Posted on 10/09/2007 9:05:40 PM PDT by Canticle_of_Deborah
Fred Thompson may have been the buzz candidate coming in and he held up well but Mitt Romney was as sharp as he’s ever been tonight. It was Mitt Romney's night.I’ll have more on Romney in a moment. First, let’s talk about Thompson.
Thompson’s performance was measured and pretty strong. He spoke faster which helped him appear more in control and presidential. He didn’t offer up a whole lot of specifics but he did answer questions directly and forcefully. And he displayed a keen sense of humor too when asked about his entry into the race. What people wanted to see tonight is whether Thompson belonged on stage and if other candidates would make him look bad. They did not and he proved that not only he belongs but he is a force that is not going away.
Now, as for Romney, man he’s a good debater. I must say Mitt Romney is truly a human power point presentation…and I say that in a very positive way. It was on display in that first answer. Fred Thompson gave a somewhat generic answer to the first question about what he will do to “ensure economy vibrancy in this country”. But then Romney followed with statistics, solutions, and a forward looking agenda. I mean, my goodness, he hit it out of the park. Later, he talked about section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. He even threw in some humor about Fred Thompson’s appearance. He had it going. Very impressive indeed.
While the headlines in Dearborn may have been about Fred Thompson’s first debate appearance, it was Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney who decided to finally mix it up. No “baloney”. They really did.
The fierce email exchange between the two campaigns over who’s more fiscally conservative boiled over onto the debate floor.
(Excerpt) Read more at cbn.com ...
• Send FReep Mail to Unmarked Package to get [ON] or [OFF] the Mitt Romney Ping List •
The lawyer remark just sunk him.
No it didn’t.
Bush’s lawyers consulted constitutional lawyers after 9/11 as to the extent of his powers. It’s the right thing to do. Otherwise we end up with a dictator like Hillary. I want a president who abides by the law.
Duncan Hunter if given a chance like the top 3 would out shine all of them....and it would be apparent he is what the USA needs..
It was a waffley, WIMPISH, unmanly statement!
It was not the statement of a leader.
Neither Men nor Women will appreciate the statement whether in fact it was correct or not!
And if Mitt had answered in the opposite you would be complaining now about his abuse of power.
There is no pleasing certain supporters of one candidate.
Actually my perfect candidate is a combo of Mitt and Duncan. I like Hunter very much.
How about we stop spamming threads with juvenile graphics from third graders?
How did Rudy do in the debate?
And was Chris Matthews his usual a pain in the ass?
Willard, what do you think your powers are in this case?
Ask my lawyer.
Well, Willard, would you need to ask the Congress?
I said, ask my lawyer!
But we just want you to know where you think the boundary lies.
I DON’T HAVE TO ANSWER WITHOUT ASKING MY LAWYER.
Nah. What fun would that be?
I don't know what Romney was thinking, but what came across was a man who is incapable of making serious decisions without checking whether lawyers approve.
Mitt blew it.
Now that is just too funny!
Better idea, stop spamming up FR with threads about RINO Precious Willard’s joke of a candidacy. Thanks.
More suppression of opinion from the Romney camp. How delightfully Stalinist.
CNBC’s Maria Bartiromo: “I think that Mitt Romney did very well.” (CNBC, “Your Money Your Vote,” 10/9/07)
Detroit Free Press’ Kathleen Gray And Joe Guy Collier: “Romney captured the early attention of the crowd, speaking to the woes of the auto industry and the recent taxes passed in Michigan to avoid a budget crisis. Romney, whose father was Michigan governor, said the president should have an ‘open door’ to the automakers.” (Kathleen Gray and Joe Guy Collier, “Candidates Avoid Each Other, Turn On Sen. Clinton During Debate,” Detroit Free Press Blog, http://www.freep.com/apps/, Posted 10/9/07)
The American Spectator’s John Tabin: “On the first question, Thompson seemed like he was winging it, especially in contrast to Romney’s answer immediately afterwards. Romney has obviously done the homework on Michigan-specific issues that Thompson hasn’t. This is pretty much exactly what we’ve come to expect.” (John Tabin, “Notes On The Debate, One Quarter In,” The American Spectator Blog, http://www.spectator.org, Posted 10/9/07)
Townhall’s Hugh Hewitt: “Romney’s Michigan-specific references underscore the roll-out of his campaign. The former Massachusetts’ governor drilled into the woeful state of the Wolverine State’s economy, its crushing tax burden, and his roots as a son of Michigan. That’s a shrewd dual use of the debate format —advancing his national image while supporting his plans to win in Michigan after the Iowa and New Hampshire contests.” (Hugh Hewitt, “The Debate,” Townhall, http://hughhewitt.townhall.com, Posted 10/9/07)
MSNBC’s Norah O’Donnell: “Mitt Romney was very strong on fiscal issues…” (MSNBC’s “Hardball,” 10/9/07)
“Neither Men nor Women will appreciate the statement whether in fact it was correct or not!”
Knee-jerk non-thinkers will unite in denouncing obvious facts!
I found that answer fine just as I found mcCain’s answer about whether the Fed did enough to drop interest rates *refreshing*.
We are electing a President, not an omnipotent God, and it’s good to know that they will consult on their legal authority to take action and recognize when there are other Govt institutions, like the Fed, that can and should be independent.
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.