GOP Debate: Winners-Mitt, Rudy, Duncan. Thompson-Yawn

As usual everywhere on the blogosphere and in the MSM there are opinions on who did well and who flopped in the debate yesterday. Many are saying that the debate did little to change the current standings, and they are largely right; at least at a national level. Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani did well. Giuliani was consistent the whole time, didn’t make any mistakes, but never really said anything memorable.

Mitt on the other hand completely fumbled the first part of the Iran question by leaving the issue up to the lawyers ((memo to Mitt: people don’t like lawyers, don’t mention them again!)) but recovered with a strong response condemning Iran. Mitt also had the best one liners and was incredible on the economic issues. The reason I would say the number one winner is Mitt is because he helped himself the most in Michigan. He new the Michigan economy and the trouble the people are having , he came across as understanding the auto industry, and he made Michigan personal. So while Mitt perhaps didn’t not have the most consistent debate, he certainly helped himself the most.

The third winner I have is Duncan Hunter. I have never really liked him and have always thought he needed to drop out of the race. But watching him yesterday made me think that he would actually be a solid and competent president. And that is more than I can say for Brownback. While he is a bit too hawkish for me, he performed well and likely scored some points with the national security crowd.

As for Fred, yes Fred, how could I wait so long to get to him you ask? It is because he doesn’t deserve to be any higher. Many commentators are saying that he did just what he was supposed to do and did fine. I ask, what was he supposed to do, not fall asleep? He gave decent answers but seemed no different than Hunter or Tancredo or anyother second tier candidate. He said ‘uh’ way to much and talked a bit too slow to keep my attention. So while he may not have ‘hurt’ himself with this debate, he certainly did himself no favors.

The other candidate that I was intrigued to watch because of his surging numbers in Iowa was Huckabee. I am a Huck fan. I think he would be a great Pres and I would be fully supporting him if I did not think that Mitt would be an absolutely incredible President. However, he too had a poor debate. Probably not because he wasn’t good, but he has set the bar for himself fairly high at debates, and this was a let down. I doubt it will hurt him much in Iowa, but it likely will with other voters in early states.

As for the others, go home and quit. Except for Ron Paul. I know, I know, we are all sick of his crazy spam-like supporters, but his is a healthy voice in the campaign. He is our “null” factor. I thought it was great that he was so unequivocal and gave straight answers, we need more politicians like that; despite the fact I disagree with him. So he has my approval to stay in as long as he likes.

What are your thoughts on the debate?



Filed under Brownback, Candidates, Conservative, Democracy, Election 2008, Fred Thompson, John McCain, Media, Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney, Politics, Republicans, Romney, Ron Paul, Rudy Giuliani, Sam Brownback

3 responses to “GOP Debate: Winners-Mitt, Rudy, Duncan. Thompson-Yawn

  1. I find myself swinging back and forth between Mitt and Ron Paul. I like Ron’s constitutionalist views, and feel that in an ideal world they would be what we need to strive for. And then I think of the world we are in and kick myself for being a lunatic. And then I think, Ron Paul would be one more step towards that ideal world.

    Anyway, I felt that Ron Paul didn’t do nearly as well this debate as he has in debates past. I know Tancredo’s line is Immigration, but he simply worked it in too much. Mitt did well, but he didn’t get the last word in his economy spat with Rudy, and Rudy’s last word was good (although I haven’t checked it’s accuracy yet).

    So unfortunately, I would have to give this debate to Rudy for his strong performance, and his luck in getting the last word against Romney.

  2. Romney and Giuliani did dominate that debate. Fred Thompson was decent, but generally a tad lackluster. Hunter shot himself in the foot by saying no to Dubai.

    Steven, Ron Paul’s a good guy but I think there’s a chance that a candidate can be “too idealist.” In fact, unrealistic may be the better word. But I’m with my DryFly friend in that Ron Paul brings a certain element of balance to the field. He just won’t win. Romney’s a proven, winnable and conservative candidate. That’s who I’m going with.

  3. Swint

    I completely agree that a candidate can be too idealist,
    and I think Paul is. But he is still healthy to have in the debate.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s