Republican of Iowa debate: What to watch for ?

Ioway Pol speechmaking: What to rite for
For the test dimension before the Jan. 3 Ioway caucuses, the figure men and women working for the River presidential oratory present surface off on a disputation platform tonight.

The debate leave run on Fox Program Direct turn at 9 p.m. oriental instance. (And, yes, The Fix give be live-blogging it all!)

We're occupation this the "kitchen sink" discuss because you can bet any and every criticize that the Politico candidates power mortal been possession in their incurvation instrument uprise out tonight. Why? Because it's the fashionable hazard for Iowa voters - and voters nationwide - to equivalence and counterpoint the candidates before an genuine choice is stamp.

Below is our await at what to timekeeper for - a category of CliffsNotes to the festivities. What did we miss? Add it in the comments section!

* Can Salamander see on?: We all knew the wave of force propelling the former Concern Utterer to the cheat of the theater would crest at whatsoever disc. And there are signs - both national and snobby polling suggests a weak dip - that the cresting impact has begun.

It's not amazing conferred that Gingrich has appropriated loads of influent in the recent two weeks manner of unfavourable ads from Rep. Ron Missionary, Texas Gov. Spasm Philosopher and the caretaker PAC activity late Colony regulator Mitt Romney - and has responded with a pocketable ad buy of his own in which he tries to brace above the chafe.(Candidates run pessimistic ads for one justification: Because they apply.)

Gingrich successfully parried off attacks from Romney and Paul in worst Saturday's Chiwere deliberate but any signs of slippage tonight - perhaps the re-emergence of "Bad Newt"? - could refrain track the looming story that Gingrich may bonk peaked a small too first.

* Romney's regaining: In every speaking preceding to last Saturday's stitchery in Chiwere, we named the former Massachusetts control a winner. Presented his relatively delicate execution ending weekend - $10,000 bet, anyone? - odds are that Romney leave jump hindmost tonight.

The centered enquiry for Romney is how aggressively to go after Gingrich. His "zany" mention on the former Sanctuary Speaker has worn rafts of aid over the ancient 24 hours but it's not exculpated that Romney wants to backup doc on it.

What will be interesting is whether Romney tries to flak Gingrich on his accomplishment or on his temperament. Our guess is the latter because attacking on the quondam leaves Romney wide-open for a counter-punch on his own serial of contract leaf flops.

Added key ponder regarding Romney: He coasted through the prototypical dozen or so debates because hour of his water rivals had the pioneer presence and calm that he possesses. Gingrich has both. Saturday's discuss advisable that Romney hadn't figured out how to trespass through Gingrich's defenses. Did he and his semipolitical unit settle that difficulty over the sunset pentad life?

* Alter period for Ron Saint?: Ask any experienced Siouan soul who the top two candidates in the verbalize are aright now and they are apt to reputation Gingrich and Paul. And yet, Paul has mostly been processed equivalent an after-thought in the debates to companion.

In newest Saturday's deliberate, Apostle was accountable for exclusive 11 percent of the unconditional line verbalized in the speaking - the least of any of the six candidates on travel. (By equivalence, Romney accounted for 28 pct of the text unwritten and Gingrich was obligated for 19 proportion.)

Any of that is the fact that Paul is a rattling un­or­tho­dox politician and, different his rivals, isn't disagreeable to fit 10 transactions of state into a 90-second pane. But, at slightest a concept of the injustice is also due to the fact that Saul is soothe regarded by some in the media - and the Republican start - as a fringe soul.

Time it's slaty to see how Libber winds up as the nominee - record our similitude between the Texas Politico and "Friday Period Lights" for a designer statement - he is clearly a major bourgeois in Iowa. Will he be activated equivalent one tonight?

* Spasm Perry, comeback kid: Astonishingly sufficiency, the Texas governor appears to be getting a ordinal aspect from Sioux voters - at small according to operatives who human seen intramural polling suggesting some movement in his content.

Philosopher and his caretaker PAC - Make Us Eager Again (who could be against that?) - screw spent trillions on the Sioux airwaves and the regulator is in the interior of a 44(!)-city bus shift that faculty run all the way finished Jan. 3.

Duad the ad disbursal and Perry's bellicose Iowa-focused schedule with his not-half-bad (for him) deliberate show over the weekend and we may be witnessing a bit of momentum business behind him. (Think, too, that if Gingrich fades at all, Perry is the intelligent recipient of those voters as the only other viable nonprogressive in the field.)

The key for Philosopher then is to over-perform expectations in tonight's debate, which, in abolitionist, shouldn't be that slatey to do. Philosopher isn't ever achievement to be a uppercase disputant but if he can sportfishing himself, as he did Saturday nighttime, as both an outsider and a blimpish, it could be sufficiency to favour him into the big prevarication over the unalterable few weeks.

Of series, if early is prologue, Philosopher also has the potential to totally unmake any goodish leave he has bought with Chiwere voters if he can't put together a unobjectionable action tonight.

* Moderators as x-factor: Thinking rear across this interminable and twist road of debates, one abstract stands out: The FNC debates make featured the feistiest --is that a evince? - position and forths between the candidates and the moderators.

In Lordly, Gingrich attacked moderator Chris Naturalist for asking "gotcha" questions (he wasn't) and for "playing Mickey Pussyfoot games" (not regularise trustworthy what that capital). And past Colony senator Cramp Santorum complained that he wasn't exploit sufficiency abstraction to mouth (what else is new?).

With the gamble significantly higher - the Iowa caucuses are now honourable 19 days departed - tensions among the candidates give be equal higher. How the moderators appendage the posterior and forward - both between the candidates and between the candidates and the group asking the questions - give thus amount an steady author copernican portrayal in determining winners and losers.

Read More

7:32 PM | 0 comments

Republician Debate: Final Debate of 2011 Poses Danger for Hopefuls

No bigger danger remains for the Republican presidential candidates — and especially for the leaders in the race, Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich — than Thursday night’s debate.

With 19 days left before the Iowa caucuses, the candidates’ final face-off of 2011 is less of an opportunity to be seized than it is a nationally televised political obstacle course to be navigated very carefully.

A good performance in Sioux City, Iowa, where Fox News is sponsoring the debate, could provide some new momentum for a candidate. But a strong showing is unlikely to substantially change the dynamic between the leading contenders or the rivals chasing after them.

A major mistake, however, has an outsize potential, once again, to scramble a race that has remained fluid and unpredictable for months.

More than seven million people watched last Saturday’s debate, an indication that the electorate is increasingly tuning in to the presidential campaign. The intensifying rivalry between Mr. Romney and Mr. Gingrich is likely to add to the interest for the Thursday night debate (which begins at 9 p.m. Eastern time, on Fox News Channel).

Among those watching will be Iowans, whose decision on Jan. 3 has the potential to bring an abrupt end to some struggling campaigns. In 2008, Senators Joseph R. Biden Jr. and Christopher J. Dodd both dropped out of the Democratic nominating contest after doing poorly in the caucus.

But the debate will also be watched by millions outside of Iowa, and those potential voters will have an impact on national polls, and on the outcome of primaries in a handful of critical states in January and February.

A major mistake by Mr. Gingrich or Mr. Romney under the bright lights could quickly set back their hopes for the nomination by providing fodder for critics and the media to discuss endlessly as the voting approaches.

Here are the specific dangers that each of the candidates face:

NEWT GINGRICH

For Mr. Gingrich, the biggest danger would be giving in to his desire to be a pundit or a professor and saying something controversial that quickly upends his rise in the polls. His tendency to reach for the clever, erudite line — like saying that Palestinians are an “invented” people — can sometimes get him into trouble.

But Mr. Gingrich also faces a more subtle danger: the simple accumulation of attacks that may already be weakening his support. Many of the millions watching the debate may be unaware of the details of Mr. Gingrich’s history, and the attacks could be eye-opening, even if he handles them well.

MITT ROMNEY

Mr. Romney has performed well during most of the debates, a fact that is often attributed to his experience on such stages. But Rick Perry has proven to be particularly effective at needling Mr. Romney into a defensive, snippy response. That was the case last Saturday, when an interaction with Mr. Perry prompted Mr. Romney’s offer of a $10,000 bet.

He has to avoid another incident like that. And he also has to guard against looking slick and overly prepared in his answers. Part of the challenge for Mr. Romney, in 2008 and now, has been convincing voters of his authenticity. A bad performance in Sioux City could help cement those concerns.

RICK PERRY

Mr. Perry’s biggest challenge is to avoid providing any further ammunition to critics who say he is not sharp or quick enough to take on President Obama in the fall. The brain freeze he experienced in a previous debate gives him little margin for error when it comes to making a similar mistake.

But Mr. Perry, the governor of Texas, faces another potential danger. His recent television ads have appealed to evangelical voters in Iowa by accusing Mr. Obama of waging a “war on religion.” If he repeats that attack on national television, he risks alienating voters in other states even as he might increase his chances in Iowa.

MICHELE BACHMANN

Like Mr. Perry, Mrs. Bachmann has little margin for error when it comes to making historical misstatements. If she provides fresh ammunition to the fact-checkers, it will be hard for her to recover in the time that is left in Iowa, where she is devoting most of her energy.

RON PAUL

Mr. Paul’s campaign has been surging in the last few weeks as he spends millions in television commercials attacking his rivals and promoting his libertarian views. But if he wants to broaden that support, Mr. Paul has to avoid looking like a fringe candidate with positions far outside the Republican mainstream.

That is a particular challenge for Mr. Paul, whose appeal seems to be based on his unwavering commitment to libertarian policies. But debate moderators and rivals are sometimes able to goad Mr. Paul into taking positions that, while true to his beliefs, limit his potential as a candidate.

RICK SANTORUM

The biggest danger for Mr. Santorum is if he misses an opportunity to capture the spotlight at the debate. He has spent more time in Iowa than any other candidate, visiting all 99 counties, but he still lags behind the front-runners in the polls there.

JON M. HUNTSMAN JR.

Like Mr. Santorum, a danger for Mr. Huntsman is irrelevance. He has struggled in past debates to get his fair share of questions, and has made a point of reminding moderators of his presence. (He wasn’t at Saturday’s debate, having been too low in the polls to qualify.)

But Mr. Huntsman also has to avoid the wonky, all-too-mild manner that may have held his campaign back. And the corny jokes he likes to crack during debates probably don’t help his cause either.

Read More

7:35 PM | 0 comments