Say what you want about any of the debate’s participants’ performances last night, but the clear winner from last night was Fox News and The Examiner. The questions asked by the panelists were tough, on-point, and drew out real differences between the candidates views. And, not completely unimportant, it made for fantastic television. Whoever the eventual Republican nominee is, they will only be helped by entertaining debates like this one that give Republicans a free platform to continue to make their case against President Obama. If they were watching, the White House can not be happy about how last night’s debate turned out.
Ames Debate
The Examiner‘s Michael Barone says the debate leaves the Republican field unaltered.
The Examiner‘s Phil Klien says the debate will be remembered for the sharp exchanges between the two Minnesotans – former governor Tim Pawlenty, and current Rep. Michele Bachmann.
The Examiner‘s David Freddoso rounds up some of the best tweets from the debate, including: “@LarrySabato: Damn fine debate. Kept our attention for 2 hrs. And panelists are SUPPOSED to ask ‘gotcha’ Qs. Testing candidates good.”
The Examiner‘s Charlie Spiering posts the top five video highlights from the debate.
The Examiner‘s Joel Gehrke posts the two-pages of opposition research Team Bachmann circulated to reporters about Pawlenty’s big government record.
Jonah Goldberg at The Corner: “Not only has Fox News — the supposed mouthpiece of the GOP — put on a far, far, far better debate than CNN did (or MSNBC could), it has subjected the GOP contenders to tougher, rougher, questions than any debate I can remember. In fact, I don’t think Obama ever received this kind of grilling as a candidate or as president.”
Ira Stoll at Future of Capitalism: “Republican voters are going to have to decide whether they want someone as unwilling to compromise as Ms. Bachmann portrays herself, or if they’d rather have a compromiser who might be able to work more effectively with Democrats and independents, or at least win their votes. Ms. Bachmann began by saying she would appeal to independents, disaffected Democrats, and libertarians, and maybe she will, but that seemed designed as a preemptive shield against the attacks that came on those lines from the other candidates.”
Ramesh Ponnuru at The Corner: “Pawlenty: Nothing says presidential more than promising to mow people’s lawns.”
Joseph Lawler at The American Spectator: “It is a shame that between Cain, Paul, and Bachmann, no one was able to challenge Romney’s pro-business, managerial-style Republicanism. Romney, the frontrunner, was able to skate through the night without being challenged, other than a predictable and odd attack on his health care plan and personal wealth from Pawlenty. A Tea Party/constitutional conservative critique of his record and agenda would have been welcome.”
Stanley Kurtz at The Corner: “Pawlenty needed a better performance. He’s more comfortable going after Iran than his opponents. There’s an awkwardness there. … Romneycare remains a problem, but a surmountable one. The GOP wants to win, and the base will accept Romney if need be.”
John McCormack at The Weekly Standard: “When Pawlenty was asked to defend his phrase ‘Obamneycare,’ (which he was reluctant to do in the last debate), he was willing to stand by the phrase. But didn’t go into any detail about the similarities between the two plans or describe the problems with Massachusetts health care today.”
Rich Lowry at The Corner: “Pawlenty: Cheap, unfunny shot against Romney. He’s opened up what ultimately will probably be a telling line of attack against Bachmann, but looks querulous in pursuing it so vigorously now. Still seems tinny and doesn’t fill the stage. … Bachmann: Always very poised. Some of her shots against Pawlenty were unfair, but she probably won the exchange. Strong performer, but she may seem too canned over time.”
Stephen Hayes at The Weekly Standard: “It’s one of the most predictable and tiresome of the many presidential debate clichés: The candidate who didn’t participate won because the others were so weak. And yet that was the case in the Republican presidential debate here Thursday night. … Rick Perry, who will announce his bid for the presidency on Saturday, did well because he didn’t do poorly.”
Campaign 2012
Perry: Texas Gov. Rick Perry’s spokesman Mark Miner confirmed late Thursday that Perry will announce that he is in the 2012 race for the presidency Saturday in South Carolina.
Paul: In the post debate spin room, Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, tells The Weekly Standard that if turnout is low, there is a very good chance Ron Paul could win the Ames Straw Poll: “He’s been at this for about five years. Low turnout, I expect him to win. High turnout, then his odds go down.”
Romney: Liberal activists took over a Des Moines Register organized question-and-answer session at the Iowa State Fair to press Romney on why he supported lowering corporate tax rates and cutting entitlement spending. One of Romney’s answers, “Corporations are people, my friend,” was quickly seized upon by the progressive messaging machine.
Around the Bigs
National Journal, Pelosi Announces Picks For Super Committee: House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., on Thursday picked Reps. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, Jim Clyburn of South Carolina and Xavier Becerra of California to represent Democrats on the debt limit deal’s Super Congress. Van Hollen is the ranking Democrat on the House Budget Committee, while Clyburn and Becerra are the highest ranking African-American and Latino members of the Democratic Caucus.
The Wall Street Journal, Portman Is Touted as a Bridge Builder on Debt Panel: Analysts tell The Journal that Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, and Rep. Dave Camp, R-Mich., are the Republicans “most likely to put ideological differences aside and strike a deal with Democrats.” “Portman is probably a little less doctrinaire or a little less conservative” than other members of the committee, Michael Tanner, a senior fellow at the Cato Institute, told The Journal. “He is a tax cutter, but is probably not as strong on the issue as some of the others on the committee.”
Reuters, Obama vows new ideas to boost jobs, slams Congress: At a battery factory in Holland, Michigan, President Obama blamed congressional “bickering” for the country’s economic problems, promised he would soon offer new ideas for creating jobs, and urged Republicans to “put country ahead of party.” Obama did not offer any new job creating ideas and, after he left the factory, he flew to New York to raise campaign cash for the Democratic Party.
The New York Times, Fight Harder, Voters Telling Congressmen: Contrary to Obama’s wishes, at town halls across the country Americans are telling their lawmakers to stand on principle, not compromise. “Republicans chasing Democrats to the left, and I hate it when the party deserts me,” Preston Davis of Payson, Virginia, tells The Times. And when Rep. Tom Graves, R-Ga., told an audience of about 100 in Fort Oglethorpe this week that he did not vote for a final deal to increase the debt ceiling, because, “I believe compromises are what got us into this mess in the first place. You can’t compromise your way out of it,” he was met with thunderous applause.
Righty Playbook
Commenting on both the state Supreme Court and state Senate Wisconsin recall elections Legal Insurrection writes, “Dear WI Dems, please keep doing the same thing over and over, while expecting different results.”
The Heritage Foundation‘s Lachlan Markay looks at how Pennsylvania is trying to reduce state construction costs by ending union-backed prevailing wage laws.
James Pethokoukis explains why Romney is right: companies are people.
Lefty Playbook
Firedoglake‘s Masaccio worries that the Democrats’ picks for the Super Congress do not bode well for Social Security: “The Catfood Commission rump report made it crystal clear that the political and financial elites have no intention of ever paying off the bonds held by the Social Security Trust Fund.”
Mother Jones‘ Kevin Drum says it is time for progressives to abandon California’s high speed rail project: “Look, I’m sorry HSR lovers. I love me some HSR too, but this project is just a fantastic boondoggle. It didn’t even make sense with the original cost estimates, and it’s now plain that it’s going to cost three or four times more than that. … This is just too much money to spend on something this dumb. It’s the kind of thing that could set back HSR for decades. Sacramento needs to pull the plug on this, and they need to pull it now.”
