I saw the whole NBC debate tonigh, and I don't know why. The questions were dull and not calculated ot get real INFORMATINO 9as no media queston is). Ther ewas no energy in the room. The answers were mainly dull. The reason I give the debate to Santorum i sbecaue of his LAST answer as to why he is the "real" conservative. Santorum actually had an edge, for a changed, in his answer, and he was CORRECT in everytnhing he said.
But did not Romney launch ATTACKS on Gingrich is a DESPERATE , negative attempt to tear newt down? Yes, Romney rried to actuallyl VIOLATE debate "rules", and simply "overwhlem" Newt with attacks as Romney jsut KEPT TALKING. Not effective, in my view. It certainly does not make me want to support ROMNEY. But wan't it "exciting"? Actuall, no. It ws like a TOOTHLESS, DCLAWED TIGER attacking a rubber doll. Gingrich chose not to "engage" with counterpunches, teh way he did with John King and Juan Williams. Newt just let the attacks bounce off. MAYBE that was "smart". I am not sure. I think Newt makes a mistake to suddenly start acting like a FRONTRUNNER. He needs to keep doing what brought him to this point, even though Brian WEilliams have him little chance (probably deliberately). I jsut wasnot impressed by either Romney or gingrich tonight. No, Gingrich did NOT "hurt" himself. But neither did he much help himself. Romney's OBVIOUS attempt to ATTACK at all cost, in a negative way, seemed DESPERATE and CALCULATED reather than effective.
I would give the Romney-Gingrich battle to Gingrich, except taht Gingrich had NO "Gingrich moment" where Gingrich gave an insight that no one esle on state gave, oris even capable of giving. When Gingrich is reduced to merely "shrugging off" attacks, and "explaining" the substance of his positions, he is NOT that good. As I think this blog has made clear, I am generally NOT impressed with Gingrich when he satrts talking aobu tPOLICY . I don't think Romney gets anywhere accusing Gingrich of "influence peddling", or callling him similar names. But Gingrich doesn't get too far when he talks about his "routine" ideas. No, I don't think Ginrich is especailly good talking abut his tax plan,--where the zero percent cap;ital gains rate can be criticized, as I have, as encouraging tax GAMES. Gingrich did get a softball questioin on the "Dream Act", and knocked it out of the park (getting to say that he likes the MILITARY SERVICE section of that act, which EVERYONE does, including me). In general, however, when Gingrich is reduced to being a regular politician, talking about the standard things, Gingirch comes across as the regular politican he CAN BE--not as someone who will easlily defeat Barack Obama in debatees. Gingrich id NOT easily defeat Mittt Romney tonight, and that is really a little bit of a SETBACK for Gingrich. Yes, it does showjust how strong that Gingrich has been in debates that I can say it is a "setback" for him not to clearly win--even though he did reasonably well and made no obvioius mistakes.
My advice to Gingrich: Do NOT assume that you can suddently start acting "Presidential" like Romney acted so long. Gingrich has to do better than that. My advice to Romney: you BETTER make a BETTER case for YOU, and not rely on TEARING DOWN Gingich with negative attacks.
Again, a DULL debate which really did not help ANYONE decide for whom to vote. Rick Santorum still comes across as teh consistent conservative in the race, but still can't seem to catch fire. Dull. That may slow Gingrich's momentum a LITTLE, but it hardly helped Romney. Did it help Santourm? I don't know. It should have helped him a little, but he has so LITTLE money, and franklyu so little 'charisma", that it probalby won't matter--UNLESS the other tw simply tear each otehr apart (possible).
Ron Paul was Ron Paul, altough he and Gingrich sort of "flirted wth each otehr" on stage. But Paul will do that sort of thing when invited, as Gingrich did try to appeal to Paul supporters. Doesn't mean much--other than that Romney just won't take ANY risks (even to the extent of taking abut Ron Paul being right on the Federal Reerve).
P.S. No proofreading or spell checking (bad eyesight).
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment