It was 90 minutes of Newt showing why he is the smartest guy on any stage, and I mean that as a compliment.
Newt was in command, and had a particularly good explanation of how to respond to Democratic scare tactics on social security. One of the best I’ve heard. When I get the transcript I’ll add it.
I think this did a lot of damage to Cain, tempered only by the fact that it was on C-SPAN not the networks, so relatively few people saw it. There was a very awkward moment when the moderator asked about defined-benefit plans, and Cain appeared not to know what those were, or at least hesitated and then passed the question off to Newt.
The forum started out with some sound problems, but after a while things went smoothly. They were very friendly to each other, so it was less a debate than a conversation.
Obama never would agree to this format with Newt, because Obama’s lack of depth would be exposed by Newt for all the world to see.
Cain did have the line of the night, asking Newt what he would want his first assignment to be as Vice President.
Anyway, here’s the Tweet of the Night:
Update: You be the judge:
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
I completely agree that Newt was hands down the best. The Defined Benefits question was particularly revealing. Wasn’t Cain head of HR some place?
I thought Newt was graceful and kindly interactive with Cain. This was by far the best and most informative “debate,” e.g. only real civilized discussion so far.
If anybody has the skill to make Barack Obama look stupid in a debate, it’s Newt Gingrich. I wonder if Obama would even have the courage to subject himself to that. I suppose he wouldn’t be able to avoid it completely. But Obama would have to insist on having friendly “moderators.”
I thought cain thought it was newts turn, this is an example of newt knowing the technical details and, IMO, cain knowing when to defer to someones knowledge.
I enjoyed this.
[…] won this debate. Not only is he smart and well-versed on the issues, he comes off as a statesman. Prof. Jacobson agrees that Newt came out on top.I posted the live stream video earlier, as soon as the full video is available I’ll update […]
Communicator vs. Lecturer
Lecturer won displaying knowledge but gave off know-it-all vibe. Did an about face on calling Ryan’s plan “Right Wing Social Engineering”.
Communicator won displaying humility and admitted learning curve in handing big media. Think he made a boo-boo with his idea of the decremental unemployment check. Contrasted against Newt’s forceful delivery, Cain came across as attractively soft spoken + persuasive.
Both uncommonly deferential to each other.
Southern manners on display.
Both got standing ovations.
Both love each other.
One know more than the other.
But both know more than enough to go against Mr. Telemprompter.
This will become a strange fusion of Cain and Newt going into 2012.
Romney and Romney effectively sidelined after tonight.
Typos:
“Romney and Perry effectively sidelined after tonight.”
Appended:
Cain had the last say/best sign-off with the VP line.
I think you were right the first time.
I thought they both did very well, Cain excelled at explaining a business point of view, Newt excelled at explaining a govt policy point of view.
But both views and perspectives were hand in hand of what works to move the country in the correct, economically expansive direction.
I loved Cain’s finishing line.
Newt has won every debate so far. But they both talked about “radical”, but necessary, ways to change government.
Both cheerful. Both respectful. Both espousing the right approach to government. I’d be proud to vote for either of them.
This is why there is such a warp based on your own perception…you saw Cain deferring to Newt as “not knowing”… I just saw it as him starting to answer and then realizing it was suppose to be Newt up on that and very graciously just handing it off.
Newt commanded the mintuia but can be name dropping and a the “lecturer” only much quicker witted than Obama’s version of lecturer…his uses snide ridicule instead of humor.
Cain speaks to the average person and breaks things down in that way. He’s got a frame of reference that he is coming from and so does Newt…both are very different. That is the idea…choices.
I think the big loser was the elite media: After experiencing this event, I think the GOP voters will be wanting more of this media-lite interaction.
The other loser was Romney, unless he is willing to do something similar or develop another innovative way to communicate with primary voters. I love the change-up, and will credit both Gingrich and Cain for the success of this debate.
An RT of adamsbaldwin’s states it far better than I can: @adamsbaldwin: RT @Afterseven: Tonights Winners: America, Gingrich, Cain, Conservatives, Tea Party, GOP … in that order #tcot
Obama, Axelrod and Plouffe are going to need some Ambien tonight IMO.
The biggest loser is the left, and I saw that as a recovering democrat, albeit a conservative (former)democrat.
What I liked it no vitriol, but well reasoned positions on policies, why they believe certain solutions will work, others will not and are destructive. It allowed time for expanding explanations, not some 30 sec. soundbite.
I was not a fan of Newt, but I came away very impressed.
I was not a supporter of Cain, and I came away impressed as well.
I’m in the ABO camp, and not sure who to vote for my first republican primary, but if its Cain or Newt, I’m feeling somewhat more comfortable with either, who I was not really supporting before seeing this set of debates.
Since you are a recovering Democrat, I hope you take no offense that I give you 2 UpTwinkles for your reply.
Ok.. I have to ask, what’s an uptwinkle..
Up Twinkle/Down Twinkle: In the PC-elitism of the OWS movement, it is not proper to interrupt a speech with cheers or boos. You wiggle your fingers in an up or down direction to signify agreement/disagreement with the orator. Like #AttackWatch, it has been co-opted by conservative citizen activists and given the mocking it so richly deserves.
They both won! The American people won! Here we saw that 2 guys who want to take over as President have common sense and are intelligent. They are not puppets on a (union) string, in turn playing puppeteer with citizens by dangling benefits (entitlements and unemployment) in exchange for a vote.
Obama loses, as all those polls showing any republican is a better choice than Obama really is true! Newt thinks a good leader delegates and Cain has the ideas and the charisma to make Americans comfortable with the change that is on the horizon. It’s too bad this format isn’t the norm- the giant debates are anything but.
Cain and Gingrich are a great example of what the country now lacks. Again, Obama loses here and that’s fine by me.
cain, occasionally, leans on some jingo-ism…newt knows his stuff inside-out, backward, forward, and upside-down. how refresing it was to hear two candidates speak, without teleprompters, for a couple of hours who did not feel the need to attack each other but, rather, complement each other. how about a gingrich/cain ticket (cain’s final humorous question notwithstanding)?
Good grief.
I don’t like Newt at all, but he, in a most gentlemanly way, handed Cain his hat.
Anyone that could not see that, will be very disappointed in the next few months.
Let me repeat, I DON’T LIKE NEWT. For me he ranks just a hair above Huntsman. Ugh.
Newt Wins? They both did extremely well. Their relative strengths showed. In that sense I’m with Chicklet. Win-Win.
I loved Herman’s blunt thumping of the media. Priceless.
I’d be very supportive of this ticket, either way up. These gentlemen would electrify the election.
Thanks Prof. for the heads-up. Best candidate debate I’ve seen in many years.
I was out and had to watch a replay, so chiming in late: this was excellent all around.
Like I msaid many times before, as in this evening’s debate, Newt has proven me right, that Newt is the only one ready for this fight, and can take on any comers, with ease.. although he has issues as well, nonetheless, he has the gravitas, the wherewithal, the knowledge, expertise, and experience, and the skill, to beat not only the other candidates hands down, but especially Obama in the General election, as the Nov. 2012 election will be a referedum on Obama, not the Republican candidate.
I have been tilted towards Cain for a long time — what a nice guy — but in the past few weeks, it has become apparent that he speaks the right words but his knowledge of many issues in very thin. Newt has pissed me off in the past for the silly things he has said that we are all too familiar with, but, man, this guy is knowledgeable. He’s just sometime too smart for his own good and falls prey to his own I’m-so-political-savvy PR.
With that said I think a Gingrich-Cain ticket would be best. Gingrich shows mastery of topics, whether you agree with him or not. Cain not so much — and makes way too many gaffes. Cain has demonstrated in his life that the minority victimhood ideology should be left on the garbage heapof history.
: )
Yes, it is coming down to what we need the most from the slection we have to choose from, as opposed to what we want and like the most.. In other words, the least of many evils has to suffice, unfortunately.. but with that being said, Newt is the only one, Obama and the Liberals, can’t tear apart, in the compoetency department, but in fact, with expose their incompetency and hypocrisy, even more..
Well seeing it was in Houston after the game we put Channel 11 News on because they were talking about “news on the debate, after the game….” all during LSU-Bama.
And top of the broadcast, the debate. And what was covered? An unsupported sexual harrassment case against Cain.
In the entire two minutes of the story we heard nothing on actual questions asked or answered, the issues of the campaign etc.
And local news wonders why it’s looked as garbage.
I hear you and I was leaning Newt until Quin Hillyer set me straight with a brief history lesson at http://spectator.org/archives/2011/11/03/newtonian-physics. On camera Newt should get an Oscar for his portrayal of a principled conservative; behind the scenes there’s not a single principle he won’t betray and not a single party member he won’t deride for whatever expediency-du-jour he becomes obsessed with. You can expect a Gingrich presidency to reprise Jimmy Carter’s role as the self-appointed smartest man in Washington.
You forgot to mention Newt getting $300K lobbying for Freddie Mac in 2006. The irony here is both Newt and Cain were lobbyists and “inside the Beltway” guys who are now playing ‘outsider’.
I just finished Tom Delay’s book. He does not give a flattering account of Newt. Great idea man but poor leader who did not delegate well. Gingrich also got pwned by Bill Clinton.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/28108013/How_Freddie_Mac_Splashed_Cash_to_Halt_Regulation
OK, we all know Newt is no Ronald Reagan, let alone Abraham Lincoln, but concidersing what we have to select from, the choice is not very appetizing, now is it..
It is coming down to the what we need the most, as opposed to what we want and like the most.. in other words, the least of many evils..
Look at what we have in the Republican Party Presidential field. It doesn’t look all that good, does it.. in fact, it stinks.. this is how bad politics and politicians have come down to.. a choice between crony capitalist RINO’s, inexperienced newcomers, and Newt.. which is why the Republican Party field of prospective presidential candidates, let alone in the Republican party as a whole, is in such bad shape.
But hey, it will the voters and time, that will tell who will be the next US President, and along with him, or her, the future of America..
First, let me say that Newt is very much a policy wonk, and non-unusually has some good ideas.
That said, Newt Gingrich has about the same chance of being elected President as does John Edwards, and for many of the same reason. The man’s personal history makes him toxic as a candidate for elected office.
Newt’s personal history is not great, but it’s not in the same league as Edwards’.
“Policy Wonk”.. translated means political technocrat.. and non-unusual is a double negative.. but I misspell quite frequently, so I will leave it at that..
But, I will take issue to same chance being electes as John Edwards, as everyone has the same chance in politics, and even prospect.. as until the actual votes has been cast at the ballot boxes, you are only speculating and porognosticating, with no evidence of predictionary skills like nostrodamus.. And the term electability, is used by people who want to destroy a candidate in the eye of the public, before a single viote has even nbeen cat,, that’s a political hit job, not a prediction.. but of course, I know you never said electability..
The way I saw it, (and it confirmed my suspicions), is that Cain has the hands on executive experience to drive the change we need and Newt has the intrinsic ability to carry it out.
Cain is a plain speaker who gets to the point while Newt is the college prof that explores the details of the beast.
I remain a Cain supporter because I think that he has a real grasp of the big picture and is a delegator. But what a combination they both could make…
So Professor what do you think of Newt now
I love Herman Cain, and I want to vote for him just to piss off the GOP elitists. And since no one can pronounce Thaddeus McCotter in this horse race, we have to consider the enormous ego that is Newt Gingrich.
I gotta say, Newt did himself all sorts of favors last night. And while he irks me on the trust level, the man does know his spin control. With a hostile media, that is a paramount skill to have.
Palin/Gingrich?
I think that both did well. Newt is certainly knowledgeable concerning govt policy. Cain comes across as an excellent CEO that analyzes a problem and figures out how to implement that policy. The defined benefit plan question was answered by Cain in a knowledgeable way later in the debate so it is not like he didn’t know anything about it-did not lose points with me.
I think it was a win-win for both Cain and Newt.
Both showed that they are serious men with serious ideas.
They didn’t attack one another. They built on each other’s ideas.
Despite the ‘dry’ subject matter, the debate was refreshing. Leading up to it, many thought that Newt would just trample Herman, and that the latter would be left looking like a deer in the headlights.
Not at all the case.
I didn’t see it as something that one ‘won’ or ‘lost’ in the least.
If anyone lost, it was the MSM and the no-idea Democrat party.
Pickled American, I agree and think that they could make a great team with respect to solving the nation’s problems.
Unfortunately, the mainstream media continues their hatchet job on Cain over practically nothing. Today’s, (Sunday), Meet the Press was repulsive and generally I give David Gregory good marks at being fair minded. That all went out the window this morning.
Back to the debate… I watch the video during wee hours and had only planned on watching a little bit of it. But I was quickly drawn in can say that it was the most refreshing political ninety minutes that I’ve “suffered” through in many years. Every American should watch this debate and I thank the prof for making it available.
EXACTLY ONE YEAR UNTIL BARAK HUSSEIN OBAMA IS VOTED OUT OF OFFICE. I am celebrating today!
This was not a debate merely an open-ended questioning, but that was fine. Newt owned Cain. Cain spent the night putting out catch phrases and platitudes and showed he doesn’t understand basic issues like “defined-benefits”. Cain is simply not ready to be President,we already have one on-the-job-learner in office, how did that go? Newt had far more hard facts and knowledge, and although I don’t think Newt is as Conservative as I would like, he is streets ahead of Cain . Of course the Cainiacs have fallen for the slick talker routine. Too bad, Cain will never win in the general election. His supporters think his sexual harrassment issues and foreign policy gaffes won’t matter, but they’ll matter to independents.