Forget Who Won. Who Lost?
« Dueling June Obama fundraising claims? — Comments (2) | Althouse on Brownback's debate performance — Comments (26) »
Forget Who Won. Who Lost? 16 Comments (0 topical, 16 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
What's worse, he said it would be okay for both circumstances. He saaid it was okay if the Court overturned it. Then, pressed by Mathews, he said it was okay if a strict Constructionist Court uphald Roe based on precedent. His fence straddling was painful to watch.
Fred Thompson option? if we can call him the winner, shouldn't we be able to call him the loser, since the quality of candidates clearly showed there is no need for him in this race?
but bingo, your repsonse was the one I was looking for.
though I do think how presidential McCain and Romney looked, as well as some quite good performances from some of the minor candidates makes the case for Fred Thompson as "loser" more credible than the silly "Fred Thompson was the winner!" talk.
Fred Thompson's speech tomorrow is going to get quite a bit of coverage, and he doesn't have to engage in banter with Chris Matthews. He gets to sit out and wait for a day when he doesn't have to play around with 10 other candidates.
he might win tomorrow, but he clearly didn't win tonight. clearly playing around with 10 other candidates, making him look like just one of many rather than the presumtive front runner hurt Rudy. but at some point, if Fred has the necessary passion for this thing, which I tend to doubt, he's going to have to do so too. sitting out and hoping everybody else implodes isn't going to work, as attrocious as I think the media starting this process so early is.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
I'm not quite so sure I agree. In the interest of full disclosure, he is still my first choice for President, but I still stand by my initial assessment that the abortion questions were the only questions that hindered his performance. I thought he did very well answering all the other questions. If aborition hadn't been referred to at least six different times, I think he would have been one of the winners tonight.
Rudy spoke to his record as a fiscal conservative in NYC, highlighted their reduction in crime as well as the welfare rolls, and did a good job defending and standing by President Bush with his last comment of the night. The only problems that held him back were his answers to the abortion questions, but he answered all the other questions very well, and didn't let Vandenhei trip him up with the Sunni/Shi'ite question, either.
Did you hear the shocked silence as he said he thought employers should be able to fire an employee just because they are homosexual? This man will never be president.
"I know nothing except the fact of my ignorance"-Socrates(the real one ;)
Well, they should be able to. Its a free country. If bigots want to fire me because I'm Mormon, I don't give a damn. If someone has a problem with gays, that's their problem, not America's.
They that are with us are more than they that are against us.
I think most Americans would disagree with you. Is there anything that you feel an employer may not fire you for?
"I know nothing except the fact of my ignorance"-Socrates(the real one ;)
I posted about this on my blog also, and have an antithesis view, and I hope you pardon the plug, but I figure we're pretty much on the same team, just arguing about who should be the next quarterback.
Well, the snapshot GOP debate is over and rather than mull over who are the winners I’ll go out on a limb, and disagree with many blogs when I make this assertion, Fred Thompson is the Big Loser. You may argue, how could he lose, he wasn’t there. If you did that, you just gave the reason. His absence here was notable, and it will hurt him.
The adage of out of sight out of mind must be remembered. There will be some likely shifting in the polls from the debate. My feeling is that Romney will pick up a few points from his anemic 10%, but where will it come from is the important question. There are a few sources, but there is no bigger source than the non candidate Fred Thompson who is around 15% in most polls, and Former Speaker Newt Gingrich who has about 8%, but I don’t think Newt is a viable candidate and he’s smart enough to know that he can’t win. He’s far too polarizing a figure.
So, that makes Fred Thompson as the most likely source to lose support, and it will go to Mit Romney who spoke articulately and clearly on a number of positions. I also think that when the dust settles, it is not likely that Giuliani will lose any ground, and will probably pick up a few points. Senator McCain is also hard to figure. On the one hand he spoke his voice, but he also seemed edgy and a bit too agressive for the format. He constantly went over his time, and I have a feeling that the base, that isn’t too enamored with him as it is, and is looking for reasons to vote against him, which may be unfortunate, I see him staying pat, but Romney closing in, and possibly losing ground to Giuliani. He could find himself in third place after this debate, which would be a disaster for his campaign.
However, former Sen. Thompson’s non participation and non announcement reinforce a perception about a dispassionate person, who does not feel a fire to run. That doesn’t bode well, as people want a Chief Executive who wants to be there.
But, now that I think about it, Giuliani didn't help himself out much when he was the only one on the stage that wasn't excited about getting rid of the wrongly-decided judicially-crafted pro-abortion mandate in Roe v. Wade.
Giuliani's reponse to the question, "How would it be if the Supreme Court were to end Roe v. Wade?" was: "OK."
Everyone else said that it would be great. Rudy just said, "It would be OK." Then he said something about how states should decide their own abortion policies. EARTH TO RUDY: states CAN'T decide their own abortion policies BECAUSE of Roe v. Wade.
Rudy, for a lawyer, isn't showing a masterful grip of the most important court decision in the last 60 years. Perhaps he should huddle with his advisors and have someone explain it to him.