Impressions from the Saturday Night NH Presidential Debates
By Jim Willis on Jan 6, 2008 in Elections, Government & Politics | Printable Version
Note: Thanks to my dad for calling to let me know the debates were on. I would have missed them had he not called!
Fred Thompson still has the best ideas–but he’s an old fart and will not catch fire, period. It’s just a matter of time before he’s out. Too bad. I watched last night to figure out who else might get my vote come February 5th here in New York should Fred drop out by then. After last night’s debate, I now have my alternative–and that’s Mitt Romney. His ideas, and his conduct, were among the best last night. I still maintain I could, and will, support any of them over the Democrats.
Romney was personally attacked by most of the others last night and he held up well. Huckabee was first out of the chute with a personal attack on Romney. But the lowest of the lows came from John McCain when asked a question by moderator Charles Gibson (after Romney had been asked the same question): “If the choice is between you and Barack Obama who is touting himself as the candidate of change, why should people vote for you?” McCain’s initial response was aimed at Mitt Romney and was something like, “I’ll give him [Romney] this…he’s the candidate of change.” Meaning Romney has flip flopped on issues (which is true…he has changed his position on some issues over the years). It was uncalled for and inappropriate. I have to say his response, the way he said it, sounded arrogant to me. McCain went out of his way to use the question as an opportunity for a personal attack on Romney instead of just answering the question asked.
Fred Thompson also took some swipes at Romney that I thought were uncalled for. Shame on Fred. It’s fine to point out policy differences, but when it gets personal, that just leaves a bad taste in voters’ mouths. Argue the issues and policies and stop making personal attacks. I realize Romney is not completely clean on this either. My concern/preference is that they all tone it down.
Other items to note: McCain is dead wrong on the environment. He ties energy policy to environmental policy–a mistake if you ask me. But more troubling is that he’s drunk the man-is-causing-global-warming Kool-Aid and said so last night. McCain is also wrong about a “path to citizenship” for illegal aliens. Giuliani is wrong on that too.
Although this post sounds negative, I was impressed by all the candidates’ stands on Iraq and foreign policy (with the exception of Ron Paul, a fringe candidate that doesn’t stand a chance), and with their positions on other issues like health care (none supports the lunacy of socialized medicine as do the Democrats). All the Repubs were “presidential.” I think any of them would make a competent president–but I remain concerned that unless we get a candidate that juices the base, it’s a lost cause. It may have gotten too negative already amongst the Republicans for all of us to come together and enthusiastically support one candidate. I sincerely hope not.
Bottom line for me: I believe the eventual Republican candidate will be either McCain, Giuliani or Romney. I can support any of them, but of those three, Romney would be my choice.
What did you think of the debates? How about the Dems? I didn’t watch much of that one (I was in danger of being bored to death). If you watched the Dems, maybe you can chime in with an analysis?
Technorati Tags: New Hampshire presidential debates, Fred Thompson, John McCain, Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney, presidential primary
William | Jan 6, 2008 | Reply
McCain looks like a frontrunner to me.
The reason he will lose to a Democrat is because he has said it would be fine with him if the US would be in Iraq for 100 yrs. As long as Americans aren’t being wounded or killed, and it’s the Iraqis who are fighting and dying, McCain believes that Americans are just fine with the United States having permanent bases there, and keeping a large military presence all over the world. He also points out that the Saudis didn’t want our base in their country, but it’s worth noting that Bin Laden was angered by our presence there as well — but according to the Republicans in last night’s debate, terrorism has nothing to do with American foreign policy. That demonstrates poor understanding of foreign policy or just plain denial.
Despite the recent lull in violence, Iraq remains an unpopular war and will hurt McCain.
Jim Willis | Jan 7, 2008 | Reply
Thanks for the comment William. I disagree about the war. That is, I don’t think the Iraq war will be much of an issue in this election and consequently would not be the main reason the Republican (McCain in your scenario) would presumably lose.
We need to be a good citizen in the world–but we’re not in a high school popularity contest. Other countries need know only one thing about America–you attack us and you’re dead. That’s the kind of foreign policy we need and the kind McCain (and the other Repubs) would provide. That’s the kind of policy Obama and Hillary will not provide. (Bill Clinton certainly didn’t provide it.)
Nobody wants to stay in Iraq forever–but we do need to stay as long as it takes and the Iraqis need to know that we won’t abandon them. They are finally getting that and because they are getting it, the situation is improving.
And no–terrorism is not caused by our foreign policy. It is caused by bad people doing bad things–in this case Islamo-fascists that want to dominate the world. It’s twisted logic to say we caused the attacks on us. Under that logic, a rape victim is the cause of her own rape!