With the big names dominating, we fail to note the “best” of the debates was the smaller forum for candidates whose potential voters barely track in the polls. This motley crew offered a greater range of ideas on defense and security, and except for his screaming fits, Lindsay Graham offered a reasoned military plan that accounted for the contradictions in region; effective strategy, it appeared to have no diplomatic component. (Someone tell Sen. Graham not to yell, “I hate the President,” that approaches and shares territory with the same bigotry and xenophobia that he rightly points out in Trump’s positions–and badly hurts his own.)
George Pataki’s role was defined; the former NY governor assignment calls for relentless hits on Hillary’s record on security and defense (with echoes of 9/11); he leads her diplomatic swift boating.
Neither debate left room for a centrist! The rare difference was in the size of the early force each would deploy again in the Middle East along with huge exaggerations of how the world’s best funded, technically advanced (see the AEGIS system!), trained and proficient military force was dolefully inadequate to fight in the sand against a non-state force of rebels and terrorists. It was embarrassing and contradicted the GOP’s belief that overspending solves no problems, even terrorism. More ridiculous: all change would happen in an American instant! Victory, slick and smooth–like their words, only awaits the votes. Been there!
Cruz Blusters and Trump Sulks at Tense Republican Debate – The New York Times http://nyti.ms/1m7DDrn
(Reply) Unlike the main debate, this one was watchable with the sound on. Only Lindsay Graham made any real impression to my mind. Although I could do without his disrespectful and unnecessary attacks on Obama and Hillary, he is at least lives in a reality recognizable to the rest of us.