My remarks are motivated by a desire to see our reactions to the candidates in this winnowing out process become more focused and more relevant. It seems to me that there are 2 tests which the candidates must survive in order to gain our support: genuine adherence to conservative values and electability.
These 2 aspects must be judged in the context of the gestalt, that is, the field from which we can choose. There were 9 people on the debate stage and potentially 3 more might get into the race. Who has the best combination of conservative bona fides and electability from these 12? It doesn't advance our conservative purpose to post that we do not like someone or that we do not trust someone, those reactions are only relevant when compared to and made relevant to the field of candidates.
Is Newt Gingrich more or less conservative than John Huntsman? Is Newt Gingrich more electable than Michele Bachmann? I think the answer to those questions is "yes" in both instances. Mitt Romney is less reliably conservative than Rick Santorum but he is probably more electable. Newt Gingrich might be less conservative than Santorum, but more electable while less electable than Romney, although more conservative.
It doesn't advance our thinking much to spasm out on these boards about the character of Newt Gingrich unless one relates those observations to his electability and his conservatism and ranks those qualities against the same qualities owned by the rest of the field.
There are so many permutations and combinations with a field of 12 that we must begin to focus our judgments somehow. First, I eliminate anyone who is not already committed to the race because time is rapidly running out. Should Christie come in we will be very disappointed in his conservatism which is limited almost exclusively to fiscal conservatism. If Palin comes in, the race will be brand-new and we cannot foresee how the matter will settle out until we see some polling numbers about her electability especially in a face-off against Obama. If she can pass that test she can go on. If not, her candidacy will fail and probably succeed in giving Romney the nomination.
Analyzing Gingrich's candidacy also requires measurement of another dimension. Many of us conservatives believe that the republic is entering a critical phase in which we must weather a perfect storm of economic disintegration, Islamic Jihad, and radical, perhaps violent, revolution. This combination of forces coming together in a perfect storm might sweep away our Constitutional Republic. This is an existential threat that, if it comes to pass, would rival the challenge facing Lincoln as he traveled incognito to Washington to take up the presidency in 1861. The situation was so desperate that the President-elect had to travel in disguise to avoid being lynched.
I believe we must also measure the candidates today against the need to find a leader who can articulate a vision so clearly that enough Americans will adhere to it that the republic can survive. Of course, that individual must have the right message to articulate. So we are back to the issue of electability and true conservatism.
Let's eliminate the field some more:
The 3 libertarians are beyond the pale of acceptability to be seriously considered, the field has now been reduced to 6.
Rick Perry has virtually eliminated himself by his performance in 3 debates demonstrating that he lacks the forensics skills, at least in that format, to carry the country. I am very concerned therefore about his electability and I am equally dismayed by his stand on immigration. I eliminate him.
Rick Santorum has failed to inspire confidence in his person although he has demonstrated that we can place confidence in the quality of his conservatism. He has recently shown faint evidence that he might catch hold. Failing that, I eliminate him on the grounds of electability. That dimension also includes the inexpressible quality, the charisma, needed to lead the country through the crisis I envision.
Michele Bachmann fails for the same reason. Too many gaffes turned off her own base. She is eliminated. Remember, I am looking for a Lincolnesque leader for an existential crisis.
Milt Romney will demonstrate greater electability powers in a general election than in the nominating process. That emphasizes his weakness as a conservative. He has rewritten his own history so that his present profile is conservative for the most part with the glaring exception of his experiment with socialism and health care in Massachusetts. There is no question that Romney can handle himself in debates especially when his audience has not set its face against him because of his Rino-ism. If I have to choose between the conservatism of Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich, the choice is easy. If I have to choose between the electability of Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney the choice is not so easy. As to forensics skills, Gingrich obviously is the leader. As to assembling truly innovative solutions to the mess we are in, Gingrich obviously surpasses Romney even though Romney can boast of a history of fixing messes, especially by citing the Olympics.
Herman Cain has surprised many including myself. He has demonstrated a likability and quickness on his feet that pushed him to the forefront. He has a real genius at boiling down a problem to a bumper sticker which the folks can understand and accept. His conservatism seems to be sound, although I was disappointed in his statements concerning the FEMA standoff. This suggests to me that my intuitive reaction Herman Cain, that he has neither the experience nor the depth to be entrusted with our fate at the most critical juncture since Pearl Harbor. I must wait and see. It will be absolutely vital for Herman Cain to avoid gaffes which betray shallowness and confirm his lack of elected public service.
By this process of elimination, I conclude that Newt Gingrich has advanced very near the top of the pile. I am not prepared to endorse him at this point nor am I committed to him. Many new entrants or developments might change everything. Herman Cain will have his moment in the sun and if he can stand the heat he might just emerge. If not, Gingrich remains a very viable alternative. It has always been the path to the nomination for Gingrich to be the last alternative standing. We will only turn to him if we are convinced that there is a real crisis confronting us.
To repeat, my purpose is not to endorse or advanced candidacy of Gingrich, I simply want to structure our thinking along the lines I have suggested.
