Although my co-blogger voted for Newt Gingrich for President in the recent South Carolina primary, I would only vote for the former Speaker were he the Republican nominee running against the failed incumbent.
I expect I will have more to say about his candidacy in due time — about a testiness similar to that of the man who seeks to replace (which said Democrat manifested most recently in Arizona). Or his commitment to Reaganite conservatism — at least in the abstract, he very much supports the ideals the Gipper espoused (but his criticism Mitt Romney’s professional endeavors calls that into question).
Having interned for Newt, I have seen him up close, having gained, as a result, a great respect for his intellect and his energy. He is very much a man of ideas and that is perhaps his greatest strength — and his greatest weakness.
It is a strength because it shows his imagination, his ability to think outside the box, to believe things possible that others see as figments of an optimistic conservatives’ imagination. He doesn’t just repeat ideas, like some politicians repeating talking points. He speaks from the heart.
Not all his ideas, however, are good ones. And he’ll often bounce those off whatever audience he can find, be it his congressional staff, a reporter, on a panel discussion or at a campaign event. And sometimes those, well, apparently loony* ideas, make him appear a little, well, eccentric.
Writing about last night’s debate, Michael Barone pretty much summed it up:
Gingrich seemed to me to morph into his expansive “grandiose” mode, which he enjoys immensely and in which he tends to say many interesting things. Interesting, but not necessarily vote-winning. His proposal advanced on the stump yesterday for a moon colony and admission to the Union as a state if it reaches a population of 13,000—kind of interesting to think about . . .
Interesting to think about yes, but not beneficial to his public image. Or his presidential campaign.
*look up this word’s etymology.
RELATED: Of Gingrich and Grandiosity
DB. Third paragraph second sentence. Not quite sure what you are trying to convey
For me, Newt’s great strength is that he boldly challenges the Left’s flawed premises. So many Republicans seem afraid to.
And his great weakness is that he is a Big Government guy. As Mark Steyn has pointed out, Newt has governmental solutions to things that most of us haven’t begun to conceive of as problems. Newt cites FDR as his hero and model President.
Why can’t we get a candidate who will boldly challenge the Left’s flawed premises, in favor of small government? that is, in favor of human freedom? Oh yeah, we had a few, but let the media destroy them for us.
Although I was wary about Newt Gingrich after his post-Iowa meltdown where he used OWS-type rhetoric to attack Romney and Bain, I’m really starting to dislike the pandering that I see, both in his comments about the moon colony (designed, evidently, to win votes in the aerospace industry in Florida) and in his comments about refusing to deport illegal immigrant grandmothers. In December, I saw an article which called him the Republican Clinton, and after his performance the last few days, I think that is seeming more and more like an apt description.
But aside from those things, his comments after the most recent debate, where he said he didn’t know how to react to what he claimed were Romney’s blatant lies–well, as I heard someone say earlier today, if they were so blatant, and he just let them slide in the debate, then what becomes of the argument that he is such a great debater? If Romney is a liar, I assure you that Obama is an ever slicker and bolder one. So if Newt’s the nominee and he bombs in a debate against Obama, I guess we’re supposed to be satisfied with that excuse about not knowing how to respond to blatant lies.
I’ve gotten no less than six fliers and two robo-calls (back to back) from Mittsy’s campaign this week. All included the BS about Newt’s alleged ethics fine. Either the ads, the crap that’s in them as well as his team killing have permanently repulsed me from voting for this progressive clown.
rusty, thanks for catching that since fixed.
Your quote, “And he’ll often bounce those off whatever audience he can find, be it his congressional staff, a reporter, on a panel discussion or at a campaign event. And sometimes those, well, apparently loony* ideas, make him appear a little, well, eccentric.”
And that is Newt’s problem when it comes to Presidential politics in my humble opinion. I love listening to him but his off the cuff and at times undisciplined vocalizations, just give me great pause when it comes to the Presidency . . .