Last Wednesday, CNN and YouTube held a GOP Presidential Debate from St. Petersburg, Florida. That night I was one of 4.4 million Americans watching the GOP go at it in what I thought was the most combative Republican debate yet. My thoughts on the debate are as follows:
Rudy Giuliani: I like that Rudy is strong and steady when it comes to foreign policy. He’s out to kill some terrorists and all for that. But his “social conservatism” is quite unconvincing and his position on immigration is wanting. I don’t care if he feels undocumented children should be allowed to go to school or call emergency services. They’re still illegal aliens and need to leave the country. His “sanctuary mansion” line to Romney was childish and un-called for. He seemed a man in desperation because he knew Romney was right and he was wrong.
Giuliani: C+
Mitt Romney: Contrary to many political pundits in the blogosphere, I do NOT think Romney looked presidential or carried the debate. While strong on immigration and taxes, he finally admitted he was effectively pro-choice in Massachussetts and sounded absolutely horrible in his answers on gays in the military and torture. There were too many questions Romney just didn’t answer and left the audience (including me) wondering what he was REALLY thinking. The more I hear Romney get asked the hard questions, the more I’m starting to see why he’s being called a flip-flopper by both right-wing and left-wing ideologues.
Romney: D
John McCain: It’s no secret I’ve never liked McCain. He’s willing to compromise conservative ideals to work “across the aisle” and produce crappy legislation like McCain-Feingold and Comprehensive Immigration Reform. However, McCain stood strong on Iraq and the War on Terror in general. Though I disagree with his views about waterboarding and torture, McCain did not compromise and used his experience to his advantage. Overall good night for him; I suspect he’ll be gaining in New Hampshire because of it.
McCain: B-
Fred Thompson: Once again, Thompson impressed me to the point of boredom. While he offered good, constructive conservative answers to nearly every question, he didn’t give an answer that was really memorable. If he’s really a true federalist, I would think he’d be proposing plans that tout states’ rights. But in this day and age, federalism is only given lip service, including lip service from Thompson. This guy just doesn’t have the passion for the job. I guess he’d make a good governor or something, but I’m not sure about President of the United States.
Thompson: C
Huckabee: Huckabee had the momentum coming into this debate and it showed. Touting his socially conservative creditials and pushing his charismatic personality, I feel Huckabee will be doing very good in Iowa. He’s a Baptist preacher after all, so that should be enough to bring along the Evangelical block in early primary states. However, his record on taxes and spending is worse than Bill Clinton’s as governor and his views on immigration are horrible. I feel his “compassionate conservatism” includes pushing his morality upon the electorate in terms of higher spending and more stupid welfare programs this country cannot afford. He played the populist card in this debate, though it’s unfortunate many Americans will be duped into supporting him.
Huckabee: B
The Others: Except for Ron Paul, I don’t really remember what anybody else said. Tancredo is a one-issue candidate and Duncan Hunter just doesn’t have the “it” factor to be memorable anyway. I love Paul’s domestic ideas, but he’s just plain wrong on foreign policy.
The Others: F
Overall Feelings: Huckabee and Giuliani will remain in strong positions after this debate. The other candidates are a mixed bag, so we’ll see what happens. On a different note, the Clintonistas and the Obama/Edwards supporters made this debate look like a big joke. CNN just plain sucks at debates. Fox News definitely has nothing to worry about these days.