FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

As the Republican candidates get ready for yet another face-off in Florida for tonight's CNN debate, there's a growing focus on what happens offstage during these events.

A piece in The New York Times asks if the news media have been creating too raucous an atmosphere by encouraging audiences to react, in order to create better television.

There's no question these debates are more lively when the audience reacts - from applause to cheers and boos. But the reaction from audience members who are partisan toward one candidate or another can distort the impression the viewer at home might otherwise get.

Newt Gingrich made a stink earlier this week after NBC's Florida debate, since moderator Brian Williams asked the audience to hold their applause until the commercial breaks.

Gingrich threatened not to participate in future debates if the audiences can't react. Picking on one of his favorite targets, the media, Gingrich said NBC's rules stepped on free speech.

But then Gingrich feeds off rowdy audiences, and they helped propel him in back-to-back knockout debate performances in South Carolina last week. Some even suggest Gingrich was off his game Monday night because the crowd wasn't allowed to respond to his zingers.

Well, Gingrich won't have to worry about that tonight. The audience at CNN's debate will be allowed to express their reactions, as long as they're respectful.
However, should Gingrich go on to win his party's nomination, he'll have to settle for debates versus President Obama without any applause.

According to the rules set by the commission on presidential debates, those audiences must remain silent.

Here’s my question to you: Should debate audiences be allowed to react?

Tune in to the Situation Room at 5pm to see if Jack reads your answer on air.

And, we love to know where you’re writing from, so please include your city and state with your comment.

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

Newt Gingrich is sending chills down the spines of establishment Republicans, and it's positively entertaining to watch.

These Republicans say things like it would be "a disaster" if he's the nominee, "There's a reason most people who know him best aren't supporting him" and "Newt means losing 45 states."

They say they're worried Gingrich would bring back the erratic, chaotic and crazy leadership from his time as House Speaker.

What's more, many worry that Gingrich at the top of the ticket would drag down Republican candidates for the House and Senate. In a nutshell, they don't think Gingrich could ever beat President Obama.

So far only 12 sitting Republican lawmakers have backed Gingrich, while more than 60 support Mitt Romney. Many who worry about Gingrich also say they doubt he'll be the party's nominee.

The irony here is that being the anti-establishment candidate could be the best thing Gingrich has going for him. The so-called establishment includes a few hundred of the most powerful and elite Republicans, from lobbyists to senior members of Congress to TV and newspaper pundits.

But Americans are fed up with the political establishment and if the inner circle of Republicans is nervous about Newt, it could actually help him with the average voter. Gingrich also seems to thrive when he's playing the insurgent.

Meanwhile, you can bet the GOP establishment has got a close eye on Florida. They say they're not at DEFCON 5 yet.

But they just might get there if Gingrich wins Florida and presents an even more serious challenge to Romney. I love it.

Here’s my question to you: Is it good or bad that Newt Gingrich makes establishment Republicans nervous?

Tune in to the Situation Room at 4pm to see if Jack reads your answer on air.

And, we love to know where you’re writing from, so please include your city and state with your comment.

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

As President Obama heads out to campaign for re-election, he has his work cut out for him.

A new Gallup poll shows Americans are "broadly dissatisfied" with the state of the nation on many issues – and in some cases, that satisfaction has dropped off a cliff since 2008.

The most toxic issue for Americans? The economy, which also happens to be the top issue on most voters' minds.

Only 13% of those surveyed in this poll say they are satisfied with the state of the economy. 13%.

Most ominously for Mr. Obama, that's a 23-point drop since January of 2008, the year before he took office.

This is the lowest rate of satisfaction and the biggest decline in the last four years for any of the 24 issues Gallup measured.

Up next: Fewer than 3 in 10 Americans are satisfied with both the moral and ethical climate in the country and the size and power of the federal government. There's been a double-digit drop in satisfaction for both these issues since 2008.

There's more: Most Americans are also dissatisfied with the level of immigration into the country and with the nation's efforts to deal with poverty.

No surprise there with more than 46 million Americans living below the poverty line and a record number on food stamps.

On the plus side, Americans are most satisfied with the overall quality of life in the U.S. along with the nation's security from terrorism and its military strength.

But if you buy the election year admonition, "It's the economy, stupid," then where President Obama is concerned, it's a problem.

Here’s my question to you: What does it mean for President Obama that Americans' dissatisfaction with the economy has skyrocketed since 2008?

Tune in to the Situation Room at 4pm to see if Jack reads your answer on air.

And, we love to know where you’re writing from, so please include your city and state with your comment.

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

President Obama wants four more years in the White House, but if he wins a second term - which is still a big "if" at this point - it's unclear what exactly it would look like.

A piece in Politico describes the president's agenda as "blurry" this time around.

Which is a far cry from the 2008 campaign. In addition to "hope," "change" and "Yes we can," then-candidate Obama ran on a long list of issues from health care reform to ending the Iraq war to imposing tighter regulations on Wall Street.

He also promised a new era of bipartisanship in Washington - and we all know how well that turned out. Washington, and the entire country, may be more bitterly divided today than at almost any time in our history.

Here's the thing about a potential second term: Unless Democrats win big in Congress, it's likely the next four years would only bring more division. That's why Mr. Obama's message may be more about stopping the Republicans than about what he can get done.

There are some items left on the president's to-do list, like a long-term budget deal and immigration reform. But don't hold your breath on those political hot potatoes in a divided Washington.

Other than that, the president is expected to campaign on the proper role for government and creating more fairness in society. This is the class warfare stuff we talked about last hour in the Cafferty File.

Meanwhile don't bet on getting too many answers in President Obama's State of the Union tonight.

Past presidents have mostly used the address to defend their first term record - instead of laying out an agenda for a second term.

Here’s my question to you: How would President Obama's second term look different from his first?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

FULL POST

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

Billionaire investor George Soros warns a class war, including riots in the streets, is coming to the United States.

Soros tells Newsweek the Occupy Wall Street movement will grow and turn violent. He says the response to the unrest could become an "excuse for cracking down and using strong-arm tactics to maintain law and order."

If things go far enough, Soros suggests it could bring about a repressive political system.

This may be a stark view of where the United States is headed, but the idea of class conflict is growing these days.

When President Obama pushed for higher taxes on the wealthy as part of his plan to cut the deficit last fall, he insisted the tax hikes were not "class warfare." But not everyone agrees.

And you can bet that same income inequality will be a theme in President Obama's State of the Union address Tuesday night. The president is set to talk about a government that should ensure "a fair shake for all."

Obama has said the system is rigged against the nation's middle class and that he wants to work toward an America where "everyone engages in fair play, everyone gets a fair shot, everyone does their fair share."

And there's no doubt Americans are feeling this clash between the rich and the poor:

A recent poll shows a large majority of Americans see class warfare, with two-thirds saying they think there are "very strong" or "strong" class conflicts.

But this is the scary part. The clash between rich and poor now ranks as the country's greatest social conflict, topping conflicts between immigrants and native-born Americans or conflicts between blacks and whites.

Here’s my question to you: How concerned are you about class warfare in this country?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

FULL POST

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

Newt Gingrich has risen from the dead for a second time in this roller-coaster that is the Republican nomination battle.

With his decisive double-digit win in South Carolina, Gingrich now heads into Florida with a head full of steam.

South Carolina has the distinction of picking every Republican nominee since Ronald Reagan in 1980, and what Gingrich did there is nothing short of amazing. It's also a bit puzzling.

A piece in Politico suggests that the surging Gingrich has mastered the art of both debates and disguise.

There's no question Gingrich's debate performances – and the free media he gets from them – have been a key to his success. Last week, his answer about food stamps and his beating up on the media helped him win over South Carolina conservatives.

As for the disguise part, Gingrich uses his master debate skills to camouflage his weaknesses as a candidate: the three wives, leaving the first two while they were ill, his erratic leadership, etc.

One ex-wife's claim that Gingrich wanted an open marriage might have done him in. But in the end, she didn't lay a glove on him. The voters yawned.

Mitt Romney must be tearing his hair out; it wasn't supposed to be this way.

With much less money and a smaller organization, Gingrich is once again threatening to take away his crown.

It’s a stunning comeback for a candidate who was sent off to the political graveyard for the first time last summer. His staff quit after he went on a Mediterranean cruise and reports surfaced of his million-dollar line of credit at Tiffany's. But Gingrich roared back to life in December, shooting to the top of the polls before collapsing again ahead of the Iowa caucuses.

He just won't go away.

Here’s my question to you: What's the secret to Newt Gingrich's success?

Tune in to the Situation Room at 4pm to see if Jack reads your answer on air.

And, we love to know where you’re writing from, so please include your city and state with your comment.

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

It used to matter.

The president's State of the Union address used to be a sort of snapshot of where the country stood: How the economy was doing, what was working, and what wasn't.

Now it's just a political speech - a nicely bundled batch of b.s. designed to make the American people feel good about whichever party is peddling it.

And in an election year it will be even worse than usual.

Nevertheless it's an exercise the president has to go through once a year and tomorrow night is the night.

With a captive audience of a joint session of Congress and a national television audience of millions, President Obama will tell us all what a wonderful job he's doing and how great everything is in the country.

He probably won't mention that the country is broke.

He probably won't talk much about the long national nightmare that is the war in Afghanistan.

He's not likely to address the fact that gas prices have doubled since he took office.

He probably won't draw much attention to the fact that the housing crisis still isn't anywhere near being over.

He likely won't mention that the overall standard of living for Americans is in decline.

And I'll bet he won't dwell on the fact that millions and millions of Americans still can't find a job.

Instead he'll likely try to portray whatever problems he addresses as Congress' fault, while at the same time promising that he's going to do much better in the coming year.

The fact of the matter is the state of our union isn't very good.

Here’s my question to you: How confident are you in the state of the union?

Tune in to the Situation Room at 5pm to see if Jack reads your answer on air.

And, we love to know where you’re writing from, so please include your city and state with your comment.

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

President Obama has a serious problem with independents - and it just might cost him a second term.

A new CBS/New York Times poll shows only 31% of independents have a favorable opinion of Mr. Obama.

Compare that to 2008, when Mr. Obama defeated John McCain by winning 52% of the independent vote.

According to this poll:

2/3 of independents say the president has not made real progress in fixing the economy, the nation's top issue.

More than half say they don't have a clear idea of what Mr. Obama hopes to accomplish if he is re-elected.

6 in 10 independents say the president doesn't share their priorities for the country.

None of this is good news for the president. It's no coincidence Mr. Obama is out with his first major TV advertising campaign today in several battleground states. One of the targets of this campaign: the crucial swing voters.

The news is not all bad here for Mr. Obama, though. There could be an opening for the president to win back some of these independents.

Although Republicans think Mitt Romney has the best chance of beating Mr. Obama - and it's looking more and more like Romney will be the nominee - almost half of independents say they haven't formed an opinion of him yet.

Nevertheless, for the time being, many independents are disappointed and disillusioned with President Obama and the state of the country. They think the president has failed to deliver on many of his promises of four years ago; and if the election were held today, a lot of them wouldn't vote for him.

Here’s my question to you: Can President Obama win re-election without the support of independents?

Tune in to the Situation Room at 4pm to see if Jack reads your answer on air.

And, we love to know where you’re writing from, so please include your city and state with your comment.

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

What's that phrase of which Republicans are so fond? "Family values"?

Just two days before the South Carolina primary, Newt Gingrich's second ex-wife is out with some tawdry details about him that suggest he has the morals of an alley cat.

In fact, Marianne Gingrich tells ABC News that Newt lacks the moral character to be president. Married to Gingrich for 18 years, says she's coming forward now so voters can know what she knows about him.

And here's what she knows:

She says Newt asked for an "open marriage" so he could have a wife and a mistress. That mistress has since become his third and current wife, Callista.

Gingrich reportedly asked Marianne if she would "share him" when he admitted to a six-year affair with Callista, who is a former congressional aide.

Keep in mind this was around the same time that Gingrich was going after President Bill Clinton for his lack of moral leadership during the Monica Lewinsky scandal.

Marianne says Newt asked for a divorce just months after she was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis. Gingrich divorced his first wife while she was being treated for cancer. Family values.

Meanwhile, ABC News will air the full interview tonight on "Nightline." Apparently there was disagreement at the network over the timing of the interview, given its potential effect on Saturday's primary in South Carolina.

The Drudge Report first leaked word of the interview last night –14 years and a day after Matt Drudge broke the Monica Lewinsky story.

As for Gingrich, so far his response to all this seems to be referring the press to ask his daughters about it. It's part of that whole family values thingy.

Here’s my question to you: When is the proper time to release a potentially damaging interview with one of Newt Gingrich's ex-wives?

Tune in to the Situation Room at 5pm to see if Jack reads your answer on air.

And, we love to know where you’re writing from, so please include your city and state with your comment.

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

It’s been a Wednesday without Wikipedia and other major websites. As they go dark to protest two anti-piracy bills in Congress, critics say these bills amount to censorship of the Internet.

While Google hasn't shut down, a black rectangle covers its famous logo urging people to "Tell Congress: Please don't censor the web!"

The web-wide protest is in response to the Stop Online Piracy Act, or SOPA, in the U.S. House and the Protect IP Act, or PIPA, now pending before the full Senate.

The battle lines are drawn with Hollywood and major media companies, including CNN's parent company, Time Warner, on one side and Silicon Valley on the other.

If the bill passes, copyright holders could seek a court order to force search engines such as Google to remove links to sites that are offering illegal movies, TV shows, songs, etc. The main targets are foreign websites.

But Internet companies worry they could be punished for users' actions. Google says YouTube would have to go dark immediately if the bill passes, saying "it couldn't function."

On the other side, supporters say that online piracy leads to job losses in the U.S. since content creators lose income. They dismiss accusations of censorship, saying that the bills are meant to fix a broken system that doesn't prevent piracy.

Supporters say this bill won't hurt the average Internet user.

Many in the tech world agree that piracy is a real problem, but they worry about the implications of this legislation, fearing that it's a foot in the door that could lead to further government controls.

Meanwhile the bills that were once expected to sail through Congress have hit rough waters. One Senate aide tells CNN that because of the growing protests, the bill might not even make it to a vote.

Here’s my question to you: Should the U.S. government censor the internet?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

FULL POST