Fresh check: GOP debate in Iowa

Just weeks away from the Iowa caucuses, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich continues to see his popularity rising - in part, perhaps, due to his confident performances in Republican debates.
Some observers see that as good news for the White House.


"I think these debates are like presents under the Christmas tree for President Obama," said CBS chief White House correspondent Norah O'Donnell, in a political roundtable on Sunday's "Face the Nation." "They want more and more Americans to watch these debates where Mitt Romney managed to make a mistake."


Until recently, the Obama administration has chiefly targeted former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney as the likely Republican nominee (and Mr. Obama's competition) in 2012.


But as CBS' Bob Schieffer said Sunday, "It's no secret they really want to run against Newt" in the general election.


A number of Democratic lawmakers have hailed Gingrich's ascendance as the possible nominee, particularly given the candidate's long history in Washington - during which time he has undergone a lengthy ethical investigation, owned up to marital infidelity, and made any number of controversial statements.


"I did not think I had lived a good enough life to be rewarded by having Newt Gingrich be the Republican nominee," quipped longtime Democratic congressman Barney Frank, when asked about the possibility.


House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi echoed that sentiment, telling Talking Points Memo in an interview that Frank's comment "spoke for a lot of us" Democrats.


According to O'Donnell, the debates potentially provide increased opportunities for Gingrich to shine, and for Romney - who is viewed by many observers as a much more serious threat to Mr. Obama - to falter.


"They want more and more Americans to watch these debates where Mitt Romney managed to make a mistake, where he said he would bet $10,000 with Rick Perry," O'Donnell told Schieffer. "The Democratic National Committee was delighted by that remark. They got it trending worldwide on Twitter. #What10kWouldBuy, essentially, was the hashtag. And then, of course, they had Newt Gingrich delivering their best line of attack on Mitt Romney, when Newt Gingrich said to Mitt Romney, 'The only reason you're not a career politician is because you lost to Teddy Kennedy.'"


So while the core issues of the conflict must be negotiated, the basis of those negotiations is clear: a viable Palestine, a secure Israel. . . . We believe the borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps, so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states.
So, Obama said the 1967 borders would be a basis for negotiations for new borders to be arrived at by making "swaps" of unspecified size. That's much different from saying the 1967 borders would be reinstated.
Romney got one part right when he said, "That's not what Israel wanted to hear." Israeli leaders reacted strongly to Obama's statement, which was viewed as a policy shift for the United States. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in a statement that he "expects to hear a reaffirmation from President Obama of American commitments made to Israel in 2004 which were overwhelmingly supported by both Houses of Congress." Those commitments "relate to Israel not having to withdraw to the 1967 lines, which are both indefensible and which would leave major Israeli population centers in Judea and Samaria beyond those lines."
Our fact-checking colleague Glenn Kessler at The Washington Postwrote about Obama's comment, saying that "until Obama … U.S. presidents generally have steered clear of saying the negotiations should start on the 1967 lines," even though the Israelis and Palestinians had held negotiations with just the basis Obama mentioned.
On May 22, the president defended his remarks and complained that they had been misreported and misrepresented. He said that what he did was to "say publicly what has long been acknowledged privately."


O'Donnell noted that Democrats aren't "giving up" on Gingrich, but that regardless of who ends up the nominee, they were hoping for a long Republican primary.


"They want this to drag on, so it saps Mitt Romney's strength and drains his coffers," O'Donnell said of the Democrats.


Still, Dickerson argues that Gingrich does have a certain advantage over Romney: As a charismatic speaker, he's potentially able to deliver more stinging attacks against the president.


"One of the things Newt Gingrich may do... is talk about the president and his failures in an articulate way that a lot of people can watch, and so it's essentially a long string of attacks on the president," Dickerson told Schieffer. "And the president's approval rating in our latest poll is at 44 percent, 33 percent on the economy. That's his lowest number ever. People think the country is going in the wrong direction. That number 44 on approval, usually the strategists say that the president's approval rating has to be at about 50 to get re-elected. So he has got a lot of work to do there."