This was the last debate for awhile, and thus, the last scorecard until next month. So humor me, read, and enjoy.
MITT ROMNEY: A+
Incredible performance.
He’s always been a good debater when he’s not under duress, but under duress, he’s bad. Last night, when under duress, he actually got better.
I never thought we'd see that day with Romney.
It's sort of like a mother who watches her son drive off to college, turns to her husband and says “I never thought I’d see this day, honey” (hold on – maybe I should be the husband in this example…)
Mitt went for the kill. His first devastating attack on Gingrich came after Newt flubbed a chance to back up his bark. Blitzer asked Newt if he was sticking with calling Romney the most “anti-immigrant” candidate in an ad.
Newt stumbled through an answer; then when Blitzer asked again, he meekly replied.
“I think, of the four of us, yes.”
Romney was ready.
He turned to Gingrich, and put all the “Go to your room” muster in his voice that he could.
“That’s simply inexcusable. That’s inexcusable. And, actually, Senator Marco Rubio came to my defense and said that ad was inexcusable and inflammatory and inappropriate.
Mr. Speaker, I’m not anti-immigrant. My father was born in Mexico. My wife’s father was born in Wales. They came to this country. The idea that I’m anti-immigrant is repulsive.
….I think you should recognize that having differences of opinions on issues does not justify labeling people with highly charged epithets.”
For a moment, let's just forget Romney's giggle-inducing sanctimony over “highly-charged epithets”, (which he’s been just as likely to deploy as Newt), and look at what he did.
He channeled all the moral furor Gingrich usually does when attacking the moderators and had a Juan Williams moment with Newt playing the role of moderator, and Romney playing the role of Newt!
The audience ate the new Romney up. Gingrich responded by pulling out something about grandmothers being deported. It was a transparent ploy to hit back, but he seemed so jarred by Romney’s strength that it fell flat.
A bit later, Mitt had his real Moment.
Gingrich, dumbly, threw a dirt clod at him by noting that Romney owned shares of both Fannie and Freddie. I say “dumbly”, because Newt is now so associated with Fannie and Freddie, that it’s never good to bring up those two playmates together.
Romney explained the concept of blind trusts; then turned to Gingrich and knocked him out of the debate.
"I know that sounds like an enormous revelation, but have you checked your own investments? You also have investments through mutual funds that also invest in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.”
Gingrich froze like an international criminal's asset.
It was probably a good thing for him that the place exploded, because it gave him more time to think of a comeback, but there was none. Romney had turned Newt into Rick Perry. He had left Gingrich speechless.
Do you know how hard it is to leave Newt speechless?
It would be easier to build Rome in a day, it’d be easier to listen to the Aflac Duck narrate a Learning French cd (“Je m’appelle Aflac Duck”), it’d be easier to sideswipe a hipster who's riding a fixed gear bike and actually feel guilty about it.
The point is that – because those two moments came early on – it was pretty much over. People tune out quickly at these debates, and Gingrich needed a magical first half to wrest control of Florida again. But it was misery; not magic for Newt.
Romney fans can take comfort in another development.
He finally owned his wealth like, well, he owned it. No apologies.
“I have earned the money that I have. I didn’t inherit it.
I take risks. I make investments. Those investments lead to jobs being created in America.
I’m proud of being successful. I’m proud of being in the free enterprise system that creates jobs for other people. I’m not going to run from that.
I’m proud of the taxes I pay. My taxes, plus my charitable contributions, this year, 2011, will be about 40 percent.
So, look, let’s put behind this idea of attacking me because of my investments or my money, and let’s get Republicans to say, you know what? What you’ve accomplished in your life shouldn’t be seen as a detriment, it should be seen as an asset to help America.”
That, ladies and gentlemen (and those somewhere in-between), is how you do it.
It was Mitt’s best moment in any debate. And it wasn’t just what he said; it was how he said it. No hiding in the shadows. It was like a Mitt Pride Day.
He had another enormously strong moment a bit later.
Everyone was talking about the moon and whether we should build a cheese factory on it, and colonize it, and get a Walgreens or CVS on every corner of it, and Romney came right out and trashed the idea – in Florida, nonetheless, a very space-friendly state.
“This idea of going state-to-state and promising what people want to hear, promising hundreds of billions of dollars to make people happy.
I spent 25 years in business. If I had a business executive come to me and say they wanted to spend a few hundred billion dollars to put a colony on the moon, I’d say, 'You’re fired.'
The idea that corporate America wants to go off to the moon and build a colony there, it may be a big idea, but it’s not a good idea. And we have seen in politics — we’ve seen politicians — and Newt, you’ve been part of this — go from state to state and promise exactly what that state wants to hear.
The Speaker comes here to Florida, wants to spend untold amount of money having a colony on the moon. I know it’s very exciting on the Space Coast.”
Wow. I didn’t know Romney had that in him. Is it possible that he went to the Wizard of Oz to get a backbone?
But now, it's time for his only hiccup, and if you watched the debate, you know where I’m going.
Early on, Blitzer asked him about an ad his campaign was running, claiming that Gingrich had called Spanish the language of the ghetto.
Romney reeled and said he doubted it’d come from his campaign and that “there are a bunch of ads out there that are being organized by the people.”
Two problems with that.
First, the ad did come from his campaign, and since he's legally required to say “I approve of this ad” in every commercial, well, it made him look like he lied in the debate.
Second, he said there were a “bunch” of ads being “organized by the people.”
No, “the people” don’t organize ads. Super PACs littered with your former staff organize ads.
Beware of any politician who defends something by referring to “the people” – like “the people’s will”, a “people’s revolution" etc.,
Communist history has shown us that any movement of the people is really all about one person – the dictator who wrests control of a country and slaps the word “people” on everything, while his are dying and groaning.
Romney has always been weak, at best, and downright shady, at worst, when the topic of his Super PAC comes up.
But that moment was his lone weakness.
The Mitt Romney we saw last night could beat Barack Obama. The president is still more likable, which makes me think he’s more likely to win, but if angsty Americans aren’t smiling, then they might not be as seduced by Obama’s.
NEWT GINGRICH: D
I always watch these debates with a Word doc up, and type brief notes as things move along. Then, once the debate is over, I flesh out my thoughts.
But I'm going to let you in on the notes I scratched for Gingrich. Here they are in all their spare glory, with misspellings intact.
DESTROYED by Romney. Destroyed. His shot at the moderator about CaymannIsland was awful. Romney’s comeback was perfect.
Panders for Paul vote by saying Paul was in great shape
He and Santorum have different types of arrogance. Santorum’s is kind of endearing; then gets annoying. Gingrich is kind of annoying; then gets insufferable; then gets like
Newt: I’m running for my two grandchildren (drug dealers on those National Geographic drug specials also talk about how they deal drugs so they can feed their families. Weak pander, annoying.)
So yeah, he was destroyed and since, for better or worse, he’s pinned nearly his entire case for the nomination on debating Obama, he just blew his rationale.
But Gingrich can take comfort in knowing this -- I'm confident that he'll be the subject of a 12 part, American Experience documentary sometime within the next fifty years.
That counts for something. I couldn’t see Rick Santorum even getting an hour on American Experience. Ron Paul, maybe a two part series, but it wouldn’t be so much about him as about the movement he created and unique ideology he tapped into.
Gingrich’s 12 part documentary, though, wouldn’t be about a particular movement, but squarely about himself. This great, tragic figure, who wound up being more tragic than great.
And Newt would love to watch it. I just hope PBS gets on the ball and does it sometime in the next 20 years, because regardless of how they portray him, I know Newt would DVR the 12 part series of himself, sit down with a big bowl of buttered movie-theatre popcorn, some malted Whoppers, and a large Coke.
He would rather be attacked than forgotten, and Gingrich will not be forgotten. His presidential run is a worthy addition to his life-long case to be written about, instead of, for once, doing all the writing himself.
Okay, but getting to the debate.
He had one particular moment where he tried attacking the moderator (Newt even used his first name, “Wolf", in a sequel to his "Juan" moment, which shows Chris Matthews it ain't a racial thing), but instead ended looking like a guy whose gig was up.
After Blitzer asked about Romney’s tax returns, Gingrich bore down on Wolf.
"Wolf, you and I have a great relationship, it goes back a long way.... This is a nonsense question.
Look, how about if the four of us agree for the rest of the evening, we’ll actually talk about issues that relate to governing America?"
Blitzer wouldn’t be intimidated.
BLITZER: But, Mr. Speaker, you made an issue of this, this week, when you said that, “He lives in a world of Swiss bank and Cayman Island bank accounts.” I didn’t say that. You did.
GINGRICH: I did. And I’m perfectly happy to say that on an interview on some TV show. But this is a national debate, where you have a chance to get the four of us to talk about a whole range of issues.
BLITZER: But if you make a serious accusation against Governor Romney like that, you need to explain that.
Blitzer was exactly right, and this time, the audience was on his side.
As Tim Pawlenty knows, the rules of debating say you’re not allowed to run from an accusation you’ve made elsewhere. And Newt ran. He tried to run over Blitzer in the process, but instead fell and started limping, but not in an inspiring way like that Youtube runner guy who stumbled in the Olympics and whose Dad came down to help him across the finish line, while everyone cheered.
And it’s fitting that, in the final debate for a long while, Romney finally felled Gingrich.
Newt was a tough guy to go through, but Mitt is better for it. At this point, Newt could find a Romney treasure map with a big X showing where he’s buried his gold in the Cayman Island sand, and it probably wouldn’t matter.
So I give Gingrich a D. Not because he was necessarily that bad, but because he lost Florida and probably the election last night.
RON PAUL: C+
He’s never better or worse. He doesn't lose followers or gain them. So that's why I get what I always give him.
RICK SANTORUM: A
This was his best debate, by far.
I’m not a fan of “grown-up in the room” moments, whereby one candidate makes a transparent bid to be the adult by scolding bickering candidates (Jon Huntsman was the master at this).
But Santorum had one such moment, and it was full of passion and fit the audience’s mood perfectly.
During a particularly testy and tertiary fight between the front-runners over Fannie and wealth, Santorum exploded beautifully.
"Can we set aside that Newt was a member of Congress and used the skills that he developed as a member of Congress to go out and advise companies — and that’s not the worst thing in the world — and that Mitt Romney is a wealthy guy because worked hard and he’s going out and working hard?
And you guys should leave that alone and focus on the issues.
Amen.
He had another nice moment when he refused to pander to the Spacecoast and talked about cutting budgets and how space cuts shouldn’t be off-the-table.
And he stayed relatively positive and really only attacked hard over RomneyCare, which is a perfectly legit point of contention.
But he just doesn’t have any gravitas. I rely on two rules for the test of gravitas, and Santorum fails on both counts.
First, if Santorum hadn’t lost reelection, and if he'd kept winning over and over until he was old, could you imagine ever calling him a “lion of the Senate”? No. Kitten of the Senate, maybe. Maybe an “Older Kitten of the Senate.” But not a lion.
Second, do you think Santorum could pull off being a dictator?
Gingrich is easy to see in that role. Churlish, severe, capricious, prone to indulgence, but not without a warm side, an “Uncle Newt” side, if you will, that makes him more interesting in the Isaacson biography you’d read about him. He’d also build statues of himself on every corner and in front of hospitals.
Romney is easy to imagine as a dictator. Coldly efficient. All the cubicles in the state-run companies are the same shape and color, all the housing is the same – affordable but with small refrigerators and bad central heating, there’s a strong police presence with little crime, but also little hope. He’d hang on for decades, and other countries would know there really wasn’t much hope of reforms. So yeah, kind of like a Soviet.
Even Ron Paul is easy to see as a dictator. He’d be this diminutive, hunched, reclusive guy, with a mischievous grin, and as his troops marched by, you’d say “How could that little, old guy control that entire country”, and outsiders wouldn’t understand just how loyal his followers are, how they’d fight to the death for him and crash every straw poll, I mean, er., Regardless, Paul could easily look like a dictator.
But Santorum? I’m not getting the dictator vibe, at all, and as we’ve just seen, there are lots of dictator vibes out there.
Nevertheless, it was his best debate, and I expect to hear lots of pro-Romney folks extending olive branches to conservatives by propping up, exalting, and writing about just how good and worthy a competitor Santorum is. That’s because Romney can bat him away like a fly without even batting.
