Winners and Losers from GOP Presidential Debate

15 Comments

by: Colorado Pols

Our friends at “The Fix” break down the Winners and Losers from the GOP Presidential debate last night in New Hampshire. Some of the more notable tidbits:

WINNERS

Michele Bachmann: For viewers who had never heard of the Minnesota Congresswoman before tonight, she put on quite a show. For the first 45 minutes of the debate, Bachmann dominated the stage with quotable lines galore and an audience hanging on her every word. She faded somewhat in the middle of the debate – particularly with her confusing answer on whether she supports a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage – but rallied in the closing moments. What Bachmann proved tonight? She’s ready for primetime.

Mitt Romney: Romney came into the debate as the frontrunner in New Hampshire and nationally and he did nothing in the 120 minutes on stage at Saint Anselm College to change that. Romney was serious and well informed – in a word: presidential. His debate experience from 2008 clearly paid off as he stayed focused on President Obama and the economy to the exclusion of almost everything else. Romney also benefited from the fact that none of his rivals seemed to have the stomach to attack him directly. And, health care was – at best – a tangential topic. All in all a very good night for Romney…

…LOSERS

Tim Pawlenty: Pawlenty came into the debate with perhaps the biggest challenge: to prove that the insider buzz he has been generating of late could be translated to a public forum. He had moments where he shined – his answer on the separation of church and state was outstanding – but by and large he came across as a bit over-programmed. Pawlenty also seemed to pass on a golden opportunity to prove his “tell the truth” credentials when King asked him about his criticism of Romney’s health care plan. Pawlenty demurred even though 36 hours before he had described the law as “Obamneycare”. Strange.

Herman Cain: After winning the first debate of the year in South Carolina, expectations were high for the Georgia businessman. And for the first hour (or so) of the debate, he held his own. But, Cain’s answer on whether he would have a Muslim in his Cabinet was confusing at best and offensive at worst and will be, without question, the memorable moment of the debate for him. And that’s not a good memory.

Since many of you probably didn’t get around to watching last night’s debate, we’ve got a broader question for you after the jump. Which GOP Presidential candidate has most (surprisingly) impressed you lately? In other words, who has made you take notice — for good reasons — in recent weeks?

Loading ...

15 thoughts on “Winners and Losers from GOP Presidential Debate”

raymond1 says:

June 14, 2011 at 10:00 pm

Because that’s what most Republicans in the Obama era want, right? Seems like this debate was quite the embarassment of riches for those looking for mature, honest leaders.

Log in to Reply
Gilpin Guy says:

June 15, 2011 at 12:14 am

Your results are going to be overstated otherwise.

Log in to Reply
ColoMod says:

June 15, 2011 at 1:00 am

(scratches head)…

Log in to Reply
SSG_Dan says:

June 15, 2011 at 1:10 am

A resounding – “Meh…”

After GOP debate, New Hampshire voters still looking

DERRY, N.H. — New Hampshire’s Republican voters, who traditionally have a big voice in whom the party nominates for president since they hold the first primary, are mostly still looking for a candidate they can passionately support. Monday night’s debate didn’t stop their search.

While GOP loyalists and independents at restaurants and shopping centers Tuesday had warm praise for former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, and wanted to know more about Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann, they said the field remained wide open.

http://www.miamiherald.com/201…

Log in to Reply
1. DavidThi808 says:
  
  June 15, 2011 at 1:11 am
  
  But both went on to win the primary and general.
  
  Log in to Reply
DavidThi808 says:

June 15, 2011 at 1:48 am

from HuffPo

At the beginning of the year, CBO put the U.S. on a five-year path of modest growth, over which time they predicted the unemployment rate would crawl down toward five percent. Elmendorf sees nothing on the horizon to speed that up.

Add to that the urge in D.C. to cut spending now which will make things worse and that we haven’t stopped the banks from gambling on the economy which could easily cause another financial recession at any time – and I don’t see how we Dems win next year.

And before everyone shoots the messenger, I agree that we Dems suck a lot less. And I agree that in virtually all competitive elections we have a much better candidate. But if true unemployment/underemployment is still at 17% (or even down to say 15%) – we’re toast.

Log in to Reply
1. Automaticftp says:
  
  June 15, 2011 at 2:01 am
  
  Things are not that simple.
  
  Many more statements like that and we might even begin to revoke your “[W]e Dems . . . ” credentials. 😉
  
  Log in to Reply
  1. DavidThi808 says:
    
    June 15, 2011 at 6:00 am
    
    And I went first to Nate Silver figuring he’d lay it all out. He does, but to say it does not have a clear impact – you’re right and yes I was overstainging it. details here
    
    But almost no matter what you do – even if you’re more or less deliberately cherry-picking – they range from zero to fairly weak.
    
    So does that mean that the unemployment rate should just be ignored and that the news media’s focus on it is misplaced?
    
    No, I think that’s emphatically the wrong interpretation. The data is not really strong enough to prove there is a relationship – but because there are a relatively limited number of data points, it is also not strong enough to disprove that there is a relationship.
    
    Log in to Reply
    1. Automaticftp says:
      
      June 15, 2011 at 6:51 pm
      
      The economy is generally the single most important factor in a Presidential election. But to distill one very important element to a single component of that element is a bit . . . simplistic for you.
      
      Log in to Reply
      1. DavidThi808 says:
        
        June 16, 2011 at 1:02 am
        
        Of course, I did cry a little 🙁
        
        Log in to Reply
c rork says:

June 15, 2011 at 2:11 am

The party presented a fairly united front and agreed on most of the issues. The nuance lies with Mitt Romney “winning” this one. Why did he win? Because nobody called him out on his flip flopping on the Affordable Care Act or on abortion, to name a few issues.

While nobody really stood out in the field, it will become apparent to the rest of the candidates that Romney will steamroll them if the gloves don’t come off at some point.

I refuse to believe that Romney can take Iowa or SC, or that the R base is looking for a “grown-up who’s sincere” after the candidates Republican primary voters selected in 2010. No way.

Log in to Reply
1. Irish Patti says:
  
  June 15, 2011 at 5:16 am
  
  Mittens: 1. He is a Mormon, can the evangelical wing of the party get past that? 2. He essentially passed ACA in MA, the Tea Partiers hate the ACA, can they get past that?
  
  Log in to Reply
  1. Ralphie says:
    
    June 15, 2011 at 5:27 am
    
    Mitt’s Mormon problem just went away.
    
    Log in to Reply
    1. Irish Patti says:
      
      June 15, 2011 at 5:52 am
      
      doesn’t mean the evangelicals are going to accept either of them. Huntsman worked for Obama, he is running for VP.
      
      Log in to Reply
2. Phoenix Rising says:
  
  June 16, 2011 at 3:23 am
  
  If Romney looks as good as everyone says he did on Monday, then either the other candidates don’t really want the job or they’ll have to start lobbing attacks in his direction.
  
  The scary part is that Bachmann was relatively smooth. Sorry, Sarah, but you can be replaced – and by someone who can hold it together on a debate stage.
  
  Log in to Reply