4th Republican Debate Review - The utterly forgettable debate of no gaffes, no standout performances and essentially no clash (updated) - Now featuring: Spice Girls Edition

So this was the bland debate in the series. The 4th Republican debate has just ended, on Fox News, and it was a snooze-fest. Mostly soft-ball questions by a panel of conservative business press, on often boring issues mostly about taxes and the economy and banking etc. And the candidates were let to speak all over each other again. And there were no gaffe moments, and there were no breakout moments. The highlight of the night was Donald Trump asking why is Carly Fiorina interrupting everybody all the time. We could save time and just say 'everybody earns a B' and it would not be far off the mark. But lets do the review anyway. In order of their national polling before the debate so first up is... (PS I added the Spice Girl names for the candidates to the bottom)

Donald Trump  - B. The Donald is no longer seeming like a goofball on the stage. He is gradually morphing his campaign to seem more plausible and serious and realistic as a candidate, which all seems  to suggest he is serious about this run and convinced his 25% support in the Republican party, based on outrageous extremst racists views, has any chance to win the general election. Good luck with that. But he had his best debate so far, and he wasn't really touched by anyone else. I think this helps not hurts Trump in the current mild increase he has been seeing in his support. He could go up a few points after the debate. Incidentially his closing - that he won't mention his website because he won't need your money - probably was the most damaging thing he could say to those candidates who need money and have been pushing their campaign website like Marco Rubio. Even when he isn't actively attacking the rivals, Trump is the wrecking ball of this season.

Dr Ben Carson - C. Dr Carson shows continued improvement in his growth into a serious political candidate. He is not anywhere close to it but this was nonetheless by far his best performance in a debate so far. He is clearly outclassed by all other 7 on the stage and few outside his core support would consider him a serious candidate to actually run for President. But Carson has far bigger problems now as the dual front-runner alongside Trump, outside the debate. He has to deal with the increased scrutiny of his past and the various lies he knows he has in his books, that will be discussed in the coming weeks. The Carson November came and he was briefly the front-runner this season according to the Real Clear Politics average of polling. That moment has already passed and Trump has returned to the top. Carson will never be the front-runner again, but he does have it on his biography as another asterisk, that once he led the Republican field in the national polling for President. Congrats on that. This debate? Won't help him but it won't directly hurt him either. His core supporters (about half of the total support) will find this a very strong performance because clearly their candidate is improving. But he is so far below the minimum levels of expectations of being the President, he will not see any gains from this debate. He will see the erosion from all the far bigger impacts outside the debate that now are conspiring to doom his campaign.

Marco Rubio - B+. Marco is a gifted speaker, but he really needs to elevate his game and hit it out of the park. If he had a breakout moment, and on tonights snooze-fest 'debate' it would not have taken that much to have a real success, but he isn't quite there yet. I was expecting on the Putin question for Marco to do a brilliant recollection to his earlier debate when he forecasted this move by Putin to bring his air force to Syria and boots on the ground, but again Marco's instincts aren't that sharp to seize that moment. He could have it as the thing everybody talks about now. It was teed up for him, to swing and hit. Instead his answer went totally in a different direction to oblivionville. Imagine candidate Barack Obama in 2012 debates or 2008 on a similar opportunity. Imagine current Hillary Clinton in a similar situation - broad smile and pre-set killer debate response that becomes the talking point and video highlight everybody talks about. Marco had the issue - he actually made the bold prediction at a previous debate that this audience had seen of what was now the topic of this debate - yet he failed to capitalize on it. Marco is instinctively a very strong politician and debater. Imagine 4 years of maturing into a more fully rounded politician, how strong he can be in 2020. Which is not to say he can't win the nomination now (I have him ranked as 3rd easiest path to the nomination, behind Cruz and Trump). But he had perhaps the best debate performance today and he is solid. He has enormous potential and he might have a superb memorable moment in some upcoming debate, there are still 7 more debates to come (based on the original schedule) on the Republican side (or at least 5 if the two possibly to be cancelled debates end up remaining cancelled. I seriously doubt that). Marco should see gradual consolidation of his support as the hopeless candidates will see their support dwindle. 

Ted Cruz - C (originally was B). After an excellent performance in the last debate, Ted Cruz didn't continue at that level. Still a good performance but not exceptional. He can definitely do better. He needs the discipline to force the debate opportunities to work for him, even if he doesn't get to 'fight'. Clearly he enjoyed last time attacking the moderators, but he can't expect to get that chance every time. Solid performance that will not in any way hurt him. I think the early signs from some state polling suggest that disgruntled former Dr Carson supporters are now starting to slip to Ted Cruz. I think that will continue and this debate helps them do that transition without much pain. We should see a continuing of the growth trend for Cruz which could now put him into serious challenger status for an Iowa win as Carson support erodes. But that growth trend was already going on before this debate. This debate does nothing to alter that general trajectory.

ADDENDUM - I missed this. My original grade was B and the above review is how I saw it. I missed the oops moment. It wasn't as bad as fellow Texan, Governor Rick Perry in 2012 with the original Oops moment, who said he wanted to cut 3 departments, and only could list two. It was also what the TV show Veep parodied in their debate episode. A classic blunder nobody should try in a debate. Now Ted said he'd eliminate 5 departments. As that happened live in the debate, I cringed thinking, please don't let this be a Governor Oops moment, and Ted seemed to stumble a bit after the first three departments, but then he remembered his last two, and it seemed all good. I didn't catch the gaffe. Unfortunately he did mess it up. He listed the Department of Commerce twice. Its not as bad a goof as one, two, oops. But it is a gaffe. And as this was so bland and featureless as a debate, I am afraid this will be repeated a lot, and Ted Cruz may have a recurring theme of mocking his ability to count to five. Or maybe its something in the Texas water, with all the fracking. If it just messes up their math. So now, not based on my own review of the debate, but after reading the first review by someone else, and seeing I missed a major moment, I am dropping my grade for Cruz from a B to a C. I think this will be a blotch on this otherwise strong debate but it will not doom his campaign. He needs to now memorize the 5 and rattle them out in every press interview several times, on full routine, that he never stumbles on this again. And nobody should ever try that. Don't say you have 5 or 3 or 4 or 6 departments you want to cut. It is a trap by debate gods, you will stumble.

Carly Fiorina - B-. Carly's pitch is starting to sound a bit like a broken record and she was quite aggressive in butting into several questions. The novelty of how hard she was hitting Hillary Clinton has worn off. The debate answers now seem more like repeats and there is nothing that exciting about her anymore. After the second debate she catapulted up to second in the polling, now she is here in the mid-field and this debate will not see her needle moving anymore. She would need a new wind or some fresh approach, or she may soon find herself back on the kiddies' table. Carly has so little otherwise to go for her, she truly needs brilliant debate performances as she did in the first two debates. And as she didn't deliver on that, this was very pedestrian also-ran performance, it is essentially dooming her run. This was a big lost opportunity.

Jeb Bush - C-. Talking about lost opportunities. Mr I-have-other-more-cool-things-I-could-be-doing candidate needed a big night (again) and failed to deliver it (again). In the first half of the debate Jeb stumbled on every speaking opportunity, not catastrophically but just enough to be a stark contrast to all others including, surprise-surprise, even Rand Paul who seems to have finally woken up to the debating. Jeb's performance was not weak, it just was nowhere good enough to restore any confidence with his supporters that he can ever be better than this. Jeb polling has been on a downward trajectory ever since Trump appeared to wreck his chances and some of recent polls had his national numbers as low as 4%. I think this downward trend continues and for the next debate by November his RCP average could be around 4%. There is no life in this campaign nor in this candidate. He is a dead man walking. For four debates he was supposed to show he has what it takes to win, and nada. He is a forgettable candidate.

Rand Paul - C+. Well good of you to join us, Senator Paul, finally, after sleepwalking through the first three debates. It was still nothing to write home about, he wasn't anywhere near the threat to win the debate, but it wasn't a piss-poor performance either. He did sound like one of the adults in the room and had some spirited moments even. His libertarian base should be relieved that this Rand Paul actually exists and can be hopeful he will now take the rest of this season seriously. I think this debate can stop the erosion in Paul's support and he might survive to the next debate with this, but it still a far way from what he needs to be a serious challenger. Well, there still is time and he is now showing some signs of life. At least thats a lot better than Jeb.

John Kasich - B-. And the biggest surprise in a debate of no real surprises, was the improvement in Governor Kasich. Yes, he is pushing that 'I'm the adult in the room' argument very hard, but he benefits from Chris Christie being out of this debate and Jeb being so weak. There is a disgruntled moderate wing of the party in search of their consensus choice. They don't want to go with Rubio for him being far too extreme. So I think this 'again adjusted' Kasich level of enthusiasm, not the mild man of Ohio we saw in the first two debates. Not the freakish Frankenstein we saw as his adjustment to be more combattive in the third debate, but this second adjustment. This is now pretty close to where he needs to be, to start to solidify that wandering moderate support who deserted Jeb and Christie and can't find a home. I think Kasich ends up picking up support and consolidating polling to rise up from fear of relegation to the kids table. And he may emerge as the preferred option for moderates, that would be really pinpointing this debate where it happened. How fitting that the boring Ohio technocrat had his breakout in the boring business debate where nothing happened.

The Kiddie table gave us nothing to care about or miss. Christie however, his support is so close to the 2.5% level, he can well return to the adults table debate regardless of this performance. But do we miss Mike Huckabee? No. Do we want Rick Santorum or Bobby Jindal onto the adults table debate. No. And what about those two guys who weren't even on the kids table debate anymore. Who cares, they were so forgettable.

Jeb needed to prove to his ever-dwinding supporter base and especially his fund-raising base that he is a serious candidate who can fight for their party and get the nomination and defeat Trump and win against Hillary. This debate showed exactly nothing of that. Jeb's campaign is on life support and this debate may be where his big money support decide its time to pack it in. He's had four chances and blew them all. Now who can I call about a refund of my SuperPAC money..

Fiorina needs the debates to fuel her run. She no longer has that magic and she is now becoming the next endangered species to be expelled from the adult table.

Dr Ben Carson has far bigger problems than what the debate could be. He did improve and this was his best debate yet, but he is outclassed and for the vast majority of voters he is unelectable. This could have been a turning point, it wasn't. His brief visit to the top of the polls will never come back again. The Carson November is already over.

Rubio, Cruz, Kasich and Rand Paul all did solid performances that their base will appreciate, no problems but no big break-outs either. Mild gains or rough parity in the polling is what they'll get.

The big winner will be Donald Trump in that he wasn't attacked and he now projected his most sensible 'adult' persona yet, in a debate. Far more Republicans will start to appreciate his message and this milder style he is developing. Trump should see his support now grow again, partly at the expense of Dr Carson and Jeb (perhaps also Fiorina) and partly out of undecideds. Expect Trump to see a polling bump after this debate.

Totally forgettable debate. But I agree with Trump, why is Fiorina interrupting everybody all the time. Shut up already.

REPUBLICAN CANDIDATES SPICE GIRL EDITION

So now we also know their Spice Girl names. Donald Trump is obviously Posh Spice (some suggested she should have been Ginger Spice because ot that thing on her head). There were lots of rumors Posh Spice would quit the band, especially as she had that gig to host Saturday NIght Live but Posh is promising us, that inspite of her huuuge talents in dancing and singing, she will remain in the band. She is also the only one who was a success before the band and could go back to a solo career.

Marco Rubio is Baby Spice. Baby Spice is the smiling babyface charmer with the perfect dance moves that everybody loves. Dr Ben Carson is Sleepy Spice (she wanted to be known as Egyptian Spice) Sleepy Spice is the one who doesn't know quite the steps and mumbles some of the lyrics, so she is often stuck in the back of the stage and sometimes her microphone is turned off during performances. Ted Cruz is Angry Spice. (She asked to be called Happy Spice and still doesn't get it why that name was not accepted for her to use). Angry is usually very good as a dancer but on video, sometimes we see that she messed up her steps, perhaps counting wrong. Carly Fiorina is clearly Scary Spice. She was a failed pop star in her past. She is the one who will sing out of synch, over other band members' lines, and often deliberately steps in front of the camera to hog the spotlight in video shoots. Rand Paul is Pacifist Spice. Pacifist Spice is the one in the band who is constantly telling the others that they're doing it wrong on any steps or lyrics. Nobody likes her.

Kasich is not a Spice Girl, she is Spice Mom who tries to be the only adult in the room. Jeb is not in the band, she is just a spectator. She's a slightly goofy and mumbling Spicegirl wannabe, member of their fan club. Her rich parents got her an audition to the band but while she tried Jeb was never quite able to remember the lyrics correctly, and her dance moves, even her posture is not worthy of being a true Spice Girl. But now she hangs around the band like a creepy older uncle.

Of the kids table, Mike Huckabee is Hasbeen Spice. Chris Christie is Neverwas Spice. (See how nice I was. I didn't call her Bridge Spice or Jersey Spice or Fatty Boom-boom Spice or Heavy Spice D. She is a mellow mild-mannered willow of a lady and would never hurt a fly. Now sit down and shut up). Rick Santorum is Nutty Spice. Bobby Jindal is Forgotten Spice. They tour the nation as a Spice Girls tribute band to tiny audiences. And out in the wilderness there are vague rumors that Lindsay Graham once was Warmonger Spice and the New York Governor-dude was Invisible Spice. They are lost in some forlorn bar drunk, and telling old stories of how they once was a Spice Girl on the stage with the big stars.

Already out of the band, tossed earlier this year is Scott Walker aka Nazi Spice (she managed to lose some of the band's money) and Governor Oops Rick Perry ie Wrong Spice (who was constantly singing the wrong lyrics) There is no Sporty Spice but had new Senate Speaker Paul Ryan chose to run this year, he'd be Sporty Spice. Mitt Romney auditioned for the Spice Girls and was rejected. And everybody still fondly remembers the original Spice Girl, John McCain who was of course, Old Spice. (and if you wanted to enjoy the 100 best jokes that were on Twitter about the lunatic things Dr Ben Carson may have said, check out my selection of the best 100 jokes)

(PS also mea culpa. Last time I felt Chris Christie had won the third GOP debate (with Cruz & Rubio also strong) and that Christie's polling would improve. He instead saw his polling dip and because he was so close to the edge, he actually fell off the adult table. Ouch. What a debate coach might see in such a performance may be in quite a big contrast to what core Republican voters see in this same broadcast)

Comments

[mpinco]

Jeb, Fiorina and Kasich slide into obscurity. Paul hangs on but also sees a slow decline.

Trump increases lead, Carson and Cruz position for VP. Rubio left out in cold as his pro-amnesty position takes its toll.

Hillary is one step closer to indictment. Sanders highlights he is a 7 year undergrad at University of Missouri

[mpinco]

In other news Hillary and Bernie are planning on meeting with Jonathan Butler, the University of Missouri graduate student who claims he is oppressed by white privilege and went on a hunger strike.

Why meet with Jonathon? Well he is the 1% ....... and has done a great job of promoting the narrative.

Yes, that is today's Democrat Party which needs a house cleaning.

[mpinco]

Kasich to undercard, promote Christie.

Frank Luntz Focus Group Gives Kasich Lowest Score Ever: "Biggest Liberal On That Stage"
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2015/11/11/frank_luntz_focus_group_gives_kasich_lowest_score_ever_biggest_liberal_on_that_stage.html

"Frank Luntz said Kasich scored the lowest number ever in his history of doing dial focus groups. The focus group was annoyed by Kasich's constant interruptions. One said Kasich went from number 2 on his list to off of it completely. Another called Kasich the "biggest liberal on that stage" and that he belonged at a Democratic party debate.

The group overwhelmingly thought Chris Christie, who was in tonight's undercard debate, should have been in the main debate............"

[Winter]

Nice read

Days of Desperation
There’s a reason Bush, Kasich and other establishment Republicans aren’t gaining traction. Their conservatism no longer makes sense.

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/11/days-of-desperation-213329

[mpinco]

@Winter - let me fix it for you considering this piece was written by the Politico, who has been in back-pedaling mode.

Days of Desperation
There’s a reason Bush, Kasich and other establishment Republicans aren’t gaining traction. Their liberalism no longer makes sense.

[mpinco]

BTW, the University of Missouri (Mizzou) debacle plays right into the hands of the anti-establishment sentiment of this election.

[mpinco]

I have to say liberals and Politico are mental.

"....the GOP is enjoying its greatest successes in generations. Today, Republicans enjoy total control of 60 percent of state legislatures and partial control of 76 percent.

....But no one is quite sure what the Republican Party’s vision is or should be any more—least of all those hapless “establishment” presidential candidates who are flailing away out on the trail......."

Maybe the eLiberals should look inwards at the havoc they have wrought with the likes of Noel Ingatiev, Professor Cheryl Matias and their "children", the likes of Jonathon Butler. Look no further than Progressive Liberals and Neo-Liberals (Hilter would be proud) for the failure of eRepublican desire to be more "Liberal".

[mpinco]

Good interview with Pat Caddell, Jimmy Carter's strategist.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/11/11/pat-caddell-trump-carson-rising-because-americans-have-had-it-with-politicalmedia-establishments/

Scroll down for audio track of interview.

Tomi's blind spot is "Mr. Smith" (Jimmy Stewart)

[mpinco]

And why "Mr. Smith" could get votes from several segments of the electorate:

"The Populist Upsurge is Real" When A Liberal College Professor Finds Common Ground With The Tea Party
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-11-11/populist-upsurge-real-when-liberal-college-professor-finds-common-ground-tea-party

"....Robert Reich is Professor of Public Policy at the University of California at Berkeley. .....

.....The post is titled, What I Learned on My Red State Book Tour, and it’s an extremely important that all Americans read it. Here are a few excepts:

I’ve just returned from three weeks in “red” America.

It was ostensibly a book tour but I wanted to talk with conservative Republicans and Tea Partiers.

I intended to put into practice what I tell my students – that the best way to learn is to talk with people who disagree you. I wanted to learn from red America, and hoped they’d also learn a bit from me (and perhaps also buy my book).

But something odd happened. It turned out that many of the conservative Republicans and Tea Partiers I met agreed with much of what I had to say, and I agreed with them......"

Hint: Hillary is NOT Mr. Smith material. In fact she if viewed as the problem.

[Per "wertigon" Ekström]

Once Trump is elected as the GOP nominee, which btw seems ever more likely though still far from a done deal, Hillarys victory will be assured.

Trump can't win an honest debate against Hillary, reason being he is a bully, and as we've been shown with both the democratic debates and emailgate, Hillary is not easily bullied around.

[mpinco]

I don't think Trump is the GOP nominee.

I also don't think Hillary will escape the indictment.

Heh Heh Hitlery's Coming Storm
https://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=230893

"Oh here it comes...

Fox News is told agents are looking at U.S. Code 18, Section 1001, which pertains to "materially false" statements given either in writing, orally or through a third party. Violations also include pressuring a third party to conspire in a cover-up. Each felony violation is subject to five years in prison.

This phase represents an expansion of the FBI probe, which is also exploring potential violations of an Espionage Act provision relating to "gross negligence" in the handling of national defense information.

It is never what you do that gets you in the worst trouble; that comes with the cover-up, if you're dumb enough to think you can get away with it......"

[Per "wertigon" Ekström]

@mpinco:

"I also don't think Hillary will escape the indictment."

If the republicans keep up the witch hunt they will keep on alienating their voters. The indictment won't happen. The U.S. is a corrupt country where money rules, and as long as noone has done anything that made people actually die then the rich and powerful won't fall. It's that simple.

But keep on living in your illusion. You'll be bitterly dissapointed at both your country and the way the modern GOP works soon enough... :)

[Catriona]

@mpinco, if Hillary Clinton were anyone else she'd probably already have been indicted for making misleading statements under that statute. However, the DOJ can overrule the FBI by ignoring their recommendation. For some reason different rules apply to the Clintons.

@per, the FBI doesn't take marching orders from the GOP. If they are investigating, it means that the non-political career civil servants at the FBI believes there is a reason to look into it.

On a side note, as David Boaz pointed out, Hillary Clinton, who sent her daughter to Sidwell Friends, says charter schools are too exclusive. Basically she's taking her marching orders from Randi Weingarten, head of the leading teachers' union. Hillary was for charter schools when Bill was president, and when she was running for president last time.

[Paul]

Following this debate, it looks like even Republican Party leaders start to freak out at the prospect that Trump might win! https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/time-for-gop-panic-establishment-worried-carson-and-trump-might-win/2015/11/12/38ea88a6-895b-11e5-be8b-1ae2e4f50f76_story.html

[Per "wertigon" Ekström]

@Catriona:

One can gain new insights over time which makes one re-evaluate opinions about something. So Hillary being for or against something she previously was for or against about could be a genuine change of opinion.

But yeah, as I said, right now all politicians are bought in the land of the free, it's a given fact. So, even if it's a bought change of heart (and it very well may), it's just business as usual right now.

[mpinco]

The US election will be won or lost on the candidates response to the Paris attacks.

Hillary needs to answer that 3am call, now, not try to deflect the reality of Benghazi.

[millard filmore]

@mpinco: "Hillary needs to answer that 3am call, now, not try to deflect the reality of Benghazi."

Would that reality be the Republicans cutting funding for security of the embassys ?

John Kerry is secretary of state, why would Hillary get involved?

[Catriona]

Hillary thinks that the terrorists are the victims. Remember that her party sees the GOP as their enemies and Islamic terrorists as their allies.

[Catriona]

I'm sure Hillary will blame this on a video. After all that video guy is still in custody on bogus charges.

[Per "wertigon" Ekström]

@Catriona:

I don't understand the Paris attacks.

My scepticism says to me this - What would IS win on enraging Paris in this way? Enraging the western world? After they've seen what happened to Afghanistan and Iraq, what in the world would compel them to do this? Why do they want a full blown war with the west, when their positions are as unstable as they are even now? They occupy territory yes, but I doubt many people actually welcome their brutal and harsh ways. It's just that the hate for the west is even stronger than the hate for IS. I smell a fish here, but I have no proof, just speculations.

This act of terrorism will ignite the flames that will leave the middle east in the rubble for a loooooong time coming. It might even get so bad that the middle east will see several nukes dropped.

So yeah. Actions, meet consequences.