Newt Gingrich a wild card in shuffling deck of Republicans

Of all the presidential candidates who have cycled to the top of the shifting Republican heap, the most improbable may be Newt Gingrich.

Since leading the GOP’s 1994 takeover of the House, Gingrich has weathered a series of flip-flops, inflammatory statements and assorted missteps that would have sunk many lesser politicians.

Gingrich’s run is “going to end with Newt and a can of gasoline and a Bic lighter,” predicted Paul Begala, who first sparred with the former House speaker as an advisor to President Clinton. “That’s the way things always end.”

The question in Republican circles is whether Gingrich arrived at such a combustible moment in Tuesday night’s debate. He said that some long-settled illegal immigrants should be allowed to stay in the country — a stance his opponents immediately dubbed “amnesty,” which is anathema to many conservatives.

“I’m prepared to take the heat for saying, let’s be humane in enforcing the law without giving them citizenship, but by finding a way to create legality so that they are not separated from their families,” Gingrich said.

He endorsed what is known as the “red-card solution,” which would give many illegal immigrants legal status and grant them work permits, but not automatically put them on the path to citizenship.

But even though he staked a middle ground, Gingrich’s comments still rankled many in his party, among them Rep. Steve King of Iowa, an immigration hard-liner whose support is coveted by the party’s White House contenders. He told reporters Wednesday it would now be harder for him to support Gingrich.

Despite the criticism, Gingrich did not back down, stating in an interview on Univision, the Spanish-language network, “I am for immigration reform,” and that it would be impossible to deport the estimated 11 million illegal immigrants in the U.S.

In breaking with most others in the field, Gingrich embraced a position that was once more widely accepted in the Republican Party. No less an icon than President Ronald Reagan signed legislation giving citizenship to millions of people who were in America illegally.

Since then, however, the party has moved to the right and so has its orthodoxy on immigration — even as Latinos become an increasingly important part of the electorate. Gingrich’s more moderate stance could help in the general election, in particular in swing states such as Colorado, Nevada and Florida. First, though, he must battle for the nomination.

For now Gingrich — pedant, provocateur and Washington insider (though he won’t admit it) — remains at or near the top of opinion polls, and even critics such as Begala confess to admiring his durability.

“Perseverance is a great quality to have in life, but especially for a politician,” said the Democratic strategist. “Most people would be under the bed in the fetal position given the shots Newt has taken.... But he’s always been a guy willing to get up one more time after being knocked down.”

To some extent, Gingrich finds himself in his fortunate position through no action of his own. As Republican voters have worked their way through a series of favored candidates — trying the fit, then shedding them like so many winter coats — it afforded him a badly needed chance for a second look after his campaign foundered in the late spring.

But Gingrich has also served himself well with a series of solid debate performances — he stands out in a field where some have struggled with even the most rudimentary questions — and especially his persistent attacks on his media inquisitors, a long-standing target of conservative contempt.

“I love it when he does that,” said Shane Vander Hart, a Republican activist and blogger in Iowa. “He is definitely the smartest guy in the room, no doubt about it. That’s attractive to a lot of people thinking about matching up Obama in a debate.”

But a successful presidential campaign requires more than besting a handful of rivals during 90 minutes on stage. It is also a test of character, organization and fundraising, and in every one of those areas there are reasons to wonder whether Gingrich can seriously compete with Mitt Romney, the former Massachusetts governor who, while not widely beloved, remains the candidate to beat for the GOP nomination.

Gingrich’s sudden resurgence has brought new attention to old liabilities as well as much closer examination of the lucrative consulting business he built upon leaving Congress beneath a cloud.

After the House takeover, Gingrich became one of the most polarizing figures in American politics — and eventually within his own ranks. He paid a record $300,000 fine for ethics violations and led an unpopular shutdown of the federal government, in part because of a snit over his treatment on an Air Force One flight to Israel.

In 1997, he was the object of a failed leadership coup in his own party, and the next year, facing another internal challenge, Gingrich stepped down after the GOP lost seats in a rare midterm rebuke.

Married three times, he has a personal life that has been nearly as controversial. Many social conservatives are especially put off by the extramarital affair that Gingrich conducted while pressing for Clinton’s impeachment following a dalliance with a White House intern.

“If your wife can’t trust you,” asked Vander Hart, “why should I?” After looking Gingrich over, he has decided to support former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum in Iowa’s Jan. 3 caucuses.

Richard Land, a leader of the Southern Baptist Convention and key figure in political evangelical circles, said Gingrich should confront the infidelity issue in a speech before Christian conservatives. “He needs to say, ‘I deeply regret the pain and the suffering that I have caused,’” Land suggested, and vow “there will be no moral scandals in a Gingrich administration.”

Speaking last March on the Christian Broadcasting Network, Gingrich expressed contrition, of a fashion, by blaming his workload and love of country for poor judgment. The response was widespread derision.

A greater political danger to Gingrich, however, may be fresh scrutiny of his richly rewarded work for, among others, Freddie Mac, after leaving Congress. Critics blame the federal mortgage guarantor for the collapse of the housing industry; Gingrich has attacked Democrats for their support of it, even calling for one lawmaker to be jailed.

However, pressed at an earlier debate this month, Gingrich acknowledged receiving several hundred thousand dollars from Freddie, saying he had offered his “advice as a historian.” Days later, Bloomberg News reported that a firm run by Gingrich had been paid much more, in excess of $1.6 million, to exercise his influence on behalf of the mortgage company — the very sort of transaction that agitates voters who loathe Washington’s back-scratching culture.

“People have known about the three marriages for years,” said Craig Robinson, a former Iowa Republican Party strategist who is neutral in the GOP contest. “But they’re not aware of stuff like the Freddie Mac payments, and that could trip him up.”

Gingrich faces other hurdles. He has a skeletal campaign staff and struggled to raised money to finance even that. Campaign officials say fundraising has picked up considerably with Gingrich’s surge in polls, but it will be difficult to build a competitive operation less than seven weeks before the voting starts. It will be even tougher to compete in the TV ad war, which has already begun in some states.

Still, Arizona Sen. John McCain survived a similar near-broke, near-death experience four years ago and went on to easily capture the GOP nomination. “A lot of conservatives do relish the prospect of Newt Gingrich being let off leash on Barack Obama,” Land said.

First, though, Gingrich will have to prove his latest comeback is more than just the set-up for another collapse.

mark.barabak@latimes.com

robin.abcarian@latimes.com

Times staff writer Michael Finnegan contributed to this report.