"If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land." -2 Chronicles 7:14

Wednesday, October 19, 2011

Debate Review 10/18/11

Let me start off by saying, I do not like when CNN sponsors these GOP debates.  They are too biased against every one of these candidates to properly moderate a debate.  Last night's debate was crucial for a couple reasons.  First, this was Herman Cain's first debate as an "official" frontrunner.  Second, this was looked upon by many as Rick Perry's last chance to gain his momentum back.  Third, Mitt Romney just needed to "keep his cool" and for him, nothing would change.  Here is my order, who did the best, to who did the poorest, based on what was said last night.  I will have facts to support all of my conclusions (since my order is almost always different from everyone else's).

#1: Rick Perry.  I know that there will be many people who disagree with me on this.  They will say that Governor Perry came across as rude, arrogant, and sometimes, just downright obnoxious.  However, for the most part, I have to disagree.  I think the governor came across as much more aggressive in this debate.  He proved that he would be able to debate President Obama.  He showed some energy and was prepared to take on both Romney and Cain.  I believe he truly did enough to bring this back to a two-man race.  He was the first person to really trip Mitt Romney up with true facts.  Here are facts to support why I put him in first place:  I believe that he is the first person to truly challenge Mitt Romney's "frontrunner" status.  There was a moment that was very intense between them, going back and forth over immigration.  Every word that Governor Perry said about Governor Romney's stance on this issue is true.  Secondly, I agree with Governor Perry that we need to drill for our own energy and create more jobs through that.  I agree with him that "the idea that we should not have our freedom of religion" is not right.  Lastly, we should defund the UN.  All of this is aside from the fact that I believe Governor Perry is the most qualified to be our president.

#2: Rick Santorum.  I believe Rick Santorum came in second in this debate, based on his statement that "the basic unit of society is the family."  I agree with him that, while creating jobs is important, every other candidate on that stage continues to overlook that fact.  Without the family, our society would be completely different.  They are the reason we are what we are today, and people need to remember that.  Another answer of Santorum's that I liked was his response to a question about a candidate's religion.  Asked about whether a candidate's religion should come into play when people choose who to support, his answer was that people need to not only look at religion, but at a person's values as well.  They should look at what their religion teaches and come to conclusions on what their values are.  Those are the reasons I believe Santorum placed this high.  Honestly, I do not think he has a chance at getting the nomination.  I do, though, believe that he is a strong voice for the traditional family that should not be ignored.

#3: Newt Gingrich.  Where to start with Newt?  I always say, he comes out strong in every debate.  One thing I do like about Newt is that he hardly ever attacks his opponents.  In fact, he sometimes even praises them.  He said that Herman Cain "deserves a lot of credit" for proposing a "very big idea" on tax reform.  I agree with him that it would be "very troubling" to have a president who would not take any faith into consideration when making decisions.  Where, he wants to know, would that person receive their guidance from?  It just doesn't work that way.  It would be very troubling to have a president who abandons religion.  (Just a quick fact, it was Mitt Romney that said he would abandon all religion as president.)

#4: Mitt Romney.  I really am not fond of Mitt Romney.  I don't know what it is, but something about him makes me believe he is in this solely for personal gain.  This debate was the first time, I think, we have seen him "lose his cool."  Many times through the duration of the debate, he was attacked hard, accurately, which made it harder for him to respond.  One thing I did agree with him on was that "we are an energy-rich nation that is acting like an energy-poor nation."  Other than that, I felt it was mostly downhill.  I felt he was very rude to Governor Perry on the issue of immigration.  He broke in during the governor's speaking time, then asked Governor Perry to stop talking.  He used a patronizing tone that I don't think will sit well with very many people.  Telling another candidate, "if you want to be President of the United States, you've got to learn to let other people speak" is not something you have a right to say.  The way that he put his hand on Governor Perry's shoulder and referenced his previous bad debate performances was disrespectful.  Mitt Romney has lied to the American people, evidenced by the fact that his book in paperback was not the same book that was in hardcover.  He edited words out when it suited his presidential run.  One thing I've noticed about Mitt; when he starts to lose composure, he laughs and his eyes get very red.  Watch videos from this debate and see if you notice the same thing.  Overall, this was Mitt's first, real, bad debate.

#5: Michele Bachmann.  Honestly, I feel like we hear most of the same things from her in every debate.  I do agree with repealing ObamaCare, as she does.  As she puts it, even the Obama Administration wants to repeal it, and they are arguing with themselves over it.  I agree with her that "we should not be cutting foreign aid to Israel", and that we should "look to Iraq and Libya to reimburse us for involvement in their wars."  We should also be looking to Egypt for reimbursement.  All of that foreign aid was wasted taxpayer money, as Congresswoman Bachmann makes clear.  As much as I do like her, I think her campaign has deflated beyond repair.

#6: Herman Cain.  We didn't hear much from Herman in this debate.  The first fifteen minutes were entirely devoted to his 9-9-9 plan, but after that he pretty much remained silent.  I do not think he did a sufficient job of defending his 9-9-9 plan, I think he could have done better.  His answer about negotiating with terrorists was not exactly clear to me.  One thing I do agree with is the fact that he will not apologize for wanting to "protect the American people, protect our border agents, and protecting our border."  Other than that, I am tempted to say this debate was a loss for Herman Cain.

#7: Ron Paul.  "Those people at Guantanamo aren't terrorists, they haven't been convicted of anything!"  Enough said.
Overall, I believe this debate was damaging for both Cain and Romney.  It was Romney's first bad debate.  Whether it was beneficial to Perry is yet to be seen.  It was very interesting to watch the exchange between Governor Perry and Governor Romney.  You can watch video of it and read the transcript here.  So interesting that Governor Romney says, "I'm running for office, for Pete's sake, I can't have illegals."  From this, it sounds like he only cared about employing illegals because he was running for office and didn't want it to hurt his chances.  This debate, though, like all of them, was fun to watch.  Debates are definitely good ways to get to know a candidate.  Not the only way, but a good way.

1 comment:

  1. Great post Beth! Of course, I am biased because I am a Rick Perry supporter but I think he really shined last night. In my opinion Cain showed his incompetence on foreign policy last night with his terrorist answer. He doesn't even understand the questions much less how to actually deal with foreign policy issues if he was elected president. I don't need to comment on Mittens - he will only get my vote if he is running against Nobama. :o)


Speak what you think!