So, the first GOP debate is done and my gut feeling that ten candidates in one debate would not end up benefiting any of them much seems to be accurate. There were a few breakout moments but no one got enough time (except Trump) to really make a case to be President of the United States.
That said, I think two things have become obvious about Fox's personal slant on this primary. They do not want Trump or Paul to be the Presidential Candidate. They tried to take both down with opposing tactics. In Trump's case, he was given far more time than anyone else to speak. I think Fox was hoping he'd hang himself on his own noose. In my opinion, he did. He might be surging in a Drudge Poll, but that doesn't mean much. People will soon start to get tired of his mean-spirited blathering.
In Paul's case, they didn't give him much time. He had to make his few minutes count. He did, but unfortunately (and I think on purpose), his questions were relegated to gay marriage and foreign policy, which are issues that we can all reasonably agree hurt his electability, the former because it turns off independent voters and the latter because it turns off the GOP base.
On the whole, however, Fox did ask very decent questions. As with all debates, I wish they would have pushed the candidates harder to answer them, but they did try. It was about as good as one can expect from a 10 person debate. That is, until they got to the ridiculous 'God' question. But more on that later.
In any event, let's look at the candidates' performances individually last night:
Trump: At this point, if you want this guy in charge of the nukes, you shouldn't be voting. I get his appeal in some ways. He's anti-PC and non-establishment. He says whatever the fuck he pleases and in a culture of hypersensitivity, that can be attractive. But he's also a dipshit. It's one thing to be right and aggressively anti-PC. It's another thing to be wrong and then use ad hominem attacks on those who point it out. His entire approach last night was to shout nonsense and then name-call whoever called him out. It's childish. I seriously began to wonder how this man became a successful businessman. His 'intel' on every topic seems to stem from backroom gossip at a board meeting.
Most disturbing, because it's about the only matter of policy he even discussed, is his seeming open support for crony Capitalism. He admits that he buys influence with his donations and proudly so. I'm not sure if he's saying that once in office he would fight the very system he's been rigging for years, but that's a dubious prediction at best. His message is clear: I only care about me. We get it, dude.
Bush: Jeb did what he had to do. He stayed above the fray, out of controversy, and continued to tout his record as Governor of Florida, which actually is a pretty impressive record. He remained dignified and calm and, I think, did about the best you can expect from a sort of uninspiring candidate. He non-answered the question about Common Core falling into the 'well, you should leave it up to the states to decide' even as Rubio pointed out that the Federal Government will soon make it nearly impossible to refuse. He did actually answer the question about donating to Planned Parenthood (inadvertently) very well. This issue isn't super important to me, except insofar as I don't think PP is a sacred cow and that there are many better options for accessibly women's health. Overall, not bad. He came of as genuine and well intentioned.
Walker: An 'okay' performance. There were no real land mines he stepped into but he also didn't break out with once exception. His zinger about Hillary Clinton's emails was on point. There was only one real issue that I, personally, need clarification on. He danced around it, not really answering, but the moderators brought to my attention that he refused to support a bill that would allow abortion in the case of the life of the mother. The vast majority of Americans, even pro-life Americans, understand that when the mother's life is in danger, terminating is reasonable. If he's this far in the giggle weeds on abortion, it might not exclude him from being an okay President (we currently have a President with equally extreme views on abortion but just in the other direction), but it does call into question his rational abilities.
Carson: Zzzzzzzzzz. Carson was a bit of a snoozefest. I hate to say that because he seems like a really nice guy and I'd probably enjoy talking to him one-on-one, but he doesn't shine in a debate setting at all. Most of his answers were delivered with a tone that made you want to go to sleep and I don't think he found his footing until the very end with his closing remarks which were endearing and funny. Most likely, those were prepared beforehand, and it gave him time to practice delivery.
Rubio: If we are awarding winners, I think Rubio won this debate. He was likable, charismatic, attacked without being combative, and stayed on message. He's another one I need clarification on the abortion issue about, but for different reasons. He's supported a rape/incest exemption on abortion bans, but when questioned he claimed that was not true. Is he just base pandering?
Some of his best moments were when he was interacting with other candidates, which actually is a very good sign. He went toe-to-toe with Jeb Bush over Common Core and came out the winner, in my opinion. He pressed the former Governor on the concept that the Federal Government never lets anything be 'voluntary' after a certain point. And though, he could have hit the point harder, he put Trump in his place about 'Mexican' immigrants, pointing out to the blowhard businessman that most illegal immigrants are not even coming from Mexico, but from many places all over Central America. Rubio has been well practiced and he only helped his campaign last night.
Huckabee: It's not secret I'm not a Huckabee fan. On social issues he clearly illustrated why. That said, Huckabee actually did shine on foreign policy to some extent. While I don't think he made it clear that he was a foreign policy expert, he did have a fantastic and true zinger for President Obama: “Ronald Reagan said ‘trust, but verify.’ President Obama is ‘trust, but vilify.’ He trusts our enemies and vilifies everyone who disagrees with him. And the reason we disagree with him has nothing to do with party." He is, of course, right and that line will resonate with the base. Still, he'll never get past the social issues about which he openly and enthusiastically bloviates.
Paul: Given the least amount of time, he actually did make good use of what he had. In an epic sparring match with Big Gov Chris Christie, he shined, in my opinion, but of course the pro-NSA crowd thought Christie won the exchange. You decide. That said, I'd vote for Paul's sassy eye rolling any day. I know that for many of the base, Paul will come off as 'disrespectful'. But let's be honest, wasn't Christie just using the 9/11 dead to make cheap shots? It was a well deserved eye-roll.
Paul floundered a bit on gay marriage saying he doesn't want his guns or his marriage registered in Washington. Okay, but he still got married, didn't he? If he was that worried about it, he could have not gotten married. Also, Washington doesn't register marriages, but whatever.
He came back strong, though. When discussing foreign aid he hit the nail on the head, though I'm sure the GOP base will not appreciate it. Essentially, he pointed out that we cannot continue to fund other countries (including our enemies) with a Chinese Credit Card. He is, of course, right. "We do not project power from bankruptcy court."
Cruz: No big mistakes, but he was forgettable, which isn't good when you are polling in the single digits.
Christie: Again, Christie and NSA supporters will disagree but I found him combative, angry, and too eager to invoke 9/11 for political purposes. He never really answered Paul's point that one should get a warrant to tap records, but then again, I think he's hoping to tap into the 'security' vote of the base so better not to get into specifics.
He wasn't given much time either, but what he did have wasn't necessarily bad. Though I think he lost the exchange with Paul, it was memorable and at least coherent.
Kasich: An obvious crowd favorite, he fed off the crowd and delivered a pretty good performance. He shined on rehabbing criminals and the economy.
I'd like to make a point about the last question of the debate. In what seems to be a sick joke from Salon or MSNBC, the last question of the debate (which seemed to be abandoned midway through the rambling weird answers) was about whether God has spoken to the candidates about their campaigns. I mean, you'd think this was an SNL sketch. It was weird, creepy, and plays on all the criticisms people have of the GOP. That they are a bunch of religious nuts. I don't want your faith to be part of your policy making, so why would I want you admitting God speaks to you about your campaign? Bad bad bad bad idea, Fox. It might make the GOP base giddy, but it will only make Independents question why they should vote for any of these people.
And there you have it, folks. Who do you think won?
No comments:
Post a Comment