The debate among the Republican candidates on CNBC just ended. It seemed different from many of the other debates; tonight the CNBC "moderators" seemed to be arguing with the candidates. I thought it particularly peculiar that some of the questions went on for substantially longer than the time allowed to the candidates to respond. So, in short, the substance of the debate was illuminating, but the nature of the interactions between the CNBC folks and the candidates was abysmal.
As for the candidates themselves, there were certain truths that became evident as the debate wore on.
1) Rick Perry is done. He began his performance well enough. Indeed, for the most part he exceeded his earlier debate performance. That, of course, is not saying much, but Perry was doing well for a while. Then came the moment when Perry could not remember his own plan for controlling government costs. This is a man who is out campaigning every day and telling crowds about this very plan. His inability to remember his own plan was a killer in my opinion.
2) Jon Huntsman also showed himself to be devoid of substance. Huntsman said that Romney's statement about holding China responsible for currency manipulation was "pandering". Then Huntsman agreed that China does manipulate its currency. His solution to that problem was non-existent. Huntsman says we need to talk to the Chinese. Huntman, like Perry, is toast.
3) Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney were the clear winners tonight. Gingrich had the best moment of the evening when he pointed out the lunacy of a question that asked him in thirty seconds or less to explain how to deal with the American healthcare system once Obamacare is repealed. Gingrich also demonstrated once again his vast knowledge of how the government works and about how problems can be solved. For his part, Romney showed himself to be calm under fire, knowledgable and rational. No one scored any points against him. Indeed, most of the arguing on the stage was between the CNBC "moderators" on the one side and the candidates on the other. There was very little sniping among the candidates.
4) Herman Cain also came across well. He was met, of course, by the inevitable question about the sexual harrassment allegations. The audience was rightly annoyed by that question since the debate was supposed to be just about the economy, entitlements and the budget. Romney did well to sidestep the followup question about Cain's problems. Cain also seemed to be playing up 9-9-9 just a bit too often. Still, Cain's humor and his logical mind shone through in this debate as they have in the past.
5) Michelle Bachmann had her best debate performance ever in my opinion. The problem is,however, that it is probably too little too late. Bachmann avoided the usual catch phrases and actually spoke about substance. She demonstrated tonight a measure of insight and intelligence that has not often been shown in prior debates.
6) Ron Paul also had a relatively good performance. Sure, there were moments when it was hard to follow his stream of consciousness delivery. And I doubt that there are too many Americans who buy into his view of what the country should be. Nevertheless, I think he helped himself tonight.
7) That leaves Rick Santorum. As usual, Santorum had a few moments when he shone in his answers. The problem, however, is that he got few questions and his campaign continues to sink from sight.
No matter what one thought of the debate tonight, there are two certainties that no one can deny: First, Jim Cramer does not belong in the group of moderators for any future debate. His performance was a joke. Second, future debates have to change the format. One minute answers do not allow for anything approaching a comprehensive answer. The American people deserve to hear in more detail what the candidates propose.
No comments:
Post a Comment