Of all the candidates, Newt placed #1 in the following measures:
41% said Newt was the most knowledgeable
41% said Newt was the most ego-driven
36% said Newt was the least consistent
26% said Newt (& Mitt) were worst at relating to Iowans
21% said Newt was least able to bring about real change
32% said Newt was least dedicated to limiting the influence of government
A damning indictment and fairly accurate, though Mitt was arguably shortchanged in some of those categories.
Criston, give me a few million to run negative ads, and I can make Iowans think you’re the devil incarnate (even though I’m sure you’re a nice guy.) Romney’s folks target the weak of mind, sending mailers to assisted living centers, etc.
Well, everybody here knows, no matter who you support, that Romney should indisputably be #1 on least-consistent. The only explanation for why he isn’t is that he is spending millions of dollars on ads to spread lies and the opposition isn’t attacking him enough.
The idea that Newt is least able to bring about real change is also utterly ludicrous if people knew his record. As Cheney has said, Newt was almost a lone wolf as the driving force getting the Republicans to take back Congress in 1994. However at 21% that was a low first place.
I’m not sure that any one of these candidates are more ego-driven than the other. If you get up there to say you deserve to have the top job in the country, how can you not have an ego? Of course, I don’t see what’s bad about having an ego. That’s a driver for success in life.
Newt is proposing far bigger than tax cuts than Romney, so that alone means government’s influence over our lives is lowered. Not to mention Romney is dedicated to absolutely nothing and will flip-flop on a dime when it’s convenient.
It is hard for someone like Newt to relate to the average person because he is so much more intelligent and on a different level than the average person. When you’re the smartest kid in your class, you don’t relate to the average students as well as, say, an average student would.