The only reason people see Gingrich as a serious candidate is because he’s a personally likeable guy. But you don’t hand power to such people.
As I said previously, if I were still a conservative I’d vote for Rick Santorum: Social conservative (as I still largely am), fiscal conservative (as I no longer am), likes small government (whereas I think that dodges the real issue of effective government), and as a bonus is a fellow Christian. I would expect most conservative Christians to be like-minded.
Of course they’re not. Some are more libertarian than conservative, and are therefore Ron Paul supporters. Some are pragmatists, believe liberals might vote for Mitt Romney—revealing how very little they understand liberals—and therefore support him. Some are conservative but not that conservative, and will vote Romney; some are anti-Catholic and would like to vote Rick Perry, or Paul.
And then there’s the Newt Gingrich wing. There is a segment of Republican wingnuts who believe that Gingrich is, without exception or irony, the only person who could win the 2012 presidential election. They believe only Gingrich has the intellect to counter President Obama, that only Gingrich has sensible policies on immigration, healthcare, economics, foreign policy, the size of government, and the deficit. Plus he’s a good Christian. Or at least he says so.
The other segments of the Republican camp make logical sense. The Gingrich camp does not; that is, it doesn’t make sense if you’re looking for logical reasons to back a candidate. But if you don’t give a rip about logic—if, instead, you’re voting for Gingrich because, come on guys, it’s Newt we’re talking about here—then it isn’t about logic at all. It’s a cult of personality: They’re voting for Gingrich because they just plain like the guy. They don’t care that his positions are all over the place; that he stands for nothing except his own aggrandizement; that he switches wives and churches whenever he finds it personally convenient, and hopes that we’ll ignore his gaping lack of spiritual fruit because he claims allegiance with our team. They’ll forgive him anything. ’Cause he’s their guy, right or wrong.
From everyone I’ve known that’s met the man, they’re agreed that Gingrich has charisma. I wrote about this phenomenon two years ago when I wrote about Ted Haggard: Some folks are so personable that you can’t help but like them. Even though you ought not like them, you just can’t help yourself; they’re such great people. Woe to anyone who has this trait who then assumes a position of power: They will screw up time and again, and instead of suffering the appropriate consequences, they will fail upward. Cheat on your wife? She’ll forgive you eventually. Lie to the public? Aw shucks; that’s just him being colorful. Stab a fellow legislator in the back? Hey, that’s just how the game is played. Break every campaign promise? Yeah, but he’s such a nice guy.
Opponents tend to think of this as Antichrist-like behavior. I sincerely doubt the Antichrist will have to do very much lying to appeal to human depravity; nor am I saying Gingrich is an antichrist, although I’ve pointed out before that I have yet to see how the man is pro-Christ. In any event, he’s managed to gain a few supporters among some Christians I know, and according to reports after the big Texas confab where certain evangelical leaders were sorting out which Republican to back, it appears Gingrich has a few supporters among them too. According to Time magazine, that’d include George Barna, J.C. Watts, Jim Garlow, Richard Lee, and David Lane. Tim LaHaye independently backed Gingrich before the meeting.
Their press release, in which they explained why they’re deviating from the Texas cabal’s larger consensus to back Santorum, sorta indicates that yes, they have been drinking the Gingrich Kool-Aid.
…We believe Newt Gingrich to be the only candidate that has the intellectual strength and the capacity to stop the Left’s attack on morality, the economy, basic freedoms and our religious liberty.
In addition, Mr. Gingrich is the social conservative that has the capacity to raise funds and produce a national organization that would allow him to compete with and defeat Barack Obama. For the sake of the nation, we remain steadfastly committed to Newt Gingrich.
Okeydokey. Why might Gingrich have the intellectual strength to counter an attack on morality, considering how his own morals are in the crapper? Because he has the intellectual ability to defend his personal immorality? No; because the tremendous man-crush these particular Evangelicals have for Gingrich has blinded them to reality and logic.
Gingrich has a reputation for being intelligent. I don’t know whether that reputation is based on actual intelligence, as his fans claim; I’ve heard him say a lot of dumb or silly things in the past. I suspect it might be based on charisma: You know how, in order to compliment a cute child or puppy, people will say such things as, “He’s so smart!” even though the only manifestation of these “smarts” has been to react to compliments? So: Gingrich managed to get some academic degrees, teach some classes, write some books, finagle his way to House Speaker, and talk semi-knowledgeably on Sunday morning chat shows. Now, can a personable bonehead get away with all of the above? Absolutely. Some of them were even elected President.
Gingrich also has a reputation for a giant ego. Bigger than mine. He has the self-esteem of an American Idol contestant who can’t sing, yet can’t be convinced otherwise: They’re amazing; everybody tells them so. The problem with these contestants is the same as that of a lot of folks who mistakenly run for office: All their friends tell them they can totally win. Because the friends honestly believe they can win; they’ve been so overwhelmed by irrational love that they just won’t realize what a horrible, horrible idea it was to have this person run in the first place. That’s why every primary race is such a carnival sideshow. Reality won’t set in for a few million dollars. But when you have to sort of love that Gingrich’s supporters have for him, sometimes money is no object. The Evangelical backers put it best: He has the capacity to raise funds. Because they would fund him themselves… if they could afford to, or if they could do it off-the-books from their ministries.
Well. The thing about a charisma-based candidate is that the only people who understand it are the people who have physically met the candidate. Everybody else either responds, “What, him?” or, if they’re in the opposition party, “Please God, please please please let it be him. We’ll wipe the floor with him.” Unless they don’t, as they didn’t in 1992 and ’96 against Bill Clinton. Yep, Clinton’s a stellar example of the phenomenon: Got charm out the yin-yang, failed upward, and while he actually is smart, has been guilty of some phenomenally dumb decisions. Gingrich tried to get him impeached based on one of those decisions in particular, and his failure to do so just goes to show you what charisma will let you get away with.
All the more reason to not put another such candidate in the White House. Even if he is from the other party.
The part that bugs me most about the Evangelicals is of course that Gingrich is not the sort of man they ought to support. Not even close. And yet they are, despite their Lord—three words that every Christian ought to find bothersome. A Christian has no business voting for someone with Gingrich’s track record of pride, dishonesty, adultery, hypocrisy, and disdain for the people he’s hoping to represent. Yeah, we can and should forgive him for all these things, repentant or not; but one of the qualifications for leadership is a consistent character, which Gingrich has never demonstrated. The only way I can see a rational Christian voting for the guy is if they want to hasten the End Times. And even then I wouldn’t consider that Christian to be all that rational.