CNN Republican debate: analysis and commentary

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
See also: CNN Republican debate (September 16, 2015) and Insiders: Fiorina shows she belongs on the big stage

The columns below were authored by guest columnists and members of Ballotpedia's senior writing staff. The opinions and views belong to the authors.

Fiorina, Rubio & Bush: Prepared to Improvise

September 17, 2015
By David Kusnet
David Kusnet is a former chief speechwriter for former President Bill Clinton. He is the senior writer and a principal at the Podesta Group, a government relations and public relations firm in Washington, D.C.

As a Democrat, I just might be an impartial judge of last night's Republican presidential debate because I have no horse in this race. While agreeing with little that they said, I’d say the best performers were, in descending order, Carly Fiorina, Marco Rubio and Jeb Bush.

They won because they scored most heavily during the moments that matter most: their answers to unanticipated questions and responses to adversaries' attacks. Long after most of the three-hour, 11-candidate debate is forgotten, those who cover and participate in politics will remember Carly Fiorina devastating Donald Trump with two scathing sentences, Jeb Bush defending his wife and his brother, and Marco Rubio displaying his fluency with foreign policy.

Instead of trying to "wing it" in front of Ronald Reagan's Air Force One, last night’s winners understood this counter-intuitive communications principle: If you want to extemporize effectively, you have to prepare painstakingly. Now here, as some public figures say, "Let me be clear."

Being well-prepared is different from being tightly scripted. Preparation means learning your facts, formulating your positions, framing your arguments and giving systematic thought to how you will address issues and respond to your opponents.

Such serious preparation enabled Fiorina to use the second-tier debate last month as a springboard to the main event last night. Proving she was worthy of her star turn, she dominated her exchanges with Trump about her business record and his. Even more tellingly, when asked to respond to Trump’s crude comments on her "face," she recalled that, just as he had "heard very clearly" what Bush had said about women’s healthcare, women had "heard very clearly" what Trump had said about her.

Similarly, Rubio more than held his own in exchanges with several rivals about the crises in the Middle East, and he and Bush ably defended themselves against Trump’s attacks on candidates who speak Spanish in public appearances.

All these effective exchanges combined familiarity with the facts and well-reasoned arguments with conversational language. Moreover, Fiorina, Rubio and Bush often gave the impression that they were actually answering the questions that they had been asked, rather than simply spouting soundbites or reciting set-piece speeches, as Chris Christie and Scott Walker sometimes seemed to do. Sounding scripted is self-defeating at a time when voters crave "authenticity."

Of the remaining candidates, Rand Paul seemed to know his own mind, returning to his roots as an antiwar libertarian. The sensible, centrist John Kasich presented himself as an experienced pragmatist—perhaps not what GOP primary voters are seeking—and rarely engaged with nor was challenged by his rivals. Ben Carson simply seemed unfamiliar with many issues, and, unlike Trump, he didn’t try to bluff his way through with blustering bravado.

As for Trump, his authoritative manner and monosyllabic certainties seemed not to withstand the counterpunches of rivals who had done what he was too macho to manage: prepare for the debate.

Trump and CNN underwhelmed

September 17, 2015
By Karlyn Bowman
Karlyn Bowman, a widely respected analyst of public opinion, is a senior fellow and research coordinator at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank in Washington, D.C.

In a CBS News/New York Times poll taken a few days before the CNN Republican candidate debate, 63 percent of self-identified Republican primary voters who had selected a candidate in the poll said it was too early to say who they would support, while 37 percent said their minds were made up. Last night’s debate probably reinforced the views of those who aren’t sure who they will end up supporting. It's going to be a long and winding road.

First a word about CNN and its moderators: A three-hour debate? What were they thinking? Even among the campaign junkies I spoke to, it was hard to find anyone who watched the whole thing without a break. It's unlikely that most Americans did. We shouldn't underestimate the difficulty of managing a debate with 11 people on the stage. The moderators' aim last night appeared to be mainly to get the candidates to attack one another—to create political theater, sizzle over substance. That's why television ratings continue to drop. We didn't need the question about their Secret Service code name. In a shorter debate that might have been fun, but in this marathon, it just made the evening seem overly long.

Other recent polls show that Republicans are particularly dissatisfied with their party these days, and that sentiment is driving support for outsider candidates such as Trump, Carson, and Fiorina. So let's start our assessment there.

Is the bloom off the Trump rose? We may have seen the beginning of his decline this week. He could still do well and even win a nomination in a big field, but last night he wasn’t the force he has been and he may be fading. His unprovoked attack on Rand Paul in his opening remarks was bizarre. At the early stages of a campaign, people are trying to decide whether they feel comfortable with a candidate. As time passes, I'm not sure even the GOP's outsider activists will feel comfortable with Trump.

Carly Fiorina had a very good night, and it is clear that she belonged on the main stage. But Chris Christie was right to tackle both Fiorina and Trump about their extended back and forth about their business acumen. She’s determined, quick, and she’s obviously done her homework. She will continue to do well.

Ben Carson exudes affability, and he's gracious. It is great to have him on the GOP's team, but nothing last night suggested he will make it to the top.

Nearly all the other candidates in the main debate had good moments and it was important to hear them discuss their concerns and differences about the state of our defenses and US decline in the world. It's not clear that any of them gained significant ground, but nor did they lose a lot of it. It was important for Jeb Bush to seem more engaged and energetic, and he was.

In the end, how much importance will the debate have? The Fed's decision today on interest rates will have more impact on the presidential election and the nation’s direction than the debate last night.

See also


Retrieved from "https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=CNN_Republican_debate:_analysis_and_commentary&oldid=5333702"