Some heartfelt (yeah, really!) advice on how to process
the debates:
First of all... if you watched the debates - one or both
- GREAT! This is what you need to do! (And the same goes for the Democratic
Party debates when they occur!)
If you didn't watch the debates... either find and view
the debate videos (at least the "Main Event" online), or, locate and
read the transcript(s). (Which brings me to my first piece of advice...)
DON'T let the media tell you "what you saw" or
what to make of it. If you watched the debates then you should have your OWN
opinions concerning who "won," who "lost," and which
candidates impressed and/or disappointed... YOU!
The media sucks! They all have their own biases and
agendas and few have the integrity to simply "report" rather than
editorialize (and try to manipulate readers) via the "narrative" they
choose to deliver.
As for the polls... don't let them sway you. Most of them
are skewed in order to (attempt to) manipulate you!
(And even if they weren't, why focus on others' opinions
and reactions rather than focusing upon your own? If you watched the debate...
go with your gut... go with YOUR initial take!)
Second of all... some harsh (perhaps obnoxious) truth.
(Ready?)
Media bias, partisanship, incompetence, and lack of honor
aside... it's hard to judge the candidates' responses if one isn't intimately acquainted
with the reality (or lack of!) of their premises and claims. This is just
common sense; and it's a fact. If one doesn't know the objective truth... if
one doesn't have a well thought out worldview of one's own... then one will
tend to judge a candidate's performance on just that - the "performance."
(*SIGH*)
Folks... I didn't take notes... and I'm not gonna bother
to review and outline examples via the transcripts... but believe me... by and
large, most of the candidates were/are NOT giving us "the truth, the whole
truth, and nothing but the truth." While it's more common to avoid
actually answering the ACTUAL QUESTIONS and instead embarking upon a
distracting ramble, at times certain of the candidates simply... lied!
(*SHRUG*)
Jeb Bush was all over the map! He contradicted himself
left and right!
Chris Christie? As regular readers know, I simply despise
the guy. Two points though: 1) On style... or performance... Christie was one
of last night's winners. He came across as "a grown-up." However...
2) He avoided actually answering certain questions and contradicted himself on
others. Bottom line... Christie can be entertaining... he can get you
cheering... but in the end... ya just can't trust the guy. (In fact, he may
very well be indicted before next year's election... but that's a story for
another day...)
How'd Trump do? MY opinion? He was one of the losers. Not
badly; certainly not disastrously so; but he certainly didn't kick ass! He knew
the moderator and questioners were going to "go after" him. (And they
did; the first policy question didn't come until the 35-minute mark!) He knew
many of the other candidates were going to target him... and they did. This
clearly rattled him in the sense that he overcompensated with regards to going
right back after them personally. Oh... don't get me wrong; Trump WON some
points; WON certain exchanges; but on the whole (especially during the opening
half-hour of the debate) he came across as... "immature." (Hey! Just
my two-cents worth!) (Note: Bush did MUCH worse overall!)
Who won the night? Rand Paul.
(*SHRUG*)
Of course... I based this not just on his performance -
which was calm, controlled, almost professorial - but upon the "meat"
- the substance - of his answers and positions. (But, hey... this is from MY
perspective. We'll see how the rest of America felt.)
The other big winner (in my estimation): Ted Cruz.
Senator Cruz has stage presence... brains... and sincerity. (And of course he's
RIGHT on most of the issues!)
(*WINK*)
How'd Carly Fiorini do? Not as well as she needed to, in
my (never) humble opinion. Her performance seemed uneven to me. Too rehearsed. She
needed to hit a home run last night and she didn't. She did no better and no
worse than Rubio or Huckabee. She PERHAPS did a bit better than Walker.
(*SHRUG*)
Kasich...??? Geezus... he melted down right before our
eyes last night. I wouldn't be surprised if he's out of the race before the
first primary! (We'll see!) At times... watching the guy... I was worried he'd
stroke out right on stage!
Anyway... did I leave anyone out? Yes... in a sense I
did. Jake Tapper! Yep... the moderator. He SUCKED!
Again... folks... these transparent morons representing
the fourth estate (look that reference up if you must) can't help themselves!
To reiterate: The first POLICY question didn't come till 35-minutes into the
so-called "debate!"
It really is a disgrace what the media does.
Partisanship... "gotchya" journalism... most questions prefaced with
"so and so has accused you of blah-blah-blah"...
(*SIGH*)
Bread and circuses, folks; red meat to the mob; not even
the pretense of caring more about substance than style.
(*ANOTHER SIGH*)
This country is in DEEP trouble, my friends. We deserve
better. Some of us DEMAND better. Most of us don't, though.
And that's my "surface" analysis of last
night's GOP debate.
P.S. -- As for the opening debate - the 6:00 p.m.
"minor candidates" debate - Jindah did the "least worst" in
my (never) humble opinion. Pataki...? A fake, phony, crooked, lying fraud.
(*SHRUG*) Santorum? My question is... how's this guy support himself - let
alone run for president every four years? Does he have a friggin' JOB to go
along with his wife and seven children...??? (Oh... and wasn't there a fourth
candidate? I believe there was... but, frankly... I can't recall who he is!)
(*GUFFAW*)
No comments:
Post a Comment