1998 isn’t the issue. It’s what’s happened to Gingrich since then.
I would have crawled over broken glass to vote for the Newt Gingrich of 1998. Yet as numerous posters have pointed out, he’s gone quite squishy since then.
We had better choices for consistent conservatism that has been more recently displayed, but we chased them all away.
Deeds, actions and Record is always the best way to assess.
Most of the more recent things have been either taken back or explained away.
I mean, if we use your standard of measurement, Romney might be the best choice. Poor record, great words and promises.
...and I think most conservatives know better.
“I would have crawled over broken glass to vote for the Newt Gingrich of 1998. Yet as numerous posters have pointed out, he’s gone quite squishy since then.”
He did. I think he bought into the group think about ‘triangulation’ that was the fetish back in those days. Dick Morris had gotten Bill Clinton in with the triangulation stunt, which was later imitated by Rove et al. to barely squeak by to some paper thin margins of victory. But it was all the rage.
Triangulation worked for Clinton, who as a liberal looked better to more people by adopting portions of conservative policy or rhetoric. It backfires for conservatives, who look worse by adoption left wing policies. I really hope that Newt has jettisoned all or at least most of that stuff. Even at his worst though, he is better than Romney, and probably Santorum.
Of the available choices, whom do YOU prefer to support over Gingrich? Why?