Does it count if the candidate apologizes?
You’ll note that I reported what they said about who won, not who I think won. I’m perfectly capable of understanding the potential for bias in secondhand reporting.
I also tend to either crosscheck or caveat things I find on the internet that I pass on, which prevents embarrassment later.
To be fair, he IS a boorish ass, period.
The only big surprise for me of the night was that Trump didn’t dial it back at all. I therefore put another check in the column that says it’s not an act. He is just being his genuine self up there. Not sure if that should make the GOP feel better or worse. I suppose the worst of all worlds for them is if Trump continues to destroy his general election prospects without ushering himself out of the primary.
The rest of the field performed about as expected. Maybe Rubio and Walker outperformed a tiny bit, aided by them apparently being the preferred candidates of Fox News. I was amused by the infographics during the first round. The one about Bush was like “hasn’t held office in 8 years, worked for Lehman brothers when it collapsed.” Got a laugh out of me.
I think the “did God tell you what to do” question was pure trolling by that submitter, but sadly no one took the bait–though Fox did dial it up an extra notch by asking them to also address veterans. Classic.
Big story seems to be the undercard debate and that people like Carly Fiorina. I thought she did fine, but I don’t really understand why people thought she had a break-out performance. Seems a little manufactured to me.
I guess I was wrong about Trump-- he did act like his usual bombastic self. I don’t know if that turned off potential primary voters or not, but I expected him to comport himself better. I’m sure he is able to, but old habits die hard…
Yeah okay.
You (and many others on the right) keep expressing this burning desire, but you never actually spell out why it matters so much. Rhetoric aside, what operational difference does it make? What percentage of people atomized in drone strikes during the past decade have been non-Muslims? How, precisely, would our success in the war on terror be enhanced by Obama saying, “You know what, guys? The enemy’s radical Islam. There, I said it.” ?
On the other hand, there is clear downside to the president openly invoking Islam. Presidents need to choose their words with an appreciation for how those words will play in the rest of the world and what attendant consequences there might be for American interests.
Like it or not, declaring a war on “radical Islam” carries a risk that large parts of the Muslim world, parts of which happen to view US foreign policy through an understandably skeptical lens, will fail to understand the significance of the word “radical.” They might simply hear, “The American government and the American people hate Islam and are at war with Muslims.” That would count as a propaganda victory for our enemies, and would put American lives and interests in greater jeopardy.
Oh most make at least one or two. Obama for example had “… they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion …”
Thing most recognize that those poorly worded bits are best avoided, and try to invest a little bit of energy into thinking before engaging mouth. One or two won’t sink someone who is otherwise a strong candidate. Being unable to avoid them as a regular thing though means not that one does not have the time but that one does not have the brain cells or at least the impulse control required for any office.
If you do Facebook, check out the Tea Party pages. It seems to me that the TPers are rallying around him and are mad at Fox for being mean to him.
W. calling NYT reporter Adam Clymer a major league asshole.
Thought I’d look at the debate in whether the candidate’s performance improved or diminished the feeling I had for him/her before the debate.
Jeb Bush: no change
Marco Rubio: +
Scott Walker: +
Chris Christie: no change
John Kasich: no change
Donald Trump: -
Ben Carson: +
Ted Cruz: +
Mike Huckabee: no change
Rand Paul: -
Perry: no change
Santorum: +
Fiorina: +
Graham: +
Jindahl: no change
Pataki: -
Gilmore: +
Whoa there, pal. That’s a lot of things to consider there! It’s almost as if you’re claiming that this situation isn’t simple at all; like your setting up an excuse for failure by trying to make this into yet another “complex” situation. Surely a real 'Merican could see thru the web and find the simple black&white heart of the matter to the real solution, which of course is lower taxes for the wealthy, right adaher?
I don’t do FB, but thanks for the info.
But he will pass the savings on to us!
ISIS is no threat to the U.S., and does not appear to be growing.
Doesn’t a brain surgeon have to do that sometimes?
Of course, the Republicans don’t mind this so much since, as last night’s debate showed, many of the candidates are quite happy to get the country involved in one or more wars in the Middle East without particular concern for the details of the individual cultures in question, so as far as they’re concerned we ARE at war with Muslims.
I can’t help but hear this in an Al Harrington voice.
Bush looked worse than I expected. I wouldn’t say Walker improved himself, he looked like he was over his head to me. Christie, however, looked like the confident adult in the room and I thought he exceeded expectations (I don’t like the guy). In fact, IMO, he’s the only one that improved his position. Carlson seemed completely unprepared for prime time.
One thing Christie certainly demonstrated last night is he is a demagogue of Gingrich-level virtuosity. With practice, he might one day even rival Ted Cruz. Wrapping himself in the flag and trotting out the grieving 9/11 families of his state in order to slap down Rand Paul on a legitimate matter of Constitutional principle–I thought that sort of shit died with the Giuliani campaign back in '08. Evidently I was wrong.
I would agree that he generally improved his position last night.
I agree that Christie appeared poised, intelligent, and most prepared to lead. I say this as someone who is aware of his poor record as Governor, and not as a supporter. But I thought he did well.
I also agree that Bush doesn’t come off as polished in any way, which I think portends that he will be underwhelming if he gets the nomination. I actually predict that (like Hillary in 2008) he will start out as the presumptive nominee but not actually get the nomination.
Carson (I assume that’s what you meant) seemed okay to me, and I laughed out loud when he said at one point that he didn’t think he was going to get another chance to speak. It didn’t seem like the moderators really took him seriously as a candidate, which I think was his biggest albatross.
None of the others really stood out to me (well, besides Trump, but that’s because he’s a bombastic blowhard, and he seemed to be making funny faces anytime he was listening to a question), although my dark-horse prediction is that Rubio gets the nod.