11th Debate (Fox) Review: Could just give everybody a B grade, nothing changed

Debate number 11 now done. This was the Fox debate after the SEC Primary/Super Tuesday. It was the rematch of Megyn Kelly vs Donald Trump. It was the first debate where Republicans were down to four candidates now that Ben Carson is also out of the race. Who won? I say nobody. I say it was a tie between Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz, with Trump close behind and even John Kasich doing very well. What this means is no real change to the race. Probably winner overall was the Fox moderators who once again were the best of the moderating teams we've seen. But lets do the grading, this will be easy and quick (BTW we'll have a surprise winner)

Marco Rubio B+. Scored good points against Trump but also took it on the chin several times. Trump seemed to more focus on Rubio than on Cruz. Came across smart and Presidential several times and pointed out some of Trump's silly answers but didn't land a knockout punch. Typical Rubio performance but not his best. Clearly was struggling with his voice (having a cold) which probably threw him off his game a bit. I think the best part was the inspirational elements and the contrast as the commander in chief argument. Also the joga comment was funny.

Ted Cruz B+. Ted seemed to tone down his attacks from Trump a bit from last time (weird) but still gave plenty. Made a good contrast of the 'more adult than Trump or Rubio' among the four but obviously not in the class of Kasich. Plenty of stinging attacks on Trump and good arguments. Cruz seemed not to have evolved his lines of attack from the last debate, very much of the attacks seemed rehashes and often with the same exact wording. Ted could do better and shame on you, you're that good Ted, you SHOULD be doing better than this.

Donald Trump B. Trump came under attack from all sides, even Kasich threw one veiled attack. And Trump got the only video attack this time because he chickened out of the previous Fox debate when the moderators ran the same format against Cruz and Rubio back then. Trump did come under constant attack from all sides and Megyn Kelly waited well into the debate before her prepared and very potent attack about Trump University with her follow-up evidence from the court and Better Business Bureau. Yet Trump weathered it all and didn't buckle. He was less childish and yes, seemed more Presidential, at times not most of the time, but most of all, he kept his calm. That was all he needed. If Trump was standing at the end and didn't have a melt-down on stage, he won what he needed to. His supporters will see this as everybody including Fox News ganging up on their guy, and he took it without falling. That is enough for Trump to not see any meaningful erosion in his support. 

John Kasich B-. John had his best debate to date and I think for the first time he really felt like he belonged among that Final Four. He was still the worst of the set but only by a sliver. He kept mostly to his only-adult-in-room game but he did do a veiled attack on Trump too and he offered more of a broad argument than what he's done in the past. The world tour was pretty clever way to show off his foreign policy credentials.

The Fox moderators were once again the best of all moderators we've seen, and they were the most successful so far - while not completely successful - in keeping the candidates from yelling over each other. Megyn Kelly had her championship match against Trump and I judge that to her on points, but give the knock-out punch out of that exchange (Trump University) to Rubio who warned the voters - this is what Trump will do to voters.

The winner of the debate? Mitt Romney. He managed to butt into the debate with his cleverly-timed press conference and scathing attack on Trump, that was brought up in the first question and returned to later in the debate. Pretty nifty move by the guy who decided not to participate in this year's Clown Circus (but clearly wishes he had joined in, and must hold hopes he can still get into the race at the Convention).

The loser of the debate. Jeb Bush. Did you see that short video of him with Trump. Reminded us once again how hapless Jeb was. Just seeing him fleetingly reminded us that this guy once was thought of as the front-runner. Even when Kasich mentioned Jeb once, it made all of us cringe again.

What happens from here? No change. There was no meltdown of Trump, he doesn't lose any support but he has hit his ceiling, he won't gain support either. Trump now soldiers on with 35% support till the Convention and if the game continues with four rivals, Trump will be the nominee simply because the rest of the 65% of the votes will be split and Trump will win a disproportionate amount of the winner-take-all states with that low level of total support. Cruz and Rubio needed to rattle Trump and they didn't. They had Megyn Kelly and the Fox team give them every opening, they were unable to get Trump off his (relatively) collected demeanor. And for what little gains Kasich may have achieved, that comes not from Trump, it bleeds a point or two from Rubio and Cruz. This is not the result anybody other than Trump (or Hillary Clinton) wanted. But the show goes on, now its up to the aftermath. Incidentially, the Fox moderators had the debate rigged clearly more against Trump than anyone else. If Trump was smart, he'd say this was a rough debate but he WON it. Take the high road, claim victory, it was close enough for him (and as always, instant online polling will be supporting his view, not because he won in reality but because he has the most online supporters). But if Trump is true to form, he will be bitching about how the media is so evil and biased and he was targeted.

Comments

[cornelius]

Apparently all online polls seem to indicate that Kasich won the debate (of course not taking into consideration the YUUUGE number of votes for Trump).
Also most analysts seem to agree that Kasich was a winner and had a great debate. Also they seem to agree that Rubio had a bad night. So that is not good news for Rubio. I expect his numbers will go down, and Kasich will get some of his votes. That would be a total disaster for the GOP Establishment. Also some analysts think Cruz was a winner but I don't expect his numbers to get a significant bump because his ceiling is low.

[havea guess]

The republican establishment (democrats too) have been a self serving, filthy den of vipers for many years now. Every one of their attempts to hurt Trump only serves to increase his popularity with the long suffering, disaffected populace.
On the democrat side, the (email)aid given immunity had better hire a security detail. Given the Clinton body count he'd be easily a logical target.

[oibur]

@haveaguess

> The republican establishment (democrats too) have been a self serving,
> filthy den of vipers for many years now.

This is democracy! Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others!
https://richardlangworth.com/worst-form-of-government

> Every one of their attempts to hurt Trump only
> serves to increase his popularity with the long
> suffering, disaffected populace.

Trump's effects in politics and especially in Republican party will be visible for years to come though ;-)

> On the democrat side, the (email)aid given immunity had better hire a
> security detail. Given the Clinton body count he'd be easily a logical target.

This is such a waste of time. Now that Super Tuesday has passed is too late for all these for the simple reason that FBI/DOJ are not the ones which decide (or even hint) who will be or not be the president of USA (or even who is or not it is a presidential candidate) thru their public/official actions/comments because then one can easily argue that basically FBI/DOJ override the people's votes (e.g. what is the point to vote then?). So nothing is gonna happen about this... Time to move on...

[Wayne Borean]

Former Reagan aide votes for Trump to destroy the party...

http://www.salon.com/2016/03/03/my_goal_is_to_destroy_the_republican_party_former_reagan_adviser_bruce_bartlett_explains_his_vote_for_donald_trump/

Wow. Things are getting reallllyyyy interesting. Popcorn doesn't cut it anymore. Suggestions?

[oibur]

@wayne Borean

Stress Balls? http://www.walmart.com/c/ep/stress-balls

[Tomi T Ahonen]

Hi cornelius, havea, oibur

cornelius - yeah but its early, lets see how the national polling comes out or polls of actual meaningful methodology, its been pretty close but not exactly in line with my analysis in the past haha. As I said, the next votes will not move much, the likely one to show slight gains is Kasich. And yes, like you said, this is bad for the establishment because it just prolongs the pain. If Kasich could be forced out, one of Cruz or Rubio could run to 40% in most states but now Kasich bleeds just enough from both that Trump will keep winning the majority of remaining states, with his 35% level (nationally).

havea - ok, but there isn't much of that constituency left who haven't already discovered Trump on the Republican side (or arguably Bernie on the Democratic side). So now whatever the parties do, will no more drive more voters to Trump. Instead it solidifies the ceiling that Trump has. Those who are voting for Trump because they truly hate the system and think this kind of protest 'middle finger salute' is somehow productive, will have found their once-in-a-generation candidate and they'll get it out of their system. What this will help do, is bring the Republicans back from the extreme - but also, I think it won't be enough they still have enough to believe in the Tea Party extremist way. So its likely they will continue the protesting until that election loss is also sustained (Cruz in 2020). After that the Republicans will return to be a normal middle-of-the-ground reasonable compromise-making party that appeals to the moderate and Independent voters, just in time to capitalize on probably huge excesses of 16 years of Democratic rule and policies (and taxes haha, lotsa new taxes and fees).

oibur - good quote about democracy worst form... True about Trump damage to party into years to come - BUT it will also be abandoned as the 'old silly white-man's party' Republicanism, a failed rejected Trumpian Republicanism similar to how McCarthyism and Mondaleism were seen as obsolete philosophies as the parties in the past went through similar lurches to the extreme. Note that this year 2016 will see epic - catastrophic 40-60 election disaster for Trump. Mitch McConnell has already ok'd Republican Senators to run TV ads AGAINST Trump, their guy !! In Arizona the first anti-Trump ad is on the air by the challeger to John McCain's seat (some local Democrat who apparently is has a reasonable chance against him). So the TV ad links McCain to Trump in quite a devastating way. This is seen by the Democrats as the prototype way to go against any generic Republican Senator or Congressman or Governor etc. If Trump loses by 40-60, and his OWN party deserts him, and his supporters are the nutty wing with the KKK and some of the most hateful racists extremists like Arizona Sheriff Arpaio or one of the most racists Republican Senators Jeff Sessions, etc - then Trump will lead an epic parade of losers to their doom. And for those of us who believe in moderation and compromise - good riddance. Trump is a blessing in disguise, helping expel some of the worst elements in the Republican party.

On the Hillary criminal indictment, yeah, thats HIGHLY unlikely to happen but yeah, let the Republicans hope haha, its a truly desperate election year for them as it now is shaping up. They need some hope against hope..

Tomi Ahonen :-)

[Winter]

After 8 months or so, the US press is finally cathing up:
Trump is not unique, far from it.

Trump is a run of the mill, 13 a dozen, populist.

‘Little Trumps Are in Every European Country’
European commentators analyze the Republican frontrunner.

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/03/donald-trump-europe-election/472113/

Trump draws his support, these observers argue, from transnational trends that also enabled the rise of Bernie Sanders and their many European analogues. Whereas “Trump constructs his messianism from fear,” theorized one column in the Spanish newspaper El País, “Bernie Sanders makes his from utopia.” But they are both establishing their “distance from the system” and responding to the “anxiety of a disillusioned electorate.”

Trump and Sanders supporters, several commentators in Europe assert, have basically similar complaints: frustration with out-of-touch, overly scripted technocrats; distrust of the establishment—whether represented by financial giants or the media; a feeling that the current economy isn’t working for them; and, some argue, a heavy dose of isolationism, whether that means building a wall on the Mexican border (Trump) or curtailing global free trade and studiously avoiding foreign military entanglements (Sanders). “Both [left and right populist] movements,” argued one German op-ed, “are on the same political pole against a world of open borders that [let in] refugees as well as global capitalism’s frigid air of competition.”

[NO ONE WANTS WINDOWS]

I am not rooting for anyone and I don't usually post on political stuff but this video has a lot of political insight in a very small segment at time frame 2:55 to 3:40 (less than a minute):

http://video.foxnews.com/v/4781313414001/gingrich-establishment-frenzy-to-stop-trump-wont-work/?intcmp=obnetwork#sp=show-clips

And remember: NO ONE WANTS WINDOWS ON A PHONE ...EVEN A SURFACE PHONE!

[Catriona]

@Tomi, Romney basically proposed a tactical approach to get to a brokered convention. That's a risky proposition as it solidifies Trump's support and because Romney didn't endorse anyone in particular, there is no one to rally around.

Kasich probably would be the best as he has the most experience and the temperament to run a general election. Rubio has whiffed three times now, so despite my earlier belief he could emerge I'm less sold on him now.

Trump seemed to pivot toward a general election campaign, easing up a bit on immigration. On paper, he's actually the perfect candidate. "Generic" socially and fiscally moderate Republican who wins among self-described moderates, evangelicals, and brings in new voters is the sort of "big tent" candidate that professional pundits have said the GOP needs. Unfortunately the specific candidate is one with a lot of baggage who makes a lot of outrageous statements. I wonder if a "kinder, gentler" Trump will emerge in the future, sort of like how Ronald Reagan emerged after Goldwater, particularly since the Democrats are rallying behind their version of Richard Nixon.

[Winter]

No comment needed:

The Daily 202: Last night’s debate was a disaster for the Republican brand
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/paloma/daily-202/2016/03/04/daily-202-last-night-s-debate-was-a-disaster-for-the-republican-brand/56d8fb8c981b92a22d67e91a/

THE BIG IDEA:
The Republican Party does not look prepared to come out of the wilderness after eight years of Barack Obama.

That’s the takeaway of many leading conservatives after last night’s 11th Republican debate.

Just when you probably thought the presidential nominating contest had hit rock bottom, Donald Trump joked about the size of his genitalia.

The two-hour shout-down in Detroit, ahead of Michigan’s primary next Tuesday, suggested that the GOP’s deep wounds will not heal any time soon and raised the odds that Hillary Clinton will wind up president this time next year

[Stephen Reed]

Tomi,

You continue to dismiss the threat of Hillary Clinton's national security investigation to her presidential campaign. In contrast to you, and as said by Donald Trump, the threat to Clinton is grave.

Reportedly, Clinton's server system administrator has been granted immunity from (felony) prosecution by the US Dept of Justice. From this fact, we can deduce certain situations that should alarm Clinton supporters.

1. Immunity is typically granted only if the witness can provide compelling evidence. In this case the evidence would be eyewitness testimony that Clinton facilitated the installation, configuration and operation of the server as its owner. The FBI will have evidence from its unsecured nature and from its confidential contents that the server was used in the commission of numerous types and instances of national security felony crimes.

2. Ordinarily, immunity is granted so that the witness may give testimony to a grand jury. Therefore, we now know that a grand jury has organized by the US Dept of Justice to investigate certain national security felony crimes regarding the custody of the confidential information, including documents having the highest security level, including a level not previously known.

3. The immunity was requested by the FBI but granted by President Obama's Dept of Justice. That event means that to a certain degree, the incumbent Democratic government officials are allowing the grand jury investigation to proceed, despite the possibility of ultimately ending Clinton's campaign.

[Winter]

@Stephen Reed
"You continue to dismiss the threat of Hillary Clinton's national security investigation to her presidential campaign."

You do not seem to understand. An indictment of Clinton now is nothing less than coup d'etat. And be sure that the Democrats will see it as such.

But I know. The Republicans know that only a coup d'etat can prevent her from being elected.

[Stephen Reed]

@Winter

As a Trump partisan, I would welcome Hillary Clinton's indictment.

I suppose that it would be best for Mr. Trump if the US Justice Dept's grand jury calls her in for questioning before she wraps up the nomination battle against Bernie Sanders, but late enough to assure Clinton of the nomination on the first ballot. One assumes that Trump runs better against a wounded Clinton than against Sanders in the general election. Furthermore, in desperation, the Sanders campaign would have to formulate, test, and deploy attack advertising exploring the various terribly negative aspects of this issue.

Perhaps next fall Hillary Clinton on one hand will be fighting a national security felony prosecution, and on the other hand defending an economy entering recession.

Interesting developments for fans of Mr. Trump.

[Winter]

@Stephen Reed
"As a Trump partisan, I would welcome Hillary Clinton's indictment."

Your disdain for free elections illustrates why other voters will vote for anyone but a populist: Populists are against free elections as well as free press.

Whenever a populist gets in power, that was the last free election.

See Putin, Orban, and recently, Kaczyński. That is also why Trump admires Putin, no more hassles of having to actually win an election.

[Winter]

A National Descent Into Trump’s Pants
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/05/arts/television/a-national-descent-into-trumps-pants.html?_r=0

Rather, Mr. Trump turns subtext into text, whether it’s about immigration or torture. Republican candidates had sent certain messages to voters for years, and now the party hears them coming back from Mr. Trump translated, or perhaps decoded.

Of course, no one made Mr. Trump bring up any part of his body. That he did so on his own points out a key part of his message: bigness.

The prime imperative of Mr. Trump is that he not be made small. He must be yuge! Hence his anatomical defense. Hence his calling Mr. Rubio “Little Marco.”

[winter]

I wonder when the GOP will realize they have lost the elections? The media seem to slowly get it, at least, get it published.

It seems to me the party should skip the presidency and start damage control for the other elections. But their most urgent goal should now be to save the party itself. Trump is close to destroying it.

[Millard Filmore]

@Winter and @Tomi:

Here is a (liberal for sure) link to twitter jokes about the debate:

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2016/03/04/twitter-goes-ballistic-after-trumps-penis-joke-some-things-you-just-cant-fact-check-tweets/

I like this one best:
Grades:
Rubio: B
Cruz: B
Kasich: B
Trump: at least 7.5 inches

[Millard Filmore]

@Stephen Reed: "Perhaps next fall Hillary Clinton on one hand will be fighting a national security felony prosecution"

A bunch of years ago (early 1990s) David Duke ran for Governor of Louisiana [1] against Edwin Edwards [2]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louisiana_gubernatorial_election,_1991
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edwin_Edwards

I remember political bumper stickers from that time. "Vote for the crook, its important!"

[Wayne Borean]

@Everyone,

Where to begin...

1) The 'Natural Ceiling' concept implies that the candidate cannot go higher. While a candidate's 'Fan Base' may be limited, the candidate's polling includes those who've abandoned other candidates, and who have decided that this candidate is their best choice. I'm not disagreeing with Tomi per se, but with how he has worded his argument.

2) Hillary Clinton is both a strong and a weak candidate. Her strength comes from experience, her weakness from living in the Beltway Bubble. Against Trump, her weakness will show, but so will her strength. Which will be more important is hard to determine this far out.

3) There are voters who say, "My Grandaddy voted , my Daddy voted , and I vote ." It doesn't matter who the candidate is, their vote is decided. We can ignore them, they aren't important. The candidates should also ignore them, but some, like Ted Cruz have no one else who will vote for them...

4) The aide who built Hillary's email server getting immunity is not important. Immunity is granted in many cases where no indictment is returned. An indictment would be important. Due to the peculiarities of the American Criminal Juatice System, the term 'Innocent Until Proven Guilty' is incorrect. Anyone who talked with police and/or prosecutors should not do so until they have immunity.

5) The GOP has not lost the election. Yes, I wrote in an earlier comment that they lost this election in 2012. Against Ted Cruz or Marco Rubio that would be correct. Against Donald Trump, well, I'm not so sure.

6) Trump has expanded the GOP. I wish we had demographics on who the supporters are, including whether they have voted before, and whether they are registered to vote. If he is able to reach and activate first time voters, AND these voters show up Election Day, it is possible that a lot of prediction models will be off.

7) Comparing Trump to the European populists like Marine Le Pen or Allesandra Mussolini is not productive. By all accounts Le Pen and Mussolini believe in their platforms. There is no proof that Trump actually has a platform.

8) It is amusing to consider a political party so upset with a nominee that it would revolt against his/her candidacy. At present we have no idea if they are serious, or doing this to try and scare away Trump support. Or there could be a third reason. We don't know.

9) So neither Fox News, nor any other debate holder has discovered the microphone off switch. Which proves that American technology education is terrible.

10) If Bernie Sanders starts winning delegates in the north, will Clinton's some of super delegates desert her? If you take out the super delegates, Clinton is not that far ahead of Sanders.

But damn, is this entertaining!

Oh, and you can't snack on stress balls. Toblerone chocolate might be just the ticket!

[Wayne Borean]

Re-write of three since Typepad edited out part of it.

3) There are voters who say, "My Grandaddy voted [PARTY NAME], my Daddy voted [PARTY NAME], and I vote [PARTY NAME]." It doesn't matter who the candidate is, their vote is decided. We can ignore them, they aren't important. The candidates should also ignore them, but some, like Ted Cruz have no one else who will vote for them.