Primary debate impressions

Even though I was out of town and did not have access to my computer Thursday night, I did watch both the 5:00 pm and the 9:00 pm debates.   So I got a pretty good look at all 17 of the Republican candidates for president.

Here are some quick impressions:

1.  Format:  Fox News and its moderators far exceeded my expectations.   In fact, I was very favorably impressed.   I had expected a group that size to simply be unmanageable and that there could be nothing resembling a real debate.

Instead, the format -- a series of good questions asked of individual candidates, with answers limited to 1 minute and no cross-talk with other candidates jumping in.   Questions tended to be focused and tough rather than general and softball.   For such a large field, the format worked far better than predicted.  Candidates, with a few exceptions, kept to the format.   (Rand Paul was the unruly one, actually, not Donald Trump.   Paul "piped up" more than once when it was not his turn, making him seem immature and petty rather than bold.)   

2.  Candidates:   Overall they had short, well-rehearsed, crisp answers.   As expected, at times they avoided answering the question and pivoted to their talking points.   But actually I think there was less than usual of that in such debates.    No one turned out to be an embarrassment or grossly unprepared -- like Sarah Palin was four years ago.

Nobody really hit a home run;  nobody really bombed.   Having said that, I will mention some who I think helped their standing and some who hurt their standing.

3.  Helped standing:   In the 5:00 pm debate, Carly Fiorino exceeded expectations and probably helped her standing more than any other one.   She seemed to know the issues, was very articulate and tough.  I knew nothing about Jim Gilmore, and he created a generally positive impression.   But he's so unknown and so far down the list, that I don't see him getting any traction.

In the top 10 debate at 9:00 pm, John Kasich stood out as doing the most to improve his standing.  Again, perhaps, because he's fairly new to the national stage and not well known outside Ohio, I was repeatedly impressed by his answers.   He was the most moderate of the whole crowd, having as governor of Ohio expanded Medicaid and giving a terrific defense of that action to this hate-Obamacare crowd.   He is personally opposed to same-sex marriage but accepts the SCOTUS decision as established law now.   He also has foreign policy experience as a former congressman on the Foreign Affairs Committee, and helped write a balanced budget as a member of the finance committee.   In short, I think he could eventually be the most formidable candidate for democrats to have to face.

Marco Rubio also looked good:   youthful, smart, informed, talking about the future instead of the past.   A Kasich-Rubio ticket could be very strong;  besides two attractive candidates, it combines two important swing states, Ohio and Florida.

4.   Hurt standing:  Except for the sizable base who love Donald Trump because he boasts that he will "get things done" in a Washington where nothing has been done -- and that does tap into a lot of people's resentments -- except for that core of support, he hurt himself pretty badly, I think.     Right off the bat, he was the only one of the 10 who would not pledge to support the eventual Republican nominee for president.   He would not rule out running as a third party candidate if he loses the GOP nomination.    He also was hurt by a question about his four companies that he took through a bankruptcy, costing their creditors billions of dollars.   And it was his cavalier attitude about it that hurt the most.   In addition, his arrogance and rudeness also put him in a bad light, especially his response to Megyn Kelly's bringing up his past derogatory remarks about women.  He does not look presidential.

Jeb Bush didn't so much do anything to hurt himself;   it was that expectations are high for him;  and, in my opinion, he performs beneath those expectations.    He seemed like a pretty good middle-of-the pack candidate -- not a star.  Expect his poll numbers to drop, as Kasich and Rubio go up in the polls.

Scott Walker also didn't measure up to his #3 status.   No mistakes, no home runs.   Ted Cruz seem slightly creepy, as usual;  and I kept thinking of him as someone once described him:  as looking like a wax figure of himself at Madame Tussauds' Wax Museum, when the wax has begun to melt.

Ben Carson, I thought, seemed earnest but ill-informed and uneasy;  although others saw him as impressive.   Rand Paul was Rand Paul -- a bit quirky, a bit rash, a tad obnoxious;  not "presidential."   His oppposing war and wanting to reduce the military budget make him a poor fit for the Republican nomination anyway, even if he were more personally appealing.

Chris Christie did his usual snow job by deflecting attention from the challenging questions asked him and adroitly pivoting to paint himself as a great governor of New Jersey.  However, for anyone who knew the facts that he either obfuscated or outright distorted, he seemed the dishonest bully that he is.   

Lindsey Graham out-hawked everyone by a country mile -- calling for ground troops in Iraq and Syria;   otherwise, he was forgettable.   Despite his tough talk, his demeanor often makes him seem like a little boy playing grown-up general, wearing his daddy's old Army hat and shouting orders that no one pays attention to.   Seeing Rick Santorum in this crowd, it's still surprises me that he won more states than anyone except Mitt Romney in 2012 primary;  yet in 2015 he's at 2% in the polls.   It reminds me that generally this is a much better field overall than 2012 (Remember Michele Bachmann?  Hermann Cain?   Newt Gingrich? -- all front-runners at one time).  

I save my disgust for the one I have come to have the most contempt for, Mike Huckabee.   See my post "Race to the bottom . . ." on Aug. 2nd.  That says it all, except to add that Huckabee just did more of the same last night.    Someone aptly labeled what he does as "incendiary hoologanism."   I agree.

 5.   What was missing:   Some rebuttal and challenges.  Someone -- either moderators or a democratic candidate -- to call them on their distortions, their failed policies, their knee-jerk demonizing of President Obama.    And some important issues were not mentioned, either by moderators or candidates:   minimum wage, racial problems, gun violence, police excessive use of force, voting rights, student loans.

We need very badly to have the first Democratic Primary Debate . . . soon.   Six seemed a reasonable number -- but it's a long time until the first one in October.   Too long.

Ralph