I thought this was the most substantive “debate” of all to date.
While Newt did very well, and is obviously smart and knowledgeable, I was a bit concerned by his frequent references to “the government giving people more choices”. He’s got a fundamental understanding wrong, and that tells me that he is still a “statist” as Mark Levin puts it, albeit one who is more conservative than many others.
I share your fundamental concern over Newt. However, I don’t see any electable candidates who are less statist than Newt. In my dreams, Paul would have a chance. But barring him...Newt’s the man.
Cain seems like a nice guy, but he simply doesn’t have the experience. Gingrich always has an instant, detailed response- no need to prevaricate- because he already has intimate familiarity with almost any issue.
I could see Newt/Cain; Newt-Obama and Cain-Biden seem like pretty natural debate matchups. On the other hand, I would be nervous about Cain-Obama. Cain’s only chance would be his charm.
true true true
I also thought (and, to be honest, always have) that Newt still had a little too much of the “old way” in him. After all, that IS his experience in government and it wasn’t instinctual for him, at first, to grasp what the Tea Party was all about.
I’d take either of these men at the top of the ticket, but I’m thinking Gingrich would be best as VP. He has so much to offer a new administration and the nation, but it would be better for him to work for someone who truly is coming at this with bold, new, fresh “eyes.”