Tim Pawlenty: I think he lost his exchange with Michele Bachmann. Too bad, because he was kind of my 2nd choice. I guess I'll have to find another 2nd choice because I don't think T-Paw will last much longer.
Newt Gingrich: He had a pretty good debate over all. His criticism of the super committee was spot on. He had a valid complaint about the quality of the questions in the debate. (My criticism of some of the questions was that there was too much content in the questions to be answered very well in 60 seconds. Especially those from Chris Wallace.) Even though he had some fine moments, in the end I still believe that he cannot and should not win the election. His complaints crossed the line to a little whiny after the 2nd or 3rd time.
Herman Cain: I like him, but he is not ready for the big time. He had some good moments, but he also made some rookie mistakes. We already have a rookie in the White House. I don't want another. While Cain would be a vast improvement over Obama, I believe we can do much better.
Ron Paul: He makes some good points, but he completely loses me when he starts talking foreign policy. He came across as kooky a few times last night, and annoyed me with several of his answers and comments. And not to be "ageist" but he is too old. The job of President of the United States is the hardest job in the world. It is not the job for someone in his declining years. And Paul looks like he is in his declining years. And his upcoming retirement from Congress is further evidence. Sorry.
Rick Santorum: Didn't do anything to change his position in the 3rd tier.
Jon Huntsman: Did very poorly. Even my husband's cousin who is a Huntsman supporter (the only one I've ever heard of) commented on Facebook that his guy didn't do well. Not impressed at all.
Mitt Romney: I am an unabashed Mitt supporter, so you can say that I am biased in his favor. He handled his questions very well, he stayed above the fray. He stated again his list of 7 keys to turning around the economy. Since he is the front runner I am surprised he didn't endure more challenges from the others, but they pretty much left him alone. It makes me wonder if the rest of them pretty much figure Romney is a shoe-in to win, and they don't want to damage him for the general election. Okay, that may be wishful thinking on my part, but it's hard to deny that he had no difficulty staying above the fray. In the end Romney is still the absolute best man for the job.
Please check us out on Facebook and If you like what you see, please "Like" us. You can find us here.
13 comments:
Hi Noelle:
This is How I judged it:
1. Romney
2. Gingrich
3. Santorum
4. Cain
5. Paul
6. Bachmann
7. Pawlenty
8. Huntsman
Bosman I pretty much agree with you. I think that Pawlenty and Huntsman are done for and that their campaign donation will dry up now.
DanL
But Paul didn't hurt himself last night. His followers are fanatics and he won't lose any with his insane rants about letting Iran get nukes.
I think that Santorum and Gingrich will peel some votes off of Bachmann.
DanL
I disagree on many points.
Michele Bachmann really didn't do well and didn't win her exchanges with Tim Pawlenty. She repeated things that everyone knows not to be true. She makes foolish statements and refuses to back off of those statements. A vote for her on Saturday is not sending a message against Obama, and her repeating that one twice only made her look worse. Rick Santorum did a good job showing that her posturing on the debt ceiling limit just wasn't practical. She didn't come across well at all.
Newt Gingrich also did poorly. He knows many issues and has many ideas, but he has never shown an ability to manage an organization. Most of us doubt him on that basis, and his deflecting those kinds of questions by calling them "gotcha questions" doesn't do anything to dispel our doubts.
Rick Santorum showed a great grasp of the issues. He looked good and avoided scowling. He made good points against Ron Paul and Michele Bachmann. He still doesn't have executive experience, but he handles things well. Many undecided social conservatives could have been swayed to vote for him in the straw poll by this debate.
Herman Cain had a good debate. He didn't duck any questions, and his answers sounded good.
Jon Huntsman didn't do too badly. He answered the stimulus and the "No Child Left Behind" questions well. I doubt that he changed many minds, but if he ended up being nominated, we'd be a little happier voting for him after tonight's performance.
Ron Paul was Ron Paul.
Tim Pawlenty had an interesting night. He did a good job in his arguments with Michele Bachmann. He presented his argument about contrast with Mitt Romney in a way that was respectful but still made the point. He repeated his point that he's done all of the things that need to be done at the federal level as a governor at the state level. That performance is the best indication that he could do the same as president.
Mitt Romney had another good debate. He handled Tim Pawlenty's comments about contrast gracefully. Ultimately, the contrast that will matter is that Mitt Romney is an accomplished winner while Obama is an empty suit. I disagreed with a few of his comments, but he continued to look good. He doesn't need to knock down the other Republicans. He just needs to continue to look presidential and show that he knows the issues. His performance tonight makes Obama look foolish for thinking that Mr. Romney could be portrayed as "weird."
If Tim Pawlenty wins on Saturday night, he'll end up being the big winner last night. I think he accomplished that, but time will tell. Rick Santorum is a winner in that he looked very good in every way last night. Mitt Romney is a winner in that he did everything he needed to do in this debate.
I pretty much agree with your list Bosman.
The debate format was horrible.
Instead of asking questions on the major issues based on what Obama has done or hasn't done, Fox went after the personal angle.
I like debates where at least half the questions are asked of everyone.
I think Romney and Gingrich were in a draw for 1st place. The others could have stayed home.
I also agree with you Bosman. I think you got the order just right.
-Martha
I wasn't a fan of Bachmann seeming to get almost as many questions as everyone else combined, and sixty second responses is a joke with how detailed some of the questions were, but I still enjoyed the debate.
Doing my best to ignore my personal opinions of the candidates, I think Gingrich, Romney, and Cain had the best debate. Newt was hit or miss, but got a homerun or two.
Paul ruined an opportunity to win over more support by pretending as though everyone was fine with Russia getting nukes (as if spies selling our nuclear secrets to them was some form of tacit approval from the U.S.) and that there's no danger in allowing Iran to do the same. He did pretty well on some questions, but that's a pretty big weakness.
Santorum did pretty well with the few questions he got.
Bachmann wasn't bad, though probably a slight step down from the last debate.
Pawlenty was off and on, but he looked bad slugging it out with Bachmann.
Huntsman had his moments, but overall I would say he came away looking unimpressive, and with his numbers, he needed to look impressive. Unless, of course, he's just in this to shave a few points from Romney and hope for another cabinet position. ;)
Pawlenty may have won on substance, but he lost on style. Now that may not be fair, but debate wins and losses are subjective, and I suspect that Bachmann win on style will carry more weight. I base that on the comments I hear and read out of Iowa. I may be wrong, and I hope I am. I admit I am losing faith in the intellectual honesty of many voters.
Pawlenty just doesn't cut it. It's hard to put my finger on it, but he just looks and acts awkward. He not only lacks in charisma, he's annoying.
-Martha
I think Mitt won by default.
Perhaps the others viewed his encounter with the heckler that day and wanted no part of encountering a pissed off Romney.
I agree with Bosman, on the first three Candidates. They were the stars of the debate, in my opinion.
Post a Comment