Who Won the GOP Poll Last Night?

Romney did in my opinion..

I really don't think anyone won.

I liked Ron Paul the best though I'm not sure anyone particularly stood out. It was the first real debate so it seemed more like an introduction of the candidates. Of course, the media is pushing Bachmann and Romney, but we will see. I have to be honest, I didn't hear anything from Bachmann that suggested she was a clear cut winner. I suppose Romney won since nobody went after him, but that will most certainly change with later debates.

Mellie said:

I really don't think anyone won.

Click to expand...

in which case I decided to give it to Romney - as the front runners' job is to "not lose" while making sure no one else steals the show.

I don't think any of them won. They didn't even debate each other. I watched the whole thing twice and Pawlenty's little ***** move with Romney was the highlight to me. Bachmann seemed pretty tough though like when she said obama will be a one term President she got the place riled up. She's too far right to win a national election though.

I'll start from the bottom of my list.

Herman Cain. He lost a lot of ground. He speaks in generalities that often dodge the question's request for specifics, which indicates to me that he isn't ready for primetime. His answer on the whole Muslim-in-his-Cabinet issue was absolutely embarrassing. Just because he speaks in all-caps doesn't mean he's a good candidate, and last night he proved it. C-

Rick Santorum. IMO, did very well in the first debate. And this is coming from someone who doesn't like him at all. Last night he felt a lot less comfortable and a lot more forced, perhaps because there were more people there and it was tougher for him to stand out? Not sure. He did alright. B-

Ron Paul. The usual from Ron Paul...sometimes he seems articulate and presents his views as common sense; other times, he comes off as a delusional grumpy old man whose campaign slogan may as well be "Get off of my lawn". Last night was a bit of each. He was far too uneven to stand out. Regardless of his actual performance, he, as expected, said too many things that will prevent him from getting the Republican nomination simply because he's a libertarian. Nothing terrible OR memorable. C+

Michele Bachmann. First of all, she had a few blatant errors (as expected), and some of her applause lines were far too rehearsed. Having said that, great showing from Bachmann. I really don't think she has a shot at the nomination, but after last night, I think she proved that she can be a real contender in a state like Iowa or South Carolina, and that could give the eventual nominee something of a headache. She can be somewhat electric and will be adored by the base. She basically stole the show. A-

Newt Gingrich. Newt's had a few terrible, terrible weeks...and last night did nothing to reverse that. Any of the great intellectual moments we've come to expect from Newt (and there WERE a few of them) seemed short-lived; for much of the night, he seemed defensive and grumpy. I always thought he would be an absolute powerhouse in the debates, but he didn't meet my expectations last night at all. C

Tim Pawlenty. Color me surprised. A few months back I was convinced this guy was going to win by default as the anti-Romney and the least flawed candidate overall. But something about him...just isn't connecting. And that's apparent in his failure to rise in the polls. He just seems a bit too forced, which isn't good for someone who wants his appeal to be based on authenticity. He lost a LOT of points for backing down from his whole "Obamneycare" meme...he had a perfect chance to go after Romney, and sheepishly backed away, which made him look incredibly weak. I'm starting to think my instincts were wrong and that Pawlenty is not going to be able to pull off the upset after all. C+

Mitt Romney: Sort of won by default. There were moments that I, as a Romney-hater, could pick at (he really had no answer at all for his statement that the bailout would be "the end of the auto industry" or whatever it was that he said in that op-ed; he's gotten strikingly skillful at dodging tough questions)...but coming from a more unbiased perspective, Romney did what he needed to do. He outlined differences in his and Obama's health care plan in a MUCH more artful and simple way than he has been able to before; he hit just about every talking point he needed to, more articulately than most of the others on stage; and somehow, strangely, he avoided being attacked, as the frontrunner so often is. Who knows what will happen between now and next summer, but he came out of the debate looking more and more like the inevitable nominee. A-

I like Ron Paul, I think he's the Republican candidate who makes the most sense and the one most likely to do as he says he will.

Yeah he's prob the most sincere but he's also rather radical and wouldn't be able to get **** through Congress.

Swizz said:

Romney did in my opinion..

Click to expand...

Sort of, yes.

Mellie said:

I really don't think anyone won.

Click to expand...

By default, they all lost. Romney keep the status as the front-runner, but had no clear vision. I had to laugh, when he said maybe he'll get it right this time, that comment doesn't exude much confidence.

Romney went in as the leader and Romeny exited as the leader and winner of the event. A very good night for Mitt.

As for the rest of the dwarves, anytime Bachmann emerges as the other bright star of the night, you know its been a very dismal night.

Mitt Romney clearly won the debate, especially since they didn't attack him on his weakest point and he was a much better speaker. Also, he ad a good answer for Romney care. Yes, he did get Romneycare in Massachusetts which is very similar to obamacare, but he believes it is a state's right issue and not a federal issue.

For this debate I will rank
Mitt Romney: A
Michele Bachmann: B
Tim Pawlenty: C (did a good job debating, but backing down from romeycare was a huge mistake if he want to get elected president. He helped Romney more than himself)
Herman Cain: C
Ron Paul: D (sounded like an angry old man)
Newt Gingrich: D
Rick Santorum: D (hardly heard him speak)

IMO, Romney won, but it was more a case of his not losing than his winning decisively.

I was not that impressed with Romney. Seemed to be dodging a lot of questions last night. I suppose rhetoric is more effective than legit answers in America.

^He did do his fair share of dodging, I'll give you that.

I really would like to hear some reasoning for the people who voted Herman Cain, lol

CAIN. He didn't win, but he's my man. Why not? The GOP stands ZERO chance of retaking the White House. Why not roll wit Cain?

ElCid said:

CAIN. He didn't win, but he's my man. Why not? The GOP stands ZERO chance of retaking the White House. Why not roll wit Cain?

Click to expand...

Might as well lose with some dignity (Romney/Pawlenty/Perry) rather than without it (Cain/Gingrich/Palin/Bachmann/Paul/Santorum)

Romney won by virtue of remaining the front runner by not making any major gaffe or being hugely shown up.

I think Paul helped himself the most out of anyone on stage.

Mitt Romney. He obviously won, he is their best hope but I feel a lot of Republican's dont like him.

I voted for Michele Bachmann. She did far better than expected, no serious errors. She is also the best at stating the far right position. Few voters will support her positions after some thought mostly because how honest & transparent she is about her solutions for our problems. Yup, I think she is the best represenative of the fairly uniform group.

Does anyone know why Gary Johnson wasn't included in the debate? I know he doesn't have much buzz and I doubt he has much chance of winning the nomination, with or without the debate...but he was a popular two-term governor. IMO that alone should qualify him to be a part of the debate. He's certainly more qualified than Herman Cain or Michele Bachmann.

I agree that Michele Bachmann won the debate though (if we're defining the winner as the candidate who helps him/herself the most by his/her performance). She toned down the crazy and actually came across as fairly reasonable...which may be the first time that I've seen her do that. I think that she's probably the second-tier candidate who is most likely to break out and have a strong insurgent campaign.

Mitt Romney did pretty well too, but as others have said, it was mostly because he didn't screw up.

I think the biggest losers were Tim Pawlenty and Herman Cain. T-Paw didn't give any reason why he should be the anti-Romney candidate as opposed to anyone else, and Cain was a big disappointment given his supposedly great oratory skills.

Kandahar said:

Does anyone know why Gary Johnson wasn't included in the debate? I know he doesn't have much buzz and I doubt he has much chance of winning the nomination, with or without the debate...but he was a popular two-term governor. IMO that alone should qualify him to be a part of the debate. He's certainly more qualified than Herman Cain or Michele Bachmann.

Click to expand...

Because he is the only one of them that could win his own state against Obama?

I like Michelle a little for now, Mitt Romney will not get my vote in the primary because he was in favor Cap and Trade from what I understand, and then there is the whole Obamny Care thing that brings his judgement into question, big time.

If he gets the nomination he'll get my vote, because even a wet paper bag is better than Obama.

For now I'm pretty much shopping around.

PoliticalMama said:

Mitt Romney. He obviously won, he is their best hope but I feel a lot of Republican's dont like him.

Click to expand...

Republicans don't like him, because he is a RINO. He claims that he has changed, but very few believe him.

Still, his performance was good, and he did have a good answer for romneycare. However, if he get elected as President, will he fight for republican ideals he doesn't believe in?

I chose Romney, even though he is not my favorite candidate. I chose him as he is the front runner and no one put a glove on him. The big loser of the night was Pawlenty as he had the opportunity to lay the glove on Romney and he chose not to do so.

I was impressed with the answers from Bachmann and Gingrich. Newt was correct in stating that it takes more than a Republican President to be able to say a candidate will do x or y. The President cannot do it by himself as President Obama now knows well.

I cannot get excited about Santorum or Paul and I thought Cain did not show as well as he did in prior debate.