South Carolina debate wrap

posted at 10:30 am on November 13, 2011 by Jazz Shaw

As it turns out, Ed didn’t get to watch the debate last night, being busy amusing the #OccupyDenver rioters guests, so we missed out on his normal, pithy analysis. I did get the pleasure of watching it, however, and with a few notable sour notes, I’m certainly glad that I did. The short lede here is that even with the aforementioned glitches, this was quite possibly the best debate of the series thus far, with almost all of the candidates exceeding expectations and the moderators (mostly) providing excellent topics for discussion.

Before getting to the contenders, though, it should be noted that the big loser of the night still had to be CBS. It was a good series of topics and Major Garrett did a very competent job in pitching questions, but as Mark Thiessen pointed out, Scott Pelley was out of his league and did a terrible job, and truly embarrassed himself when he tried to challenge Newt Gingrich on matters of the law. But even Pelley’s failures paled in comparison to the Tiffany Network’s baffling decision to schedule a ninety minute debate and then only broadcast the first sixty minutes of it so they could cut away to a re-run of NCIS in many markets. (People out west apparently got to see the entire thing, but the east coast lost the feed and had to go to one of two online feeds to watch, both of which were immediately swamped and delivered a technically unusable webcast.)

Really smart, guys.

As far as the candidates themselves go, as I mentioned earlier, it was largely a terrific performance. I joined in with the usual list of suspects tweeting up a storm, and for once I found myself saying almost entirely positive things and showering compliments on the contenders rather than smashing my head into my keyboard and contracting alcohol poisoning from the Flubbed Answer Drinking Game. (As was the case in too many of the earlier ones.) Here’s a hopefully brief breakdown of how I rated them, in no particular order.

Mitt Romney: I almost get tired of saying this, but Mitt was once again just being Mitt. He’s very good in a standard debate format and he once again avoided any seriously embarrassing gaffes. He went a bit further at one point, giving what I felt was an excellent answer on dealing with China in terms of both trade and military considerations. Another solid, if not terribly exciting showing by Romney, where he might not have managed to suddenly win over the hearts and minds of the conservative base, but he certainly didn’t hurt his cause.

Rick Perry: This was the surprise showing of the night for me. Every time I’m ready to write the Perry campaign off as road kill on the political highway, he turns around and upsets the apple cart. He not only handled his “oops moment” flub from Wednesday with style, but incorporated it into this debate in a way which made him seem funny, grounded and in touch with the voters. He scored huge points early on when discussing foreign aid, proposing a “start with zero” theory, where America would judge each case individually before agreeing to pay the first penny to other countries. A few people took that as a questionable answer, focusing more on the budget, but the moderators brought the subject up in terms of foreign relations, so it was definitely applicable and expertly explained. He had plenty of other zingers, memorable quotes and solid answers. No doubt about it, this was Rick Perry’s best debate of the entire series and he may be on the road to recovery from earlier stumbles.

Herman Cain: To be kind, as we were discussing the debate after it finished, one friend asked me if Cain hadn’t performed better than I had expected. I had to admit that he did, with the caveat that the alternative would have been pretty much impossible. Cain came off better on some answers than I would have expected, but still had a number of questions where he seemed to get that deer in the headlights look and fall back on generalities. He also went to the, “I’ll ask my best advisers, generals, etc.” far too often, causing me to ask, “How many questions can Herman Cain answer by saying he’ll ask somebody else? Why not just ask Newt now, Herman?” All in all, Cain managed to surprise everyone by not entirely shooting himself in the foot, but it was far from a sparkling performance on foreign policy.

Newt Gingrich: For the most part, Newt put on a textbook display of how to dominate a crowded debate setting. Some may feel that he went a bit overboard in attacking the moderators, but that’s his style and the audience ate it up. As usual, Newt was pitch perfect on knowing policy and his answers showed that. Another exceptionally strong showing for Gingrich, and if his star is truly rising as the next “Anti-Romney” he certainly continued to help his cause last night.

Jon Huntsman: Given my own views on foreign policy, it’s obvious that I’d have a bit of a soft spot for Huntsman on this subject, but even given that predisposition, Huntsman raised the bar last night. He unfortunately will never be a sparkling speaker or one who gets the crowd up on their feet, but he was the most educated one on the stage, popping off the names of every player on the international stage like it was second nature to him. Obviously, some of his proposed policies won’t sit well with the conservative base, and I don’t expect everyone to suddenly flock to him after that performance, but he excels on foreign policy and it showed last night.

Michele Bachmann: She got almost no questions, (and we’ll have more later today on precisely why she had a valid complaint on that score) but the ones she did get she handled well. I don’t agree with her on some of these positions, but she was focused and very crisp in her answers. Her experience from her spot on the intelligence committee served her well. She didn’t deliver anything that’s going to launch her out of single digits as far as I could tell, but she handled herself very well last night.

Ron Paul: I have nothing to add to my previous reviews. Paul was Paul, steady, unchanging, on message, and not likely to break into frontrunner status any time soon.

Rick Santorum: Continued whining about not getting enough face time. Took some more extreme positions on foreign policy than the others and was the first to invoke Israel to get a round of applause. Seemed a bit out of his depth on answers about how to deal with the duplicity of Pakistan as they affect our relations with Afghanistan. Other than that, he was mostly a non-entity in this debate.

Conclusions: As I said, one of the best debates yet, even with all the technical problems and the efforts by CBS to shoot themselves in the foot. Lots of good performances and after a night to sleep on it, I still can’t say there is one clear winner. I will award this one as a tie between Rick Perry and Newt Gingrich for the win. Romney stays pretty much where he was. I have no idea what, if anything this does to Cain, (since he’s apparently made of Teflon) but I don’t see how this helped him with anyone who wasn’t already firmly in his camp. The rest of the field didn’t do enough to break out of their current positions.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

CBS panned for debate…

cmsinaz on November 13, 2011 at 10:32 AM

Romney = No.

Key West Reader on November 13, 2011 at 10:42 AM

Cain came off better on some answers than I would have expected, but still had a number of questions where he seemed to get that deer in the headlights look and fall back on generalities.

“Deer In the Headlights” look is NOT something you want from a President when he gets that 3am call.

He also went to the, “I’ll ask my best advisers, generals, etc.” far too often,

“Best Advisors” … such as MARK BLOCK.

Your judgement in picking “advisors” quite frankly sucks, Hermie!

HondaV65 on November 13, 2011 at 10:42 AM

Every time I’m ready to write the Perry campaign off as road kill on the political highway, he turns around and upsets the apple cart. He not only handled his “oops moment” flub from Wednesday with style, but incorporated it into this debate in a way which made him seem funny, grounded and in touch with the voters.

And this time next week Perry will still be in the single digits. Perry was unprepared for a national run, was oversold and fatally underperformed. Next.

ddrintn on November 13, 2011 at 10:44 AM

“Best Advisors” … such as MARK BLOCK.

Your judgement in picking “advisors” quite frankly sucks, Hermie!

HondaV65 on November 13, 2011 at 10:42 AM

I’m a Cain supporter and I agree with what you’ve said. I really don’t want Romney. I love The Newt but honestly, with the MSM in full attack mode, would there even be a chance?
Cain? Get your act together.

Key West Reader on November 13, 2011 at 10:45 AM

“Paul was Paul”. Imagine that. Someone that does not change his opine with the wind like the others. But, the American people want them to say what is popular and not what they will actually do when they are elected.

Santorum’s motto “Elect me, I’ll kill some people!”. Sounds like that of Newt, Romney, Bauchman, and the other neocons.

livermush on November 13, 2011 at 10:48 AM

I didn’t comment last night because I was too busy/distracted trying to get the feed to work.

I thought that Perry looked strong. It’s the first debate I saw where it seemed he loosened up and tried to be himself, and he seemed to be more comfortable. Good for him – I’d like to judge him on his policies, and not on whether he hits or misses the banana peel (although that’s a drinking game in itself).

Re: Cain.

I disagree with the near universal panning of his performance. To me, he was pretty steady. My perception of his “dodging,” etc. was that actually he was showing us that he’s not going to jump out ahead of time and give definitive answers on things he doesn’t yet have the facts for.

I felt that in his answers on those things that can’t be decided until he has the same access to information as the president, he went as far as he honestly could but then said he’d consult the experts.

I like this approach because I feel it is honest. It shows his executive makeup. And it’s just a caricature to hang this all on Mark Block. Just because all the other candidates were trying to jump out with sharply defined positions on each question, doesn’t mean they wouldn’t have to walk these positions back as president once they saw the intel that 0bama is getting.

So I feel that Cain was being honest, and I thought he really was steadier than being given credit for.

Romney was, again, impressive. He’s smooth and articulate – he’s got the tools.

cane_loader on November 13, 2011 at 10:50 AM

Why do we have to let flaming leftie Obama sycophants run our debates…?
The Democrats would never ever let Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham or Michelle Malkin anywhere near their candidates but the GOP subjects itself to the left-wing interrogations by people who obviously despise them.

If this was such an important foreign policy debate then why not have a policy expert like Condoleezza Rice or Dick Cheney as moderators…?
Why can’t we have debates sponsored by conservatives and the GOP itself instead of extensions of Obama’s reelection team ?

NeoKong on November 13, 2011 at 10:56 AM

Romney was, again, impressive. He’s smooth and articulate – he’s got the tools.

cane_loader on November 13, 2011 at 10:50 AM

I won’t vote if Romney is the nominee. A vote for Romney is a vote for Obama and a vote for the continuous corruption that has infested our Nation. Perry or Cain. If the MSM forces Romney on us then let BHO get his second term.

We’re prepared for that.

Key West Reader on November 13, 2011 at 10:57 AM

Regarding Cain’s answer on whether Pakistan is a friend or enemy, and his saying it’s not clear:

Can a candidate really come out and declare Pakistan is an enemy?

I think it’s along the same lines as Romney calling out China to its face in the previous debate. Cain did fine, IMO, saying that we don’t know.

cane_loader on November 13, 2011 at 10:58 AM

Newt is the smartest guy on the stage. The problem is that we have too many low-information voters who don’t really understand basic economics and prefer watching American Idol – with much larger numbers on the left of course. These people end up voting for Romney or Perry cuz they’re more charming – or something.

perroviejo on November 13, 2011 at 10:59 AM

I won’t vote if Romney is the nominee. A vote for Romney is a vote for Obama and a vote for the continuous corruption that has infested our Nation. Perry or Cain. If the MSM forces Romney on us then let BHO get his second term.

We’re prepared for that.

Key West Reader on November 13, 2011 at 10:57 AM

I don’t want 0bama to have a second term under any circumstance.

So I’ll vote for Romney if he’s the nominee – at least as a placeholder until we can elect more of a conservative.

Put it this way: who would you rather getting the next 3 SCOTUS picks – Romney or 0bama?

I rest my case.

cane_loader on November 13, 2011 at 11:01 AM

Cain was terrible.

“I do not support torture. Period. However…”

As Commander in Chief, he would let his generals tell him what torture is.

The man is a buffoon.

bigred on November 13, 2011 at 11:02 AM

perroviejo on November 13, 2011 at 10:59 AM

The problem is the MSM’s belief that IT, and IT alone can decide elections. The MSM will be dismantled.

Key West Reader on November 13, 2011 at 11:03 AM

As Commander in Chief, he would let his generals tell him what torture is.

The man is a buffoon.

bigred on November 13, 2011 at 11:02 AM

Heh.

Key West Reader on November 13, 2011 at 11:03 AM

Newt is the smartest guy on the stage. The problem is that we have too many low-information voters who don’t really understand basic economics and prefer watching American Idol – with much larger numbers on the left of course. These people end up voting for Romney or Perry cuz they’re more charming – or something.

perroviejo on November 13, 2011 at 10:59 AM

Or maybe they’re just not as into Newt as you are. Just because someone doesn’t think Gingrich is the best thing since sliced bread doesn’t make him/her hopelessly shallow as a judge.

ddrintn on November 13, 2011 at 11:04 AM

One commenter said that we could wait 0bama out because the justices are only in their 70s and so because people live a long time now, there will be no SCOTUS vacancies between now and 2017.

I don’t feel like gambling on this.

There has been a long-time tradition that presidents nominate a justice with near the same philosophy as the one they’re replacing, so as to maintain the balance of the court.

Does anyone here really think that if Scalia has to retire/dies, 0bama really will not replace him with a hard-left justice?

That’s the problem I have with anyone sitting on their hands and not voting in 2012. 0bama doesn’t play by any rules but his own.

cane_loader on November 13, 2011 at 11:05 AM

The man is a buffoon.

bigred on November 13, 2011 at 11:02 AM

No way! bigred is attacking Cain again? Who wudda thunk?

John the Libertarian on November 13, 2011 at 11:07 AM

I really don’t want Romney. I love The Newt but honestly, with the MSM in full attack mode, would there even be a chance?
Key West Reader on November 13, 2011 at 10:45 AM

The question might be better put___ With Newt in full attack mode on the MSM, would THEY even stand a chance? I’ll take Newt.

donh525 on November 13, 2011 at 11:07 AM

So I’ll vote for Romney if he’s the nominee – at least as a placeholder until we can elect more of a conservative.

Put it this way: who would you rather getting the next 3 SCOTUS picks – Romney or 0bama?

I rest my case.

cane_loader on November 13, 2011 at 11:01 AM

Cane? I don’t think we should view this as a “place holder” election.

2012 is summarized:

Will the USA become a Socialist Nation or will we maintain our Freedom? A time for choosing. A time to choose a mili-vanilli half black half white half dem half socialist half this half that.

Personally, I’m looking for someone that will go “all-in”. We are a Nation of Patriots. Or, we are not.

That is the choice. That is the definition of 2012.

Key West Reader on November 13, 2011 at 11:07 AM

The beauty part is that President Toonces could not answer any of the questions and follow-ups posed as pithily and factually within the time constraints of this “debate.” He does not get such pointed questions and aggressive follow-up in any of his interviews or press conferences.

Cheers for all of the participants.

onlineanalyst on November 13, 2011 at 11:09 AM

Personally, I’m looking for someone that will go “all-in”. We are a Nation of Patriots. Or, we are not.

That is the choice. That is the definition of 2012.

Key West Reader on November 13, 2011 at 11:07 AM

But if Romney is the nominee, you have to vote against 0bama. Withholding your vote from Rommney is half a vote for 0bama, because someone else in your state will make a full vote for 0bama.

At least you have to cut in half the vote of whoever that fool in your state is.

cane_loader on November 13, 2011 at 11:10 AM

I love The Newt but honestly, with the MSM in full attack mode, would there even be a chance?
Cain? Get your act together.

Key West Reader on November 13, 2011 at 10:45 AM

Seems to me that the MSM will be in full attack mode on whoever wins the Republican nomination. In their attacks the MSM will blur fact and fiction, as they always do. If there is no real dirt they will create dirt, or push stories about dirt regardless of the lack of substantiation. Thus, in my effort to analyze the candidates I disregard the fact that they will be attacked without mercy, because that applies to all of them. Doing that makes me focus more on who will be best able to attack Obama as well as not fold under Obama’s upcoming dirtiest campaign ever to be run.

GaltBlvnAtty on November 13, 2011 at 11:11 AM

I had assumed the decision to cut away at one hour was made by associated networks. If that was CBS’s doing, it would be baffling.

Perry did well with the humor, but I don’t think he advanced himself. Frankly, the sight of him on Letterman put his campaign to final rest for me. I don’t need another celebrity president. I need someone who is serious about turning this nation around.

Bachmann, with her frequent interruptions, is losing what viability she might have left. She has a case against CBS, to be sure, but whining does not enhance her leadership image.

Santorum struck a sour note on the need to treat Pakistan as a friend. There’s an element of truth to that, but it needs a lot of discretion to drive it, and he utterly failed to show an understanding of the competing forces vying for control of Pak.

Paul I like on economics, but his FP is so bad he completely disqualifies himself. Too bad.

Cain simply is not up to the job. His positions are generally right, and he is a likable guy and a leader, but he is terminally inarticulate and has reversed himself far too many times.

Romney is playing a high-stakes game of Being There. He’s just showing up and trying to avoid stepping in it, and hoping the others will flame out. So far it’s worked, but that was before the rise of…

Newt is running the most unorthodox campaign in memory, and that is a good thing. No money, pared-down appearance schedule, he is seeding the race intellectually, and it is working. The speeches he has made, as to the Values Forum, were very impressive indeed. And his positioning as the mature irenist among the candidates, being the only one consistently following Reagan’s 11th Republican commandment, shows the kind of uniting leadership that this race should be about, while still being strong on conservative principles.

I understand that Newt is a very flawed individual politically. To some extent, there is no doubt that he is saying what he needs to say to win the Nom. But he is the only one who inspires at this point, and whose general campaign would give America the choice of direction that she needs.

I believe Newt continues to rise, and goes on to obliterate zero in the debates.

paul1149 on November 13, 2011 at 11:13 AM

Doing that makes me focus more on who will be best able to attack Obama as well as not fold under Obama’s upcoming dirtiest campaign ever to be run.

GaltBlvnAtty on November 13, 2011 at 11:11 AM

Agreed. So, in your opinion who can withstand the onslaught? Who will be the best at exposing the fact that the MSM is the defacto DNC with a bullhorn? Who, other that Brietbart will expose these roles?

Key West Reader on November 13, 2011 at 11:15 AM

Should Newt be able to make it to the presidential debates, yes I think he would show America that the emperor has no clothes. He would embarrass 0bama so badly that even the lazy independent squishes in the middle would not be able to ignore it.

cane_loader on November 13, 2011 at 11:16 AM

I found it to be the most boring debate so far. I didn’t see anyone I thought had a Reaganesque view on foreign policy. We needed some of Palin’s “We Win, They Lose”.

huckleberryfriend on November 13, 2011 at 11:18 AM

Agreed. So, in your opinion who can withstand the onslaught? Who will be the best at exposing the fact that the MSM is the defacto DNC with a bullhorn? Who, other that Brietbart will expose these roles?

Key West Reader on November 13, 2011 at 11:15 AM

At this point I think it is Newt.

GaltBlvnAtty on November 13, 2011 at 11:19 AM

I understand that Newt is a very flawed individual politically. To some extent, there is no doubt that he is saying what he needs to say to win the Nom. But he is the only one who inspires at this point, and whose general campaign would give America the choice of direction that she needs.

I believe Newt continues to rise, and goes on to obliterate zero in the debates.

paul1149 on November 13, 2011 at 11:13 AM

Why is he so flawed? I keep having this dream that it’s Newt/Cain or Cain/Newt.

Bimbo’s that are funded through David Axelrod are one thing, but for a novice, I’m having a bit of difficulty figuring out what’s wrong with The Newt.

Key West Reader on November 13, 2011 at 11:19 AM

Lots of good performances and after a night to sleep on it, I still can’t say there is one clear winner. I will award this one as a tie between Rick Perry and Newt Gingrich for the win.

LOL… don’t let the Cainiacs get a hold of you. They were busy spinning Perry’s “Start at zero dollar foreign aid for every country and then re-evaluate” into “Perry will cut forein aid to Israel”.

Telling them you think Perry won the night is sure to send them over the edge. :)

TheRightMan on November 13, 2011 at 11:20 AM

NEWT shines on the Tiffany Network. Heh.

boko fittleworth on November 13, 2011 at 11:21 AM

The thing about Newt, and we’ve seen it in his fights with the moderators, is that he was a way of stepping back from the immediate question and throwing a roundhouse punch at the questioner.

If he were to turn this on Barry, instead of the moderator, Newt would be able to take 0bama’s and the moderator’s ticky-tack, myopic jabs, take a step back, and knock him out with a haymaker.

Other candidates might feel constrained to stay within the form of the question, which you KNOW is going to be constructed by the moderator to suit 0bama.

So, of all the candidates, I feel that Gingrich has the best ability to fight off a slanted moderator.

cane_loader on November 13, 2011 at 11:22 AM

Key West Reader on November 13, 2011

Look, I sympathize with your frustration and disdain for Romney, and he’s not my choice either. But if election day comes Obama vs Romney and you don’t punch the ballot for Romney, then you deserve Obama. We’re a nation of 300 million people. A third are liberal or worse, a third are conservative, and a third are confused. If you want to make it into a “purity or chaos” choice, you’re going to get neither. You’re going to get the same leftist statist crap we’ve been living with for 90 years.

We have a chance to hold the House, and win the Senate. With an R in the White House, we’ve got a chance to really turn in the right direction. A true conservative in the White House would be awesome, but even a flip-flopping RINO say anything to get elected Romney R will be better than Obama with a veto, legislation by Executive Order, and SCOTUS appointments.

Fight for your candidate, then vote for the Republican nominee.

peski on November 13, 2011 at 11:22 AM

LOL… don’t let the Cainiacs get a hold of you. They were busy spinning Perry’s “Start at zero dollar foreign aid for every country and then re-evaluate” into “Perry will cut forein aid to Israel”.

Telling them you think Perry won the night is sure to send them over the edge. :)

TheRightMan on November 13, 2011 at 11:20 AM

As a “Cainiac”, I agree with Perry on foreign aid, including to Israel. I also liked his views on drilling and exploiting oil. I like the fact that Perry is a TX Governor that will not fail to execute. On Cain, I like the fact that he conveys defference to the Generals on the Ground. I like that he came right out and endorsed Bush/Cheney on waterboarding.

So, there we are.

Key West Reader on November 13, 2011 at 11:25 AM

I will award this one as a tie between Rick Perry and Newt Gingrich for the win. Romney stays pretty much where he was. I have no idea what, if anything this does to Cain, (since he’s apparently made of Teflon) but I don’t see how this helped him with anyone who wasn’t already firmly in his camp. The rest of the field didn’t do enough to break out of their current positions.

Exactly what debate did you watch? Perhaps you were already drunk?

Rick Perry didn’t do anything except regurgitate a bunch of emotional talking points that his handlers told him to get into the discussion anywhere. And it certainly didn’t matter if it was apropos to the context of the question. And deer in the headlights? Cain? Perry was completely lost as the others were speaking. I expect all he was doing while they talked was remember which buzz words he could fit in his answers if he got the same question. The best thing that happened to Perry was that he wasn’t front and center. He was relegated to the same position on the stage that Ron Paul was.

At least Cain didn’t drag out 9-9-9 to solve foreign policy issues. But he does need something other than “surround himself with competent people” answer.

Gingrich needs a new schtick. This smartest man in the room stuff is great, but he’s eventually got to stop reminding us all that any of them are better than Obama. There is a disconnect with him. He says all the right things, but his history is over shadowing him.

Huntsman, Santorum, and Bachmann should not be invited back. And considering Perry’s weak performance, he has one more chance to articulate his own heartfelt ideas or he should not be invited back. He is an embarrassment to the GOP.

Paul should be kept around just to remind us how we should be dealing with our domestic policy.

This narrative that “Romney didn’t hurt himself” is just ridiculous. Romney isn’t going to hurt himself. It just isn’t going to happen. What Romney is doing is solidifying himself as the steady consistent candidate that is unflappable. Romney will be the nominee for that reason. Yeah, yeah, we all know he is a flip-flopper. That wont hurt him because he is being consistent now.

What has to happen now is that the candidates that don’t have a chance need to be encouraged to get out for the good of the country. Bachmann, Huntsman, and Santorum for sure. And I add Perry to that list because he doesn’t bring anything unique to the field that will outweigh his embarrassing behavior.

csdeven on November 13, 2011 at 11:25 AM

What is kung fu? The art of using the energy of your opponent’s attack as leverage to defeat him.

If Newt can use political kung fu to redirect the energy of a biased moderator’s questions PLUS 0bama’s own attacks, back against The Won, they will have to cart what’s left of 0bama off the stage, piece by piece.

cane_loader on November 13, 2011 at 11:25 AM

I believe Newt continues to rise, and goes on to obliterate zero in the debates.

paul1149 on November 13, 2011 at 11:13 AM

Excellent post. You summarized my opinions quite well.

peski on November 13, 2011 at 11:26 AM

@Key West Reader:

Newt has a history of abandoning principle to serve himself. He blinked during the shutdown crisis. He sat on the couch with Pelosi. He endorsed Scozzafava in NY. He’s pro-ethanol subsidies (see point #1). That immediately comes to mind; the list goes on. And then there is the personal side, which will work against him. See a recent piece at AtlasShrugged for a good article on his track record.

On the positive side, he says he has come to the Lord, so maybe there is root change. But one needs to be wary of that sort of thing in the political arena.

For those just tuning in, I am pro-Newt and believe he will win.

paul1149 on November 13, 2011 at 11:26 AM

paul1149 on November 13, 2011 at 11:26 AM

Thank you for the education on Newt. I’m skeptical because he’s establishment, like Romney.

I’m still thinking Cain/Gingrich as a winning ticket.

Key West Reader on November 13, 2011 at 11:30 AM

I’m still thinking Cain/Gingrich as a winning ticket.

Key West Reader on November 13, 2011 at 11:30 AM

Me, too. There’s a synergy there. Those two complement one another extremely well.

cane_loader on November 13, 2011 at 11:32 AM

As Newt continues his climb in the polls, the LSM, along with the Dems, are going to go nuts trying to kill his bid for the nomination. The result, I think, being the loss of credibility for them.

Assuming of course, Newt doesn’t have any more skeletons in the closet, and assuming the LSM and Dems have any credibility left.
Two big assumptions, I know.

donh525 on November 13, 2011 at 11:32 AM

csdeven on November 13, 2011 at 11:25 AM

So everyone but Romney did poorly? Geez… this line is almost becoming your 999 slogan.

TheRightMan on November 13, 2011 at 11:33 AM

That is the definition of 2012.

Key West Reader on November 13, 2011 at 11:07 AM

I noticed you didn’t deal with the SCOTUS issue. It sure would be dumb for us to allow Obama to stack the court with 2 and possible 3 progressives that will overturn every conservative law that a REAL conservative will sign. Just to make a stupid point that one can sit home and claim patriot status while allowing a distinctly Marxist president destroy the SCOTUS for the next 25 years.

That IS NOT the action of a patriot.

csdeven on November 13, 2011 at 11:33 AM

That IS NOT the action of a patriot.

csdeven on November 13, 2011 at 11:33 AM

Mark your calendar – we agree.

peski on November 13, 2011 at 11:34 AM

Although Gingrich/Cain sounds cool, just to watch Newt dismantle 0bama.

Don’t underestimate Cain, though.

I think he’d take 0bama out with real-world common sense, and likely embarrass him just as thoroughly as Newt would, IF the moderators didn’t target Cain.

If the moderators in a presidential debate were to obviously pick sides, thereby throwing the 2012 election, it’s time for a conservative Occupy the MSM, and don’t stop until some of the biggies are run out of town on a rail. We can’t keep allowing the media to pick our president – that’s what got us where we are….

cane_loader on November 13, 2011 at 11:35 AM

@KWR:

You’re welcome. HERE’S the Geller piece on Newt.

At this point I think I’d like to see Newt/Rubio. Newt/Cain would work too.

paul1149 on November 13, 2011 at 11:38 AM

Why is he so flawed?

Key West Reader on November 13, 2011 at 11:19 AM

His moral indiscretions, he is the only speaker to be disciplined for ethics violations, and he was blamed for the 1998 mid term losses.

csdeven on November 13, 2011 at 11:38 AM

Cain’s response to the first question in the first presidential debate:

“Mr. President, I’m TWICE as black as you are, and so I’m twice as COOL for all y’all out there to vote for. Just wanted to get that out of the way right off the bat. Now, Brit, what was the question?”

cane_loader on November 13, 2011 at 11:39 AM

I won’t vote if Romney is the nominee. A vote for Romney is a vote for Obama and a vote for the continuous corruption that has infested our Nation. Perry or Cain. If the MSM forces Romney on us then let BHO get his second term.

We’re prepared for that.

Key West Reader on November 13, 2011 at 10:57 AM

..then retreat down into your bunker for another four years while the SCOTUS gets overhauled, the executive orders flow like diarrhea, and ALL of the bills to stop ObamaCare and the incredible over-regulation of our businesses get repealed. Of course, you will be around HA beating your gums about what an assshole Obama is and how he’s taking this country down the road to ruin, waiting for your precious, perfect conservative Nirvana in 2016.

..you will have become, because of your inaction, the 52% of 2008 and we will all owe you a great debt of thanks.

(And spare me the “Romney would be the same” meme. No one is as bad as the immense bowel movement we have as POTUS now.)

The War Planner on November 13, 2011 at 11:40 AM

They were busy spinning Perry’s “Start at zero dollar foreign aid for every country and then re-evaluate” into “Perry will cut forein aid to Israel”.

TheRightMan on November 13, 2011 at 11:20 AM

So, like with Palin, when Perry says EVERY COUNTRY he REALLY means every country except Israel.

Great, he we go again with the lunatic worshipers of an unelectable candidate.

csdeven on November 13, 2011 at 11:41 AM

I’m shocked that Cain did not give one defense answer with “99 Luft Balloons”

Huntsman actually had a good answer regarding China and rebutted Romney’s answer quite well.

Perry has been playing “rope a dope” and is just starting to add layers onto his previous talking points, subtle, but only to those with knowledge of certain issues (unlike all pundits).

Kermit on November 13, 2011 at 11:41 AM

Every single candidate lost last night including Newt. They were all told at the beginning of the debate that the last half hour was going to be preempted and tossed over to a so called live feed on the internet.

That was just one more slap in the face to our GOP candidates by the LameStreamMedia and they all should have walked off stage at the end of the first hour.

Who in the hell is in charge of scheduling these debates?

Knucklehead on November 13, 2011 at 11:43 AM

Romney has shown with every debate that he is the most well-rounded person up there. Each crisis a POTUS faces will come in shapes of economics, military, health, environment, energy, etc and Romney will know what needs to be done. He will also be the type that those that are not Tea Party types in our party and the Indies will vote for because he comes across as likable and has facts right at his disposal.

Gingrich turned in a very solid performance BUT he will not attract the Indies and moderates of the Republican party we need to beat Obama. We just need to continue to GROW our conservative movement each election until we have a strong Congress and can overturn many of these bills and laws from the last several decades.

g2825m on November 13, 2011 at 11:43 AM

Newt Gingrich: For the most part, Newt put on a textbook display of how to dominate a crowded debate setting. Some may feel that he went a bit overboard in attacking the moderators, but that’s his style and the audience ate it up.

There is no such thing as “overboard” in repelling the obvious attempts by liberals masquerading as “debate moderators” actually trying to participate in the debate. As long as the RNC continues to allow the liberal media to host their debates, Newt really has no other choice.

deadrody on November 13, 2011 at 11:44 AM

Fight for your candidate, then vote for the Republican nominee.

peski on November 13, 2011 at 11:22 AM

..excruciatingly lucid maxim, sir (or madam)!

The War Planner on November 13, 2011 at 11:44 AM

After this debate: I HAVE OFFICIALLY REACHED STAGE 5 IN THE KUBLER ROSS CYCLE.

Mutnodjmet on November 13, 2011 at 11:44 AM

Every single candidate lost last night including Newt. They were all told at the beginning of the debate that the last half hour was going to be preempted and tossed over to a so called live feed on the internet.

Well, I wouldn’t be surprised if CBS were doing some research on its own future. They wanted to compare TV viewership to Internet viewership. This would be one way to do it. As a CBS statistician, I would be very interested in the results.

cane_loader on November 13, 2011 at 11:44 AM

The problem is the MSM’s belief that IT, and IT alone can decide elections. The MSM will be dismantled.

Key West Reader on November 13, 2011 at 11:03 AM

It is more than this. The MSM views itself as an extra-constitutional force in America, a de facto and fluid fourth branch of government, outside and supervisory to the other three. The MSM views itself as more worldly, borderless, wiser and better than our creaky, provincial and corrupt institutions. Its ethos of the watchdog has mutated into a monstrous self-identity as arbiter over all political life. This is why, in just one example, the NY Times can discuss the First Amendment (as it did in a magazine cover story a few years ago) as an outdated construct no longer helpful to global relations. The media feels it has the moral authority and duty to police political life and reshape America to its superior progressive vision.

Pelley opining on “the rule of law” is a minor example.

In past years candidates just uncomplainingly took their medicine. In 2008, Romney, Huckabee and McCain sat there like obedient schoolchildren as the media badgered and berated them with the same no-win questions based on false narratives.

Gingrich is challenging this. He is drawing out their arrogance and self-importance for all to see. Of course it is risky. But it is the most important development in our political discourse since Reagan’s more genial defiance of their narratives.

rrpjr on November 13, 2011 at 11:45 AM

So everyone but Romney did poorly? Geez… this line is almost becoming your 999 slogan.

TheRightMan on November 13, 2011 at 11:33 AM

None of the other candidates are performing at the level required to remain competitive over the long haul. T-Paw, Bachmann, Perry, Cain, and soon Gingrich will have risen in the polls and then crashed. You can argue that those aren’t the facts all you like, but it just makes your comments irresponsible. This is the Romney strategy and it is working.

csdeven on November 13, 2011 at 11:45 AM

After this debate: I HAVE OFFICIALLY REACHED STAGE 5 IN THE KUBLER ROSS CYCLE.

Mutnodjmet on November 13, 2011 at 11:44 AM

Now that’s funny.

rrpjr on November 13, 2011 at 11:47 AM

Although Gingrich/Cain sounds cool, just to watch Newt dismantle 0bama.

Exactly what is Herman Cain, man of many advisors, going to bring to that ticket, exactly ? I think I know the answer and my rebuttal is “don’t count on it”. He brings basically nothing, so stop the silliness. If the man cannot win the nomination, which I see as a zero possibility at this point, then he has no business being otherwise involved. I don’t know how much a VP debate influences opinion, but even Biden could probably wipe the floor with Cain.

deadrody on November 13, 2011 at 11:47 AM

No one has been able to take Romney out, and the MSM haven’t tried. It seems he is the media’s favored candidate.

cane_loader on November 13, 2011 at 11:47 AM

csdeven on November 13, 2011 at 11:41 AM

Speaking of which…Hi, CS!
///

annoyinglittletwerp on November 13, 2011 at 11:48 AM

And RE: Huntsman, since when is memorizing names a basis for anything ? His policies suck, but hey, he knows everyone’s name! What ?

deadrody on November 13, 2011 at 11:48 AM

Exactly what is Herman Cain, man of many advisors, going to bring to that ticket, exactly ? I think I know the answer and my rebuttal is “don’t count on it”. He brings basically nothing, so stop the silliness. If the man cannot win the nomination, which I see as a zero possibility at this point, then he has no business being otherwise involved. I don’t know how much a VP debate influences opinion, but even Biden could probably wipe the floor with Cain.

deadrody on November 13, 2011 at 11:47 AM

Cain brings a career of successful executive experience. He brings steadiness to Newt’s erratic brilliance. Together, they make a formidable team.

cane_loader on November 13, 2011 at 11:49 AM

No one has been able to take Romney out, and the MSM haven’t tried. It seems he is the media’s favored candidate.

cane_loader on November 13, 2011 at 11:47 AM

..maybe they (the MSM) should be careful what they wish for. (For what they wish?) Methinks they discount the Dems’ and Independents’ disaffection for The Pantload and their viewing Mittens as an acceptable alternative.

I know, I know.

The War Planner on November 13, 2011 at 11:50 AM

So, like with Palin, when Perry says EVERY COUNTRY he REALLY means every country except Israel.

Great, he we go again with the lunatic worshipers of an unelectable candidate.

csdeven on November 13, 2011 at 11:41 AM

Um. @ you.

Key West Reader on November 13, 2011 at 11:50 AM

cane_loader on November 13, 2011 at 11:49 AM

Two words: Mark. Block.

annoyinglittletwerp on November 13, 2011 at 11:50 AM

Huntsman comes across as a reactor, not an actor. That’s his biggest problem, to me. We don’t need another Jimmy Carter, and that’s who Huntsman’s analytical preachiness reminds me of.

cane_loader on November 13, 2011 at 11:51 AM

cane_loader on November 13, 2011 at 11:49 AM

Two words: Mark. Block.

annoyinglittletwerp on November 13, 2011 at 11:50 AM

That does not negate Cain’s undeniably successful career. It’s an easy catch phrase, but it’s too reductive to be accurate.

cane_loader on November 13, 2011 at 11:52 AM

csdeven on November 13, 2011 at 11:25 AM

Mitt Romney: Mr. Cranbrook Academy.

But he didn’t grow up with a silverspoon in his mouth, right?

BuckeyeSam on November 13, 2011 at 11:52 AM

I could also judge Rick Perry on, “Oops!,” but I’m still giving him a chance.

cane_loader on November 13, 2011 at 11:53 AM

I won’t vote if Romney is the nominee. A vote for Romney is a vote for Obama and a vote for the continuous corruption that has infested our Nation. Perry or Cain. If the MSM forces Romney on us then let BHO get his second term.

We’re prepared for that.

Key West Reader on November 13, 2011 at 10:57 AM

Key…I think you’ve been getting too much sun down there bro!

Even as much as I am a Romney supporter, I will still gladly punch the ticket for Cain or Gingrich or Perry or…. to get the current resident out of 1600 Pennsylvania. THIS is the goal.

For you and those that say Romney is Obama-lite is just lazy and you know that is not true. Where in these debates including back to 2008 has he shown anything remotely close to Obama? His Team has people such as Judge Robert Bork, former AG Michael Mukasey, Nat’l Security guru Cofer Black, Michael Chertoff, etc…Romney will vote conservative!

g2825m on November 13, 2011 at 11:54 AM

If you insist on judging Cain by Mark Block, then I will insist on judging Perry by “Oops.”

There – we’re both blind now. See how this works?

cane_loader on November 13, 2011 at 11:54 AM

Jazz, good review except for the outrageous overestimation of Perry’s performance & the outrageous underestimation of Santorum’s performance. But neither of them are going anywhere, so it doesn’t really matter.

itsnotaboutme on November 13, 2011 at 11:54 AM

Let’s just clear the field.

Obama fears Cain the most.
The Establishment fears Newt.
The MSM loves Romney, so let’s be sure to vote for him, ala MSM.

Cain will beat Obama over his wooden head with the Stick of Truth.

You want to be socialist? Vote Obama

You want to be American? Vot Cain.

There’s your choice. FUBO.

Key West Reader on November 13, 2011 at 11:56 AM

I agree with some of the posters as we are within 60 days of the first caucuses that the field should be winnowed down to Romney, Gingrich, Cain, and Perry.

Any disagreements here? We need to start figuring out who people are behind. I am sorry but Santorum (love the guy’s stances), Bachmann, Huntsman, and Paul (sorry devoted fans) just have NO chance of winning the nomination. They do not and that is a fact.

g2825m on November 13, 2011 at 11:58 AM

It’s kind of delicious, isn’t it, to imagine what 0bama must see when he looks at Herman Cain?

A successful black man who did it the hard way – everything 0bama is not.

0bama probably runs to the bathroom every time he sees Herman face….

cane_loader on November 13, 2011 at 11:58 AM

Key West Reader on November 13, 2011 at 11:56 AM

If you want competence-you make sure Perry or Newt is the nominee.
Cain lacks intellectual curiosity and has shown poor judgement.

annoyinglittletwerp on November 13, 2011 at 11:58 AM

g2825m on November 13, 2011 at 11:54 AM

As I said, we are prepared.

Thank you so much for the cites.

Key West Reader on November 13, 2011 at 11:59 AM

Cain will beat Obama over his wooden head with the Stick of Truth.

Key West Reader on November 13, 2011 at 11:56 AM

That phrasing right there is funny!! lololol

cane_loader on November 13, 2011 at 12:00 PM

My 17 year old has a better grasp of foreign policy than Herman Cain.

annoyinglittletwerp on November 13, 2011 at 12:00 PM

If you want competence-you make sure Perry or Newt is the nominee.
Cain lacks intellectual curiosity and has shown poor judgement.

annoyinglittletwerp on November 13, 2011 at 11:58 AM

“Oops!”

cane_loader on November 13, 2011 at 12:01 PM

Mitt Romney: Mr. Cranbrook Academy.

But he didn’t grow up with a silverspoon in his mouth, right?

BuckeyeSam on November 13, 2011 at 11:52 AM

Buckeye… 99% of the country does not know where Cranbrook Academy is and do not care where a person went to high school.

We want to know where they stand on the economy, foreign policy, jobs, defense, etc…

g2825m on November 13, 2011 at 12:01 PM

My 17 year old has a better grasp of foreign policy than Herman Cain.

annoyinglittletwerp on November 13, 2011 at 12:00 PM

And my kat can kount to 3.

Bring on the hyperbole :-)

cane_loader on November 13, 2011 at 12:01 PM

“Oops!”

cane_loader on November 13, 2011 at 12:01 PM

Cain’s campaign has been one HUGE ‘oops’.

annoyinglittletwerp on November 13, 2011 at 12:02 PM

cane_loader on November 13, 2011 at 12:01 PM

Your cat can count to 3?
He’s up on you then.

annoyinglittletwerp on November 13, 2011 at 12:04 PM

Cain’s campaign has been one HUGE ‘oops’.

annoyinglittletwerp on November 13, 2011 at 12:02 PM

Keep it up – you sure are making me want to vote for Rick Perry so that his supporters don’t think I’m stupid.

Let me know when your shovel’s worn out and you’re digging with the handle.

cane_loader on November 13, 2011 at 12:05 PM

Your cat can count to 3?
He’s up on you then.

annoyinglittletwerp on November 13, 2011 at 12:04 PM

And you’re a poopy head.
Are we to China yet? Let me know when the heat recedes….

cane_loader on November 13, 2011 at 12:06 PM

I agree with some of the posters as we are within 60 days of the first caucuses that the field should be winnowed down to Romney, Gingrich, Cain, and Perry.

Any disagreements here?

g2825m on November 13, 2011 at 11:58 AM

Ron Paul would rightfully disagree here. Heck, he’s polling better than Perry in a lot of ways.

MeatHeadinCA on November 13, 2011 at 12:06 PM

Obama:
After meeting with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev in Hawaii, he said the two men intend to “shape a common response” to new allegations that Iran has been covertly trying to build a nuclear bomb…and after this meeting he ran over to the Hawaii Dept of Health to make sure they NEVER release the fake birth certificate!

Okay maybe I added that last line…haha

however, you cannot tell me that while he was in Hawaii, of all places, and pending a case by Sheriff Joe, that Obama did not have some minion make some calls while there.

Conspiracy Theorists Unite!

g2825m on November 13, 2011 at 12:07 PM

cane_loader on November 13, 2011 at 12:05 PM

You’re doing a fine job of making people think you’re stupid.
You don’t need to vote for Rick perry to do that.
///

annoyinglittletwerp on November 13, 2011 at 12:07 PM

It’s kind of delicious, isn’t it, to imagine what 0bama must see when he looks at Herman Cain?

A successful black man who did it the hard way – everything 0bama is not.

0bama probably runs to the bathroom every time he sees Herman face….

cane_loader on November 13, 2011 at 11:58 AM

Cain is a real Black Man. He will be the one to stick it to this skinnny punk azzbiatch who succeeded in life by way of George Soros. His skoo records will be and ARE, discoverable now that he’s running for a second term.

Key West Reader on November 13, 2011 at 12:09 PM

I agree with some of the posters as we are within 60 days of the first caucuses that the field should be winnowed down to Romney, Gingrich, Cain, and Perry.

Any disagreements here?

g2825m on November 13, 2011 at 11:58 AM

Ron Paul would rightfully disagree here. Heck, he’s polling better than Perry in a lot of ways.

MeatHeadinCA on November 13, 2011 at 12:06 PM

I totally agree, however, Ron Paul WILL NEVER win the Presidency because of his foreign policy views are just not reasonable.

g2825m on November 13, 2011 at 12:09 PM

causing me to ask, “How many questions can Herman Cain answer by saying he’ll ask somebody else? Why not just ask Newt now, Herman?”

At least you’re honest in your partiality Jazz.

Cain is an experienced executive. And this is the answer an effective executive would give when they were hired to take on a new company. This is Cain’s management style. It’s an honest answer to the question. Now, you might now agree with his style, you might prefer one who does not review the history of the organization or assess the present conditions to set future goals. You might like one who brings his own agenda to the organization and remakes the organization to reflect his agenda.

All right, Cain threw the first response to Newt a few times in the Lincoln-Douglas at the Woodlands and I’ve seen this assumptive meme now developed that Cain let Newt respond first because Cain didn’t have an answer. But it appears to me that those who have this assumption about Cain’s motives, didn’t listen to the answer that Cain gave after Newt’s response. Cain didn’t mimic Newt’s answer; rather he gave the same answer he has given at other settings to the same subject. And at least once (perhaps twice), he corrected the moderator’s mistake when it was Newt’s turn to go first.

When I read stuff like this, as well as, the meme floated that Cain doesn’t know that China is a nuclear power, it indicates to me a prejudice that undermines the “objective credibility” of the person who is trying to persuade me with that meme. Frankly, it’s an insult to my intelligence.

Texas Gal on November 13, 2011 at 12:10 PM

I just watched the debate, Cain did well enough for someone that everyone knows is not a savant on foreign policy. But truth be told, no one in the field besides Huntsman, Santorum, Gingrich, and Bachmann can credibly say they have foreign policy experience. And even with that said, everyone in the field would heavily rely on foreign policy experts to make their decision.

Anyone suggesting otherwise, is not to be trusted with the presidency. So people harping on Cain, you hate him anyway, but those who still have an open mind, watch the debate and you will see a man who knows his beliefs, will separate allies from enemies, and will always look out for U.S. interest. This compares much more favorably than the current Commander-in-Chief.

milemarker2020 on November 13, 2011 at 12:10 PM

Let’s cut to the chase and eliminate some of the R’s right away. Santorum, Paul, Bachmann and Huntsman. That leaves four who have a chance to win the nomination. Let’s pare them down a little more. Perry had a fair to middlin night but he is not up to the job from the public acceptance position. That leaves three. Cain is getting stale with his ideas and his answers to serious questions. It may be fine to say I don’t know once in a while but to say it on every question is not good. He will begin to fade from lack of depth. That leaves us with you know who. Mitt and Newt. There is no one on the Republican or Demorat side that can match Newt in a debate. Mitt comes as close as anyone on the scene can but he does not possess the ability to go for the jugular like Newt. Newt will say something really stupid and Mitt will hedge a position before the primary is over. Both men have their flaws. It will be up to US to decide which one WE want and not whom we think the msm will allow us to choose. I have reached a point in my life where I can honestly say that I can vote for a flawed man/woman with the knowledge that they can do a great job and still have some serious warts. For those of you who think that you cannot vote for X or Y you need to STFU! Do what you must but don’t try to sell your BS to anyone else. If for NO other reason, the SCOTUS is too important to allow this Marxist to choose one or two justices that will influence out nations direction for the next decade.

inspectorudy on November 13, 2011 at 12:12 PM

cane_loader on November 13, 2011 at 12:05 PM

You’re doing a fine job of making people think you’re stupid.
You don’t need to vote for Rick perry to do that.
///

annoyinglittletwerp on November 13, 2011 at 12:07 PM

I challenge you to a butterfly-ballot duel.

The one with the most votes for Pat Buchanan loses. Except I get to accuse Perry of setting up roadblocks because Cain is not a liberal.

cane_loader on November 13, 2011 at 12:13 PM

Anyone suggesting otherwise, is not to be trusted with the presidency. So people harping on Cain, you hate him anyway, but those who still have an open mind, watch the debate and you will see a man who knows his beliefs, will separate allies from enemies, and will always look out for U.S. interest. This compares much more favorably than the current Commander-in-Chief.

milemarker2020 on November 13, 2011 at 12:10 PM

MM2020
I will agree with you and do here BUT also want you to apply the same template for Romney as in past posts you have not been exactly fair with Romney that you ask us to be with Cain?

Fair?

g2825m on November 13, 2011 at 12:15 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3