Newt will skip debates if audience can't participate. For real.

[Insula Dei]

uh, Politico, didn't Romney start crying that he didn't want any more debates after he lost a grand total of ONE debate? Remember the Lincoln-Douglas debates did actually feature people debating one another rather than staying at home for fear of losing.

[Lief 🗽]

What's the point of even having an audience and renting out these big convention halls if you're going to force them to pretend to not exist? Either let the audience react naturally or hold the debates in an empty room.

[Likely Voter]

So if he wins, will he refuse to debate Obama without crowd reaction (which is traditional for the Presidential debates)?

[Frozen Sky Ever Why]

Gingrich is a despicable troll. Obama has got to be looking forward to destroying this disgrace.

[Eraserhead]

These freakshows are totally lame without crowd interaction, let's be honest. I support the Speaker and his latest media jihad.

[Marokai Backbeat]

Pandering to an audience is exactly what is wrong with American politics, and I can't stand hearing people cheer as if at a rally when watching these debates. Sure, from the perspective of "I want Newt to be the nominee so he gets crushed and these debates are much more entertaining with applause and hollering" I want to see the audience able to participate. But I do not want these debates to be turned into reality television, and to see a candidate basically openly admit his entire debate strategy is to disingenuously pander to an audience to cut off any actual discussion against his opponents, is a testament to how low things have gotten.

That said, Lief is right about one thing. If you're going to tell an audience to shut up and not react, don't even invite them. At least be consistent about what you want from these debates.

[Torie]

Pandering to an audience is exactly what is wrong with American politics, and I can't stand hearing people cheer as if at a rally when watching these debates. Sure, from the perspective of "I want Newt to be the nominee so he gets crushed and these debates are much more entertaining with applause and hollering" I want to see the audience able to participate. But I do not want these debates to be turned into reality television, and to see a candidate basically openly admit his entire debate strategy is to disingenuously pander to an audience to cut off any actual discussion against his opponents, is a testament to how low things have gotten.

That said, Lief is right about one thing. If you're going to tell an audience to shut up and not react, don't even invite them. At least be consistent about what you want from these debates.

That is precisely what the debate commission tells the audience in the general election Presidential debates. Think of the audience sort of like the one that sits in the gallery in Congress. You make any noise, and the guards haul you off.

So Newtie, think of having a muzzled audience as practice for you in your coming debates with Obama.  

[Link]

Good. Last night's debate was awful and boring, mostly due to the lack of audience participation. Most of the great moments in debate history involve audience reactions. Gingrich is doing the right thing here.

Says the Democrat who wants Gingrich to win so that Obama coasts to a larger mandate than he had in 2009.

Most of these debates with audience participation have descended into sideshows that turn off the general electorate. There is nothing wrong with serious debates about the serious issues facing the nation. This is not about running for a right-wing talk radio host position, this is about running for President of the United States of America. These sideshow debates are reflecting poorly upon the democratic process in place to nominate presidential candidates. In fact, they're part of the reason why the GOP field is considered such a joke by many quarters. This did not happen when Obama and Clinton debated. When did the GOP start being out-classed by the Democratic Party? The GOP is supposed to be about professionalism.

I never thought I would say this but I agree with Politico... mostly.  The part about the GOP being about professionalism is a bit weird.  I know plenty of people in the GOP in the South and they are far from professional.

Anyway I don't care if you are a Democrat or Republican.  It's a selection process for president of the United States.  Just come on stage and answer the questions.  I've turned off so many of the debates half way through because of the stupid cheering and boos.  If I wanted to see this I would watch Amateur Night at the Apollo.

Some of these debate audiences have an excuse.  They aren't exactly the crème de la crème of society.  What really pisses me off is the State of the Union speeches.  What's with all the constant clapping?  It was terrible under Bush and even though Obama is a better speaker he's not belting out "Blood, Sweat, and Tears" like Winston Churchill.  Just sit down, listen, and politely clap at the end.

WTF America?!  If you want a real show have prime ministers questions.  Have Obama come down to a joint session of Congress and answer questions unscripted.  Then you can have the carnival come out.