First of all, I never thought I would be supporting Newt Gingrich for the President of the United States. I think he is an ass, an arrogant man that has lots of baggage; baggage that includes sitting on a couch with Nancy Pelosi in an attempt to start to start a conversation on climate change. Newt endorsed Dede Scozzafava in NY-23 special election, the very pro-union, liberal Republican. Newt was cheating on his second wife during the Clinton-Lewinsky affair in the 1990s. Oh by the way, if Newt does win the Presidency, the First Lady will be Callista Gingrich, the person Newt had an affair with in the 1990s. Newt endorsed the individual mandate that Mitt Romney implemented in RomneyCare up in Massachusetts. Newt had ethics violations as Speaker of the House for making money on book deals that could be used for future campaigns (Ironically, Newt took out Democratic Speaker Jim Wright in 1988 for the same ethics violations). Newt made $1.6 million lobbying for Freddie Mac during the beginning/height of the housing crisis. Most of his colleagues still hate Newt from his years as Speaker from 1995-1999. His hubris was such that, in early 1995, Newt basically called out the President as being irrelevant. Well, after the Oklahoma City Bombing, President Clinton became relevant for the rest of his Administration.

I wanted to first tell you the reasons why Newt Gingrich should not be President. But the problem I have is that the rest of the field is even worse than Newt. Mitt Romney is playing a “prevent defense” and only 25% of Republican primary voters want him to be the nominee. For a front-runner, he is disliked across the GOP electorate. Romney passed RomneyCare, which was used as a model for ObamaCare. The people just do not trust Romney to be able to fight Obama on this important-to-liberty issue. Also, he has a long history of flip-flopping. Romney also will be painted as a Wall Street “fat cat” and part of the problem with the economy. Romney seems very vanilla and not able to challenge the media or Obama. Plus, at these debates, Romney never answers questions. He has been avoiding interviews. The way Mitt handled the Bret Baier interview makes me wonder if he can handle the spotlight.

Rick Perry checks all the boxes when it comes to standing in the center of the Republican Party. Texan, not an egghead, can handle a weapon, very pro-energy exploration person, pretty conservative record, passed real tort reform, huge job growth and population growth in Texas, and the three-term Governor has never lost an election in a huge state. With a résumé like Perry’s, he ought to be a slam dunk to win the Republican nomination and beat President Obama. But those damning debates have killed Perry’s chances. Perry usually looks like a wallflower. Starts early with some energy but by the end of the debate, Perry looks like one of the audience members having to sit through the pain of these debates. Sorry, but the Republican base wants someone to go toe to toe with Obama. Plus, I believe after the George W Bush years, the base wants someone who projects intelligence.

Ron Paul and Gary Johnson face the same problem. They are the true RINOs. They are principled libertarians but alienate too much of the Republican Party coalition. They stand strong on the fiscal plank, but veer way off the reservation on social issues and foreign policy issues. Because they are 180° out of phase on those important issues in the coalition, they can only grab at most 25-30% in the caucuses/primaries.

The problem Rick Santorum has is that he screams social issues. Unfortunately for Santorum this will be an economic/jobs election. Also Santorum is very negative and makes the scruffy Newt Gingrich look like a lovable Teddy bear.

The problem Michele Bachmann has is she also screams social issues. Plus her parroting that Gardasil injections cause mental retardation makes her seem to either have poor judgment or be anti-science. That’s a disqualifier for me.

Jon Huntsman, Jr. is an Obama plant in my opinion. His jokes are terrible. He worked for Obama as an Ambassador to China. Plus Huntsman came from a privileged family and basically inherited all he has gotten in life. I prefer self-made men or women for the Oval Office. He is just too timid to fight Obama.

Conclusion, the field sucks. Once you accept that fact, the primary season will get a lot easier to handle. I hoped that one of these candidates would rise up and take this nomination like Ronald Reagan in Nassua, NH, in 1980. But maybe Newt’s debate performances will be Reagan’s microphone moment with Newt challenging the premises of the moderator’s questions, and not fighting the other Republican candidates but instead fighting Obama.

Here is why Newt is the guy to be the Republican nominee and to beat Barack Obama for the Presidency. What is the most important thing in picking a candidate? Who is the most conservative person? Who is the person who thinks to closest to you? Who is the most likeable? Who is the most electable? Who would be the best President for America? I will vote for who would be the best President.

I have what is known as “The TexasorBusted Rule” on voting in primaries. Vote for the most conservative candidate that can win unless the candidate is no choice versus the Democrat, then just vote for the candidate you want as a protest vote. Because a “Dirty Mop” could beat Obama in 2012, we must accept the fact that whoever wins the Republican nomination will probably win the Presidency. With that in mind, we need to pick the best President, not the person that is most conservative. America trumps conservatism every time. I believe only Rick Perry, Mitt Romney, and Newt Gingrich rise to the level of “Dirty Mop”.

Perry’s map will look eerily similar to Bush 43′s map. That map can win, but will make it a nailbiter election.

Romney’s map would be larger than Bush 43′s. He would open up the midwest including Michigan, where his father was governor. With his LDS faith, that could open up the mountain west, and by his perceived intelligence, that ought to open up more affluent states like Virginia, Colorado, and North Carolina. Mitt ought to win the Presidency with margin.

Newt Gingrich’s map would look similar to Mitt’s. Newt is very intelligent, believes in a more “humane” solutions with immigration. Newt ought to have more reach with Latinos than Romney’s harder line stance on immigration issues. Remember: any future for conservatism must include a sizable portion of Latinos.

Now why Newt over Mitt and Perry? How those administrations would pan out.

A Perry Administration would increase the Latino support over time, but I fear Perry would just try and end programs and not phase stuff out. He will have promised too much that could never be fulfilled in four years and will depress the conservative vote in 2016. Then we get Obama 2.0.

A Romney Administration would probably be a successful four years, but he will solidify the Leviathan. Basically, he would make what Bush 43/Obama tried to do work and keep government strong as ever. I feel in this moment, me must try to move DC to the right. And having someone who is a weathervane and loved by the future GOP Congress is a formula for Compassionate Conservatism 2.0.

Newt Gingrich Administration would be chaotic. The future GOP Congress hates the new President. This ought to minimize new laws and regulations and policies. That’s what freedom loving folks like myself want. This would ease the markets and allow economic recovery to occur. Newt would be a visionary instead of a caretaker like Mitt. Newt would try and move the country to the Right. He has done it before as a Speaker. And he has been educating himself on how to do it by being in DC for over 30 years. He knows how the system works. Plus Newt will espouse conservatism for four years unlike Mitt.

If you don’t buy that Newt will govern like a conservative and not a progressive, then just look at the record compared to Mitt. Newt plotted the takeover of the US House after the GOP was in the wilderness for 40 years. Newt, with the help of the bubble and peace dividend after the fall of the Soviet Union, helped bring about balanced budgets with a Democratic President. Also, he helped bring capital gains tax cuts that brought more economic growth. What are Mitt Romney’s key conservative accomplishments? Anyone? Anyone?

Newt just delivers a more conservative government than Mitt. Gingrich even relishes being hated by his peers as long as the goals and vision are met. Do you believe Mitt will accomplish that? Or will Mitt try to get along with Washington and the media and his peers?

Newt is the guy. Unless Jeb Bush decides to join the party. Broker Convention anyone?