If you look solely at the candidate’s records, and what each has actually accomplished, Newt is far and away the most conservative of the remaining candidates, and the only one with a proven record of changing the current trajectory.
He worked tirelessly to build a conservative majority in both Houses of Congress, he was the author of the Contract with America, the brains behind nationalizing the election using the Contract as a vehicle for winning majorities in the election in 1994, won Republican control for the first time in 40 years, implemented the Contract as promised, balanced the budget with those majorities, implemented welfare reform, built the Republican party into a majority in Georgia which had been Democratic-run since the Civil War, worked tirelessly to develop conservative ideas, principles, and for other conservative candidates. His reward? He was “Palinized” by the media, the dem/progressives, and abandoned by the GOP-E to twist in the wind.
Neither Romney nor Santorum have done a tenth as much as Newt to bring conservative ideas into the mainstream consciousness and national discussions. As a result, the dem/progressive/liberal/media alliance developed a template to destroy Newt they subsequently used on Palin, Cain, and any others they deem to be a conservative threat to the establishment and their power.
The worst thing, which I absolutely abhor, is that Romney and the GOP-E have now adopted the template used to destroy Newt in the mid-90’s by the lib/progressives/media in this 2012 Republican Primary to destroy Romney’s conservative opposition. I will be completely disgusted if they are rewarded for their efforts by Romney winning the nomination.
We should be better than that.
Ideas matter. Accomplishments matter. G_d help us if all it now takes to win a Republican nomination is the money to buy five or six or ten to one media ads against your conservative opposition, that tell half-truths, outright lies, and include endorsements of the mushy moderates that sat on their hands while we got into this mess, by going along with the ridiculous spending and expansion of the federal government into every aspect of our lives, in direct contravention with the constitution.
To ignore Newt’s accomplishments, while ignoring the absolute dearth of those types of accomplishments in Romney, is akin to sticking your head into a hole in the ground. You believe what never was and will never be accomplished.
Romney will court media approval and re-election to the exclusion of all else IF he is elected.
Better than Obama? Sure. Change the trajectory of our non-constitutional massive deficit spending congressional path? Not so much, judging by his past actions in that regard.
I had rather go down with someone who will make a difference, if elected, than vote for another mushy moderate that will simply slow the speed with which we approach the cliff.
Newt has demonstrated he can change the direction, and change Washington’s go-along-to-get-along power elite operating mode.
I am simply stunned that more good people, who know what we need to do to get back to constitutional limited government, one that lives within its means, cannot see that Newt’s determination to change Washington, and upset the power elite’s cushy status quo, fuels most of the negative ads and resistance to his candidacy.
Newt has no equal in succinctly and powerfully presenting the conservative argument and providing historically documented, practical examples of how those principles benefit us all. This is a critical skill needed to win independent and moderates over to our side.
Vote for whom you wish, but expect no change in direction from a Romney administration, IF he manages to get nominated, and IF he wins the general election.
I say it is high time for a little blood-letting on the convention floor, because the blood that will be spilt is that of the GOP-E. The winners will either be the Tea Party conservatives that are the base of the party, or we will finally form our own political party, where conservative ideas and constitutional principles will be given the respect and allegiance they deserve.
We will get much more media coverage of our ideas, and the dem/liberal/progressive/media alliance will not be able to concentrate their media ads against a single opponent until much later in the game than they would wish.
Newt Gingrich should receive credit for putting together the conservative revolution of 1994. He did many things well in Congress, and he showed himself to be an effective legislator. He has many years of faithful party service, and that service has earned him the support of many party stalwarts.
On the other hand, he shouldn't get as much credit for some of the accomplishments as some give him. Welfare reform began to gain support in the late 80's and was supported by a huge majority of the voters in 1995. The balanced budgets of the 1990's came largely from Bill Clinton's deep cuts in the military, the so-called "peace dividend." The late 90's were also a time of increased revenue from the internet explosion. Some good things happened during that time, but Newt Gingrich doesn't deserve as much credit as he sometimes claims.
Against those successes are some failures. Many people in Congress during that time were not happy with his leadership. He was good at creating the revolution. He was no so good at keeping things running smoothly as leader. Unlike Sarah Palin who was forced out of office by false accusations, Newt Gingrich was forced from his leadership position by his own bad character.
Newt Gingrich is a good man and an intelligent man, but he's not the purist conservative that many try to claim. He was an early proponent of individual mandates at the federal level. To me, the individual mandate is the least destructive part of Obamacare, but to claim that Newt Gingrich is so far above and removed from mandates and other policies that we dislike is false. He has supported cap and trade. He chases after a million ideas and some of those ideas end up being bigger government ideas.
He hasn't run his campaign that well, and running a campaign is one way to demonstrate the executive skills that would make a good president. He's had ballot access problems. The vacation immediately after making his announcement was ill-timed. If he'd started focusing on ballot access and other issues at that time, maybe he'd be doing better now. Certainly, he's have appeared to be a more serious candidate.
I don't dislike Newt Gingrich, but I can't see him being a particularly effective president.
“This is a critical skill needed to win independent and moderates over to our side.”
While I appreciate your argument for Newt, the only sentence that really matters is above, his electability. The moderates & indy’s will run the other way (from Newt). The remaining no-nothings will vote Obama. That is what we have, and that is why we can’t count on a large enough “conservative” vote to remove him from office.