The GOP Debate

After watching tonight's debate among the Republican presidential candidates, my main reaction is that these are some very good and qualified people. Okay, Ron Paul is still loopy and cannot seem to put a full paragraph together. And Michele Bachmann sometimes seems more like a walking talking point than a thinking person. Nevertheless, the group was impressive. Specifically, there were great moments and great answers by a number of these folks. Newt Gingrich gets my vote as the most consistently thoughtful and clear thinking of the group. Mitt Romney seemed to want to come across as presidential, and he did well in that regard. His answers were clear, he put forward ideas that made sense and he never seemed to go down into the fighting pits the way that Bachmann and Pawlenty and Santorum did. Herman Cain came across as a businessman not a politician. Still, none of his business oriented answers could touch Romney's answer about two of his investments at Bain Capital that resulted in layoffs. Romney pointed out that there had been over 100 companies in which Bain had invested and only some were successful. It was one of those moments when reality triumphed and the ignorance of the assumption in the question was revealed. Tim Pawlenty had the funniest line of the night when he offered to cook dinner for anyone who could find Obama's plan on how to deal with the economy. Pawlenty, however, was scarred by his cage match with Bachmann. Both of them came out of that exchange wounded. Rick Santorum was surprisingly effective in his answers although I doubt that too many people around the country cared how many couties in Iowa he had visited. Jon Huntsman had good answers, but in his delivery he always seemed to be on the verge of tears. I doubt that most of the Iowa GOP voters would agree with his positions though.

So here is my guess as to the most memorable moment of the debate. It occured when Gingrich told Chris Wallace that not only should the candidates put aside the talking points but also the press panel should put aside the "gotcha" questions. Gingrich was just as feisty for the remainder of the evening. Who knows, he may have even put himself back into the race. Gingrich was the biggest winner tonight.

The second big winner was Romney. He did what he needed to. He was presidential. He was above the fray. He was competent. He made clear that he knew something that Obama did not know, namely, how to fix the economy.

The biggest loser was Pawlenty. He had a chance to break through into the top group, but instead he lost it in a battle with Bachmann.

I also think that Bachmann lost in a big way. She seemed to be repeating talking points or parts of her stump speech. Even when she had to deal with hard questions she fell back on lines that were clearly and obviously rehearsed. The best example of this was the question about whether or not she would "submit" to her husband even when she was president. She answered that ridiculous question well, but then she went into a litany about her life with her husband that I have heard her say at least three times. I think that most people would rather have a president who thinks rather than one who memorizes lines well. We have seen that talent reading a teleprompter does not mean talent as a leader. The same can be said for talent memorizing a script. Bachmann also lost from the Pawlenty battle. I doubt that many people missed the fact that on every issue that Bachmann claimed to have led the way, her side lost the battle. It was not good for her future as a candidate.

One final note: for much of the last four months, we have heard over and over again in the media that Obama would win because none of the Republicans would be a formidable opponent. Tonight's debate put that meme to rest. Aside from Ron Paul, each of the candidates in the debate could hold his or her own with Obama. The true message of the debate is just more bad news for Obama and the Obamacrats.