flip, flop, and fly

there's a reason why gingrich might get more of a pass on inconsistencies than romney. you can more or less see that gingrich is excited by his ideas, that he's inside them. he seems to have the right relation to the positions he puts forward; he seems sincere. romney seems merely to be mouthing whatever soundbite will get him your vote; there's no connection of the man and his positions. admittedly, this may be a kind of illusion either way. but i think what's being assessed isn't changes of positions merely, but changes of positions in relation to their expression, or in relation to a whole public persona. nor do i think this response is irrelevant or irrational: you're electing a person, not a position paper, and the person as well as the position can be jive, in which case no one can really be committed to the candidacy. that's romney's problem; i don't see how anyone could really put their heart into his candidacy or regard it as truly important or possibly 'transformational,' etc. but you can do that with gingrich: he can sort of capture your imagination as a person.