Posted on 10/29/2015 6:06:18 AM PDT by xzins
The three winners of the night were pretty obvious: Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, and Donald Trump.
Rubio ended Jeb Bush’s campaign with the kind of body shot that buckles your knees. That’s on Bush, who never should have come after Rubio in that spot for a host of strategic and tactical reasons. But what should scare Hillary Clinton is how effortless Rubio is even with throwaway lines, like “I’m against anything that’s bad for my mother.†Most people have no idea how fearsome raw political talent can be. Clinton does know because she’s seen it up close. She sleeps next to it for a contractually-obligated 18 nights per year.
Cruz was tough and canny—no surprise there. He went the full-Gingrich in his assault on CNBC’s ridiculous moderators. He did a better job explaining Social Security reform than Chris Christie, even (which is no mean feat). And managed to look downright personable compared with John Harwood, whose incompetence was matched only by his unpleasantness. If you’re a conservative voter looking for someone who is going to fight for your values, Cruz must have looked awfully attractive.
Then there was Trump. Over the last few weeks, Trump has gotten better on the stump. Well, don’t look now, but he’s getting better at debates, too. Trump was reasonably disciplined. He kept his agro to a medium-high level. And his situational awareness is getting keener, too. Note how he backed John Kasich into such a bad corner on Lehmann Brothers that he protested, “I was a banker, and I was proud of it!†When that’s your answer, you’ve lost the exchange. Even at a Republican debate.
And Trump had a hammer close: “Our country doesn’t win anymore. We used to win. We don’t anymore.†I remain convinced that this line (along with his hardliner on immigration) is the core of Trump’s appeal. But he didn’t just restate this theme in his closing argument. He used it to: (1) beat up CNBC; and (2) argue that his man-handling of these media twits is an example of what he’ll do as president. It was brilliant political theater.
Those were your winners. You also saw tonight several campaigns which are over, even if the candidates don’t know it yet. Kasich was less likable than Rand Paul. Rand Paul was mostly invisible, and petulant when he was visible. Mike Huckabee wasn’t visible enough, except when he was doing his populist defense of Medicare and Social Security. But the effectiveness of this spot was diminished by Cruz’s excellent response, which is what people are apt to remember. There just isn’t enough space for him to make an impact by dint of personality in a field with a bunch of other strong and attractive personalities. And as for Bush? Jeb’s dead, baby. Jeb’s dead.
That leaves us with Chris Christie, Carly Fiorina, and Ben Carson, who, by the way, is actually leading the field in some polls.
Christie was as impressive tonight as he could be, given his position. He had a great opening. His interjection on regulating fantasy football was tremendous. The “Even in New Jersey what you’re doing is called rude†line to Harwood just killed. If the establishment had jumped on Christie early, instead of being scared off by the GW bridge scandal and going for Bush . . . well, this race would probably be different. But they didn’t. That said, we’ll keep Christie in our final grouping because he’s so talented that he’s always going to have a puncher’s chance.
Fiorina had a solid debate, but wasn’t the run-away winner she’d been in the first two debates. If her numbers couldn’t hold when she was the class of the field, I doubt they’ll move much when she’s merely on the high-side of the average. It looks more and more like Fiorina isn’t running to win the nomination.
And what to do about Carson? Gentle Ben was fine—great in some moments; pedestrian in others. I don’t think many people in the media fully grasp the passion for Carson, but that doesn’t make it any less real. And if you look at the history of Iowa, and Carson’s numbers now, it’s not hard to imagine him doing very well there.
So there’s your final six: Trump, Carson, Rubio, Cruz, and maybe—just maybe—Fiorina and Christie
Carson was horrible last night.
Thanks, took me two times to read what you said and I “think” I get it.......stop laughing not nice to laugh at old people./wink. <P.
It is the translator: ok, fire it, it is very annoying.
I agree. Did you notice he didn’t have a clue what to do with his hands?
Either than or his hand-wringing was pure nervousness.
If he’d squeezed them any harder, blood would have come out of his fingertips.
You have the front end of that right. Clinton/Castro for sure.
The back end...is still up in the air. Maybe Cruz/Carson, maybe Trump/Cruz or even Cruz/Rubio.
We’ll see.
AND... he came out against ethanol subsidies. Goodbye Iowa.
Yes Rubio and Crispy both talk a good game. You just have to remember who they really are.
He needs a soundtrack every time he goes off. You know that earnest look, heartfelt thing he does. A little inspirational music would be a nice touch.
As Waylon Jennings once said, “Old age and treachery will always overcome youth and skill.” I remind my (now adult) kids of that every so often... ;-P
It’s the right answer, but probably bad timing. There are places where government research inititives can lead the way, but gasohol isn’t anything new. My understanding is that when the continued viability of the grain as cattle feed is factored in that it actually breaks even. Nonetheless, the government shouldn’t be involved.
Those demanding their subsidy will turn to someone guaranteeing their subsidy. I don’t know who that would be.
At first I thought that meant Huma...
“My thoughts are that Donald Trump should purchase two hours of block time on some obscure cable channel and then invite all the viable candidates to join him in a debate moderated by Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Sarah Palin. The ratings would probably go through the roof.”
This idea has a lot of merit. It would make money, further showing the acumen of Trump. The money could be distributed to the campaigns according to how much of the show they paid for.
It may be the right answer, but he flip-flopped so loudly it calls his other positions into question. He studied it really hard and figured it out? Give me a break. He’s toast.
I was confused about the Mannatech thing. No idea what that was about, but he fumbled that question, too.
He’s a horrible candidate. All he had was sincerity. That is gone now.
“”Nobody “editsâ things anymoreât€™t””
Where does that crap come from? What causes it?
I started watching last night but the CNBC moderators and their stupid questions made me so mad, I quit watching and came to FR.
I am now watching my aging children morph into ME......lol
And I love reminding them of it...that's the funniest part and one they don't like to admit, rofl.
I noticed these ODD CHARACTERS are showing up all over the place (on FR).
Seems to have happened right after the recent spate of “THIS IS A MALWARE SITE” warnings (although I got none on my computer).
Wonder if they are connected ?
I notice they are in place of an ‘apostrophe’.
Yesterday, it was a SQUARE character, today it is a mix of weird characters.
The candidates did very well amongst themselves and in general against the biased panel. I was proud.
Contrast the debate last night with the Democrat debate of a few weeks ago. It is clear to me which party are the winners and which party are the losers.
I almost pity Hillary. Not!
They are in front and back of an ‘apostrophe’, when we use them in this example.
Also, quotation marks and sometimes after a colon.
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.