Tag Archives: huntsman

Jon Huntsman Drops Out; Ain't A Dang Thing Changed

In case you haven’t heard, former governor of Utah, Jon Huntsman Jr. has officially dropped out of the Republican primary.  That’s not surprising, really, considering that he spent most of the past year in the single digits.  What is surprising is that he didn’t bow out on the night of the New Hampshire primary; the guy practically lived there, and he still came in behind Ron Paul.

The other thing that is surprising (and particularly #HeadDesk worthy) is that Huntsman thinks his dropping out will consolidate the vote.  That couldn’t be any further from the truth.

Huntsman dropping out does very little, if anything, to affect the dynamics of this race.  Right now you have three factions: Romney, Paul, and then this gaggle involving Perry, Gingrich, and Santorum.  And the truth is that as long as Paul is in the race, there will probably never be anyone with enough momentum to overcome Romney.  Even if you have Santorum and Perry drop out, there is a very real chance that Paul staying in can help Romney get the plurality every time.

So it’s cute that Huntsman wants his endorsement to carry weight, just like it’s cute that McCain wanted his to do so, but Jon dropping out did nothing to change this cluster-truck that we’re dealing with.  The only thing it did was to make the Huntsman girls seem a little less relevant.  But with today’s news culture, they can probably go to CNN and be three times more compelling as pundits than Meghan McCain has ever been. (click here and here to see some of what the Huntsman girls have become famous for)

NBC is Run By Heathens: GOP Sunday Morning Debate Recap

Two Republican debates within 12 hours of each other are enough to make even the biggest political junkie fatigued.  Sunday morning saw the follow up to the Saturday night ABC debate (Worst. Debate. Ever.) hosted by NBC and Facebook and moderated by David “Why are all Republicans racist, capitalist pigs” Gregory.  Apparently the heathens at NBC don’t attend church. Surprising? Hardly.

This debate was much, much better than Saturday night’s martini fueled disaster (there was some question as to Sawyer’s sobriety), although that is not due to Gregory’s moderating, that much is sure.  I won’t delve too much into Gregory’s liberal bias. We all know and understand where he’s coming from.  It is no surprise that all his questions were thinly veiled “gotcha” questions so let’s not waste time on that.  What was surprising is that the candidates seemed much more alert and enthused at this early morning debate than the previous night.  With the possible exception of Jon Huntsman everyone on the stage looked alert and ready to rumble. Huntsman looked quite tired. I can’t blame him. He’s staked everything on a New Hampshire surge and I’m quite sure he spent the better part of the night boning up for this last debate before the primary votes are counted. Huntsman look tired, but he sounded more enthused than in any previous debates I can remember. He even reached out to attack Romney once or twice and clearly David Gregory and NBC want Huntsman to make a splash in New Hampshire. He is in last place in every poll but was offered more time screen time than most of the other candidates and certainly more than he’s received in debates thus far.

The real surprise this morning was Rick Perry. Saturday night he looked good, but Sunday morning he looked great. Perry is obviously staking his ground as the last “outsider” in the field and it seems to have reenergized him.  He refused to be sucked into the gotcha questions and succinctly expressed his opinion that big government and socialist policies have been destroying America for far to long.  Perry was also the only in the field Sunday morning to consistently remind voters that Obama is a socialist. Mr. Gregory didn’t like that. He offered Perry very few turns to speak.

Rick Santorum was much better than his very decent Saturday night performance. Perhaps his best line came when asked what he would do if his son told him he was gay (insert eye roll here). Santorum responded, “I would love him just as much as I did the second before he told me.” What a dumb question. It made me wonder if the moderator from New Hampshire has any children. As a voter I was most curious to see how he would address the right to work issue, as he had voted against it while in the Senate. He was offered the opportunity and explained that he voted against the legislation in the Senate because Pennsylvania was not a right to work state and he did not wish to give Washington D.C. the power to determine Pennsylvania state law. Its up to the voters to decide if that answer was satisfactory.

While each candidate did take a turn at jabbing Romney, the only one that really went for the throat was Gingrich, predictably. Newt is mad about Romney’s super pac attack ads and he has vowed to take down Romney accordingly.  At this point a Gingrich win seems unlikely, but the remaining candidates will probably owe him a debt of gratitude when this is all over, since no one else is willing to go for Mitt’s jugular.

There was the typical line of questioning about gay rights and gay marriage because as we all know Republican primary voters are very concerned about that. Somewhere along the way two New Hampshire news personalities (I use that term lightly) showed up to self-righteously grill the candidates about why they are such cruel, racist, classist, sexist homophobes.  They fit right in with David Gregory. Why do we let people like this moderate GOP debates? It does little to illuminate the real issues REPUBLICAN voters are concerned with.

Saturday night’s debate was a true and complete disaster.  Sunday morning’s debate was slightly more dignified, but it was the performance of the candidates that elevated it in the end.  Clearly these men are sensing that the final push is on.  Perry seems to have finally awoken and is depending on a very good showing in South Carolina to garner the next GOP surge, which will be bad news for Santorum if he pulls it off.  Tuesday’s primary in New Hampshire will be very telling.  I look forward to putting a fine point on some of these races… but please, no more Sunday morning debates. Especially from the East Coast. Some of us on the Left Coast actually enjoy sleeping past 5:30 a.m. on the weekends.

 

crossposted at kiradavis.net

Only One Candidate Can Name Their Favorite Supreme Court Justice (Sorta)

At last night’s debate, Megyn Kelly made what seemed like a simple request.  Name your favorite Supreme Court justice.  For some reason, only candidate (barely) was able to pull it off.

I mean, wouldn’t it have been awesome if each candidate just rattled off their favorite justice?  But, no.  They all had to get long-winded and then not even have the courage to just pick ONE justice.  Most of them hedged their bets with as many as THREE.

What do you think of candidates being so long-winded with what should be a “one word answer”?  And also, if you were on that stage what justice would you have chosen?  (and no, faithful readers, you are not limited to one word with your response)

Fox News GOP Debate Recap: Are You More Conservative Than a 5th Grader?

Fox News hosted yet another GOP Primary debate on Thursday night and the entire field was there…well, besides Gary Johnson, but is he in “the field” these days, really?  From the top the thing that interested me the most was that this debate seemed to be set up as the “are you conservative enough” debate.  I liked that.  I like to think the tea party has played a big role in making this election about conservatism more than any other in recent years.

Every question asked seemed to be tinged with the inquiry “Are you conservative enough?”  It was obvious Gingrich and Romney were the two candidates under the most pressure to answer that question with authority.  Gingrich spent a large amount of his time invoking Reagan and defending himself against the “lobbyist” label.  Not surprisingly, Gingrich did his best to remind voters that he basically forced Clinton to sign welfare reform in the nineties…and also he is the smartest candidate ever in the history of Presidential primaries.  In case you didn’t know.  But in all seriousness, Newt is the smartest guy in the room and it always shows.  Newt’s issue on Thursday wasn’t could he convince voters he’s smart, but could he convince voters he is a true conservative.  The jury is still out on whether he did that or not, but now that he has attained “front-runner” status, Gingrich is seeing an increase in attacks on his conservative credentials.  I think he maintained in this debate.  He did not do anything to worry his supporters but I don’t think he made many new fans either.  As with the debate last Saturday night, Americans will need to decide if they are satisfied with a Debater-in-Chief, or do they want more when it comes to a Gingrich candidacy.

Ron Paul started out very strong.   As always, he is masterful in his understanding of domestic economics.  It’s the spending, stupid!  Ron Paul was on fire Thursday night until it came to the foreign policy segment.  Then Ron Paul said something about warfare vs. welfare in Washington and how Iran would be totally willing to play nice if we weren’t so bossy and suddenly you could hear crickets chirping.  Even Paulbots seemed slightly subdued by his answers.  Perhaps they knew that even with so much support for his ideas behind him, Paul always manages to sound like a kook to the general audience when he starts talking foreign policy.  I’m sure he lost no support at all.  Paul supporters are nothing if not loyal (read rabid).  However, with surging Iowa numbers in recent days, Thursday’s debate was a great opportunity for him to seize the lead.  This performance was not his best, and will most likely not contribute to an Iowa lead.  If anything, Paul proved that all Obama would have to do in a general election is bring up Iran and foreign policy and that would be the end of a viable Paul candidacy.

Santorum and Bachmann were definitely the most solid in terms of conservative principals on the debate stage.  Santorum gets Iran.  It’s a shame the MSM (and many on our side of the media spectrum as well) has labeled him as the “social conservative”. I believe that label keeps people from really hearing his valid and dire warnings about the dangers of a nuclear Iran.  Rick Santorum gets Iran.  Whether we vote for this man for President or not, that is something that more Americans need to be paying attention to.

Bachmann was also very solid.  In her home state of Iowa she seemed comfortable, relaxed and she looked fantastic.  Did you know that Bachmann is 55?!  I’ll have what she’s having!  Bachmann doesn’t garner much mainstream favor with her Midwest accent and her Evangelical brand of Christianity, but the woman knows her facts and she is smart.  If voters are looking for a true conservative, she’s one to look at.

Even Perry did well Thursday, looking much more comfortable and even applying a little good natured self-deprecation.  Perry has many other qualities to recommend him to the position of POTUS besides his debating skills.  In our desperation to find a formidable debate opponent to Obama I hope we don’t overlook other important qualities for a good GOP candidate.

Should I mention Huntsman? Ok, fine.  Jon Huntsman was there. He talked.  He said stuff. He talked some more.  I wish he would stop doing that.

As the debate season rolls on and Republican voters duke it out for their favorite candidates, the process becomes more and more frustrating.  People are beginning to express election fatigue already, and are frankly nervous about selecting the right opponent to Obama.  That’s understandable. I share those nerves.  However, Thursday’s debate should be heartening to conservatives.  Oh, the battle still rages, but when the underlying question of a national primary debate is “Who can prove they are the most conservative candidate?”, that is a win for conservatism in general.

 

Diane Sawyer Impressed by Iowa Hicks and Their Book-learnin' : Debate Recap

ABC held yet another Republican debate at Drake University in Iowa Saturday.  Diane Sawyer moderated along with George Steph….. oh you know who he is, don’t make me spell the whole thing.  The GOP field is becoming smaller and it seems to make for a much more interesting debate process.  There was arguing, bickering and even a few jokes.  All the candidates seemed to appreciate the extra time less contenders in the field produced and they all took full advantage.

Cranky Uncle Newt showed up straight from the family Thanksgiving gathering where he spent the whole weekend cranking at cousin Jimmy for being a lazy, slacker, mama’s boy and fussing at Aunt Linda for being 40 years old and still single.  Newt has that air – he’s one of the most intelligent political candidates in modern history but he always sounds like he’s in a bad mood.  Personally I find it charming; some of my favorite relatives are cranky old people.  I don’t know how it washes with the rest of the electorate, however.  Also, there was the issue of Newt’s hair.  His typically well-groomed, silky white mane was looking extra helmet-y on Saturday.  It was strange and distracting for this blogger who is weirdly obsessed with presidential/political manes.  Is Newt auditioning for Galaxy Quest 2?

Newt’s hair aside, the Speaker’s Saurday debate performance was that of a man who know he is surging in the polls and understands the importance of winning in Iowa.  No doubt, Newt would kill Obama (metaphorically, liberals. Don’t get your chemical-free, dye-free panties in a bunch) in a debate, but do Americans want a Debater-in-Chief or something more? Time will tell.

I get tired of saying this about Romney, but he was quite polished, as usual.  Mitt Romney worked very hard to reassure voters that he is not the establishment candidate many conservatives are worried about.  He has a private sector record, didn’t you know?  Oh, yes…Romney worked in the private sector for 25 years.  Also, Romney was a private sector businessman for 25 years.  And don’t forget, for 25 years Mitt Romney worked in the private sector, that’s run privately, and not by government.  As always, Romney was clear and succinct and even got a few good-natured barbs in there.  He continues to lay out a platform for the general elections, should he receive the nomination.

Rick Perry seems much more relaxed in a debate setting where he is afforded more time to answer questions.  Perry is as solid on his positions as the day he announced, but the real question is this: Will Americans be more interested in his actual policy and political platform than his debate performances?

Ron Paul was there and so were many, many, many of his supporters – as usual.  Ron Paul wants to end the Fed.  He wants to end the Fed and American involvement in foreign issues of any kind, forever.  Of all the candidates I think Paul is the most consistent. He never backtracks and never changes his tune.  I may tire of hearing him talk about the Fed, but at least I know Ron Paul hates the Fed.  No one can lie or say otherwise.

Rick Santorum had a good night, but he continues to see less screen time than his opponents and have fewer questions directed toward him.  At this point Santorum is known as the ‘social conservative’ candidate and he seems comfortable with that.  Santorum had many good moments on Saturday night. One came when Diane Sawyer was becoming perturbed that none of the candidates would give a firm number on the amount of jobs they would create in their first term as President.  Santorum basically said its not the President’s job to make promises like that because the President can’t create jobs; private sector citizens create jobs and all the government can do is get out of their way.  I like that answer.  Government doesn’t create anything, Diane! Except red tape; they are good at that.

Michele Bachmann gave a very good performance Saturday as well.  Iowa is her home state and she certainly looks at home when she is campaigning there.  As a former tax lawyer and IRS employee, Bachmann has a very unique position.  She’s been on the inside of our tax code and she knows how devastating it is for working families.  She knows the dangers of Obamacare and Obama’s tax policies in general.  Bachmann is extremely intelligent.  Those Americans that live on the coasts may feel she is dumb because her A’s are flat and she talks like she’s from Iowa. I think those people should stop being such snobs.  Quit listening to her (very American) accent and listen to the content of her words.  Bachmann may have a very slim chance of winning this primary, but she seems more than qualified to be in this race.  Her experience as a midwestern girl on the inside of Washington makes her one of the more genuine candidates, in my opinion.  The Iowa primary will be very telling for Bachmann.  If she does not do well there, its likely her campaign ends.  Bachmann did manage to salute her tea party compatriot, Herman Cain.  As she said, its just not a debate anymore unless someone mentions 9-9-9.  I agree! I missed the Herminator.  I did not miss Jon Huntsman.

Sawyer and George (sorry, I just can’t type that whole name) did a satisfactory job moderating, although Sawyer was very condescending when she opened with a comment to Iowa voters telling them how IMPRESSED she was at how seriously they take their primary process.  Imagine that, Diane! A bunch of mid-west country hicks who don’t shop designer stores or have issues with trans-fats actually like to take part in the political process.  How cute!  Yes, Diane – Iowans vote.  They love to vote. They love America and they care about what happens here.  Shocking news to an East coast elitist, mainstream media diva, I know.

CNN Republican Debate Recap: Debate Fatigue and Box Wine

I have a confession to make.  I was really bored by Tuesday’s Republican debate.  I know, its shocking.  Somebody found a primary debate boring? Quel horreur!  It is my job to comment on such things and I watched it eagerly, but as I was writing my traditional recap I realized that I just wasn’t that excited about what I had seen.  It’s not that the candidates weren’t interesting or capable.  Actually all of them seemed more prepared then they have been in the past. There were no major gaffes or senior moments.  The topic of national security is certainly engaging enough as debates go, but still that wasn’t enough to raise my excitement level.  Everyone did just fine.

Herman Cain is doing his homework, as always.  It’s one of the things I really appreciate about him as a candidate.  He is obviously weak on foreign policy and security issues.  Of course he is; he’s a business man.  He does not have the advantage of being privy to the tidbits of information and exchanges that result from working inside government.  Cain has to develop his foreign policy and domestic security stances just like the rest of us – by studying and employing old-fashioned common sense.  It puts him at a disadvantage, no doubt; but Cain has proven he is up to the challenge and he always seems to go into every debate knowing more than he did the last time.  Cain is what it looks like when a regular, average Joe runs for President.  Some people don’t like that, but I think its kind of neat.

This was the first debate that didn’t turn into the Mitt Romney show.  In fact, Romney probably got less camera time on Tuesday night than he has in any debate so far this year.  It was refreshing.  That being said, he (predictably) made the best use of every second. He was confident and assured in his answers.  Romney said nothing out of line or out of order or out of Romney.  Even his hair was on board. 

Maybe that is my problem with this debate.  It was predictable.  Everyone performed according to their character descriptions in the GOP Primary Field Handbook.  Cain was weak but adequate in his depth of knowledge on the subject.  Ron Paul gave his typical RonPaul-y answers about minding our own business as a nation and if we would just be nice to the terrorists they would stop hating us and leave us alone in peace.  Predictably there were more than a few Ron Paul fans in the audience.  Santorum stayed true to form: feisty, with a touch of whine but bolstered by his strong conservative stance on social and security issues alike.  Jon Huntsman was…there.  His daughters graced CNN with an appearance on the debate pre-show.  They were way more interesting than their father and they seemed like lovely young ladies.  I didn’t care for their lipstick, though.  The shade of red made me suspicious.  Rick Perry was just fine, but I always feel like I’m holding my breath when he speaks.  He seems like a nice man and I hate to see him struggle up there, which he does all too often.  But Tuesday he was fine.

Perhaps the only two people who really interested me in this debate were Newt Gingrich and Michele Bachmann.  This was Newt’s first debate as a “front-runner” and it remained to be seen how his platform/performance would change in light of that.  It didn’t really change at all which is a good thing, I suppose.  Newt was simply Newt, the smartest (if not crankiest) guy in the room.  Newt knows his stuff…and Newt does not like gotcha questions.  For the most part I believe Wolf Blitzer behaved accordingly.

If anyone “won” that debate it was Michele Bachmann.  Bachmann has a seat on the House Intelligence Committee and she is obviously privy to some very sensitive information.  She knows what she is talking about and when Bachmann speaks on foreign policy, security and Obamacare she sounds more competent than any of her compatriots on the stage.  In fact, it infuriates me to hear people refer to her as an idot, a la Sarah Palin.  I don’t know how you can listen to her speak of the nuances of foreign aid and intelligence and conclude that she is dumb.  You may not care for her social stances or her tea party label, but the woman is wickedly smart and deserves respect for that.  I really feel we need a woman like Bachmann in the House for as long as possible, but if she were our President, I have no doubt she would fight for this country every day she was in office.

In the end, the predictability was my problem.  No one came out with anything new or different.  Everyone pretty much held the line on the stances they have developed throughout this process.  There were no surprises; besides a couple of small differences on withdrawing troops and securing the border the candidates pretty much in line with each other and the Republican outlook on such issues.  Except Ron Paul, of course…but there’s an “except Ron Paul” implied in every line I write about these debates.  I know, ultimately it is a good thing that there were no fireworks.  Its important for the people to see the candidates lay out their positions logically as much as possible.  Its good that they were predictable because it helps us feel confident about how they will behave in the general elections.  But it makes for boring television sometimes.  I admit, debate fatigue is setting in.  There are at least four more debates to go.  I think I’m going to need a bigger box of wine.

 

Jon Huntsman Still Thinks He Can Do Well In New Hampshire. What Do You Think?

Jon Huntsman has stated that he’s made over 100 appearances in New Hampshire, yet he’s still near the bottom of the polls. Piers Morgan pressed him on this earlier in the week, and this is how Huntsman replied.

I know Jon Huntsman is not a very popular figure on this website, but I think he handled this question really well. What do you think? Is he a good candidate that has been over looked by the Republican electorate? Or is he an idiot who should have never quit his day job (as ambassador to China)? What do you have to say?

Jon Huntsman: I Want To Be President Of The 99%


In one of the biggest flubs of the night, Jon Huntsman said he “wants to be the president of the 99%”.  Ouch, Jon.  That was not a good move.  Check it out, below.

Now, to be honest with you, I think Jon had a good opportunity, maybe even a great one.  He should have said,”I want to be president of the 100%”.  Instead, he said, “I want to be president of the 99%.  I also want to be president of the 1%.”  That was an awful response, Jon.

What do you guys think?  Did Huntsman miss out on a potentially great opportunity?  Or is he so far back in the polls, that it wouldn’t have mattered if he delivered the new Gettysburg Address?  Let us know in the comments below.  Or, if you see me playing extreme frisbee in Bryant park, you can stop and talk to me then.

CNBC Debate: Your Money, Your Vote, Perry's Senior Moment

CNBC hosted the “Your Money, Your Vote” Republican debate Wednesday night and Jim Cramer is a loud bugger, isn’t he?  The CNBC financial analyst who is famous for his apology tour after he criticized Obama early in his regime was one of 3 moderators in Wednesday’s debate.  He was also the loudest.  Cramer’s perpetual outside voice lacked no measure of righteous indignation as he attempted to shore up his lib cred by yelling at the candidates.  It was clear from the start that Cramer and his colleagues were thoroughly disgusted with the general conservative approach to the economy.  At one point the topic of student loans was broached and the disgust from the moderating panel was palpable.  Students pay for their own college?  The horror!

There wasn’t anything about this debate that would be particularly interesting to those outside the world of GOP primaries.  It was pretty much cut and dry economic policy questions.  Not the most exciting topic but one that is very important in the search for our next President.  For the most part the candidates all seemed solid and answered questions capably…with the possible exception of Rick Perry.  Perry started out the evening looking more competent than he has in a while but then stumbled into the most cringe-worthy moment half way through when he could not recall the third of three federal departments he would prefer to put an end to.  His fumbling only lasted a few seconds but in Presidential debate time it was an eternity.  Perry paused, stuttered, repeated himself, and even looked to his fellow candidates to help him remember.  A few did shout out some ideas to him, probably just hoping to put an end to his embarrassment.  Eventually Perry had to admit he just didn’t remember his third point.  As a regular person, Perry’s stumble was forgivable.  We’ve all had those moments when we’re put on the spot and can’t remember the simplest words or lose our train of thought right in the middle of a sentence.  However to see a Presidential candidate fumble so horribly for so long on the debate stage was excruciating and it was obvious the audience and other Republicans on the stage felt the same way.  It may not necessarily spell the end of Perry’s candidacy, but I wouldn’t be surprised to hear Herman Cain sent Perry a lovely edible arrangement the next day.  This will be all anyone thinks about when they hear Perry’s name for a long time.  He’s got a lot of work to do to erase that memory.

Speaking of Herman Cain, the big question of the night was how he would perform after a brutal week of shocking allegations and scandal.  Maria Bartiromo led off the night with a question aimed directly at Cain regarding the scandal.  The question was met by hearty boos from the audience, after which Cain reiterated he would not be distracted by attempt to assasinate his character.   The audience responded with great applause and from that point on Herman Cain was off and running.  At least for one night it seems Cain was successful in rising above the accusations. Also, Cain has a tax plan.  Its called 9-9-9.  And, oh yeah…9-9-9.

Gingrich continues to dominate as an intellectual heavyweight.  At this point I must admit that I am changing my mind about a Gingrich candidacy.  I’m not convinced yet, but I may end up eating a little blogger crow at some point.  The guy is good.  He made mincemeat out of every “gotcha” question that was thrown at him.

The rest of the field was fine, solid- there weren’t any surprises.  As always Bachmann is at her best when she is talking Obamacare repeal and Romney was as smooth as ever.  He is obviously fine-tuning his platform for generals, but it remains to be seen if the conservative wing of the party will bow the pressure of “electability” and “next in line”.

The winner of Wednesday’s debate was Newt Gingrich.  Cain comes a close second if for no other reason than he was able to rise above the media circus of the last week and stay on message for the whole night.  Losers were Rick Perry (ugh, I cringe just thinking of that moment) and Jim Cramer, because he’s a loud mouthed ass.  It wasn’t the most exciting of platforms but it was valuable in the sense that it gave the candidates a good opportunity to expound on their economic positions.

October 18th CNN Republican Debate [Full Video & Poll]

Photo: Antoine Taveneaux

Overview

At 8pm on Tuesday October 18th, CNN and the Western Republican Leadership Conference hested the most recent in a line of GOP Presidential debates.

Many of the early front-runners have struggled in the most recent debates. Mitt Romney has seen his once-formidable lead become second pace to a rotating cadre of new blood. Rick Perry stumbled in the last two debates and Michele Bachmann never recovered from her Gaurdasil/autism claim. Herman Cain now enjoys front-runner status and seemed to hold up to the increased scrutiny in the debate on October 11th.

Tuesday night’s debate promised to focus on Herman Cain and Mitt Romney – the two front-runners. Herman Cain defended his 9-9-9 plan using fruit analogies and Romney fumbled on everything from illegal immigration to Romneycare.

This was by far the most argumentative and least informative debate of the season. CNN’s Anderson Cooper was out to get the candidates to wrestle – informing voters wasn’t in CNN’s interest.

Jon Huntsman chose to boycott the debate due to Nevada’s primary scheduling battle with New Hampshire. Huntsman will instead hold a campaign event Tuesday morning.

Participants

Michele Bachmann, Herman Cain, Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul, Rick Perry, Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum

Video/Streaming

The debate was held at the Venetian Hotel in Las Vegas, Nevada and aired on CNN.

Full Video of the Debate (from RCP):

The Debate in 100 seconds (TPM):

Cain and Romney in a fruit fight over 9-9-9:

Perry and Romney Spar on Illegal Immigration:

Ron Paul on Obamacare:

Santorum and Romney on Romneycare:

Herman Cain Negotiates With Terrrorists:
Wanting Cain to do well, this and the fruit exchange blew it. Listen as Herman Cain tells us that he wouldn’t negotiate with terrorists, except in certain cases. No negotiating with terrorists.. except?

and here’s the transcript:

Herman Cain, let me ask this to you. A few hours ago you were asked by Wolf Blitzer, if al Qaeda had an American soldier in captivity, and they demanded the release of everyone at Guantanamo Bay, would you release them? And you said, quote: “I can see myself authorizing that kind of a transfer. Can you explain?

HERMAN CAIN, PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: The rest of the statement was quite simply, you would have to consider the entire situation. But let me say this first, I would have a policy that we do not negotiate with terrorists. We have to lay that principle down first.

Now being that you have to look at each individual situation and consider all the facts. The point that I made about this particular situation is that I’m sure Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had to consider a lot of things before he made that.

So on the surface, I don’t think we can say he did the right thing or not. A responsible decision-maker would have considered everything.

 

Bachmann on Obama’s Illegal Immigrant Family:

Ron Paul on the 9-9-9 Plan:

Other stuff:

CNN’s full transcript of the debate

Debate Poll:

[poll id=”32″]