I watched the debate and I do not buy the media conclusion about those who performed the best.
Again, the star of the show was the moderator who intentionally stirred attacks against candidates with “flame questions” such as the “fake” question to Ron Paul.
For the most part, Santorum did as well as anyone for the major part of the debate EXCEPT for the omnibus bill questions.
Gingrich did well on every question and was not touched at all by anyone.
Romney answered his questions well EXCEPT that the Romneycare questions really get him visibly flustered. There is a huge dishonesty about the man regarding conservatism, and every time he pretends it I see his actual past rather than his rewritten past. The most telling dishonesty was signaled by Gingrich’s “are you kidding” look at Romney and then Gingrich reemphasizing his point about Romney’s deceit by quoting an article written on the issue.
Paul always seems hesitant every time he answers anything. It might just be a voice quirk. I also sense a basic dishonesty about his responses such as getting troops off the Pakistan border and putting them on the US border.
Gingrich was the best.
Santorum has to better explain why an omnibus bill with some evil mixed with some good and a lot of average in it must be supported. There needs to be a clincher argument on that one, and not just a passable answer.
Romney is an unrepentant liar, but a good one.
Paul’s quavering voice hides something wrong, but I’m not sure if it’s a touch of uncertainty about his positions or a touch of instability.
But, I saw no knockout blows yesterday at all.
Excellent analysis in #11.
We need Santorum to win in Michigan, otherwise it’s over for Rick and Newt. It could very well be conservatism’s Waterloo.
If Rick wins, Romney’s donations dry up, and we have a level playing field. Hopefully Michigan viewers picked up on Romney’s phoniness.
that’s exactly how I saw the debate.