Romney says no to Gingrich debate
Posted on 12/22/2011 7:58:04 AM PST by TBBT
BETHLEHEM, N.H. (AP) - Mitt Romney is telling The Associated Press that he won't agree to debate Newt Gingrich one on one.
The former Massachusetts governor says in an AP interview that he's not declining his rival's debate challenge because he's afraid to square off against Gingrich, as the former House speaker has implied. Rather, Romney says he doesn't want to define the contest as a "two-man race." And he says that debating Gingrich alone would be disrespectful to other candidates.
Romney also is continuing to distance himself from the Washington standoff over the payroll tax-cut extension. He suggests it's not the place of presidential candidates to weigh in. And he says that doing so would simply complicate the situation - not help it, making an implied reference to John McCain shutting down his campaign in fall 2008 during the Wall Street bailout crisis.
(Excerpt) Read more at cbsatlanta.com ...
Spongebob RINOmney would be pulverized by the Newster. (And no, I’m not a Newt fan....)
I cannot think of a more worthless blog of protoplasm than RINOmney.
Oops, belay that.
I forgot about our Cretin-in-Chief.
The discussions between Newt & Cain and Newt & Huntsman were a comprehensive display of ideas, common sense and philosophy; without ‘gotcha’ and sound bytes.
Cain and Huntsman both gained from those debates . Newt’s reputation for being ‘zany’, undisciplined and spiteful were laid to rest. He showed all the skills & knowledge of wide ranging issues, required of a POTUS.
Romney has no grace under pressure.
Wow! No cojones. Very weak excuse!
He will have to come out of his foxhole or you will have defeated him.
Oops, should have read the thread more closely. Great minds anyhow...
Is Romney afraid? No matter how he attempts to use the “unfair” excuse, that question will remain in the minds of MANY.
On another note, a UCLA Political Scientist says Newt Gingrich is Biggest Threat to Obama.
I’m not sure there is any difference between Romney and Obama at all.
Except Romney is more strongly in favor of gay marriage than Obama.
You’re not all that far from Iowa.
We could take up a collection for your travels and hotel.
The bail money is another matter...........LOL.
I’m not sure there is any difference between Romney and Obama at all.
Except Romney is more strongly in favor of gay marriage than Obama.
Newt should be sure to make it well-known that Romney has no cojones and drive home the question in people’s minds about whether someone like that can really be trusted to stand up to Obama.
bump!
This turd is afraid to debate Newt. How do you think he will do with Obama....wait is it even possible to have a “debate” with Obama since he has basically all the same positions?
Maybe they debate the fact that Obama defines the rich at $250k, while Mittens defines them at $200k.
I can’t vote for this guy....no matter what. I’ll vote for the congressional candidates, and hunker down for four more years of Zero.
And for the same reason I wouldn’t debate Stephen Hawking on quantum mechanics.
You read my mind.
Translation: He's declining Gingrich's debate challenge because he IS AFRAID to square off against Gingrich.
Agree completely. Haven’t heard this snake oil salesman say one thing - NOT ONE THING - that I agree with, nor find inspriring, uplifting, or in-line with my core conservative values and convictions. Nothing! Nada! Makes me sick to think this puke of a punk (with disgustingly greasy hair), could become the nominee. Ultimately, a sure win for BHO if Romney manages to fool enough people to become the repugnican’s nominee.
I’ll donate. lol!
His opportunistic lackies (Bachmann and Paul) wont be there to protect him.
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.