Matthews asked some very stupid questions, but there were a couple of good ones from the audience and/or The Politico.

Some things I noticed:

- "What do you think is the worst thing about America?" Romney couldn't think of anything bad to say and waxed lyrically about the greatness of America. :-/ In spite of that, he was the smoothest and best "debater" of the bunch. Even when he was questioned about his flip-flops, like whether we should pay any price to get bin Laden, he explained away his previous statements (not that I accepted his explanations, mind you).

- "How many of you do not believe in Evolution?" 3 hands went up. McCain tried to have it both ways and talked about seeing God in the beauty of the Grand Canyon.

- Thompson said that private employers should be able to fire gays just for being gay.

- Ron Paul made a decent showing in arguing for (extremely) limited government. Of course, he doesn't have a chance to win the nomination.

- All most all of them couldn't find anything wrong with overturning Roe v. Wade and some said it would be the greatest day in the history of the country, or something. Jim Gilmore tried to finesse it a little, Rudy Giuliani said it wouldn't make much difference - the country would go on and the states would decide for themselves.

- None of them really said anything of substance when asked what they would do different from Bush in Iraq. McCain said he'd follow bin Laden to the "gates of Hell". :-/

- I thought the format suited Gilmore did very well, but the lighting made him look like he was sweating tremendously. I think he came in 2nd, but at this point he has little chance of winning. Perhaps he's running for VP.

- Rudy mentioned 9/11 about 30,000 times...

- McCain had his "Conservative Republican" suit on, but said he could work with Democrats (trying to have it both ways again)...

- Thompson did well when he talked about what he'd done in Wisconsin, but he probably turned off a lot of people with his comments on firing gays. (What someone's sexual preferences have to do with their job performance is beyond me.)

Mostly, I'd say it was a wasted 90 minutes. The Democratic "debate" was better. Romney "won", but little light was shed on the issues. They're all anti-abortion, they all want to continue Bush's policies, they all praised Reagan unconditionally (which was understandable given the setting), etc., etc. They only differed in their degree of right-wing-ness.

Someone on from The Politico on the radio a week or so ago said that they "debates" should be broken up so that the "first tier" candidates debate among themselves, and the others debate among themselves on another night. That has some appeal. If the extra time was used to allow longer answers and followups, that would be fine. If it just let MSNBC (or whoever) shorten the broadcast or force in more questions, then it wouldn't matter.

There's more at the [link|http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/03/AR2007050301047.html|Washington Post].

My $0.02.

Cheers,
Scott.
(Who also thought Nancy Reagan looked like she was asleep with her eyes open.)

[link|http://blog.washingtonpost.com/achenblog/2007/05/the_republicans_who_are_those_1.html|Achenblog] described him pretty well:

[...]

My friend hurled invective at Ron Paul whenever he came on the screen. "He's our Kucinich," he said.

Wait: Tom Tancredo's not the Republican Kucinich? Maybe Tancredo is the Republican Gravel. We need to nail this down.

Let's face it: Not only are most of these guys completely obscure, they also look exactly the same. They're aging Caucasian men with jowls. Several of them are fighting for a starting position on the All-Jowl Team.

Except, of course, Mitt Romney, with his perfect, comic-book jawline. He looks almost aerodynamic, like something manufactured by Boeing.

Having one guy without jowls is what the Republican party leadership calls "diversity."

The large Republican and I thought McCain did poorly. He seemed uncomfortable. He made the tactical decision to stare directly into the camera, to connect with the viewers, but he came off a bit hot, a bit intense, like he might crawl out of the screen and throttle someone. Starting with Osama:

'On the subject of Osama bin Laden, he's responsible for the deaths of thousands of innocent Americans. He's now orchestrating other attacks on the United States of America. We will do whatever is necessary. We will track him down. We will capture him. We will bring him to justice, and I will follow him to the gates of hell.'

He must have known that last bit sounded a bit over the top, because he quickly forced a smile.

[...]

Cheers,
Scott.