My Thoughts on the Republican YouTube Debate

posted by Curt Bentley, on November 28, 2007 08:34 pm

Well, the Republican YouTube debate is over now, and here are my thoughts.

(1) Romney didn't do well. Part of this was due to his unwillingness to commit himself to positions on issues like torture (and, surprisingly, the literalness of the Bible) and part was due to some tough questions and situation (e.g. the gays in the military and torture questions). It's hard to win when you are in a torture debate with John McCain. He did do pretty well in the initial immigration scuffle with Guillani, but, other than that, didn't seem all that strong.

(2) No more free passes for Huckabee. Mike Huckabee comes across as very likable and sincere. He's been doing really well . . . but the days of easy answers and free passes are over for him. He's on the other candidates' radar screens now and can prepare for some attacks (he was even attacked in an ad from the Thompson campaign shown during the debate). Also, Huckabee's jokes get him a favorable audience response, but he's going to have to tone down the humor a little bit if he wants to be taken seriously as a candidate, in my humble opinion. Jokes only work for you for so long . . .

(3) McCain came across as sincere and experienced, i.e. presidential. He was able to successfully set himself apart from the others on a couple of issues (esp. foreign policy) as the one who would give straight talk. I thought his condemnation of Ron Paul as an appeaser was a little ridiculous, and I thought that Ron Paul didn't respond to that too well. It seems to me a huge difference between WWII and Iraq is that, in WWII we were actually attacked by the Japanese government, whereas we were never attacked by Saddam Hussein. Also, the torture question played to McCain's strengths.

(4) Ron Paul has something the other candidates need to pay attention to. Ron Paul won't win the Republican nomination and certainly won't win as an independent. But he touches a nerve with Americans every time he opens his mouth -- and this is not only on the war. He has the Reagan critique of big government, and it resonates today just as well as it did back in 1980. John McCain grabbed a piece of it when he talked about vetoing pork barrel projects. The other candidates need to attack big government with the same fervor that Ron Paul does . . . it will really get them somewhere (and will divert attention away from Bush's foreign policy mistakes and distance the current candidates from his mistakes).

(5) The GOP must appeal to minority voters. The GOP has got to realize that its strength lies in the philosophy of limited government rather than evangelicalism. It needs to move beyond its image as the party of white, evangelical Christians and reach out to others who share concerns about the size of government, the role of the courts, and law enforcement. Those issues have broad appeal, and the GOP can win converts in those areas if it just reaches out a little bit more. If it doesn't, then it is in trouble. If it does, it may have a chance (albeit a slim one, in my opinion) this election.

Anyway, I thought the debate was interesting, the format was good, and I look forward to more debates like this in the future. I'm not going to try and declare a winner . . . I'll leave that to the "professionals." I'll just enjoy the ride.

Add New Comment

Your Name:
Your Comment:

Security Code: