first throw-away wife who had the job to earn the money. Then after he was booted from Congress did lobbying for his political cronies for which he was handsomely paid.
Posted by: neastsider | January 31, 2012, 1:31 pm 1:31 pm
green godless Gingrich was disciplined in January 1997 by the House of Representatives for an ethics violation and he resigned in disgrace.—-Nice lie….. Within two years he was cleared of all charges of ethics violations. He then resigned later and not in disgrace…..
Posted by: dem has been | January 31, 2012, 1:42 pm 1:42 pm
neastsider Nitmit never had a position in anything where he was subordinate to someone else. His main goal was to buy out companies, then wring them of all profits, then sell them to get that profit and, if workers lost their jobs, too bad. ===Another lie… good gawd you people are dumb. Companies HIRED Bain Capital to invest and to turn their companies around to make a profit for a fee. People don’t provide that service for free.
Posted by: dem has been | January 31, 2012, 1:47 pm 1:47 pm
HAS BEEN | JANUARY 31, 2012, 1:42 PM Posted: “Nice lie….. Within two years he was cleared of all charges of ethics violations. He then resigned later and not in disgrace…..”
WRONG.
No matter how often the Right Wing tries to sweep this under the rug, repeating misinformation does not make it true. 84 ethics charges were filed against Gingrich during his term as Speaker; all but one of which were eventually dropped.
However, Gingrich was IN FACT reprimanded by Congress. Look it up. After an extensive investigation and negotiation by the bipartisan House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, Gingrich was OFFICIALLY reprimanded and fined $300 grand.
It was a 395 to 28 House vote – the first time in the history of the House that a Speaker was disciplined for an ethics violation. There are many who rememeber and still believe Gingrich is not a fit leader.
Posted by: green.goddess | January 31, 2012, 2:26 pm 2:26 pm
Gingrich was found guilty of only one violation and that was on a technicality. That was the best that the Dimocrats could do out of 84 charges…pathetic. That shouldn’t keep him from being president. Lying to Congress didn’t keep Clinton out of the whitehouse……Unless you are a hypocrite
Posted by: susan | January 31, 2012, 2:34 pm 2:34 pm
HAS BEEN | JANUARY 31, 2012, 1:47 PM Posted: “good gawd you people are dumb. Companies HIRED Bain Capital to invest and to turn their companies around to make a profit for a fee.”
No, that’s not how venture capital works. How is posting misinformation “smart” in Right Wing land?
Bane’s charter is to make money for investors and for their own pockets at any price; they are not in business as nice guy job creators or turn around artists.
An article this month in wsj describes how 68 deals that Bane Capital made up through the 1990s lost money or broke even on 33 of them. Another study that looked at the eight-year period following 77 deals found that in 17 cases the company went bankrupt or out of business, and in 6 cases Bain Capital lost 100% of its investment. Druing that time, only 10 deals were successful and represented 70% of the total profits.
Romney’s claim is that he helped create 100,000 jobs and that number included the jobs taken away by layoffs. Both the WAPost and Fortune said his claim is false. For decades Bane made money while stripping companies of jobs and money while adding debt. Sometimes it worked – but the unemployed and collapsed companies are littered in Bane’s wake.
Posted by: green. goddess | January 31, 2012, 2:53 pm 2:53 pm
but the unemployed and collapsed companies are littered in Bane’s wake.
POSTED BY: GREEN. GODDESS | JANUARY 31, 2012, 2:53 PM —–And they would be out of business regardless of Bane.
Posted by: whining liberal | January 31, 2012, 3:01 pm 3:01 pm
SUSAN | JANUARY 31, 2012, 2:34 PM posted: “Gingrich was found guilty of only one violation and that was on a technicality. That was the best that the Dimocrats could do out of 84 charges…pathetic.”
Sorry Susan, today’s Right Wingers need to read up on history. It was a overwhelmingly bi-partisan vote in the House – 395 to 28. (See, the word “bi-partisan” means these were also REPUBLICAN votes. )
In exchange for the subcommittee agreeing to modify the charges against him, Gingrich agreed to the penalty as part of a deal in which he admitted guilt.
Newt said he brought discredit to the House and broke its rules by failing to ensure that financing for two projects would not violate federal tax law and by giving the House ethics committee false information.
Rep. Porter J. Goss (R-Fla.), the House Representative who HEADED the investigative subcommittee that charged Gingrich said, “We have proved to the American people that no matter how rough the process is, we can police ourselves, we do know right from wrong,”
Newt Gingrich is unfit for office.
Posted by: green.goddess | January 31, 2012, 3:07 pm 3:07 pm
whining liberal | January 31, 2012, 3:01 pm – I’ve worked with venture capitalists before. In business there are many options other than selling an ailing company to VCs so the exisitng management can bail out with cash in their pockets.
For example, companies emerging from bankruptcy find a balance and do not go out of business; other companies sell ownership to their employees and the business thrives. VCs are focused on one thing: how to make money for THEIR organization at any cost, even at the expense of jobs or continued existance of the company they buy into.
Posted by: green.goddess | January 31, 2012, 3:17 pm 3:17 pm
You do know that those companies asked for Bain’s help to become profitable….I guess not….Posted by: Brian | January 31, 2012, 11:17 am.
Some did. Some did not. Stories are coming out about how Bain took over a company that was NOT suffering, then bled them dry to pay for their ‘management fees’, then sold them or allowed them to go bankrupt. But you will never hear about them on FOX, or Rush Windbag’s show.
Posted by: A Cynic | January 31, 2012, 4:03 pm 4:03 pm
There is a reason why scavengers such as the vulture/buzzard are a protected species. They are needed.
Posted by: ginny | January 31, 2012, 4:22 pm 4:22 pm
How many find a “Community Organizer” as positive?
Posted by: uisignorant | January 31, 2012, 5:34 pm 5:34 pm
What is negative about being a community organizer?
Posted by: Jigglypuff | January 31, 2012, 5:48 pm 5:48 pm
Bain Capital purchased Clear Channel. They then cut (fired) 1,850 people to pay for a new contract with Rush Limbaugh
11/16/2006 “Clear Channel Communications, the nation’s biggest radio station owner, agreed today to be acquired by an investment group for about $18.7 billion”
July 3 2008 “Clear Channel, Limbaugh Ink $400 Million New Contract”
January 20, 2009 “The cuts were made at the behest of Clear Channel’s new owners, Thomas H. Lee Partners and Bain Capital Partners, who took the company private in a $20 billion deal last year and are now seeking to trim about $400 million in costs.”
Bain Capital has NO problem destroying the livelihoods of 1,850 families to provide an outrageous paycheck to ONE person. All of these FACTS / headlines can be easily researched on the internet.
I think it’s a bit ironic that Limbaugh once bragged about not feeling the recession. I wonder if the families involved in this deal still feel the effects of Romney math.
Posted by: dan | January 31, 2012, 7:13 pm 7:13 pm
Obama…one and done
Posted by: Sloan | January 31, 2012, 7:32 pm 7:32 pm
I love Rush. He is my hero
Posted by: a cynic | January 31, 2012, 7:33 pm 7:33 pm