Posted on 01/24/2012 8:21:28 AM PST by Bigtigermike
Newt Gingrich insists his fans will not be silenced.
Mr. Gingrich, a former House speaker, on Tuesday morning threatened not participate in any future debates with audiences that have been instructed to be silent. That was the case on Monday, when Brian Williams of NBC News asked the audience of about 500 people who assembled for a debate in Tampa to hold their applause until the commercial breaks.
In an interview with the morning show “Fox and Friends,” Mr. Gingrich said NBC’s rules amounted to stifling free speech. In what has become a standard line of attack for his anti-establishment campaign, Mr. Gingrich blamed the media for trying to silence a dissenting point of view.
(Excerpt) Read more at thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com ...
1. No audience applause allowed (unless it's for Mitt Romney).
2. Mitt Romney will be allowed unlimited time to bash Newt Gingrich.
3. Mr. Gingrich will be allowed a maximum of 30 seconds to respond.
4. No mention of Barack Obama will be permitted and if any candidate violates this rule the moderator will immediately interrupt and change the subject.
“You are 100% correct its the MSM meddling trying to once again choose the candidate to run against Obama.”
He can’t pull out of debates anyway. These debates are his campaign.
It actually was better to have the debate without the interruptive Ra Ra Pep Rally each time a candidate responded to a question.Well, the only complainers are the ones whose candidate didn't get positive reactions from the previous debate.. Even Paul got some positive feedback from that one.
The debate is to elicit candidate responses, not elicit populist hoopla from the audience.
==
Gingrich complaining about the debate format is reminiscent of Gingrich complaining about setting at the back of AF1 when Clinton was president:
{pic snip}
Conservatives are trying to sell the 'angry Newt.' While it may be cutzie now for the Newtbots, it won't be in the general election.
He is petulant. Always has been given to petulance, pouting, extreme egotism, hypersensitivity, bursts of rage...we've already seen all of that on display during this campaign.
Then you run the chance of the Ron Paul groupies hootin n hollerin and drowning everyone else out.
The “Drive-By Media” don’t like to be humiliated by boos to their questions from the grass root audiences.
Newt is smart not sign another agreement with them to demand silence from the debate audiences.
That’s funny, I was just thinking the exact same thing about you.
“He is petulant. Always has been given to petulance, pouting, extreme egotism, hypersensitivity, bursts of rage...we’ve already seen all of that on display during this campaign.”
That’s why he’s on the stage and not you. Because you won’t have what it takes to run a national campaign.
What’s keeping the audience from telling the moderators to pound sand. What are they going to do, remove people from their seats if the clap or cheer? If I were Newt, I would encourage the audience to respond if they feel like it.
Not only should there be applause ... I would offer free rum beforehand and baskets of rotten fruit, vegetables and eggs placed in strategic places among the audience. Politics has gotten too tame!
I think you misunderstood what he said.. he didn’t say he wasn’t a great debater he said it was his message not his debating skills that won the day.. he brags on his debating skills all the time especially when taunting Obama for the Lincoln/Douglas debates where he’ll just use his knowledge and ability to get across his views(ie. superior debating skills)and Obama can use his teleprompters
Well if we are going to encourage cheering and booing then the rules need to change to allow all candidates more time to respond. I do not think it would be fair to candidate X if all his time was drowned out by crowd noise supporting candidate Y. I have no problem with brief polite applause if some candidate makes a point that the audience appreciates. I could do without the booing. Encouraging audience participation also gives great power to those that choose the audience, do we really want to go there?
Gingrich is giving a series of addresses around the state, wth a particularly important one tomorrow regarding the Space Industry. His ideas are his campaign. The debates were one format, but since they have turned into the equivalent of a boring TV morning-show, they’re not a good format.
The media is setting the stage so that when Newt is the nominee his tearing apart Obama won’t come across so effectively. Newt should just defy the moderator at the next debate and tell the audience they have his permission to exercise free speech.
—With due respect, you could not be more wrong. It did not make for a more “professional” debate. It made for an awkward little food fight where the enemy - liberals in Obama’s administration and the media -were ignored.—
If the media is boo-proof, they are perfectly free to follow their agenda. The crowd can serve to keep the interogators in check, or at least voice our disapproval with them.
Do Both. Tell the media to pound sand before and at the beginning of the debate.
His shtick as you call it is populism in purest form.
Gingrich is no Ronald Reagan, but Reagan was every bit a populist as he was a conservative.
There has not been any Republican since Reagan who has tried to tap into populism.
Those guys with the same first and last names did not have an ounce of populism running in their blood.
Bob Dole's idea of a good time was social chit chat with the likes a Kathryn Graham, Dwayne Andreas and Mikhail Gorbachev.
McCain was anything but a populist which goes without saying for anyone who spent time in the Senate.
If Newt gets the nomination, he will win the general with all his baggage and all his flaws because this nation is angry and ANY populist will defeat the biggest elitist to hold the POTUS in my life time.
Their headline is inaccurate.
Gingrich essentially states that he regretted not saying anything last night, but that in future debates he will speak up for the audience to be able to applaud or cheer. Further, he said that he felt that what the media’s fear was the audience siding with the candidates against the media!
We have to teach the American people to stop just reading/listening to what is placed in front of them and to start actually listening to what the candidates are saying!
May God grant us strength, wisdom and courage.
Tatt
Since the debates are what gave Newt most of his following, skipping them would not be good for future primaries.
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.