For Advertising Info, Write.
rwnews@blogads.com
Premium Left blogad
Left Blog Ad

Advertisement
Winners & Losers In The GOP’s New Hampshire Debate
Written By : John Hawkins

There was a debate last night. Did you see it? If not, it may be because it was on freaking Bloomberg TV. I don’t know where they go from there. CB radio, maybe?

Charlie Rose was the debate moderator, the debate was entirely focused on the economy, and there was actually a round where the candidates got to ask each other questions (That should be in every debate). All in all, it was a good debate. A lot less “Gardasil!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!” and “Why don’t you pick a fight with that guy?” and a lot more time focused on issues. Here’s a rundown of how everyone did.

Winner: 1) Newt Gingrich. He’s just head and tails better than everyone else on the stage. He’s knowledgable, charismatic, positive — he’s just an outstanding debater. In fact, if this were all about debating, the race would be over already and Gingrich would be the nominee.

“If you want to put people in jail, you should start with Barney Frank and Chris Dodd.” — Newt Gingrich in response to a question about putting banking executives in jail for the housing crash

“You gotta be able to afford it to be able to buy it and that’s where we went wrong in the last decade.” — Newt Gingrich

2) Michele Bachmann/Herman Cain/Rick Santorum. Michele Bachmann looked and sounded good. She was crisp, knowledgable, but, she also said this:

“When you take the 9-9-9 plan and turn it upside down, the devil’s in the details.” — Michele Bachmann

Personally, I thought the line was funny, but it didn’t seem to get a good reaction — maybe because it sounds like a SNL parody of Bachmann.

“Obama plans for Medicare to collapse so everyone will be pushed into Obamacare.” — Michele Bachmann

Santorum made a fantastic point about how the number of children being born out of wedlock is driving poverty in this country, ignored the moderator and kept going at one point, and just knocked Cain’s block off when he got a chance — he’s just like the Honey Badger up there. Rick Santorum don’t give a crap!!!

Herman Cain was a little “one note.” The answer to every question was 9-9-9. That’s a dilemma created by Cain’s situation. He’s trying to build name recognition and since the plan is generally getting a good reaction, he keeps repeating it. But people who hear it over and over again are going to get annoyed with it.

He also noted that he initially supported TARP, which may be the first time some of the people who are excited about him have heard that. In his defense, he has said that he later changed his mind because he didn’t like how TARP was implemented.

Although Cain seemed a little one dimensional in the early part of the debate, he picked it up and improved his performance in the second half of the debate.

“I don’t object to the Federal Reserve being audited. It’s simply not my top priority. My top priority is 9-9-9!” — Herman Cain

5) Ron Paul: Ron Paul is generally pretty good on the economy — and he was tonight. He tends to have a round-a-bout rambling style though and even when he’s saying things you agree with, he doesn’t always come across well. In that sense, and this could be a positive to a lot of people, he’s the anti-Mitt Romney. On the upside, it makes him seem more authentic, but on the other hand, it’s hard to picture Ron Paul as the leader of the free world.

Ron Paul press release sent out during the debate: “Cain’s 9-9-9 Doesn’t Add Up”

6) Rick Perry: Perry wasn’t sleepy like he was at the last debate, but he was…what’s the best word for it — adequate, maybe? He spent a lot of time talking about energy and Texas, which is to be expected, but he didn’t have a lot of fire and he didn’t give the impression that he is as knowledgable about the economy or knows as much about the issues as most of the other people on the stage. He also didn’t have a lot of great lines. Although this was an improvement over his last debate performance, it wasn’t a good performance for him.

“The reason we have that many people living in poverty is because the President is a job killer.” — Rick Perry

7) John Huntsman: Huntsman said some funny things and although he’s very much a centrist, he stayed on point tonight. So, there’s nothing to complain about there.

Here’s the thing: Huntsman’s just not a particularly likable guy. He comes across as weird, nasty tempered, and a little smarmy. These are just some of the Twitter comments from the debate and I agreed with all of them — although the last one was pretty mean.

Explaining Huntsman’s jokes: lots of people tell rich kids they’re funny. — bdomenech

Huntsman is the awkward character in bad sci-fi movies who you aren’t sure if he wants to help or kill you. #econdebate #tcot — DerekBrigham

I have a new game, every time we hear 999 someone punches Huntsman in the mouth. Volunteers? — cprater

In his defense, he did get off some decent lines, too.

“I thought (9-9-9) was the price of a pizza when I first heard of it.” — Jon Huntsman

“Pennsylvania isn’t the gas capital of the United States. Washington is the gas capital of the United States.” — Jon Huntsman

Loser: 8) Mitt Romney: Many people are calling Mitt Romney the winner of this debate because he sounded knowledgable, smooth, and got off a few good lines.

All true.

He also defended Romneycare, supported TARP, noted he was open to doing more bailouts, and wanted to start a trade war with China.

There’s a lot to be said for sounding good, but how many GOP primary voters want to put someone in office who’s up for another round of Wall Street bailouts? Also, starting a trade war with China when the economy is already flagging may make some people’s hearts’ flutter, but it’s absolutely insane as economic policy. The Smoot–Hawley Tariff Act was one of the things that mired us in the Depression and Romney is ready for Act Two? Right after he bails out some more banks?

Declaring Romney the winner after he dropped that bomb seems positively wacky.

“I can tell you this; I’m not going to have to call up Timothy Geithner and say, ‘How does the economy work?’” — Mitt Romney

“You have a President who’s well meaning, but over-his-head with the economy.” — Mitt Romney

1
  • Anonymous

    I just thought I’d “save or create” a few hundred thousand jobs by posting a comment here. What? I can’t do that?

    Prove it!

    • Daytrip

      Thank you, you are a warrior for the middle class.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Ahim-Anyd/100002645118503 Ahim Anyd
  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Spencer-Trumbore/100000496654093 Spencer Trumbore

    I can’t believe this review was on the first page of Google results…I want my 3 minutes back.

    • Anonymous

      Poor baby. I feel so sorry that someone held a gun to your head and forced you to read this post.

      Oh wait, nobody did that, did they?

    • Anonymous

      So why did you waste more of your precious time by posting a comment?

    • TheDarkKnight

      Wow.. that’s amazingly close to what your mother told your father right after you were conceived.

      That is so weird…

    • Anonymous

      I can’t believe that’s your Facebook profile picture.

  • Anonymous

    Cain was ultimately the big winner because he turned in a good showing with the bulls-eye on his chest. It’s easier to nip at heels instead of being the one fighting off the attacks.

    He’s going to have to better explain how he thinks 9-9-9 will work without taking the legs out from under the working poor and middle class though. Passing a stiff tax increase on that sector without first getting the jobs engine running and strengthening the dollar is going to severely damage the housing market and consumer buying power…sending us to double-dip-ville.

    • President Friedman

      I understand his thinking, which is that even though it will be a tax increase on some at the lower end of the scale, it will free up a ton of money on the upper end and that will spure job creation and economic growth… essentially fixing the jobs engine and the weak dollar problem at the same time.    I think it makes some sense.   But yes, you are right, he needs to do a better job explaining it.  

      • Anonymous

        There just aren’t enough details on the plan available.

        To continue my example on housing: how or where is it taxed? Is there going to be a 9% tax on all property sales? Are home owners going to have to pay 9% tax on their mortgages or rent payments? Considering most people spend 30-50% of their income on housing, that’s kind of important to know.

        I’d also like to see a breakdown of how the tax will hit across the GDP and how much revenue it’s expected to generate.

        • President Friedman

          I agree we need to see more details.  Cain wants 9/9/9 to be a first step towards the Fair Tax, so in that respect I think you could probably look towards the Fair Tax for some of the details on the sales tax portion of it.   And the Fair Tax does apply to the sale of new (not used) homes.  It would not apply towards mortgage payments (other than the principal value of the home) or rent payments.    It would also do away with capital gains taxes on home sales, which would offset some of the harm done by the increased sales tax. 

          I’m not sure about the GDP percentage, but Cain claims the plan is revenue neutral.   One of the moderators last night claimed an independant report said it woudl have collected about $300 Billion less in revenues last year, to which Cain replied “The problem with your analysis is that it is incorrect.”  He got a lot of laughs, but I would like to see more details.  

  • http://www.cavalierx.com CavalierX

    Too bad you didn’t live-blog it, John. I had to go to TeaPartyNation.com to join in.

  • http://www.cavalierx.com CavalierX

    Santorum and Bachmann (both of whom did extremely well, I thought) very effectively attacked Cain’s 9-9-9 plan on its weak point: creating a new way for Congress to tax us is a very bad idea. Once they get that power, they will never, ever give it up — no matter how many times Cain says he’ll have it repealed later on. Aside from that, I thought Cain did a great job.

  • President Friedman

    I really liked the ’round table’ format much better than the podium format,and thought the moderators did a good job trying to get to the root of the issues rather than trying to orchestrate pro-wrestling style smackdowns. 

    Just about everyone turned in a good performance last night.  Romny had a good night, not because he was so great on the issues, but because he did a good job judo flipping the arguments that were levied against him.   Particularly when Huntsman continued to attack him for wanting to give waivers to the states on Obamacare, after Romney had repeatedly said that he would also pursue a legislative repeal, you just kind of got the feeling that the other candidates don’t know how to mount an ideological attack on Romney… probably becasue none of them are very ideologically grounded (unfortunately this includes Herman Cain).    Likewise, when Cain went after Romney for not having a simple plan to deal with our issues, it is hard to find fault with Romney’s counter argument that the issues we face are going to require a multi-faceted solution.   Romney judo-flipped Cain’s question and made Cain look a bit naive.  Look, I’ll never vote for Romney in the primary, but I think he may just be the best debater on the stage, and I include Newt in that assesment.

    Cain had a good night overall.  He certainly has the most personality of anyone on the stage, and comes of as likeable, sincere, and smart… that’s a tough combination to pull off in politics.   His biggest problem is that he does appear to be politically naive at time… he spent all night harping on his 9/9/9 pland only to have Santorum completely burst his bubble by asking for a show of hands from the audience on who would support a national sales tax… not a single hand went up.   If Cain’s biggest selling point is a plan that cannot get any support, then let’s face it, his campaign is over.  

    Bachman had a good night… her best since Perry’s entry in the race.   Santorum had one of his better performances, and had the hands-down best comment of the night when he spoke about how our increasing poverty levels are entwined with the breakdown of the American family.   The problem I have with Santorum is that he honestly believes the government can and should fix that problem… it can’t and it shouldn’t.   Huntsman did OK but is too moderate and too often he seems like he’s the only one who gets his jokes.  

    Ron Paul was Ron Paul, and was in his element in a discussion mostly about economics… of course Ron Paul in his element is only attractive to probably about 20% of the Republican base, so he didn’t gain any ground.   I did agree with his ridiculing Herman Cain over picking Alan Greenspan as a model Chairman of the Fed, and pointing out that all of the candidates support a Federal Reserve that is highly likely to bring us right back to our current monetary situation. 

    The big looser of the night was Rick Perry.  He just continued to fade.  I think the round table format hurt him by making it more difficult for him to throw bombs and forcing him to focus more on giving detailed answers to questions, which he just didn’t seem prepared to do.  

    Newt was good, but a few times he seemed to stray off into answers that were circular and navel-gazing in nature.   I love a good thinker, and Newt is certainly that, but sometimes it seems like thinking is all he’s able to do.  Still, he adds a lot to these debates and I hope he stays in them for awhile yet.  

    • http://www.cavalierx.com CavalierX

      “The problem I have with Santorum is that he honestly believes the government can and should fix that problem… it can’t and it shouldn’t. ”
       
      This is the only disagreement I have with your analysis. Rick Santorum realises that government has played a major role in the destruction of the family, and that it can and should take steps help correct it. For instance, the government has made motherhood attractive to single women, which has contributed mightily to absentee dads fathering multiple kids with multiple women, which has in turn contributed to increased poverty. That needs to stop. For another, convenience abortions should be outlawed. Those are two things the government should do to encourage more responsibility and more stable families.

      • President Friedman

        The fact that so many women see single motherhood as an attractive option has more to do with popular culture than it does the government.   If you look at the realities, it is in no way an attractive option: your are far more likely to live in poverty, your children are far more likely to wind up in jail, they are twice as likely as other kids to experience sexual abuse, psychiatric issues, and drug addiction. 

        The problem is that society as a whole increasingly ignores these dangers in pursuit of a lifestye that only exists in movies and on the TV sceen.   The government can’t change that, it takes parents teaching their kids to recognize the lies that are being told to them, and providing them with other things to value.     

        • President Friedman

          Although, should say:   I do agree with you that in some instances our government actually actively encourages anti-family policies, and subsidizes anti-family choices.   They should stop doing this.  I just dont think that is very likely to fix the problem. 

        • http://www.cavalierx.com CavalierX

          “The fact that so many women see single motherhood as an attractive option has more to do with popular culture than it does the government.”
           
          And yet, there is some evidence that supports my premise that increased govenrment benefits for unwed mothers encourages unwed mothers. Remember: if you want less of something, tax it; if you want more of something, subsidise it.
           
          http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-402541/How-handouts-tempt-single-mothers.html
           
          I remember when Hawkins wrote on this site, “You may say that the amount we pay out for welfare and food stamps is so small that it shouldn’t be an incentive, but you can directly trace the explosion of illegitimacy in this country back to the decision to allow unmarried mothers to collect welfare.” I agreed with him then, and still do.

          http://rightwingnews.com/john-hawkins/we-need-to-stop-glorifying-single-mothers/

        • Anonymous

          The fact that so many women see single motherhood as an attractive option has more to do with popular culture than it does the government.

          Maybe so, but the President has far more influence over the government than he does over popular culture.

  • http://www.vega.com Vega – Proud Liberal from NYC

    The person who wins a debate, in my opinion, has to be the person who either doesn’t lose ground and then also gets stronger coming out of it. And that means Romney won.

    All of the other candidates seem to attack whomever is second to Romney at any given time. Thi time it was Cain. Romney is withstanding attacks and getting stronger, so everyone else failed in that regard.

    Gingrich, Santorum, Bachmann, Huntsman, Perry and Paul all failed to move the needle for themselves and only achieved hurting Cain. A debate is not just sounding good or having some good lines. It’s stopping or building momentum.

    Romey still comes out of this the winner. The others have no more ammunition to fire at him.

  • Pingback: The Conservative Case Against Mitt Romney (2011 Edition) | Tennesseans Watching Federal & State Government

Advertisement
Featured Video

Who Is Brett Kimberlin?

php developer india
Premium Right Ads
Blogads Right
Previous Features

Ads

The Best Quotes From “Ten Prayers God Always Says Yes To”
Hey Lady Gaga, Kids Have a Time-Tested Answer for Bullies: Punch Them in the Mouth
Seven Differences Between Winners And Losers
The Problem With The Occupy Wall Street Generation
The 20 Most Influential Black Republicans
Talking With Chuck D. From Public Enemy About Farrakhan, Air America’s Failure, And Open Borders
Advertisement
User Info