The American Spectator : Why Mitt Must Debate Newt

Text Size

Why Mitt Must Debate Newt

By Aaron Goldstein on 12.6.11 @ 6:09AM

Either way, he has everything to lose so why not display courage?

Say what you will about Newt Gingrich. The man isn’t afraid of having a debate.

I would dare say that Gingrich loves debating in the way some people love baseball or cats. And why shouldn’t Gingrich love a good debate? He went from being yesterday’s man to now being in the position to be the future of the Republican Party almost entirely on the strength of his debate performances.

As much as Gingrich enjoys sharing the stage with six, seven, or even eight Republicans at any given moment, the former Speaker of the House clearly likes the one-on-one debate format best of all. Indeed, should Gingrich win the Republican nomination, he will challenge President Obama to seven “Lincoln-Douglas style” debates.

In order to hit the ground running, Gingrich has spent his time engaging in “Lincoln-Douglas” style debates with several of his GOP rivals. Last month, Gingrich went one on one with both Rick Santorum in New Hampshire and the now departed Herman Cain in Texas. Next week, Gingrich returns to the Granite state to go toe to toe with Jon Huntsman.

For a while it appeared that Gingrich would have an opportunity to face off against Republican frontrunner Mitt Romney. But it would appear that Romney does not share Gingrich’s passion for debate. Late last week, Romney declined to debate Gingrich one on one.

So does this mean Mitt fears Newt? In a blog piece in the Washington Times, Rich Stowell doesn’t think so but argues that Romney is making a mistake by not agreeing to debate Gingrich:

Is Romney afraid of Gingrich? Doubtful. Newt is certainly a formidable debater, quick with facts, solid on ideas, and feisty to boot. But Romney is a master of information. He can match up easily with Gingrich on every area of policy, and is on firm conservative ground on most issues.

Maybe Romney has a strategy planned, and a two-man debate doesn’t fit in. Well, someone in his campaign needs to remind him that he is only one for three in elections. Unless he is counting on the law of averages to put him across the line, his strategy needs some major reassessment.

It has been suggested on more than one occasion that Romney’s strategy has been to “run out the clock.” However, it would appear that Romney isn’t making good use of his time. According to the latest NBC News/Marist poll, Romney leads Gingrich by sixteen points in New Hampshire (39% to 23%) amongst likely primary voters. To put this number into perspective, when NBC News/Marist conducted their previous New Hampshire poll two months ago, Romney’s lead over Gingrich was more than forty points (45% to 4%).

With the New Hampshire Primary set to take place in just over a month, Romney stepped up his presence in the Granite state over the weekend with a door-to-door campaign blitz. He has also stepped up his criticism of Gingrich as a Washington insider. During an appearance on Fox & Friends last Friday, Romney stated:

I must admit that Newt has had a very extensive, long record of working in Washington with various governmental and non-governmental agencies, and I just don’t think that’s the background that’s ideally suited, one, to replace Barack Obama, and number two, to lead the country. This is not a matter of that America needs better lobbyists, or better deal-makers, better insiders — I think America needs a leader.

Yet later that same day, Romney’s campaign announced he would not debate Gingrich one on one. What does that tell us? It seems that Romney is perfectly content to criticize Gingrich in an interview but won’t look Gingrich in the eye and tell him what he thinks mano-a-mano.

Mitt Romney after all has a new campaign slogan, “Earn It with Mitt.” But if Romney really wants to earn the Republican nomination he is going to need more than a fancy new campaign video. He needs to convince us why his policies are the best the Republican Party has to offer. In order for him to do that he needs to go through Newt Gingrich face to face, one on one. If Romney won’t debate Gingrich face-to-face, one on one then he better have a damn good reason. To do otherwise would fail to inspire the confidence of conservatives. If Mitt Romney can’t stand up to Newt Gingrich, then how can he be expected to stand up to President Obama?

About the Author

Aaron Goldstein writes from Boston, Massachusetts.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (58) | Leave a comment Leave a comment

Jack in Wi| 12.6.11 @ 6:45AM

I think Neuter would possibly beat Romney in a debate. More likely it would just be another lovefest of 2 of the elite's pets. Newt is totally unelectable and won't be around after January. His record, personal baggage, and big mouth have already sunk him. The nominee will either be Willard Romney or Ron Paul. They are the only ones with the money and activists to win.

Romney represents the Eastern and countryclub elites who have almost destroyed the conservative movement and the Repubican Party. Ron Paul represents the vast majority of people in this country who want us out of these wars and a small Federal Government. He also has by far the most activists and small contributors. He gets far more money from active military members, then all the other candidates combined.
The people with their lives on the line know who the best man is. He won't squander their blood on some Neocon pipe dream.

Unless there is a long civl and honest debate beween these 2 men, there will never be a united party to defeat Obama. By all means throw in Mr. Fannie Mae for some commic relief.

Cosmo| 12.6.11 @ 8:10AM

Newt has so much baggage he would be a punching bag in the general election...
Especially three wives, an amnesty plan that won't work, a Social Security plan that won't work, $$ Millions in payoffs from taxpayer-
funded organizations, ethics convictions when
he was in Congress, and "crossing the aisle" even
more than McCain.
Romney is the best choice to defeat Obama,
although he is not perfect by any means.

Bo| 12.6.11 @ 11:09AM

Right you are, Cosmo. I'm afraid that too many don't understand this.

SpiralArchitect| 12.6.11 @ 1:24PM

Aside from his current address, names of his family & dog what else do we know about Zero prior to 2oo8?

OK, we do know he knew how to vote present while he was a US Senator.

Everyone is ok with the Mystery Man from, well, who is to say where. Yet his opposition must be pristine and all his back ground & planned agenda must be known & approved in advance.

TrueBlue| 12.7.11 @ 11:45AM

Downside of being a Republican.

IzeHavitt| 12.8.11 @ 12:15AM

RE. Newt's "baggage".....So what????? That's already been refuted by even his own daughter. So why should any of the rest of us care? Never mind that Obama is absolutely, without doubt, no one else is even close- the WORST POTUS ever- yea, even an enemy of the Constitution- and you want to niggle about Newt's shortcomings? Quite literally-for Christ's sake-, will you people get your head out of your collective rear end and wake up!!!!! The future of this country is at stake!!!

chuck| 12.6.11 @ 11:52AM

...........................................................
...........................................................
...........................................................

The shunning of ..... continues.

Please don't feed the trolls.

Clint| 12.6.11 @ 7:03AM

Neutered Gingrich and Mittens Romney are Serial Traitors To Conservatism.

The RINO-CINO'S Gave Us The Serial Traitor To Conservatism, John McCain Of McCain-Feingold, McCain-Kennedy,McCain-Lieberman,Gang Of 14, Opposing Bush Tax Cuts Of 2001 & 2003,TARP.

Now They Are Trying To Give Us:

Mittens Romney: RomneyCare,TARP, Cynical Flip-Flops On Abortion, Gays, Refuses to Sign Pro-Life Pledge, Illegal Immigrants, "Little Chain Saw Al" At Bain, Crony Capitalism Campaign Money Trail.....

Neutered Gingrich: Individual Mandate, support of Dede Scozzafava in the 2009 congressional election in New York’s 23rd district, his backing of Medicare Part D and TARP, and his commercial with Nancy Pelosi about climate change.

The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa.

Dai Alanye | 12.6.11 @ 11:55AM

This comment from Clint tells us all we need to know about Ron Paul's worshipers.

Ken (Old Texican)| 12.6.11 @ 7:05AM

I've said it in many ways before; Romney is a wuss.

Always has been...always will be.

chuck| 12.6.11 @ 11:54AM

Ken,

I lived in Texas for 9 years, and have family still living there. One thing for sure, Texans can spot wusses a mile away, or in this case, about 1500 miles away.

Romney is a wuss.

Richard Baker| 12.6.11 @ 7:06AM

The reason he doesn't want to debate Newt is: The baloney knows the meat grinder.

WhatAboutBob| 12.6.11 @ 7:29AM

I think the last sentence of this article pretty much nails it.

c. j. acworth| 12.6.11 @ 7:38AM

"Earn it with Mitt"

Thats a campaign slogan? What the heck does it mean? Earn what with Mitt, the nomination? I'm not running for anything. The Oval Office? Ditto. Earn a paycheck? Love to, since I got laid off last month. How is that nebulous phrase supposed to inspire confidence and a willingness to vote for the man? " Morning in America" it ain't.

chuck| 12.6.11 @ 11:55AM

I guess it's slightly better than "hope and change".

Maybe.

SpiralArchitect| 12.6.11 @ 1:32PM

Hope & Change was a brilliant slogan/logo.

That phrase was insightful. It could mean most anyhting.

Just consider how well it was used to push everything as it was released to mean whatever someone thought. It was crafted to be special to everyone, mean whatever each person thought - all in one brief, easy to remember catchy phrase.

Things like that are what thrusted Zero to the top. Unfortunately this had the reverse effect on America.

chuck| 12.6.11 @ 1:34PM

Hope and change was a mindless slogan, perfect for the mindless who voted for Obama.

Nancy in NC| 12.6.11 @ 7:46AM

Newt make Romney look good...or at least to anyone that checks out what Newt has done versus what he says.

The GOP, as usual, manages to bring the crap to the top, and expect us to hold our nose and vote in their latest disaster. Until they find a way to encourage the best to run (and forget whose turn it is) we are screwed.

The establishment GOP will be the cause of America's fall off the cliff into economic and cultural demise. We work our butts off to send some conservatives to the District of Corruption and they are dismissed by their own party. Apparently they are so busy lining their own pockets with insider trading, etc. they fail to get the message we sent in 2010.

Ken (Old Texican)| 12.6.11 @ 7:54AM

Nancy,
actually our Republicans in the House have blocked gobs of bad stuff.

POST American| 12.6.11 @ 7:48AM

---The most vapid of Mason taffy pulls---

"Understand, before you vote for anyone
--even on the local level, you MUST demand
FULL disclosure of ALLLLL their associations,
funding sources, ALLLLL their involvements
and memberships in occult societies --and
ALLLL the funds they've taken, support
they've received --and oaths they've taken.
Understand, if they've been brought up by
the foundations, the CFR etc. --they've
already signed on to world govern-ANTS.
They've already BETRAYED your soverignty."

------------AND so they have. . .

SpiralArchitect| 12.6.11 @ 1:34PM

At least we did this for Zero in '08.

His forgery prowess is laughable. Four Birth certs with 2 dif SSN's & the alledged home state claimed to not be able to find a BC. Granted Zero still released a couple from Hawaii all the same - bahahahaha.

teflon93| 12.6.11 @ 8:01AM

Romney is an empty suit who has never done a thing for the conservative movement but has done a lot for the progressive movement.

He belongs on the ashcan of history with the rest of the Rockefeller Republicans and if Newt Gingrich puts him there it will be yet another thing the former speaker has done for conservatives.

Mike W| 12.6.11 @ 9:42AM

Fat, motor mouth Newt will put assure Obama four more years.

The lousy Democrats are salivating at the chance to run against him.

Ryan| 12.6.11 @ 8:51AM

Romney needs to be careful...he may take New Hampshire, but it's almost shaping up where he is in danger of placing third in Iowa (Ron Paul's numbers there are actually decent...)

Jabber3| 12.6.11 @ 8:56AM

Mitt has exactly the right strategy in not seeking to debate Newt at this tiime. Despite the fact that Newt owes his "15 minutes of fame" to the debates he will disappoint in Iowa because of lack of organization. Given the current polling numbers Gingrich is expected to win big in Iowa and when that doesn't happen he will fall back into the second tier so if you are Mitt and trailing in Iowa why give him more exposure.

JayDick| 12.6.11 @ 11:33AM

Newt may not win Iowa or New Hampshire, although his showing should be respectable in both. However, he will win South Carolina and Florida so convincingly that the campaign may be effectively over by then.

Lyneuss Fields | 12.6.11 @ 12:49PM

Both the Romney and Huntsman campaign (aided by their wealth) will last up to and throughout the Republican Convention. Regardless of popular support, it is their duty to fulfill Joseph Smith Junior's White Horse Prophecy. http://lyneussfields.blogspot......rated.html

JayDick| 12.6.11 @ 1:11PM

It won't matter. The campaign will be EFFECTIVELY over.

Lyneuss Fields | 12.6.11 @ 2:53PM

My point is this: both Utah Senators Mike Lee and Orrin Hatch are using The Tea Party to tear down America's Constitutional protections (e.g, Article I, IV, 13th Amendment). It serves Mormonism's dogma for them to do so. http://lyneussfields.blogspot......n-ethic-of religious.htmlhttp://lyneussfields.blogspot.com/2011/10/beyond-american-ethic-of-religious.html

Lyneuss Fields | 12.6.11 @ 2:56PM

http://lyneussfields.blogspot......gious.html

Peppermint Tea| 12.6.11 @ 9:10AM

Perhaps Mitt should gain exposure by debating Ron Paul. We know what the two of them will say, but it will treat Newt like a flash in the pan and make Iowa and NH contests between the Rockyfeller and Libertarian wings, with no room for the thrice married former Speaker.

Kade| 12.6.11 @ 9:37AM

When Newt looks in the mirror he sees Mittens staring back at him – two liberal Internationalists posing as conservatives during primary season.

If I was forced to vote between the two I would choose Mitt only because the conservative talking heads would push a President Romney to the right, whereas they would carry Newt’s liberal water as they did for Bush and further distort and destroy conservatism.

A President (Trojan Horse) Gingrich is more dangerous since naïve conservatives somehow think this ultimate RINO insider is one of them and our radio guys are not exposing him as a flaming liberal.

wodiej| 12.6.11 @ 2:41PM

Romney gave Obama the blueprint for Obamacare. Gingrich reformed welfare and balanced the federal budget for 4 years even though Clinton kept vetoing his legislation. He also lead the first Republican controlled congress in 40 years. This is likely why Romney won't debate Gingrich. Romney just strikes me as an insincere blueblood. And I sure wouldn't vote for anyone stupid enough to strap a dog carrier to the top of their car and put their Irish Setter in it for an 8 HOUR DRIVE.

Chuck| 12.6.11 @ 9:57AM

The GOP establishment supports Romney because he like they are pro-abortion. The GOP establishment gave us Roe v. Wade (5 parts out of 7) and at all costs Roe v. Wade must be preserved.

bill| 12.6.11 @ 10:12AM

Who wants to watch debate between Newt and Romney ?

I would rather watch Lady Gaga's new music video "Marry the Night"..............Why NOT..................

wodiej| 12.6.11 @ 2:49PM

bet you just want to have a cowpie throwing contest w Perry. You're a troll.

Kade| 12.6.11 @ 10:44AM

Newt and Mitt make John Kerry look like the model of stability – we are in deep trouble.

Ed| 12.6.11 @ 11:15AM

"Mitt is running out the clock?"

Mr. Goldstein, the band hasn't even started to play the "Star Spangled Banner" yet. Wait until Iowa and New Hampshire before you start making predictions.

Dai Alanye | 12.6.11 @ 12:03PM

If Romney were both smart and bold he'd come out with an agreement to debate Newt, but point out the unfairness to the other candidates, suggesting Newt work out some kind of round robin to let everyone go one-on-one with each other.

This would make Romney look fair-minded, while keeping Newt busy for awhile. I'd like to see the Bachmann-Gingrich pair myself, but Santorum-Romney would be good as well.

David| 12.6.11 @ 1:03PM

" He went from being yesterday's man to now being in the position to be the future of the Republican Party almost entirely on the strength of his debate performances."

And that's why we should vote for him? Forget the criminal activity or everything else, and just fall in line, right?

Newt is another one of these "Bad for America" candidates. Every election these slimeballs and weasels start crawling up out of the sewer, but usually they are stomped on and we spray ourselves down with Lysol and move on.

This year it seems the that GOP is determined to ram one of these weasels down our throats and force us to either support the weasel or vote for another party. When we do, the Repubs all cry about solidarity and why did we abandon the party etc etc. We didn't. The party abandoned us!

If Newt gets it, I will have no choice but to vote Dem this time. Until the GOP learns to stop propping up these criminals, I have to vote for the lesser of two evils.

David| 12.6.11 @ 1:59PM

This is the "David" who has been posting here for years.

To the David who posted at 1:03 p.m., I have to say that you are an idiot. It is one thing to say that if Newt is the nominee you will vote for a write-in candidate, a third party candidate, or you will simply stay home; but it is a moronic statement to say that you will vote for a DEMOCRAT.

You are a phony and an OBAMA backer, and probably don't have a job. Go away and let serious people make their comments.

idalily| 12.6.11 @ 3:32PM

THIS.

roadmaster| 12.6.11 @ 2:08PM

Since we're pretty much stuck with the candidates we have, I find it interesting to study their strategies. Mittens is playing defense, running out the clock, which almost never works. Newt has adopted an almost Reagan-esque "go around the media, directily to the people" tack, and through attrition has nearly become the default candidate. His problem is that he has literally millions of words out there that he may have to eat. Bachmann has stuffed her honest and sincere persona to engage in the usual pol technique of distorting and taking all her opponents words out of context in a shrill manner-not a winner. Paul alternates between sound constitutional views to stumbles and fumbles on national security, yet his supporters manage to manipulate and rig polls in his favor and flood talk shows with rabid Paulians. This phony game strikes people as almost as corrupt and crooked as how dhimmicrats operate. Huntsman started at the bottom and has managed to go down hill from there. Santorum just can't get any respect, mostly because he's kinda whiny.
All that said, and since these are our choices, I'd vote for ANY of them OVER obama.

Bill| 12.6.11 @ 2:17PM

In a debate between Newt, Romney, and Rick Perry, American people will discover the most articulate and authentic conservative leader, Gov. rick perry.
NO DOUBT.

wodiej| 12.6.11 @ 2:34PM

The last debate I saw Perry in, he was not articulate. I'm not saying he hasn't done some good things as Governor but he is not very good at speaking. I'm not sure that is as important as other things but don't say he's articulate because he isn't.

idalily| 12.6.11 @ 3:33PM

You can't change hearts and minds when you're staring speechless into the camera.

Slacker| 12.6.11 @ 2:20PM

I never thought I would say this but, at this point I would prefer Ron Paul.

I can’t hold my nose and vote for Romney. I just can’t. Ditto Huntsman.

Newt is acceptable (barely) I guess.

At this point I wish Palin or Trump were in.

The establishment really screwed this up. We can thank the supreme gimp Krauthammer and the rest of the National Review crew.

wodiej| 12.6.11 @ 2:32PM

Gingrich's new campaign AD was all about America. Mitt's was all about him. 'Nuff said. I've seen Gingrich in a one on one and he was very gracious and non combative w his opponent. So there is no reason for Romney to not do it unless he has something to hide like uhm, he has nothing to run on.

Kade| 12.6.11 @ 3:04PM

Trump may still get in, especially if this primary gets strung out. It is obvious that true conservatives and patriots are pulling their hair out and are looking for somebody else.

Freedomist | 12.6.11 @ 3:32PM

I would like to see Ron Paul debate Newt Gingrich and/or Mitt Romney one-on-one or a three way. I bet Paul would, but Gingrich and/or Romney doesn't want to give Paul any legitimacy.

Natural Born Texicanette| 12.6.11 @ 4:13PM

Let's just base the way we vote ONLY on what a good speaker the candidate is. Does he lie? Does he twist the truth? Does he make up facts as he goes along? Does he twist history to his own agenda? Yes, but he does SUCH a GOOD JOB at LYING!!! He is so articulate when he's LYING!!! He seems so sincere when he's LYING!!!!

So let's just vote for him anyway. He just has such a way with WORDS!!! Even if those words ARE LIES!!!!!"

STUPID!!!!!!!!!!!

REALLY PEOPLE?????????????????????

Natural Born Texicanette| 12.6.11 @ 4:15PM

Sarcasm...in case you don't get it.

A good debater doesn't a leader make........

martin j smith| 12.6.11 @ 4:35PM

No its why Mitt must answer Tea Party questions.

Nancy in NC| 12.6.11 @ 5:41PM

One has to pass a test to drive a car in this country. I think we need a test before people should be allowed to vote. I am sick and tired of the mindless and clueless voting for the scum of the earth, and the rest of us with two brain cells suffer.

If the applicant can't properly identify the current speaker of the house, name the three branches of government and identify one of the amendments, I don't think they should be allowed to vote.

It would have prevented the obamanation we currently have at 1600 Penn. Ave.

gary siebel| 12.6.11 @ 9:46PM

Newt would make a very good sacrificial lamb. Dems would get to truly vent their spleens over the attempted coup de tat of Clinton and the tainted 2000 victory of Bush, and enjoy the Obama victory in the process.

Obama likes to debate and cheats at them very well, even better than the Grinch. Plus, the Obama campaign will not be cash strapped. Revenge will be sweet.

Does the Grinch's ad in Iowa in which he expresses his love for the country mean he's already planning to dump the current wife?

wedding dresses | 12.7.11 @ 4:17AM

http://www.weddingdressesstore.com.au/

Paul in Colorado| 12.8.11 @ 2:08PM

Newt holds a special place in the hearts of the Democrats. Not only did he take the House from them in 1994 - an institution they had treated as their personal property for forty years - he damaged it beyond their recognition. No more free loans to themselves, no more exempting themselves from the laws they impose on the public, no more lifetime chairmanships - the list goes on and they will never forgive him for it. For their part, the Republican establishment longs for the good old days before 2006, and understandably prefer the game they know to the uncertainty that the Tea Party creates. They're hoping that those passions will cool during a bland Romney administration, and they won't have to deal with the fundamental changes that Gingrich and a Tea Party dominated Congress might unleash. Tort reform? Tax reform? Regulatory reform? Anathema to both parties. What would they have to sell?

Latest Headlines

Not Ready for Primetime Players

Daniel J. Flynn|99 comments

Assessing a Week of Scandal

Matt Purple|118 comments

Oops, Maybe Government is Tyrannical

Marta H. Mossburg|59 comments

Soros Funds Anti-‘Torture’ Report

Mark Tooley|104 comments

Treasure State Treasury

Bill Croke|3 comments

My Generation’s Disease

Benjamin Brophy|60 comments

The View From the Other Side

George H. Wittman|16 comments

USPS: Radical Surgery Needed

Peter Hannaford|19 comments

The Spectacle Blog

Elijah Harper, R.I.P.

Aaron Goldstein | 5.18.13

If Only the Tsar Knew!

F.H. Buckley | 5.18.13

Low-Level IRS Staffer: No, We Didn’t Mastermind This Entire Thing

Matt Purple | 5.17.13

UPDATED: IRS Acting Chief Apologizes, But Defends His Actions

Kaylin Bugos | 5.17.13

Voter Fraud Affected Election Results in Missouri