About that Gingrich-Huntsman "debate" yesterday

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Politico:

The meeting of two presidential candidates here today was billed as a successor to the Lincoln Douglas debates, but turned out to be a festival of self-congratulation intended less to tease out differences between Newt Gingrich and Jon Huntsman than simply signal their status as serious men.

Well, Huntsman is a serious man, I suppose, but Gingrich is still an egomaniac.

Now, sure, a Gingrich-Huntsman debate (or, rather, discussion, as there wasn't much disagreement) is more substantial than, say, a Perry-Cain debate (where there would be disagreement about the number of Supreme Court justices and about what continent Libya is on), and if only by the standards of their own anti-intellectual party these two did have a fairly substantive discussion about foreign policy and national security -- whatever you may think of their specific policy prescriptions.

But let's not make too much of this. It wasn't Lincoln-Douglas. It was just a forum for Gingrich to sell himself as the "serious" candidate of 2012, particularly without Romney there, as the Republican candidate most able to stand up to Obama (and put him in his place -- and, yes, this racist fantasy of putting the uppity Negro in his place is driving a lot of Republicans, and Newt is more than willing to blow the dog whistle, appealing to that racism), and for Huntsman to pre-sell himself as a "serious" candidate in 2016 should the GOP not take the White House next year and turn to a more moderate option four years later.

It was all just a big show, in other words, and Newt did well enough to reinforce his standing as clear GOP frontrunner.

**********

For an excellent description of the "debate," here's The Guardian's Richard Adams:

If the famous Lincoln-Douglas debates had been as insipid and smug as yesterday's self-styled copy – a debate between Newt Gingrich and Jon Huntsman – slavery would probably still be legal in America.

In reality the long-winded discussion in New Hampshire between the two 2012 Republican presidential hopefuls was more like a warm bath than a hot-tempered dialogue.

In 1858 Abraham Lincoln and Stephen Douglas clashed over slavery, equality and what Lincoln called "the eternal struggle" over right and wrong – "The two principles that have stood face to face from the beginning of time," in Lincoln's words.

By 2011, Gingrich and Huntsman politely mused alongside each other's thoughts, largely agreeing and when they didn't agree they merely agreed not to disagree. How agreeable.

The high point of the night came when Huntsman, in the middle of a windy reply, spotted a family member in the audience falling asleep. "I see my daughter nodding off, so let's move on," he said.

I was following it on Twitter, and then watched some clips, and found it an utter bore. Good thing I didn't waste more time on it.

(photo)