It was so interesting seeing all the Democrats and Republicans on stage last night. The animosity was absent because right now they are not fighting with each other. The links between them were fascinating.
By the time I was thick into the Democratic debate, I had such a sense of cohesiveness among the arguments made, and trust for these sharp, experienced, articulate folks (not so much Richardson) that I realized the chaotic structure of the Republican debate was absent from this one. I remember looking at the stage of Republicans and thinking that Huckabee was the only one who seemed decent and somewhat grounded--and he's a zealot. It occurred to me that his zealousness for his religion is probably directly tied to his patriotism, which isn't necessarily a bad thing since he was the first to cite the Constitution when Gibson asked what the candidates principles were. My husband pointed out to me long before that moment that the #1 job of the President is to defend the Constitution, not to make us the strongest, toughest nation (McCain, Mitt). McCain seemed petty and defensive, even when he didn't need to be. Thompson is out to lunch and wings it. Paul is a theoretical purist who ignores historical precedents that blow serious holes in his extreme libertarian, anti-federal philosophy (although it's fun to see how he runs circles around his peers). Mitt seems like a policy wonk who likes social policies and loves pharmaceutical companies, but doesn't think we can change global warming in ten years (like Hillary?). Huckabee was pretty impressive with his compassionate rhetoric (is it real?) and he seemed calm and humble compared to the rest. Giuliani seemed confidant and sounded sane but he's full of misstatements (do Republicans still believe we have the best healthcare in the world? Does Fox tell them that?) and only about 30% of the country believes we should still be shaking our fists at the world in that bullying post 9-11 way.
I'll post about the Democratic paradigm later today.
No comments:
Post a Comment