The ABC Debate--Long, but revealing

So how many of you were up for a four-hour debate last night? Wow. It was a marathon, but if you did tune in, and and I hope some of you did, I think it was really quite good. Charlie Gibson rocked as a debate moderator. He obviously knew his stuff and used what he knew to really pull information, character "moments" and answers out of the candidates. He was smart without being the center of attention. Good job.

One thing that was really interesting was having the Republican candidates and the Democratic candidates on back to back on the same night. It really gave us a truer snapshot of where people stood. No one group had time to run back to their handlers and regroup based on what went on with the other "team".

That being said, here is my analysis of the evening's contenders:

Republicans:

Ron Paul: Extremely strong showing. Right about the Islamic terrorists being helped by us being in "their" territories. Others, especially Romney and Giuliani tried to dismiss this by saying that the leaders of the Islamic terror machine would have attacked anyway because they are trying for a World-wide Islamic Caliphate (maybe because they like to look smart by showing they learned a new vocabulary word--sounds scary, too!), but while that may be true, those leaders do use our presence in the Middle East as a major recruiting cry. And they are not blowing themselves up. They look for others to do that.
Hopefully people will realize that while Paul does really know the Constitution of the United States, and I think that is very important, if you follow a lot of his policy ideas to their logical end, we could end up in a scary place.
Rudy Giuliani: The man is a goon. Having lived under his "rule" in New York, I applaud him for helping reduce crime, though Clinton's additional new police helped him big time, but his micromanaging of jay walking to the point that from my exit of the subway I had to cross an intersection on three sides to get to work during rush-hour leads to me to believe that this "my way or the highway" power grabber will hold true to the Republican view of limited government only when it suits him--and God help us if it doesn't suit him. I find it hard to listen to the man in the debates. If he hadn't fought the mob as a prosecutor, he might well have gotten a job as one of their enforcers.
Mitt Romney: This guy is a modern day snake oil salesman and God help the poor souls who buy what he's selling, because the guarantee will not be worth the paper it is printed on. He will close shop and reopen one selling an antidote the next week and try to sell you that. Plus, he's mean. The attack ads he has run are mean spirited even for politics--and these are against members of his own party! Doesn't he remember Reagan's 11th commandment: Thou shalt not speak ill of another Republican.? No wonder everyone is ganging up on him. This guy is making DeLay look saintly.
John McCain: Kept his cool and stayed out of the mud. Classy showing last night. I just wish he had stayed away from the Evangelical hate mongers he had originally denounced a few years ago--that really left a sour taste in my mouth. McCain may yet rise again, though, because agree with him or not, he doesn't tell you what you want to hear just to make nice and win a vote (one of the things I most admire in Biden, as well). He was out on the morning shows today --Face the Nation and Meet the Press-- standing by his statement that he would be fine with leaving American troops in Iraq indefinitely-- like in South Korea or Japan. Don't count this veteran out--even if he has seemed more a loyal soldier than a leader during much of Bush's second term.
Mike Huckabee: Sounded pretty good last night. Surprisingly he didn't say anything too stupid and he has a sense of humor, which is refreshing. I'm still a little nervous about the guy, as he is running around with Chuck Norris all the time, but you have to give it up for a guy who is doing all he is without a bunch of consultants to back him up. I do think that despite his win in Iowa, he got a little break last night, as the rest of the field piled onto Romney (deservedly). The goal here is to knock Romney out and then take care of Huckabee if he still hasn't shot himself in the foot. His aw shucks populism is novel for a Republican--and sincere to boot. People need to start asking: What is in the water in Hope, Arkansas?
Fred Thompson: Looked a lot more presidential than we've seen in a while. Overall, a strong showing. Seemed in control of his message, but a bit of a throwback for the Year of Change, though. I don't hear anything new from this guy, but I loved him on Law and Order.

Democrats:

Bill Richardson: What a nice guy. And I thank him for giving an honest answer to Charlie Gibson's question of what specifically he'd take back saying in one the debates, but he is playing in the Minor Leagues here. I hate to say it, because he is a genuinely nice human being and he cares about and is knows a lot about Latin American, which we all know is a big interest of mine. I even praised an interview he gave in a Colombian daily a few blog entries ago, but I don't see him closing the deal--especially in any of the next few states.

Barack Obama: A disclosure--I am now supporting him since Biden is out. He looked a little tired, especially in the cut-aways, but I think he did well--looked Presidential enough, didn't sink too low into personal attacks on Hillary (Obama will need to stay positive to keep his luster), but made his points when it counted. No major mistakes, which has to be his goal going into New Hampshire, because I think South Carolina is his to take. His lack of real fight put him above the fray, while reaffirming for me my contention that he is the one who is humble enough to reach out for help when he needs it.

Hillary Clinton: Okay, Hillary, we know you have worked really, really hard and we are so proud of you. Do you want a gold star now? Clinton spent the first half of the debate feeling sorry for herself and lashing out at the other candidates and, in a way, us trying to desperately shake us into realizing what we obviously are too stupid to see--that she is supposed to be the next President, because she works hard. Maybe in the back of her mind she is adding "and I was a loyal soldier and I stood by that philandering good ol' boy for all of you, damn it." She did have a much better second half though, laughing at herself about getting her feelings hurt that someone might like another candidate more. She lightened up and lightened her load, which I think helped her connect to us and deliver her message much better. Do not ever count her out. She is a fighter. And, she does work hard.

John Edwards: Won this thing. He was feisty without being rude. He made his points clearly and they seemed heart-felt as well as pretty on the money for a Democratic crowd--or even for Independents who don't like where Bush has dragged us. Second place in New Hampshire would keep him in this thing. Maybe Clinton peaked too early. That is Edwards only hope to eventually taking down Obama (or Obama has to really screw up). I don't think this debate is enough to propel Edwards to the nomination, but if he gets it, this is where we can all say he turned the tables. I just don't think that he has done enough for me lately--as in since 2004. Next.

I'd love to hear what you all think! Drop me a comment.