Cruz made a stupid comment from a political standpoint with the "New York values," but he obviously isn't wrong, and it's obvious he meant New York is like left-wing central. New York has gone to Democrats since 1984, and in 84' it was Reagan vs. fucking Water Mondale (ROFL) and 80' it was Reagan vs Carter (another ROFL, just not as much as 84'). Trump's WTC comments were a cheap ploy after that, IMO.
Trump I felt was the weakest on the stage when considering his poll numbers (the real weakest was obviously Carson). His tariff idea is correct, but he failed to relate it to the common man. He simply could have said that the increase in cost of goods from China would force us to pay more for goods from China, but would simultaneously put US goods comparatively cheaper to imported Chinese goods than they are currently. Additionally, with the cost being more competitive, manufacturing would have a shot at coming back. That would have went over well, but he didn't seem to find the words to say it. I also found his WTC comments distasteful overall as someone not from New York, and I think any person from New York (or anywhere) with a brain would see it as a cheap trick, too.
Bush did well on a his first couple of responses, but he started floundering a bit, then came back a bit toward the end. The biggest issue I took with Bush is that he seemed to reference the military as nation building after defeating the enemy, whereas I am a firm believer that the military has the sole purpose of destroying our enemies. The nation building should be left to other entities. Otherwise, I think Bush at least alluded to having some actual strategies the Middle East, where no other candidate gave any sort of hint at having even thought of any strategies at all.
Most surprisingly, I thought Kasich did an excellent job until it got to the point of illegal immigration / asylum. He sounded weak on immigration, and that was the main issue I had with him in his responses. Further, his directing the "US citizens would pay more" to Trump's tariff strategy made me wonder if he actually knows anything about economics; I think my above note on Trump's response would be easy to understand, and I think it made Kasich look like an idiot to even ask the question. Trump failing to appropriately respond was pretty much sheer luck on his part. His first few comments of the debate were great, though.
Rubio seemed a little weak; he didn't really explain anything, just made a few declarations about how when he is President -- and he seemed to be repetitive with them. Noticed, as well, Rubio's phrasing of "radical jihadist," which pretty much reinforces my belief that Rubio can't be trusted.
Carson was a joke. I will be surprised if he is still around for the next debate.
Christie got called out by Rubio, then lied about it convincingly*. I don't remember much else about what he said, though.
Overall, the only two candidates that gave any sort of decent explanation or examples of what they would do that I remember were Kasich (on economy) and Bush (on military). I guess you could count Carson's terrible explanation of simultaneous attacks, but I wouldn't call that a decent explanation, or really relevant to any sort of "real" strategy. There wasn't a lot else of substance overall, I felt.
This was the first debate I've ever watched and I was disappointed. I was expecting people to be giving some sort of detailed plans and strategies, so I guess I'll have to just stick to reading about them in the future since these debates don't seem to be the place that happens.
Facebook
Twitter