Replies

Well, here's my take.. (Ping to GWB continuing the conversation from the first debate)

First off, as I've said, everyone looked much more comfortable this time around. This is both due to their increased experience and to the more conservative-friendly forum. This was a much better debate as well.

Giuliani got himself behind in the count in the first debate and part of this one, but Ron Paul floated one over the plate for him, and he knocked it, along with Paul's chances, out of the park. Rudy didn't help himself on abortion, but the exchange with Paul is what people are going to remember, so I'm reluctantly going to have to call him the winner here. Ron Paul is the biggest loser, unless you consider his chances at winning some third party votes. He's done as far as the Republican nomination is concerned, masses of internet poll-stuffers notwithstanding.

Romney looked just as polished this time, but with the other candidates catching up in that regard, and with more of his philosophical malleability being exposed, I'm going to say he loses a few steps here. His exchange with McCain didn't help him, either. McCain holds serve here. He looks good on Iraq and on spending, and I think he explained his opposition to the tax cuts well. His answers on torture showed conviction, but were wrongheaded, and I think that's how the voters will see it. He explained CFR about as well as he could have, but he won't win many converts to his point of view. His composure was much better this time around than last time. He came across as a man of conviction, which contrasts him with Romney, who seems to be targeting him, as expected. He gets a little bump up this time, but not enough to give his campaign serious momentum, as his some of his convictions don't square with those of most Republicans.

Duncan Hunter came up big here again, showing some gravitas and looking good on the key issues. He stuck to his talking points, which are good talking points for the base, but he's going to need to expand them or risk sounding repetitive. He also needs to be a little more dynamic, as he still seems a bit stiff and rehearsed. Still, he built on what he did last time, and I think his campaign might gain some real momentum if he keeps this up and corrects his problems.

Huckabee scored points as well, though maybe I'm biased because he mentioned the FairTax again. He looked competent on every issue, and I can't remember any real stumbles. His explanation of his tax increases in Arkansas was adequate, if not inspiring. I think he helped himself tonight, and is still in the race.

Tancredo looked much better this time around, even if no one will be confusing him with Cicero. He had some of the best lines of the night, as has been noted elsewhere, and probably earned himself quite a few fans. He's still a million to one shot, of course, and he didn't come up big enough to change that.

As for the rest, Tommy Thompson was his usual honest, straightforward self, looked competent and even a little presidential. He's continuing to flog his record, but nationwide he's not turning many heads. He's putting all his chips on Iowa, which I believe is a losing strategy. Brownback is showing himself to be a one trick pony. Like last time, he shows great conviction and passion on the life issue, but looked lost on other issues, pandering to narrow constituencies in such an obvious fashion as to make himself look more like a politician than a President (I know, false dichotomy and all that...). He's really falling off in my book. I know he has fans here, but Jim Gilmore wins my "What the hell is he doing here?" award. At least Paul has moonbats to impress. Gilmore's "consistent conservative" message isn't going to play outside of his groupies.

So, here are my power rankings after the first two debates..

1. Rudy Giuliani (+)
2. John McCain (+)
3. Mitt Romney (-)
4. Duncan Hunter (+)
5. Mike Huckabee (+)
6. Tom Tancredo (++)
7. Tommy Thompson (=)
8. Sam Brownback (-)
9. Jim Gilmore (=)
10. Ron Paul (---)

Going forward, I expect Rudy's bump to fade as he fails to win over conservatives, but as of right now, his smackdown of Ron Paul will be the story of the campaign, and has salvaged his momentum. Romney's campaign is in big trouble, as, in this debate, he was just "one of the guys", and he can't afford that. If Hunter can translate his performance in the debates to the polls, he may even overtake Romney at some point in the near future.

We'll see how this all plays tomorrow.

What an excellent analysis.

Giuliani got himself behind in the count in the first debate and part of this one, but Ron Paul floated one over the plate for him, and he knocked it, along with Paul's chances, out of the park. Rudy didn't help himself on abortion, but the exchange with Paul is what people are going to remember, so I'm reluctantly going to have to call him the winner here. Ron Paul is the biggest loser, unless you consider his chances at winning some third party votes. He's done as far as the Republican nomination is concerned, masses of internet poll-stuffers notwithstanding.

Giuliani grandstanded over Paul's war positions and was laying in wait. No doubt, Ron Paul has heard this same attack on him before. My guess, Giuliani did himself some good, probably not enough to offset his poor previous showing. Paul's numbers may actually rise sharply, eclipsing a number of other second-tier candidates but not exceeding Duncan Hunter's, at least not yet. RP also will reap some funds. You notice, I'm not saying these will necessarily be conservatives or even Republicans. I would expect he will gain with libertarians nationally and those liberals in solidly blue states who might cross over in the primary (a hazard to our primaries I've personally always opposed). Even if FNC wants to exclude him from future debates, it doesn't mean PMSNBC will cooperate.

OTOH, given that Giuliani wants to appeal to conservative Republican voters despite his leftwing social positions, then there is no real test of party purity for discriminating against Paul except for his antiwar position. Giuliani does oppose major planks of the party platform. Ron Paul doesn't. In each case, the candidate has significant opposition from a large portion of the party base and is relying on crossover appeal for their support. The two are not equal in this but their positions and history make them stand out from the bunch starkly.

Romney could not dominate the FNC team easily as he did with PMSNBC. The other candidates were a little better prepared also. I think Romney and McStain didn't damage each other much though the talking heads will make much of it. McStain turned in a solid but uninspiring performance, not as creepy as the first debate.

Hunter did well and has improved his image and came across personally on a few of those questions. Still, he reminds you of your dad's Republican and not so much of a candidate for the 21^st century. Whether Duncan did himself 1% worth of good in the polls remains to be seen. But like the other second-tier guys, he has to move visibly soon or he won't be able to.

Huckabee didn't impress me much. Somehow, the stench of Arkansas politics sticks to the man. Not grossly corrupt like Xlinton but cast out of that mold. No thanks.

Tancredo was more likable than the rest. His personality came out a bit more and he came across personally, probably a little better than Duncan did. I doubt he'll budge in the polls but if the border/RealID issue is still hot, he could pick up a percentage point or two in what is an issues candidacy.

Tommy Thompson continues to bore, despite his excellent resume. Same for Gilmore. Brownback seems destined to recreate the career trajectory of Bob Dole and lead the party to defeat as its nominee in 2024. Depressing even to think about it.

I don't think Rudy helps himself all that much but I could be wrong. FNC is totally in the tank for him as was made clear tonight. McStain might gain a few points in key states, Romney might lose a few (despite the resume and all that money).

The race isn't over and may not have even begun as this second and more conservative-friendly FNC debate highlights that The Guy just doesn't seem to be in the field.

Me, I'm waiting to see what Fred Thompson does. He's the wild card. But he shouldn't wait too long.