The Early Reaction From The Right Side Of The Blogosphere To The Debate

by John Hawkins | May 16, 2007 1:44 am

Here’s a good selection of comments from around the right side of the blogosphere about the debate.

“It was easily Rudy’s night, which was made easier because much of the questioning seemed to fit right in his wheelhouse. His smackdown of Michael Moore sounding idiot Ron Paul was a microcosm of why people like me would consider voting for him even though we disagree on many social issues – because he’s not afraid to call a spade a spade and tell it like it is.” — Ankle Biting Pundits[1]

“My initial reaction to the debates? Tom Tancredo and Duncan Hunter are underrated. They are the ones to watch.

Giuliani is the top contender. He won it. Romney was too wooden. He has to work on that. He is a great candidate but lacks spontaneity.” — Atlas Shrugs[2]

“I firmly believe Rudy Giuliani will emerge the winner tonight. He was the only candidate to stand up to Rep. Ron Paul’s despicable comment blaming 9/11 on America’s foreign policy. …Giuliani also did everyone a favor by exposing Paul as someone who doesn’t belong in this field and should be booted from future debates. It’s time for Republicans to stop giving this libertarian a platform.” — Bluey Blog[3]

“Top-tier winner: Rudy
Second-tier winner: Huckabee” — Mary Katharine Ham[4]

“For what it’s worth, Romney looks stronger and stronger to me. He’s in his zone, he’s nailed down his positions, he’s confident and articulate, and he has charisma. I thought McCain held his own. He, too, was confident. He did a better job than the last debate. However, his position on interrogations is simply ridiculous when held up to scrutiny. I don’t think Rudy gained very much. A forum where 10 candidates get equal attention is simply not helpful to a front-runner. But I am becoming increasingly impressed with Duncan Hunter. He’s poised, has a good grasp of the issues, and is consistent. He’s solid on national security, and I like his idea about zero taxes for the manufacturing sector (although I don’t believe I share his overall approach to economics). In my own mind, it would be nice if he’d move into the first tier of candidates. Being a member of the House, however, his name identification and public exposure remains limited.” — Mark Levin[5]

“So who won? Tonight, two candidates really benefited form their efforts. I have a feeling that Mitt Romney will emerge from every one of these shindigs as the most articulate, well informed and appealing candidate. In terms of debating skills, it’s a man amongst boys out there. But Rudy also had a great night, rebounding from a fairly disastrous debut at the first go-round. Rudy is by far the most likely candidate to have an “I paid for this microphone” moment.” — Dean Barnett[6] on Hugh Hewitt’s blog

“I’ve criticized and remain critical Huckabee’s immigration stance, but he did well for himself again tonight. Will he be the next president? Probably not. But he made a solid, respectable showing.

I think I’ve made myself clear about Gilmore and Thompson.

McCain is flagging, flaming out. Romney turned in another careful, safe performance.

Giuliani had more pep and fight tonight than the last go-around. He gets points from me for bringing up Fort Dix and continuing to invoke it in post-debate commentary on Hannity and Colmes.” — Michelle Malkin[7]

“Best punchline: “We’ve had a Congress that’s spent money like John Edwards at a beauty shop,” so sayeth Mike Huckabee

Best showdown: Giuliani’s slapdown of 9/11 conspiracy theorist Rep. Ron Paul.” — Moxie[8]

“In the first debate, Mitt Romney far outperformed the field. That wasn’t true tonight. Romney did well, as he always does, but he didn’t outclass his main competitors.

The big winners were Rudy Giuliani and John McCain, who both improved on mediocre performances the first time out. Rudy got a golden opportunity to respond to a Ron Paul answer that more or less endorsed the idea that September 11 was our fault. Rudy blew that idea away, and the audience went wild. That is the space that he needs to occupy.” — Power Line[9]

“I’m fascinated by everyone who thinks McCain or Rudy won tonight. I think there is a bit of bias showing among some who declared McCain, Rudy, or Romney the winner. The McCain fans think he held firm. The Rudy folks solely remember his rebuke of Ron Paul, which was truly awesome. The Romney folks remember him sounding Presidential.

But not one of them could hold a candle to Mike Huckabee tonight. Huckabee eloquently defended our culture of life versus the culture of death in radical Islam. He defended the troops. He talked tough. He kept making sense and giving great sound bite after sound bite from social issues to national defense issues.” — Redstate[10]

“Who do I think won? I need to read the transcript because sometimes it’s hard to get a good feel for what was said when you’re liveblogging, but here are my initial impressions: Huckabee sounded great, committed to life, but I have to give the edge to Romney. He came off as the most prepared, and sounded very presidential and looked it, too. I have to say as someone who has struggled wondering who to support, Romney is starting to sound very good to me. McCain sounded very defensive, and lost me early on with the old used drunken sailor spending joke (yawn).” — Sister Toldjah[11]

“Big win for Rudy.” — Don Surber[12]

“Me, I think Giuliani and McCain did well for themselves, Huckabee distinguished himself as the most eloquent of the group, and Mitt Romney was the big loser. I’m sorry to say. If the press isn’t all over his gaff about the Islamists “coming together,” then it is asleep at the switch.” — Tigerhawk[13]

  1. Ankle Biting Pundits:
  2. Atlas Shrugs:
  3. Bluey Blog:
  4. Mary Katharine Ham:
  5. Mark Levin:
  6. Dean Barnett:
  7. Michelle Malkin:
  8. Moxie:
  9. Power Line:
  10. Redstate:
  11. Sister Toldjah:
  12. Don Surber:
  13. Tigerhawk:

Source URL: