Posted on 11/13/2011 2:25:54 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
For the second time in four days, the GOP presidential candidates took the stage for a debate. This one focused exclusively on foreign policy and national security. The first hour aired live on the CBS network. The final half hour was only available online and the CBS feed was lousy for the first 15 minutes of that. So, most viewers only paid attention to the first hour. This recap covers the entire debate.
Here is a look at how each candidate fared, along with winners and losers:
Michele Bachmann: Once again, the Minnesota congresswoman was in command on the issues and offered plenty of substance. She also failed to stand out, again. Bachmann had a good line about Obama “allowing the ACLU to run the CIA”. Often ignored, she practically begged the moderators for time on two different occasions, but was shot down. Bachmann held her own, but did little to sway voters.
Herman Cain: Without the ability to use “9-9-9” as a crutch, Cain struggled. He provided his answers with a slow, methodical delivery, probably trying to avoid a gaffe. Much like Cain’s stances on social issues, some of his foreign policy answers were indecipherable.
Cain proclaimed, “I do not agree with torture. Period. However, I will trust the judgment of our military leaders to determine what is torture and what is not torture.” Huh?
Six months after officially declaring his candidacy, Cain is still giving the same non-answer on the war in Afghanistan. Cain called Yemen’s corrupt president “our friend”, and still believes we can somehow undermine Iran’s nuclear program by drilling for oil here. Cain received few applause breaks from a lively South Carolina crowd. It was not his best night.
Newt Gingrich: Once again, the former House Speaker commanded the stage better than anyone else. He provided strong, substantive issues. Gingrich projects an aura that he knows the issues better than anyone else. Probably because he does know better. It was another very good performance.
Jon Huntsman: Although I still believe Huntsman is running in the wrong party, this was a very good performance. Unfortunately for the former Utah governor, most GOP primary voters disagree with his stances. However, he provided strong arguments for his views, which include immediately pulling our troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan and opposing waterboarding. If this were a general election campaign and Huntsman was in his rightful spot as the Democrat, he would have fared very well.
Ron Paul: The Texas congressman’s foreign policy stances are what prevent a lot of Republicans from seriously considering him. As expected, he disagreed with most of the candidates on stage. Paul gave a much better answer regarding Iran’s nuclear program than he did at the Ames debate in August. Although he still opposes going to war to prevent it, Paul said, “If you do, you get a declaration of war and you fight it and you win it.” I thought Paul did a good job presenting his arguments. It seemed like he had very few chances to speak, however.
Rick Perry: After the “Perry Plunge” on Wednesday, I thought his campaign was over. Now, I’m not so sure. This was Rick Perry’s best debate. He was relaxed and provided lots of substance. He scored with the audience by joking about Wednesday’s brain freeze.
Perry gave a terrific answer in regards to foreign aid. “The foreign aid budget in my administration is going to start at $0.” He later added that Pakistan doesn’t deserve any aid and stuck to his answer later in the debate when asked if his $0 policy would include Israel. Perry even got a compliment from Gingrich in regards to his answer. This might signal a rebirth in the Perry campaign.
Mitt Romney: The former Massachusetts governor was his usual polished self. Romney is well versed on every issue and has become an excellent debater. As the presumed frontrunner, Romney handled this debate very well.
Rick Santorum: The former Pennsylvania senator again showed he has a command of the issues. He even disagreed with Newt Gingrich in regards to how to handle Iran’s pending nuclear weapons, but the moderators did not allow the two to argue it out. Calling Pakistan “a friend” probably raised some eyebrows among GOP voters. Santorum was not given a lot of time to shine, which he desperately needs at this point in the campaign.
Overall Winner: Rick Perry. In the aftermath of Wednesday’s gaffe, we have seen a much more human side for Perry. He actually did well in that debate, except for the 53 second brain freeze. Saturday, Perry shined. While he might not have delivered the most style and substance, I believe he helped his campaign more than anyone else. That makes Perry the winner.
Overall Losers: CBS and Herman Cain. Cain avoided any major gaffes, but was clearly the least knowledgeable candidate on the stage. As for CBS, what kind of network only airs an hour of an hour and a half debate? Then encourages people to watch the rest on their website, but provides a feed that pauses every four seconds? Wait. I know the answer. It’s the same kind of network that tried to alter the 2004 presidential race with phony documents.
I had 3 years of French and tutored it, we learned the Marseilles, too, but we NEVER recited a pledge of allegiance to a foreign country including France.
This isn’t a Perry thread.
Here are a few thoughts on the debate. There's no secret on here that I support Perry. That doesn't blind my objectivity to the point where I'm a kool-aid drinker. I am very aware that he has screwed up in the prior debates. I was quite frustrated with the earlier debate this week b/c he was doing a good job, and having his best debate so far, then had his brain fart. That was so frustrating to me b/c I know what kind of governor he is, and I know he's better than how he's has come off. Last night was a different ballgame. I thought he did 10x better, even with the small mistake of referring to Ron Paul as senator.
Regarding the author's description of Cain's slow methodical style, I have absolutely no problem with that. I sure as hell would prefer a thought out response over the shoot from the hip style he and Block have been using recently in blaming this sex scandal on Perry, a Politico reporter, the Free Masons, CIA, the Jews, etc. (I'm being slightly sarcastic) Even if this isn't his strongest suit, I don't think he did poorly at all. His only remark that I had issues with was deferring the definition of torture to the military. Otherwise, I thought he did well, and I'm glad he stood up to say that waterboarding isn't torture.
Romney was Romney. I had no real beef with his answers last night, from what I can remember. He's polished, and there's not much more to say about him on style. Style is good, but I want core principles. If there is not a solid foundation, then the there is no hope for a solid conservative governing style.
Newt did well, as he always does. I would suggest that he take care on going after the moderators. That can be off-putting, as he runs the risk of being known as the person who bitches about the press and moderators. That can be red meat for us conservatives, since we don't particularly care for the press, therefore don't care about their feelings getting hurt, but when it comes to the independents and such, I think that may come across as condescending. I could be wrong, but that's my take. Substance wise, he's spot on, which is of no surprise to anybody. He will be in the firing squad now, and will have much more baggage than Cain has. He was once the most hated man in politics, and don't think for a second that the press will sit back and take him speaking down to them. They will bite back when the time is right, and will do the whole "Gingrich that stole Christmas" theme all over again. I hope for his sake that he has dropped his prima donna issues. He pulled that nonsense with Clinton regarding an Air Force One flight, and Clinton made him look like a fool.
Santorum was Santorum. I have problems with his stance that we must always give money to Pakistan. This is why I support the zero-sum game that Perry and others support. Whatever issues I have with Santorum, he would be a million times better than the current occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania.
Bachmann was given the shaft last night. I thought the moderator was rude to her on two separate occasions. I'm not a fan of hers for the presidency, but I think she was disrespected. She should have just said "screw it" and kept on talking, especially the 2nd time they shut her down.
Paul was Paul. His people drive me nuts. I couldn't be in a debate audience b/c of them. You would hear me on national TV yelling for them to STFU. I completely disagree with Paul of foreign policy, and his waterboarding answer provided Rick Perry with the best answer of the night, which, if I remember correctly, got the biggest applause line of the night. Unfortunately it was on the online part of the debate.
Huntsman? Whatever. I'll give him credit on providing 50% of the DNA on some hot daughters.
Overall I enjoyed the debate. I hated the brilliant idea to split this up between live and online. That was a stupid move. I also hated that this was on a Saturday night. I didn't watch it live. I had family priorities. I did happen to dvr it, and found the 2nd part online. I think that guaranteed low viewership, but we'll see. It couldn't be any worse than last week during the LSU Bama game.
They did that twice that I saw.
In the debate that was just between Cain and Gingrich, several people commented that Cain hesitated and waited for Gingrich to answer first, before Cain knew what he wanted to say. So it looked like the moderators of last night's debate threw questions to Cain first so he wouldn't have the crutch of hearing other responses first (let him walk the plank alone, so to speak). Cain did just fine on those attempted gotcha questions.
Cain wasn't afraid to take a stand, such as on water boarding. He didn't wait to see how the audience reacted, he said what he believes.
And for the author of this article to say that he doesn't understand Cain's stance on torture, the author is either dense, or he's just trying to bash Cain - or both. Cain said he is against torture. But Cain doesn't know ALL the possible interrogation techniques (again, he doesn't have Top Secret clearance, and I WANT those techniques to remain secret, so let's not talk about them during televised debates!). So Cain also said he will trust his military advisers on what is torture and what is not torture. What is so hard to understand about that? I like sleep, so sleep deprivation would be "torture" to me, but I really don't consider that to be "torture".
Torture is cutting off someone's head while they are still alive, with a dull knife, while they are gurgling and drowning in their own blood. And if anyone needs to be reminded what our enemies would be happy to do to us, we can pull out some of those beheading videos for everyone to watch.
Enough soapbox from me for now. :-)
Do you have a link for Cain and Block blaming the Free Masons, Jews and CIA or did you make that up?
I was being sarcastic on that. He has been throwing out accusations right and left, though. His campaign once against blamed Perry this week. That's the 3rd time they've blamed him, along with the democratic machine and a non-existent reporter at Politico who was "confirmed" to be a relative of Karen Kraushaar.
And that's the damned truth.
Huntsman’s daughters win that contest. Three beautiful gals.
Liz, sweetie, you missed the best thing of all.
The Dallas Observer (weekly rag that makes the Dallas Morning News look conservative) had an article about the growing problem of HIV in Dallas among young guys, black and white.
The Observer chose to blame Perry for it, citing that he is trying to defund Planned Parenthood.
So, see there is something else you can add to your list.
--------------------
Which experienced President will you be voting for?
Who do you recommend the GOP put up against Obama?
Let’s hear a big Amen !!!
CW was not objecting to your posting on this Perry thread.
She may have objected to your posting really stupid stuff, but she is too nice to say what she probably is thinking.
So you dud make it up.
Do the laws say waterboarding is torture?
This is NOT a Perry thread. It is a wrap up on the debate talking about ALL of the candidates. Was Perry the only candidate? NO, HE WAS NOT!
Yes, as I mentioned on the original post. Right after I listed the group, I said I was being sarcastic. If that was not clear, I apologize. I was making a joke of the Cain camp blaming everybody and their mom.
If you’ve gone on all the Perry threads, you should know that they immediately go downhill from discussing the substance of the thread and descend into gratuitous and mostly ignorant slams by Perry haters.
the Perry haters are a funny bunch. With every other breath, they declare that Perry is a non-factor. With every post, they show their fear of him.
You need to get your tent and Occupy GOP Headquarters.
Is that your rally cry?
WE WANT MORE! WE WANT MORE! WE WANT MORE!...PABLUM, CANDY, FREE RENT, FREE TUITION, OTHER PEOPLE'S STUFF.
In the ownership class?
Good grief, I'm in the ownership class, as are 100% of the FReepers that post here.
Did you just get out of middle school?
Click on the demonRAT underground, there are loads of people with the same feelings that you have. Sheesh.....
It’s time you learned, youthful one. The Cain supporters are totally lacking in any sense of humor.
Yes you can tell from the nastiness of the Perry supporters that they have the market cornered on humor, including claiming all threads belong to Perry!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.