Skip to comments.My own humble opinion about the debate... and yours?
Posted on 09/22/2011 8:12:40 PM PDT by dangus
Newt Gingrich won again. I'm actually starting to get excited for him. In fact, if Sarah Palin doesn't run, I'm going to have to consider him, in spite of his personal life. He came off as the smartest, most capable guy in the room, but also, again, the most feisty and courageous.
Michelle Bachmann continues to fade into the background, despite explaining her Gardasil comments. Much better than the last two debates.
Herman Cain gave a great performance, a huge improvement over a couple debates ago when he was a non-factor. I think his 9-9-9 is idiotic, since a sales tax is BOTH regressive and crushes spending, which might have been a plus in 2005, but is a killer to hopes of an economic recovery. But his *performance* was strong.
Rick Perry was absolutely terrible. He was so stiff, he looked as stiff as Charles Krauthammer and as propped up as Mike Dukakis, and so incapable of annunicating his attacks on Romney that they fell apart with a simple denial by Romney. His answers about illegal immigration were complete crap, forcing him to run away from Rick Santorum's painfully simple question.
Romney in contrast played a game of "I'll deny this, but I'll admit this," openly acknowledging that there's stuff in his past that people will have problems with, but denying each of Perry's specifics. To me, his admissions in general to unpopular stances, but denials of specific accusations by Perry actually made his specific denials credible, and Perry seem weak.
Santorum was excellent, second only to Gingrich in his sharpness and boldness. Too bad he's unelectable, but he actually started to seem vice presidential to me.
How can Ron Paul top siding with Ahmadinejab? How about making the US into the Soviet Union and the Mexican border with the Iron Curtain? Despicable. Loathesome. Insane.
Gary Johnson came off as the credible libertarian candidate. An awkward delivery style, but he avoided the bizarre statements and embarrassing positions of Ron Paul.
Jon Hunstman quit attacking Republicans and actually started to sound like one. Not a bad talker, but too much like Romney. Not at all because they're both Mormons.
The big winner: Newt Gingrich, with Mitt Romney, Herman Cain and Rick Santorum being strong. Johnson takes the libertarian title.
The big loser: Rick Perry actually manages to top Ron Paul in offending the most people, by calling opposing giving special $100,000 tuition breaks to illegal aliens, "heartless."
Still waiting for Sarah.
The truth is that any one of them would be so much better then what we have now it’s not even measurable. I believe anyone of them would beat obumber the way Reagan bet jimmy. The msm has been running interference for obumber all along, but voters now know what he is about. But Palin would be the best thing that could happen for the country.
Cain and Gingrich were the best by far. Cain could be a good leader with Newt as a VP to get through the D.C. maze since he knows how it works. I think Cain will advance after tonight.
Maybe I missed it but did Rick Perry appear on Sean Hannity's post-debate segment on FNC? I recall seeing Herman Cain, Michele Bachmann, Mitt Romney and even Ron Paul but if Perry was on, I don't remember it.
I also wonder if Rick Perry's handlers realize that this is now the third debate in the row that he's been off the mark. I don't necessarily equate a debate performance with the skills required for the Oval Office but, to put it kindly, he's not been a Great Communicator (in the mold of Reagan, a high standard to be sure) thus far.
I’ll throw in an opinion from overseas. I’m not American so domestic policy is not a huge concern for me. Gingrich is the man America needs right now to re-assert itself in the world. He knows his stuff, he’s been around a long time and he’s got a brain between his ears. The very last thing America needs is another lightweight like Bush and Obama.
Newt will never be POTUS
Too bad you are right. Its hard to decide if they are spin doctoring for Mutt or just want to look cute by having such a crap format pandering to lib Google. FNC actually managed to make the chickenshit stuff on the CNN debate look fairer.
Fox seems to want to play up the wannabes that really don’t have a shot at the nomination to what point? Leave Mutt the last one standing? Maybe just to have more exciting theater.
Sadly Perry did not do well, possibly by being “too coached” like Cain said to Hannity, and possibly because the format and questions were played to “gotya” Perry. I do know from Perry’s Texas debates, when he flubs the debate when being set up by MSM debate producers, he comes back stronger, guess we’ll have to wait and see.
Newt and Cain did come out much better than previous debates, as they should. Only thing, smart as Newt is, he has some real bad baggage. Cain still has too big a hill to climb with zero political background, even though he sounds marvelous.
Bachmann seems to be trying to out-Paul, ronpaul. Way out of her league, God help us if she somehow got the nomination.
The other dwarfs were just pesky flies.
Cain is talking about 9% FEDERAL sales tax. After your state+local sales tax is added (mine is 8.25) you're at 17.25 percent sales tax. Cain ain't gonna make local and state sales tax go away.......
When it comes to actually doing legislation and working with people he's a waffler and his positions on some things are downright terrible.
Don't be fooled by rhetoric alone. That's what got the country into the mess with Obama.
Nwet did well tonight—I see him as VP now-—Mitt did well, Perry fumbled, Ron Paul is Ron Paul, Michele B. is out the door. Its still a long way til the election comes—anything can (and will happen)> Rudy could enter the race,Sarah P. as well maybe Trump will do something. Obama may quit (we can but hope) Michele isn’t Evita—she can’t get away with expensive jewelry and still pretend to speak for the Black Population.
Newt has always been the smartest and the best debater of them all. He is articulate and well verse on the issues. With that been said I still think Palin will out shine them all in a debate.
Perry didn’t have to veto the in-state tuition. All he had to do was not sign it and it would have become law anyway.
He wanted in-state tuition. And unlike his appointement of a Hispanic Supreme Court judge, this decision was well before his re-election.
Simply put, Perry favors illegal immigration !!!
Well, lets say that is true, then why wont he leave the Repubs and change parties and run as a libertarian.
He is a dottering old fool and getting worse by the day.
I am in agreement with you on many of these points. You expressed your thoughts well, straight to the point and hard to argue against.
Newt has been very impressive in every debate - and again tonight was no exception. I am probably going to agree with you that he won the debate. I said as much to my wife after the debate. I would have complete confidence in his Presidency - his mind, and his overall command of an indepth insight into Washington and the World, has grown to a level of statesmanship and capability at this juncture in his life that I believe he would bring America through these times and into greatness.
However, without sounding shallow, I would say that, while the media will focus on the differences and counterpoints among the candidates ... What I also see and hear is agreement among them on so many of the core values that make me proud to be a Republican!
At this time I am still leaning Romney, looking at Newt, ready for Bachmann.
And if I were a journalist for a conservative news web, and had to “box in” the debate with three one liners, I would print:
Main Headline: PERRY IMPLODES OVER ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION
Sub-Title: ROMNEY CONTINUES TO HOLD HIS OWN
Adlib Bold: NEWT ENDURES TO ICONIC STATURE
... Keep the debates coming!
I agree with all of your sentiments, (especially Santorum) except for Palin. She has dallied too long- could have been a force earlier, but not now.
The “tuition” explaination missed the best reasons it passed, Perry should have done better on it, but how do you do it justice in 60 seconds?
In State tuition was granted by the Legislature in a veto proof majority. Perry had no choice.
In State tuition is only granted to students who have attended Texas High School for minimum 3 years and have personally applied for citizenship. During their 3 years in HS, them and their illegal parents, like every other Texas citizen, paid State Sales tax and Local Shool tax, whereas out of state students have not paid a dime toward Texas schools.
Its unlikely any Mexican HS student came here on their own just to go the Texas HS for 3 years and then get a relatively small tuition break (the $10000 Mutt blabbed, exgerating of course, was for University of Texas, which is expensive and which damn few regular Texas students can get into because of grades). Mostly we are talking about smaller colleges and Jr. colleges, not UT or A&M.
Not so fast. I understand that you have to pander to Hispanics in Texas but not the whole United States. This will probably be the last election this will be true.
Perry didn’t have to veto the bill. All he had to do is not sign it and it would have become law anyway.
6.8% of the electorate is Hispanic (of which the majority is Caucasian). Of that 6.8%, 38% vote R.
In 2008, 125, 225,901 people voted.
8,515,361 were Hispanic and 3,235,837 voted R.
If McCain received all of the Hispanic vote he still would have lost by 3,259,035 votes.
You nailed it. Looking forward to his next "Contract."
Well, no. It’s NOT about pandering to Hispanics for the whole US. I’m saying he did what he had to do to be a Republican governor in TEXAS. That mess follows you. As for the US Hispanic vote, Obama is terrified he’s going to lose the Hispanic vote to Perry.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.