Fox News Debate

This was Fred Thompson's second strong debate in a row; it's as if he realized there was a real campaign and that he had real talent to bring to bear in a way that makes him look good and his opponents look silly.

Generally: Mitt Romney was mezzo-tempo tonight; he avoided saying things like "net-net"; the moderators didn't gang on up him -- unusual for a Fox News debate. John McCain had the stature of a frontrunner; Mike Huckabee seemed less fluent with foreign policy issues but was strong, as always, when defending his record as governor. Rudy Giuliani seems content to stay in the background.

Comments

I was so disappointed in Mitt's response to the question about how to send 12 million illegal immigrants home. A smaller government that he pledges doesn't have the manpower or budget to find 12 million illegal immigrants, let alone look at them one by one, and track them individually until they recross the border and "get in line." I can't believe someone that smart would have such a trite answer. Fred Thompson was much clearer in his response. Arizona's law to impose sanctions on employers of illegal immigrants is going to help. If they can't earn money here, if they can't get free medical care here, if they can't get a free education, they'll go home. Humane and compassionate deportation is an oxymoron. Attrition is the key, aided by deporting illegals who don't leave of their own volition.

Posted by Wendy Morejon | January 10, 2008 11:14 PM

Hello, Marc-

I give Fred a very high grade tonight. He had good jokes, a grave demeanor when the occasion called for it, and generally sounded very presidential.

Posted by ElectionNightHQ.com Publisher | January 10, 2008 11:29 PM

Tonight's Republican debate raises a very puzzling question: Do Rudy Giuliani, Fred Thompson and Mike Huckabee want John McCain to be the GOP nominee?

The debate, hosted on Fox News, was the third in the space of five days, but the situation has dramatically changed since the back-to-back meetings of this past weekend. McCain won the New Hampshire primary, and he has jumped to leads in next week's contests in Michigan and South Carolina. If he manages to win both of those primaries, it would become very difficult for his rivals to stop his momentum and prevent the party's establishment from rallying around the Arizona Senator.

Yet, none of the candidates was interested in going after John McCain tonight; the contrast could not have been greater with last Saturday's ABC debate in which the entire field piled on Mitt Romney, sensing an opportunity to knock him out of contention.

Full analysis here, over at Campaign Diaries.

Posted by Daniel, NY | January 10, 2008 11:29 PM

"I was so disappointed in Mitt's response to the question about how to send 12 million illegal immigrants home."

I am disappointed when people begin their arguments with disingenuous pseudo-objective speech. "Disappointed?" Like you were expecting so much more? Give me a break.

It is obvious that Mitt's plan is the same as Fred's when it comes to attrition. Fred's plan will require just as many man hours as Mitt's. What will Fred do with all those illegals whose fake SS #'s lights up as stolen...yes each one of them? You mean he plans on processing each for return? Does that disappoint you?

Be obvious, say it like you mean it, stop pussy footing and get behind YOUR candidate.

Posted by Mike | January 11, 2008 12:13 AM

The best part was the way Ron Paul taught some basic lessons of conservatism to the other morons who claim to be republicans!

Posted by matt | January 11, 2008 12:18 AM

Whats up with Fred? Why is he so negative and sarcastic? He looks too old, just like a grandpa with 20 grandkids.

Huckabee thinks he can cover all his weaknesses with good vocabulary but he is useless.

McCain also looks too old and talks like a smart ass. He is not a conservative for sure.

Any dem will easily destroy McCain, Fred or Huck in general election. They are the weakest ones.

Posted by otherthree | January 11, 2008 12:22 AM

All I can see all of them are so tired. None of them made a huge punch as Mitt did twice in NH. I will not rely on that debate. Sprint became Marathon- give the candidates a break.

As always, Mitt looked presidential, he is the most passionate when it comes to serving the country. He wants to serve America in the name of America, while others may want to in their name where they can go down in history as a president that served America. Mitt goes beyond it, he knows 'SERVICE' what it mean to serve his country. He pledged to lead America into a better tomorrow. So, VOTE for MITT and you will surely NOT regret it. I stand behind this guarantee. There is absolutely no risk in voting for Mitt!

Posted by so-tired | January 11, 2008 2:17 AM

Marc, You'll love tearing this guy a new one. He's saying that Fred "has performed poorly in the previous contests." Utterly clueless.

Posted by Gary Gross | January 11, 2008 2:19 AM

Ignoring McCain is the best strategy. He is inherently a bore. All he has to offer is righteous indignation (when confronted with his many failings). They are all hoping the voters will realize his inherent irellevence - as they had earlier this year. And they are right. At some point his boringness will defeat him. All he has to attract anyone's attention is his crazy anger.

Posted by copp | January 11, 2008 9:51 AM

Fred Thompson has made me look silly by waiting this long to come out of his shell. I was predicting him as a dark horse victor in the early primaries, but I also failed to consider the emergence of Huckabee, who I think also appeals to people who want to see someone nominated who can think for himself and not just rattle off sound bites. I am pulling for both of them. If Hillary gets the Dem nomination, I want a Republican who is honest and isn't a stooge in the race so I can vote against her with a clear conscience.

Posted by Tim | January 11, 2008 1:56 PM

Gary Gross, when I clicked your name it linked to a criticism of Huckabee for invoking images of hellfire in connection with the US military. Good for Huckabee.

Frankly, this quote indicates to me (I am a socially liberal former military officer who was adamantly opposed to the Iraq war because it was stupid) that Huckabee has an excellent grasp of how the US military should be used. It is an offensive, destructive weapon aimed first at deterring others, then at crushing those who are not deterred, from agressing against the US. If he wants to evoke damnation to describe the death that does, in fact, come to the enemy under such circumstances, it does not bother me in the least. It's not any happier an occasion if called by another name. It seems like an honest and intelligent remark.

Posted by Tim | January 11, 2008 2:20 PM

McCain is in this race for himself (I), Huckabee just loves the "spotlight" (look at me), Romney is in this running for President of the United States because he cares about the American People and our future (US)

Posted by Wendy73 | January 12, 2008 2:46 PM