More Active Posts
Front Page
Candidates debate
 |
 20 Comments |
As its name would suggest, Sunday night’s “roundtable” on Fox News with (most of) the Republican presidential candidates was supposed to be intimate (a “discussion” was the word) and easygoing. While it was the most intimate yet, at least in physical proximity — candidates were positioned so close around the too-small table that they nearly bumped elbows — the atmosphere was less than easygoing.
After his pile-on beating in Saturday’s ABC News debate, where everyone but Ron Paul took potshots at him, Mitt Romney came out swinging Sunday, landing blows on Mike Huckabee, who routed the former governor in the Iowa caucuses, and Sen. John McCain, the leader in the polls in New Hampshire, where the first primary begins tomorrow.
Romney’s first came just minutes into the evening. Moderator Chris Wallace asked him about his tax increases in Massachusetts. They were “fees,” he said, and anyway . . . McCain “voted against President Bush’s tax cuts.”
McCain looked tired and sedate, with mercifully fewer of his apropos-of-nothing Romney attacks from Saturday night after the media dinged his antics as “puerile.” Romney played that to his advantage, cracking that he accomplished in four years what McCain’s been trying to do in Washington for 20. A slightly peeved response followed from McCain that he’s done what he did “not for profit, but for patriotism.”
Romney swung hard at Huckabee during another exchange about taxes that only ended when Wallace stepped in. Neither candidate has ideal credentials to anti-tax groups like the Club for Growth, but Huckabee’s taken the most flak: He enacted 94 tax cuts that sliced tax revenues by $378 million during his decade-plus tenure as Arkansas governor, but presided over a net increase of $500 million.
Romney demanded that Huckabee deny this. Huckabee evaded, saying first that he lowered certain taxes, then that he “raised jobs.” “Facts are stubborn things,” a satisfied Romney replied. “You make up facts faster than you talk, and that’s saying something.”
Largely pushed to the periphery by the Romney-Huckabee-McCain trio of newsmakers, Fred Thompson still had a strong night, most pundits agree, looking wonkish on issues like Social Security. Still leading in most national polls, Rudy Giuliani, others say, got a bad rub from Fox News; Wallace asked him a “baggage” question right at the end about whether the ignominy of his former police commissioner Bernie Kerik, indicted on federal charges of tax fraud in 2007, also tainted him. “Why ask that question at this point of the campaign, except to bring up the baggage?” notes ABC News’s Rick Klein. The ticker at bottom of the screen also flashed, irrelevantly, that America’s Mayor lives with his “current wife,” an observation it didn’t make of the two other divorcés at the table.
Ron Paul, meanwhile, was cold-shouldered, shut out somewhat inexplicably; debate organizers said only candidates polling in double digits were invited, so some had to go. Paulites went up in arms because their man finished fifth in the Iowa caucuses, in front of Rudy Giuliani. A steady stream picketed outside with signs like “Boycott Fox News.”
 |
Topic: Campaign 2008, Front Page, The Nation |  |
Email a friend |
 |
Keywords: debates, election-2008 |  |
RSS 2.0 |
 |
Both comments and pings are currently closed. |  |
Share this: |
The race for No. 2
After his pile-on beating in Saturday’s ABC News debate, where everyone but Ron Paul took potshots at him, Mitt Romney came out swinging Sunday, landing blows on Mike Huckabee, who routed the former governor in the Iowa caucuses, and Sen. John McCain, the leader in the polls in New Hampshire, where the first primary begins tomorrow.
News flash: the primary is today. And it begins and ends today, only lasting one day.
Sitting on a sofa on a Sunday afternoon
Goin to the candidates debate
Laugh about it shout about
Anyway you look at this you lose!
-Simon and Garfunkel
And as far as we’re recalling oldies music, who will be the “Real Nowhere Man” of 2008? Bill Clinton??
OOps!Should have written “When you hafta choose”
after “Laugh about it shout about it”
I hope these R fellow tone down the rancor and vitriol. One will pick one of the other as Veep nominee, no??
I think the Fantastic Four’s Dr Reed Richards and Mitt Romney were separated at birth!
Sawgunner, Peter Leavitt is rooting for McCain to win the nomination, and then select pro-abort Democrat Joe Lieberman as his running mate.
I heard a poll today that said 79% of Americans are looking forward to the election in November. The commentator said we are eager to vote. I think so many of us look forward to November because it will be the (temporary) end of the constant campaign news and so-called debates. (Perhaps we should get our Congressional representatives to pass a law against campaigning so early? I know that reeks of speech prohibitions, but they got McCain-Feingold thru.)
I’m not eager to vote. I see it as my duty to vote, but there is no one in this election season I want to vote for.
Besides, voting leaves a bad taste in my mouth for other reasons. Yesterday I received a letter from the county election commission saying that on Christmas Eve, voter lists for the whole county were stolen, and they include names, addresses, social security numbers. So I had to call this morning to put my name on a “fraud alert” and to pay $100 to get my credit extra-specially monitored for the next year. I can think of better uses for $100! Nothing like the government indirectly compromising my social security number. (It was never intended to be used for things like voting. By demanding it of voters, and then not being able to protect it from being stolen, the government left me and many thousands of other people vulnerable.)
Cheryl,
I’m in total agreement about the SS number. It was never intended for use as an identifier number either. The original cards said right on them: “Not to be used for identification purposes.”
But where is that message now? And what is it used for?
As for the elections? I’m not ready either, but I’m ready for all the campaigning and complaining to stop…
MIM’s enjoying himself, what will he (I) do when Hillary’s gone?
I’m afraid Hillary will still stick around, NJL, even after she loses.
Oh well, her husband’s 8 years in office was a huge boon for the talk show hosts!
Anyone seen the new collection of quotes from Ron Paul’s old newsletter? Praising David Duke, calling MLK a bisexual pedophile, saying that 95% of the black males in DC are criminal or semi-criminal, etc. I doubt if this is going to set real well with the leftists who back him, although it will no doubt improve his image with a lot of the right wingers who back him. It will be interesting to see how Frank in Phoenix responds.
http://snipurl.com/1wxcc
http://snipurl.com/1wxce
“MIM’s enjoying himself, what will he (I) do when Hillary’s gone?”
Whuh? I’m not following you NJL. Whadja mean by that?
I recall that Joe and Hadassah are Orthodox Jews. Does the ortho rabbinate not have an official position on the sanctity of unborn life? My understanding has been that a few Judaism denominations are as notoriously liberal as their Christian counterparts (despite clear Scriptural/Torah teachings to the contrary re: homosex abortion etc)
I wish someone would pony up money and hire media to cover a multiparty debate featuring Gravel, Kucinich, Dr Paul, Alan Keyes, Gov Richardson etc etc etc.
It would certainly be a bit more lively than the top tier folks seem to be!
The problem with the election cycle is not that it is too long, even though it is way too long. The problem is that these fools running for office can raise an unlimited amount of money to spend to get elected, or spend their own unlimited amount to get elected. As long as there is money flowing then the cycle begins earlier and earlier and candidates raise money 24/7/236 as a result.
If there was law that said a candidate can’t spend more than 10 times their yearly government salary they are trying to get elected to, then the cycle would be short, sweet and just lovely. Plus no one in their right mind should ever even want to spend 10 times the salary they hope to get if elected - if they want to show even a modicum of fiscal spending restraint.
Since there are no spending limits we get idiots spending hundreds of million of dollars to get elected to a crappy $400,000 a year job and other fools spending tens of millions for $165,000 a year jobs as Senators and Reps. They of course spend your hard earned tax money (and way, way, more) like it was water once the get elected too. Now you don’t have to wonder why. The only thing they are good at is spending huge piles of someone else’s money on worthless stuff no sane person wants or needs.
Like they say, you get what you pay for - and we do - well we at least pay for most of it.
Night Train, I’[m going to make you very mad by telling you the truth: David Duke’s most serious critics and vocal opponents have been right wing Republicans. Also, neither leftists nor right wingers are supporting Ron Paul, by and large. His supporters tend rather to be angry people who are attracted to consiracies and are just gleefully cynical about all sides of the spectrum.
Also, your stereotypes at #12 were more ignorant than anything I recall even you writing before. Your lack of wisdom and fair-mindedness has reached full completion.
Joel, you might oughta check the expiration date on that anti-freeze.
What “stereotypes” did I express in #12? I mentioned some things that appeared in RP’s newsletter. He praised David Duke, and he accused MLK of being a bisexual pedophile. Neither one is my position, and neither one is a stereotype. They’re simply statements that appeared in RP’s newsletter.
Do you even know how to read?
You’re a disgrace even compared to the average WoW commenter.
Latest results:
CLINTON 39; OBAMA 36; EDWARDS 17; RICHARDSON 5; KUCINICH 1…
73% IN:
*MCCAIN 36.78; ROMNEY 31.74; HUCKABEE 11.15; GIULIANI 8.52; PAUL 7.74; THOMPSON 1.19…
LOL, NT (a troll, according to the way most of us define the term) calling Joel Mark (a pastor, according to the way most of us define the term) a “disgrace”?
Whatever . . .
Gotta love the results, Victoria, don’t we! Romney now has the most delegates of any of the GOP candidates!