Friday, August 12, 2011

DEBATE PERSPECTIVE

Here's my two cents on last night's debate:

Winners and losers are based on expectations and results.

First, the debate itself. The Debate Format was, again, a joke and Gingrich was absolutely on the mark in saying so. When Baier announced the format, I laughed for a few minutes. A Debate ? When each candidate has 1 minute to respond and 30 second follow ups ? And, throughout the debate, Baier would give candidates an extra 15 SECONDS to comment? With all the country's problems, the media are still looking for 1 minute answers between commercials. Sound bite answers are not going to persuade anybody but the already convinced. GRADE F

Bachmann looked very tired to me and seemed almost ill at times. Maybe she was. It happens. her performance was O.K., but she seldom smiled and offered little in specifics. But, given the one minute guidelines, that's all she had time for. Grade C

Pawlenty was.... Pawlenty. Nice guy arguing a school budget at a town hall. Great Governor but going nowhere in this race. His Minnesota back and forth with Bachmann helped neither and he came nowhere near " winning " the debate. Grade C

Gingrich had one of his better "performances". Was it a debate performance ? No it wasn't. He threw out a dozen different " Names " of ideas without any substance. But, as he pointed out, one minute to comment is an eye flicker. His ideas, and other candidates ideas need substance to discuss. But, I'll give Newt a grade of B

Huntsman seems like a smart guy, but the one minute format allowed him to escape what should have been a real zinger. What's the real story with his company creating all the jobs in China ? His answer was all about job creation......conveniently avoiding the point that his job creation experience seems to be in China with Chines jobs. Also, if the Chinese were engaged in Cyber warfare with us......wasn't he our guy in Beijing ??? Grade C

Paul. Boy, this guy is a piece of work. His suit is way too big. He moves his jaw like he's going to put his teeth in a water glass. He criticizes some legitimate points but his solutions are either absent or off the wall. To his many supporters, he is red meat.........but the media and Obama would eat this guy for lunch. Grade D

Santorum had a pretty good debate actually, although much of it was his side debate with Paul and his obvious effort to wrap social issues into all issues for the crowd in Iowa. He is always on the end in debates and everybody seems to emphasize that he is going nowhere....except to the next election, using more money from other people. Grade C

Cain probably had the best debate. He is, unfortunately, also going nowhere, but he might be a good VP. His comments about not knowing answers at last " debate " and then studying up and now knowing the right answers was kind of a grammar school answer. But , he's pretty articulate and was on the mark when he told folks to learn to take a joke. Grade B

Romney.... Mitt had the most to lose and I expected both the moderators and the candidates to jump on him big time. That didn't happen and he helped to insure that it didn't happen. He benefited from the format which prevented a substantive answer from anybody, although Mitt seems most comfortable giving substantive answers that take up exactly ONE minute. The questions from the moderators were often longer than the time frame to answer. Romney was picture perfect in all his answers. Little actual substance, but no time for that, anyway. Avoided attacking anybody but Obama. Avoided the silly Paul- Santorum or Pawlenty-Bachmann "ladies bridge" repartee. Avoided Gingrich's visible hostility to the press ( which gets paid back in spades in an actual election cycle ). Gave little opportunity for the moderators or the other candidates to comment his answers. So, in terms of what he had to accomplish, I give him an A. In terms of substance I give him a B......because the format allowed NOBODY any time for substance.

This is how you remain a front runner. Avoid mistakes and give no one an opportunity to run at you. Textbook lesson

CraigS


Please check us out on Facebook and If you like what you see, please "Like" us. You can find us here.

5 comments:

Noelle said...

I just made a similar post with my impressions of the Ames debate. Our impressions were fairly similar.

BOSMAN said...

Hi Craig,

This is How I judged it:

1. Romney
2. Gingrich
3. Santorum
4. Cain
5. Paul
6. Bachmann
7. Pawlenty
8. Huntsman

Ben said...

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.

larry said...

I think you're being kind to most of these folks.

The debate was Newt & Mitt. Pretty much a draw.

Revolution 2012 said...

I agree with you assessment of the debate format and questioning. a SOLID F