GOP Debate Thoughts -- Romney Rises, Pawlenty Falls

GOP Debate Thoughts -- Romney Rises, Pawlenty Falls
Posted by Ashish?on 06.13.2011

Pawlenty fails to stand up to Mitt...

Some quick thoughts on tonight's largely uneventful GOP debate...

* Tim Pawlenty is, at least for now, being viewed as the only other serious candidate in the GOP field other than Mitt Romney, but he blew a major chance tonight to put himself on the map. After stepping up and going after Romney on Sunday, he was called out by the moderators to repeat his criticisms to Romney's face and basically refused to do it, looking insincere and weak in the process. Pawlenty didn't look at all like he belonged in the top tier with Romney, and I think his poll numbers will continue to reflect that until he decides to make some aggressive moves. Problem is, I don't know if he really has that aggression in him. With his apparent lack of fundraising skills and overall lack of charisma, he can't waste too much time trying to be a nice guy, he's going to have to buck up and take a swing at Romney, if for no other reason than to get the publicity that comes with going after the frontrunner. He isn't going to raise enough money to market himself effectively and will need to rely on the media, and the media isn't going to cover him if doesn't develop a fighter's attitude.

* In terms of stage presence, Mitt Romney was the only guy who came off as a top tier candidate. A lot of that had to do with the fact that every other candidate seemed scared of him, basically refusing to go after him at all and giving him a cake walk of a debate. But even aside from that, Romney gave mostly clear, composed answers and came off Presidential. That isn't a huge factor yet, but when non-politcos actually start following all of this, being able to come off "Presidential" is just as important to winning as your policies.

* Michelle Bachmann did the best among the rest of the pack. She came off composed and gave answers that were designed to fire up the crowd and get into news highlight packages. She was also media-savvy enough to announce her candidacy at the debate, ensuring that she got a ton of free publicity in all of the debate coverage on every network. No game changers, but because of her ability to give speeches that the base actually reacts to and to raise money effectively, she has more time and more of a margin of error than someone like Pawlenty does. And we already know that she isn't afraid to throw a punch.

* After a really strong month, Herman Cain's momentum probably ends tonight with a lackluster debate where he didn't deliver any memorable lines and stumbled around his past remark about not letting Muslims serve in his administration.

* It's pretty easy to see why Newt Gingrich's entire staff bailed on him -- the guy just isn't relevant today and seems like a relic from the past when on stage with the rest of the field. His answers were too professorial to be effective. It took Obama months to change his speaking style from professorial to more populist in 2008, Newt doesn't have that much time.

Main take away: Missed opportunity for Pawlenty; Romney comes out stronger than he came in; Michelle Bachmann, at least for now, looks like the only second tier candidate that knows what she is doing politically and could rise up to the top tier; and the field is wide open for someone like Rick Perry to come in and instantly shake things up.

Post Comment (22) ?|? Email Ashish ?|? View Ashish's 411 Profile

Comments (22)

? That's because Dr. Paul is not taken seriously at all by the establishment and doesn't even exist in their spectrum. I am a liberal but I agree with mostly everything he says. I think the reason Rep. Michelle Bachman did so well was because the bar was set so low. I think the Speaker went in looking not to hurt himself and succeeded, even if he had to explain his statement against Paul Ryan's plan again. I don't know, Mitt Romney just doesn't have that it factor that people look for in a candidate. This was a meet and greet debate, with everyone going out of their way to agree except for Ron Paul, but since no one stood out, we leave the debate basically the same way we went in, with Romney still on top. Posted By: wzl (Guest) ?on?June 14, 2011 at 12:48 AM ? ? Of course Hashish ignores Ron Paul despite the fact the entire crowd agreed with everything he said. Posted By: Michael (Guest) on June 13, 2011 at 11:50 PM Got to love how the Ron Paul supporters see some sort of left-wing conspiracy in the Ashish's reporting. As if this Ashish not mentioning Ron Paul on a wrestling website is the deciding factor of whether he gets elected or not. It's like a bizarre version of Scooby Doo: "That's not a wrestling site, that's a tentacle of the vast media conspiracy against Ron Paul" "And we would have gotten away with it if it weren't for those darn Ron Paul supporters" Posted By: Guest#1060 (Guest) ?on?June 14, 2011 at 04:54 AM ? ? Of course Hashish ignores Ron Paul despite the fact the entire crowd agreed with everything he said. Posted By: Michael (Guest) on June 13, 2011 at 11:50 PM I'm guessing because Ron Paul is an idiot and has as much chance of getting elected as Jesse Jackson. Posted By: Guest#2608 (Guest) ?on?June 14, 2011 at 09:20 AM ? ? I know Ron Paul is the in thing right now but unless you want a theocracy I suggest just moving along. "the notion of a rigid separation between church and state has no basis in either the text of the constitution or the writings of our founding fathers" - Ron Paul "The founding fathers envisioned a robustly Christian yet religiously tolerant America, with Churches serving as vital institutions that would eclise the state in importance." -Ron Paul Posted By: Guest#0891 (Guest) ?on?June 14, 2011 at 11:04 AM ? ? "I'm guessing because Ron Paul is an idiot and has as much chance of getting elected as Jesse Jackson. Posted By: Guest#2608 (Guest) on June 14, 2011 at 09:20 AM" No, Ashish wants Romney in the National Election because he knows that failure he kept hyping four years ago, Obama, would easily defeat Romney Care. Ron Paul is a clearly different candidate than Obama, unlike big government Romney. Posted By: Michael (Guest) on June 14, 2011 at 11:05 AM Does that foil hat come in many different sizes, or is it customized just for you? Posted By: Guest#1931 (Guest) ?on?June 14, 2011 at 11:40 AM ? ? "Anyone who thinks the founders wanted a "robustly christian" society is just as off their rocker as someone who had no clue who Paul Revere is " The founders didn't want an atheistic society either. Nice try, liberal. Posted By: Michael (Guest) ?on?June 14, 2011 at 12:11 PM ? ? "Anyone who thinks the founders wanted a "robustly christian" society is just as off their rocker as someone who had no clue who Paul Revere is " The founders didn't want an atheistic society either. Nice try, liberal. Posted By: Michael (Guest) on June 14, 2011 at 12:11 PM Are you a conservative then? If you are wouldn't following the foundation of what this country is build on make you happy? i.e. not turning this nation into a theocracy? Or are you one of those conservatives who only call themselves a conservative because they want politicians to run this country based on religious beliefs and forgot that the Pilgrims landed on Plymouth rock to get away from just that tyranny? Posted By: Guest#7947 (Guest) ?on?June 14, 2011 at 01:33 PM ? ? "Anyone who thinks the founders wanted a "robustly christian" society is just as off their rocker as someone who had no clue who Paul Revere is " The founders didn't want an atheistic society either. Nice try, liberal. Posted By: Michael (Guest) on June 14, 2011 at 12:11 PM Nope. They wanted a society where only white landowners could vote and blacks could be bought and sold. Shame damn progressive liberals had to screw that all up. "Oh yeah? Well more Republicans voted for civil rights than dumb-o-crats!" Right, and those Republicans weren't conservative. Posted By: Guest#2543 (Guest) ?on?June 14, 2011 at 02:24 PM ? ? None of these guys can hang with the messiah after he came thru with all those shovel ready jobs!!!!!!! Posted By: JD DUNN (Guest) ?on?June 14, 2011 at 05:29 PM ? ? " Romney came off as a smug douche. He's got a long way to go before he is officially their nomination, I'm sure he has some skeletons in his closet. Posted By: Dirk Diggler (Guest) on June 14, 2011 at 03:23 PM" If he did, reporters would have found him by now. They went through his garbage cans as thoroughly as they did Sarah Palin's, Romney just had less to criticize. Posted By: Guest#1357 (Guest) ?on?June 14, 2011 at 07:46 PM ? ? I understand why people would hate on the left and democrats. But why the hell would these same people align themselves with another bunch of crooks like the republicans. These guys are just as bad if not worse because they throw religion around like they are each the friggen pope. Maybe when people decide they have had enough of both parties and start calling their own out on their BS some of this crap will get fixed. Until then we get dog and pony shows like this debate and the future DNC debates. Posted By: ugg (Guest) ?on?June 15, 2011 at 09:38 AM ?

Source: http://www.411mania.com/politics/columns/190110

plantar fasciitis queen latifah lamar odom samsung phones jet ski colbie caillat mojito recipe