« Hurricane Katrina Saves New Orleans Schools | Main | That Darn Republican Establishment »

Wednesday, October 19, 2011



Santorum was a disaster. Easily the worst performance. He came off looking whiny, snarky, and totally unpresidential.

Gingrich always does well in debates. Perry was terrible as usual. Cain didn't give any specifics on his plan, and didn't really do a good job defending it. Paul was his usual self. Romney had the crowd on his side, but he come off looking a little arrogant. Bachmann did fine compared to her previous performances.


Thanks, SDPride.

Many will, no doubt, agree with you on Santorum's performance. That is fair. But I appreciate the fact that he willing to say what others are often either too polite or too scared to scared to say. I am particularly glad that he is willing to voice to the concerns of social conservatives, who are sometimes marginalized.

Bill Fleming

I'm always intrigued by Ron Paul. I wonder what it would be like to have a guy like that for POTUS.


Ron Paul has a real plan to eliminate the abusive TSA and other useless agencies. Herman Cain, a proven liar at the debates, is an ex-Fed Chair, he’ll never eliminate the Fed (and his 9%+9%+9% plan = 27% tax rate as bad as Libs). Mitt equates corporations to people, killing his general election chances. Ron Paul is the only candidate that will end all the wars. Both Republicans and Democrats support endless Wars for Israel, it all started nearly a decade ago under a false flag attack.
9/11 and Israel, here: http://www.amazon.com/America-Deceived-II-Possession-interrogation/dp/1450257437

Bill Fleming

Sal, there are quite a few Dems and Republicans who don't support war. I'm just sayin'.


Overall, I doubt if anyone's poll numbers will move much, based on last night's debate.

I've seen all the debates so far and while this was Perry's best performance to date, it would be a leap to call it good. He's the only GOP candidate who makes me absolutely cringe when I think of him debating Obama.

I've got to agree with sdpride about Santorum, in every debate he comes across as whiney and petulant, no matter how good his points may be, he undermines them with his presentation.

Best debate for Huntsman, by far!! =|;0)

I really like Herman Cain, but wonder if he wouldn't have been better off simply proposing the Fair Tax, as he's state that's the ultimate goal and 9-9-9 was simply proposed as a "gateway" to it.

Bachmann presented herself well overall, but said nothing she hasn't already said before and ALL the candidates obviously agree that they want Obama to be a "one term president."

Newt is "the smartest guy in the room" again, but his past haunts the social conservatives too much for him to gain the nomination (but EVERYONE thinks he needs a role in the next administration).

Ron Paul has done more to shape the debates than anyone, including Newt, particularly on domestic and economic issues.

Romney is obviously the "Establishment Choice" and has seriously improved as a candidate over the past 4 years (which he obviously should have) but seems to have a low ceiling of support of the most motivated GOP "grassroots".

FWIW, I've always like Gary Johnson and enjoyed the debate he was in, but his positions on abortion and immigration prevent him from gaining ground in a GOP Primary.

So far, Romney and Cain appear to be the frontrunners and Perry has serious money to continue his campaign. Ron Paul will stay in the race until (or unless) he's voted out of it. The rest of the field is pretty much running on fumes, at this point.


Paul has good ideas but he is terrible at articulating them.


Thanks, everyone, for your comments.

Bill: I agree with you. Paul is, if nothing else, always interesting.

Sal: The TSA could certainly use some kind of reform. I don't think Romney's comment about corporations will kill his chances in the general election. Corporations are, after all, made up of people. Many of those people vote - and many are unhappy with the Democrats for backing Occupy. Romney's words may actually win him some of the Wall Street types who used to back Democrats.

William: I largely agree with you, but I do think Cain's numbers may go down, while Romney's may rise. I like Cain too. Personality wise, he may be my favorite candidate. But I am not sold on 9-9-9.

Stan Gibilisco

And then there came this little twist...


Big improvement, I say.

Herman Cain has done the nation a huge favor in one respect: He has brought out the "national sales tax" idea -- a toxic, dangerous, seemingly immortal slime-bug -- into the bright sun, which has already begun to shrivel it up. Most Americans don't want it; 85 percent of the Senate doesn't want it. I hope it dries up and blows away with the prairie winds and never comes back in this generation. A "national sales tax," no matter how benign at first, would evolve into a value-added tax and bloat to the threshold of public revolt, 20-plus percent, like they have in Greece; we see how well it has worked for them.

I really like Cain personally; he reminds me a little bit of Eddie Rickenbacker. However, like Rickenbacker, Cain is probably too controversial a figure to ever become President, and his off-the-cuff remarks don't help him at all.

I'm squeezing my brain as if it were a damp sponge, trying to extract the name of a person who I think could really make a fabulous President. I just can't come up with anybody in any party.

A Scherer

Paul would do a great job. He'd have zero chance of getting everything he wants, but even if congress went one-third of the way, it would be awesome. For everyone who says he's too far away from mainstream, keep that in mind. Unfortunately, his TV speaking qualities mean he shoots himself in the foot.

Gary Johnson has enough of Paul's issues and a consistent record to keep Paul's fans in the game, if he could just get on TV. If he had gotten started sooner (2008, probably, like Paul), I think he'd be cleaning up. I'll definitely support him and tell people about him, but it may be too late. I'm hoping that Cain flames out, and the media somehow find Gary Johnson instead.

But I won't hold my breath waiting. I expect to use my primary vote for Paul. And if neither Paul nor Johnson get the nomination, I might even go Democrat... I don't have confidence that any other republicans would shrink the government, and if we're going to get big gov't anyway, we might as well get someone who says they care about the little guy.


A Scherer,

It sounds as if you're saying: if we're going to be driven over the cliff, it might as well be a Democrat in the drivers seat...

More important, in my opinion, will be the makeup of the House & Senate as a result of the next election. I honestly don't believe Obama will be able to secure another term if, as is likely, the unemployment rate remains close to its current level. If the elections in 2012 follow the pattern of the elections in 2010, there will be a mandate for whoever becomes the President to reverse the course we're on.

If we're to survive as a nation, we must address the critical economic problems we face, as they also serve to exacerbate all of the social and cultural issues that are are boiling over. If the economic issues are addressed in a way a majority of the American People believe in, it will serve to diminish the social and cultural divide, as well.

"A House Divided Will Not Stand", and we are currently more divided than I've seen in my lifetime. I fear for the survival of the United States AS United States...

We desperately need a leader that can unite us through what will be a harrowing time, will the times make our next President that leader? It's really not obvious anyone is ready for that, but the same criticisms we hear about the current crop of GOP candidates were certainly made about Reagan. Despite some shortfalls Reagan lead this nation to a renewed sense of pride and prosperity after economic and social challenges similar to those we face today.

With the right team in place, I think Herman Cain may be the best candidate to rise to that challenge. If nothing else, his belief in America as a land of opportunity (and responsibility) is the most inspirational of all of the current candidates.


Thanks for the great comments.

Stan: Thanks for the link! Bad news for Cain. Or maybe good news. We'll see what he does with it.

Regarding the candidates: Don't squeeze your brain too hard. Your comments would be missed!

I actually like almost all of the candidates this time around. To be sure, they have their flaws, but I wouldn't be heartbroken if any of them won. Well - apart from Perry, who seems to have trouble putting together coherent sentences against Republican challengers. Obama would probably tear him to shreds.

A Scherer: I agree with you on Paul. He would probably not get much of what he wanted, but he would get more done than most would even try for. He would be an excellent check on Congress and Congress would, as you note, be an excellent check on him. Like you, I will probably vote for Paul in the primary. Because I am a social conservative as well as a fiscal conservative, Johnson does not have the same appeal to me as Paul does. But I do appreciate the former's sense of humor and I have enjoyed listening to him during the debates.

William: At least with the Republican we might get to sit in the front seat! Obama, after all, said we had to sit in the back.

I do love Cain's spirit, but he is as fearless as he is optimistic and I think sometimes that fearlessness is more divisive than unifying. Consider, for instance, the time he said that he would not appoint a Muslim to a position on his cabinet. As I say, I like his attitude and I love his personality, but I think comments like that have hurt his chances.

The comments to this entry are closed.