1. A strange #gopdebate. Overall: Trump was a seesaw, lurching between moments of surprising lucidity and almost completely losing his shit.
2. I doubt Trump loses ground based on tonight. Carson was a wreck and seems very likely to continue his collapse in the polls. #gopdebate
3. Cruz seemed exceptionally, almost irresponsibly hawkish, but maybe that’s why his followers like him? Curious to see how polls react.
4. Total lack of Trump-Cruz fireworks was notable. Rubio … I don’t know, it seemed the same as always. No breakout moments. #gopdebate
5. Same for Fiorina and Jeb!, despite Jeb!’s holding his ground in exchange w/Trump. Overall, nothing to move the needle. #gopdebate
6. Good night for Christie and especially Paul, who stated his wing of the party’s position better than he’s done up to now. #gopdebate
7. Christie might actually boost himself into contention in NH, tho still a big hill to climb. Paul … not sure. #gopdebate
8. I liked hearing Paul’s position and thought it added a lot to the debate, but will it translate to a poll boost? Dunno. #gopdebate
9. Kasich was also on the stage, I’m told. #gopdebate
I did some live-tweeting too; it’s all here. Follow us, if you don’t already!
I agree with him that arming moderate Muslims is like finding purple unicorns, he didn’t seem to endorse ground troops like all the other candidates not named Rand, and he took a realist stance on democracy promotion and nation building. Back secular dictators, don’t back Jeffersonian experiments that devolve into quagmires that devolve into fundamentalist terrorist regimes. Were his positions consistent or the ones I’d adopt? No, but on these issues I would hardly call him the biggest hawk on the stage. He seems to be between the isolationism of Paul and Trump and the boilerplate neocon saber rattling of the rest of the field. As sad as it is to say this, a return to Reagan-Bush foreign policies is a move to the left of the current GOP field.
Had Jeb been this punchy at Trump two or three debates ago it might have made a difference, especially since he caught him off guard, but now it doesn’t matter. It really seems like Carson and Fiorina were flashes in the OAN that aren’t coming back, and Christie has taken Kasich’s spot in NH. The question is, does he have staying power beyond it and would the establishment coalesce around him as the anti-Trump?
Rubio is following the John Kerry/John Edwards 2004 primary playbook and it may pay dividends. A 3rd place in IA is doable for him, and a second or third in NH is still a big ticket to Super Tuesday where he could be more competitive. In a field this big, it helps to be everyone’s second choice.
Position wise he is between Paul and Rubio. Like Paul he is not for taking Assad out, does not support a no fly zone or, early on giving weapons to who knows who in Syria. And even Rubio reframes from putting real boots on the ground.
Cruz’s rhetoric of “bombs glowing in the desert” is amplified by his hell and preacher skills and his weaselly looks. It is a frightening combination that gives right-wingers comfort and scares the hell out of everyone else.
He’s just having fun now, saying the extremist things he really thinks, rather than trying to play for the big prize. Trump is cresting, just like Carson did a month or so ago. When the media grabs one of his many routinely oddball statements and turns it into a “Pyramids were for storing grain” national headline ala Carson, it will be a strong sign Trump is heading for the exits. The establishment is trying to rally around Jeb! but it may be too little, too late. Cruz, then his little brother Rubio, have the strongest long-term prospects right now, I’d say. Very amusing that Christie has fallen so far so fast because of some traffic problems in Ft. Lee. He’ll have to wait four, or maybe eight years, it appears.
I was hoping he’d remain a serious contender because he is the only one giving voice to a particular wing of the party which should be represented in the debates.
Trump appeals to a chunk of the electorate (much discussed). We’ll see what percentage of early state Republican primary voters he gets. The game is like American Idol. As contestants drop out, the question is where to their voters go? If he never gets above 35-40% eventually a majority could come out for an alternative.
Ben Carson was always going to be a lousy candidate. It just took time for that to pull him down. His current job is motivational speaker and there’s nothing past that. Last night’s question “Can you bomb innocent children?” had a really bad response. His support was obviously social conservatives, and Cruz is the natural recipient of Carson’s votes.
Paul’s father built a good base and I think Rand thought he’d build on that. I’ve never understood that “wing” (I wouldn’t really call it that actually) and I think organization and enthusiasm made them seem more influential. You might remember Paul supporters ambushing the 2012 delegate process here in MA. Note: I think Paul is just the current manifestation of the isolationist thread in the US. I bet if there was no Israel we wouldn’t have ever been involved in the Middle East.
I don’t see Bridgegate as what hurt Christie, except for the punditry, which did affect the view of him nationally. Overall I bet 90% of voters haven’t heard of it, and the investigation is over and they haven’t pinned anything on him. He’s sort of like Giuliani (people want to like him), though he’s more conservative. If he hangs in there he still could be the alternative to Trump.
All of the second tier candidates got in pre-Trump and what are they going to do now? I’m thinking they are all running for cabinet secretaries.
That leaves Cruz and Rubio. Social conservatives like Cruz. Most other Republicans I know don’t. There is something about him. I think it’s the lips or maybe the eyes. He really has a negative vibe, at least on TV. I passed on an opportunity to meet him so maybe I would feel differently. Rubio is a wild card. I think down the road he could have been a real statesman in the Senate. Obviously he’s following the Obama path of trying to rush things. I just don’t see people (and money) coalescing around him. Maybe.
PS Bush is the biggest surprise of this election. I have yet to meet any Republican that likes him.
Maybe the most shocking think said all night: “millions of voters … called bigots for holding onto traditional values.” Like lynching? imho he would be the most difficult candidate for the Dem 70-somethings to beat. He is very attractive, young and slick, less rigidly stuck on the far end of immigration and other debates.
Although I think the present situation is different, especially the huge media bias towards covering every Trumpism, it is interesting to remember that in 1968 13.5% of the electorate voted for George Wallace. Trump’s 36% support among the 1/3 of the electorate who are registered Republicans = 13%. But Wallace’s support was clearly more regional (he actually won 4 (?) southern states).
Have to agree with Frank Bruni that the Dem establishment has buried their debates, which is really too bad, because there is no effective rebuttal to the incredibly insulting characterizations of Obama. I can’t ever remember such language used against a sitting president especially on foreign policy issues. Well, GWB was called a “wimp” but I don’t think by a Democratic contender. Gary Trudeau may have started that one.
I particularly liked this line:
I agree completely, and would add that it’s interesting that Cruz is also openly borrowing from the Obama playbook. It’ll be interesting to see if this is the new normal of Senate life. Used to be you had to pass some laws with your name on it before you could run for President.
As for Jeb, I think the Beltway focused solely on the money race and the legacy of the Bush team, without realizing how tarnished the brand was. It’s probably the only name in Republican politics that simultaneously turns off a large number of primary voters and swing voters alike. The narrative on the right for the past 8 years has been that Bush was a lousy President since he was too liberal. It was always an uphill climb for Jeb to break out of that.
that you can be a governor of a state, even a bigger state, and still blow it nationally (Perry, Walker, Pataki). Bush has been so totally underwhelming. His brand is damaged, and not just with the general electorate. I bet many primary voters said to themselves “no more Bushes.” He’s not a social conservative so he lost that crowd from the start.
Perhaps one way to look at it is there are two strong blocks in the GOP primaries: Tea Party nativists (Trump, perhaps 30%) and evangelicals (Cruz/Carson, perhaps 20%) with some blurring between those lines of course. Everyone else (around 50%) is still floating around. Jeb! was perhaps their natural home, but he’s failed to attract them, next Christie but I think he’s been more damaged by Bridgegate and the larger botch he’s made of NJ than you credit, finally Rubio but he’s trying to push it, as you say, without Obama’s gravitas, intelligence, and speaking ability — or his campaign staff. My one quibble: “I bet if there was no Israel we wouldn’t have ever been involved in the Middle East.” I disagree: since WWII, which demonstrated the decisive importance of oil supplies for military victory, among many other things, we have been in the Middle East first, last and always for oil. We may be interested in Israel, but we are committed to oil.
Too often the media and some progressives confuse the Tea party and Evangelical wings of the GOP. They are waging distinctly different culture wars. For an evangelical, Planned Parenthood and a gay pride parade are the mark of our cultural decline. For the America First crowd, it’s having a Spanish speaking option on the ATM, having to talk to IT techs in India on the phone, and seeing Made in Not America on every item they buy, and seeing the occasional veiled women in Wal-Mart.
How much of that is anxiety about our cultural decline and how much of that is anxiety about the decline of the white middle class is an interesting thing, if we can keep the discussion economic there are some Trump voters who might go for the Democrats if the GOP nominates a Wall Street conservative.
Lots of people who are looking for smaller government are also social conservative- it’s just not the thing that they vote on.
Also the nativist thread in the US runs outside Tea Party circles. It’s out there and it goes deep. It just doesn’t come up regularly or it’s no big deal (griping as you mentioned), and only really presents itself when it comes to the undocumented.
It’s hard to image the present given a change in history. Certainly US/UK were deep in the ME post-WW2, but what would have happened if over time we got more oil from sources outside the ME? If the ME was a mess or hostile perhaps we would have sought other sources, or even (imagine this!) started conserving earlier.
I just see Israel and part of almost every equation in the ME post 1948.
Last night’s debate joins pretty much everything the GOP has been doing since Barack Obama was elected as one long Gish Gallop.
See sites like this for details.
Attempting to rebut the cascade of lies and bullshit is a senseless waste of time.