The accepted wisdom (perhaps not in this august forum) is that Clinton balanced the budget. If you go to the budget proposed by Clinton in February, 1995, you’ll find that it runs $180 to $200+ billion projected annual deficits for the next ten years, yet within a few years the budget was running a surplus (yeah, I know it was a surplus based on the diversion of FICA monies, but that’s the common perception).
The key fact here is that the Gingrich Congress was elected a few months before this budget was submitted, so it seems to me to be more fair to credit Gingrich with the surplus.
The problem, though, with Gingrich is that he is erratic. The knock on his tenure as Speaker of the House is that he would have a Number 1 Great Idea, Super-Priority today which Absolutely Must Be Worked On and a different one tomorrow. A leader needs to be more focused. Gingrich would be an disaster as president.
I like Gingrich, but his strength is that of an insurgent.
If it’s a choice between Gingrich and the incumbent, sure, I’ll vote for Gingrich but without enthusiasm.
When Gingrich was first elected, I was a liberal Democrat.
I voted for my last Democrat in 1988. (While Perry was aiding Al Gore in Texas)
Intelligent people gain wisdom as they age. I doubt Newt has stood still either and I give much more weight to his words of today than those of decades ago.