Santorum: If I were looking for a religious right warrior / social conservative and nothing else, it would be Santorum vs. Bachman. And I do have to give the guy credit for sticking to his guns through the years. But unfortunately he doesn’t seem particularly smart, or compelling of a speaker, or really focused in any principled way on what I’d hope would be important this time around: stopping the run away federal government before we turn into Europe. We don’t need Democrats telling us how to live, and (unfortunately?) we don’t need Republicans telling us how to live either. 0% income tax on manufacturers? What’s that? The government picking winners again? How about equal treatment for all, Rick?
Bachman: Aside from the fact that she is an intellectual lightweight and has never really achieved much, her “attack the other Republicans” routine is getting tiresome. How bout try and stand on your own merits? Despite the fact that she often speaks with passion, as of late you can hear her grasping through talking points in the debates.
Hunstman: Sorry, someone tell me again why this guy is a candidate? He’s playing the “smart” “pro-science” “understands china” card, is it? And he stands for what, exactly? Cap and trade as a crucial lever against catastrophic man made global warming? Oh, he was a good governor? I like Perry’s results a bit better. Lets face it, the only reason this guy is in the race is because the liberal media loves him. Sorry Hunstman, lower your cocked eyebrow and go away.
Perry: Boy I tell ya, when they said the media would go after this guy with the “like Bush, but dumber” line I was TOTALLY ready to reject it. But then… then, then then, then he proved their case. Not just once but over and over, in almost every debate. He may actually be a decent leader and chief executive, but in a president I think we can all now finally agree, we need a really good communicator as well.
And as immensely likable of a guy Herman Cain was, I’m really happy I don’t have to hit him again here.