Enough With the GOP Debates?
It was the best presidential primary debate of the 21st Century. But did it matter?
As a political debate aficionado of 40-plus years, I deeply enjoyed Wednesday night's NBC-Salem Radio-Republican Jewish Coalition debate. More about that in a moment.
First, it helps to have people you know involved. Hugh Hewitt, one of the three moderators, is a friend and the senior statesman of conservative talk radio, nearly three decades and running. He is the best interviewer in the media, full stop, a modern sophist devoted to civility and exuding depth and seriousness. He eschews media gimmickry and vapid sound bites of so many radio colleagues.
I've known Senator Tim Scott (R-SC), worked with, and even played tennis over his Senate career. He is the real deal, a genuine public servant and, more importantly, a man of faith and integrity. I would love to see him serve as President of the United States.
Even former Gov. Chris Christie (R-NJ) is someone I’ve worked with and battled against (and won) on various issues during his governorship and before, when he was US Attorney for New Jersey. He also is the real deal, serving as a no-nonsense, blunt, and largely effective governor with a blind spot for hiring staff who take their loyalty a little too far without adult supervision. The perception grew during his governorship that his governing philosophy was about Chris Christie, not a conservative philosophy or vision. The “time for traffic trouble in Fort Lee” scandal expounded that, in spades.
Lesson: In successful organizations, loyalty and commitment focus on the mission and the vision, not the person.
Meanwhile, “personnel is policy,” as Ronald Reagan famously said. Christie personally was exonerated in the biggest scandal of his administration. However, he’s responsible for the culture he created. He governed New Jersey more by fear than hope, which is understandable in a state known for its cutthroat and largely brass-knuckled Democratic-dominated politics. He left office with a horrible approval rating and his political party in shambles, forever banished to minority status.
Nothing he’s said or done indicates he’s learned a thing from it.
It portends what the end of a future Christie Administration might look like.
But back to the debate. It was the finest of the three GOP presidential primary debates, clearly besting the previous two by Fox News.
Why? NBC and Salem learned from Fox News’ mistakes and their silly tactics and shallow, vapid questions. By adding debate veteran Hewitt, NBC benefited from his past debate moderating experience and deep connection to the GOP and its candidates, who have appeared multiple times on his estimable morning radio show. The format allowed for opening and closing statements and longer answers and didn’t feature the stupid rule of allowing candidates to respond if mentioned by one of their competitors. That Fox News silliness allowed things to devolve into talk-over-each-other verbal slugfests that turned off voters and viewers.
In short, they let candidates talk, asked serious questions, and controlled the debate. The moderators invested days in serious preparation. Best of all, no stupid “raise your hand” or other silly questions that the shallow-minded moderators at Fox thought were cute. It helped to have fewer candidates.
No more Fox News debates, please. The network’s descent continues unabated.
But, of course, there was one missing element. The front runner had his competing and largely ignored rally between court appearances. Without Donald Trump on the debate stage, they’re diminished.
Then again, the debates are more serious and substantive without Trump's theatrics. So there’s that.
So what do we make of the third debate, and where do the candidates stand?
First, this was a terrific debate, substantive and serious, with minimal theatrics. Despite sophomoric attempted breakout moments by Ramaswamy, the candidates all acquitted themselves very well.
Second, I’m not sure we need more debates, barring new developments requiring the candidates to opine in new and important ways, or if Trump decides to show up. The Republican National Committee is committed to a fourth and possibly fifth debate if only to narrow the field, which is not a bad objective. That means that candidates Scott and Christie, and possibly Ramaswamy, fall by the wayside sooner than later.
The field is truly beginning to narrow between Trump, Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-FL), and former Ambassador and Gov. Nikki Haley (R-SC).
A few thoughts about the candidates.
Each candidate had their objective for the debate; for the most part, they were given ample opportunities to meet them. DeSantis was “voted” the most successful of the debaters, but he continues to have a difficult time personally and emotionally connecting to voters like Ronald Reagan did.
With a heavy focus on foreign policy, Haley was in her sweet spot. She knows her stuff and strutted it with confidence and aplomb. The white suit works. Defending her 25-year-old daughter from the sleazy attack from Ramaswamy - calling him scum - resonated. The attacks on her fell flat. Voters sense that she’s up to the job.
She won the debate in terms of meeting objectives and advancing her candidacy.
Vivek is clearly not up to the job and is not ready for public service. His antics and breakout attempts all fell flat in a debate that called for seriousness. He needs to drop out and grow up. He looked desperate, condescending, and solicitous. It’s almost as if he was trying too hard. His response to Hewitt's TikTok question - to attack Haley’s daughter - was disqualifying. Despite some good ideas, he lacks finesse, maturity, and gravitas. He needs to run for state legislature, not President. He annoys.
Senator Scott probably had the most time, and while he connects and resonates with voters, I think voters may have a hard time envisioning him as President. Something is missing despite his policy chops, compelling personal story, and wonderful personality. I can’t put my finger on it.
Christie looked tired and off from his game, despite good answers. His love affair with Haley on stage was weird. But he did veer away from his anti-Trump focus and provided serious responses to questions, perhaps better than the others.
DeSantis has been solid, consistent, and disciplined throughout the debates. His open and closing statements were nearly identical and pitch-perfect. He’s the most conservative of the candidates on stage. He has a game plan and is sticking to it. Given his style and personality, he needs to better connect emotionally and personally with voters. I suspect he will do very well if he ever gets one-on-one with Donald Trump. So would Haley. Stay tuned.
One last point. All the GOP candidates blew it by not inviting Jewish voters into the GOP, given the genocidal anti-semitism on rabid display among Democrats. How did no one mention that 45 Democrats - 45 - refused to support a House resolution condemning Hamas and supporting Israel’s right to territorial integrity? My God.
I wanted so badly for any of the candidates to look into the camera and say, “Jewish Americans, you have a home in the Republican Party. Events of the past month suggest you are no longer welcome in the Democratic Party.” That needs to be conveyed because it is true.
Do we need more debates? My sense says no, but GOP voters deserve a one-on-one-or-two debate between Trump, DeSantis, and possibly Haley. If Trump truly thinks he deserves another term, he should be willing to stand on stage with these two and engage in a serious debate. I’ll not hold my breath. Trump isn’t interested or up to it, and I suspect Iowa and New Hampshire voters will eventually take notice.
Then we’ll see the mettle of the candidates. That will be clarifying. If Trump continues to wimp out, voters in Iowa and New Hampshire will punish him.
I stand by my previous prediction that neither Biden nor Trump will be the major party nominees.
I agree with your analysis of the debate. I thought both DeSantis and Haley helped themselves. Tim Scott is super likable, but I don't see it happening this year (maybe VP?). Christie may be the most qualified candidate, but he also is going no where. Ramaswamy is just being a jerk. I think, however, that voters count and that Iowa and New Hampshire will still matter. Both the news media and the Democrats have an interest in Donald Trump winning, and they have done everything they can to make his nomination look inevitable. But I am not so sure Iowans will agree once they get to meet the candidates. So I think additional debates matter, and, if DeSantis or Haley upset Trump in Iowa and/or New Hampshire, I think Trump will have to debate. And that will be well worth the price of admission.
I love how you summed up Vivek with “he annoys”. Yes, yes he does.