Fox hosted another debate last night. It was one of the better ones in my opinion. I must admit I missed the bulk of the second half due to a DVR conflict, since I was taping Burn Notice and Beavis and Butthead. As much as i love Ron Paul, I'm not missing Beavis and Butthead. The first half featured the best and worst of the presumed frontrunner, Newt Gingrich. The good: he was eloquent in channeling peoples' anger at the federal judiciary. The bad: Michele Bachmann pretty much destroyed him over the FRE payments. You could literally hear his campaign sinking under her assault. If Arnold decides to make another Terminator movie, I think he should seriously consider Bachmann for a role as a Terminator. She certainly is not afraid to go for the kill. Tim Pawlenty thought it was a good plan to engage her. The next thing he knew, he was on the floor looking up at the lights ,wondering what hit him. Rick Perry thought he would skate in and grab the nomination. She tore him apart over the twin issues of the mandatory HPV vaccination and the big contributions that accompanied it. Now Gingrich has wandered into her kill zone. She also fired several clips of neo-con ammo at Ron Paul, but it is unclear if she scored any hits or perhaps shot herself in the process instead. Romney, as always, was Mr. 3 C's. Composed, confident and competent. He looks more presidential by the day. He is a reassuring figure in an increasingly crazy world. I heard nothing last night to damage any of that. Ron Paul was clearly the story of the night, along with the attacks on Newt. Paul's caution about foreign entanglements drives the Fox News staff apoplectic. Bret Baier tried several times to paint Paul into a corner over Iranian nukes, but Paul never wavered. Bachmann was close to foaming at the mouth over his refusal to commit to attack Iran, but Paul pointed out how many other odious regimes also have nukes. Are we going to attack all of them? Huntsman continues to impress (me at least), but he is going nowhere. Santorum and Perry are on borrowed time. Santorum has a big ground game in Iowa and may surprise at the caucuses, but that would say more about the wisdom of giving Iowa such prominence than it would about his chances. I thought the winners were Romney by virtue of the hits scored on Newt, Paul, who has clearly gone way past kook/ego candidate to become a genuine threat and Bachmann, who has a surprising ability to command the stage. The big loser to me was Newt. It's clear his big payday from FRE was influence peddling, pure and simple. He desperately needs to change the subject, but to do that he needs to answer the charges in a believable manner, and I can't see a way for him to do that. Rather than insult ou rintelligence with claims about consulting work, he would be better just to say, look, I had huge legal bills and a fine to pay, I was desperate for money and I had to take it.
You have seemed to like Bachmann a bit, so I tried to be open minded about her. But she lost me the last week. Bachmann is out of her depth. Bachman looked ignorant on the judiciary question. (she also looked ridiculous a week ago explaining why she was against the payroll tax. ) She wants to take back power from the judiciary... and start a constitutional crisis? How is that going to work out? She did not really explain what happened in Marbury vs. Madison. She just fumbled around. Newt, at least seemed to understand the historical basis of what he was saying. Bachmann just seemed to go along for the ride to feed some meat to her base... without any understanding. Nevertheless Romney nailed them for a very practical reason. (if I recall) What we want to give more power to Congress? I would vote for Paul, but for his position on Iran... one minute he wants strong military and the next minute he does not. The problem is you can't be libertarian all the time in this world. That makes for confusing sound bites. I was leaning Newt...now I am beginning to think Romney should win. They will both be far better than Obama.
The Republicans have to come up someone that has a chance to beat Obama. Putting up Mitt or Newt is the democrat dream. Ron Paul is someone many could vote for, but I still don't think he has the machine to go full speed ahead. Not sure who the next candidate of the month will be, but there has to be someone out there. Until then, all this is nothing more than fodder for Saturday Night Live. Still think Jeb Bush could pull it off, but many fear the Bush dynasty appearance. Entertaining however, c
Huntsman seems like he could do it. So Does Romney. I thought Bush was the best governor I had ever experienced during my few years in Florida. However, I am not sure I could get past his dad lying about taxes and his brother screwing up the Presidential chance of a lifetime.
you have to live with one of these guys. the time limit to get on the ballot has passed in many states. there will nobody riding in to save the day. it looks like newt now. romney has that morman problem. how anybody could think bachman would make presidential material is laughable.
I'm not happy with the Republican field. I like Newt but wish we could find someone with a lot more discipline. I think he is brilliant but I am concerned that he would run an imperious and very messy White House. He would probably be good at foreign policy but what does he know about the economy? I don't like Romney. Just flat-out don't like him. He is not a conservative. I think Obama would crush him. I agree passionately with Ron Paul on about half of the stuff he says and absolutely hate the other half of what he says. (shrug) Bachmann, Santorum, Hunt...none have the creds or experience. Its just hard to understand why this is happening each election cycle for the republicans. Is there a systemic flaw that prevents us from selecting suitable candidates or what? If I could just select the President I would have to pick John R. Bolton.
Actually, I believe that is only the case if you consider the national polls which have a significant flaw in them. They generally just gather a popular vote, but the election is all about the electorate. I held a similar opinion to the one you shared until I checked the electorate map. Surprisingly, it reenforced why the Obama camp is hitting Romney so hard and virtually ignoring Newt. Without much effort Romney can put himself in a situation that is unbeatable in the general election. The ironic thing in my theory is that the exact thing that kills him in the primaries is what seals it for him in the general; that he is a Mormon. A few states are very likely to switch to GOP this year regardless of nominee, such as Virginia, Iowa, and Ohio. Among those that would likely switch for Romney are New Hampshire and Michigan, based on his reputation there. Obama really needs to keep Colorado, New Mexico, and Nevada. That is a big problem for him because as California found out with the prop 8 issue, it is very hard to compete against a base of fired up Mormons. If Mitt is the nominee, it is difficult to imagine a situation where Obama can hold any states in the Mormon corridor. Nevada is a lock for Romney. Obama can kiss those electorates good-bye. Colorado was already close in '08 and I think the Mormons tip the balance there too. Even more interesting for me is that everyone is calling California a guarantee for Obama. I think it is probable for Obama, but not a guarantee. Again, the large Mormon base can have heavy influence in Cali. So when I said Romney could win with little effort..... he already pulls enough independents to give Obama heartburn and tip the scales in the states that have become disenchanted with Obama. So Obama must grab the lion share of a key demographic. The Hispanics. The "little effort" part comes in with a VP selection of Marco Rubio or someone else popular with that demographic. That tips the scales in Florida and maybe even enough to get Cali too. But either way, given Mitt's popularity with independents and the Mormon influence. Florida is enough to beat Obama so even a VP selection like Jeb Bush would seal it.
First off, thanks AAA for your analysis on the debates. I enjoy reading your comments. I know Bachman is your girl but she is just becoming too much of an attack dog. Although both she and Megan Kelly looked pretty hot last night. I'd be afraid to get in an argument with either one. Those two pretty ladies scare me. Especially Bachman, she never smiles while she is cutting your legs out from under you. Newt is by far the most knowledgeable. I've always liked him except for a period right after he did that commercial with Pelosi. I would have loved it if he had punched her at the end of it. Yes, he has some baggage but if he can minimize that and convince people he is sincere in what he's saying now, he's the man. I like Romney. I like his talking points. I don't like his defense of his healthcare plan in Mass. His baggage is, at least morally a little lighter than Newt's. I rate him second behind Newt. Ron Paul is an enigma. I agree with Ohm's assessment of him. I like a lot of his smaller government ideas but I think he is just so naive on foreign policy. If only the world were a nice place with all countries being democracies. But they're not and we have to watch our ass or be surprised again like WWII. Only this time the weapons are much more devastating. I don't like hearing Paul talk either. I expect him to break out in a whine at any moment. Huntsman is done. He's like a broken record. He also seems to want to embrace China with open arms. Personally, I think China is the most dangerous country in the world. Right up there with Iran or even worse because of its size and growth. If we were out of the China Sea, China would immediately begin taking out countries in that area. Santorum? He's OK. Glen Beck loves him. Oh, and Perry, he's looking better but it's too late for him. I could be wrong but I don't see him climbing back to the top.
BTW, as a strong independent, I also thought the debate last night was decent. The entire field looked better than it has during the previous months. I thought the GOP was in an unfortunate situation, but now I'm thinking otherwise.