Debate: II

Updated: The Fox video - my review below.

Debate Round up:

According to the Fox focus groups, Romney was the big winner tonight. What he did best was show informed voters he's probably the guy Republicans need in the Fall.

On substance, Fred is great. Fredheads shouldn't think I don't like the guy, I do. He just doesn't seem interested in doing what's needed to get it done. Frankly, he seems more interested in propping up McCain.

Huckabee was the big loser. It won't be long before he's irrelevant. He doesn't have the depth of knowledge for the job and he's had plenty of time to prepare. Simply put, he's in way too far over his head.

McCain is going to be 72. There shouldn't be a need to say more than that, but I guess there is. He's the kind of old DC hand voters ultimately reject for President and doesn't have a chance of capturing the nomination. Without Iraq, he has nothing to say and less to offer in an executive role. Everything from his temperament to his positions are simply wrong.

Rudy isn't going to go away soon. It's unclear to me that he can get past his baggage with the base. Eventually this may come down to Rudy versus Mitt and I suspect Romney will win that fight.

So, while I wouldn't score it as a big Romney win in terms of point by point scoring, when you look at the big picture, this, again, was Romney's night. Look for him to start firming up support as people begin paying attention. Win or lose in New Hampshire - and I'm starting to think he may just pull that state out, Romney will most likely eventually emerge as the Republican nominee.

Back to back debates. Well, it's cold in New Hampshire, maybe people will actually watch. I'll be watching and updating with anything major I happen to see, or think.

Allah has a thread at Hot Air.

Michelle Malkin is blogging it here. She has also text of Huckabee on Fox today being called out on his lie about the surge. Too bad it didn't get prime time play.

Romney took it to Huckabee on his political rhetoric, ability to manufacture facts faster than he talks and not deal with the truth. He won that exchange.

McCain's idea of change, as most of the Republican base knows, isn't the type of change Republicans want - a failure to support Bush's tax cuts and support for Campaign Finance reform. McCain's idea of change seems to be more confabs with Ted Kennedy and less communication with the average man and woman. While we all applaud his well-known military service a few wars ago, he completely failed to engage on substance when asked to address why he is the man to bring change to Washington.

Rudy made an excellent point as regards the need for Republicans to engage and educate the middle and lower classes on how conservative politics works for them. Romney displayed the type of private economy expertise we need in government. Too bad McCain could take the opportunity to step back from his running down the pharmaceutical companies who contribute so much to America. Outside of national defense, it's unclear what McCain really has to offer. His relationships in DC are notoriously antagonistic. That won't result in a President who can get things done.

Huckabee is an empty suit when it comes to foreign relations. His rhetoric on the subject couldn't rise above the level one might expect from a tourist. He simply can't speak to the issues and doesn't appear to even understand what they are beyond the level of talking tough about a big military footprint. That makes him as dangerous as it does uninformed in this important area. Even the congenial Fred Thompson couldn't resist pointing out how wrong his world view is. Huckabee doesn't seem to understand that Guantanamo is not within the United States. If his depth on the subject is deep, as he insists; it's because he's standing on the bottom of the ocean off the coast of Florida and is all wet.

Comments

[seekeronos]

Well, Huckabee did get ONE foreign affairs issue correct:

He honoured Canada's National Igloo:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bCyy7q_ylc

I mean after all, if Huckabee is to be POTUS, he should at least know or thing or two about that Great Igloo-having neighbour to the north. :P

[Cory]

Romney owned this debate!

[seekeronos]

Romney did well enough.

If Fred becomes nonviable or otherwise folds, which seems all but inevitable if Fox News is to be believed...

... I'll probably support Romney, with a fair amount of nose-holding. Of the remaining candidates - assuming he doesn't stick it to us AllCons (that's FisCon, DefCon, and SoCon all rolled into one) with a great big flip-floppy shiv.

The others:

McCain: has zeroed out whatever gains he has as a POW and war hero by his unmitigated support of shamnesty, as well as Gang of 14 and other want-on rapes of the GOP base

Huckabee: Great SoCon, but is unacceptable on just about everything else.

Giuliani: has lost his steam, and he's a gun-grabbing, cross-dressing, LGBT-enabling supporter of fetus murderers.

Ron Paul. Yeah, right.

Duncan Hunter: Even more conservative than Fred Thompson, but will probably become a torpedo to someone's campaign much like Tancredo tried to torpedo Fred.

[JustADude]

NH might as well be called Mitts back yard so not very different from a familiar voter base for him.

Mack last time around won NH with lot of support from independents but this time silky and ob will snap them up in the anti-hillary race so Mitt may win, margin depending on how many independents go left.

[JustADude]

By Mitts plea for an outsider business pro with govt experience he was trying to boost himself but for me it sounded like and endorsement for Bloomberg.

[louinjax]

Three times....Three times Romney asked Huckabee to confirm/deny that he raised taxes a HALF BILLION dollars, and three times Huckabee refused to answer and tried to switch topics!

He later explained his reasoning for raising taxes in a seeparate interview, but this was just his "stand-up" remarks, knowing he was out of the fray of being challenged by his competitors. Pretty safe, huh?

Still, his reasons to raising taxes a HALF BILLION defeats his stand on being a viable Conservative candidate. It's just not going to hold up before the voting public.

[TheSpartan]

NH voters are not MA voters...the 6 new england states are very different. As for the amnesty argument, didn't Reagan grant true amnesty? I thought he was a deity to you people.

[Wahoo Willie Sez:]

"didn't Reagan grant true amnesty? I thought he was a deity to you people."

No,no Spartykid. It's only demonrats who agree 100% with everything (no matter what) thier officials do. Repubs and Indies often disagree with thiers and you should be glad about that. It's why you're going to have a demonrat president next year.

[Fred Beloit]

If Mitt gets the candidacy, I'm going to go right down to city hall and change my registration from Repub to Indy, just to show my dissatisfaction. Would I vote for Mitt? Don't know, somewhat depends which bad or worse candidate the Dooms choose. However, I have a hard time getting enthusiastic for a complete political phony like Mitt (doesn't make him necessarily a bad person, just perhaps an overly ambitious person). Mitt could run in either party. He has no agenda except Elect Me. He proved this in Mass.

[seekeronos]

"--- If Mitt gets the candidacy, I'm going to go right down to city hall and change my registration from Repub to Indy, just to show my dissatisfaction. ---"

That's more or less what I'd do if McCain or Huckabee won the nomination, unless Ron Paul goes against his 99% word that he'd not run as an indy as a protest/spoiler against the GOP. Of course, that would be a protest vote that would be meaningless at that point, but what would it matter, since my guy wouldn't have had a chance anyway. Social Democratic rule Euro style on the right, and outright socialism on the left.

Or maybe I'd go with the US Constitution Party. They have a platform I like more than not.