Walker's limitations, deficiencies stood out
He was in over his head. He seemed unprepared, uninformed, uneducated. Like a Double AA youngster thrown into the Major Leagues and failing the audition.
And as I predicted, his summary was 100% talking points - - his kids, his Harley, his beating the unions.
Someone tell me - - name one thing Walker said that was memorable?
So I thought.
Completely forgettable.
The bigger story is Trump not pledging to support any GOP nominee.
For Wisconsin, the story is Walker's non-performance, is whether Walker can pick up those GOP loyalists Trump may have turned off.
Stay tuned.
And as I predicted, his summary was 100% talking points - - his kids, his Harley, his beating the unions.
Someone tell me - - name one thing Walker said that was memorable?
So I thought.
Completely forgettable.
The bigger story is Trump not pledging to support any GOP nominee.
For Wisconsin, the story is Walker's non-performance, is whether Walker can pick up those GOP loyalists Trump may have turned off.
Stay tuned.
3 comments:
The moderators followed up with Trump if they thought he didn't respond completely to questions, but they let Walker off the hook when he evaded with 35 second talking points. Throughout the debate Walker came across as a kid bluffing his way through an essay exam that was over his head.
One example that stood out is when he was asked about black lives matter and what is the civil rights issue of our time and, as you pointed out, he responded by talking about the Milwaukee County Sheriff (he should have gotten a follow up on that). I don't think he is capable of talking about race or civil rights, and he knows it.
Another example that stands out is when asked about which countries in the Middle East not already allies he thought the US should develop relationships with, he responded with something like, "The question should be how do we strengthen relationships with allies we already have?". That question was way over his head, so he simply asked himself an easier question and plugged in a vague response. Again, no follow up.
Oh, and it seems like every time the camera was on him he had his mouth open.
Agree Walker was forgettable and lost ground tonight.
One thing stood out to me. I know I shouldn't expect foreign policy nuance in a GOP primary debate, but Walker casually lumped ISIS and Iran together towards the end of one of his answers. Halfway expected somebody (candidate or moderator) to call him on that. If, heaven forbid, we get into a ground war with ISIS, Iran is right nextdoor and would be one of the most important allies we'd need on board.
Also, lumping all 10 candidates together, the consensus seems to be that we need to:
1. Buy a whole lot of new military hardware
2. Go to war in Iraq and Syria (and who knows where else... or how, say, Turkey would feel about that)
3. Militarize our southern border
4. Massively expand the VA (which will need to serve even more veterans after #2)
5. Drastically cut taxes
6. Repeal the ACA
7. Reduce the national debt (as a national security/foreign policy priority)
I know I'm not going to agree with GOP candidates' priorities, but is it too much to ask that their platform at least be somewhat plausible? Even if the Laffer curve worked (it doesn't), it would take yrs to get from the initial tax cuts to magical economic growth to tax revenue growth. Whatever anyone does on tax policy, any wars in the next presidency are going on the credit card. Would have hoped at least Rand Paul or somebody would point that out.
All I can say about this so-called debate is that what I did hear is the stuff nightmares are made of. Walker gave the expected and predicted answers and his closing statement was a joke. Really, is that all he has to say; the same old talking points. He was basically non-existent in the debate. He might as well have been in the first debate. It's where he belonged. Just about every question was deflected and the debaters talked about what they wanted to talk about. That's not what people want to hear. Will they ever actually answer a policy question with a forthright answer. I kept talking to the TV saying answer the question. I want to know your answer to the question.
I cannot believe these people think every single fertilized human egg should be brought to term regardless of anything else. They make me think they want to promote similar policies as sharia law in the U.S. so far as women go.
They are a frightening group of people. It ought to scare the pants off of everyone. Their unrelenting bashing of everyone else is uncalled for. If they have a good argument for or against something, make the argument. They sound like a bunch of radical extremists to me.
Post a Comment