Skip to comments.Who Won the Florida NBC GOP Debate? Newt Gingrich First, Ron Paul Second, Mitt Romney Last
Posted on 01/24/2012 5:55:37 AM PST by xzins
Are we watching the meltdown of GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney?
Fending off pointed attacks by fellow GOP candidates Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum ... Romney looked ...flustered, stiff, and at times just babbled
In comparison, Gingrich looked like he still had all the momentum from Saturdays South Carolina primary win. He calmly answered questions ...(snip)
The biggest surprise in the debate: Gingrich was not asked about his personal transgressions, ...
...After his 12-point South Carolina win, Gingrich has surged ahead in the Florida polls, leading 41% to the former Massachusetts governor's 32%.
Still, Romney does expected to win Florida. Almost 200,000 absentee ballots have already been cast in the state... favor Romney. ...
But as Gingrich showed ... debate very much matters.
One point Gingrich hammered Romney on was his tax rate. Gingrich forced Romney to announce that he will release his tax records on Tuesday. ...He reaps millions of dollars a year from his former work at Bain Capital, though, maintains a low tax bracket. Gingrich in comparison pays a 31% tax rate.
Romney blasted Gingrich for his work at mortgage giant Freddie Mac, but ignored his own financial links to the organization.
...snip...Romney, though, had as much as $500,000 invested in Freddie Mac. All GOP candidates have blamed Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac for contributing to the housing crisis that helped to drag the nation into the Great Recession.
Ahead of next weeks Florida primary, Gingrich looks like he is gaining incredible steam. Romney shell-shocked ... looks like hes out of answers.
And it might be a two-man race soon. In Florida, Rick Santorum is currently polling 11% ...
Mondays debate turned out to be the slug fest most pundits thought it would be, with Gingrich the last man standing.
(Excerpt) Read more at policymic.com ...
here’s the money quote
“Romney, though, had as much as $500,000 invested in Freddie Mac”
He’s President, and no one bothered to mention him hardly.
I'm not surprised. The mainstream media reporters are a bunch of chihuahuas who are not used to people who bite back. They're not going to take the risk until they figure out how to do it and make Newt look bad instead of embarrassing themselves.
I agree that Obama did not directly come up.
However, since Romney is Obama-lite, Obama was right in the thick of it.
I have viewed each debate as “the big dog with the little dogs nipping at his heals”.
Normally it’s been Romney as the big dog and all the others as nipping at him.
Last night was as significant change, Newt was the big dog and the others nipping at his heals.
I believe it’s much more effective when talking about what the candidate WOULD do, not like Santorium: I did, I did, I did......
It is certainly getting interesting!!!
PS: can anyone tell me (as I’ve missed it) did Santorium actually sandbag Michele Bachman in Iowa and what happened?
In addition to Romney’s personal 500,000, I wonder how much Bain had invested in Freddie/Fannie?
This proves somewhat that objecting to the premises of silly and inconsequential debate questions cowers the questioners themselves.
No one wanted to tee Newt up last night.
I don’t agree Romney babbled, but I think he tired out. On the last question about conservatism he seemed to be falling asleep. I credit Brian Williams for inducing narcolepsy.
Rumor is that RNME and Soros are assembling a Romney 9.0.
I’m solidly in the Newtist camp but he struck out last night.
He’s in FL for heaven’s sake, doesn’t he know that many older voters — and many ARE older — don’t use computers? They just watch the tv. Referring them to his website is worse than useless. He had the audience right there, that was the time to answer the question and trounce Romney for saying “resigned in disgrace” over and over and over again. :(
Many younger voters too, insofar as they bother to vote, are too busy to check out his website and explore the tedious cuneiform records of the 1990’s.
Nobody, but nobody, tuned in to obtain a link to a website.
And what answers he gave on the spot were spotty.
Newt was the poll leader last night, so all were nipping at him. I thought his calm answers were superb. I thought his deflection of terribly complicated issues of ethics charges and his speakership was right on target.
It simply isn’t possible to explain 7 dozen partisan charges in one sound bite, other than to say that Romney lies and here’s the documentation at Newt.org.
The moderators intentionally took the crowd out of the debate, so I think being the good debater he is, Newt evaluated the situation and answered differently than he would have had he been able to get a crowd boost.
That’s the sign of an experienced debater.
I disagree, LL. I think he did exactly what needed to be done.
There were some 7 dozen charges, and it’s impossible to deal with all that in one sound bite EXCEPT to say that Romney lies, which he said, and here’s the truth of a complicated subject at newt.org
If he had tried to get down in the weeds on those multitude of charges, it would have been impossible in a 60 second soundbite. He handled it correctly.
Romney accomplished his mission. He put the words “resigned in disgrace” in people’s heads.
Gingrich did nothing to remove it. “Resigned in disgrace” is not a label you can flick off your sleeve.
It was a dud. The audience was asleep because it was an anticlimax to the SC debate. I hope the next one is better.
Yeah, Brian Williams did a GREAT job of making sure the debate was about personal attacks, and not the issues. He sprinkled two or three issue questions in there, but generally, just let Romney and Gingrich spar.
Again, I disagree.
“Resigned in disgrace” is obviously not so, since Newt Gingrich is standing there the winner of the S Carolina debate.
He did not resign in disgrace, he resigned as part of political gamesmanship and a group of near-sighted republicans.
Now, is it best to get in the weeds defending your speakership, or is it best to deflect it and respond via education?
I choose the latter in THIS case.
Speaking of robots, R2D2 has more of a likeability factor than Mitt.
A lot of that was intentional. Newt used a prevent defense, scored some himself, and deflected any passes by his opponents.
I think it Newt won by his opponents not winning.
If this charge came from someone with any degree of credibility, it might have more effect. But coming from Romney, it will have no effect whatever. It won’t slow Newt down or deflect him from his course, and it is unlikely to change anyone’s mind.
On the other hand it does make Romney look even smaller and pettier than before, if that’s possible. I didn’t see the debate but I have seen Romney leveling charges at Newt in other recent fora, and he looks like a ninth grade weenie who has been turned down for a date by a girl who is going out with his best friend instead.
IOW, like a loser with a big “L” tattooed on his forehead.
What I noticed about the debate is that there were four people present, but only two were given full opportunity to participate. Of those two, I saw a lot of sniping and very little substance.
The morning takeaway from the anti-Newt crowd seems to be that unlike Carolina, he couldn’t generate enough red meat to evoke applause from the audience.
Of course, they fail to mention the audience was told several times they would be removed if they responded to the candidates.
There's much time to counter that jab. Like maybe how come Romney isn't still governor of Mass? Don't misunderestimate Newt. He's in the zone right now.
The point of this debate was to try to get Newt angry after unloading all the dirt on him. Angry Newt would just scare the folks.
Very poorly run, which is I am sure what NBC wanted so that no one could watch the thing.
And telling the audience that they can't react? What kind of audience agrees that a couple of media interns get to dictate their reaction?
Suckfest all the way around.
Newt has another debate to remedy the deficiency that you see. Romney, however, failed to name names while Newt did (which Congressmen did Newt approach, Romney?), so Romney came off as making unsubstantiated accusations.
I agree with you that many, if not most of the viewers are ignorant. Absent being spoon fed a rebuttal, they'll have to go with their gut, if they are choosing between Romney and Newt. In other words, to those people, the facts really don't matter at all - all that matters is their impression.
Disgrace? Newt helped bring about a republican surge for America and it continued after he was was shown the door. Hastert didn’t have newts fight or vision. Romney’s term as governor ended a long republican trend in MA, again no fight or vision.
Yeah, I realize NBCs Brian Williams is to blame, but so is Newt and the audience for playing along with that charade. If Newt were on his game, he could have overwhelmed Williams and the crowd would have been with him.
But in fairness, no one is on their A game every day.
Last night was as exhausting as visiting a boring old aunt who keeps the thermostat set on 90. She tells you a story about her cat that died several years ago for the tenth time as she serves you warm lemonaid in what appears to be dirty glasses.
You can’t wait to get outta there.
My recollection is that he briefly recounted his rationale for resigning his post; and that rationale was not one that amounts to a disgraceful reason.
I disagree. If your opponent launches an attack on you that is impossible for you to defend against, then by definition you’ve lost. Newt needs to look back to why he lost Iowa, because he’s going down the same path.
There are two ways to answer those attacks, disprove the claims, or simply say that’s not true and then spin it around to launch a series of attacks back at Romney. There were openings to attack Romney on his governorship and on his tenure at Bain Capital to spin the focus back on him and Newt didn’t take them. “I’m going to stay positive and not attack Governor Romney” is what lost in Iowa. Newt can’t unilaterally disengage from the fight. At this point attacking Romney serves as a demonstration to the voters of how he will attack Obama and that’s what voters want to see.
He didn't disengage.
I will not chase Romney's misinformation. He just said about four things that were false and you can check on my website. This is the worst kind of trivial politics. We have an ad where Huckabee and McCain talk about how Romney can't tell the truth. ...
Wait a second, he just went on and on and on. He is a terrible historian. The vote on the ethics committee was in January 1997 and I asked the Republicans to vote YES to get it behind us. We took control of the House in 40 years and the Democrats were bitter. The only thing we did wrong was that I didn't pay one fine but then I paid it and I wanted it behind us. We had four balanced budgets after that vote. You ought to do is stop and look at those facts. We won the House for the third time in 1998 but the margin was not big enough. In 2006 when you chaired the Governor's association we lost governorship so as a party builder I have the record and you don't.
You know it’s not so, I know it’s not so. For reasons I am sure I need not explain to a fellow freeper (ie, a well-informed conservative), I do not have much confidence in the political IQ of the average FL voter.
However, there’s still a week to deal with it. Romney took Newt down in the polls before and must not be given any elbow room to do it again.
Sure we’ll see some voting shenanigans in favor of Romney.
I’d just rather Newt had taken the charges and crammed them up Romney’s fundamental orifice.
Another thing I’ve noticed about Romney that makes me uncomfortable....he mince-steps when he walks.
Yes Newt did respond, he just said that the details were at Newt.org. If you recalled he very clearly said that Romney had just lied 4 times. He also attacked Romney's deficient governorship.
Everything you asked for above was done by Newt.
"Romney can't tell the truth" is about the same as "You're a liar." Romney didn't rebut that charge! He just made up a few more false allegations, and faced similar knockdown. He accused Gingrich of making 1.6 million dollars, to which Gingrich asked about the gross income of Bain Capital. Romney's response was that question was irrelevant. The liar can't even frame and maintain an argument worth a darn!
Leep, By that description, I can see you have been there. Very good. Well put.
—If he had tried to get down in the weeds on those multitude of charges, it would have been impossible in a 60 second soundbite. He handled it correctly.—
Correct. He is remarkably good on his feet.
Nothing illegal about either one of their past jobs/income but Romeny sure doesn't come off looking any "cleaner" than Newt in the Freddie Mac area.
Romney just lost his attack talking points!
If Mr. Romney brings that “resigned in disgrace” line up again, Mr. Gingrich can answer him with:
“People tell me that YOU, Governor Romney, “resigned in disgrace” from the Governorship of Massachusetts. You knew you couldn’t win reelection because your popularity had dropped to less than 40%. So you “moved on”, just as I did after Republican “big spenders” in the house formed an unholy alliance with the Democrat “big spenders”.”
“Which is more disgraceful? That my team of patriots brought the GOP to a majority position in the House? Or that your “big spending” ways nearly destroyed the Republican Party in Massachusetts?”
No, there isn't. Voting started on Saturday. Every day the message war is lost means lost votes. You're right that Newt should've pointed out that Romney was an unpopular one-term governor who declined to run again and lost a Senate race to Ted Kennedy by 17 points. All stuff he's mentioned before. It's funny that both Mitt and Newt seem to get overconfident and perform best when they're in the underdog position, and not so good when they're coming off a win. I thought Santorum had the best answer of the night. He clearly and cleanly laid out a good argument why he would be a better contrast to Obama than the other guys.
Did you see Drudge's story link???
Hey Drudge, could you be more misleading???
It's a tough deal when you have to fight the opposition as well as your own party.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.