News Republican Debate

Ivan Seeking

Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
That seems a very odd thing to say this far out. Especially given the history of unpredictability in primaries.
Not for Republicans. You're thinking of the Democrats.

It's especially seems odd to think that Romney is the only viable candidate. The only reason he even has a chance is the popular belief that he would be most likely to defeat Obama, and how desperate and urgent that goal is to so many Republicans.
I see him as the only candidate the Republicans would nominate who isn't a nut. If you want to beat Obama, you will need someone at least as moderate as Romney.

Put Palin or Bachman or Paul in there, or any tea party extremist. Obama would LOVE that.

Al68

I see him as the only candidate the Republicans would nominate who isn't a nut. If you want to beat Obama, you will need someone at least as moderate as Romney.

Put Palin or Bachman or Paul in there, or any tea party extremist. Obama would LOVE that.
I would agree with that, if you replace "nut" and "tea party extremist" with "depicted as a nut by the media" and "depicted as an extremist by the media".

How candidates are depicted by the media does impact electability, whether the depiction is accurate or not, and must be taken into account, unfortunately.

BobG

Homework Helper
I don't think the GOP Presidential Candidate has been seen as a front runner yet.
It is pretty late to start from scratch. By now candidates need to be getting the money machine in place.
True. At this point, it's all about raising money. We'll have a front runner about Jul 15 - when candidates announce their second quarter fundraising.

Early hints: Romney raised less than $20 million. Pawlenty, Huntsman, Paul have raised somewhere around$4 million. The other candidates aren't giving out early hints.

I'll be surprised if Romney doesn't have a huge lead in fundraising, even given the vagueness of "less than $20 million". GOP presidential candidates tally up second-quarter fundraising Second quarter fundraising in 2007 for comparison: Five candidates raised over$10 million.

I think the key to the Republican nomination will be getting the endorsement of Sarah Palin (since I'm almost sure she's not running). I think a good strategy would be for one of the candidates to offer to make her Ambassador to Russia. :tongue2: Heck, she could even work from home!

Last edited:

BobG

Homework Helper
September 7 debate:

Perry entering the race is the best thing that ever happened to Romney - at least debate wise. The fact that Perry is leading Romney in the polls and could actually beat him is problematic. But Romney looks a lot more like a real person than he did back in 2008. I'd still feel like a drunken bimbo to ignore his first Presidential campaign .... but he looked so manly last night!

I still don't know enough about Perry, but my initial impression is that I don't like him. Something about the Texas accent and the occasional 'we done it's' just bother me. At least he didn't back off of things he was already on the record for. They may be damaging, but they were going to be damaging anyway and he didn't want to make the same mistakes Romney consistently made in 2008 - mistakes that just made Romney look like a wimp.

We have too many candidates at these debates. We should get to vote one candidate off at the end of each debate. Gingrich would be a good first choice. He's the only candidate more annoying than Ron Paul. Santorum would be a good second choice. He's a non-entity and just fails to make much impression at all.

I'd keep Huntsman and Cain around a while. Both present themselves well (which is an improvement for Cain from his first debate) and have at least some possibility of being discovered and moving up in the polls because of their debate performances - Huntsman probably moreso than Cain. I could even vote for Huntsman.

Bachmann and Paul did about as expected, but who cared? Romney and Perry kind of stole the show and finally seem to be providing a race that could help Republicans instead of just making all of them look a little smaller.

Last edited:

WhoWee

Romney seems to be in control - slow and steady - in spite of attacks by Perry - IMO.

I want to put this into print - to see how it looks:

Romney - Gingrich 2012

Truth be told - I just want to see Newt debate Biden.

BobG

Homework Helper
Some candidates just don't handle debates well.

Rick Perry:
I think Americans just don't know sometimes which Mitt Romney they're dealing with. Is it the Mitt Romney that was on the side of against the Second Amendment before he was for the Second Amendment? Was it—was before he was before the social programs, from the standpoint of he was for standing up for Roe v. Wade before he was against Roe v. Wade? He was for Race to the Top, he's for Obamacare, and now he's against it. I mean, we'll wait until tomorrow and—and—and see which Mitt Romney we're really talking to tonight.
That's not quite Palinesque, since Palin's problem is she can't tolerate seconds of silence while she thinks about the question. Instead, she tosses out a string of mindless fragments until she finds a fragment that might get a little traction.

Perry knew what he wanted to say, but his words gave you the Fourier transform of his message instead of the time domain version of his message. That can happen to anyone that speaks a lot, whether a prestigious candidate or just a lowly teacher.

Still, the brightest points for Perry, so far, have been the attacks from Bachmann and Santorum. They have a knack for making sure everyone knows Perry isn't really a bonafide Tea Party wacko.

He just isn't good enough in debates to make a good case for himself.

lisab

Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
Some candidates just don't handle debates well.

Rick Perry:

That's not quite Palinesque, since Palin's problem is she can't tolerate seconds of silence while she thinks about the question. Instead, she tosses out a string of mindless fragments until she finds a fragment that might get a little traction.

Perry knew what he wanted to say, but his words gave you the Fourier transform of his message instead of the time domain version of his message. That can happen to anyone that speaks a lot, whether a prestigious candidate or just a lowly teacher.

Still, the brightest points for Perry, so far, have been the attacks from Bachmann and Santorum. They have a knack for making sure everyone knows Perry isn't really a bonafide Tea Party wacko.

He just isn't good enough in debates to make a good case for himself.
:rofl:

mheslep

Gold Member
...

He just isn't good enough in debates to make a good case for himself.
Apparently he had the ability to destroy the able K. B. Hutchinson in the Governor's primary race, but he's not showing much debate strength here so far.

mheslep

Gold Member
Romney seems to be in control - slow and steady - in spite of attacks by Perry - IMO.

I want to put this into print - to see how it looks:

Romney - Gingrich 2012

Truth be told - I just want to see Newt debate Biden.
That's only possible if Senator Rubio declines, as he's the first choice. I guy who could deliver Florida's ~27 electoral votes and who many would already like to see as a ~2016 President is impossible to pass up. I doubt Gingrich can deliver a state that's in play, plus a Gingrich is not needed to beat Biden in VP debates.

WhoWee

That's only possible if Senator Rubio declines, as he's the first choice. I guy who could deliver Florida's ~27 electoral votes and who many would already like to see as a ~2016 President is impossible to pass up. I doubt Gingrich can deliver a state that's in play, plus a Gingrich is not needed to beat Biden in VP debates.
Personally, I think it's too soon to tap Rubio - or any first term legislator (one of the major problems with Obama). This is the same reason I don't want to see Chris Christie or Nikki Haley in the mix. They all need to establish track records.

I would like to see some polls of Gingrich versus Rubio. Gingrich has the requisite experience on the Hill to fix a lot of problems - Rubio may face bi-partisan resentment and add negative value. I think Newt is the ideal Vice President candidate - he would "complete" any of the front-runners and help restore confidence.

mheslep

Gold Member
Personally, I think it's too soon to tap Rubio - or any first term legislator (one of the major problems with Obama). This is the same reason I don't want to see Chris Christie or Nikki Haley in the mix. They all need to establish track records.

I would like to see some polls of Gingrich versus Rubio. Gingrich has the requisite experience on the Hill to fix a lot of problems - Rubio may face bi-partisan resentment and add negative value. I think Newt is the ideal Vice President candidate - he would "complete" any of the front-runners and help restore confidence.
The first task of the VP candidate is to help the head of the ticket win. Deliver votes. Smart as he his, do you really think Newt, with all of his Tiffany purchases and marriages, does that better than Marco?

WhoWee

The first task of the VP candidate is to help the head of the ticket win. Deliver votes. Smart as he his, do you really think Newt, with all of his Tiffany purchases and marriages, does that better than Marco?
Again, I'd like to see a poll.

I think Rubio is perceived as the Latin Eric Cantor by the general population and a token choice by others. Newt probably has the strongest name recognition in the field and a proven track record in Congress.

If the presentation is - here's Romney, a moderate with strong business experience and a track record as Governor to point and over here his partner former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, creative, experienced, intelligent, balanced, and able to keep Mitt out of trouble in Washington - it's a strong ticket. If the Left wants to attack him for spending too much on jewelry - the President will face similar scrutiny for the First Lady's pattern of travel on separate jets at minimum. Newt wasn't spending taxpayer funds.

BobG

Homework Helper
A Vice President candidate might bring in one state. The main job of VP candidates is not to be a disaster - not to be a Palin or an Eagleton.

Gingrich would be exactly the type of VP candidate you'd want to avoid. While Biden may say silly things fairly often (and even get some dirty looks from the President during extra swearing in ceremonies), he has an easy personality to like. Gingrich has an easy personality to hate.

mheslep

Gold Member
... and able to keep Mitt out of trouble in Washington - it's a strong ticket.
Newt has ample experience, but that is not the same thing as knowing how to stay out of trouble. How do you get credit Newt as able to help there given his ethics sanction, that he was more or less forced to resign by his own as Speaker, and nearly single-handedly blew up his own current campaign with the "“right-wing social engineering" comment.

WhoWee

Newt has ample experience, but that is not the same thing as knowing how to stay out of trouble. How do you get credit Newt as able to help there given his ethics sanction, that he was more or less forced to resign by his own as Speaker, and nearly single-handedly blew up his own current campaign with the "“right-wing social engineering" comment.
I think it's safe to assume he's learned from life experiences. There are 2 issues on the table; 1.) getting elected, and 2.) governing.

The current President's experience as a community organizer, and the strategy of equating McCain with Bush, enabled him to get elected, but his absolute lack of management experience has forced him to rely on Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi to drive legislation (a success from their perspective). However, President Obama has failed to deliver on his specific promises to fix the economy, close Gitmo, etc.

While Newt might not deliver as many votes as Rubio among Hispanics and strict Conservatives, I think we'll pull center and left voters that Rubio might not draw. As for Governing, Newt is by far the strongest person on the stage - and the most knowledgeable - IMO. I'll concede he's not electable as the President - but Vice President is another story.

mheslep

Gold Member
I think it's safe to assume he's learned from life experiences. ...
Well he may very well have, but safe to assume? Many people never do.

I don't think the strength of a VP candidate Newt would be in keeping a former governor and business exec out of trouble; he would provide other strengths. Given he'd be free of ever running for office again (~too old in 2020), he could sharply contrast his ticket's issues with the opposition's, allowing the presidential candidate to remain presidential.

WhoWee

Well he may very well have, but safe to assume? Many people never do.

I don't think the strength of a VP candidate Newt would be in keeping a former governor and business exec out of trouble; he would provide other strengths. Given he'd be free of ever running for office again (~too old in 2020), he could sharply contrast his ticket's issues with the opposition's, allowing the presidential candidate to remain presidential.
When I commented about keeping out of trouble, I meant politically/strategically on the Hill and with regards to foreign policy more than in a Clinton/scandal way. As you've pointed out, Newt is at the end of his political life. I think he would be very determined to make things happen - whereas a Rubio MIGHT be more concerned about his (own) future in politics.

skippy1729

So what is going on with the Florida straw poll? On the face of it, I was (very) pleasantly (very) suprised by Cain's victory; but also (very) puzzled. His performance at the debate (where he got about half the face time of Romney or Perry) was good but nothing spectacular. In view of the performance of Perry and Bachman it seems fair to say he got over 60% of the Tea Party vote. Perhaps they are figuring out that Bachman is unelectable and Perry is not what they hoped for.

Any other ideas?

Skippy

PS I hope he can use this victory to raise some cash and turn this race around.

mheslep

Gold Member
So what is going on with the Florida straw poll? On the face of it, I was (very) pleasantly (very) suprised by Cain's victory; but also (very) puzzled. His performance at the debate (where he got about half the face time of Romney or Perry) was good but nothing spectacular. In view of the performance of Perry and Bachman it seems fair to say he got over 60% of the Tea Party vote. Perhaps they are figuring out that Bachman is unelectable and Perry is not what they hoped for...
Yes he's been competent in the debates and he is a self-made man, an authentic rags to riches story. If he had held elected office, any office, I think he'd be leading the field now in popular polls as well as that Florida straw poll. If he somehow manages to raise his game and earn the nomination I think he'd destroy Obama/Biden, carrying even some heavily blue states.

WhoWee

Yes he's been competent in the debates and he is a self-made man, an authentic rags to riches story. If he had held elected office, any office, I think he'd be leading the field now in popular polls as well as that Florida straw poll. If he somehow manages to raise his game and earn the nomination I think he'd destroy Obama/Biden, carrying even some heavily blue states.
Cain made a few mistakes in the early debate regarding foreign policy. However, I think people are receptive to his honesty regarding the matter. He didn't try to spin his behavior and instead went to work learning more about the subject. He's another candidate that would be enhanced/completed by an elder statesman running mate.

DoggerDan

Cain made a few mistakes in the early debate regarding foreign policy. However, I think people are receptive to his honesty regarding the matter. He didn't try to spin his behavior and instead went to work learning more about the subject. He's another candidate that would be enhanced/completed by an elder statesman running mate.
He's got my attention. I appreciate his straightforwardness and matter-of-fact way of looking at the issues.

DoggerDan

If he had held elected office, any office, I think he'd be leading the field now in popular polls as well as that Florida straw poll.
Given the sad state of affairs in American politics, that's probably to his advantage, particularly if he's elected.

BobG

Homework Helper
Some candidates just don't handle debates well.

Rick Perry:

He just isn't good enough in debates to make a good case for himself.
Apparently he had the ability to destroy the able K. B. Hutchinson in the Governor's primary race, but he's not showing much debate strength here so far.
While he's definitely not helping himself in the debates, his performances apparently aren't bad enough to destroy his campaign. He still leads in the polls, but his margin has decreased from 12 points to 7 points.

http://www.pollingreport.com/wh12rep.htm

Gingrich is definitely on the upswing and Cain's ratings have even improved. Apparently, people have given up on the 'hope' that Palin will run and Paul supporters are begginning to admit he isn't really a viable candidate.

Jimmy Snyder

Bachmann blames Arab Spring on Obama's 'weakness'
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44726590/ns/politics-decision_2012/" [Broken]
I suppose Bachmann is no longer a serious contender so this doesn't matter much any more. I have always advised policitions you can't do yourself harm by saying bad things about foreigners and you can't help yourself by saying good things about them. Bachmann understands this. Most Americans hear the words blame and Arab in the same sentence and count it wisdom.

Last edited by a moderator:

Gold Member

Physics Forums Values

We Value Quality
• Topics based on mainstream science
• Proper English grammar and spelling
We Value Civility
• Positive and compassionate attitudes
• Patience while debating
We Value Productivity
• Disciplined to remain on-topic
• Recognition of own weaknesses
• Solo and co-op problem solving