Gingrich is killing it in these debates

manifold

Diamond Member
Feb 19, 2008
57,723
8,638
2,030
your dreams
I'm not a huge fan, but I have to give credit where credit is due and he's wiping the floor with the republican field in these debates. I wish Paul was a little bit more articulate and less frenetic in his responses. He definitely offers the most substance in his replies, but a lot gets lost in translation. Romney is a milquetoast douchewagon who can't even give a straight answer to a simple question like 'do the states have the right to ban contraception?'

Get used to the idea of 4 more years of the Oh-Boy. :thup:
 
He is really great to listen to. When it comes to talk, no one can beat him, which explains why he is on his fourth wife. He is great at talk. But there seem to be performance issues.
 
I don't think that anyone has "killed it" in the debates.

I think Newt has been the most accurate and forthright. He has been married 3 times, currently for 13 years to Calista, and I respect the fact that, in spite of political consequences, he has been divorced 2 times, rather than having a sting of lovers, while married to one woman, as so many other politicians try to get away with. I like Newt because I trust Newt. He is the least PC of them all, thus far, and in my opinion.

Justin Quinn: "Gingrich has been married three times, and he has been accused of having a multitude of extramarital affairs, although he has only admitted to one -- with the woman who would eventually become his third and present wife."
Source: Justin Quinn. "A Profile of Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich." USConservatives.about.com.
 
Last edited:
I'm not a huge fan, but I have to give credit where credit is due and he's wiping the floor with the republican field in these debates. I wish Paul was a little bit more articulate and less frenetic in his responses. He definitely offers the most substance in his replies, but a lot gets lost in translation. Romney is a milquetoast douchewagon who can't even give a straight answer to a simple question like 'do the states have the right to ban contraception?'

Get used to the idea of 4 more years of the Oh-Boy. :thup:

Probably. The GOP is trying to convice itself that Romney is the one like a drunk warming up to a barfly.
 
Back in the Day it came out that Cleveland had a child by a woman he had no interest in marrying. (This is the baby Ruth the candy bar was named after.)

The democrats response to this was "Hurrah for Maria, Hurrah for the Kid, I voted for Cleveland and I am glad I did."

It is generally agreed that Cleveland was one of our better presidents, Ruth not withstanding.

Over the long haul, the Republic has shown more appreciation for presidents who were competent than those like Grant, Nixon and Carter who were uxorious.

My issue with Gringrich is that he in the words of Ann Coulter likes to talk a big fight against democrat positions, but he is actually to the left of a substantial part of the Democrat base.
 
Back in the Day it came out that Cleveland had a child by a woman he had no interest in marrying. (This is the baby Ruth the candy bar was named after.)

The democrats response to this was "Hurrah for Maria, Hurrah for the Kid, I voted for Cleveland and I am glad I did."

It is generally agreed that Cleveland was one of our better presidents, Ruth not withstanding.

Over the long haul, the Republic has shown more appreciation for presidents who were competent than those like Grant, Nixon and Carter who were uxorious.

My issue with Gringrich is that he in the words of Ann Coulter likes to talk a big fight against democrat positions, but he is actually to the left of a substantial part of the Democrat base.

I love Ann Coulter to death, but I think she's absolutely unhinged on this subject. Newt Gingrich has a 90% lifetime rating from the American Conservative Union, as much as some people try to wave it away.
 
He is really great to listen to. When it comes to talk, no one can beat him, which explains why he is on his fourth wife. He is great at talk. But there seem to be performance issues.

Gingrich has only been married three times, not four.

That makes it better somehow?

I like Newt, but his marriage issues have killed him.
 
Back in the Day it came out that Cleveland had a child by a woman he had no interest in marrying. (This is the baby Ruth the candy bar was named after.)

The democrats response to this was "Hurrah for Maria, Hurrah for the Kid, I voted for Cleveland and I am glad I did."

It is generally agreed that Cleveland was one of our better presidents, Ruth not withstanding.

Over the long haul, the Republic has shown more appreciation for presidents who were competent than those like Grant, Nixon and Carter who were uxorious.

My issue with Gringrich is that he in the words of Ann Coulter likes to talk a big fight against democrat positions, but he is actually to the left of a substantial part of the Democrat base.

I love Ann Coulter to death, but I think she's absolutely unhinged on this subject. Newt Gingrich has a 90% lifetime rating from the American Conservative Union, as much as some people try to wave it away.


Ann got her marching orders.... support Romney- or else.
 
Newt does well until he gets caught in a lie... then everyone sits there thinking "wow..." Then they think "Wow, he is still going to try and sell this and he (Newt) is smiling because he knows how full of shit he is and also knows he was just caught" In this last debate what was it, oh it’s when Newt attacked Mitt over Super PACs, then Mitt points out that Newt is doing the same thing… And Newt gives that shitty slimy grin, a little laugh and tries to keep pushing it while the audience just sits there thinking “wow.”

Oh, did you hear Newt just got 5 million donated to his super pac?

Here is Newt in his prime, getting caught but loling his way through it.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Newt is the best debater and did catch Romney in the Bain matter according to fact check. He is the only cadidate who canouty debate Obama in every issue without a doubt. Obama would be lost.
 
He is really great to listen to. When it comes to talk, no one can beat him, which explains why he is on his fourth wife. He is great at talk. But there seem to be performance issues.

Gingrich has only been married three times, not four.

That makes it better somehow?

I like Newt, but his marriage issues have killed him.

It's called a "correction", dimwit, not a justification. If I thought it "made it better", I would have said so.

If you're really worried about the man's marital issues at a time like this, you DESERVE what four more years of Obama will do to this country.
 
Gingrich has only been married three times, not four.

That makes it better somehow?

I like Newt, but his marriage issues have killed him.

It's called a "correction", dimwit, not a justification. If I thought it "made it better", I would have said so.

If you're really worried about the man's marital issues at a time like this, you DESERVE what four more years of Obama will do to this country.

I'm not worried, but I know that they make him unelectable. Women will see every cheating boyfriend and husband and turn on him.

I really like the guy. I think he's the smartest guy on that stage. But practicalities are practicalities. We want the illusion that our leaders are perfect family men.
 
Yep.. I like Newt too, Romney does ok, Santorum I don't care much for in the debates, but they poured millions into demonizing Newt I hope he can recover
 
Yep.. I like Newt too, Romney does ok, Santorum I don't care much for in the debates, but they poured millions into demonizing Newt I hope he can recover

I think Republicans/conservatives who understand what's at stake in this election and STILL try to make it about ridiculous nonsense such as "what he did in his marriage decades ago" should be ashamed of themselves.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: I'm not looking to date the man, so I don't give a shit about personal stuff. And I DOUBLY don't give a shit about personal stuff that happened while I was in elementary school.

It amazes me that people who would be outraged at the very IDEA that a job candidate would be asked about his marriage in the interview think it's perfectly okay to make a Presidential election about that.
 
Gingrich has only been married three times, not four.

Yes, an important distinction.

As noted, I’ve seen no evidence of 'Gingrich brilliance,’ unless the accurate regurgitation of rightist dogma is considered ‘brilliant.’

Perhaps an admirer could post a link as evidence.

I love Ann Coulter to death, but I think she's absolutely unhinged on this subject. Newt Gingrich has a 90% lifetime rating from the American Conservative Union, as much as some people try to wave it away.
Which is fine if one is a rightist.

In the real world it’s an indication as to why he’s not qualified to be president – or any such blind adherent to conservative dogma.

If you're really worried about the man's marital issues at a time like this, you DESERVE what four more years of Obama will do to this country.

And what exactly is that? And how could it be any worse than what republicans have done to the country.

Voting for a republican for president is a classic example of Einstein's definition of insanity.
 
Gingrich has only been married three times, not four.

Yes, an important distinction.

As noted, I’ve seen no evidence of 'Gingrich brilliance,’ unless the accurate regurgitation of rightist dogma is considered ‘brilliant.’

Perhaps an admirer could post a link as evidence.

I love Ann Coulter to death, but I think she's absolutely unhinged on this subject. Newt Gingrich has a 90% lifetime rating from the American Conservative Union, as much as some people try to wave it away.
Which is fine if one is a rightist.

In the real world it’s an indication as to why he’s not qualified to be president – or any such blind adherent to conservative dogma.

If you're really worried about the man's marital issues at a time like this, you DESERVE what four more years of Obama will do to this country.

And what exactly is that? And how could it be any worse than what republicans have done to the country.

Voting for a republican for president is a classic example of Einstein's definition of insanity.
You are right the is no evidence of "Gingrich brilliance", most think the guy is a con man, huckster, charlatan, snake oil salesman, one thing for sure he is a Washington insider that knows his way through those revolving doors. Most don't consider this an admirable addition to ones resume .He has taken millions from Freddy Mac and the healthcare industry as a wheeler dealer, consultant, lobbyist ? This guy carries so much negative baggage he would never get elected on the national scene. The voters of Iowa saw through his facade, he and his ego rode the bubble for a few days and he declared himself the nominee(what an ego maniac)then his bubble burst and he left Iowa with no delegates, a whining broken old man full of hate and vengeance. He left Iowa just as many had predicted he would who knew him from his House leadership days. None of those serving with him in the House was endorsing him but he did have several speak up and say he would have good ideas one day and crazy ones another, in other words the guy was a flake. That's why some like him on stage , he is a bomb thrower, but a maniac/depressive personality not consistent .We certainly wouldn't want this guy with his hand on the button. We do not have to worry, he could not even get it together enough to get his name on the VA. ballot, anyone who votes for this loser now, doesn't have their elevator running to the top. You either will have one of two choices Romney or Ron Paul. Many Independents are wanting Ron Paul to go third party. America is ready for a third party. Americans are fed up with this corrupt corporate controlled two party system. America is ready for a real change.
 
Yep.. I like Newt too, Romney does ok, Santorum I don't care much for in the debates, but they poured millions into demonizing Newt I hope he can recover

I think Republicans/conservatives who understand what's at stake in this election and STILL try to make it about ridiculous nonsense such as "what he did in his marriage decades ago" should be ashamed of themselves.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: I'm not looking to date the man, so I don't give a shit about personal stuff. And I DOUBLY don't give a shit about personal stuff that happened while I was in elementary school.

It amazes me that people who would be outraged at the very IDEA that a job candidate would be asked about his marriage in the interview think it's perfectly okay to make a Presidential election about that.

Well, people on the right DID make a big deal about Clinton's marriage. So we don't exactly have a high ground here.

(I do think Clinton's problems indicated something far worse, a pathology, if you will, in how he related to women.)

Is it fair game? Well, yeah, I think it does say something about his character. But I am also willing to give him the benefit of the doubt because people change and marriages do fail.

On a pragmatic level, this has to be taken in consideration that the people who don't give a flip about idealogy will take this very personal stuff into account in the General Election.

I'll still vote for Newt before Mittens.
 

Forum List

Back
Top