In Which I Wholeheartedly Praise Mitt Romney and Criticize Newt Gingrich
As Katie notes below, Mitt Romney today followed the lead of Ron Paul and Jon Huntsman (there's a phrase I'll never get to type again) in swearing off participation in the December 27 GOP presidential debate moderated by Donald Trump. Good for him. As I wrote last week, participating in the debate is a tactical error for the entire presidential field and an embarrassment to the party (unlike my friend James Poulos, I don't think the unintentional mediocrity of the other debates is license for the intentional buffoonery of this one). And, as Diane noted yesterday, this event is all the more inappropriate given that the press-hungry Trump is still threatening a third-party presidential bid.
As of right now, only Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich have agreed to participate in the forum. While I'm disappointed in Santorum's decision, I can also understand the desperation that's driving it: with his campaign gasping for oxygen (a point we're debating over at the Center for Individual Freedom's Freedom Line Blog), the prospect of a stage where the former Pennsylvania senator can get more than two minutes of airtime is too tempting to pass up. He'd probably show up if it was moderated by the Muppets.
Newt is another story entirely. Not only is he participating, he was in New York yesterday to pay homage to The Donald in person.
Look, I have no problem with Newt and Trump teaming up to mentor poor schoolchildren. More power to the both of them. But Newt's the candidate who has spent this entire cycle trying to convince us that he's above the fray -- the true adult in the room. Now the guy who's repeatedly criticized the reality show format of the debates is going to be onstage for a forum hosted by one of the biggest reality stars in the country? With a big lead in many of the polls, he doesn't need the attention. And with his newfound friendship with Trump secured, I doubt he'll use this as another opportunity to bash the moderator.
Newt's been telling us for the better part of 2011 that the country is in dire need of someone with the seriousness to confront our national challenges. That leaves one wondering why he would choose to close out the year looking like he has less discretion than Ron Paul.
- Comment (48)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
Comments :
Aug '11
Re: In Which I Wholeheartedly Praise Mitt Romney and Criticize Newt Gingrich
Perhaps Newt is just showing his fearlessness.
Maybe?
Edited on Dec 6, 2011 at 7:06pmDec '10
Re: In Which I Wholeheartedly Praise Mitt Romney and Criticize Newt Gingrich
Newt has major detractors in his own party (heard Peter King Sunday on radio say after working with Newt for years in Congress he "would most likely" endorse Romney). Coburn doesn't like him. I fear more and more of this will come out and that, we -- are--doomed.
Jun '10
Re: In Which I Wholeheartedly Praise Mitt Romney and Criticize Newt Gingrich
What on Earth are they afraid of? Any televised debate is like attending a thousand county fairs at once. They don't have to give foolish answers just because Trump may ask a foolish question or two. And like all politicians, if they don't like the question, they just answer a different question. I think they've all learned by now how to gracefully change the subject.
Jun '10
Re: In Which I Wholeheartedly Praise Mitt Romney and Criticize Newt Gingrich
Is there a money angle, I wonder?
I trust Newt. He doesn't have to do everything in a media straight-jacket.
Regarding your comment:
Your characterization is all wrong here, Troy. What Newt does with the media is undermine their integrity as putative reporters. Why would you not see this? If Newt chooses to go on a Reality TV show with The Donald I don't get why he would do it. But, I don't have to pretend to be confused on just exactly what Newt is doing with regard to regular reporters who are mostly political enemies with barrels of ink (so to speak).
Everyone thinks Newt's great in debates. I'm fine with that. It seems that in relative terms he is -- and he's well informed on all the important issues.
I think what's great about Newt is that he goes after Obama directly and he goes after Obama's best friends forever, the reporters in the leftist press.
Jun '11
Re: In Which I Wholeheartedly Praise Mitt Romney and Criticize Newt Gingrich
I don't understand why any of the candidates would show for this. Just because a celebrity wants to host a debate is no reason to show. What if Carrottop or Larry the Cable Guy decide to call a debate? Should the candidates show up just for the TV time? I don't think so.
Aug '10
Re: In Which I Wholeheartedly Praise Mitt Romney and Criticize Newt Gingrich
I'm glad Mitt sat this one out; I would've been pretty disappointed if he had chosen to participate.
Trump is nothing but a dishonest celebrity vulgarian - serious people should not give him the time of day, let alone a forum to boost his king-size ego.
Any candidate who participates in this is going to look like a chump when Trump endorses Newt at the end of the "debate". Romney could see that trap a mile away...
Jun '10
Re: In Which I Wholeheartedly Praise Mitt Romney and Criticize Newt Gingrich
Trump is dumb like a fox. He knows people expect him to embarrass himself, by his ignorance, and he'll do just the opposite. He probably won't be the one writing the questions. I think he can afford to buy some help with that, and he's smart enough to know he needs help. I predict the no-shows will be the ones who look foolish.
Re: In Which I Wholeheartedly Praise Mitt Romney and Criticize Newt Gingrich
Could be and that would be an interesting move by Trump. It assumes, however, that his motivation is to be taken seriously. As a candidate, my primary concern would be that his motivation is purely to gin up media buzz in advance of the new season of his TV show, in which case any press would be good press (this seemed to be the trajectory of his presidential flirtations last year). My secondary concern would be that he's serious about a third-party candidacy and is looking to differentiate himself from the candidates with this forum. In either case, I'd stay home.
May '10
Re: In Which I Wholeheartedly Praise Mitt Romney and Criticize Newt Gingrich
Actually, if the Muppets moderated a debate, that would be the first one I've watched this year. I have more confidence in Kermit THE Frog and Miss Piggy than I do in most of the rest of the clowns we've seen running these things.
May '10
Re: In Which I Wholeheartedly Praise Mitt Romney and Criticize Newt Gingrich
Why do they keep giving me two choices I don't like?!
May '10
Re: In Which I Wholeheartedly Praise Mitt Romney and Criticize Newt Gingrich
Very disappointed in the Rico response thus far. This, pardon me, snooty elitism that only certain proper kinds of venues or erudite interlocutors are appropo is more befitting a liberal old boys club. Are there no genuine American voters who listen to reality shows and hold Trump in some regard? Might these not, in fact, even ber the very citizens who need to be persuaded of the rightness of conservative principles? the very principles that we must sell to a large majority if we are to have a serious mandate for major reform of government. If these are the best responses Rico can come up with, we've become nothing more than liberals without the patina of respectable polish. Sad.
May '10
Re: In Which I Wholeheartedly Praise Mitt Romney and Criticize Newt Gingrich
Second copy removed.
Edited on Dec 7, 2011 at 8:45amNov '11
Re: In Which I Wholeheartedly Praise Mitt Romney and Criticize Newt Gingrich
Troy Senik
I don't think the unintentional mediocrity of the other debates is license for the intentional buffoonery of this one.
Rather than assuming that a Trump-moderated debate will be buffoonery, why not wait and see? (That my main complaint these days, that so few are willing to just wait and see. We all gotta pronounce in advance, and then afterwards we gotta spin our heads off explaining why our prediction was correct, even if it wasn't.) What's to be gained from the premature judgment, other than the devious pleasure of an "I told you so?"
Doesn't strict honesty require us to declare every presidential debate of the last thrity years to have been buffoonery. Why should this cycle be any different? And, no, I'm not completely joking.
Once again, Troy, you make much of a distinction between accidental buffoonery and intentional buffoonery. I guess I value that difference, too, . . . except I prefer intentional absurdity: Because one is intended to laugh at intentional ridiculousness, one can laugh at it without feeling quite so . . . cruel.
We say debates should test candidates under every stress. How about the pressure of being made to look a fool?
Nov '11
Re: In Which I Wholeheartedly Praise Mitt Romney and Criticize Newt Gingrich
Definitely number 1, even if a bit of number 2 figures in. But really, your analysis is way too complicated.
An eternal question: What's the "motivation"? Why do "they" do "what they do?"
By "they" I mean politicians, actors, artists, poets, celebrities, and every other sort of person who works in the public eye.
By "what they do," I mean anything and everything that is done publicly by politicians, actors, artists, poets, celebrities, and every other sort of similarly public person.
They all do all they do . . . shhh, don't let this out . . . for the euphoria of adulation, and failing that, for the mere attention. If we want a more polite term, we can call it "glory"; less polite, "fame"; even less polite, "notoriety".
In cynical old age, one can't help knowing Machiavelli got this right. So let's not get fooled by claims about their sense of duty, honor, art, etc. Our business, the business of all of us of no name: somehow to control them.
Jun '10
Re: In Which I Wholeheartedly Praise Mitt Romney and Criticize Newt Gingrich
Astonishing, you are... actually, you are astonishing.
Good stuff. Keep it up.
Sep '10
Re: In Which I Wholeheartedly Praise Mitt Romney and Criticize Newt Gingrich
I'm with James Poulos on this one and Astonishing as well.
Reality shows have informed us in more ways than we are aware. The reality show has elements of a game and there are consequences for the real-life participants who play themselves (or some version of themselves).
We as audience know there must be some artifice when cameras are present, and we know intuitively that we are being presented with certain aspects of "reality" when there are editors during and after the fact. We know that the franchise, the show itself, be it The Apprentice, Survivor, will always come off looking great, and by extension the paid employees and paid on-air talent will always be portrayed in the best light possible. The show is for our entertainment, not to inform us or educate us, and the show will protect itself and it's reputation as its first priority.
Debates nowadays are reality shows using politicians as fodder, and are primarily designed to make money for the producers with a secondary goal of adding name recognition and credibility to the network's news division.
Sep '10
Re: In Which I Wholeheartedly Praise Mitt Romney and Criticize Newt Gingrich
continued-
I'm particularly interested in seeing someone other than a liberal Democrat host a GOP debate. I'm interested in seeing someone who is not in the direct employ of a corporate media conglomerate ask questions for a change.
I wonder if the Trump debate might be the most interesting, lively and informative debate yet.
The debates I've seen, both in this cycle and in previous ones, seem designed to make the candidates look small and powerless, and the moderators look big and important.
Mar '11
Re: In Which I Wholeheartedly Praise Mitt Romney and Criticize Newt Gingrich
There is a reason folks with "no hope" hang on to the end: because there is always hope. This could be the moment Santorum has been waiting for.
History has turned on lesser events.
Aug '11
Re: In Which I Wholeheartedly Praise Mitt Romney and Criticize Newt Gingrich
I do.
I mean, conservatives know that the saying "all press is good press" is demonstrably false. But there is absolutely nothing to be lost for Newt to take an opportunity for some "face time" with the American public, and possibly quite a bit to gain. This is free face time for that matter, in a setting that has proven to work very well for him regardless of the moderators.
And while the political class (and those of us who are political hobbyists) considers Trump to be a buffoon, a large segment of the American public seems to enjoy his television show, so Newt deciding to blow off Trump and treat him with disdain may be perceived as a bit of elitism. It would be as if Newt told me he couldn't stand to watch one second of Star Trek. I mean, I don't know if I could vote for someone like that.
Edited on Dec 7, 2011 at 6:37amApr '11
Re: In Which I Wholeheartedly Praise Mitt Romney and Criticize Newt Gingrich
I believe Newt's motivation in attending the debate is basically the same as Trump's for hosting it, which is their over inflated sense of self.
Troy, through his personal knowledge, has expressed in past podcasts Newt's grandiose persona that will never be held back, be it debates, running for president, being employed by Fannie and Freddie,etc. Any invitation for him to show he is the smartest guy in the room, well he is all in.
Santorum, on the other hand, is looking for any venue to show he is the only true conservative worthy of choice but is a product no one is buying regardless of the packages appearance.
As far as reality TV is concerned, it is a true reflection of what our culture has devolved into since Watergate. We no longer can honestly celebrate a winner or hero, if you will. We enjoy seeing others humiliated, either at their own hands or by someone else's. It is never a true contest since a large chunk of Producer money is at stake and will never be left for chance or to the whim of others but will always be scripted, as these debates.