Tonight we have…
…the first Republican debate. Actually, two debates, one at 5 PM for the second string, and one at 9 PM for the first.
You can discuss it all here.
UPDATE 6:15: Well, I’ve been watching it, sort of. As some of you long-time readers know, listening to things (speeches, debates, interviews, lectures) is not my forte; I don’t do well with an auditory format and never have. In addition, live debates make me nervous, and the speed with which these candidates are almost forced to talk makes their messages sound both forced and canned, and there’s already a tendency to sound forced and canned anyway.
Nevertheless, I’ll say that Fiorina did fine but seemed more grim than usual, Perry was intermittently okay, and Gilmore (with whom I wasn’t familiar) sounded competent. Lindsay Graham sounded grumpy and tired. Jindal always talks way too fast and in addition swallows many of his words; not sure if he’s tried to overcome this and failed, or if he really hasn’t tried, but it’s a big problem.
The empty auditorium didn’t do them a favor, either. What’s Fox thinking? Are they out to get these candidates (some think so)?
The commentators afterwards on Fox (Wallace and Will) were impressed with Fiorina.
And the commenters at Ace’s really liked Martha MacCallum’s hair.
I wonder how many people watched the undercard debates, though, and will watch tonight at 9. My guess is that it’s mostly political junkies like us.
I’m calling my shot. Carly wins the first debate by consensus of the talking heads.
Neo, it isn’t like you to write so sloppily. FNC may call these debates, but that doesn’t make them debates; and there is no reason that we should accommodate FNC’s grandiose pretensions.
Cornhead, I agree and will raise you. I think Carly would win either of these pseudo-debates, given the chance. It is a travesty that she, along with Jindal and Perry, are pushed to the sidelines in favor of Christie, Huckabee et al.
My wife is trying to shame me into watching. I will probably cave–after 57 years I know where my bread is buttered. But, the best thing America could do is ignore this farce. I have said before that if FNC had wanted to do something worthwhile they would have had a committee of distinguished political observers just pick about four candidates that they thought the electorate should hear from at this point. Then ignored the flack they would get. Alternatively, when the idea for this show came up, Ailes could have said, “Not a chance. It is stupid. Let a few primaries play out and let’s find out who the serious contenders are.”.
I don’t get Fox News, and wouldn’t watch this charade even if I did.
Perry, then Carly…get the first Qs.
I like the biographically pointed questions, thus far. They assume some knowledge on the part of the viewer, and challenge the candidate to demonstrate their relevance and capacity to answer well, on the fly.
Of the cast of 16-17, I am only interested in Walker and Fiorina. I like Cruz right where he is breathing fire on the senate leadership.
ISIS and terror Q to Perry – he mentions Carly (as a more capable negotiator than feckless Team-O), then Fiorina answers with fire!
NICE.
Gov. Petaki has been forgotten, I think – here he’s been shining, though. Bright and likeable.
Gov. Gilmore mentions proposing a mid-East NATO to support managing the terrorist threats arising from the region.
How come this is the first I’ve heard about the idea?
Oldflyers:
Well, of course they’re not actual debates in terms of format. But they are consistently called “debates” nonetheless, and I will call them that instead of coining some phrase to use every time (like “time-limited sequential question-and-answer sessions where the candidates line up in a row and are shown in real time on national TV”), which seems rather cumbersome and unnecessary, when everyone pretty much knows what they actually are anyway.
Sales Presentations?
Will anyone name and call out Dear Leader by name?
Instead of “If I were President…” and stupid fluff like “take the fight to these guys” (THANK you, useless Graham) that?
Graham is more hawkish than I ever realized. He returns to his “we need troops on the ground” theme at every opportunity. Pitching to the military .
At 1:04-8m, Carly hits prog-con differences (and maybe goes too long) – and then is asked about American vision (and is brief), and is stirring!
American exceptionalism – American potential for Greatness! Yes.
Sorry, that should have been a question: “Pitching to the military?”
Q before the closing statement asked each candidate for three words about this administration – REPLAY THAT! – not many compliments, said the mod.
Hell no.
FIRST post-event comments by [what’s his name, the Sunday talk show guy] and George Will salute Carly as the clear winner.
I DID call my shot. No contest and what I expected from Carly.
My two words re HRC: untrustworthy criminal.
Just kidding you Neo. I prefer the term “One Ring Circus sans elephants”, but as you say that is too long.
One of the problems with the format is that anyone can say anything and not get push back. Example, Graham saying he would gladly give up his Social Security. Well, duh. As a U.S. Senator he has the best retirement plan in the world, excepting someone who did win the WH. And he will double dip as a retired, do nothing, USAF Reserve Col. (He seldom even showed up for his mandatory drill sessions, but got promoted anyway, because he was a Senator.)
Most of these folks did quite well. Carly clearly has a very refined ability to organize her thoughts, and deliver them intelligently, succinctly, and forcefully. She is tough, but gracious.
Oldflyer:
Sans elephants? But it’s full of elephants.
DRUDGE links to Weekly Standard the clip and pull quote, Q of Carly: “can you inspire this nation?”
A: “This is a great nation. It is a unique nation, in all of human history and on the face of the planet. Because here our founders believed that everyone has a right to fulfill their potential. And that that right, they called it life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, comes from God and cannot be taken away by government. We have arrived at a point in our nation’s history where the potential of this nation and too many Americans is being crushed by the weight, the power, the cost, the complexity, the ineptitude, the corruption of the federal government. And only someone who will challenge the status quo of Washington, D.C. can lead the resurgence of this great nation. I will do that.”
Megan Kelly needs to shut up.
Is this “America’s Got Candidates”?
A little dignity would be more appropriate.
Neo,
“full of elephants”
Now that made me laugh.
I believe the elephant comes from the civil war saying “I have seen the elephant” meaning battle. They also used “I have seen the monkey show” to mean the same. Seems appropos.
HRC … Liar, chiseler.
Re: the 9 PM debate, Cruz got the least opportunities (I counted, tied with Kasich and Carson) but by far gave the best answers.
Waiting for neo’s post, but am angry Cruz got snubbed.
Thought Trump hurt himself big time.
Tonawanda:
My post on the debate is now up.
I forgot to say that yes, I noticed the candidates did not get equal numbers of questions. I was very very surprised at that. If it’s purposeful favoritism (which it might be), then it’s certainly obvious purposeful favoritism.
I found the varied and peppering style of questioning in the evening debate – this time, with a live audience – making for a raucous, freewheeling, and entertaining exchange of views.
Candidates tend to answer with some pointedness first, or maybe “out and back” (eg, vets, God, country), and then weave in some canned answers to some point they really wanted to make, usually reasonably relevant.
The “bob and weaving” style set-up questioning that FNC gave candidates meant a chance for them to be more spontaneous towards the more informed sorts of folks who, naturally, follow the field this early. I enjoyed that!
I pray that FoxNewsChannel gets a slot to host one of the fall 2016 debates. (But I doubt it will happen.)
The early round of 7 was more controlled and sober event. The questioning was tighter. The evening event, more festive!
I’m glad there are fewer of these this cycle, but more of this kind of presentation finds me heartened.
Rubio’s closing line: “I think God has blessed us. He’s blessed Republicans with some very good candidates. The Democrats can’t even find one.”
Carson had the neurosurgeon’s classic “we are all people” answer – not a “color.” “We are a United States….”
We ARE Americans. And we debate and dispute and contend like this like no other people in the world Compared to Dear Leader’s lie, diversions and delusions, I think this was a fine, thoughtful, and fun party!
ZINGERS COLLECTED:
http://onpolitics.usatoday.com/2015/08/06/zingers-gop-candidates-drop-their-best-one-liners/
That link to Ace about hair is wrong. Maybe try again?