Incorrect. Gingrich stated the principles well enough in 1994 in the "Contract with America". We lack enough people who have the ability that Gingrich had to lay out the overall case and defend it ruthlessly from attacks from the Left.
We have some fine thinkers like Cruz, Lee and Paul in the Senate. Our bench in the House is weaker, but some of the talent we need is there. What we need is a new "contract" and have those with the communications skills -- even Palin can contribute to this -- lay it out in terms the bread-and-butter voter can understand.
“Incorrect. Gingrich stated the principles well enough in 1994 in the “Contract with America”. We lack enough people who have the ability that Gingrich had to lay out the overall case and defend it ruthlessly from attacks from the Left.”
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Unfortunately, you are not correct enough to refute my argument, which stands.
The weakness here is that Gingrich folded under pressure like a cheap lawn chair. His Contract With America was indeed brilliant and badly needed. But how much of it came to fruition? Virtually none of it. Why? Because Gingrich caved to Clinton’s dirty politics.
Leaving us where? Now anytime someone tries to resurrect any of the points of the Contract, it is met with a smug “Oh, we tried that already and it failed!”. It failed because Gingrich failed.
So again, I stand correct, not corrected.