2nd GOP debate

[ConservativeElector2]

Quite surprised nobody started a thread yet, but any thoughts so far?
 
I think the debate was overall slightly better than the first. Maybe my expectations were just too high back then. Anyway, for me Tim Scott has won this one. He had the answers and shined when he had to. Ramaswamy did better than last time, also Christie improved a lot compared to his first performance in August. DeSantis and Pence were okay, but not really remarkable. Haley was attacking each and everyone but in a rather nasty way. Her debating style didn't click with me. Doug Burgum was there, he was better during the first debate. My 2 cents.

[Pringles]

Based on what I saw, Haley won. Her attack on Ramaswamy was the highlight of the night. Frankly, I feel Tim Scott needs to drop out, he can't articulate his sentences well, and when he attempted to attack Haley she walked right all over him. Christie did okay, DeSantis was a little better than the first, but still much to be desired. 

Pence did really poorly as well with his awkward joke. 

[vcczar]

13 minutes ago, ConservativeElector2 said:

Quite surprised nobody started a thread yet, but any thoughts so far?
 
I think the debate was overall slightly better than the first. Maybe my expectations were just too high back then. Anyway, for me Tim Scott has won this one. He had the answers and shined when he had to. Ramaswamy did better than last time, also Christie improved a lot compared to his first performance in August. DeSantis and Pence were okay, but not really remarkable. Haley was attacking each and everyone but in a rather nasty way. Her debating style didn't click with me. Doug Burgum was there, he was better during the first debate. My 2 cents.

I've only read about it. I might watch it tomorrow. I think the most pundits are framing this as "No one won/Trump won" or "Scott won."  Scott's winning had more to do with him being more assertive, but the pundits agree no one looked great. DeSantis and Pence seem to have fallen the most below expectations. I think Scott, Haley, Christie, and Ramaswamy should stay in and everyone else drop out based on pundit responses to both debates. I read that Ramaswamy worked really hard to be less annoying this time. I guess I'll find out when I watch it.

[ConservativeElector2]

25 minutes ago, vcczar said:

I've only read about it. I might watch it tomorrow. I think the most pundits are framing this as "No one won/Trump won" or "Scott won."  Scott's winning had more to do with him being more assertive, but the pundits agree no one looked great. DeSantis and Pence seem to have fallen the most below expectations. I think Scott, Haley, Christie, and Ramaswamy should stay in and everyone else drop out based on pundit responses to both debates. I read that Ramaswamy worked really hard to be less annoying this time. I guess I'll find out when I watch it.

I haven't read a single pundit's comment and I'm quite surprised that I agree with most of them on two important points. Scott won and Ramaswamy was definitely less annoying. Usually my opinion is at odds with the pundits opinion. Last time everyone said Haley won the first debate, but I didn't find her remarkable. This time she was the annoying one.

[vcczar]

6 minutes ago, ConservativeElector2 said:

Last time everyone said Haley won the first debate, but I didn't find her remarkable.

A lot of non-pundits, including people in this forum, think she won the first debate too. I think she did, for instance. I thought Ramaswamy was probably the worst in the first debate. He came off as both annoying and as an idiot. 

[ShortKing]

2 hours ago, Pringles said:

Pence did really poorly as well with his awkward joke. 

I hated that joke so bad and I like Mike Pence but that grossed me out

[vcczar]

I just watched the 2nd debate. I think for short-term gains it was a bad debate for everyone, and short-term gains are incredibly important. I don't think Trump loses much support after this debate. I think one candidate gains long-term, assuming Trump's numbers fall in the longterm only. 

Here's how I'd rank the competitors:

• DeSantis gets a C. He gave few specific and seemed to focus more on defending his record. He really needs a speech coach. He's awkward both in body language and in how he speaks. He's got a high voice, just short of sounding like he was castrated. A president wins partially because of presence. He doesn't have that. He also doesn't have many ideas right now. If he's the nominee, he'll basically be the Dem version of Michael Dukakis.
• Haley gets B-. She mostly did well, but it was far below her 1st debate performance, which makes this performance more underwhelming than it was. Her attack on Tiktok is undermined by the Tiktok ad that followed it. I think her sound bite against Ramaswamy is catchy.
• Ramaswamy gets a C+. He did a lot better than the first debate, but he's still coming off as both naive on foreign policy and as an annoying tech kid, despite his rhetoric to deflect this last charge. He also needs a speech coach. His overpronounciation of words is grating. To his credit, he's one of the few with ideas and overt passion, but the combination of that can also be really bad if it isn't the right ideas and the right passion. He can only succeed with Trump out of the race. He's not going to earn that much support from reluctant Trump supporters. He's got some extreme views and states comments, he's going to be fighting to defend the entire election. His statement on workers, where he showed some empathy with labor, was a good move.
• Scott gets a B. He made no real bad moves, unless his tangling w/ Haley causes some alienation. Overall, he seemed much more determined in this debate, and his score is partially because of improvement. Not outstanding, but solid good, even if I disagree with his policies.
• Christie gets a B+. The crazy thing is he's clearly holding back his attacks (except on Trump) because he's got to raise his favorabilities. I think this is an excellent long-term strategy, assuming Trump's numbers fall. It's the same thing Newt Gingrich did in 2012, which led to a brief burst in the polls. Unlike most of the others, he had ideas. He also had some of the best sound bites, almost all of them going after Trump, which is going to keep his name in the media. His weakness in this debate was that he didn't get much speaking time.
• Pence gets a C-. He's a little stiff and isn't good at humanizing, but he was good at using the parts of Trump's record that GOPers support to claim it as part of his doing (our administration). He had some missed opportunities, and he also bailed out on the Obamacare question, possibly because he realizes Obamacare is here to stay, and he can't say anything without scaring people. He's as unfavorable as Christie, but Christie also room to undo some of this. Pence hasn't that because he's got more name recognition. He should drop out.
• Burgum gets a C-. He had ideas and he did well when following the debate rules. However, he was making almost the entire debate experience unbearable because he was routinely talking over people. I like him a lot more than most of these people on the stage but someone needed to punch him in his Muppet-looking face. While he often had good ideas and answers, they were undermined by the fact that they often involved him using his time as Gov of a low population state as a means to say what he will do in a nation of over 300 million people. The flaws in the analogies become very obvious. You can do things in a Dakota that you can't do on the national level or can't do in CA or NY, for instance. He should drop out too. 

The 3rd debate hopefully won't include Pence or Burgum. I also think DeSantis should drop out if non-Trumpers really want someone that can potentially beat Trump. Here's the strategy:

- Ramaswamy stays in to keep some voters from supporting Trump. 

- Christie stays in to consistently attack Trump to keep some level-headed people from supporting Trump.

- Then Haley and Scott fight it out over non-Trump GOP voters. When one is ahead of the other by 10%, the other drops out.

- All candidates that have dropped out endorse Haley or Scott. Ramaswamy stays in through Super Tuesday to keep some voters from Trump. Christie needs to drop out just before the 1st primay with a huge endorsement that mostly attacks Trump. Ramaswamy will probably endorse Trump.

- Another option is if RFK Jr runs 3rd party, the non-Trumpers should give RFK Jr enough attention in a way that Trump support goes there and away from Trump, but this risks a bad scenario in the general election.

 

• Burgum

[Vols21]

I hate that debates have become gotcha interviews where only one candidate is supposed to answer.      The moderators kept telling them to quit talking so they could answer more questions.   I was thinking: how about less questions and more answers?!

I’d much rather let everyone have a minute to answer a broad question than asking someone about something from 13 years ago and get mad when others want to weigh in on important topics and even try to answer someone else’s questions from 3 or 4 back rather than talk about the “gotcha” posed to them.

ita a debate so let them give their opinions on every topic (then the ND Gov isn’t having to try to get a word in by talking over others)

[DakotaHale]

The cringe Donald Duck comment from Christie immediately dropped him to F tier

[vcczar]

7 minutes ago, DakotaHale said:

The cringe Donald Duck comment from Christie immediately dropped him to F tier

I loved that comment. I thought it was a highlight! 

[pilight]

Trump's comments since the debate suggest he's most afraid of Haley

[The Blood]

Just now, pilight said:

Trump's comments since the debate suggest he's most afraid of Haley

Haley seems to be playing the long game towards becoming the last viable establishment candidate in the race, and given it's a rather pitiful field, she shouldn't have much trouble getting there, especially if she keeps placing solidly at the debates like she has been.