The entire debate was a train wreck. Let's start with that first. Ron Paul was the only one that actually said anything half-way logical, and he doesn't rely on "Obamasuxx" memes to get his point across. Of course, Newt Gingrich had a target on his back, being the front runner and all, but I actually did not for once sweat his chances of coming through the debates smelling like a rose. The reason is simple: His opponents cannot muster the ability to sound confident while telling outright lies. They don't have it in them. I think Michele Bachmann and Rick Santorum actually BELIEVE the things they say, so they can say them with confidence because in their alternate reality, there's no such thing as starving children because their parents are obese. Romney? Well...
I've always thought of Romney as a brittle man. He is condescending, accustomed to position, and I do not think that life has put him through any trials that would normally toughen a person. He walks through life as if his coronation is just around the corner. It really came out in tonight's debate. While I think he will get the nomination, (Newt not filing his papers on times makes it difficult to get delegates) he will come out of the primary damaged with the conservative base. You see, Newt is the master at spin. He could murder someone on the street in front of your very eyes and convince you, from his sober historian's perspective, that in fact socioeconomic factors going back several generations created the environment where he had no choice but to turn to violence.
And somehow, the audience will clap.
You see, Gingrich will never apologize, never back peddle, never offer another viewpoint besides one he has already given, and at the same time, he is able to amend his position ever so slightly to absorb your attack and then neutralize it. He did this to Glenn Beck, and if he can fend off the polished baby face of the Bircher Society 2.0, then he can handle someone like Romney. I hate to say this, but Gingrich was adept at fending off Romney's attacks and resisted allowing Romney to turn himself into the "adult in the room" by weaving a web that somehow his position was clearer and more fundamental. Gingrich's contradicted himself, but he hid it under so many layers that Romney wasn't agile enough to get at it. Gingrich said that he would tell the truth, even if it caused disarray for the "timid." Yet, at the same time when Romney pointed out that he would never do anything that might harm Israel without their expressed permission, Gingrich brushed it off. I'm sorry, but if you are 100% behind Israel, as the rest of the Republicans seem to be, then saying or doing something that would inconvenience them or harm them, even if it was "the truth," is undermining a friend. Did anyone pick up on this subtle contradiction? Not Romney!
We're going to see some more Romney flails as time goes by. Paul tried a couple too, but the thing is he's more used to presenting an idea, the same idea, constantly and never resorting to personal attacks. It must be frustrating for him to see a lobbyist being applauded for being the most expensive historian in the history of time. Yet, no one seems to care. The truth just hasn't sunk in yet. Or perhaps, fantasy is preferable to to the truth in this case. If this keeps up Romney will continue to get steamrolled in future debates.
Now, Gingrich vs. Obama in a debate would be interesting to say the least, but the President has a lot that Willard just doesn't have in terms of personal fortitude and delivery. You see, Gingrich relies on you becoming hypnotized by dates and creating non-existent historical trends. For instance, with his "manufactured people" comment, he says that there were no Palestinians because they were under the rule of the Ottoman Empire. Specious logic at best. Being under imperial hegemony does not erase a people, and the identity of a group, any group, over 80 years ago does not necessarily mean there is no grounds for a group identity in 2011. This requires some attentiveness on the part of the listener. I call it the "History Professor Smoke Screen." I believe the President can point those things out. He's calm, he's collected, and he can deliver surgical verbal strikes which is how you beat Gingrich. It will be easy to trip of Gingrich with a well placed fact to trip up his logic, and send him scrambling. He'll deliver himself straight into the corner, and that's a strategy Obama knows how to employ well.
Of course, there are going to be many surprises this season, but one thing is for certain, we are going to watch Romney try to land a punch and find that he's up against the ultimate sleazy politician, with little in the way of recourse.