By _Sojourn_ 1 Comments
I had to work last night so I couldn't watch the entirety of the debates, but what I did see was quite uninspiring from a liberal-progressive-democrats stand point. Obviously, I was expecting very loud and harsh quips aimed at the president, but what I really wasn't expecting was all of the fire under Rick Perry's arse. He was gunned for so much last night I sort of felt sorry in an apathetic/not really sort of way for him. In the discussions taking place after the debates I think some very important questions were answered, some which were given correct answers and some that I don't think were so spot on.
- Who was the big winner last night? Some people said Rick Perry, some said Mitt Romney. I happen to think it was neither of them. I think that debate was flat with the exceptions of a few high points of interest. I think everyone with the exception of Michelle Bachman was really on their A-Game. No one backed down from any questions no one gave really wild answers, again with the exceptions of Everyone there...but again that's coming from my standpoint as a LPD...I'm sure if I was a conservative republican, I would have enjoyed it...But even, I think Conservative Republicans were a little disheartened by that debate, simply because social issues were not discussed, probably on purpose because if was MSNBC who was moderating, but that's another thing. None of them had the opportunity to bash gay marriage, talk about taking your rights as a woman, or any other hot button issues that they say they don't want to talk about.
- Who was the big looser last night? MICHELLE BACHMAN. Truthfully, up until Rick Perry jumped into this race, she was the one that everyone looked at as the possible persone to defeat Mitt Romney if she played her cards right, but what happened last night proved what I'd been saying for a long time. Conservatives resist change...You may not like it but it's true, and last night proved it. And here's my reason for saying it. Michelle Bachman was probably one of the most right wing minds up there last night, and for the most part, she was ignored, and when she answered questions, her answers were just plain fodder to fill time and space. The debate showed one thing, the Republican party is not ready to elect a woman President. Sad but true...Like I said, up until Rick Perry entered the running, she was the one to watch out for, and now that he's in, she's been thrown to the wayside. The part has said to her in a gist "You were just here as a seat filler" she was never going to get that seat anyway, and she was never going to be anything more than a seat filler because she is a woman...And not that being a woman in Republican politics is bad, even if it is sort of an oxy moronic status, she could never get the nomination because the party resists change in huge leaps and bounds. I think that's why she's the big looser to begin with, but I knew she was never going to be able to be tough enough, or matter of factly MAN enough to take what is seen as a Mans, Mans, Mans World...While it wouldn't be nuthin' without a woman or a girl, it's still a mans world in Republican politics, and in Democratic politics as well...
- Why didn't anyone swtich up a question and take it down a more Social conservatives path? There are two answers for me. One: Everyone there was worrying about Rick Perry's performance...And Two: They didn't get any chances...MODERATION WAS TIGHT!------ It was Rick Perry's first debate, and because he is now the front runner, all candidates, and participants and all party members were watching him like a hawk, waiting for him to succeed. That's right...They wanted him to succeed, because the DON"T Want Mitt Romney, and the never really wanted Sarah Palin or Michelle Bachman. For the most part he did that, with a few slip ups when it came to HPV vaccination, which I suspect will be getting A LOT more scrutiny in the coming days. Also, the moderators, even thought they ran over their time limit, were really swift in timing their answers, and going on to the next person when it was time to do so. Doing that, with a rigid set of questions allowed them to control the debate just as much as what any of the candidates were saying...Newt Gingrich who was the best debater/ aside from Ron Paul, both of whom are usually great at debates in general, tried to do this and it just didn't happen for them both...Maybe because Newt is as hypocritical as anyone on that stage or because Ron Paul is so swift with his remarks no one dared challenge him on such things.