Newt Gingrich Won the Republican Debate

Newt Gingrich won the debate hands down.

No one else was even close.

He was honest and pragmatic on immigration, recognizing the tough reality that a percentage of the eleven million illegal immigrants have been living and contributing to American society for decades. He admitted that some people would have to go, but that he would implement a policy that was fair and rational.

His answer on Iranian sanctions conveyed a depth of understanding about national security policy that no other candidate has. He proposed imposing sanctions on Iran’s gasoline imports. Few policymakers are aware of the fact that Iran imports a huge percentage of gasoline because of that country’s limited refining capacity.

Newt’s answer on the Patriot Act was also nuanced and thoughtful.

After this debate performance, Newt could pose a serious challenge to frontrunner Romney. That said, aside from Gingrich’s wonkish brilliance, his personal life has been a bit tumultuous and could likely turnoff more socially conservative Republican voters.

About Sean Patrick Hazlett

Finance executive, engineer, former military officer, and science fiction and horror writer. Editor of the Weird World War III anthology.
This entry was posted in Central Asia, China, Clean Energy, Clean Tech, Crime, Defense, Energy Security, Finance and Economics, International Security, Leadership, Media, Middle East, Nuclear Power, Nuclear proliferation, Policy, Politics, War and tagged , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

22 Responses to Newt Gingrich Won the Republican Debate

  1. Scott Erb says:

    I don’t think Gingrich is electable in a general election. Opposition research by the Obama team would be intensive and unyielding. I also think he’s peaking too early. Romney remains the best bet — both in terms of his likelihood of winning, and in giving the Republicans a good shot at the White House.

  2. Ed says:

    He spoke at my church months ago. He seems to have a depth of knowledge that is rare in politics.

  3. This is a bad outcome if you are all correct, and I think you are. Newt is an intelectual debate machine. Unfortunatly he is likely politically damaged on a number of fronts to the point of not being electable. The worst outcome I can imagine is him taking Obama apart in a debate, and loosing in the general. An Obama second term would make the first look like a vacation.

    • I think the opposition will likely try to paint him as mean and heartless in his personal life, and unfortunately they will have plenty of ammo. That said, if he survives the Republican primary with all this baggage (after all, many Republicans are socially conservative), he might have a shot. I worry that Romney will get hammered Kerry style on flip-flopping. At a time like this, Americans want and need a decisive leader. Obama certainly isn’t one and Romney hasn’t convinced me yet that he is either.

      To make a long story short, I have very mixed feelings about Gingrich. That said, I will likely vote for the candidate who has the best chance of beating Obama. At this point, you are right that that man is still Romney.

      • I think we agree on all counts. Romney would be planning the convention by now was it not for his ever changing positions and his designer answers to explain those away. I am guessing that some of those who decided not to enter the race are having second thoughts now the GOP nomination seems ever more valuable. Being undecided is something I am not accustomed to, but all of the alternatives leave me with serious concerns.

  4. Vern R. Kaine says:

    I was impressed with Newt’s performance as well. I think he’s laying good groundwork for the assault re: his personal life that’s surely to come, at least as far as the socially conservative are concerned. He’s phrasing it in the context that he reconnected to God and sought forgiveness from Him. If hardcore Christians don’t allow him a second chance on that they’re being hypocritical in my opinion.

    A general election, however, will be another story I think.

  5. pino says:

    Newt Gingrich won the debate hands down.

    No one else was even close.

    This has been the case for some time now.

    Gingrich has won me over; I have been a Romney supporter for 6 years now, but Newt is just better. That we would select a leader in qualities other than ability to lead seems silly.

    • This is the first full debate I had a chance to watch, and I was clearly impressed by Newt’s abilities. Newt is direct, balanced, and rational. Romney is balanced and rational, but indirect and too “safe” in his answers. Sometimes one just needs to see some conviction for a change.

  6. William says:

    IF you are a christian and you are voting for any of these candidates, you are nothing but a hypocrite. I am in no way saying you should vote for a democrat. But the fact that you continue to push for these hypocrites in office simply because of the (R) in front of their name and the fact that they throw around God every once in a while and you fall for it over and over again. While the (R)’s have some great ideas and platforms, what they do most of the time is the exact opposite. most will give the excuse “i’m voting for the lesser of two evils” which I believe a christian should never ever ever do. If there’s evil, then there is evil PERIOD. Why would you vote for evil just because they are less ‘evil’ then somebody else in your eyes? Both R’s and D”s are all crooked and disgusting. As a christian, you should never ever compromise your religious beliefs, but when you constantly flock to anyone with an (R) in front of their name simply because they throw around their ‘religion’ is nothing but you compromising on your beliefs. They’re Christianity should show in their actions, not the fact that they have to tell you over and over again how ‘godly’ they are. They should only have to tell you once and let their actions do the rest. R’s are no better then D’s. They just claim they are. Republican’s are not the party of GOD, which so many of you believe. God would not act they way they do, he would be disgusted with most of what they do. IF you can’t find a candidate you fully support and don’t have to compromise your religious beliefs for, then you shouldn’t be voting. Voting for the lesser of two evils is nothing but a compromise with satan, and satan wins every time you do that.

    • Vern R. Kaine says:

      Are you referring to anyone specific here, William, or just Christians in general, or the people on this blog in general?

      I can’t speak for everyone, but I think a large factor of what people are looking for here from either side in this election is someone who can stick to their convictions, Christian, Mormon, Jewish, or otherwise. If you’re speaking to the phoniness of politicians, I can certainly agree there.

    • Ed says:

      The only time I have seen Newt speak was at our Church. I was very impressed with his knowledge of politics, history, and Christian moral values. There was another guest speaker that talked on the Bibles role in politics and government and I CAN NOT think of his name, or the name of his book. When I find it, I’ll try and post it here. I do not know Newt personally ( of course), and I really do not follow politics that closely, but I know that Paster would have not have let anyone who was bubbling over with evil speak at Cornerstone.
      @Sean I am really enjoying this Blog. I found it by chance while looking for current jobs/unemployment numbers. I was debating my wifes Aunt (huge Obama supporter) after she started ranting on some of my FB posts. Long story short she has “thrown in the towl” twice, but still comments on my posts and pictures. Guess that’s just the way it goes sometimes…. And as my wife keeps reminding me, she’s my Aunt too..

      • Ed,

        I can’t vouch for Newt’s moral values, but I do agree with you that his knowledge of politics, history, and policy are impressive.

        “@Sean I am really enjoying this Blog. I found it by chance while looking for current jobs/unemployment numbers.”

        Thank you, Ed. I appreciate it.

    • William, to be honest, I don’t care what their religion is so long as they support private property, small government, low taxes, the free market, and a strong defense.

  7. William says:

    let’s take newt for example. how many wives has he cheated on, then married the one he was cheating with? This guy was fined 300k by his own party and thrown out as speaker of the house for ethics violations. And because he has an (R) next to his name, the church jumps at the chance to endorse him. Do you honestly think because he spoke at a church, that he is this Godly man? He was speaking at the church for one reason and one reason only, to get your support and/or your vote. all these politicians are total phony’s. They are out there for no-one but themselves, and use God as a ploy to suck in the voters.

    • “They are out there for no-one but themselves, and use God as a ploy to suck in the voters.”

      I don’t disagree with you, William. Many politicians have few morals. The ones who do, tend not to get elected, because they don’t tell people what people want to hear.

  8. No doubt at all that Mr. Gingrich has an excellent , deep, and nuanced grasp of the issues and a suitcase full of creative ideas which stand a chance of breaking up long standing political and foreign policy log jams. As a redeemed sinner myself, I take the risk that he has repented and reformed. Two questions: Does he manage well? Is he a capable CEO? I guess we need a Gingrich mind and a Romney skill set.

  9. Pingback: Newt Gingrich Won the Republican Debate | Reflections of a Rational Republican | enotrapfodene

  10. Pingback: Why I Will Not Vote for Newt Gingrich | Reflections of a Rational Republican

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.