Posted on 10/11/2011 3:18:34 PM PDT by Kaslin
Greetings from the picturesque campus of the Ivy League's Dartmouth College, the site of tonight's Republican presidential tilt. The Tipsheet will have live coverage of the event, which kicks off at 8:00 pm ET and airs on Bloomberg television (time to break out the TV guide, I suspect). Before you read my take on what to watch for tonight, check out the latest poll from Gallup, which puts the three top-tier candidates within five points of eachother.
Storylines
(1) Iran: Although the debate is supposed to focus almost exclusively on economic issues, today's breaking news bombshell that the Iranian government has been caught financing and coordinating terrorist attacks against targets inside the United States should absolutely be addressed. The candidate with the most granular understanding of the issues at play on this subject is Rick Santorum. I'm eager to hear what he, and all of his rivals, have to say. (Except for Ron Paul, who doesn't think Iranian nuclear aggression is a biggie, and who will find some way to blame us for Iran's poisonous treachery). Another wrinkle: Could Eric Holder's involvement in this story provide an opening for someone to finally raise Solyndra and/or Fast & Furious in one of these debates?
(2) Chris Christie's endorsement of Mitt Romney will likely get some play. Will Rick Perry -- or someone else -- pull the Northeastern RINO card? A Perry spokesman has already come pretty close.
(3) Mormonism: Rick Perry was recently introduced at an event by a pastor who has called Mormonism a "cult." Today, Mitt Romney demanded that Perry repudiate this view, arguing that the Consitution forbids a religious test for the presidency, and that anti-Mormon bigotry is ugly and has no place in American politics. A Perry spokesman has already declined to acede Romney's request, calling the issue a "distraction." I'll be stunned if this kerfuffle doesn't spill over into the debate, and Rick Perry had better be prepared with a damn good answer.
(4) Occupy Wall Street questions are almost inevitable. The base cannot stand the mob of hippies, communists, anti-capitalists, and sundry lefty hangers-on who comprise the bulk of the "movement." Organized labor and the Democrat Party establishment are getting on board, too. He (or she) with the best Occupy Wall Street-related zinger might win one of the biggest headlines tomorrow.
Candidates
Mitt Romney - The former Massachusetts Governor is in his own backyard, leading in the polls, and feeiling buoyed by the Christie "get." Deep down, he knows that Rush is right: Absent a tactonic shift in the race, Mitt will be the Republican nominee. His goal is to keep things moving on the current trajectory. It will be interesting to see if anyone besides Rick Perry will try to jolt Romney out of cruise control.
Herman Cain - With first-tier status comes first-tier scrutiny (and first-tier stage positioning). Expect more exploration of Cain's 9-9-9 tax plan, which I called for in an earlier post. It's been fascinating to watch the Romney-Cain partnership develop over the last few debates. Neither one has anything bad to say about the other, with Rick Perry hardest hit. At some point, if Cain is going to win this thing, he's going to have to attack his ally. Will that first salvo come tonight?
Rick Perry - The guy is still raking in major bucks and has never lost a campaign in his life. Reports of Perry's demise are -- for now -- premature, but the comeback train has to leave the station soon. Perry's campaign unleashed a brutal attack ad against Romneycare this week. Almost on cue (arguably, directly on cue), the White House has leaked the story that several top Romney healthcare advisors were actively involved in crafting Obamacare. If ever there were a time to really tee off on the frontrunner, tonight would be the night. Perry's probably got the most to gain, and he seems to enjoy mixing it up, so he'll likely lead the charge. But will be be able to pull it off succinctly and convincingly, unlike his slow-motion trainwreck in Orlando? The good news: Perry's son says his dad will be "well-rested" this time.
Newt Gingrich - I briefly heard Newt compare Occupy Wall Street to the Tea Party movement on a local radio show this morning. I wonder what he means by that, and whether he's read Ann Coulter's column on the subject.
Rick Santorum - The former Senator's expertise and greatest appeal to primary voters lie in the realms of foreign affairs and social issues. Does this mean he'll he flounder in an economic debate? Not at all, but he may feel less relevant.
Jon Huntsman - He needs a strong showing in New Hampshire to justify the continuation of his campaign, so Romney's the guy to beat. But some anti-Mormon rhetoric has seeped into this race over the last few days, and Huntsman might join forces with Romney to beat it back.
Michele Bachmann - One of her previous high water marks came here in the Granite State, when she made a stellar debate debut in June. She'll try to recapture the magic tonight.
Ron Paul - The retiring Texas Representative says many of his "extreme" views of three years ago have been vindicated by intervening events, and have now gained broader credibility and acceptance. He'll have another chance to explain why tonight.
Tonight's debate is being co-sponsored by Bloomberg, the Washington Post, and a local television station. Between Romneycare, Mormonism, and the "Occupy" mob, there could be major fireworks on tap. Tune in, and follow our live chat here at Townhall.
yes, I know
lOL, no Perry won’t. And, he is hardly more Conservative than Cain.
I don’t doubt Mitt’s made “the deal” with her and one or two others, Cain included.I agree. The fix is in. Perry threatened to upset the applecart which is why the issue of "soft on illegals" had to be concocted to get rid of him. (After the phony issue of Gardisil was raised and then quickly dropped.)
Although I do admit, Perry being unable to speak for himself is a huge problem for him.
But still, the fact that Perry can't speak doesn't absolve the major players of their guilt for their part in the Conspiracy of RINO, and it doesn't excuse the stupidity of all the suckers who are following along like lemmings over a cliff.
I think ole Johnny left his marbles in said sh**hole.
But even he in retrospect looks...well not “good” but “better” compared to Mr. Just for Men. Mitt would be the biggest RINO since Ford.
That is what was reported and I know the person making the report. It should be investigated further but if this is the truth (and I think it may be) Newt has suffered a lot of abuse he didn’t deserve.
He said that the plan is forth coming with in the next 3 days.
In the meantime you can look at the Texas economy.
“This surprised you?”
No, I didn’t say that.
What surprised me was him and Huntsman being in the same room didn’t cause a black hole to spontaneously appear.
I think thise two (Cain, Gingrich) like each other and would make a formidable team. I wish the adults would get back in charge. I wish the question on how you would reach concensus in Congress would have gone to Newt. He did it. Herman’s answer on that one was disappointing. Like it or not, we are going to have Democrats in office after 2012...and the worst of the bunch.
Harry Reid (although in a diminished role) and Pelosi (whose district is too full of koolaid to elect anyone else) They are still powerful and can do damage to our next President.
You’ll have to work with others to marginalize their impact...and the only one up there that I can seee who can do that is Newt.
Cain, as a CEO, may be used to working with a board of directors and other officers but as CEO, you still call the shots and everyone else falls in line. Don’t get me wrong, I think he’s up to the challenge..but I don’t think he’s had to face that much dissention before. Newt has.
Even if someone says there was no evidence to substantiate a run for the WH, you called that hate. Hate, hate, hate. You use that word just like liberals.
I want to win an election, We must choose wisely. I can read and if anyone was willing to look at the evidence objectively, they would have to acknowledge that Palin had high negatives and would not be the most effective candidate Republicans could choose. Stating the obvious does not translate to hate.
I just found this. It may deserve it’s own thread. I don’t know what is appropriate to post and what isn’t. http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0511/54971.html
Thanks. Perry supposedly had 15 million free at the end of the cycle, but we’ll have to see. The “southern” money is on hold and may not come into play, but there is a ton of “northeast/California” cash ready to be spent.
Such an unfair statement.
He clearly said he would have one........in a few days.........
Lol. I’m from the south, so I know how black people talk. He should have said “My 9-9-9 plan gonna make you ‘po” ‘cause it’s not well thought out, but damn is it a catchy turn of a phrase.”
Troll back atcha!!
F newt and F romney...
I will NOT vote for either of these two socialist CS’ers
As a boxing match Newt G. won because of clean, sharp, powerful punches. His defense was silence and then the sureness of those masterfully potent punches. The awe an opponent has of you is a defense method.
Cain got honorable mention. Cain was a quick-puncher, his types of punches somewhat limited in number. The 999 and the 999 and then the 999. But it’s a Dempsey-esque paradigm gut busting “shovel punch” of a punch. Cain also employed the weak-hand the deflectatory “Economist Lowry” and “Federal Reserve” punches at times as a adjunct to his defense method — that method being quickness and firmness.
Romney and similarly Perry were classic style boxers. No surprises, well-trained. Romney wore out the audience by over-talking, yap, yap, yap, yap. His effect was lost in a cloud of yapping dust. Perry just never got in the ring much, and when in the ring had no special hero sauce to share with the voters looking for a hero. He looked like another in a long line of older white males with dark hair (for whatever reason to have dark hair at that age) and a business suit. IOW, boring.
Paul has some really strong punches, but he wanders into and out of the ring at will, sort of hard to see such a man as a national President.
Bachmann clearly worked on appearance and voice, and both improved, although she always looks great, last night she looked like a real leader. But ... her messages drifted and lock-in on and emphasis on ideals wasn’t there. The audience (me) can’t handle hearing endless repeating of parts of the Michelle Bachmann story. Put the ideals out FIRST and then brand them. She has that cart and then horse, putting her personal and political story in front of the ideals.
Santorum added to the debate with some fine displays of great responses, but he also by desperation “I’ve had the least time to answer” validate his non-serious contendership.
There was another man there, but he is like some random “meeting ballast” you’ll see managers drag into meetings at time to make the meeting seem bigger.
> Damn! Newt is just kicking butt. Right now, I don’t care
> about this personal baggage. The country’s baggage is more
> important.
Maybe you need to see again that Global Warming commercial with Newt and Nancy Pelosi on a love seat telling us how we all need to live in the stone age.
I do not trust Newt.
Perry was three days short of an economic plan for a debate that focused on economics. Unprepared. Fail.
DRey - Palin said she wouldn’t deport either.
DRey - Seriously? Palin said it would be impossible to deport all the illegals.
Which one is the truth DRey because “wouldn’t” and “impossible” have two VERY different meanings. Of course, you knew that didn’t you?
I really don’t give a hot damn about the GOP. I do care about getting Obama out of office. I will vote for and so will the vast majority of FR, the eventual nominee. It doesn’t matter what is said now and by whom.
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.