From what I was reading, New Gingrich was speaker of the house during the Clinton administration. That had made him the most powerful Republican at the time. Then the ethics violations came into place in 1997 and almost the entire House of Representatives voted to fine him $300,000. He attempted to stay in his position as Speaker of the House but in the congressional elections of 1998 the Republicans did poorly and he was blamed (rightly so) with damaging the reputation of the Republican Party. He ended up resigning in 1999.

He left politics and went into the private sector. He remained politically active, wrote books, etc. I imagine that after 13-14 years he thought that people might have forgotten his ethics violations. However, his opponents were bound to bring that back. At this point I imagine that it is the Romney camp pushing the issue. For the Democrats the nomination of Newt Gingrich would have been better than Romney because reviving his past ethics violation would have been better right at crunch time one week before the vote.

Reading about Willard Mitt Romney, it seems to me that he is as conservative (and perhaps more so) than Newt Gingrich. Mitt Romney (like George W. Bush) seems to represent more the wealthy elite and inherited wealth.

At this point I am inclined to believe that Romney will win the nomination. I think he will attract more voters within the Republican caucuses. At this point the party will probably see him as the best chance to defeat the Democrats.

As for the Democrats, Romney seems to represent the more difficult opponent because he seems "cleaner" and better equipped to defeat Obama's charisma. However, ultimately Obama has the full support of the finance and banking sectors, and that will give him the edge to win. I am inclined to believe that Obama will be reelected just like Bill Clinton was, specially since the American economy is showing signs of improvement at this point.