Ken Berwitz
Since I did not see the debate – though I caught the last 25 minutes or so on radio as I drove home, I am not qualified to provide a full rundown of the candidates.
But from the small part I heard (which, given how late it was, probably eluded a large percentage of people who were there at the beginning) and what I have read, it appears that Rubio put in another strong performance, Cruz did not hurt himself, Fiorina held her own, Trump “won” on immigration early but was booed several times afterwards, Carson did OK, Kasich did little to help himself (he probably hurt himself on bank bailouts) and Rand Paul treaded water.
Jeb Bush – whom I thought was a poor debater last time out but did well on substance (the basis for my assumption that he was still a strong contender), went nowhere but down. I may or may not have been right about him then (at this point I assume I was wrong), but there seems little doubt that there isn\’t much left now.
It should be pointed out that – again from what I read, not from what I personally saw/heard – this was a real red-meat conservative audience. So the more socially conservative (if you call being in favor of banning all abortions and against gay people marrying social conservatism, which most media people do but I don\’t), the better for them. Similarly, the concept tossing out 11 – 12 million people, as if there were any practical way of doing so, made Trump their hero – though, to me, it made him sound ridiculous as a presidential candidate.
One other thing: from what I\’ve read so far, the quality of moderating – i.e. the questions asked and the follow-up questions – were so vastly superior to the insults-posing-as-questions put forth by the joke of a star chamber at CNBC, that it made them look even worse than before – something I would have thought nearly impossible.
I\’ll try to read up on other reactions to the debate as best I can today, though it won\’t be easy (I\’ll be running training sessions from midday to almost 11:PM).
