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?