He isn't going away he is going up!
Scorecard: November 9, 2011 Republican Debate | Who Won The Nov 9 Debate? | Mr. Media Training
THE TOP TIER
HERMAN CAIN (1st Place, Grade: A-)
With another strong performance, Mr. Cain continues to show why he has soared to the top of the pack. When asked about allegations of sexual harassment, he delivered a short, media-friendly sound bite:
The American people deserve better than someone being in tried in the court of public opinion based on unfounded accusations.
Mr. Cain also demonstrated why he was an effective marketer, not only continuing to brand 9-9-9, but seemingly inventing the phrase sneak a-taxes which I suspect well be hearing again.
His answer regarding Italys debt crisis exposed gaps in his knowledge, which could hurt him as he moves closer to the nations first votes being cast in January.
Plus, I question his decision to label Nancy Pelosi, Princess Nancy during this debate, as its probably not the right time to give critics any ammunition to label him a misogynist. Despite the downsides, it was an overall impressive performance.
MITT ROMNEY (2nd Place, Grade: B+)
Gov. Romneys strategy seems to be to try to win the nomination by remaining steady while other candidates self-immolate, rather than to win by being loved by voters. That strategy may work for him.
Mr. Romney was steady again tonight, although hes increasingly looking annoyed when answering questions. One humorous (if not telling) moment occurred when Mr. Romney tried to reverse his image as a flip-flopper:
I think people understand that Im a man of steadiness and constancy. I dont think youre going to find someone who has more of those attributes than I do. Ive been married to the same woman for 25 excuse me, Ill get in trouble for 42 years.
As someone on my Twitter feed recently said, Mr. Romney has a glass jaw, but his opponents have yet to find a way to break it. That must say something about his debating skills.
NEWT GINGRICH (3rd Place, tie, Grade: B)
Speaker Gingrich showed his wit time and time again tonight, most notably when moderator John Harwood tried to get him with a gotcha question:
John Harwood: Your firm was paid $300,000 by Freddie Mac in 2006. What did you do for that money?
Newt Gingrich: I offered them advice on precisely what they didnt do.
Mr. Gingrich is moving up in the polls (perhaps because the other conservative choices Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry have flamed out, while Herman Cain is busy fighting tough allegations). Its understandable why voters are attracted to him hes witty, knowledgeable, and tough.
But I continue to question his lack of optimism and his discipline. Why waste several seconds fighting the moderators that he only has 30 seconds to answer a question? He agreed to the rules prior to the debate, and his reaction to the rules being enforced was a waste of valuable airtime. Its okay to attack the media, but he should pick his moments more carefully.
Little has changed. In August 2010, I wrote on this blog:
If Mr. Gingrich can find a way to remain stubbornly on message (and can begin to exude some optimism), he can become a viable contender. But until he demonstrates he can do so, he is not likely to win a general election, even against an unpopular president.
MICHELE BACHMANN (3rd Place, tie, Grade: B)
Ms. Bachmann had one of her strongest performances since her first debate tonight. She began by knocking a question about tax rates out of the park, and made a compelling case that every American should pay at least something in federal taxes, even if its just $10.
Ms. Bachmanns solid performance tonight will likely not prop up her flagging campaign, but it might help keep her supporters from moving to a different candidate for now.
TRAILING THE FIELD
RON PAUL (5th Place, tied, Grade: C)
We know something about the type of person the American people elect. Since the beginning of the 24/7 media age in 1980, the more charismatic candidate has won every general election. Rep. Paul is not that candidate.
Many of this blogs readers are fans of Dr. Paul, and my analysis is not a referendum on Dr. Pauls ideas. But style points matter to the electorate, and Dr. Paul too often looks more like a scolding nag than a presidential figure. Hes consistent and steady, but isnt breaking through to a large-enough base to earn the nomination.
RICK SANTORUM (5th Place, tied, Grade: C)
You know that old saw that voters tend to vote for the candidate theyd most like to drink a beer with? Its hard to see many people choosing Sen. Santorum as their drinking buddy.
Mr. Santorum looks sour. He spends way too much time talking about his 1990s legislative record instead of focusing like a laser on what he would do if elected. Mr. Santorum has run a campaign without any embarrassing headlines but unfortunately for him, also one without any headlines at all. He failed to distinguish himself any further tonight, and will almost certainly remain in the also-ran category.
Despite that, Im still giving him a C because hes passionate and clearly believes in his positions. He deserves some credit for that authenticity.
JON HUNTSMAN (7th Place, Grade: D+)
If you ask the average American to list the people running for President, Im betting Gov. Huntsman shows up as little more than an asterisk on the list. Despite national exposure in half a dozen debates, hes barely made a dent.
Hes trying to run as an intellectual (tonight, he used words and phrases including, the metastasis effect, yield curve, and efficacious. Im all for big words, but just ask Al Gore and John Kerry how well their intellectualism worked for them.
Im convinced that Mr. Huntsman is no longer running for President, but rather to boost his chances of a high-profile job post-candidacy. He may be a smart and likeable fella, but its hard to see how hes going to be the Republican nominee.
RICK PERRY (8th Place, Grade: F)
In politics, image is (almost) everything. When Gov. Perry said he wanted to eliminate three government agencies and tried to list them, he couldnt come up with the third agency. Instead of gracefully moving on, he continued trying to think of the third agency for almost 45 painful seconds.