Andrew Weinstein

Five years ago, a retired Georgia congressman and former House speaker announced his campaign for president on a Reaganesque platform of optimism, inclusiveness, fiscal responsibility, and global gravitas. Today, that same man is considering joining the ticket of another candidate who makes a mockery of those principles. If he gets an offer, he should turn it down.

In his 2011 announcement speech, Newt Gingrich called for collaborative solutions to our problems, saying Americans “will have to talk together, work together, find solutions together,” because “no one person in the Oval Office can get it done.”

Donald Trump, however, has built his campaign on the politics of division, referring to Mexicans as rapists and criminals, women as menstruating “dogs” and “pigs” who should be sanctioned for abortions, the disabled as objects of mockery, and Muslims as terrorist sympathizers who should be tracked (if here) and banned (if not).

From encouraging violence at his rallies to launching daily ad hominem attacks against his perceived enemies, Trump has created his own 11th Commandment: Thou shalt speak ill of nearly every fellow American.

While Gingrich spoke of collaboration, Trump has made clear that he believes “one person in the Oval Office” can do it all, if that one person is Trump. Every Trump speech includes unachievable and oft-unconstitutional pledges to take unilateral steps as president, from expanding the death penalty to abrogating our trade treaties, ordering the military to commit murder and torture, and eliminating gun-free zones around schools.

Ted Cruz caves to Trump and ambition: Column

Highlighting that dismissive approach to counsel, Trump bizarrely cited himself as his “primary consultant” on foreign policy issues, responding to a question on the people with whom he discusses such issues by saying, “I’m speaking with myself, number one, because I have a very good brain, and I’ve said a lot of things.”

While the difference in governing style is stark, it pales beside the difference in substance. During his presidential campaign, Gingrich laid out a positive conservative vision of a balanced budget, entitlement reform, rational immigration, expanded trade, and international engagement. Trump’s campaign is now working to sabotage all of those goals.

In 2012, Gingrich proudly highlighted a Fiscal Associates study showing that his economic policies as president would balance the budget in four years, an act he had already accomplished as speaker for the first time in a generation. Trump’s tax and budget plans, by comparison, would add $10 trillion to the federal debt over the next decade, according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.

Candidate Gingrich unveiled a dramatic entitlement reform plan that would allow workers to save and invest their own money, eventually eliminating the payroll tax. Ignoring the looming solvency crisis for Social Security, Trump claims nothing needs to be done, saying, “It is my absolute intention to leave Social Security the way it is.”

On immigration, candidate Gingrich argued for expanding legal immigration and defended his prior vote to create a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants by saying, “I believe ultimately you have to find some system that reviews the people who are here.” In contrast, Trump’s primary immigration proposal has been the forcible deportation of 11 million people.

Clinton needs a conscience for vice president: Jill Lawrence

POLICING THE USA: A look at race, justice, media

On trade, Gingrich fought for free trade throughout his congressional career, including efforts to pass NAFTA, which he called “a vote for history.” Trump, however, regularly refers to NAFTA as the “worst trade deal” in history and has vowed to launch blistering trade wars against our partners.

Internationally, Gingrich has blasted authoritarian leaders like Vladimir Putin, calling him a “dictator and a thug” and saying, “While we have to deal with him as the president of Russia, we don't have to respect his views.” Inverting Gingrich’s logic, Trump has basked in Putin’s praise, accepting his near endorsement by saying, “If Putin respects me and if Putin wants to call me brilliant and other things that he said that were frankly very nice, I'll accept that.”

On nearly every issue of substance, Trump is a barking repudiation of the inclusive spirit, conservative values and innovative policies that made Newt Gingrich an inspiration to a generation of Republican activists. Rather than carrying forward the Reagan legacy, as Gingrich did with the Contract with America, Trump stands in such stark contrast that even Reagan’s son Michael says his father would likely have voted against him.

Republicans should hope Gingrich will look to the principles he so effectively articulated in 2012 and decline any offer to join the Trump ticket in 2016, so the former speaker can lead the process of healing his party in the years to come.

Andrew Weinstein, the CEO of Ridgeback Communications, was a spokesman for House Speaker Newt Gingrich for two years. Follow him on Twitter: @techflack

In addition to its own editorials, USA TODAY publishes diverse opinions from outside writers, including our Board of Contributors. To read more columns, go to the Opinion front page, follow us on Twitter @USATOpinion and sign up for our daily Opinion newsletter.