OK, Bachman is good in many ways.
But she is lack luster in the debates and has narrow experience compared to Gingrich who understands a huge variety of historical, domestic and international issues.
Newt will not be labeled as stupid — wouldn’t that be a nice change? — and they can’t smear him with sex scandals he hasn’t already dealt with.
While he has tipped his hat to AGW goons, he offers market solutions instead of government take overs — the real harm to belief in global warming. For many voters to deny global warming is like denying science. Newt’s position neutralizes the harm of agreeing with the warmists.
Newt seems a lot better dealing with pressure of public eye and in making market ideas sound reasonable. He is the only one who has succeeded in eliminating a huge federal welfare program when he lead congress. Repeating that record of cutting government programs is what we need now.
No! The healthcare solution that Gingrich supported in the 1990s and that was created by Heritage Foundation had individual mandate as part of it. The only difference from Hillarycare about this solution was that the private players would be selling stuff.
‘Market based solutions’? You need to wake up and smell what you’re shoveling. Creating a worldwide fascist cabal to trade friggin carbon credits is not a ‘market based solution’.
Of course they can, they can just make them up like they did with Cain. Who wouldn't the public believe it?