Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
CBS Republican Debate: This Just Got Real
Well, folks, here we are again. Is this the ninth or the tenth Republican debate? I think I lost count. We have heard all the talking points before, we have seen all the candidates before, nothing new could have possibly happened. Right? If that’s what you thought, you are dead wrong, my friends.
This was the first debate that felt to me like it mattered, to everyone. No kiddie debate, and finally a manageable number of candidates. In fact, this debate got so intense for a while that I actually had to take down notes to make sure I didn’t miss anything.
The sparks flew in this debate, especially between Jeb! and Trump, and Cruz and Rubio. Normally I do this by candidate, but I think this time I will do it by highlighting the two main fights and my impressions of everyone’s role in them, and then a quick word on everyone individually.
The Iraq War:
This was maybe the fight of the night. Coming off of a general discussion on foreign policy in which Trump looked like the kid who’s asked to stand before the class and give a book report about a book he didn’t read, Trump bragged that he’d opposed the Iraq war and left it all but said that he thought Bush should have been impeached for it. He essentially made the Code Pink argument without bothering to go all the way to the “Bush lied people died” chant. But he might have done that, given time. This offered Jeb! a serious chance to jump in, defend his brother, and beat Trump for the ignorant Democrat that he is. Jeb! did a good job of it, actually. Kasich came in and said something of no consequence that I actually think was wrong, then Rubio came and laid down the hard truth. He might as well have said to Jeb!, “Step aside grandpa, this is how it’s done.”
Then Trump sunk so low he blamed W. for 9/11. It was pathetic.
But Rubio converted Trump’s lowest point in his campaign to a brutal and honest attack on Bill Clinton. This whole exchange was yuuuuge. I think it reveals Trump beyond all doubt to be a Democrat. I can’t see how it will help him in the Republican primaries. Maybe in a general it might work better, but in a South Carolina Republican primary?
Illegal Immigration:
Well, Ted and Marco, who are my number two and number one guys in this process, squared off hard on this one issue of seeming divergence. Cruz’s attack is as it’s always been: Slap Rubio with the Gang of Eight. Can’t fault the man for doing what works. Rubio, though, counter-punched hard. He essentially called Cruz a typical politician who in committee moved for amnesty and more visas but then on the floor fought it on just those counts. I guess we shall see how well this can be substantiated, but it was a hard rebuke against the one politician who is working hard to pretend he isn’t one. I’m looking to you, my fellow Ricochetti, to fact-check all of thi, for me. Of final note: Jeb! tried to pull a Christie after this heated Rubio v. Cruz, but like a novice he read the stage directions before delivering the line, by telling us he was going to pull a Christie and slam the Senators for their Senate talk. It was weak, and he lacked all the contempt and bluster that let Christie carry out that nonsense attack.
So let’s get down to the individual men.
Ben Carson: I say this every time I write about him. I just love this guy. If they made a plush doll of him I would buy it and hug it every day. I don’t think Ben has made any headway, sadly. But he made one good point, and had by far my favorite line of the night. The point he made was that judgement is more important when facing new circumstances than experience, because by definition no one could have any experience of a new situation. It was a good defense for his lack of experience, though it could be argued that experience builds wisdom. The line of the night was when he was asked to say something hard for people to hear, something that’s not PC. After a long ramble, he came to it. I shall paraphrase, “America’s problem isn’t evil rich people, but rather an irresponsible and evil government!” Ha! Beautiful.
John Kasich: You can’t see this, but I’m just shaking my head at the man right now. My head-shaking, I think, sums him up the best. New Hampshire was his moment, and it’s all downhill from there. I honestly can’t say anything about him because he said nothing of note or merit. His dad was a Democrat, Democrats like him, and he is running for the Republican nomination. Good luck. pal. Keep Ohio functioning. It’s a good state, you seem a fine governor.
Jeb!: Fourth place was not a bad result in New Hampshire. I doubt he will do better in South Carolina. He did, though, finally figure out how to stand up to Trump. But even at doing this he’s less good than Marco Rubio. Jeb! is like a 10-year-old luxury car. Sure, it’s well built, has leather seats, and cruise control, but Marco is a brand new model with better suspension, faster acceleration, and a sweet paint job. Now, I have a note here that says, “Jeb! said that people should vote for the most conservative governor or senator that can win.” Did he actually say that? With Marco standing right there? The same Marco that leads against Hillary in all the polls? Someone check that, because if he did, that is probably the biggest unforced error of the night.
Ted Cruz: He was good tonight, but not that great overall. His exchange with Rubio on immigration was tough, but I can’t tell if he came out the winner. All Rubio has to do on that front is hold steady, because that’s his one weakness against Cruz. On foreign policy, domestic policy, Ted is nothing special. He was, though, very good about discussing the precedent of judicial nominations and confirmations during election years, and he didn’t let the moderators’ ignorance get in the way, which we all know has tripped up past nominees. Cruz is a solid guy. I think he is more politician than he pretends to be, but I’m not offended by that.
Marco Rubio: Full disclosure: I love Marco Rubio. I really do. I think he is the bee’s knees. Why do I love him so? One, his power to articulate and explain ideas is one of the best if not the best in the party right now, certainly in the current field of nominees. Second, he knows foreign policy and cares deeply about it. When the moderators asked Trump and Jeb! about the three things they would ask about of their advisors about international affairs, Trump said a bunch of nonsense, Jeb! then said that he would have plans, which was basically more articulate nonsense than Trump’s. But Rubio nailed it down hard: China, Russia, and Iran. He gave a clear answer, had specifics. The man has a vision of the whole chess board. He sees it all. I’m not saying here he’s a genius or anything like that. But he sees that it is all connected and that you have to play the whole game, not just parts of it. Above all else, this makes me have confidence in him the most, because when it comes to foreign affairs, the President has the most unilateral powers imaginable under our constitution. On the domestic front, we have checks and balances galore. Elect a solid Republican House and Senate and with Rubio we will have as good an immigration policy as we would under Cruz or Trump. I can’t say the same about foreign policy with Cruz, who to me never seems to say much about it of distinction. Cruz is mostly bluster on this issue, and don’t even get me started on Trump’s foreign policy.
Donald Trump: Let’s get started. The man is a walking foreign policy disaster in the making. He all but says we should make alliance with Russia! His populist economics will do nothing but antagonize our allies. He shows no grasp of understanding how hard we have worked to maintain the world order that gives us prosperity and ensures freedom. I am in despair over this man. I think, “Maybe he is toning it down, maybe he won’t be so bad,” and then he gives populist rants like his on trade tonight, and his Iraq War and 9/11 arguments, and all I can see is a long dark future for freedom in the world if he’s elected. Honestly, I think Hillary might be better, and that very thought makes my head hurt.
What did you guys think? Can Trump be stopped? Is Marco making a comeback? Will Jim Gilmore win a brokered convention? Let me and the rest of Ricochet know.
Published in Elections, General
Magnificent!! That needs to be tweeted far and wide – and often.
Note He often sounds like one, as well.
Rubio was on fire. That is what we need. He even defended his tax proposal which I don’t like, well. Cruz didn’t defend his well because he’s afraid to make it clear. His proposal is superior to all of the others, but he’s afraid of it because most conservatives hate VAT’s. They’re wrong Cruz is right but it’s dead if he can’t sell it.
That sounds like what everyone says. I’ve heard from women who are in a position to compare that it’s worse than childbirth. Are you okay now?
I sympathize. A few weeks back I had terrible back spasms and one of the things they checked for was kidney stones. It wasn’t that. So I imagine that yours was worse than mine. Don’t know how I could have taken it. Except, of course, you don’t have a choice.
How did it go? Rubio did ok. Cruz did ok. Kasich did ok. Trump was the Scary Frowny Orange-y @$$πσle from Central Casting.
Crow’s Nest, that evangelical comment is me being a smart aleck. You are right to question.
Rubio’s charge that Cruz is playing fast-and-loose on his previously articulated stance about bringing illegal immigrants out of the shadows was effective and there is a good deal of evidence to back up his claim. When a politician claims that they are more pure and honest, watch out. When a crafty, lawyerly politician keeps saying he is the most pure and honest then he’s likely plying his craft rather than being pure or honest. Just saying.
I’m afraid you had the better night.
Okay I take it back, listening to Trump doesn’t sound as bad as that.
Feel free to Tweet is all you want. I don’t have do Twitter because I don’t get it, no do I want to get it. You or any one else can feel free to use my lines if you think them good without any need of referencing.
OK. Well, I guess I’m the only one who finds Rubio’s immigration issue maneuvers to be smarmy.
Rubio is lying with grace.
He’s still leaving the door open to amnesty. And, his enforce the law first claim is obscured by his figure out what to do with those who are here.
Newsflash: enforcement of current law ( with respect to illegal entrance/ visa overstay) is little more than deportation of the “12 million” or so, who are here now; with prohibition of reentry for various periods of time; depending on the severity of the offense. It’s mostly that, and a fence that somehow isn’t built yet.
If enforcing current law is his policy, then they (the so-called 12 million) won’t be here to be talked about, will they?
So, in that case, then the American people will be much more reasonable about… What, exactly?
As Valiuth said, there’s a difference between questioning the war and quoting Michael Moore/Code Pink talking points. It sounds like Trump did the latter, and on Meet the Press this morning he didn’t sound like he was backing down.
Copy all.
And that will work for trump. Just because you believe your narrative, doesn’t mean anybody else does, even if it is the truth.
In my best of all worlds, the SC results would put down Carson, Kasich and Bush (though Bush might stagger on for a few more states).
Then (and here’s the leap) Rubio and Cruz disappear into a back room, and – in whatever language – agree that Cruz drops and endorses Rubio, in return for Rubio’s public pledge to nominate Cruz to fill the SCOTUS vacancy if elected.
That would put paid to both Trump and the Hildabeast.
I don’t do twitter, either. Was just tossing out the thought to those that do.
I thought your analysis was very good. My esteem for Rubio has steadily grown over the last couple of debates.
My intense dislike of Trump actually increased last night. I wasn’t aware that I could dislike him more than I already did but when he went after Dubya and 9/11, that took the cake as far as I was concerned.
Kasich…what can you say about a guy who should have run as a Democrat? I believe he might have been able to beat those currently running. Has anyone noticed the jaw thing he does when receiving a question? It’s as if he is grinding his teeth. That’s okay. I grind mine too when he speaks. My centerist father is a Kasich fan, as is an uncle. Both are well into their 80’s. They are the only people I know who like him.
Well we hate VATs for a good reason. But I agree, on the whole his tax plan appeals more to me. Frankly I would go to an all VAT system over income tax, but I don’t think the political realities make this a good plan.
Loved every word of this, Valiuth. That’s all I have to say. Just that I loved it.
But in a Republican primary? Will it work there as well?
Although at the beginning of the election cycle there was an abundance of Republicans with impressive resumes, no one is unflawed. As the field has narrowed more energy is available to expose flaws in the remaining candidates. Negative ads work — that’s why there are so many of them. So we are left to decide who is the least-flawed candidate. Those flaws can be philosophical, intellectual, theological, social, attitudinal; they can be in delivery and communication; they can be in collaboration and leadership. The primaries will sort out in an imperfect way how those flaws are to be prioritized and assessed.
I suspect that fervent support for any of the candidates suggests a different prioritization of flaws than a wholesale blindness to them. The arguments should be how to prioritize them and select someone with the fewest flaws that matter. On the other side, Sanders and Clinton have enormous flaws of terrible consequence to the nation, and even if someone were to slip into the Democrat nomination (e.g., Biden or Warren) with fewer flaws, just the continuation of the flawed outcomes of Barack Obama such be sufficient for us to hold our nose and vote for anyone with an (R) behind their name in the General Election.
Yes. It would do the Republican party and Cruz a world of good. Personally, I like the man but unfortunately there are a lot of people who hate him. I believe he is brash, ambitious, oddly intense, really smart and takes unpopular positions because he believes it is the right thing to do. Those who hate him perceive that he is a slimy politician, a “nasty guy”, a Nixon like fellow who should be selling used cars and someone who only takes unpopular positions because he thinks they will benefit him politically. Because of this it does seem that Rubio would have the best chance of defeating the democratic rival. Neither Rubio or Cruz is perfect, but Reagan who was arguably one of the greatest conservative presidents of all time was not perfect either. Americans do love virtue. Americans also seem to love negative campaign ads which are usually without virtue. Your post described a dream moment in politics. These can happen like when George Washington declined the crown – but they are rare.
I’m with you. I despised his answer on immigration. I half expected him to say “Amnesty–that was sooooo 2013–what the heck is everyone so worked up about? Jeez, guys!”
And then the remark about Cruz not speaking Spanish–as if there weren’t transcripts available–set a nice trap for Cruz. Which Cruz, sadly, completely fell into. Now Rubio gets to say “Hey, I’m not the one speaking Spanish at a Republican debate,” when he’s the one who changed his legislative goals depending on the language he was speaking.
Right now, the man makes me sick. But hey, he probably knows what handsome, glib guys can get away, since he’s been one all his life. My opinion and yours won’t matter a darn.
Never had one, but I live in fear of kidney stones and also hope you are feeling better.
As long as Trump is in the race I recommend the debates be moderated by Jerry Springer with the big gong from The Gong Show. It’s no wonder democracy is losing it’s appeal around the world if we are it’s most prominent example. I’m ashamed for my country watching this.
Of this, we can be sure.
Bush went out with like 20% support. That’s a lot of cranky republicans. Also, consider just how much the party had been laid to waste in 06 and 08.
Plus I believe the Buchanon/Perot wing of the party was pretty down on the war from the get go as well.
I want to say that Rubio speaks beautiful Spanish and I believe it would be a great asset to have a presidential candidate who can communicate clearly with all our Spanish-speaking people. It’s one thing to be able to say in Spanish, “Hi everyone. Thanks for coming out today. I’m so glad to be here” and another to be able to speak eloquently and movingly of the principles that guide your beliefs and politics. Rubio can do that. I have listened to videos of him explaining his views in Spanish. Admittedly, it is Caribbean Spanish, where they subtly drop the consonants off the ends of the words as they speak them and I don’t know whether Mexicans would entirely identify with that.
But there is strong evidence that people are better convinced when a message is given in their “heart language,” their mother tongue, the language they learned at their mother’s knee.
If Rubio was our candidate, he could reach two language groups in their mother tongues. I believe it would be a great asset to Republicans and would greatly increase the number of people who would be exposed to and helped to understand to conservative message.
So your argument is (no snark intended) that Rubio could be President of the Western Hemisphere; that he could project American values across a large swath of the globe due to his eloquence and bi-lingualism?
I hadn’t considered what a disruptive force that would be when an American President can speak directly to the disenfranchised citizens of Central and South America and promote changes there that would create less pressure on immigration to here.