Tonight I think I’ll be like Quin last time (and Aaron tonight)
and offer some instant analysis with not too much querulous
criticism of each of tonight’s debaters. I’ll do so in alphabetical
order, if I can still remember my ABC’s after Charlie Rose lost
track of them when the candidates did the questioning.
Michele Bachmann: Hit a home
run, tape measure at that, early on with her response to Karen
Tumulty’s question about whether Wall Street bankers should have
gone to jail. By pointing the finger at the federal government and
its Community Reinvestment Act and the unseemly pressure put on
banks to lower lending standards, she was telling Ms. Tumulty
something the latter’s ears just didn’t want to hear. And she did
so forcefully and compellingly. She was not as successful in her
later comments, particularly in the tired shot at Rick Perry for
once being a Democrat who backed Al Gore. I didn’t know, as Jim
Antle reminded us below, that she backed Jimmy Carter in 1976.
(Full disclosure: I voted for Jerry Brown that year.)
Herman Cain: He was targeted
perhaps more than Romney, a sure sign of his rise, stature, and
star power. He remained tough, most civil, and no less likable. His
defense of Alan Greenspan gave Ron Paul a whopper of an opening,
but it also was a reminder that Cain is loyal and a reminder of why
he’s become the most genuinely well liked of all the
candidates.
Newt Gingrich: Again, his
seeming command and soothing, mellifluous voice and delivery are
irresistible. It’ll be a lonely stage when he’s no longer there to
contribute, and in his inimitable way, to tell like it is even
while pushing for Republican solidarity against the real opponent,
Obama. But again, doesn’t he know Ben Bernanke can’t be
fired?
Jon Huntsman: Had one good
moment, when he quipped to Romney that he won’t ask him about
Mormonism. That defused the entire controversy ginned up by pastor
Robert Jeffress last week (though Huntsman slyly managed to link
Perry to the issue). For the longest time he seemed missing in
action, which was just as well.
Ron Paul: With foreign
policy not in play, his guileless presence was no less
indispensable to the event than Gingrich’s. Except that he’s happy
to remind viewers that he’s almost as anti-Republican as he is
anti-Democratic.
Rick Perry: Well, at least
this time no one will be able to say he tired down the stretch.
That’s because for most of the evening he just sat there politely,
taking in lots and lots of smart talk by others that he couldn’t
compete with. And when he had his chance to ask Romney a direct
question about Romneycare, Romney in his reply pretty much wiped
the floor with him. To add insult to injury, when Romney had the
next question, he directed it to Bachmann, seated right next to
Perry. Rick who?
Mitt Romney: Besides
disposing of Perry one last time, he strengthened his front-runner
position, which in case anyone had any doubts was reinforced by
Gov. Chris Christie’s presence in the audience. Now that’s a real
endorsement. Romney also smartly played up issues of importance to
South Carolina and New Hampshire. He intends to win this nomination
early.
Rick Santorum: He seemed
most determined to bring Cain down a peg or two, and also made a
solid point about the link between broken families and poverty. If
he were riding higher I imagine he would not have gotten away with
chiding those who backed TARP by saying he strongly opposed it.
Surely one of his rivals would have reminded him that when Congress
was passing that legislation he was a defeated ex-senator. That’s
been the problem for him all along, hasn’t it — the difficulty of
overcoming the stigma of losing his Senate seat in 2006.
