Jan 19 2012

Live Blogging SC Debate

Published by at 8:10 pm under All General Discussions

Overall good debate. Can’t wait to see the results. Romney did not skate and failed in many places (tax returns). Newt is back as is Santorum. Paul …..

Update 13: King ends on a great exit question: should SC push Romney forward or slow the train down. After a horrible start this is a good end for him.

Paul: Sort of good,  but wonkish.

Newt: Priority one – defeat Obama, since he is the most dangerous president. Also need a big team win across the spectrum. Newt is right as someone who could debate Obama.

Romney: Agrees with the critical nature of the election. But then goes to vague buzz words, which sort of proves Newt’s point. A litany of rah-rah sound bites is not enough (because Obama can do that too). Ending with a steal from Reagan.

Santorum: Who is the best? Santorum says a conviction (or convicted?) conservative is best. Santorum has a point, but he cannot carry the water. Santorum goes back to Rick (its always about him and not us), and pretends a social conservative is like Reagan – which Reagan was not. However, he resonates with evangelicals, so watch him in SC.

Update 12: Paul wins abortion topic. Yes, when a woman is pregnant a doctor has two (or more) patients. And yes, our culture has destroyed the sanctity of life. Santorum is losing this because no one wants a intrusive government in the family decision process. Paul does a good knock on Rick.

AJStrata: And yes I KNOW life begins at conception (scientific fact provable in any court of law with DNA testing). Paul is also right to move it to the states where Santorum is wrong.

Update 11: Illegal worker question – how do we make sure Americans get first cut at jobs. King mangles this to be about amnesty.

Newt: Rightly says we need to remove all barriers to control borders. Also fix the laws so it is easier to get here legally instead of making it easier to be here illegally. English as primary language – yes. Silly comment about Mastercard being able to run a guest worker program (something we need so we can keep track). Yes, long term residents of our communities can stay here as long as they were not felons. Many aspects silly (going out of country for reenry) and a pure waste of money.

Romney: Answer weak. A magic card will solve all the problems. Then begins echoing Newt’s nonsense about leaving and coming back later.

AJStrata: Look, we don’t need this cost, If they have been in our communities for decades, let them stay and pay fines – and get at the end of the citizenship line. Not that hard.

Santorum: Another fail. A misdemeanor does not result in losing home and family. Santorum thinks all illegals steal SS numbers. Losing moderate voters. We can fine people for their violations. We don’t need to cause families harm who have been here for decades with NO violent crimes. Most people want a rational answer, not a vindictive answer.

Paul: Good answer regarding punishing people who employ illegals to work. This is not a simple problem. I agree with Paul that providing support to illegals is not right because they are not paying in. Then he wanders off to Afghanistan … Incoherent.

Update 11: SOPA question.

Newt: Blows it on this initially. Even Hollywood deserves their IP protected. SOPA is wrong and over the top. Newt is right, use the patent laws to deal with this.

Romney: Newt got it right (yes, sort of obvious what is wrong with SOPA).

Santorum: blows it – no one said anything goes. Looks like he is not listening (or understanding).

Paul: OK, I guess.

Update 10: Apple as Pinata?? Gimme a break!What do with so many workers in China?

Santorum: Cut corporate taxes so we don’t lose jobs! Great and strong answer.

Paul: Newsflash – Paul noticed foreign care factories in the US. Well spotted.

Paul – Santorum: Paul loses the battle because he wants Federal dictate over states decisions.

Update 9: Romney will not let primary voters see his taxes until he is elected. Bad answer. Santorum’s answer is weak.

Good lord, did Romney screw this up or what? Who needs another rich guy in politics? Romney does not respect GOP primary voters if he cannot show us his income. He is not afraid of Obama, he is afraid of GOP primary voters,

Update 8: Santorum’s attacks on Newt are dumb. He attacks Newt and then says he will go after Obama. Newt’s connections to Reagan just shows everyone how long he has been rattling around DC. However, as he said big ideas are needed. Santorum’s attack on Newt is not working. Big FAIL for Santorum. Really, really dumb.

Every Conservative is cringing and screaming “remember Reagan’s 11th Commandment!”

They all fell into the trap of letting a liberal give them a chance for the circular firing squad.

Update 7 Question from audience: Can ObamaCare actually be repealed? (Of course King asks it through a loaded question)

Romney: Executive decision is not going to end ObamaCare (moment of honesty). Yes, it will take Congress and President to end the silliness. And here is where Romney shows his big government ghosts. He wants to REPLACE ObamaCare with RomneyCare II! Wrong….

Newt: Great answer “who could trust DC?”.  Can it be repealed – yes. Newt again leans on the “replace’ bandwagon, Great line: kids on parents health care because Obama can’t get them jobs.

Santorum: Hits RomneyCare hard (and rightly). Surprised Santorum was the Pit Bull here and not Newt. Again, good answer with lots of RomneyCare details.  Nails Newt on his individual mandate position. Great response

Get’s Romney to admit RomneyCare did not do much for MA. Newt answered well, because he did fight for a lot of good ideas. Newt is doing well tonight. He admits he was wrong – which neutralizes Santorum and Obama.

Paul: Plays doctor card (and military card again – ugh). Paul throws cold water on pulling back Obamacare – so why vote for him? Loses ground big time here. Instead of pulling Obamacare he wants to pull troops home. Someone look up ‘incoherent’ and you will find Paul’s pic.

Update 6: King – great question on out of work vets (know this one since it is close to home).

Paul: Hisresponse is not to do much for them. Goes back WW II (because we all remember that so well …). Agreed, cut taxes and open the economy. Paul is leaning too hard on his veteran status. VA support for returning vets an obvious answer – not a discriminator.

Santorum: Yes, give those who serve some preferences. I agree, for both my father the WW II Navy vet and my son, who will be a US Marine veteran sometime in the future. Obama cuts are an insult. Good answer.

Romney: In our state we gave vets a ‘free ride’ – insulting? Leave veteran support to the state level? And put them in RomneyCare??? Sorry, but the military is clearly a federal responsibility, so going to the states for this is a bad idea.

Newt: Going after Paul’s version of history. GI Bill was huge (for Newt’s dad and my own). Everyone who serves should get a college degree and we should have aggressive again.

Update 6: Santorum responds well – capitalism for everyone (not just the Bain’s). Workers feel abandoned by both parties (true!). Santorum is doing well here.

Update 5: Bain try 2 – Romney flailing himself. Newt is ready to pounce. Nothing wrong with profit, unless it kills Main Street jobs. Let’s see if Newt strikes.

Update 4: Newt get’s another softball against Romney/Bain. Again, dealing to Newt’s strength. Romney babbles about marginal issues and then goes onto Obama’s ‘crony capitalism’ – as if Bain was not exactly that! Dumb move.

Update 3: Paul: Solution to jobs is getting government out of the way. A bit wonkey in the details. Newt: 3 solutions. Kill Frank/Dodd bill; go after America’s energy sources; fix the Corps of Engineers.

Update 2: King leaves Santorum a trap and he sort of kind of dodges it. He should have taken Newt’s lead and slapped King. Weak response. Romney nails the response (“move on to real issues”). Paul slips sideways to a irrelevant component about corporate media. CNN and media lose big, Newt gains and Romney follows.

Update 1: John King, flails and fails by trying to “splain”. He earned this shellacking and gave Newt a softball.

Original: CNN Leads with the muckraking. And Newt nails CNN for leading with this stupidity John King stepped right into it and deserves the shellacking he is getting. Way to go Newt!

7 responses so far

7 Responses to “Live Blogging SC Debate”

  1. [...] here: The Strata-Sphere » Live Blogging SC Debate Comments [...]

  2. Frogg1 says:

    I enjoyed the debate and was proud of all four of them. I thought Romney actually had some moments where he came across like he was connecting with people. Paul made some good points and didn’t say anything crazy about foreign policy since the debate centered on fiscal/domestic issues. Santorum is Santorum (this is not going to be a social policy election). And, Gingrich looked strong and had another good debate night starting with that very first question.

    I think Perry’s speech today was also well done. Eric Erickson (Redstate Blog) said his sources tell him that Perry will head up a 10th Amendment project for Speaker Gingrich to rally Governors and state legislators toward a plan of devolving power from Washington.

    Gingrich is also starting to voice some of Ron Paul’s issues. He recently said he was in favor of returning to the gold standard, etc. He’s also willing to put partial privitization of Social Security on the agenda (where Romney/Santorum both say we can’t do it right now because of the budget problem).

    No matter who wins, we won’t have the candidate we hoped for. However, I am starting to see signs that whoever it is may still take steps in the direction we need to go. Some candidates may only take baby steps, others would be giant leaps. Either way, it’s a process. I’m starting to have hope that the process will be moving forward. We shouldn’t get discouraged if it doesn’t all happen as quickly as we would like.

  3. crosspatch says:

    So far I’m still in Romney’s camp. Gingrich is another professional politician / academic who really has never done much of anything in his life. His whole life revolves around government and as far as I know he has never run anything short of a private government lobbying effort. He is a think-tank sort of guy, someone I might want as an individual contributor who comes up with ideas … about half of them good. He isn’t someone I would want running a country.

  4. crosspatch says:

    At first I was for Pawlenty. When he dropped out I was for Perry. When Perry turned out to be something of a dolt, I started looking more closely at the other candidates and as I actually watched more of what Romney was saying and not relying on what other people were saying about what Romney was saying, I started to come around to him. It reminds me of the process I went through with Reagan. At first he was a California movie actor who came across as a pretty liberal Republican. Conservatives hated him until his second term. I was for Ford in the 76 election and thought Reagan was from the land of fruits and nuts. After I started really listening to him in the 1980 campaign, I started to really like what he is saying.

    The same process is happening with me now with Romney.

  5. crosspatch says:

    To put 2012 into 1980 perspective, Newt reminds me of Phil Crane. Actually, Crane had better credentials, in my opinion, as a graduate of Hillsdale College. But Newt has another side of him that is more like Bill Clinton.

    Newt is the nutty professor who has a bazillion ideas and bounces from one to the next but never really manages to follow completely through on any of them.

  6. Redteam says:

    “I was for Ford in the 76 election and thought Reagan was from the land of fruits and nuts. After I started really listening to him in the 1980 campaign, ”

    That’s a lot of difference, I listened to Reagan before the 76 election and knew he was the one for me and I’m a conservative. I sure didn’t wait til his 2nd term to start liking him.

    Wonder why the press has no problem with all the philandering of Jack Kennedy, LBJ, Bill Clinton, John Edwards, etc? Is it because they didn’t get a divorce (does that assume the spouse was agreeable to an OPEN marriage, so it was OK? )?
    At least Newt was man enough to realize he needed to divorce his wife if he no longer had respect for her, unlike those others I mentioned.

  7. ivehadit says:

    I,too am for Romney now. He will not allow obama to move to the center (which he will do if Newt is the nominee) and he has much less baggage than Newt. I thought Romney did great last night. I don’t understand the big hoopla over his taxes…except for those who don’t like him. He’s successful and a real winner in the game of life, imho. People like him should be exalted not punished for their hard work and risk-taking.