Monday, June 13, 2011

NH GOP Debate

Rick Santorum
Like what he said, but he didn't stand out much except on right-to-life.

Michelle Bachman
I like what she's done. Did well in the debate as compared to prior performances. Not ready for prime-time.

Newt Gingrich
Smartest guy there. Already blew it.

Mitt Romney
Didn't come off as fake as 2008. Didn't decisively win, but didn't lose any ground.

Ron Paul
Great answers. I'd vote for him (* see explanation below before stoning me).

Tim Pawlenty
My current bet for nominee. Didn't stand out that much, but conservative across the board tonight.

Herman Cain
My favorite so far. Good, smart answers. Not a career politician. (The muslim in the admin exchange will hurt him)


* Why I'd vote for Ron Paul
Obviously he's a relatively extreme libertarian. He's also a conservative. On the issues that are affected by the federal government, especially the President, libertarian is almost alway aligned with the kind of conservatism we desperately need now (at least in my view). The issues where it diverges like legalizing drugs and gay marriage, are and should be handled at the state and local level.

10 comments:

dark commenteer said...

Thanks, MB.
As usual, I get all of my political inforamtion and analysis from the OccObs contributors.
I myself was too busy watching the Bruins game last night to remember that the debate was even on...oops.

dark commenteer said...

And I'm getting so lazy, I don't even bother to spell-check and notice that I wrote "inforamtion."
FAIL!

Fredo said...

The post-mortems on the debate in the press have all been re: T-Paw's odd wimp-out moment, when King attempted to goad him into attacking Mitt on "ObamneyCare". Even in real time last night, me and my Dad were like "WTF was that?"

While I like T-Paw, the video of that "wuss-out" has gone viral, and he likely did himself some major damage last night. Certainly not fatal, but he's going to have to regroup and come back with a re-focused message.

I didn't feel that Bachmann had a very strong debate; but reading WSJ, Politico, and even conservative political websites this morning, everyone seems to think she's got momentum now, and an open path to become THE tea party candidate (although Rick Perry might have something to say about that).

Whether she'll capitalize on that opportunity remains to be seen.

Fredo said...

FWIW, Mitt seems to be in the driver's seat for the time being. Tea Party opposition is splintered, and he seems a cut above the rest of the field in terms of his polish, delivery, and preparation. Except for maybe Newt. Who's (as MB stated) done for other reasons.

Anti-Mitt support will eventually coalesce around one anti-Mitt candidate to his right, but I don't see anyone in the field who could actually beat Mitt at this point. T-Paw seems to be faltering, Huntsman has yet to prove he's viable, and the rest are sideshows.

My current handicapping guess is that anti-Mitt fervor coalesces around Bachmann after she makes a strong showing, perhaps winning, in Iowa. Then Mitt wins NH, NV, edges Bachmann in SC, sweeps FL and it's over early.

That said, only a new candidate like Perry, Christie, or Ryan; or Jon Huntsman establishing himself as a legitimate threat to steal some of Romney's core voters (moderate-right, main street conservatives), could change that.

Fredo said...

BTW, Jim, I'm with you on Paul. He truly understands the real issues that are undermining our national greatness, and has a real intergrity and honesty that's hard to find. He's the "Mr Smith Goes to Washington" candidate in my book (just a lot more wrinkly and grumpy).

That said, 30% of the country would go nuts for him, but he'd still lose in a landslide. A sad indictment of where we are as a nation. Or maybe I'm just too pessimistic.

ManBeast said...

I don't know who Jim is , but I don't think Pawlenty's failure to attack Mitt will hurt him that much. The guy is from Minnesota for goodness sake. He's midwest nice. That will actually appeal to a good chunk of the GOP base IMHO.

I'm really surprised at how many think Bachmann did such a great job. I guess she set a low bar for herself with earlier public appearances.

Huntsman is supposed to get in next week. I wouldn't be surprised to see Perry get in either.

As much as I like him, I think Cain will be among the first to drop out, followed by Santorum and Newt. Paul will stay in late for the same reason he did last cycle - rabid devotees.

I want to wait until the next debate before putting any money down on who will be the nominee (I did get it right in 2008 after all).

Fredo said...

w/r/t "Jim", I always speak to my bourbon before making a declarative statement. It's like a truth test.

"BTW Jim, I really think Mitt's solidified himself as the front runner."

"As you know, Jack, cutting taxes will spur economic growth by driving down the cost of capital."

"You know, Austin, I just don't think there's anything unsettling about a guy using a man-bag. European's do it all the ti.... I can't do it. Sorry Austin."

Fredo said...

As for the predictions, at this early date, we're really just spit-balling. We'll get another competition going after Thanksgiving, when we should at least know who is in the field.

dark commenteer said...

Looks like a cabin discussion to me...

Fredo said...

Love the way you think, DC

AddThis

Bookmark and Share

Always sniffing for the truth

Always sniffing for the truth

Blog Archive

Follow by Email