September 13, 2011

"Seldom has there been as clear a winner" as Mitt Romney at last night's debate.

Asserts Fred Barnes.


GulfofMexico said...

Romney is the establishment guy...malleable enough for DC. Perry is the outsider...less malleable.

Paddy O said...

No doubt written yesterday before the 3pm deadline.

TMink said...

Yeah, Fread Barnes is an insider, so Romney is his guy. Honestly, the current president is so bad it is difficult for me to get too excited about the primary season.


Saint Croix said...

If I compared them all to food...

Bachmann - Juicy ribeye. Got a little bloody there.

Paul - astronaut food made in a lab somewhere.

Cain - pizza (sorry)

Romney - spinach. Might be good for me. Damn if I want it.

Huntsman - tofu

Perry - mashed potatos. lumpy mashed potatos.

Santorum - chimichanga

Newt - frog's legs (sorry)

lyssalovelyredhead said...

Was he watching the same debate that I was?

james conrad said...

I notice over on PJM, Roger Simon is going all in for Perry, although he doesnt say it, its kinda obvious from his column headline " Rick Perry and the 7 dwarfs"

Although i am undecided, i think its great that the race for the nomination has gained much needed interest & passion since Perry entered the race.

Carol_Herman said...

Clear LOSERS are much more obvious.

I'll take a guess that just like Ross Perot came out of the woodwork in 1992, we will see the emergence of a THIRD PARTY.

It was a disaster when Teddy Roosevelt went after Taft, with this BULL MOOSE RUN. And, the republicans came in 3rd.

Taft didn't go away. Every time the republcans came back, out came the "good old boy" network, that the republicans own. And, Taft got placed up on the Supreme Court.

The republican party INSIDERS are a very small club. They want to remain in the minority. Where they fit into Washington, DC. And, work with the democrats, in what's really a ONE PARTY SYSTEM.

We haven't seen the challenger, yet. But it's still very early.

Bender said...

"Seldom has there been as clear a winner" as Mitt Romney at last night's debate.
Asserts Fred Barnes.
. . .

and written by him before the debate even began.

I don't know how you can call something a "win" when it makes folks less likely to vote for the guy. (OK, you're right to ask, how can there be anything less than my current "hell no, I'll never vote for him"?)

Lem said...

From watching highlights.. (sorry my horse is not in the race yet) Romney looks and sounds more polished than Perry..

Remember, that's very important inside the beltway..

Legend (I don't have a link) has it that people who heard the debate on the radio thought Nixon won.. but those watching it on the tube thought JFK won.

Bender said...

Romney looks and sounds more polished than Perry

Whoever had the more crease in his pants, that's who we should nominate!

edutcher said...

Freddy was an enthusiastic Big Government Conservative 10 years ago.

Do the math.

MikeR said...

Judgment of pundits on who won debates is pretty pointless. Everyone thinks the one he likes did best. After all, that one said the best answers!

Joe said...

Actually, I won for not watching the silly charade of a press conference masquerading as a "debate."

traditionalguy said...

Perry did what he needed to do, which was appear compassionate and realty based.

Bachmann went down the Vaccines are poison cult road just like it was a briar patch she was born in.

Vaccines are the single greatest accomplishment of man. Bachmann's aim to criminalize medical science is way off the reservation.

Romney danced around a maypole of claiming Social Security is not a problem unless we talk about it. That is a religious habit opposing reality out of fear of losing a member.

Perry is the man the crisis needs which became clear through all of the CNN smoke and Fred Barnes mirrors.

Simon said...

Depends how you define winner. Romney did very well, for example, in taking apart Rick Perry's misguided volte face and suddenly untenable position on social security. The problem is that Perry has changed his position and come closer to Romney's position—which is wrong! So Mittens did great work lacerating Perry, but he didn't help himself any.

Simon said...

traditionalguy said...
"Perry is the man the crisis needs which became clear through all of the CNN smoke and Fred Barnes mirrors."

Perry was the man the crisis needs when he denounced social security as an unconstitutional and unworkable ponzi scheme that needs to be folded up and put away. Now he's walking back on those positions claiming that we have to save it somehow—it ill-becomes him and ill-serves us.

Dad29 said...

Barnes is now, and always has been, a shrill shill for East Coast Establishment Club-Member Republicans.

Some spots never change.

GulfofMexico said...

Perry is going to stay to the right of the Romney as long as Romney smells of RINO stink. This will not be difficult to do. If Romney veered right no one would believe him anyway. It's a two man race until we see a new entrant. Reminds me of Reagan vs Bush 1980. Very early, though.

traditionalguy said...

Simon...Social Security is demagoguem fodder all day long for Pelosi, Obama, Reid, Wasserman-Schultz and Romney.

So Perry stepped aside while those bulls ran through the red cape he held out.

Perry is not running for Blogger of the Year.

Mid-Life Lawyer said...

Barnes is wrong. Romney looked like who he is and that is not what we want. Perry did well considering he was being cheap shot from every direction. Bachmann's hysterics really disappointed me; I thought she was better than that. Hunstman gets worse every time I see him and he started out bad. Newt has won every debate. It's a shame he was unable to get enough traction to really contend. I hope he is able to get a good position with the new administration. Cain and Santorum are good guys but never have had a chance. I agree with Rush, Huntsman and Paul should run against Comrade Obama in the Democratic Primary.

The Crack Emcee said...

Asserts Fred Barnes.

Asserts nobody.


Paddy O said...

Has Palin declared her candidacy yet?

Jason (the commenter) said...

Show me the poll results and I'll show you the winner.

But from what I saw on Drudge, Perry (with a big picture) was the winner and Bachmann (with a smaller picture) came in second. No one else was mentioned.

For Perry the Ponzi scheme quote seems to be a winner. Every time it gets mentioned it seems a little more sensible, especially when you have other Republicans willing to say he didn't go far enough or they basically agree. As for his handling of Gardasil and college for illegals, the Republican electorate is going to have several weeks and several more debates to get used to that. And to think about how those last two positions are the perfect proof he's not the heartless Republican the oposition (Obama) would like to portray their candidate as.

sorepaw said...

I prefer Fred Barnes over some of the other Weekly Standard types.

But Fred used to push "national greatness" when that was the Weekly Standard's line.

He used to urge readers to forget about ever cutting Federal spending, when that was the line.

He sees Romney as similar to himself.

Which I would have to think is true.

That's why I won't vote for Romney in a primary, and really hope he doesn't end up getting the nomination.

CEO-MMP said...

Freddy the beetle Barnes!


GulfofMexico said...

Patty-Patty Buke-Buke

Icepick said...

Huntsman - tofu

Tofu or Hufu?

AST said...

The rumors of Perry's wonderfulness have been overstated. He's not a real conservative at heart, and he has quite a bossy streak even for a Texan. He came out looking for fights, but he didn't do all that well defending himself. He's still got a big lead.

He strikes me as though he wants us to believe he's Paul Bunyan or Pecos Bill, but I don't want another FDR, ever.

I've done some reading about Gardasil, and would probably have agreed to vaccinate a daughter of mine, but having it ordered without consulting me or the legislature is not the kind of leadership I want.