South Carolina Fox News GOP debate **live commentary thread** (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 23, 2024, 06:14:32 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2012 Elections
  South Carolina Fox News GOP debate **live commentary thread** (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: South Carolina Fox News GOP debate **live commentary thread**  (Read 23561 times)
TheGlobalizer
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,286
United States


Political Matrix
E: 6.84, S: -7.13

« on: January 17, 2012, 11:47:01 AM »

What happened ?

A short summary please if someone has time ... Wink

Here's my version:

Romney: Played it safe - too safe.  Was on his heels much of the night, and when he needed to fight back, was mostly flat and unpersuasive.  Had a few of his classic polished non-answer answers, but others, was taking a lot of hits.

Gingrich: Full-on attack mode on Romney and everyone not an uber-conservative.  Lots of red meat for the stalwart SC conservative base, lots of cheers, sounded confident and poised.  His positions still ring as almost absurdly extreme, so I don't think this alters his ceiling, but he'll definitely gain some momentum from this, and the support will probably come 50/50 from Romney and Santorum.

Santorum: Tried to be the attack dog, but was cornered into some bizarre positions.  To me, it felt like he was actually running to the LEFT of Romney, on race issues, indefinite detention, etc., which was really, really strange.  He seems to be running a FL campaign in SC after running a SC campaign in NH.  Didn't perform badly, but didn't notice a lot of applause moments and may have stepped in it a bit by repeating Ron Paul's "blacks get screwed by the judicial system" comments from NH's debate.

Paul: Pretty much the usual Paul performance.  Was more assertive and strident than usual, but missed a lot of the cues to convey a vision vs. responding to the specific question.  I think his big success of the night was to do a better job of conveying his military vs. defense view - blunts some of the national security criticisms, and looked like less of a libertarian and more of a paleocon on that issue.  However, he stepped in it on Osama bin Laden, as he gave a meandering and unpersuasive answer about what the US should have done.  All told, he had a pretty solid performance, but it wasn't a breakout performance.  (Personally, I find it fun to watch his evolution as a debater.  Still hoping he learns to do a better job at communicating his vision, rather than approaching a debate as a strict Q&A.)

Perry: Didn't receive much attention, didn't overtly blow any of the questions, but still said some of the same stupid sh** he's known for, just hid it better.  The Turkey comments will probably be requoted.  One of his better performances, but he's still done after SC.
Logged
TheGlobalizer
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,286
United States


Political Matrix
E: 6.84, S: -7.13

« Reply #1 on: January 17, 2012, 12:00:37 PM »

Apparently, throwing red meat to South Carolina Republicans is far more important than acting like a reasonable statesman.

Don't act surprised and indignant about it, this has been true since time immemorial.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.024 seconds with 12 queries.