A few people specifically requested I do a write-up of last nights' clash of titans, or approved of my stated intent to do so. Never let it be said that I don't do requests. Hoping this won't be overly lengthy, but also hoping this will wet my thirst to return to regular updates. We'll see.
Without further ado, a brief summary of each persons performance, with a 1-10 scale. Note that the ranking is not based on agreement or disagreement with the person's policy positions or ideology, only how well I feel they did in the debate.
Rand Paul
He is, as the kids say, "my boy", and he had a golden opportunity in this venue that I would say was only "partially seized". He stumbled falling out of the gate, because while he may have been able to play the persecution card regarding the usual Trump ad hominem, his opening statement did not take full advantage of the time allotted, and he seemed to lack an ability to connect with the audience. (Minus that one guy who clapped for everything he said, who I suspect is the same guy who travels to golf events to yell "get in the hole" whenever someone putts.) This lack is not surprising, as the Paul family appears to share my occasional delusion that the truth is it's own defender. It would be, and is, in the scope of providence, but here a little more pathos might be required.
He finished strong, I thought that he accurately and directly summarized his views and he shines most when he diverges from the Republican mainstream, as on the Middle East and weed. Personal bias is playing a role there for me, of course, but I will leave it to the viewer to judge how much. Ultimately he was most damaged by a weak opening and a weak conclusion. Come on, the secret service isn't going to use a three word phrase for a codename.
6/10
Mike Huckabee
In the past I have not been a Huckabee booster. I have still not gotten over the inanity of the typical fundygelical crowd's Dolchstosslegende during the Romney campaign. I continue to find the man's theology eye-roll inducing. All of that being said, he acquitted himself well Wednesday night. He had limited opportunity to speak (even with three hours, eleven speakers is a hard row to hoe), but on each of his presentations, he was unafraid to speak truth to power, particularly on the issues that matter most to Christians. He also had one of the strongest opening statements. I wouldn't give him an official "winner" label, as I doubt he can, or intends to, reach the broad conservative mileau, but the hour suited the man from the Christian perspective.
8/10
Marco Rubio
A clear winner on Wednesday. Looked intelligent, capable, well-spoken and ready to lead. Dominated Trump on the question regarding Trump's prior foreign policy gaffes. I doubt very much I am in the Rubio camp personally on foreign policy issues, and I think tactics like calling Vladimir Putin a "thug" reflect the typical neoconservative fantasy that we are still living in the 1980's and still dealing with the same Russia. But that does not reflect his score, and he showed a competent and polished blend of "compassionate conservatism" (his appeal to Spanish-speakers was a masterstroke) and no-nonsense American exceptionalism that plays to the base ("the American military was not designed for pinpricks" was similarly excellent). I saw concerns that he came off too scripted in the moment, but I don't doubt his commitment to his convictions, and after President Teleprompter, I don't doubt that most things would be an improvement.
9/10
Ted Cruz
Yawn. Disappointing performance of the night goes to this guy. On top of the sheer moroseness of his mannerisms (one participant in my facebook drama during the live coverage wondered if the Clinton family was shooting his dogs whenever he answered a question), Senator Cruz meandered into generalized talking points rather than giving policy specifics. I thought essentially refusing to give an alternative to the Iran deal while insisting on the "tear it up" approach probably hurt him with "moderates". For those inexperienced with Ted Cruz, I recommend his Senate floor presentations over this debate.
4/10
Ben Carson
Numbers don't lie, this guy is within 3-5 points of Trump right now, although how much he's getting the benefit of some obvious voting tactics I'm unsure. He presented as dignified and confident throughout the debate, although the seeming lack of passion in his calm demeanor may hurt him with the right of the party. Was called one of the big losers of the debate on CNN, but I doubt his numbers will fluctuate much after his sticking to his guns. He was also one of three men on stage willing to talk about former foreign policy gaffes on the part of this country, which the media consistently underestimates in terms of impact on the white 18-30 crowd.
7/10
Donald Trump
The debate format was structured essentially to give the other lobsters in the pot an opportunity to claw at the one on top, which they efficiently did. I had a whole post started on this man, but haven't finished it and am unsure that I will. Suffice it to say I think he showed his true colors in this event. Swaggering, blustery and utterly unconvincing on women's issues (he was actively booed when going after Bush on funding for women's health), the man has (hopefully) shown the American people that he cannot, in fact, be trusted to govern. He proved vague on immigration, nasty and issue avoidant in engagement with specific candidates, and paranoid and shallow on the issue of vaccines (Carson's line about doctors was particularly adept.) He also served as a near-bottomless fount of easy wins for Fiorina, which I doubt he grasped. On the other, hand, I think I'm probably awarding him a full point for his Secret Service codename joke.
3/10
Jeb Bush
Started out slow, giving me the impression he would sink to his common perception of being too soft. He later rallied, and I thought took an impressive stand on Planned Parenthood. While I disagree with him on minutiae of marijuana legalization, I thought he came off as honest and forthright with the American people on the issue, as well as humble. That moment alone was a high-water mark. Bush showed himself to be particularly adept at attack by defense. As the primary target of calumny from Trump, he showed a remarkable willingness to stick to his guns and defend both his family and his policy statements, which I think people will like. I doubt I'd vote for the man in a multi-option primary setting, but he displayed a deftness on Wednesday that will help him more than his copious cash reserves.
7/10
Scott Walker
There is not a lot to say here, as Walker didn't appear to have a lot to say there. What he did say was correct, but in mannerisms and terminology he appeared to have accepted the status of an also-ran. The appeal to Wisconsin experience was valid, but the lack of engagement with other candidates' specific statements made him look almost disinterested. It's telling that I am having a hard time remembering specific things he said.
5/10
Carly Fiorina
Had the title of clear winner snatched from her by the presence of Rubio. For every thrust Trump had, she had a parry, and she proved herself serious and competent even during the seeming throwaway questions. Her closing statement and answer to the "woman on the ten dollar bill" gave her the appearance of a leader and an adult, and gave the audience what any debater should: take-away memories. She was accused of being "unsmiling" in the aftermath, but I think many conservatives will recognize her as a serious woman for a serious hour in this nation. Bonus for being one of the candidates to engage on foreign policy and present more than vague keyword phrases.
9/10
John Kasich
In one sense, he did was he needed to do: present himself, implicitly rather than explicitly, as the voice of reason among a pack of extremists, while also showing himself direct and assertive (he probably led in direct confrontation with the "moderators", who on a side note showed themselves unworthy of the title). On the other side of the coin, he failed to convince anyone that all his talk of unity and compromise means anything other than the failed tactics of capitulation that the Graham's and McCain's have made a source of nausea for consistent conservatives. He dodged a bullet on not having to answer any questions about Kim Davis. But I think the informed GOP voter will know *why* he didn't answer any.
5/10
Chris Christie
The man's record does not make him a viable choice for right-wingers, however he might try to spin himself. Someone in the aftermath panel said a storyline of the debate was "magically, Chris Christie is a conservative", and in fact, he scored serious points speaking to his record as governor and his stances on the issues. Both he and Dr. Paul may have lost more than they gained on the marijuana tiff. He did, along with Kasich, show a seriousness and maturity in asked to hurry through the "fight with Trump" questions to the real issues. In a hypothetical general election, however, his record would be his undoing.
6/10.
All in all, it was a fairly riveting three hour marathon. Personally I'm hoping the current status of the polls will be shaken (or overthrown) by the exchange. The clear winners were Fiorina, Rubio, in one sense Huckabee, in another Bush. Cruz and Trump probably hurt rather than helped themselves. I would look forward to voting for any of them that aren't named Trump, given the alternative.
~JS
No comments:
Post a Comment