Has Romney seriously agreed to the Apprentice Debate?

Oh for the love of….

I didn’t realize Tommy was the one who posted this.  I should have paid more attention when I posted my comment…because, as usual, Tommy is wrong.

According to this http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/284801/whos-attending-trump-debate-katrina-trinko (and NRO is usually correct), no one has accepted the Trump debate.

Damn it, I just knew they were going to bring their real candidate out of the dark and bring him into the limelight after all the clowns fell apart. Gingrich wants the nomination like I want to have a set of crazy eyes like Bachmann. Come on you teahaddists, for Pete’s sake, Huntsman believes in science, evolution and climate change. Pick the cheating slimeball, PLEASE!

Newt Gingrich (R – Freddie Mac) to “debate” Jon Huntsman (R – Piers Morgan). 

Newt does love the sound of his own voice.

I am a liberal and a HUGE fan of Huntsman in these primaries. I wanna see Huntsman ridicule the fat  man live on TV. I want lines like “Mr Gingrich is NOT fit to be president of the USA. He is the only Speaker Of The House to be kicked out of congress in disgrace.”  

Huntsman must really want Gingrich as the nominee.  Smart move … give Gingrich an hour to use the guy the entire conservative base universally hates as a punching bag.  Brilliant.

and the fact that a liberal is a huge fan of Huntsman might give you some insight as to why the GOP is not real fond of him.

This is actually a smart move on Gingrich’s part.  Huntsman is the Romney alternative.  Having a debate in NH, where Romney is ahead (but can’t get past 25-30%), if Gingrich can split his voting base and push more Romney people to Huntsman, the better for Gingrich.

I’m an independent, who voted for Obama (even though I didn’t think he was quite ready for prime time) because John McCain picked the pit bull with lipstick as his running mate.  I don’t think we would have been better off with them but at this point Obama is totally ineffective in working with congress. Too much hatred, gridlock, etc. and now Obama is nothing more than the Washington politician he use to rail against.  I think Huntsman is the best qualified candidate to be President and I think we would see honest, civil, elevated discussions of issues if he were to be the GOP nominee.  (I personally don’t have problems with his conservative positions.)  In the meantime, I am happy to watch this bright gracious guy expose Newt for the bloviating phony he is– a pseudo-intellectual arrogant hypocrite who is hateful and “mean as a snake”.  We don’t need this overt glutton who does not know the meaning of humility.  Catholic, my ass.

Don’t know what universe you live in with this………..

Spot on!!  Honestly…. I have been thinking the same thing as well. I totally agree with u on the ineffectiveness of Obama to get Congress to do anything. While some people might argue about the real reasons behind the gridlock and hatred, (some might say racism or whatever other reasons but i personally  think it was just a desperate move of a dying Republican party to revive their base after the Bush dark years) It is not doing the country any good. The country has become very polarized and that’s what republicans wanted.  As much as i hate Huntsman’s conservative views I believe he would make a far better alternative then The Flip Flopper or The Fat Man… plus… like you said it would be a honest, civil and elevated discussion on the issues. 

Well, Newt was leading the GOP.  Huge mistake by Newt.

seriously, this is a stupid move my Gingrich.  Huntsman is going to show everyone what class is…

GOOD.  The faster he goes the better…….

that sucks..  please tell me the national review is wrong.

No way…. we want him to get the GOP nomination.  If Huntsman get’s it somehow Obama will be in big trouble.

Your GOP is going to have to decide whether they truly want to beat Obama,and move the country forward, or do they just want a candidate who is totally polarizing and hateful.  That kind of guy is NOT going to win in a general election.  Maybe the reason liberals are looking at and liking Jon Huntsman is because he gives his points of view respectfully and reasonably.  Maybe he leads by setting an example, rather than spouting negatives and rhetoric for the MSM to pick up on.  Look at his record critically.  READ.  He is a true conservative (whatever that actually means).  No one is 100% pure anything.  The GOP should be thrilled that Huntsman attracts liberals and independents.  Maybe these people will learn why and what a conservative is and might find they agree more than they think.

“The GOP should be thrilled that Huntsman attracts liberals and independents.”

You’re 100% right, but instead, earning the respect of liberals and independents makes them toxic.

What a sad farce the GOP has become.

This will be the biggest mistake Newt has ever made.

I don’t want to agree with you, but it’s getting more and more difficult not to.

I will say this, the LOUDEST Republicans aren’t clamoring for Huntsman… yet. I’ve talked to many who know the facts, who are choosing country over party, who are big Huntsman fans. I just hope it catches on by the NH primary…

Yep. This is a win for Huntsman. It brings him up to the top tier for at least a few days in the news cycle. This could only be bad for Newt.

Huntsman’s poll numbers should skyrocket to 2% (plus or minus 3%.)

How could you even have the nerve to admit you voted for Obama?  Saying you’re now for Huntsman is not doing him any favors.

I assume Gringrich will be arguing for the Douglas side.

you mean the Birther Debate

Very Smart move by Newt, he knows Huntsman is the most likely to beat Obama and wants to bring the GOP to a higher level. The ticket should be Huntsman/Gingrich. Jon can deal with the world and Newt as president of the Senate can deal with congress to get things passed, surely he knows where all the bodies are :) I predict the “debate” will be the most substantial of all, I only hope people will pay attention and stop jumping from one bandwagon to the next.
Huntsman is the single most qualified man for the job since Reagan ran for re-election. Any Republican not for J.H. hasn’t read his bio at jon2012.com

I will be watching as I sometimes need help falling asleep, this is sure to put me out in about 5 minutes. 

I couldn’t agree with you more.. Huntsman will have the independent and what’s left of the normal Republicans and Gingrich will bring all of the others that believe the earth is flat…This will be a nightmare for Obama, sad to say.

I love how you libs love Huntsman.

Let’s see what positions he holds versus the liberal philosophy of Obama whom you support, shall we?

Huntsman’s positions:

Repeal Frank-Dodd
Repeal Obamacare
Lower tax rates
Reign in the EPA
Increase domestic oil exploration and production

Yeah, aren’t those the positions you Obamabots have been advocating?

By all means, you hypocrites, keep supporting Huntsman- the man who is against everything you are for.

LOL

I love how you libs love Huntsman.Let’s see what positions he holds versus the liberal philosophy of Obama whom you support, shall we?

Huntsman’s positions:

Repeal Frank-Dodd

Repeal Obamacare

Lower tax rates

Reign in the EPA

Increase domestic oil exploration and production

Yeah, aren’t those the positions you Obamabots have been advocating?

By all means, you hypocrites, keep supporting Huntsman- the man who is against everything you are for.

LOL

I totally agree.  The people who even might consider voting for Huntsman were never going to vote for Gingrich in the first place.  If he can siphon off even a bit of Romney’s centropublican support while getting more airtime, this is a boon for Gingrich, too.

Still, not without risk for Gingrich.  Huntsman must know he is basically a spoiler at this point.  He will no doubt be trying to get under Newt’s skin (scales?) and rattle him.  If Newt can resist, and appear calm and Presidential, and Huntsman can get airtime and win over moderates who will vote for him once he is on the third party Bloomberg/Huntsman ticket, its win/win.

Most of the commentors here have got this all wrong!  This is a very smart move by Gingrich (Huntsman will benefit also).  What are the benefits?
1.  Show that he is not afraid to debate anyone.  No hiding behind a crowd.
2.  Makes Romney, by comparison, look like he is afraid to go one-on-one with Gingrich.
3.  Provides more free PR – and an opportunity to really showcase his smarts and in-depth knowledge of the issues.  Whether or not you like him – Gingrich is usually the smartest guy in the room – although Huntsman is also a very very smart guy.  (Probably the 2 smartest candidates the GOP has).
4.  Another opportunity to soften his image.  My guess is that the debate will be quite collegial, not the usual bluster.  Both candidates will benefit from enough time to discuss their proposals to “heal America” with real substance – rather than the usual sound-bites and talking points you have to get in with only one or two minutes to make your point on any subject.
5.  Once people see how much more substantive these types of debates are – they will become more popular – and it will be harder for Obama to refuse to participate come the General Election.

The only losers here are Romney – and Obama (for the general election).

Gingrich will argue for the Newt’s side. And he will win.

Agree. I voted for Obama and have also found him to be too ineffective and not enough of a fighter.
My cynical side sees this as a sign of the width and depth of the corruption in DC and no president is going to root it out without a lot of help and support from the general public. That said, I respect honesty and good reasoning regardless of which side of the aisle it comes from , and Huntsman strikes me as both. I think he hasn’t done well in the debates because he hasn’t been given time. IN a one on one I expect much more and am looking forward to this one. 

The GOP didn’t offer much of an alternative, and by the looks of things so far, they are still not interested in doing that. 

Same way I have the nerve to admit I voted for Bush, TWICE.  Why not try opening your partisan brain a bit to realize that because people like me voted for Obama (as opposed to that pathetic alternative) JON HUNTSMAN got the chance to become Ambassador to China, which is one of many things that makes him so qualified to be President.  Every time I pick up a piece of clothing these days, it says Made in China.  I think we need someone who knows how the Chinese work and has the experience to deal with them, unlike the other clowns up for the GOP nomination. 

Why are you so narrow-minded and mean-spirited?  Maybe those you label the  ”libs” have learned something or are at least questioning their positions.  Is that a bad thing?  If you want hypocrisy, just look at Gingrich.  Stop trying to put everyone in a pigeon hole with labels.  We are all Americans, remember, with different opinions which are subject to change and should be–it’s called maturation.  No candidate fits everyone in every way so get over it.  You should think about leading by example and constructive debate not by insult and cynicism. Like Huntsman.

Agreed, the commentators have this wrong.  Newt will do well and Huntsman’s image is raised.  He scores a few upticks in the NH polls–where do you think those votes come from?  The Romney camp.  If Newt can split the moderate GOP vote, he could possibly take NH.  That would essentially be a death blow to Romney who is banking everything on winning NH.  This is actually a brilliant move by Gingrich.

This is a great opportunity for Newt to practice for debating Obama.
Huntsman is a white facsimile of the emperor of oralation, Obama

Rance, you are right–This is a brilliant move for Gingrich, I had exactly your thoughts as I read the claim that this was a gamble for him.  It proves once again that the MSM just doesn’t get it.

This really is a great move by both of them. Gingrich knows that if he helps Huntsman, he mainly just hurts Romney (a lot); and that means helping himself. Additionally, it will help Huntsman obviously, so it is a great move for him also.

Plus, it increases the cordial relationship between the two, and opens up the possible Gingrich/Huntsman ticket. (Gingrich reigns in the establishment and tea party Republicans, while Huntsman gets the moderate Republicans, independents, and moderate Democrats. The libertarians will mostly also follow begrudgingly to get Obama out.) With both of their smarts, that could be a truly winning ticket.

Yes, Dan, you are absolutely right. Anybody who watched the Gingrich/Cain debate knows that both benefited from it. However, I would amend one comment. It’s not that Newt is the smartest, heck, they are ALL smart. It’s that he is the most knowledgable. He’s the ultimate policy wonk: he knows everything about everything and never falters on any question. Ultimately, Herman Cain was not done in by the bimbos, it was clear lack of knowledge on important issues that lost him support.  Huntsman, too, is knowledgable.  This will be a good debate.

I strongly disagree that Gingrich has “nothing to gain” in this.  I believe that this could prove to be a brilliant move. To compete in New Hampshire (having already taken much of the support of fellow conservatives) Gingrich will require a third party to draw some of the liberal/centrist vote from Romney. If Huntsman’s numbers rise, it will not be at the expense of Gingrich.

SHHH! If they want to think Huntsman is more friendly to their ideology, let them. Huntsman is probably the best candidate to put against Obama for just that reason.

Entirely true. It’s a brilliant strategic move on Gingrich’s part. The only possible downside could be strengthening Huntsman enough to become a contender. Truth be told, I would much rather see Huntsman get the nomination. He has experience, integrity and he is conservative on the issues that matter, but moderate enough on social issues to appeal to some who may otherwise vote for Obama. I would love to see him become a real contender in this race. It would be particularly nice to see him draw support from Romney, who lacks in every one of Huntsman’s strengths.

why Gringrich need to agreed to have a debate with Huntman, since Huntman only looking for a spotlight to elevate his boring campaign. the man have no substaNTIVE.

Speaking as a Libertarian, I would rather see Huntsman than Paul get the nomination. Huntsman has the core ideals of a Libertarian, but will appeal to non-Libertarians far more than Paul could hope to. Don’t get me wrong, I am 100% with Paul on the issues. I just don’t see him overcoming the (completely false) image of the crochety old loon. 

It’s not that we love Huntsman’s positions. It’s that we love his integrity, how he treats others with respects and refuses to say the outragious and callous lies and remarks like the others do about the President.  That is a rare breed in todays Republican party which is sad.

So Huntsman’s campaign bores YOU steve.  Who cares about YOU and what entertains YOU.  What about the country for christ’s sake.  Huntsman is 100X’s the statesman Newt could ever hope to be.  Newt was practically run out of Washington in the 90′s by his own party.  That fat SOB lobbied for a any number of positions that run counter to true conservative core values so long as the $$ was right and the check didn’t bounce.  Your attitude is everything that is wrong with politics today and this nation at large.  Do the country a favor and stay the heck away from the polls come election day. 

What a great idea to hold a Gingrich/Huntsman debate and what a stupid idea to have Trump moderate the next Republican debate. Trump has zero credibility and intelligence to be an objective moderator. Asides from NewsMax, who were the birdbrains responsible for making the Republican candidates even more irrelevant than they are.I just had a realization. At the end of this marathon clown show, the only people left standing may be Jon Huntsman and Ron Paul. Seriously, the Republican Tea Party will not let Romney run, Gingirch’s fantastic baggage will certainly provide entertainment for the next few weeks, but, let’s face it, this clever rightwing ‘intellectual’ has much, too much baggage, and his shooting from the hip doen’t help either. And the wonderful Ron Paul who leftwingers adore if only for his great anti-war and pro-pot stances will not make it because he doesn’t believe in any government – social Darwinism at its worst – bye-bye Social Security, Medicaire and your local Fire Dept. Go Huntsman go…!

No Romney is going to get his celestial alter ego to go to the debates the one he calls flip- so flop can get his brand new planet and stake a claim in Missouri waiting for the second coming of Brigham Young and Joe Smith and the rest of the Mountain Meadows folk for a rendezvous !

C’mon.  In the interest of honesty, you gotta admit it’s not COMPLETELY false.

What about Paul’s position on 9/11?  He’s roughly on a par with Rev. Wright, fer chrissakes.

Huntsman’s a likeable, reasonable, competent guy.
Gingrich is a bullying a-hole.

Sadly, BOTH traits are what I think are needed in the WH.

Gingrich/Huntsman or Huntsman/Gingrich?

Too bad Mitch Daniels isn’t in the race.

This is the first correct thing you’ve posted so far. (Keep up the good work. Try for a second!)

I’ve got no illusions about Huntsman. He’s nearly as a far to the right as the others, but the reasons that independents like myself and some Democrats are drawn to him is that he has a number of positive character traits that the others don’t. He:

Doesn’t demonize Obama

Has been respectful of many of Obama’s achievements

Believes in evolution and is quite forthcoming about that

Hasn’t been taken in by the climate change denialists

Was a reasonably well regarded governor

Is hated by the far right fringe

So while most of Obama’s supporters aren’t thrilled with him, if he was the nominee we’d at least feel like the republic wasn’t going to get driven off a cliff if he won.

And Gingrich never fails to let you know that he knows EVERYTHING!

The commenters are much more insightful than the author – this is a smart move for Gingrich to elevate Huntsman on Romney’s left. It’s likely to follow the positive love fest style of the Gingrich-Cain debate with perhaps a pointed disagreement on Afghanistan. But rather than creating an unnecessary risk for Gingrich, Huntsman’s past debate performances actually suggest he will make Newt seem more likeable and knowledgeable by comparison. Huntsman’s debate highlights to date have included awkward jokes and childish attacks (a la “I believe in evolution”), uninspiring answers on his supposed go-to subject of China, and answering foreign policy questions with a stump speech on how New Hampshire citizens are hurting in this economy. He comes across as over-scripted and undisciplined at the same time, the worst traits of Romney and Gingrich in one.  The long form debate may play to Huntsman’s knowledge, but I bet the temptation for him will be to pander to New Hampshire issues and trot out his talking points. 

Sounds like fun to me.

huntsman would be the most dangerous and i personally feel that is why Obama snatched him up so fast as ambassador..
huntsman may not get all conservatives..but he could get a hell of a lot of indies..

This is a smart move for both candidates. The advantages to Huntsman are obvious as he gets greater exposure to a nationwide audience and is guaranteed attention to for a few news cycles. Gingrich, meanwhile, may also benefit because a strong showing by Huntsman in this debate will not, in all likelihood, turn many Tea-Party and heavily conservative types towards Huntsman, but will attract Republican moderates and pragmatists, namely Romney’s base. This would weaken Romney most in New Hampshire, where Huntsman is running strongest, thus helping Gingrich on the overall path to the nomination. Furthermore, should Huntsman perform badly, then a nationwide audience gets to see Gingrich win a debate big, which certainly doesn’t hurt him. The only bad outcome for Gingrich is one in which he screws up massively at the debate, a low possibility.

More like on par with commonly-known military intelligence. But sure, make up what you want.

Question to you and other Ron Paul supporters, will you vote for whomever is the republican nominee, or will you sit out the election in protest which unfortunately may result in an Obama reelection, that’s what truly worries me!!!

it’s not “love”, it is respect

Hey logic how far back does your memory go?  Did you forget Jim Wright the Democratic Speaker from Texas who resigned amid accusations of  ethics violations in 1989.

Each time the GOP presents a center right candidate the disaffected democrates and independents choose the true liberal. Why vote for the Liberal-Lite when you can have the real deal?  Liberal-Lites  such as both Bushes didn’t last long or were barely elected to office. Others like McCain etc. were passed over, again for the real Liberal. Landslide victories came with the real deal, truly principled conservatives who were not afraid to campaign and lead based on those principles.

I can only speak for this wacky Ron Paul Supporter when I say Huntsman
is a tolerable option. If it came down to Huntsman vs Obama, I vote Huntsman. Gingrich or Romney, I vote 3rd party. 

Ron Paul believes in government! As defined by the constitution. Ron Paul is the only candidate with a plan to ensure Social Security and Medicare have funds for those dependent on them by redirecting moneys save from reeling in our overseas military expansion to these commitments. He does propose letting those under 25 “opt out” which I suppose if 100.00% of young people opt out for the next 80 years (highly unlikely) in 80 years+-, the last checks would be written.
Ron Paul fully supports our locally controlled and run Fire Departments. He opposes all attempts to nationalize local functions like fire & police. He does subscribe to the radical notion that running a national “Fire Dept.” from Washington would reduce quality of service and increase costs.

Newt Gingrich is the
shooting-star-of-the-month Republican candidate for president. He’s proclaimed
himself the front runner based on the polls; and it must be true because all
the other Republican candidates have begun criticizing him. But can the chubby,
twice divorced, former Speaker of the House with an attitude and a record in
politics longer than Moses’ trek in the desert win the Republican nomination
and the 2012 election? The answer to both questions is yes, and here’s why.  http://ewross.com/can_newt_gingrich_win_the_nomination_and_the_election.htm

Huge mistake by Newt!!

I you are so right!  I mean, Republicans should just nominate a far right conservative.  Ask President Goldwater.

Oh please.  Ron Paul is the only Republican who gets it on 9/11.   

They didn’t just attack us for no reason.  But most Republicans act like you’re committing treason if you acknowledge that the other side might actually have an opinion too.

If you think terrorists attacked us because “they hate our freedom” you are an idiot.  

This liberal doesn’t support Huntsman.  

I just think it’s hilarious that your party won’t support him because he actually believes in science …and can talk like an educated person.

The knee-jerk anti-intellectualism of your party is crushing the most electable (and probably the most conservative) candidate you’ve got.

You’ve basically summed it up for this liberal.

Huntsman is pretty darn conservative…and I wouldn’t vote for him over Obama.

But if I had to pick between Huntsman and a flat-earth Republican, it would be an easy choice.

At least Huntsman comes at his positions from a thoughtful place…not just knee-jerk ideology. What a concept! A Republican who isn’t afraid to be intellectual?

Huntsman needs to run as an indy.   The GOP doesn’t do sane these days.

  I agree.  We will loose this race if we don’t go with Huntsman.  Ironic that Huntsman is more conservative than any of the other 7.