• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Gingrich nails CNN at Presidential Debate

Peter Grimm said:
Gingrich Nails CNN at Presidential Debate! - YouTube


Wow, that's all I've got to say. Home run by Newt.

Classy answer by Romney as well.
Click to expand...

No.

Moral Failure by Newt. Failure, for example, to be able to distinguish between asking a candidate about a major issue that has strong salience in a key demographic (not despicable) and the actual act of serial adultery itself (which is despicable). Newt was acting "outraged" in order to try to force the discussion off the topic, and the audience was stupid enough to lap it up.

Newt has had some awesome performances in this debate season. His description of conservatism is at times unparalleled. But this? This wasn't it.
 
cpwill said:
No.

Moral Failure by Newt. Failure, for example, to be able to distinguish between asking a candidate about a major issue that has strong salience in a key demographic (not despicable) and the actual act of serial adultery itself (which is despicable). Newt was acting "outraged" in order to try to force the discussion off the topic, and the audience was stupid enough to lap it up.

Newt has had some awesome performances in this debate season. His description of conservatism is at times unparalleled. But this? This wasn't it.
Click to expand...

You got to admit it was pretty ingenious of Newt to turn the tables on the accusations. He went from culprit to victim with a stern lecturing of the debate host and immediately the audience was giving him a standing ovation.
I have seen that such ploy in a few comedy movies before. It was a gamble on his part to try that twist. Once he felt the audience bought it he went full attack on the host.
I think if he had slammed his podium to the floor the audience would have gone nuts with applause and cheering.

Give the guy credit for having the balls to pull that off.
 
Newt is a very good politician.
 
cpwill said:
No.

Moral Failure by Newt. Failure, for example, to be able to distinguish between asking a candidate about a major issue that has strong salience in a key demographic (not despicable) and the actual act of serial adultery itself (which is despicable). Newt was acting "outraged" in order to try to force the discussion off the topic, and the audience was stupid enough to lap it up.

Newt has had some awesome performances in this debate season. His description of conservatism is at times unparalleled. But this? This wasn't it.
Click to expand...
Until they start asking Democrats these kinds of questions on a regular basis, the Reps should be outraged. Whether these questions have a point or not, the fact that the media kisses Obama's ass, is enough for me not to get too upset about how Newt handles this.
 
I give Romney credit for side-stepping the question.
 
American said:
Until they start asking Democrats these kinds of questions on a regular basis, the Reps should be outraged. Whether these questions have a point or not, the fact that the media kisses Obama's ass, is enough for me not to get too upset about how Newt handles this.
Click to expand...

Is there ever a time when you're not partisan?
 
While perhaps John King had a right to ask the question he, and the likes of Anderson Cooper and most of his CNN pals, are undoubtedly on the liberal side of politics while pretending strenously not to be, and it was a treat to see his face at Newt's attack.
 
Last edited:
cpwill said:
No.

Moral Failure by Newt. Failure, for example, to be able to distinguish between asking a candidate about a major issue that has strong salience in a key demographic (not despicable) and the actual act of serial adultery itself (which is despicable). Newt was acting "outraged" in order to try to force the discussion off the topic, and the audience was stupid enough to lap it up.

Newt has had some awesome performances in this debate season. His description of conservatism is at times unparalleled. But this? This wasn't it.
Click to expand...

Did you happen to catch the part where that "key demographic" gave him a standing ovation and hooted and hollered to wit's end?

This answer will win South Carolina for Gingrich.
 
Peter Grimm said:
Did you happen to catch the part where that "key demographic" gave him a standing ovation and hooted and hollered to wit's end?

This answer will win South Carolina for Gingrich.
Click to expand...

Part of it was a delight at someone finally taking a crack at those asking the questions. Part of it was a smack on those who knew that Edwards was as big of a slimeball and said nothing.

It's not going to change the mind of those who expect far more from those who want their votes but IMO the reaction had as much to do with who was asking the questions as opposed to support for Newt.

We'll see.
 
Crosscheck said:
You got to admit it was pretty ingenious of Newt to turn the tables on the accusations. He went from culprit to victim with a stern lecturing of the debate host and immediately the audience was giving him a standing ovation.
I have seen that such ploy in a few comedy movies before. It was a gamble on his part to try that twist. Once he felt the audience bought it he went full attack on the host.
I think if he had slammed his podium to the floor the audience would have gone nuts with applause and cheering.

Give the guy credit for having the balls to pull that off.
Click to expand...

Newt is a gifted debater. We know this by now.

If we put him up against Obama, he will steal the show just as he has done in these debates. That makes him electable.

If we put him in the White House, he will get things done. Newt has always gotten things done.

Maybe he hurts some feelings along the way, but Newt is effective. I want him putting that skill-set to use and working for us.
 
Finding reason to chastise the media is a gimmick Gingrich now uses in every debate. Romney's performance improved, Santorum did extremely well and Paul captured likeability.
 
1Perry said:
Part of it was a delight at someone finally taking a crack at those asking the questions. Part of it was a smack on those who knew that Edwards was as big of a slimeball and said nothing.

It's not going to change the mind of those who expect far more from those who want their votes but IMO the reaction had as much to do with who was asking the questions as opposed to support for Newt.

We'll see.
Click to expand...

It's simple. He played on a common conservative "hot button" theme - mistrust of the intentions of the mainstream media.

Somehow, he is the only one who is quick-witted enough to do that kind of thing.

But I think what it also did was put the biggest skeleton in Gingrich's closet to bed... at least for the time being - that being his personal baggage.

That should be enough to carry him through South Carolina.

Plus, you could just tell by the crowd where their heart is.
 
joko104 said:
Finding reason to chastise the media is a gimmick Gingrich now uses in every debate. Romney's performance improved, Santorum did extremely well and Paul captured likeability.
Click to expand...

Gingrich is great at finding "hot buttons" and winning the crowd. Don't underestimate that. What he did was extremely witty and shrewd. That man can play a crowd like a fiddle.

Romney was solid but he floundered too much on the income tax release issue. He really should just release them and be done with it, for the sake of his own campaign. I don't think he won any votes tonight and may have lost one or two.

Santorum came across as a little whiney to me... and I typically like Santorum. That said, I think some of his attacks stuck. I just don't see Santorum doing that well in the South, to be honest.
 
Peter Grimm said:
It's simple. He played on a common conservative "hot button" theme - mistrust of the intentions of the mainstream media.
Click to expand...

Sure, as I stated, he's good at politics.

Somehow, he is the only one who is quick-witted enough to do that kind of thing.
Click to expand...

He really had little to lose here.

But I think what it also did was put the biggest skeleton in Gingrich's closet to bed... at least for the time being - that being his personal baggage.

That should be enough to carry him through South Carolina.

Plus, you could just tell by the crowd where their heart is.
Click to expand...

Will it cause others to not be as quick to bring his sleaze factor up as often knowing he will bite back? Yes, it very well may. IMO it's not going to change the opinion of those who have already made up their mind about him. I'll never vote for him but yeah, I do get a kick out of the hypocrites getting smacked now and then also.
 
Home run? Seriously? More like a foul ball. Nothing but typical deflection by the slimey hypocrite. Gingrich is the epitome of the "Do as I say, not as I do" mentality.
 
Personally: I'm glad he said what he said. . . I don't care about the 'relationship fiascos' that unfold - I don't care AT ALL about that. Almost every president has had some personal or family thing that's 'classless' go on at some point: it doesn't matter to me.

So - yes - I'm tired of tuning into a debate to have to hear that junk. I wish people wouldn't vote based on such things and I'm glad they handed Gingrich the opportunity to say what I'm ALWAYS thinking. . . did they expect less from him?

I'm looking for a president - not a future spouse, not a lifetime partner, not a stroke coach . . . but someone who KNOWS the country, how our country works, what went wrong in 2007/2008 and what would be helpful to do in response - and who has an interest in furthering our country's ability to function.

Who they married, what sex they like and how they like to eat their french fries is NOT my concern - at all.
 
Last edited:
Peter Grimm said:
Gingrich is great at finding "hot buttons" and winning the crowd. Don't underestimate that. What he did was extremely witty and shrewd. That man can play a crowd like a fiddle.

Romney was solid but he floundered too much on the income tax release issue. He really should just release them and be done with it, for the sake of his own campaign. I don't think he won any votes tonight and may have lost one or two.

Santorum came across as a little whiney to me... and I typically like Santorum. That said, I think some of his attacks stuck. I just don't see Santorum doing that well in the South, to be honest.
Click to expand...

I think the majority of people can relate to Newt far , far more than they can the elitist Romney.
I could picture myself having a beer with Newt more than I could ever even imagine being in the same tavern with Romney.
 
disneydude said:
Home run? Seriously? More like a foul ball. Nothing but typical deflection by the slimey hypocrite. Gingrich is the epitome of the "Do as I say, not as I do" mentality.
Click to expand...
Says a man who'll vote for Obama.
 
Crosscheck said:
Give the guy credit for having the balls to pull that off.
Click to expand...

Real ballsy. But that's what got him into this mess. The only one he's fooling is gullible righties.
 
American said:
Until they start asking Democrats these kinds of questions on a regular basis, the Reps should be outraged. Whether these questions have a point or not, the fact that the media kisses Obama's ass, is enough for me not to get too upset about how Newt handles this.
Click to expand...

Frankly there's a very good reason Newt is being asked. His hypocrisy on this issue is epic. He gets what he gets. His feigned anger is pleased the guppies that follow him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom