Who won the debate?

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

Rick won the debate, but he normally does well in them. Paul acted like he didn't give a f**k, which was funny to watch. Newt looked pretty bad from his past performances, and Romney finally showed some emotion when he nailed Newt on his Fannie and Freddy holdings that Newt tried to use in his favor.

I think Romney will wrap up this race on Tuesday. The GOP seems to be in a herd mentality, and if it wasn't for CNN setting Newt up for the Homerun during the SC debate, he would have won there.

[Keystone Phil]

Rick won the debate, but he normally does well in them. Paul acted like he didn't give a f**k

Wow. What a badass LIBERTY lover! Definitely won the debate by not caring.

[TheGlobalizer]

Rick won the debate, but he normally does well in them. Paul acted like he didn't give a f**k

<generic Phil anti-Paul comment>

<generic Globalizer anti-Phil comment>

[TJ in Oregon]

1.  Paul
2.  Romney
3.  Newt
4.  Santorum

It's like this dude is literally begging to not be taken seriously. Like, not even considering his placement of Santorum in last place, the guy has Paul above Romney.

Don't even bother. The Globalizer has already said he will never defend Santorum regardless of what he says or what is said about him, so let a hack be a hack. And he's put Santorum in last! So shocking! Ron Paul could go on stage reciting his racist newsletters and The Globalizer would probably still say he won the debate, not that Paul did any of that last night.

Read my recent follow-up post.  I thought Santorum did great in the last debate.

Whether or not I consider a candidate to be the Worst Person Ever^TM is not dispositive of my view of their debate performance.  I base my views on the relative improvement a candidate makes in their overall electoral prospects through the debate.  Santorum did almost nothing to improve his chances last night, IMO.  Any Gingrich supporters he peeled off (through attacks / militarist rhetoric) are likely to be offset by those lost to Romney (the more calm, stable, poised candidate).

Okay, that makes sense as a way to rate Santorum lower from the debate, but you can't use that logic and say Ron Paul won because he also did nothing to improve his chances last night. If that's your metric, then Romney is the clear winner, Gingrich is the clear loser, and Paul and Santorum are the middle two (I'd say Santorum would benefit more than Paul because a Gingrich decline would likely benefit him, but that's splitting hairs).

It would really be more accurate to say Paul/Romney tied and Gingrich/Santorum tied.  Paul's boost is by coming off as more personable and delivering quotable lines - I've already seen multiple media cites of both the "politicians to the moon" and "jihadists under the bed" quotes.  I'm not counting the boost that will come from winning FL, as I consider that to be a slam dunk for Romney, but will favorably affect his national numbers and numbers in upcoming primaries.

To be honest, I'm not sure a Gingrich decline helps Santorum much.  We're approaching primary season fatigue, and I think the conservative base is done with the spastic vacillating between champions.

Just my opinions.  As much as I hate Santorum, I think he presents well, but he's just not hitting the home runs he needs to hit.

Do you honestly think last night's debate is going to help Paul's electoral chances?

[Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!]

The Globalizer somehow forgets to mention Pennsylvania. You can't make this up. Really.

Pennsylvania is a very late state. By the time it comes up, Santorum will have either dropped out or will be prepping himself for debates with Obama in an alternate universe in which the primary schedule isn't composed of a series of states he has no hope of performing in.

No need to scream and rant every time someone says something bad about Santorum.

Anyhow, my ratings would be:

WOLF BLITZER
Paul
Santorum
Romney
Gingrich

Gingrich did poorly, Romney was better but lost several times, Santorum was good up until he started ranting about the SOUTH AMERICAN JIHADISTS, and Paul did better than the previous debates. Blitzer slamming Romney was the highlight of the debate.

[TheGlobalizer]

1.  Paul
2.  Romney
3.  Newt
4.  Santorum

It's like this dude is literally begging to not be taken seriously. Like, not even considering his placement of Santorum in last place, the guy has Paul above Romney.

Don't even bother. The Globalizer has already said he will never defend Santorum regardless of what he says or what is said about him, so let a hack be a hack. And he's put Santorum in last! So shocking! Ron Paul could go on stage reciting his racist newsletters and The Globalizer would probably still say he won the debate, not that Paul did any of that last night.

Read my recent follow-up post.  I thought Santorum did great in the last debate.

Whether or not I consider a candidate to be the Worst Person Ever^TM is not dispositive of my view of their debate performance.  I base my views on the relative improvement a candidate makes in their overall electoral prospects through the debate.  Santorum did almost nothing to improve his chances last night, IMO.  Any Gingrich supporters he peeled off (through attacks / militarist rhetoric) are likely to be offset by those lost to Romney (the more calm, stable, poised candidate).

Okay, that makes sense as a way to rate Santorum lower from the debate, but you can't use that logic and say Ron Paul won because he also did nothing to improve his chances last night. If that's your metric, then Romney is the clear winner, Gingrich is the clear loser, and Paul and Santorum are the middle two (I'd say Santorum would benefit more than Paul because a Gingrich decline would likely benefit him, but that's splitting hairs).

It would really be more accurate to say Paul/Romney tied and Gingrich/Santorum tied.  Paul's boost is by coming off as more personable and delivering quotable lines - I've already seen multiple media cites of both the "politicians to the moon" and "jihadists under the bed" quotes.  I'm not counting the boost that will come from winning FL, as I consider that to be a slam dunk for Romney, but will favorably affect his national numbers and numbers in upcoming primaries.

To be honest, I'm not sure a Gingrich decline helps Santorum much.  We're approaching primary season fatigue, and I think the conservative base is done with the spastic vacillating between champions.

Just my opinions.  As much as I hate Santorum, I think he presents well, but he's just not hitting the home runs he needs to hit.

Do you honestly think last night's debate is going to help Paul's electoral chances?

No, but I view the nomination likelihood as this:

Romney: 99%
Gingrich: 0.9%
Paul: 0.1%
Santorum: None

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Rick probably won the debate overall again, however this time I voted for Romney in the poll unlike the previous one. The reason being there was a clear winner between the Mitt-Newt struggle and I assumed that the media would focus on that to Santorum's detriment. In the coverage I saw on ABC and CBS, there was no mention of the healthcare situation between Rick and Mittens and little mention of Rick at all. Immigration (Did Newt really try and call Romney anti-Immigrant? Did he really think channelling McCain's ridiculous, establishment-originated, false premises on immigration was going to work?) and jamming the Freddie Mac investment back in Newt's face got the most coverage.

[Torie]

Rick showed a lot of knowledge on a variety of issues, and of course with the Newt/Paul backdrop, was able to act in the role of one of the "sane" ones - and yes, stable ones. But he is a bit shrill, and went off the deep end on Latin America, making it seem as if Castro is finally in his last moments going to set Latin America afire in Marxist flames.

[anvi]

Yeah, I thought the top to bottom finishers were Santorum, Paul, Romney and Gingrich last night.