[Huck]

I agree with you. Actually, I think Romney is a BETTER choice than Gingrich. On the issues, they are indistinguishable. Romney is just as good a debater, and has less personal baggage to answer for.

[BillyBoy]

>> Actually, I think Romney is a BETTER choice than Gingrich. On the issues, they are indistinguishable. Romney is just as good a debater, and has less personal baggage to answer for. <<

I'm probably in the minority on FR, but I agree with you and rank Newt below Romney. They're both RINO sellouts who know how to talk conservative but suck up to liberals and would drive over their own grandma to get votes. The main difference is Romney is much more personable and has far less scandals. Voters can't stand Newt regardless of how effective he is at debating. Pretty much if we nominate Newt, we guarantee Obama a second term.

[RainMan]

You mean other than Obama thanking Mitt for Romneycare as the blueprint for Obamacare ... nah, that will never come up in the campaign.

BTW, Mittens is NOT a good debater (go back to 2008 for proof). He is the only candidate that has gotten the velvet glove treatment from the press so far, which is why he appears to be “good”. Thing about the velvet glove is, it is removed in the general election. Newt has already shown he can battle the “iron fist” ... Mittens has not.

[RockinRight]

That’s ridiculous. Did Romney bring a GOP majority to Congress, or balance the budget for 4 years?