The best exchange of the night. Fox News
I watched the debate last night, and I have a lot to say about it. I wish I had been able to post right after I finished watching the thing, but I did not have the time to get it down while it was still fresh. Better late then never right?
Before I say anything else I have to say that the Fox News crew did a great job moderating the debate. They didn't shy away from the tough questions and didn't let anyone off the hook. For a network that is often accused of being a cheerleader for the Republican party, they asked some intelligent and pertinent questions and everyone got a chance to have a curve-ball thrown their way. Whatever Donald Trump says, I think they did a great job. So kudos to Chris Wallace, Megyn Kelly and Bret Baier for doing the job that every debate moderator should do.
As for the debate itself, it was one of the more entertaining ones in recent memory. I don't think I heard any really bizarre policy positions or any revelations that really shocked me, but it did give me a better idea of who stands for what. For a first debate, it was good.
I'm going to go through each candidate that I saw last night and write what I thought about them. A few cavets first. I didn't see the first debate for the seven candidates that didn't make the cut. From what I understand though Carly Fiorina did the best, according to the media, but since I was unable to see it, I won't comment on it. Second, I didn't see the whole debate. I missed the first 10 or 15 minutes and another 10 near the end. I caught up on what I missed later, but I figured I might as well disclose that I didn't see the whole thing. Anyways, here's what I thought of each candidate's performance.
Donald Trump:
I have to say, he wasn't as bad as I thought he would be. That isn't to say that I agree with him on much or like his policies, but he did do pretty good in the debate. He dominated the talk time though, which is kind of annoying. That was probably unavoidable. I also liked that he was, at times, polite when someone said something he agreed with. He stuck with his guns which is at least admirable.
What didn't I like? First of all, I hated the fact that he said he could run as an independent if he doesn't secure the nomination. That felt like aimed at not only the other candidates, but the average Republican voter as well. I read it as a threat saying "Vote for me or Hillary will be the next president". I don't like being threatened like that, and it could turn off even voters that support him, if they care more about getting a Republican in the White House then Donald Trump. Of all the things that happened in the debate, that was probably the thing I liked the least, and it will have implications for the whole election.
Second, I think his answer to Megyn Kelly's question about how he treats women wasn't strong enough. To be fair he did stand by his statements and said that he "doesn't have time" to be politically correct, a view that sounds right to me. Kelly was right to ask that question, because the liberal media will do the same thing if Trump is the candidate. But I would have answered it differently. Here is what I would say:
"Megyn, I believe that women are not fragile little flowers that can't be exposed to any criticism, crude or otherwise, lest they wilt. Women are just as capable of handling criticism as men, and to not treat them the same way as any man is sexist. Furthermore, I am disgusted by the idea that criticism of one woman, like Rosie O'donnell, should be considered a criticism of all women. That is a typical dirty trick that is used to fool voters and anyone who tries it should be ashamed of themselves. It's just as bad as claiming that just because I think Obama is a bad president that all black people are bad. It is nonsense." I have no idea if Trump actually feels that way, but that's how I feel...
As for the rest of the debate, Trump had a few good moments explaining away criticisms, such as being too close to the Clinton's or going bankrupt. They didn't convince me, mind you, and I am still unsure about his actual status as a Republican, but at the very least he made an argument. Less impressive was the fact that he didn't seem to have any actual plans. I said in my last post about the election that Trump says a lot of things he thinks will be popular but he says very little about what he can actually do.
Jeb Bush:
I wasn't a fan of Bush's performance. The only good thing I can say is that he didn't sink to Trump's level when the moderators asked him if he called Trump an asshole, among other things. He said that he didn't and he even got an approving statement from Trump out of it. It was handled well, and it made him look presidential. Had he doubled down and gotten into a fight with Trump, it would have hurt him and helped Trump.
Other then that, I pretty much tuned him out. He did try and trumpet his accomplishments but all I heard was "I'm George Bush's brother". Even if I did like what he was saying, it wouldn't matter. He can't escape his brother's legacy. He did try to distance himself from George Bush by saying that he wouldn't have gone to war in Iraq, but that's a pretty big flip flop. He also came down hard in support of Common Core, which every other Republican came out opposed too. Not much else to say about him on my end.
Marco Rubio:
I have got to say, I can't remember a thing Marco Rubio said, but I definitely remember the way he said it. He had a pretty good answer on immigration and he was very well spoken throughout. He also sounded very knowledgeable. He also had a good line about how the Republicans had a lot of good candidates and the Democrats didn't have any. Other then that though, I can't say much about his performance. He didn't really have any great moments that stood out.
It's too bad I don't like his stance on the NSA scandal. He seems like a guy that could have appeal for undecided voters and isn't so far to the right that the center wouldn't vote for him. And he also doesn't seem to have much to differentiate himself from other candidates that are similar to him, like Bush. Of all the guys I don't want to vote for, I like Rubio the best. Which is probably damning with faint praise, but what are you going to do?
Scott Walker:
Was Scott Walker even in this debate? Other then Rand Paul, he had the least speaking time, but at least Paul had a couple of interesting exchanges. Walker didn't really say much of anything. He did say how he was governor of Wisconsin and tried to show how he has done a good job here, but he really didn't make his case well. We did learn a little more about what he thinks about foreign policy, but it was short on plans and big on statements that didn't add much to what we know about Walker.
On the other hand, he didn't really screw up either. He also avoided any soundbites that could come back and bite him on the ass as the election goes on. That's probably ok for the first debate, but we really need to know more from him. I want to know what his stance is on the NSA and if we can trust him on foreign policy. Right now I can't say I know either. I'd like to like Walker, because I really do kinda, not really, like him as my Governor, but I really want to know more about his positions before I can commit to him.
Ted Cruz:
Another guy I didn't really notice that much. He did come out strong about fighting ISIS, but other then that I can't remember a single thing he said. Part of that is because he didn't get into any fights with anyone and part of it was that he just didn't speak much. I did like how he said the first thing he would do in office is to reverse all of Obama's executive order. He then said a bunch of other stuff I didn't care about, but at least you know where you stand with Cruz.
Either way, the debate didn't change my mind about Cruz one way or the other. He's still a middle of the pack guy for me. I like that he is libertarian, but whenever he talks about social issues, my eyes glaze over. I guess I could vote for him, but I will never be excited to do so. Oh well.
Mike Huckabee:
I keep getting surprised by Mike Huckabee. He's obviously the largest social conservative in the race. Normally, that would be a non-starter with me since I am not really all that socially conservative. But other then going on and on about abortion, an issue I don't care about at all he had some good points concerning foreign policy. Other then that though, it was a quiet night for him. He did have a good zinger for his closing statement, but he just didn't have much of an impact on me.
I'm still neutral on him, but I just can't see him winning a general election if he keeps going on about abortion. It's in the news right now, but I am guessing by the time the general election comes around nobody but the Republican base is going to care. They are going to be motivated anyways, so why keep harping on the issue? That's more of a general criticism of all the candidates, but Huckabee strikes me as the leader on this issue.
Ben Carson:
This was my first exposure to Ben Carson, and as a person, he seems like a good guy. He was kind and soft spoken and I generally enjoyed listening to him talk. I also loved the fact that he said that he doesn't judge people based on the color of their skin but on their brains. That was the best answer any Republican can make to any question about race. They will get called racists anyways, but what can you do?
As for policy issues, I have no idea. He seemed kind of lite on actual plans. He did seem to imply that he would bring back torture as a possibility against ISIS. I'm opposed to that, but even I have to admit that the way he said it made it seem a lot more reasonable then it actually is. Either way though, I did enjoy listening to him and I hope he sticks around for the rest of the race. I also think he makes a great vice presidential candidate. I still need to learn a lot more about him though.
Chris Christie:
Listen, I can't even pretend to be objective when it comes to Chris Christie. I hate the guy and I wish he would drop out of the race and resign from the governorship. I won't even pretend to give him a fair shake. I think he got blown out of the water by Rand Paul during the best moment of the campaign when the two of them sparred over the NSA. But, like I said, I am biased against him. And his constant invoking of 9/11 struck me as a blatant and disgusting appeal to emotions. He also got into it with Mike Huckabee, but at that point I stopped caring what he had to say.
I will say that Chris Christie will probably make the people that think like him happy with his fight with Paul. But everyone who likes Paul probably hated what he said, and anyone undecided will just think he was the guy that got into it with Paul. I don't see this debate helping him. At least I am hoping like hell it doesn't.
Rand Paul:
As much as I like Rand Paul's politics, I don't think he did a very good job here. He was too hostile to everyone, and that is going to turn people off. He picked a fight with Trump right away when he said that he might run as an independent. Rand Paul was the worst person to criticize Trump, even though he deserved to be criticized, because his own father did the same thing in 2012. That didn't give Obama the White House, but it did take some votes that could have gone to Mitt Romney. I know the sins of the father shouldn't be visited on the son, but it still looks bad.
His fight with Christie didn't make him look very good either. I think he was 100% right to attack Christie, considering what he said, and was right on the issue but I still think it will turn off undecided voters. It was red meat for the more libertarian Republicans, but other conservatives won't like what he said and undecided voters could just decide that Paul is "mean". I still like Rand Paul more then anyone else in the hunt, but I'm starting to think that he doesn't have much of a chance.
John Kasich:
I went into the debate knowing little to nothing about Kasich. He wasn't on my radar at all, and I have to say, he is now. He was incredibly smart to acknowledge the wave of discontent that Trump rode to the top of the polls. He never insulted anyone and he had effectively touted his governorship. Most importantly he seems to have a broader appeal then many of the other candidates.
His answer about gay marriage is about as close to an acceptable one for social liberals that a Republican candidate can give. He's still opposed to gay marriage, but doesn't have a problem going to one. And he also accepts the Supreme Court's decision. All he asks is that people not be punished for not being in favor of gay marriage. As someone who is completely neutral, his stance on gay marriage is a lot closer to mine then any other candidate.
I still need to know a lot more about Kasich, but at this point, I at least know who he is and have a few things I agree with him on. I really want to know more about his positions are and if he agrees with me on them. In that, he is doing better then a lot of the other candidates.
Finally, I have to say that I was surprised that gun rights did not come up much during the debate. Other then a passing mention by Rand Paul and a question from Megyn Kelly that Trump ignored, it didn't seem to come up at all. That is just crazy to me considering how important the issue is. I think this will come up sooner or later, but for this debate it was a non-starter. I'm guessing the Democratic debates will bring up the issue, albeit in the opposite direction.
I also found myself kind of annoyed that not every candidate was asked the same questions. I know that was a limitation of both the format and the number of candidates, but I really wanted to know what certain candidates feel on the issues. The NSA scandal, for example, did come up, but only Paul and Christie talked about it. I already knew where those guys stood on the issue. I don't know where Trump, Walker, Carson and Kasich stand. I am hoping this will be rectified as people drop out of the race and we can spend more time with the candidates.
All and all, it was an entertaining debate. Trump did dominate it, but I feel I learned at least a little bit about all the candidates. I am hoping the rest of the debates, on both sides, are of the same quality or better. I also hope to write about them as they happen, even the Democratic ones. I have to say, this is an exciting election, and no matter what happens it will be interesting.
No comments:
Post a Comment