Moe Lane

It’s on at 8 PM, and I am not particularly convinced that I have anything worthwhile to say about this one at this point.  It’s almost over, one way or the other, and pretty soon we can all get on with our lives until after the convention.

So: should I tweet this one as usual, or should I go play some more Skyrim?

Ben Shapiro, on the news that we’re now all done with debates, apparently:

The big question is: now the debates don’t matter?  For months, all we heard was that debates were the best way to select our candidates.  On that basis, we ousted Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry. Now debates have taken a backseat to basic campaigning.

(more…)

…since other sites are: do we need more primary debates?  I certainly don’t want any more, given that at this point I can feel my IQ points ablate away with every new one.  And I can’t imagine that any more of them will move the needle at this point.

I could, however, be wrong. Thoughts?

Jim Geraghty thinks so, I think: and certainly the way that my brain snapped last night during the Terry Schiavo question – WHAT THE [EXPLETIVE DELETED], NBC? – and I started chanting invocations to Cthulhu and Yog-Sothoth on Twitter would be evidence arguing against even more debates.  And I have a State of the Union address to watch tonight!  Oh, boy!

Seriously, they should never schedule one of these things back-t0-back to a legitimately major speech, ever again.  I feel almost [nauseated] at this point.

Ed Morrissey notes this Byron York article about how Mitt Romney would probably like to stop the debates now, please.  This is my thinking on this.

• On the one hand, I agree with Ed: we’ve had a godawful amount of debates so far.  They’re exhausting to cover; I can only imagine how grinding they are to the people actually doing them.  From Mitt Romney’s point of view, a debate must be much like how Tom Wolfe portrayed physical examinations as being for fighter pilots.  Which is to say, the best that Romney can hope for in a debate right now is to not have a campaign-ending disaster.
• On the other hand, I also agree with Ed: we’re actually starting to see things that look like debates, instead of an extended poking of Republican candidates with sticks to see whether they’ll attack the bars.  Also, as Byron noted, the debates are popular (the ABC News poll had 6.25 million viewers).
• And on the gripping hand: well, this is probably not a good time for Mitt Romney to quit debates anyway.  Yesterday was… not optimal: Romney got punched hard by Santorum, frankly evaded his way through the question of whether he’d release his income tax statements, and spent most of the debate agreeing with Rick Perry.  I would seriously recommend that Romney quit the debate schedule when he’s in a slightly better pole position.

I think that this is a reasonably fair take on the subject.

More accurately, let me let Clubber Lang tell you what the debate should be about tonight.

Seriously, if there isn’t blood on the walls and at least one ear on the ground by the end of it then we all truly did waste the last six months of our lives. I want to see Darwinian, red-in-tooth-and-claw savagery in the debate tonight… and here’s something that Mitt Romney should consider: the only way that he lives through this is to be the most savage one of all. The days of ducking under the podium are over.

And, hell, if Romney starts channeling his inner Batman it’d actually be a bit reassuring at this point; so, no downside.

Moe Lane

Short assessment: …screw it. Perry won tonight. Good answers, and Fox News absolutely GAVE him that one about Operation Fast & Furious.  Ron Paul imploded in three minutes of psychedelic hysteria.  Bachmann & Santorum will drop out after Iowa, and that’s a shame.  Gingrich and Romney did well, but not well with Iowa voters.  And Jon Huntsman will probably be the next Vice President of the United States.

That’s my first impression.  I’m going to go have a little drink now.

The last debate before the Iowa caucus is tonight.  9PM EST, hosted by Fox News.  We just need to hold out for a little bit longer.  Just a little bit longer, and it’ll be done until after the Iowa results.

Anyway: expect tonight to be as knockdown and drag-out a fight between Romney and Gingrich as either dares to do; Huntsman and Perry will try to keep themselves from immolating themselves on national TV; and the other three will be having some bittersweet moments of pre-nostalga.  Yes, yes, I know that Ron Paul is currently polling well in Iowa; it’s not going to help.  Sorry.

Still: almost there.

Or, rather, Senator Blutarsky does:

Vodkapundit has the right idea on this one.  It’s not even that I don’t think that the debate won’t be interesting; it’s just… how many of these things have we had by now?

Anyway, it’ll be on ABC News.

There are only two more Republican debates before the Iowa caucus, and they’ll both be in Iowa.  It’ll all be over soon.

No.  NO!  We WILL survive this!  Never doubt that!  And do you know why?  Because we are so very pretty. We are just too pretty for God to let us die.

(pause)

OK.  Bad precedent.  But still.

And here’s part II: the Q&A from last night’s (10/11/2011) post-debate remarks by Texas Governor Rick Perry. Again, this was done by RedState’s Aaron Gardner, not myself. You can see the first part here.

Moe Lane (crosspost)

Our own Aaron Gardner was on hand to record the Governor’s remarks after the debate last night. I’ll be putting up the video in two parts: this part consists of the formal remarks that Governor Perry made, and the second will be from the question-and-answer period.

Not to be, ah, pawkish about this or anything: but as you can see, the difference between Perry’s performance at debates, and his ability to interact with a room, is palpable.

Moe Lane (crosspost)