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.
Romney on the other hand, is not going to be so easy. Not only does he have a very large bank roll, he probably gave his best debate performance of his career last night. Perhaps it was because Newt was on his AAA game and Romney stepped up to match it.
I believe that the coming week will show both Newt and Romney to take a bigger lead and perhaps Perry will move into a strong third. Cain is definitely on the way out. He was clearly outclassed, outgunned and suffers from Political Vertigo. On top of all that, he still has Gloria All-Red waiting for him to actually face his accusers and not deny what is already on the record.
Simply put and very true; The others need to go.......(Keep repeating as often as necessary.)
Thanks for the thoughtful response. SO much better than the usual ‘RINO’ nonsense (enormously successful governor of a red state, worked for 3 Republican presidents, strongly and consistently pro-life, strongly and consistently pro-gun, you know the drill...). Yes, Huntsman (just like that first president he worked for, Ronald Reagan) is a strong believer in free trade.
I understand your concerns, but I believe that Huntsman knows how the global game is played. He is the right one to deal with China, and the rising markets in the emerging Asia/Pacific economies. Quite frankly, although it is a decent applause line, Romney’s naive drum-banging for a Sino-American trade war, unsettles me. I’d much prefer Huntsman in the Oval Office on this issue.
Gingrich has a lot of baggage.....sure he can sound good, slick even.....and substantive....
...the next day he can slide around to the other side...
..he's done it before.....I don't trust him to not do it again.
Cain is strong....neither you nor the MSM will dilute the strength of his character or abilities just because you want him out of the game.
Good analysis!
Newt is very capable of combating the Press and the smear campaign they are sure to launch against him. It’s time we had a candidate like that, frankly.
I think this election is headed that way by the looks of it. Newt has very a clear vision of the status of International Affairs as well as how to handle immediate crisis. His stance on the border was also very logical and made sense.
If Gingrich wins, I would feel comfortable that he would do the right thing. He seems to have learned not to sleep with the enemy and forever has cast away, his moderate tendencies. Time will tell, but I remain cautiously optimistic.
Probably trying to figure out why so many "conservatives" spend so much time saying they don't want Ronmeny, but use all their energy to trash the rest of the field....
Perry seemed to have good answers but they weren’t to the questions asked. After the second time he did this it seemed like he was using the debate to get his sound bites in more than his position on foreign affairs.
“I do not go on other candidate threads (like “Liz” consistently comes to Perry threads) and make wild, false comments and then leave. Just so you know the difference.”
They aren’t wild and false comments. What she stated was true. You just can’t stand hearing it, because you are totally enamored of your chosen candidate, lol.
You are losing it CW - just like your candidate.
Your post to Liz is uncalled for on these threads. We all have respected your right to Post Perry Threads continually but won’t tolerate others opinion. I suggest you start your own Blog site if you can’t respect others.
Mouthing sound bites rather than answering questions-----is typical self-serving Perry----one of THE rankest political opportunists that has had the gall to surface.
Me-First Perry's taken his endless debate flops to new heights of self-importance----he was all over the web with his "oops" moment---(pumping himself up to skeptical audiences).
Watta cornball---the rube has no clue that voters (who have the last say) see through his shenanigans.
"Well, shucks---thas the way he got elected in Texas, pardner."
ROTFL.
Bullshit
You work for Obama and you lie.
Why do you use a women’s screen name?
Is that what the Dem’s taught you?
Why do you only post on Perry threads and lie about him?
IMO Cain did just fine last nite and Gengrich made progress. Perry’s only good point was zero-based foreign aid - which I expect fits well with Cain’s business experience and will be adopted. Other than that, Perry’s a blustering autobot as opposed to Romney who’s an establishment autobot. The others are not in the running for any number of good reasons.
The sponsor, format, and topic were matched well - all second rate. The diplomatic nuances of foreign affairs is so inconsequencial to America’s current challenges, to me, elegant mastery of this arena is akin to winning a blue ribbon in mental masturbation.
My preference remains Cain/Gingrich ‘12.
I swear, sometimes I think you're a cartoon person.
Perry is soooo bad, we dumb hicks just keep voting for him, and voting for him.
I will trust Perry on getting rid of Obamacare, defunding the UN, protecting my 2nd amendment rights, and castrating the job killing EPA more than any candidate out there.
He still thinks it's the first debate and Romney is the guy to beat. Sad.
Actually, it’s kinda like those judges’ scores in Olympic ice skating. You know how they drop the highest and lowest scores?
That’s how I feel about the two of you. Cin sees Perry through rose-colored glasses, and Liz is blind to his (admittedly few) virtues.
So I just ignore you both. ;-)
How is this a "huh?" moment? What he said was perfectly clear, but I guess Kevin Hall failed most of his classes which is why he's a journalist.
Oh, Liz! Tell us how you really feel, lol!
I know, but it looks like he’s going to get the nomination. So what do we do, vote for Obama?
IF you'd rather NOT be pinged FReepmail me.
IF you'd like to be added FReepmail me. Thanks.
*****************************************************************************************************************************************************
Doesn't sound like something Herman would want on the bumper sticker.
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.