Seriously, this is your response ? If you believe Gingrich was viable or electable as President, I'd like to sell you a bridge in Brooklyn. After 1995, Gingrich wasn't going to be elected to any higher office than Congress. He couldn't even win statewide office in Georgia. This bizarre cult of Newt is anathema to reason and common sense on his actual electoral prospects, and that ain't "beltway", pal.
Everything you say is absolutely beltway thinking....Newt’s talent was unparalleled by any candidate on either side - the ability to take down racism, unions, judges, academia nuts, Democrats in office and the media in one debate answer that ties it all up in a bow.
You don’t have any damned idea what Newt could, or could not have done. There is no cult of Newt, there are those of us mature enough to understand that at over 60 years of age, 30 in the public square, Newt has made a lot of mistakes, but he’s learned a lot too.
And he is, and has been for years, when he’s the “good Newt” - a peerless articulator of why conservatism works and liberalism fails. Yeah, the bad Newt might embrace some of that liberalism a tad, so it’s not a slam dunk he would have won. No one said it was.
What we’ve said is this: A Newt candidacy would have made the election highly ideological, which is the only way Republicans win. EVER. There would be no escaping the Tea Party vision v Occupy Wall street vision of America.
Newt might have struck out, but Mitt was out on called strikes. And Santorum doesn’t have the talent to even be considered. Nice guy I guess, but just no talent.