Wednesday, November 28, 2007
|
|
Winners and Losers
|
|
Posted by:
Matt Lewis at
10:16 PM
|
The real winner tonight was CNN, YouTube, the GOP, and the American people. Yes, there were some stupid questions. But there were also some very, very good questions on important topics such as immigration, that would not have been asked by typical MSM moderators.
It was a tough and nasty debate, and that's a good thing. Whoever comes out of this as the nominee will be battle-tested and ready to take on the Democrat nominee.
In a multi-candidate debate, it's hard to pick one winner or one loser. In addition, as always, success is judged based on how candidates perform versus the expectations they came in with.
In my estimation, the candidates who benefited from tonight were McCain, Thompson, and Huckabee.
I'm reading David McCullough's excellent book on Truman, so a lot of what McCain said rang true tonight . McCain's comment to Ron Paul about WWII and the danger of isolationism rang particularly true.
In addition, his comment about the importance of America taking the high-road when it comes to torture also reminded me of the book.
As anyone familiar with history knows, there was a clear difference between the way America treated our enemies than the way other countries treated their enemies. For this reason, Germany actually tried to surrender only to England and America (and not to Russia).
But the bottom line is that I think McCain got his message out tonight -- that he has the experience needed at this time in history. In short, he was "Presidential."
... Fred Thompson benefited from low expectations. Tonight, he was "on." He was humorous, and had some great one-liners. At a couple points, he was even, "Reaganesque." There were glimmers of the Fred Thompson a lot of people (not me) thought they were going to get from day one. His controversial YouTube attack commercial was tough but very good. His opponents will say this is "desperation," but I say considering the position he's in right now, and the amount of time left, it's smart.
... Mike Huckabee is such a good debater that even when he's mediocre, he's still pretty good. As always, he did well and was humorous ("Jesus was too smart to ever run for public office..." was a great answer).
... If you like Ron Paul's message, he did well tonight. The question is if you like his message...
... Rudy was mediocre, but probably benefits from the fact that Huckabee and Thompson did well (presumably, their success hurts Romney). His closing line about the Yankees was humorous, but his opening skirmish with Romney about Romney's hiring illegal immigrants seemed personal.
... As such, Mitt Romney was probably was the one who most under-performed tonight. He didn't seem "on." In addition, he often seemed holier than thou. Some of his answers seemed to be pandering. Other questions reminded us of his past record. And some of his answers -- like the one about the King James Bible and gays in the military -- just seemed odd ...
Again, it was a good debate. As I watch the post-debate analysis, I only wonder why CNN doesn't have some younger conservative bloggers on the panel. I mean, David Gergen?
|
|
|
Huckabee may be charismatic, but he won't get my vote. He's two-faced. He raised taxes in Arkansas after saying he wouldn't. He's VERY soft on illegal immigration; I heard his interview on Hannity today. We don't need another Democrat Lite. We've had enough of that with GWB! |
|
Huckabee is coming up in the South. He is basically dividing the hard core Southern Vote. Fred is left mainly with the good ol boy voters and Huckabee is taking about 1/2 of the Evangelical vote.
That opens up the South for Romney, Rudy and McCain. It means that the key success factors for winning in the South now shift to money and organization. That helps Romney and Rudy the most.
With scandal brewing and Romney running strong in NH and SC, Huckabee is Rudy's best hope. |
|
Their conduct just goes to show how pervasive their socialist-progressive bias is throughout their organization. The caricatures they tried to put forward in their selection of questions was just so brazen I sort of felt sorry for the company.
What I got out of this debate:
Huckabee and McCain can wear their hearts on their sleeves at times. That's a good thing in that they have sincerity and gravitas. It is also a bad thing because logic, principle, and reason take a back seat with these guys when the bleeding-heart sob-stories come out.
They can't be trusted with the purse strings or law-enforcement. They talk a good game about "pork," but will never recognize the mounds of inappropriate entitlement spending at the federal level that needs to be wiped out and put back on the State and Local governments. Their too afraid of feeling bad because some innocent kid's irresponsible / criminal parent isn't getting an entitlement benefit they shouldn't need in the first place.
Fred Thompson and Duncan Hunter seem to have the best heads on their shoulders. Fred's got the better policy set and campaign. Hunter has a much better public presence. We need to splice a Reagan-like candidate out of these two guys. Maybe we may Hunter Thompson's VP and slip Fred a Red Bull 20 minutes before each public appearance?
Ron Paul just discredits the few valid points he has by burying them in crackpot theories and an general attitude of the alarmist.
Tom Tancredo finally got what he wanted, immigration reform at the front of the public discourse. He's just not going to be the guy in the Oval Office to do anything about it. I'd like to see him in someone's cabinet, though.
|
|
It does not matter who wins, because America loses being there is NO true leader with a real plan to help this country.
All of the top candidates in both parties are having their skirts lifted by the CFR which is our shadow government.
Say Goodbye America unless you, the citizens of this country, have the spine in your backs to fight for it when these traitors pull the drain plug, North American Union, which is right around the corner.
All four of the top GOP candidates are freaking CINO’s, and Fred was fed to us conservatives like a dog is given a bone just to shut you up and make you think you have a horse in the race.
|
|
We're scoring the debate like a beauty pageant. Who looked best in a swimsuit? Who had the best evening gown? Who gave the right answers to the questions.
It should be more like the end of the year standings in football. Who has the best record over-all? Who's played the toughest teams. Who won the close ones?
Romney has met BIG challenges and succeeded. So has Rudy. McCain has been a government employee all his life. What significant challenge, other than his weight, has Huck overcome?
Romney could turn this country around if given the chance, the same way he's make other organizations successful.
|
|
It may not always come across in 30 or 60 or 90 second sound bites, but Romney clearly has the accomplishments to justify the presidency.
Fred's a good actor. But what has he ever accomplished? I can't think of anything.
Rudy did a good job in NYC. But moving your mistress into the governor's mansion. Come on. That's a pretty distressing lack of decorum.
McCain has never run a corner drugstore, or any other business.
Huck is a Baptist preacher. He has good delivery, and would probably keep me awake on Sunday mornings. But he's on the wrong side of immigration and taxes. And although he's been a governor, that's not the same as running a business.
Romney's record prevails, irrepective of sound bites.
As prosecutors say at sentencings, "The best evidence of future performance is past performance. |
|
|
Of course, Ron Paul wins the post debate polling again. Who else could win other than Ron Paul? Ron Paul's standing as the champion of the debates is becoming automatic, it's spontaneous. Ron Paul's honesty and integrity has become ubiquitous. Even though CNN limits his input, Ron Paul still wins. Ron Paul could stand on the stage and not say a single word the entire debate and still win the post debate polling just on the fact of his long established principles of freedom, integrity, and honesty. |
|
|
Mitt made Rudy look pathetic. As for Huck - Mitt is right - if Huck wants to give money to illegal aliens kids then he is punishing american kids in the process - there is a limited amount of money to go around. |
|
I've been listening to Fred since the rumblings of his candidacy started. It's hard not to notice that Fred IS lackluster. He could have mixed it up with Rudy or Romney last night, but chose not to. He should have injected himself if he wants the tide to turn for him.
He has a very hard time spitting out what he wants to say - he meandered last night. He is NOT an natural leader like Rudy or Romney. I don't know if he could ever become persuasive.
That said, he is a far better choice than Huck, McCain, or even Rudy for me. I wish he would get his act together. If he can't run a campaign, can he be an effective president? |
|
|
Sometimes it helps to do a little research and thinking for yourself PC. Your whole attitude regarding Fred Thompson is exactly the one the MSM have worked hard to pin on him. While others pander and dodge questions, Fred fields questions with clear, concise, direct answers. All the other leading candidates started off their answers at least once with "I agree with Fred" or "Fred's got this right". That cannot be said for any other candidate. There isn't a stronger leader in the bunch and there is nobody else that I would want sitting across the table from other world leaders representing us. He doesn't pander, he doesn't flip-flop, he allows his conservative principles to guide him in making wise and thoughtful decisions. That's exactly the kind of guy this country needs steering this ship through perilous waters. |
|
Good analysis! I am making a prediction: Huckabee surge plummets within 3 weeks, because he peaked too soon. Romney crashes when more people start talking about his fake 2nd Amendment support (among all other flip-flops). Fred gets 1st or 2nd in Iowa, 1st in South Carolina, and then carries the south.... winning the nomination. Folks, you are about to witness a Thompson surge again, and big. He is once again gaining traction.
|
|
is what made the Huckster look good. However, once his record sees the light of the public day in comparison to his 'reinvention' of himself and that'll be the end of his run.
Romney took several hard hits which should have rightly taken place in the very first debate and his poll numbers would be equal or under Pauls. ( who's not even worth talking about. )
Giuliani was hit hard on the Second Amendment and for the first time rightfully booed but, his biggest hit is yet to come when they find out he doggedly sued all the major gun manufacturers and distributors of firearms while Mayor of NYC which would have bankrupted each and every one of them...as it is, handgun prices are nearly double what they were today thanks solely to Rudolph's lawsuit....Shall we show him the thanks he deserves?? 80 Million plus families of thanks should be a proper send off to civilian life I should think.
McCain's flagrant denial that the Shamnesty bill wasn't amnesty sunk his bathtub boat. This is the same guy who told us he "finally gets-it on illegal immigration"...rrrright, sure thing John. Could we hear one more time why you feel that any infringement on our first amendment right of free speech through organizational participation by the attachment to McCain-Feingold is "alright with you because the bill works". He's surely toast by his own hand also.
Look, the only man up there with real answers to our country's serious problems without the animation of clowns is Fred Dalton Thompson. Solid and completely trusted to do what's right every single time on all of the issues and we will vote him in as the 44th President of the United States.
|
|
I don't want to be entertained. Fred brings no energy. He honestly doesn't seem to care one way or the other for the job. He's old, slow and has no heart for it.
I agree about the strong core values - unfortunately Fred doesn't have the market on them in this race. |
|
|
Would that help PC? Maybe Fred could tap dance to keep you entertained or maybe the cha-cha! I don't need to be entertained. I need a conservative president with strong core values. |
|
Fred is not religious, so I don't know how he could answer authentically about the Bible. He is right on most issues and his policy papers are detailed and right on, but he is too slow and boring. He could have injected himself into the debate, but didn't - it seems like he avoids it a little. He also rambles on and on without saying much.
Fred is not presidential material - that's all. He just doesn't seem to care if he is there or not. |
|
People don't like how Fred talks, but what about what he SAYS?
Fred has clear-cut policy papers written on Social Security and Immigration. I encourage everyone to read them if they have not already.
And regarding Fred's 30-second "attack ad," it was Mitt's and Huckabee's own words. What's negative about THAT? Cooper gave them a chance to rebutt (which I think was a bad thing, but...)
Fred didn't get the air-time tonight, but his responses were powerful. Mitt, Rudy, and Huckabee got more air time, but they also "stepped in it" several times each in my opinion. No one was turning to Fred and asking him about misappropriating funds while visting a mistress or employing an illegal alien. No talk from Fred about giving illegal aliens in-state tuition like the "compassionate" Huckabee. Nor did he state that the words in the Bible were not literal. He wasn't asked or given the opportunity to answer those questions, but he certainly would have responded based on his strong conservative principles. You can count on that!
|
|
Fred Thompson was the only one with any serious substance. He was the most adult-like and the most Presidential. His answer on the VP's level of involvement was the best as was his answer to the Confederate Flag question.
Everybody else was too busy making jokes, attacking other candidates, and giving non-answers to questions, or they weren't given enough questions to answer.
The best of the night were Fred Thompson, John McCain, Tom Trancedo and Duncan Hunter.
Paul is just off the wall.
Romney, Giuliani, and Huckabee are all flip-floppers and shouldn't even be at a Republican debate. |
|
"Jesus was too smart to ever run for public office..."
That was Romney, wasn't it? |
|
Romney came out swinging at the outset and leveled Giuliani. I didn't see any pandering and didn't catch any "holier than thou" statements. Giuliani tried to paint him as such, but Giuliani has every reason to do so considering he has boogeymen too numerous to name in his closet. But Romney said flatly he isn't perfect.
Romney got weaker towards the middle and then picked up a little bit towards the end, though he didn't return to his earlier stature. All in all, he was fairly persuasive and effective.
|
|
|
We'll see. In the past he has done well, but tonight he was terrible, in my opinion. |
|
Romney did stammer on a couple questions, but overall outdid everyone but Rudy, as usual. I thought Romney came out on top in at least one of the most important exchanges - illegal immigration. Rudy looked petty there, and Bill Bennett was right, why would Rudy want to bring the debate to the personal level at the homes of candidates? Not a good idea.
Fred is basically right on all the issues, but is hard to watch and listen to. He's too slow and spends a lot of time not saying anything.
Huck was a non-event, and Rudy was pretty good. Commentators always seem to think McCain is the winner (I don't know why), but the polls never agree. |
|
|
sounded awful. The slick facade cracked under four questions. His campaign is close to dead in the water now. |
|
|
|