Last debate, last stand?
posted at 11:35 am on February 22, 2012 by Ed Morrissey
Tonight, the Republican candidates for the presidential nomination will hold the 20th nationally-televised debate — or 24th, or 22nd, depending on what counts as an official debate and what doesn’t. Do Mike Huckabee’s forums count? How about Jim DeMint’s Palmetto Forum in September? Apparently not, but that’s just fine, because we’ve had plenty as it is. The candidates seem to agree, as I note in my column for The Week, since the next two debates have been canceled, and apparently no one has committed to doing the only other one left on the schedule after tonight, an NPR/PBS debate from Portland, Oregon on March 19th.
Once I get past venting my frustration at the utter waste of time these debates turned out to be, I note that the two men with the most to gain or lose tonight are Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich. And then … I channel just a little more frustration:
That means Wednesday’s debate is perhaps the last time we will see the candidates on stage together in this primary cycle. Can we expect that this event will be any more meaningful than the 19 game shows that preceded it? Probably not, but it could be important for Gingrich and Santorum. John King gets the nod again as moderator for CNN, a curious decision after King’s performance in the debates overall and especially since this might be the final opportunity to have Wolf Blitzer run the show. If Gingrich can rekindle the embers of his campaign with another attack on the media — especially one that produces a fumbling response, like King’s in South Carolina, rather than the far more effective riposte Blitzer gave Gingrich in Florida — he could perhaps generate a third surge among conservatives.
For Santorum, his momentum makes him the biggest target in the debate. CNN will no doubt open a host of social-conservative issues and force Santorum to talk about contraception and Satan all night long. If he falls into that trap, his momentum will dissipate quickly. If he can turn the tables on King and force the conversation back to religious and economic liberty, Santorum will ease fears that he is too distracting to beat Obama on the economy.
In the end, though, this debate will probably produce nothing more than a final round of gotcha moments and a lot of talk about negative ads from other candidates in the field. The only game changers will come on perceived gaffes and facial expressions rather than actual policy differences and defense of value systems. After 20 of these debates, that will sound like an appropriate finale to American Political Gladiators, which has all of the political substance of the original, with none of the costumes or suspense.
Gingrich has already committed publicly to staying away from negative attacks in the debate:
Appearing on Fox News’s America’s Newsroom on Wednesday, Gingrich promised he would “focus on the big solutions,” in tonight’s debate and “stay out of the kind of negativity that unfortunately has characterized way too much of this race.” When asked about a report that said his daughters wanted him to appear more presidential, Gingrich responded that he was “behaving too much like a normal candidate” after feeling the brunt of Romney’s advertising blitz in Florida.
“I think they were concerned that the weight of negative advertising by Romney had drawn us into a back and forth that wasn’t particularly helpful,” he said. “I think what people want to know is, ‘Are you capable of solving the country’s problems?’”
Unfortunately, that probably means that Gingrich won’t get too much attention, thanks to the fundamentally unserious nature of the format. To the extent that Mitt Romney decides to go on the attack — and he may not at all, with his standing rebounding a bit in Arizona and Michigan, if not nationally — it will be to go after Rick Santorum. Santorum will probably go after Romney on health care reform and Ron Paul on foreign policy, but he has no great need to go after Gingrich, either. Gingrich will be a non-factor in Michigan, Santorum’s best shot to win a primary next Tuesday, thanks to Gingrich’s decision to stay out of the state to concentrate on his native state of Georgia, one of the Super Tuesday states.
Politico previews Santorum’s moment at center stage, and predicts a tough round of questioning on social-conservative issues:
One point to watch is how he and his rivals handle discussions of faith (the debate falls on Ash Wednesday) at a time when theology, world views and belief systems are frequently mentioned in the campaign — usually with respect to President Barack Obama.
One thing seems certain: The moderator is likely to ask Santorum at some point about some of his more controversial statements, such as remarks about birth control, or his backer Foster Friess’s widely publicized joke about women using aspirin “between their knees” as birth control.
Complicating Santorum’s task on the eve of the debate was his defense of a speech — unearthed and splashed on the Drudge Report on Tuesday — he made in 2008 in which he talked about Satan infiltrating the United States.
Santorum might be asked about it by moderator John King and could use such a question — or others like it — to slam the media, which he has said is trying to “destroy” a conservative candidate. The approach would be similar to the way Gingrich leveraged a confrontation with King at the debate before the South Carolina primary, when he was asked about claims made by his ex-wife.
Santorum will need to avoid seeming angry or defensive, reactions Romney is likely to try to provoke. Romney may also attempt to drive a wedge between Santorum and the rest of the GOP by seizing on his past comments about banning contraception, although that’s risky for a candidate who has his own problems with the GOP base.
Overall, the timing affords Santorum the chance to passionately make a case for himself before a televised audience, one of the elements of his candidacy his backers find most appealing. Just as important, a strong performance could vault him ahead of Romney in the two states in which a number of voters say they are still undecided.
As Gingrich proved in more than one debate, getting angry at the moderator can prove fruitful for rallying the base. John King’s presence on stage, and his deer-in-the-headlights response to Gingrich in the South Carolina debate, may leave Santorum an opening for that strategy. However he deals with these topics, Santorum has to show that he can both defend himself while bringing the debate back to the topics of religious and economic liberty rather than the relative merits of the Pill and IUDs. If he can pull that off, Santorum may well rally the rest of the fence-sitters in the last national debate game show gladiatorial combat of the season.
Related Posts:









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
ahahaha I cheated on my wife, humiliated my family, stole taxpayer money, and lied to my constituents. ahahahahhahahaahahahahahahaha IT’S FUNNY WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT IT.
Jeddite on March 29, 2013 at 8:59 AM
Maybe Sanford can win this election, but I’m still not convinced he can. I think he’s a very poor choice, but typical of what the Vichy Republicans are running.
I don’t know how we’ll replace those Country Club types with real, honest conservatives, but it has to be done or the Constitution will be dead.
TKindred on March 29, 2013 at 9:05 AM
I’m not a big fan of the idea that Sanford is uniquely qualified for Congress because of his fall from grace. How does abandoning your job and family to chase tail in South America teach you anything you can apply to getting our fiscal house in order?
Happy Nomad on March 29, 2013 at 9:05 AM
It may be too late. To revive the GOP, that is. We have a Zombie Republican Party on our hands.
Myron Falwell on March 29, 2013 at 9:08 AM
The problem I have with Sanford is not any failing in his personal life. Plenty of politicians have those. It’s that he failed in his professional life. Going AWOL the way he did is a disqualifier IMO. It’s not like South Carolina Republicans don’t have an alternative in this race. Bostic may have his alleged skeletons, but nothing like Sanford’s. Why risk it?
Doughboy on March 29, 2013 at 9:15 AM
Politics is no place for penance.
If Mr Sanford had any humility and respect for the electorate, he would have demurred on any opportunity to run for public office.
Now like many others have done recently, he’s put personal ambitions and desires above common sense and honest conclusions.
In the end it will hurt the very people Mr. Sanford states he has a desire to allegedly help.
Mr. Sanford has actually unwittingly revealed to us that nothing has changed. Past is indeed prologue.
Marcus Traianus on March 29, 2013 at 9:20 AM
*gag*
bazil9 on March 29, 2013 at 9:21 AM
I wish Sanford would have just stepped down and gone away! The man is a hypocrite. he rebuked Clinton for his infidelity and his lies, declaring Clinton should have stepped down as President. when Sanford did it, he abandoned his position & left the state to meet his mistress, lied, committed adultry, then fought to remain in office, defending what he did and what Clinton had done was somehow different.
He has demonstrated he is self-serving and his morals, ethics, and honesty have an ‘on’/'off’ switch. While he has proven with those qualities he belongs in Washington, if we ever hope to change things there we have to make sure people like him never make it there…or ever hold office again.
easyt65 on March 29, 2013 at 9:32 AM
Yeah I guess this should be the point when we finally stop making our party the butt of every political joke.
Go away Sanford!
Valkyriepundit on March 29, 2013 at 9:43 AM
The commenters here are FULL OF HOTAIR! Sanford is the right choice, he is a proven fighter in the US Congress and as Governor he took on the worst bunch of Good Old Boy Republicans in the country! Bostic is a tool and has never seen a spending bill he would refuse to support. Bostic would also lose big to the DRat!
el Vaquero on March 29, 2013 at 9:44 AM
Somewhere it says…..”let he without sin cast the first stone”.
Right now I mostly care about fiscal matters, so I think Sandford would be the best choice.
I believe his ex wife supports him, so obviously she has put their differences (his infidelity, her lack of warmth which was probably why he strayed in the first place; it doesn’t appear that he is a serial adulterer like Clinton, Kennedy, etc.) so it shouldn’t be a deal breaker. I believe his four sons support him too.
And as for stealing taxpayer money, I am not sure if that is correct. It is my understanding that he met her while at a business conference for the state; since he was having an affair, and someone made a ruckus, he paid back the money spent on the trip.
And as for not telling his staff where he was when he was with his
girlfriend? You have to be kidding me. He was always available via cell phone. They could get in touch with him if they wanted.
Their announcing that they couldn’t find him was political.
Amjean on March 29, 2013 at 10:21 AM
Wow! I’m stunned with your post. Apparently lack of integrity, ethics, and morality don’t matter in your world.
How is this election about the redemption of Mark Sanford?
Fair enough. So for you integrity doesn’t matter so long as the candidate says all the right stuff about fiscal matters? How does that make you any different than one of the parasitic single-issue voters that supported the rat-eared devil?
So….. It really isn’t adultery if you only do it once and the family doesn’t completely disown you afterwards?
So….. It really isn’t stealing if you pay back public money when somebody makes a ruckus?
So…. It really isn’t being derelict in your responsibilities as Governor if you have your cell phone on? There are some really easy ways to know if you are failing as a leader. One of them is if you have your staff lying for you.
Happy Nomad on March 29, 2013 at 10:33 AM
It’s bad enough cheating on your wife. But going AWOL. lying to the people of his state and misappropriating funds to finance his romance should disqualify this dirtbag from holding office ever again.
bw222 on March 29, 2013 at 10:48 AM
After watching Republicans lose race after race when it seemed they couldn’t, from the two yokels babbling about how rape doesn’t get you pregnant (remember, one of them made his remark while the other remark was still blazing its way around the web), to Christine O’Donnell, to Linda McMahon, to trying to find someone to run against an incumbent empty suit with a blank resume with the economy in the toilet and FAILING, now this imbecile running in SC and leading, I’m convinced that the national Republican party is throwing elections on purpose. To what end, I don’t know, but I can’t believe a party can be this inept.
Russ in OR on March 29, 2013 at 10:51 AM
“Hey, my cheating/stealing/humiliating my family is SOOOOOO 2009. Let’s focus on how I can fail in 2014.”
-Disgraced Governor & Appalachia Trail hiker Mark Sanford
portlandon on March 29, 2013 at 10:58 AM
I will always suspect that his girlfriend was a DNC swallow.
slickwillie2001 on March 29, 2013 at 11:17 AM
Wow…. his defense boils down to “greatness choosing the man”. If my eyes roll any further, I’ll be able to see out the back of my head.
Murf76 on March 29, 2013 at 12:49 PM
All I know about him is he’ll screw over other people and break promises/oaths for personal benefit without serious concern for his actions; because he’s already done so.
I’m not saying put him to death “throw the first stone” I’m saying accept that he’s got a history of not being trustworthy, maybe don’t trust him.
Do you give your money to robbers instead of banks for safe-keeping? I mean maybe he won’t do the same thing this time he’s done in the past… right?
How is looking at what someone does and considering that a template for what they’re willing to do offensive to you? Do you find learning form history offensive as well?
People may change, but they usually don’t. Why should we start with the assumption he’ll never do again what he’s already done and put himself above his job, his promises, and everything else?
gekkobear on March 29, 2013 at 1:24 PM
The simple answer is to get informed about the candidates who are running, during the Primary election and then support the candidates who convince you that they are “real, honest conservatives.”
Running for Congress is a huge and expensive project that takes a massive amount of time away from family and career. A candidate and their family also lose almost all of their privacy during the campaign.
Good conservative candidates will only be willing to run if they know they can count on support from their fellow Conservatives.
wren on March 29, 2013 at 5:53 PM
Thank you for posting the video of the highlights from the Bostic vs. Sanford debate, Ed! The special run-off election on Tuesday (April 2) is an important one, so the more people who are informed about the race the better!
I watched the whole debate via the web yesterday and while both men did well, I was most impressed by Curtis Bostic.
Curtis Bostic was articulate, confident and a strong proponent of Conservative values.
Both men talked about the importance of developing “relationships” in order to get things done in Washington, several times during the debate. Mark Sanford may have had a head start in developing political relationships a few years ago. But any relationships that Sanford had in the past must have been seriously damaged by his embarrassing lack of judgement and integrity when he went AWOL to visit his mistress in Argentina. Why would anybody trust Mark Sanford again after he so publicly demonstrated that he was not worthy of trust?
Curtis Bostic is a strong candidate for the Republican nomination for South Carolina’s 1st Congressional District, and selecting him on Tuesday is the best way to prevent having to listen to Democrats make jokes about Republican family values in Argentina for the next several years.
You can learn more about Curtis Bostic at his campaign website:
http://www.stopspending.com/
Integrity matters!
wren on March 29, 2013 at 6:12 PM
People, especially the kind of people that Sanford panders to, love a good mea culpa. Even more so, they love a good redemption story.
He’s still a joke, though. There’s a difference between “mistakes” and what he did. After what he did and the public shaming that followed, trying to return to office is simply pathological power-seeking by someone without the conscience or moral clarity to realize his own urges.
mintycrys on March 29, 2013 at 7:14 PM