I disagree on your assessment of Fred Thompson's performance in the debate, Jim. He seemed even more lazy than usual to me; his answers seeming to trail off at the end of his response at times as if he was tired and he just wanted to take a nap.

Perhaps, as you say, if he had entered the race back in the spring of 2007, back when the crowd was pumped and calling out his name, he'd be in a better position but here again his laziness and unwillingness to do the hard work was evident.

He's paying the price with a 2% showing in the Zogby tracking poll released yesterday. Stick a fork in him.

I sat through the snore fest myself. I think when the audience is discouraged from voicing their approval of what is being said then the candidates start losing their enthusiasm as the debate drags on. And drag it did. Unless you like to listen to people argue.

When people want to hear something, anything, to make them want to pck someone and all they get is a lot of bickering, they tune out.

Those of you with children know, if they're fighting and shouting, there's not a lot you can do unless you shout over them to be heard. At that point, you just blend in with the rest of the noise. Instead, you wait for the right time to intercede.

Fred did exactly what he needed to do last night, sit back and let the world get a good look at the others as they tore each other apart. He got some good swipes in where he needed to. He knows he won't do well in NH. South Carolina, the south in general is going to be where he comes alive. He's a southern boy. He knows us southerners well.

One a western side note: he did pick up 3 delegates in Wyoming yesterday. Romney got 8 and Hunter got 1 plus wherever the alternates were placed. So not bad for not being in the state since September.

I'm a 'Fred'eralist, I admit that, so my perspective changed little with last night's verbal slugfest, except to solidify why I'm not behind any of the other candidates unless I'm forced to have to vote for one of them.

On to the others:

Huckabee: Were they playing mother may I? or whatever you want to call that raising his hand when he wanted to permission to speak thing he kept doing? He didn't need permission. He just needed to jump in.

Paul actually behaved himself, somewhat. Maybe because Fred was sitting beside him with a 'don't make me come over there' look pinned on him?

Romney...when you have to spend most of the debate on defense and having that deer in the headlights look on your face, you're in trouble.
And when you own up to liking healthcare mandates, you're definitely in trouble.

Rudy, a sanctuary city is a sanctuary city no matter how you paint it. As Fred said, illegal is illegal. If all you have to do is pay a $5000 penalty and learn english to stay here (a lot of places offer english as a second language for free), then that illegal has purchased amnesty, at a bargain basement price.

Ditto McCain. That amnesty bill he tried to pass just keeps on biting him in the ass.

In all it was boring. I doubt few people decided or changed their minds last night. Maybe tonight's debate will be better for everyone involved.

Yeah, Fred just let them go at it. When he did talk, you just had to listen. Voice strong, and only a few words needed to complete each thought. He just appears not to get rattled and waits for the right time to speak.
Go get them Fred!
excuse me while I go give him more $$

Apart from Charlie Rose's lecturious nature against Republicans, I thought the format was vastly improved over past debates.

I think conclusions about "winners" and "losers" should be made in the context of what each candidate needed to accomplish from the debate:

Romney provided the most specificity of all candidates last night and that goes a long way with me. The health care mandates issue, though, really does hurt him because there are so many people trying to wishcast him into some true conservative that he simply is not. He had the toughest bull to ride last night with the other candidates continually belittling him... and that also means he had the best opportunity to score big. Again, on specificity of ideas, I think he outperformed everyone else in this debate, but given his great need to stop the bleeding in his campaign, I don't think he did enough to stop McCain's momentum and therefore this debate was not a success for him.

I view McCain's night as a complete reciprocal of Romney. He had all the momentum and NH is his dream electorate. He simply needed to "hold his own" by expanding and defining those issues (liberal, I may say) that resonate with the unique NH voters. Instead, he did resort to several unnecessary Romney shots. This negated a very powerful theme that was developing in Romney being the candidate of negativism. McCain may have been better served to maintain Huckabee's optimism. However, given that he has the momentum, this performance DID NOT hurt McCain and he will likely win the primary. So, from that perspective, he was successful.

Huckabee needs to break out some specifics real soon. He had several opportunities to elaborate on some of his ideas but slunk back into the same generalities. I was particularly disappointed in his failure to provide detail on his energy program when the topic was delivered to him on a silver platter. His vertical politics thing may be helpful in the general election, but this isn't the time or place. Still, his realistic expectation is to finish third on Tuesday and Paul's idiocy helped that goal become a reality.

Thompson would make the finest president. But he showed again last night why he is not polling higher in the primary process -- we all cringe at the prospect of his slovenly style going up against a vibrant Obama or simply brutal Hillary. He did little to change this last night.

Giuliani is just getting killed on issues. It's hard for a social liberal to gain traction among these opponents. Given that a 3rd-place finish in NH would be huge, I was very surprised he did not go after Huckabee.

A McCain win on Tuesday likely leads to another win in Michigan. Huckabee would have to fall apart not to win SC. As a Huckabee supporter, I rejoice at such a scenario because all the vitriol about him not being conservative enough would evaporate if John McCain was the final obstacle.

"I have to say the ABC format is the best yet."

Agreed. Except the desks should have been built to scale.

"Thompson ~ Another good showing."

Yep. And no one I was with said he looks too old, unlike...

McCain. For some reason, the viewers at my house (non-politicos) said McCain looked really old (despite his rather unlined face) or about to explode. The "explode" part I agree with. He needs to finally evacuate last Thanksgivings' turkey dinner before a tree grows out of his back. Step one: remove doorknob from rectum.

Romney: had stars and bluebirds circling over his head all night. All that was missing were cartoon lumps and Looney Tunes sound effects and Bugs Bunny disguised as a waiter offering more sugar for his tea with oversized mallet behind his back.

Da Ghoul: The incredible shrinking squirt. His performances are reason 1 why half the Bushblogoshere pretends to have "missed" this debate. Hothouse lilies! Good for you, Jim!

Huckabee: Or maybe the Huckster's the reason the Bushblogoshere....etc. The erstwhile public political religionists and amateur nuns and Opus Deists and "culture warriors" hoisted on their own petards in front of the in-laws and all the neighborhood kids, knocking over the grill and catching the yard on fire. Fire trucks show up and everything.

Paul: "Did he really answer the question on health care costs by saying our "warmongering" prevented us from "spending those resources at home"?"-ja

As for the tension of War vs domestic needs: see the bankruptcy and subsequent reliance of "service economy" money shuffling to hide UK's dire domestic predicaments in the wake of WW1. See Churchill tearfully turn over all gold and borrowed (Belgian) gold to the USA before Lend-Lease Act (nothing's really "free"). See hand-off of UK hegemonic ambitions due to bankruptcy to the USA, post-WW2. See devaluation of the pound to finance the British welfare state (bread and circuses) and the subsequent open-borders policies for cheap labor from the West Indies and "Asia" in the 1950s to maintain it. (Unsurprisingly, these early immigrants have become wards of the state now, and must be nurtured by newer immigrants such as Poles in the 1990s. It's deja vu all over again.)

Note: it was no coincidence that post-Vietnam, silver was disconnected to currency to hide the bill for MACV, CINCPAC, and Johnson's Guns and Butter budgets. But it didn't work too well.

So enter WIN buttons: "Whip Inflation Now!" The $3000 sedan: gone forever! LPs that held steady at $3.99 for years jumped to $5.49 overnight. I remember it well. Purchase of "Band On the Run" delayed 1 week!

Today, check your 401k statement if you have one. (Sit down first.) And is the dollar tanking against the fricking Canadian dollar? Is Bush selling our highways to Spain for the income stream their conversion to toll roads promise state governments when Uncle Sam says "Uncle!"?

Anyway, while the UK still exists (barely), the UK had American cousins to buck them up. The US has the Peoples' Republic of China.

Heckuva job, Georgie!

"Thompson helped his cause the most, I think."

Probably. He's the natural for Romney's voters and half of the Ghoul's. Thompson's "who cares" demeanor beats the apple-polishing of Rudy, Romney, and even Huck.

But the winners were Huck and Paul. They needed less touching-up to begin with. Thompson's responses seem to overshadow his statements, but his responses are well delivered if not necessarily cogent. After Thompson, they all blow chunks. Romney, the chunkiest.

The debate highlight? Ghouliani consigned to the far edge of the stage! Not a single "hee hee!" from the bottle baby all night!