YouTube Debate

Of course, I am biased, but I believe the winner of tonight's debate was Governor Mike Huckabee. He showed, yet again, that of all the GOP candidates, that he is the best debator, and the truest conservative. With this debate now over, I would like to address two things that I noticed about tonight's debate. First, how the candidates, specifically Huckabee, performed tonight. Second, some of CNN's post debate analysis of the debate and how the candidates performed.
First, how did the candidates perform? It was definitely an entertaining debate. Right from the start, the leaders, Romney, Guiliani, and Huckabee, began sparring with each other over the issue of immigration. While this initial round made for decidedly good TV, I must say that Romney looked desperate. As one of the front runners, it surprised me to see him act as though he were trailing. He took a couple of wild swings at Guiliani and Huckabee, but failed to corner either candidate. As the debate continued, Romney continued to look weak and flustered. He is a very polished candidate, but could not seem to answer simple questions simply and decisively. He even fumbled one answer about whether he believed in every word in the Bible. He gave a good response at the end of the debate, but even this answer seemed canned and more like a campaign button than a real response. Sorry Mitt, but after tonight's performance your poll numbers are sure to drop even farther.
Guiliani performed adequately, as we have all come to expect. Yet on three key conservative issues his flaws were exposed. On immigration, the initial question, Guiliani defended New York being a sanctuary city by playing a typical political card. New York he said was not a real sanctuary city, but only a sanctuary city in three ways. For a second I wasn't sure if I was listening to Guiliani or Bill Clinton, the master of verbal political jujitsu. I have no idea where he stands on immigration, but that was slick the way he turned the issue against Romney. On abortion he said he was for overturning Roe v. Wade and giving the decision back to the states. No wait, that's not it. What he said was that if the courts did overturn Roe then the laws governing abortions would revert to the states. Thanks for the Con law lesson Rudy, I was unsure what would happen if Roe were reversed. I believe the question was whether he would support a federal law banning abortion, he would not, and whether he would fight to overturn Roe by nominating conservative justices. He again showed his prowess by dodging this conservative land mine. On gun control, well I have no idea what he would actual do, except that he does believe people have the right to bear arms. Yet, he seemed to imply that the government has a right to control the right to bear arms. Rudy did not get himself into any trouble like Romney did, but he did open the door for criticism.
McCain had an overall strong and consistent performance. He has never floundered on any of his positions, and did not flounder tonight. For the most part, he stayed above the fray, only once attacking Ron Paul, to many cheers and boos, on the Iraq issue. McCain has been a stalwart of old time politics, never bending or yielding on issues. Yet he looked tired and worn out. This is not to disrespect McCain, who has become a rock for veterans and active duty military people, but he looked old. McCain is to be commended for his defense of the military and Iraq, but it appears as though his time has past.
Thompson looked yet again like he woke up this morning and wondered why he was running for President. He had a few good lines, but seemed unable to answer questions directly. Which three programs would you cut Fred? And why when you have 30 seconds of free advertising would your people run an attack ad?
Mike Huckabee, in my opinion, won the night. Its hard to pronounce a winner when candidates are only given a very few questions, and so little time to answer. He defended his immigration policy as Governor by saying that we have never been a country to punish children for what their parents have done. He gave an eloquent answer to the question of the Bible, as I would hope a theologian would. He said he would cut the IRS and revamp Homeland Security to cut runaway government spending. And at the end, my favorite line, he said he would send Hillary Clinton on a mission to Mars. He was articulate and funny, and seemed once again to inspire rather than divide. In all, I believe the night belonged to Mike Huckabee.
I did not get a chance to watch all of CNN's post debate analysis, and that was probably a blessing. I must say that Anderson Cooper and CNN did a good job. The debate was fair and balanced, to steal a line from Fox news. I would have liked to see more detailed questions and some more follow up questions, but given the number of candidates and time, this seemed impossible. In the post debate coverage everyone seemed to agree that Romney did poorly and Guiliani did well. They also agreed that Govenor Huckabee had a good night. Yet they said that he was not giving adequate answers and not answering tough questions. He can only answer what he is asked. When Huckabee says that he would like to go to the "fair" tax plan and do away with the IRS, I believe he is serious. As to this notion that the Govenor would make a good running mate, I agree, but before we get to that point, lets have the primaries first. For a candidate who is leading in Iowa and gaining in other states, he is still not being considered seriously. This is sad and tragic. I know how much the media would like to see a Guiliani v. Clinton election, but here's a thought: Lets let the American people decide first. In an era where people are picking politicians only because they can win, lets trying picking one because we believe in their message. For me that person is Mike Huckabee, and the message is one of Hope.
Publius