![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
So Denise and I watched the prime-time Republican debate last night. With the caveat that I’m WAY over to the left on the liberal side of the fence, and that I didn’t watch the “kiddie table” debate at all, here are my initial thoughts.
Bottom line first: this wasn’t a ‘debate.’ This was a barely-disguised reality-tv show. They should have had a final vote via Twitter to remove one or two of the candidates from the race (“And the person being removed from the campaign tonight is…”). A debate is when people argue their stands on issues, with the candidates going back-and-forth outlining the specifics of their views, with rebuttals and incisive follow-up questioning by the moderators when the candidates fail to answer the question adequately or dodge it completely. I didn’t see any of that. In fairness, I don’t know that it’s even possible with ten candidates (it’s best accomplished with two or at most three), but there wasn’t even an attempt. The biggest example of that failure was with Donald Trump, who persisted in insulting those he disagrees with (“They’re stupid…”) without offering any specific details of how he might do things differently.
The truism of circuses like this are that they are more likely to produce “losers” than clear “winners.” I didn’t see a winner in this debate. I think Marco Rubio and John Kasich were the two who helped themselves the most and seemed the most ‘presidential’, if that’s actually a trait; Trump was Trump -- if you liked him before, you probably still like him, because he kept spewing his bombastic one-liners and slipped any attempt to tie him down to specific policies.
There were those who didn’t hurt themselves horribly but also didn’t help themselves. I saw Jeb Bush showing that he’s more studied and reflective than his brother, but also that he’s bland and doesn’t look comfortable at all campaigning; Ted Cruz spent the entire night essentially saying “I am more religious and conservative than you are,” which is what the Tea Party section wants to hear; Chris Christie seemed to start every comment with “I’m the only one on this stage who…” and always came back to 9/11; Ben Carson came across as likable enough, but was buried in the crowd.
And there were those who (in my opinion) lost ground: I thought Rand Paul came across as the “wild-haired crazy demagogue” of the group; Mike Huckabee tried to follow Cruz’s lead but failed; Scott Walker came across as the person you try to avoid talking to at a party: self-centered, dull (in most senses of the word), and boring.
It was interesting to note the subjects raised — immigration, abortion, “has God talked to you?” (to me, easily the strangest question asked), the Iran agreement, Hillary Clinton, Islam vs. Israel, repealing Obamacare, how to end gay marriages — but perhaps more interesting the subjects that were NOT addressed: climate change, race relations, voting rights, how the party could attract a more diverse voter base, religious freedom, education (beyond some talk about Common Core), health care (beyond “we must repeal Obamacare”), America’s standing in the world and with our allies, how America can re-position itself as a world leader (or whether that’s something we want to attempt), and so on…
And the moderators certainly didn’t question the candidates about such niceties as how they reconcile wanting to keep Big Government out of people’s lives, but also intend to stop any woman from having an abortion, or how they want to have America have the strongest, biggest, bestest military with the newest shiny weaponry but they also insist on a balanced budget (so what are they going to de-fund to accomplish this?)
It also seemed obvious that (at least for some of the candidates) to be a true Republican, you must also be a Christian, preferably of the protestant or fundamentalist variety. That may just be me. But hey, Ted Cruz, in his closing statement, said that one of the first things he would do as president is "instruct the Department of Justice and the IRS to start persecuting religious liberty." My fear is that wasn't a misstatement, but the truth.
What were your thoughts on the debate if you watched it? Who do you think were the winners or losers? Here's what the BBC thought: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-33815103
Bottom line first: this wasn’t a ‘debate.’ This was a barely-disguised reality-tv show. They should have had a final vote via Twitter to remove one or two of the candidates from the race (“And the person being removed from the campaign tonight is…”). A debate is when people argue their stands on issues, with the candidates going back-and-forth outlining the specifics of their views, with rebuttals and incisive follow-up questioning by the moderators when the candidates fail to answer the question adequately or dodge it completely. I didn’t see any of that. In fairness, I don’t know that it’s even possible with ten candidates (it’s best accomplished with two or at most three), but there wasn’t even an attempt. The biggest example of that failure was with Donald Trump, who persisted in insulting those he disagrees with (“They’re stupid…”) without offering any specific details of how he might do things differently.
The truism of circuses like this are that they are more likely to produce “losers” than clear “winners.” I didn’t see a winner in this debate. I think Marco Rubio and John Kasich were the two who helped themselves the most and seemed the most ‘presidential’, if that’s actually a trait; Trump was Trump -- if you liked him before, you probably still like him, because he kept spewing his bombastic one-liners and slipped any attempt to tie him down to specific policies.
There were those who didn’t hurt themselves horribly but also didn’t help themselves. I saw Jeb Bush showing that he’s more studied and reflective than his brother, but also that he’s bland and doesn’t look comfortable at all campaigning; Ted Cruz spent the entire night essentially saying “I am more religious and conservative than you are,” which is what the Tea Party section wants to hear; Chris Christie seemed to start every comment with “I’m the only one on this stage who…” and always came back to 9/11; Ben Carson came across as likable enough, but was buried in the crowd.
And there were those who (in my opinion) lost ground: I thought Rand Paul came across as the “wild-haired crazy demagogue” of the group; Mike Huckabee tried to follow Cruz’s lead but failed; Scott Walker came across as the person you try to avoid talking to at a party: self-centered, dull (in most senses of the word), and boring.
It was interesting to note the subjects raised — immigration, abortion, “has God talked to you?” (to me, easily the strangest question asked), the Iran agreement, Hillary Clinton, Islam vs. Israel, repealing Obamacare, how to end gay marriages — but perhaps more interesting the subjects that were NOT addressed: climate change, race relations, voting rights, how the party could attract a more diverse voter base, religious freedom, education (beyond some talk about Common Core), health care (beyond “we must repeal Obamacare”), America’s standing in the world and with our allies, how America can re-position itself as a world leader (or whether that’s something we want to attempt), and so on…
And the moderators certainly didn’t question the candidates about such niceties as how they reconcile wanting to keep Big Government out of people’s lives, but also intend to stop any woman from having an abortion, or how they want to have America have the strongest, biggest, bestest military with the newest shiny weaponry but they also insist on a balanced budget (so what are they going to de-fund to accomplish this?)
It also seemed obvious that (at least for some of the candidates) to be a true Republican, you must also be a Christian, preferably of the protestant or fundamentalist variety. That may just be me. But hey, Ted Cruz, in his closing statement, said that one of the first things he would do as president is "instruct the Department of Justice and the IRS to start persecuting religious liberty." My fear is that wasn't a misstatement, but the truth.
What were your thoughts on the debate if you watched it? Who do you think were the winners or losers? Here's what the BBC thought: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-33815103