I missed the opening (I jumped in after the big Reagan salutation break), but caught all the remainder. Other than the absurdity of a debate that’s for an election that’s still 15 months away, I thought the moderators (and I really loved that they trotted out the Telemundo guy — were the Republican candidates aware that he would be chiming in with immigration questions I wonder?) dished out some relevant saucy queries.
I had to split right as the shindig was ending so I did not hear the chattering TV ninnies pontificate afterwards, but here’s my quick rundown:
Romney: was well polished for this, took square aim at Perry, the frontrunner at this point, he’s a slimy chameleon that would say or sell anything and then say or the opposite the next day/week/year, if politically opportune. He scored points, twisting Perry’s “Ponzi” social security screed into a series of repeated blows against “Obama’s failed leadership”. He keeps touting his private sector acumen, but did not he buy and sell ventures and squeeze out jobs for profit? I haven’t seen any post-debate polling, but it sure seemed like he got some audience cheers and smoothly shifted into Obama bashing at the end of the debate. He’s probably too much a flip-flopper for the core tea bagger base, but I could see him taking Obama down.
Perry: he stammered and spluttered, got put on the defensive, and only points he scored was the ghastly bit (and the audience response was just as ghoulish and blood curling) where he proudly proclaimed his stature as Colonel Texas Death. He got teamed up on too from the others, Romney seemed to be prepared with many barbs and dug into Perry, as well as several of the others but Romney, it appeared to me, went out of his way, to slice and dice Governor Goodhair. Worse than the horrifying Perry indifference and childish braggadocio is the feeling I get that’s he’s not actually serious about any of these stances, it’s just purely party posturing ploys.
Huntsman: is anyone going to know who he is next week? Sure he was the only sane, science believing non-magical non-delusional human on stage, but his policy prescriptions for the nation’s economic ills are the same 19th century solutions trotted out by the rest of the field.
Cain: why was this man even on stage? And speaking of delusions, what laundry powder is he sniffling with the babbling about Chill-AY social security privatization. I thought even the Chicago school boys had retrenched in championing those disastrous reforms.
Santorum: really? seriously? It is pathetic that this guy was actually a U.S. Senator. At least not a total tragedy as PA voters refrained from re-upping him (though he did get 2 terms!). He’s about as far from reality based as can possibly be conceived…
Bachmann: …except for this one who is even further off the rail than even Santorum.
Paul: A more PC and astute Paul, who has buried his neo-confederacy sentiment and desire to abolish every federal institution. Probably the candidate that got me shouting “Right on, brother!” when he imploring to end the foreign elective invasions, stopping the insane “war on drugs”, railing against the border wall nonsense spouted by the other ignoramuses and police militarization. He took the opportunity to take good some shots at Governor Goodhair, and had him reeling on his vaccination foible. But then he reverts back into absolutist “government evil”, “private industry good/golden” mode and sounds like crazy 1950s John “Glenn Beck” Bircher uncle.
Gingrich: The reality that Newt has constructed about himself, his world, and political relations is vastly different than not only the reality based world, but even the perspective of those Republican cheerleaders and loyalists looking inward.
As I stated, have not read or heard a peep since the last minutes of the debate, so these are raw factcheck-less impressions, submitted for your approbation.