Well, I watched the entire debate non-stop last night and here are my thoughts on the event:

First off, I’d like to say that like Chris Matthews, Wolf Blitzer is a HORRIBLE debate moderator. You could just sense the bias coming from his mouth, trying to place blame on the Bush Administration for “mistakes” and trying to trip up the GOP candidates who believe in what the president is doing. He was also a downright time-Nazi and would always try to cut everyone off in the middle of a thought. Blitzer downright sucks and I NEVER want to see him moderate another debate. Anyway, on to the debate:

Mitt Romney was my favorite coming into tonight (as everyone knows). While presenting a good explanation of the Iraq War in the beginning of the debate, he tripped up from there, more or less. He got called out on his support for banning assault weapons and seemed to just skip over questions that would clearly be answered by more conservative candidates (think Tom Tancredo). When questioned why he aired campaign commercials in Spanish, Romney went on a rant about optimism. Frankly, I wish he would’ve just answered the question. In my opinion, REAL conservatives are proud to be conservatives, and if Romney’s a true conservative, he should have just answered the questions he skipped over.

Romney grade: C+

It’s not that I hate Rudy Giuliani, it’s just that he’s a big government moderate, much in the mold of George W. Bush. While I support his stance in the war on terror, we need a president who didn’t just get there running on post 9/11 leadership. I feel he is definitely lacking the credentials that could appeal to social conservatives who care about things like abortion, traditional marriage, and gun rights. Fortunately, Rudy had a good night bashing Democrats about how wrong they are on basically every issue and was the strongest candidate when it came to defending the war on terror. Actually, Rudy might have looked comfortable on stage and finally got that commanding presence he so desperately needed to compete with Mitt. Overall, strong on national security, weak on domestic issues.

Giuliani grade: B+

Basically, McCain killed his chances to be President of the United States last night. His immigration compromise with Ted Kennedy and RINOs in Congress earned him absolutely no points with the GOP base. Immigration was a huge issue last night with every other GOP candidate going after him. I have to respect McCain for standing up for the bill, but he eventually caved saying it wouldn’t have been the bill he’d written if given the opportunity. McCain’s steadfast support for Bush’s plan in Iraq was not unnoticed however, and I give him credit for that. But since he’s STILL a liberal in conservative clothing, I’m deducting points.

McCain grade: D

Duncan Hunter had command of the military issues last night and even threw a comment or two in there about losing industrial and manufacturing jobs and China’s looming economic threat. Hunter knows about the military and I wouldn’t be surprised if he made inroads with one issue, wartime conservatives. He showed a strong knowledge on foreign affairs, though he seemed a tad bland on social issues like healthcare. He again strongly spoke out about securing the border and near the end of the debate, actually attacked Romney, Giuliani, and McCain for cooperating with Ted Kennedy at some point during their political career. It was awesome. Overall, strong on national security, generic on domestic issues.

Hunter grade: B

Tom Tancredo had a great night in my opinion, at least when it came to his core issue, illegal immigration. I was very impressed when Tancredo said that the problems with illegal immigration did not just stem from social spending or breaking the law. He actually turned the immigration debate into a debate about a clash of civilizations, the effects of non-assimilation, and social survival. I was very impressed. Unfortunately, Tancredo is not the best orator and I don’t think he made any inroads with independents because of it. I always look forward to Tancredo debating however, because he always manages to throw in a quote from the founding fathers that is still relevant today.

Tancredo grade: B-

I really want to like Ron Paul, but he’s not growing on me at all these days. In the beginning, I preferred him to other candidates because he was the only one defending the Constitution of the United States. I respect him because he’s still the only constitutionalist in the race, but unfortunately, instead of getting better in debate performances or more deeply explaining his positions, he keeps going on rants about foreign policy and the history of the GOP. It’s actually kind of disheartening. Anyway, I really haven’t heard much about Paul’s domestic policy positions, but that may be moderators’ fault. I just hope he doesn’t go down in history as the GOP’s raving libertarian.

Paul grade: C-

Mike Huckabee, what can I say? What a defense of Christianity and God himself! I don’t think he has what it takes to be President of the United States, but Huckabee is the man when it comes to defending God and Christians in general. He was simply amazing when it came to answering the question on evolution and faith. Great performance at that point, take a look:


Huckabee grade: B+

The other candidates not mentioned above really did nothing to satisfy me in the debate and their performances are not really worth mentioning. They just all seemed too generic and did nothing to make inroads with the GOP base.