Replies

After going back and watching it again (as I said, I was a bit distracted the first time around), I more or less stick by what I originally said, with a few revisions. One thing I looked for this time was whether or not the candidates answered the questions and showed some mental agility.

Hunter drops slightly because of this, as a lot of his confidence seemed to come from the fact that he largely stuck to his talking points, even if they only had a loose relationship with the question asked. He still looked strong, and I still think he benefits, but he's going to need to expand beyond defense, trade, and immigration if he wants to make the big leagues. He's hardly alone here, of course, as Brownback and Huckabee did much of the same. Huckabee sounded better on policy, while Brownback sounded better on principles. Neither did well enough to gain any traction, though.

Tommy Thompson gets a bump up. I think I mistook his quiet thoughtfulness for lack of confidence the first time around, as he seemed to genuinely want to answer every question directly, honestly, and completely. I'd almost say he's Lincolnesque in this way, except he lacks the rhetorical skills. The same could be said for Tancredo, but the way he handled the time constraints seemed weak, and I still think he was the biggest loser. He's a smart man, and his heart's in the right place, but he's just not ready for prime time.

I said Gilmore was forgettable, and I now realize that was largely because he didn't seem to get as much face time as the others. Still, he didn't really say much beyond touting his own record as governor and as a "consistent conservative", and so I don't think he really scored any points here. No one's going out of his way to vote for him unless they already knew him.

I still have McCain and Giuliani where they were. McCain said a lot that will please conservatives, but he stumbled a lot and liked to grin at his own statements; basically, he exhibited the things people hate about the President's speaking style, only it looked even worse on him. He did not seem very Presidential tonight. Giuliani did seem Presidential, and I think he handled that "gotcha" question on Sunnis and Shiites rather well considering the obscure subject matter, but he let slip a lot of things conservatives won't like. Between the two, Giuliani did better, but both will probably lose a little. This is bad for both, because even though they're frontrunners, their respective problems with conservatives mean they both have to be brilliant all the time to win. This is especially true for Rudy, whose vaunted leadership abilities are his number one selling point.

Overall, my list of winners and losers stays roughly the same. Romney was the biggest winner, followed by Hunter and, to a lesser extent, Paul. Rudy and McCain both lose a bit, though I think McCain's lack of composure will hurt him badly in the long run if he doesn't fix it. The rest lose by default, as I've said.

The biggest winners, though? Fred Thompson and Newt Gingrich, because, aside from Romney, no one was particularly impressive. The only declared candidate who is going to gain a great deal of momentum out of this is Romney, and that's good news for anyone waiting to get in. Still, I wouldn't advise either to miss too many more of these, and I think both are missing opportunities to show their best qualities. I've never seen Fred in a debate, but I know he's both well-spoken and an intellectual who is knowledgeable about a wide range of subjects. I get the sense he could have wiped the floor with this field, Romney included. The only way Newt ever loses a debate is by putting the audience to sleep or by agreeing too much with the competition. If he can avoid those two things, he could still be a factor, if not necessarily the best candidate.

Hunter drops slightly because of this, as a lot of his confidence seemed to come from the fact that he largely stuck to his talking points, even if they only had a loose relationship with the question asked.

Hunter did well. Not well enough to move to the first tier. I think Tancredo will lose support, especially financial. The closed-border crowd had better pick one candidate, the same that the conservative base needs to settle on one candidate to stop the leftwing mayor.

Tommy Thompson gets a bump up. I think I mistook his quiet thoughtfulness for lack of confidence the first time around, as he seemed to genuinely want to answer every question directly, honestly, and completely.

No charisma. He'll prove, yet again, that resume isn't everything.

Overall, my list of winners and losers stays roughly the same. Romney was the biggest winner, followed by Hunter and, to a lesser extent, Paul. ... The biggest winners, though? Fred Thompson and Newt Gingrich, because, aside from Romney, no one was particularly impressive.

I still agree. I'd add that Thompson and Gingrich might be more tempted to enter but also that Ron Paul's performance and the stronger-than-expected response he'll get in the polls will tempt Hagel to enter as well. Ron Paul as the last constitutional conservative, Hagel as the last living Eisenhower Republican.