GOP Candidate Critiques

As I was watching the GOP debate Thursday, I jotted down a few notes concerning each of the candidates.

With the exception of Rick Perry’s embarrassingly tongue-tied lambaste of Romney’s flip-flopping and the shameful booing of the gay soldier who submitted a question, the debate was more or less a predictable, albeit mildly entertaining, affair.

First of all, I am amused at both Romney’s and Perry’s constant plugging of each other’s books. They have the veneer of being opponents in these debates, but I think they might be in this thing together to sell their books.

If you missed the long debate, you’re in luck. Below, you’ll find each candidate’s performance summed up:

Rick Perry: In bolstering his credentials as a job creator, he claims Texas is the No. 1 state for business relocation. But does this not ultimately undermine Texas’ job growth statistics? The reason Texas had so much job growth is that it lassoed in jobs from other states. Can this really be a model on which to base the U.S. economy?

Mitt Romney: The substance of his policies aside, he looked and sounded like a president, which is what I think the GOP has been waiting for. No one else at the debate could claim to be more presidential than Romney.

Herman Cain: His 9-9-9 tax proposal (9 percent flat corporate tax, 9 percent income tax and 9 percent national sales tax) seems to me the most fair and simple tax proposal of any of the candidates, which is probably why it isn’t taken too seriously. Too fair. Too simple.

Jon Hunstman: He’s a perfectly viable, articulate and reasonable candidate, so why is he constantly coming up short in the polls?

Maybe he is too short.

Newt Gingrich: To a certain extent, I admire his position as the grumpy old man of the group. When the candidates were unfairly asked to name their potential vice president, Newt rightly refused to answer the question, saying he didn’t want the debate to be a “Hollywood game.”  

Ron Paul: In previous debates, Paul’s best moments have been when he is talking about foreign policy. This is where he diverges the most from mainstream Republican thinking and must be why the moderators didn’t allow him any time to sound the much-needed horn of non-interventionism. Also, his response to the question concerning how to restore the 10th Amendment was one of the debate’s best moments.

Each candidate is given 30 seconds to respond to each question. Paul only needed two. “The responsibility of the president is to veto any bill that violates the 10th Amendment.” Ron Paul has the wacky idea that a president should abide by the Constitution. No wonder he isn’t taken very seriously.

Rick Santorum: Clown.

­— sdance@indiana.edu