There was something terribly bothersome about about last night’s debate between Republican candidates for President, and I couldn’t figure it out until I watched it a second time this morning.
First of all there were either too many candidates or not enough time. It seemed as if the candidates did not have enough time to answer particular questions, and because all the candidates did not answer each question its is hard in some ways to compare.
Secondly moderator John King was a disaster. With almost every answer one could hear King in the background, it was hard to tell if the guy was lifting something or trying to answer questions of his own, because the sound of grunts or “ums” coming from King were annoying as hell.
The three most important topics to voters are how to create jobs, how to fix the economy and energy, yet there were few questions on those topics,but there were questions about the tea party which are important only to King and the rest of the liberal media. The United States is facing economic disaster….why would John King trivialize the debate with those inane “this or that” questions? Is it really important to know whether Herman Cain prefers deep dish or flat pizza?
Do you think Cubans are fighting for healthcare or freedom from Communism?
Despite the problems with the format some of the candidates did find a way to stand out yesterday.
- Romney’s job in last night’s debate was “not to lose it.” In other words not to make any gaffes. He seemed knowledgeable about each of the topics and he even seemed to believe his answer about Romneycare. Romney was a winner by not losing. I wish he didn’t seem like such a dammed politician all the time.
- Michele Bachamann was a big winner last night. Her job was to prove that she wasn’t the nut job she is portrayed as by the liberal media. Bachmann more than succeeded. She seemed knowledgeable and enthusiastic, perhaps a bit too enthusiastic the times she tried to get the crowd to cheer along with her. Her answers were knowledgeable, not only her answers to the economic questions which one would expect, but on foreign policy also. I wouldn’t surprise to see her jump up in the polls after her performance.
- The biggest loser last night was Tim Pawlenty. Already with a reputation of being a “98 pound weakling” as a candidate, perhaps the debate’s most uncomfortable moment was the “Obamnycare” question. John King served Mitt Romney’s head to Pawlenty on a silver platter, but the former Minnesota Gov. chickened out. I believe that last night will mark the end of Tim Pawlenty as a serious candidate.
- Most of Newt Gingrich’s answers were very good (although his continuing claim that his comments on the Ryan plan were taken out of context doesn’t do him any favors). The Gingrich campaign is falling apart. All of his senior people have quit. Gingrich had to win the debate and win big in order for his campaign to remain viable…he didn’t. Goodbye Newt.
- I went into last night wanting to really like Rick Santourm. He did an adequate job but for a guy participating in his first candidates debate he needed to do much better. He looked very uncomfortable when he was asked for economic plan specifics and offered a handful of nothing. Many of his answers seemed like political hooey.
- Anybody that ran a pizza company has a leg up in my book but Herman Cain did nothing to break away from the pack last night. Too many of his answers revolved around “hiring the best people” and/or asking the Generals. Sorry Herman but you have been running long enough, you should have surrounded yourself with some of the right people and asked a general or two by now…we need to know some specifics. Cain was wonderful when he stopped King and showed how he misquoted the”hiring Muslims” line, but then he took three paragraphs to get to what he really meant Shariah Law.
- Racist/Anti-Semite Ron Paul was also there. I am sure he appealed to the Ronulins.
Overall the big winner was Michele Bachmann and the biggest loser was John King and CNN