• Send FReep Mail to Unmarked Package to get [ON] or [OFF] the Mitt Romney Ping List •
Posted on 06/06/2007 7:46:47 AM PDT by Reaganesque
Who were the winners and losers tonight? The list of losers does not exist. The top tier candidates all did well. There were no testy moments between Romney, McCain and Giuliani. But the way I see it, they should have company in the top tier after tonight...and I'm not talking about Fred Thompson.
It’s appropriate that Tuesday night’s Republican debate took place in the Granite state because tonight Mike Huckabee was solid as a rock. This is now the third debate where he has done well but tonight he cranked I up to another level. There was a passion in his voice tonight. He made an incredible eloquent case when he talked about God, creation, fighting radical Islam and the life issue. If social conservatives are looking for a presidential candidate to fight for their issues across the board, they can look no further than Mike Huckabee. But the magic of Huckabee tonight was that he took the pro-life issue and besides calling it the greatest moral issue of the day, he broadened it out and talked about respect for life outside the womb. Great answer and a great way to bring more moderates and others into the fold. A winning night all around, Memo to mainstream media: when does Mike Huckabee start getting mentioned as part of the top tier?
If Mitt Romney doesn’t become President, he should seriously consider being CEO of debate school. He could teach every candidate a thing or two. He is so polished, a great speaker and doesn’t come across as robotic. His answers tonight on Iraq and immigration were very clear. He comes across as very knowledgeable. I thought it was the right move tonight to NOT attack John McCain on immigration. This way he comes across as the nice guy, not the attack dog. Romney had been criticized before the debate because McCain said he didn’t have a plan on immigration but Romney said very clearly that he does: enforce the current law. That answer was a crowd pleaser.
John McCain looked a little distracted at first. It looked like he was pre-occupied with something else. He seemed calm, a little too calm. During the first debate, he seemed pretty wired. He was like that a little less in the second debate. Maybe his handlers told him to tone it down a little and not look like you drank 4 cans of Pepsi before you went on stage. McCain did improve as the night went on. When he got up from his chair to address a mother who lost a loved one Iraq, it was a great body language move. It showed that he cared. He looked her straight in the eye and gave her a straight answer.
Rudy Giuliani seems to just get better and better with each debate. He had plenty of opportunities tonight to talk about Iraq, national security and 9/11. Right up his alley. He comes across as a straight shooter and genuine when talking about defending this country. He told Americans tonight that it was the right decision to go into Iraq. He didn’t beat around the bush. (Excuse the pun) He was able to weave the JFK terror plot into one of his answers. On immigration, it’s a very complicated issue but Giuliani was able to boil it down to basically say “throw the bad people out” and then was able to weave his idea for national ID cards into the answer. Also, when Giuliani was asked about what the greatest moral issue of our time is, he mentioned God and that America’s ideals come from God. Good move. It was another solid night.
Some other thoughts:
Did you notice that Romney kept agreeing with Giuliani tonight? I think it was done on purpose. Let Americans see that this is a two horse race between Giuliani the front runner and Romney.
Also, many of us in the media were expecting a big argument on immigration tonight between McCain and Romney. It never happened. It surprised me because both had been critical of each other. Maybe they'll live to fight another day.
Now, off to the spin room. Check back for video interviews with campaign staffers.
Duncan Hunter????? Not a word on his performance.
They never do
I think they’re scared of him.
"....I'aaammmm Baack!! "
One other observation. I’ve believed since the first debate that very often, Rudy Guliani is indirectly addressing Hunter when he speaks.
I’m curious about where Politico.com came from. A few months ago noone ever heard of them. Now they are one of the big guys and seem bent on erasing “second tier” candidates and supporting the same old crap from the big government GOP.
The spawn of the establishment owned MSM, of course.
Who elected Moe, Larry and Curly “top tier”?
May I ask in what way? I can’t tell if he’s acting coy, talking to Hunter in a cryptic way.
As I've yet to make up my mind, with the exception of those whom I have excluded totally from any future vote by me, I am noticing that by not mentioning a number of those who make a very credible arguments, especially "unpopular" in big business (aka "free trade" types in conservative circles); those who disagree with the idea that we need to fund every dictatorial regime through our "trade" policies but most especially anyone tough on illegals in this country are given no notice whatsoever.
Those "second tier/third tier candidates to media and "established" political pundits are treating some great answers and candidates as the elephant in the room, no one notices.
Shemp?
Besides John McCain, Hunter seems to be the only candidate with wartime combat experience. Now more than ever, that is a definite plus when someone wants to speak as POTUS about the lives and fate of our troops.
I will always appreciate Rudy. He is one helluva big city mayor. That does not make him a true conservative Republican. Want some perspective on Rudy? Look up Buddy Cianci, Mayor of Providence RI. Lots of parallels there.
Do Democrats believe in locking up criminals and throwing away the key?
Do Democrats believe welfare is not a right but a privilige, and that you should work in exchange for it?
Do Democrats believe pornography should be chased out of residential areas, and that children should be protected from it in libraries and other public areas?
Do Democrats believe that public money should not be used to support blasphemous and obscene works of "art"?
Do Democrats believe that citizens should be protected from mentally ill and sociopathic people by vigorous enforcement of "quality of life" laws?
“Duncan Hunter????? Not a word on his performance.”
I read the transcipt fully, so this is biased by failure to see visual, but helped in that I focussed on what they said - my estimation on that:
Duncan Hunter did the best. why? Clear answers, facts, no humbug or distraction - and the ‘Kennedy wing’ comment hit home. pardon for the Border Patrol officers, and putting out facts on what is working and what is not. Reviews should have said - DUNCAN HUNTER WON.
Romney did second best. Clear and concise on every answer. His immigration comments said what needed to be said, and he pointed out Iraq in context of wider war on terror, very important to do as the libMedia wants to over-focus on Iraq and ignore the fact of terrorism and our war on it. I can easily see how Romney could make mincemeat of any Democrat in a general election debate, not an ounce of rancor in him.
Huckabee did third best. good passion and nailed the faith v reason issue. but Huckabee is for “dream act” and I suspect his ‘compassionate conservative’ views are not focussed enough on how to keep a lid on spending, viz. his comments on ‘pro-life’ etc.
McCain did forth best (because of his slam-down on Brownback’s ideas and good answers on Iraq, but his defense of the indefensible immigration bill IMHO makes him radioactive) I’d rate him higher if it werent for his phony claims on Immigration. Maybe I should rate him best *and* worst.
Most disappointed in Ron Paul who dealt only in foreign policy issues, where I disagree, and not on domestic issues, where he could out-conservative anyone on the stage. Disagree on his bash on ‘preemtive war’ as a moral issue
... my #1 moral issue? Protecting Family in America. Why couldnt Ron Paul has talked about freedom and citizenship? He’s sinking further into the mire of isolationism.
Brownback’s idea on Iraq is flaky and wrong, but good answer on faith and reason.
Tancredo once again showed that he is not ready for prime time. It’s not easy to get your point hit home in 90 seconds, but once again - Hunter can do it, Tancredo cant. IMHO Tancredo should bow out and get all the ‘secure the borders’ conservatives behind Hunter, a far better candidate.
Rudy ‘did well’ by talking more conservative and not getting called on it. I dont buy it. I dont see why he is considered above the 2nd tier like Gilmore and Tommy Thompson or Brownback, who have as good a grasp on things as Rudy and are more acceptable Republican candidates.
The fact that God almost Zotted Rudy on his answer about Catholic Bishops should tell us something! :-)
An excellent summary. Rudy didn’t just support these principles, he acted on them. And in New York City!
Outstanding synopsis. I just wish your worked for the media.
And he acted on them in the teeth of a hostile and contemptuous media, which he beat like a rented mule in dramatic and highly confrontational press conferences.
“I’m curious about where Politico.com came from. “
Never been to thier site but heard about them via Laura Ingraham - they are ‘good people’ (she knows them) from journalism community (ie Wash Post journalists) who she (and we) wouldn’t be agreeing with on. (So they must be non-conservative). So, a politically savvy web/news site.
If they think Duncan Hunter came in last, they are nuts. He did great.
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.