SC Rep. Debate

[ShadeHonestus]

Of those out there that paid attention to the debate tonight, what were your impressions?
1. Who do you think came across as the most sincere?
2. Who had the worst night?
3. Who did you see as the emerging top 5?
4. Who surprised you? (pleasantly or in disgust)
5. What did you think of the questions?
6. Did you watch the follow up interviews by Hannity and Colmes?
7. Any other thoughts.


1. Tanecredo Col
2. Tommy Thompson Wisc
3. McCain, Tanecredo, Giuliani, Huckabee, Romney
4. Tanecredo (pleasantly)
5. Fairly tough questions, made the candidates address some of their records.
6. Yes, very nice interviews and engaging.
7. McCain is sharp for his age, but I really think he's starting to show his age. physically. Presidency may just kill him.

[Odin]

I only got the highlights this morning on NPR, but I am curious as to how others think the candidates did. I am particularly curious on Romney, I heard a couple quips from him that werent to shabby.

I am hoping one of these guys emerges from the pack, otherwise I am leaning toward Biden at this point but like a lot of moderates out there Im craving a conservative who wants to come back a little bit to the left.

[Major Robert Dump]

everyone lost, becaus they are not real debates. hey havent been real debates in two decades, they are party-organized, media-fueled romps of pre panned questions and they are GAY

[Odin]

everyone lost, becaus they are not real debates. hey havent been real debates in two decades, they are party-organized, media-fueled romps of pre panned questions and they are GAY

Really? so you think they show a merry lively mood?

[Major Robert Dump]

i suppose u could say that. anymore, it serves a candidate just as much not to participate in debate becausr they are not real debates (think gore and thompson)

anymore, your standing in the polls affects your ability to be included in the debates.

it should be the other way around

[Pindar]

I only got the highlights this morning on NPR, but I am curious as to how others think the candidates did. I am particularly curious on Romney, I heard a couple quips from him that werent to shabby.

I think Giuliani had the best night. If the consensus was Romney won the first debate, Giuliani won this second round. Romney was fine. McCain was better than in round one. Over all, the top three put distance between themselves from the lower rungs. One reason for this was the lower rungs were either incompetent or failed to capture their brief moment before slipping back into obscurity. Ron Paul is insane. Tancredo and Gilmore were cartoonish. The others..."what were their names?" will be a common reaction.

You can note the National Review link in the post above on pundits impressions.

[Odin]

I think Giuliani had the best night. If the consensus was Romney won the first debate, Giuliani won this second round. Romney was fine. McCain was better than in round one. Over all, the top three put distance between themselves from the lower rungs. One reason for this was the lower rungs were either incompetent or failed to capture their brief moment before slipping back into obscurity. Ron Paul is insane. Tancredo and Gilmore were cartoonish. The others..."what were their names?" will be a common reaction.

You can note the National Review link in the post above on pundits impressions.

Thanks pindar much appreciated. Intresting commentary from Charen on McCain "McCain was fine on spending of course. But he did not do himself any favors in the discussion of campaign finance, nor in his invocation of bipartisanship on immigration" Frankly working with Dems is going to be a reality for the next president, I dont necessarily view it as a weaknees, but understand its in the context of a republican primary.

It also sounds like (well others think it sounds like) Giuliani is formulating his position on abortion more clearly, I thought (and still do) that that issue, along with his personal life might be his achillies heel.

Im still holding out for Mitt, as my govenor he did a decent job with a crap hand of cards, massachusetts has to be the hardest place in the US to move forward a conservative adgenda. I was a McCain guy before this all began but I just get the feeling he's going down with the Bush ship, and his endorsement of the "surge" is going to bite him in the rear down the road.

[Pindar]

Thanks pindar much appreciated. Intresting commentary from Charen on McCain "McCain was fine on spending of course. But he did not do himself any favors in the discussion of campaign finance, nor in his invocation of bipartisanship on immigration" Frankly working with Dems is going to be a reality for the next president, I dont necessarily view it as a weaknees, but understand its in the context of a republican primary.

It also sounds like (well others think it sounds like) Giuliani is formulating his position on abortion more clearly, I thought (and still do) that that issue, along with his personal life might be his achillies heel.

Im still holding out for Mitt, as my govenor he did a decent job with a crap hand of cards, massachusetts has to be the hardest place in the US to move forward a conservative adgenda. I was a McCain guy before this all began but I just get the feeling he's going down with the Bush ship, and his endorsement of the "surge" is going to bite him in the rear down the road.

Things are still in the forming stage. Even so...

I dislike McCain. I hope he doesn't get the nomination. McCain-Feingold is evil. It looks like with politicos the McCain Campaign is slowly imploding.

Giuliani is the man to beat. Romney will be trying a repeat of the Jimmy Cater 1976 playbook. He is focusing on the early primary states and ignoring national polls. If he wins one or two, say New Hampshire and Iowa and/or places strong in South Carolina then he will trampoline into major contender status. Romney's war chest is vast. This gives him staying power. If I recall correctly, his first quarter monies raised were all designated for the Primaries. This was unique for all the candidates (from both Parties). This means he can go back to the same sponsors later for the general election.

None of the lower rung fellows are tenable.

[Odin]

Things are still in the forming stage. Even so...

I dislike McCain. I hope he doesn't get the nomination. McCain-Feingold is evil. It looks like with politicos the McCain Campaign is slowly imploding.

Giuliani is the man to beat. Romney will be trying a repeat of the Jimmy Cater 1976 playbook. He is focusing on the early primary states and ignoring national polls. If he wins one or two, say New Hampshire and Iowa and/or places strong in South Carolina then he will trampoline into major contender status. Romney's war chest is vast. This gives him staying power. If I recall correctly, his first quarter monies raised were all designated for the Primaries. This was unique for all the candidates (from both Parties). This means he can go back to the same sponsors later for the general election.

None of the lower rung fellows are tenable.

Good analysis, I suspect Romney is playing for 2nd to be blunt, although if Giuliani does get the nod, an all east coast ticket would be a disaster. Romney is definately the potential spoiler at this point, he ought to do okay in NH (if not win it) and by default that ought to carry him to a repectable 3rd in SC.

[drone]

I think Giuliani had the best night. If the consensus was Romney won the first debate, Giuliani won this second round. Romney was fine. McCain was better than in round one. Over all, the top three put distance between themselves from the lower rungs. One reason for this was the lower rungs were either incompetent or failed to capture their brief moment before slipping back into obscurity. Ron Paul is insane. Tancredo and Gilmore were cartoonish. The others..."what were their names?" will be a common reaction.

Of course he is insane, he ran as the Libertarian candidate in 1988. I think insanity is one of the main criteria for that nomination.

Looking at his voting record, I definitely like him the best. He definitely old-school Republican-Libertarian, limited government, etc. Voted against the Iraq war, against the PATRIOT Act, and wants to disband the IRS. What's not to like? His 9/11 statement could have been worded better, but he is essentially correct. The MSM is trying to sideline him, which means he must be doing something right.

[ShadeHonestus]

Tancredo and Gilmore were cartoonish.

You really found Tancredo cartoonish? He's been hitting Iowa pretty hard lately more so than most candidates and I'd have to say that he translated well to the debate. His ideas about how to handle illegal immigration were nice to see mentioned on a national stage. He was candid, but not cartoonish imo.

Tancredo and others regularly appears on Steve Deace's show, "Days in the Afternoon" on WHO radio Des Moines. www.whoradio.com you can get the live broadcast there. I think you have to register, but its free of course. For those of you in the know, that's the radio station where Ronald Reagen started in broadcasting.

As far as Giuliani goes, he did have a strong night, but it was as opportunity presented itself in the guise of the jester Paul. I think his strongest line of the night (if I remember correctly) was overshadowed and lost in the exchange with the Paul and that was his quoting of Hilary's position on free markets to contrast his conservative credentials.

From the NR link you provided:

I love that Mike Huckabee, Baptist-minister social conservative, emanates “normal” and “likable.”

Huckabee can be engaging. However is it just me or does anyone else think that he probably moonlights as a Kevin Spacey stunt double.

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

I was actually liking Ron Paul until the "it's our fault" thing.

[Pindar]

I was actually liking Ron Paul until the "it's our fault" thing.

Paul is an isolationist.

[Pindar]

You really found Tancredo cartoonish?

Yes. Being a single issue presidential candidate already moves one in the cartoon direction. Using speech affectations i.e. 'like' and 'you know' in a Presidential Debate lessen the rhetorical gravitas. Not paying attention to the questions or issues does the same. An example of the latter: there was a series of questions that moved along the lines of a terrorist attack scenario. The scenario involved several attacks on shopping malls with one group of terrorists being captured and the thought a larger attack was in the works. The thrust was what techniques would be allowed to get information from the captured. Tancredo couched his response in terms of what he would do after the nuclear attacks (not in the question) and that he would be looking for Jack Bauer to get the job done (suggesting the law is dispensable).

Huckabee can be engaging. However is it just me or does anyone else think that he probably moonlights as a Kevin Spacey stunt double.

Hehe. I can see it, kind of an uglier version of Spacey.

[ShadeHonestus]

The thrust was what techniques would be allowed to get information from the captured. Tancredo couched his response in terms of what he would do after the nuclear attacks (not in the question) and that he would be looking for Jack Bauer to get the job done (suggesting the law is dispensable).

Points taken on Tancredo although I would encourage you to listen to more of his interviews, if you haven't, as he does become more than a one issue candidate, at least to me. Twenty four hours later and my recollection of specifics is less than admirable, but as far as the nuclear attack didn't the question find its way to him after another candidate fielded it in a figurative refocus of "instead of once the bomb has gone off, we should focus on prevention" and therefore wasn't his reference to refocus and say he'd be looking for a metaphorical Jack Bauer? This is not far off from what many of the candidates stated in saying they would take responsibilty for the call on what means would be used to save American lives.

Of course I could be off on my memory so please do correct...

[Pindar]

Of those out there that paid attention to the debate tonight, what were your impressions?

Here is a compilation of the National Review Symposium on the Debate/Press Conference: National Review Symposium Reviews