Posted on 11/06/2011 5:30:38 AM PST by SeekAndFind
The debate didn’t really use a Lincoln-Douglas model, and we ended up hearing from the moderators far too much, but both Herman Cain and Newt Gingrich delivered on their promise to give America a substantive debate on the biggest issues of this cycle. For 90 minutes, the two men discussed entitlement reform and associated issues, and even if the two only rarely disagreed, the format allowed for lengthy responses, nuanced proposals — and plenty of opportunity to hit Barack Obama’s performance as President.
Who won? It’s pretty clear that Gingrich had the better of this debate. He had better command of both the issues and the facts, offered plenty of corroborative studies and resources, and managed to make all of it accessible to the average voter. Cain did well at times, but twice had to ask Newt to handle questions first, which isn’t exactly a confidence builder. Cain seemed confused about the difference between defined-benefit and premium-support approaches on Medicare, getting confused between pension plans and health care later on the same point. While Cain discussed philosophical approaches to these issues confidently, Gingrich had actual data at the ready, and the difference was telling.
Mostly, I think the voters won this debate. We finally had 90 minutes of substantive discussion of the real issues in entitlement reform, offered in positive terms from two of the men who want to lead this country. With media “moderators” out of the way, we put aside slogans and soundbites and the sniping that broadcast outlets love to provoke to write stories on the fluff rather than the issues.
This could set a standard for debates in the future, but only if Republican voters demand to see the other candidates in similar forum models. I’d love to see Rick Santorum and Ron Paul debate foreign policy, for instance, or Mitt Romney and Rick Perry debate economic policy, for 90 minutes with no moderators and no media needling. That would produce real choices for voters, and strip away the gotcha strategies to find out which candidates have substance and which have really good tailors.
Let’s take a poll to see what readers think. Note that I left off “the American people” as one of the choices. I’d like to get a real sense of who people think won between the two candidates on stage.
CLICK ABOVE LINK TO VOTE ON THE POLL
The People Won !
The People of the United States of America won.
Someone should post portions of it on YOUTUBE.
Something as significant as this ought to be viewed by people who vote.
America.
Hands down. What a fantastic format.
Conservatives!
‘Setting the new standard.’
Sorry, old media, too bad, establishment. The people have taken the process to another level. I love it.
Cain/Gingrich will return liberty to America.
Love the way both the bloggers and the media HAVE to manufacture some controversy rather then just report the news.
The Media coverage on this is just absurd. Rather then do their job and report, they are all whine about their mythological “Cain Scandal” wasn't the topic.
Love the way the slander at Cain is a “scandal”. When can we expect the same junk Media to refer to the “fast and furious scandal” or “the Solyndra scandal”
http://www.c-span.org/Events/Cain-Gingrich-Debate-Lincoln-Douglas-Style/10737425199/
Great idea, I will start a thread
Both men were appealing. Newt did best, but that is to be expected given his years in government and his years out of government where he has served as social critic.
I don't think it was a debate per se' .. rather .. an opportunity to speak to me/us about what they think regarding certain issues.
Like I said ... as I dozed off, I felt calm and peace.
We are in good hands if either of these men is president, or involved in higher office.
It WILL be a Republican administration next year and we will have majority in House and Senate.
We need to be prepared for Holder to be arrested for obstruction of justice, which I fully anticipate a la The New Black Panthers.
I can hardly wait.
I enjoyed every minute. I like them both, but think Newt won. His knowledge is so vast and has clearly thought out some truly simple ways to keep us from going off the financial cliff. Cain is appealing for his business sense, but he had to punt to Newt a couple of times when he couldn’t formulate an answer.
Is it true that they couldn’t be on the ticket together?
EXCELLENT! I think I see the ticket to we being who we should be as Country again.
It’s also satisfying to realize that Obama couldn’t last 30 seconds in a debate like this without his teleprompter. (”Well, I, Uh, believe that,errrr, I uh, don’t uh, think that the, uhh, ....)
I’ve been on the anyone-but-mitt train since the beginning and would support that nominee. I’ve watched every debate including last nights. Cain just isn’t in the same league as Newt, hands down. I’d forfeit a paycheck for a Newt/Cain ticket. One or two terms as a VP would make Cain an unstoppable candidate, but he’s just not the guy for now when we have the caliber of Newt in the race.
It was not a debate and neither candidate considered it to be one.
And when Chris Wallace came on with his nasty little jabs, I swiched to a John Wayne movie. I’m almost totally off FOX News.
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.