So what did he get in return though? Usually the 'caving in' is in response to an agreement on other terms. I'm not taking up for him, mind you. Clinton may not have conceded on anything in return, but I'm just curious. My question is genuine and not sarcasm.

I'm coming in late to the game here, comment wise, but there is something required that Newt doesn't have: likability thus winability. Too many moderates are less forgiving of Newt's past. Most conservatives will agree, that we need the moderates to win. At this point in time, I am fully supporting anyone who has the ability to beat Obama. That means that moderates will have to support whatever candidate that may be. I would much prefer a strong conservative like Newt and I have no beef with him at all. I like the man and feel he's a great person, it's just that too many disagree with me.

Politics is a nasty business. Bill Clinton beat two great men (Bush and Dole) and all because of his charisma alone. It wasn't his resume that got him into the white house. Most voters don't care about that. My own grandmother (may her saintly Christian soul rest in peace) said she liked him because of his smile! I couldn't believe my ears. This was a fiercely conservative church-going woman. Despite all his shenanigans, she still liked him!

The point is, we need someone strong, that has charisma and has the ability to make moderates (and independents) happy. I hate to say it because it shows how shallow our country has become, but there it is. I have decided, for myself, who I think best fits that... even it's still not the perfect solution. I've at least decided which Republican I'm going with in the primary. In any case, we seriously need charm because right now it's everything.