I read the transcript of the debate yesterday and my impression was that McCain came across as dishonest, particularly in his mincing of the English language with respect to Romney's position on the surge. I can see why Bill Clinton says that McCain has much in common with Hillary, for who can forget the insane word games of the Clintons?
The best analysis I have seen of the debate was this by Hugh Hewitt. McCain comes across - I watched some clips on YouTube (and by far the best clips show McCain's obvious contempt for Romney and Paul) - as angry and un-Presidential. Far from being a viable candidate against either Obama or Clinton, he'll be vulnerable to attacks and that the MSM hasn't dished these up yet in his fight against Romney should be a large, flashing, neon "tell."
Thursday, January 31, 2008
GOP Debate Analysis
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Mike, yes, that pretty much sums up my impression of McCain's performance and his ability to compete with Hillary or Obama, whichever receives the democrat thumbs-up.
On the other hand, Romney didn't do himself, nor the Republican Party, any favors in my opinion. I understand that everyone has the occasional "bad night," but I think he (Romney) simply spent too much time protesting McCain's tactics, and not enough time convincing Republican voters that he is the superior candidate, which I think is critical.
Hopefully he'll give a better accounting of himself in the next and final debate prior to super-Tuesday.
-Terry
Terry,
This is fascinating. I take it you watched, rather than read the transcript?
I'll echo you on this: at some point in a fight, one has to counterpunch, although the transcript sounded like that was happening. It is admittedly hard to play offense when you're constantly under attack. Sports analogies don't apply here as well as I'd like except to borrow from our pal Edmund's favorite sport, hockey. If you're down a skater while the other team is on the power play, it's very difficult to mount any offense.
Post a Comment