I watched the GOP Presidential Debate last night and was pleased that Christie, Haley and DeSantis all did well. In fact, each seemed more relaxed and effective. Ramaswamy, unfortunately, was his usual disruptive self.
I have watched with great interest all but the third debate.
The New York Times has rated the debaters on their four debates. These are cumulative ratings which can range from 0 to 10.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2023/12/07/opinion/republican-debate-winners-losers.html
Chris Christie earned first place: 6.6 points
He was calm, self-assured, courteous and complimentary where appropriate. He made relevant critical comments about the other debaters. He had the strongest personal presence on the stage--in a good way. Christie's likeability was at his best.
In the debates so far he's always impressed me as presidential.
This debate was watched by writer and expert debater Todd Graham who was so impressed with Christie's skills he wrote a lengthy essay on it. Graham gave Christie's speech a title: "Chris Christie's Retribution Speech." https://ktvz.com/author/cnn-newsource/ The "Retribution" refers to Donald Trump's ominous threat of, "I AM your retribution." ["Retribution" means punishment inflicted on someone as retaliation.]
Graham's article is a joy to read and especially fascinating because it points out the particular debate skills demonstrated by Christie; I really liked what Christie did, and because of Graham's article I understood better why it was so awesome.
Nikky Haley earned second place: 4.9 points
She has done consistently well, occupying first place three times and second place in this 4th debate. She has always shown good debate skills, self-confidence, and not been rattled when attacked by others. She is exceptionally well-informed, quick thinking, and effective in her attacks. I think she didn't fall to second place, but Christie improved himself in a stellar manner into first.
In the debates so far she's always impressed me as presidential. She certainly commands respect, and it is in a natural and pleasant way.
Ron DeDantis was third: 4.3 points
I found his personality more likeable than in previous debates: there were fewer distracting mannerisms, he smiled more frequently, seemed to be enjoying himself more, and didn't show as much anger and insistence as he had before.
In previous debates his negative emotional output along with his tendency to voice authoritarian attitudes made me wonder, "Why would we ever want this radical right authoritarian leading the country."
So I was actually pleased that he did well for himself in this debate. In this debate, I feel he came across as presidential.
Vivek Ramaswamy was fourth: 2.0
Ramaswamy in three debates has been consistently and severely "obnoxious" (to quote one of his fellow debaters).
His puts out a jaw dropping display of: interrupting others, failing to end his talking when directed by the moderators, speaking too rapidly, and doing so without normal pauses. His talk rushes out of his mouth in a torrential flow, accompanied by holding up first one pointed finger and then the other--repeatedly throughout each diatribe.
He doesn't seem to be aware of or concerned with his obnoxious qualities. And when he's finally done talking he confidently looks out at the world and smiles.
If that weren't bad enough, Ramaswamy proudly presents himself as a Trump supporter and voices various conspiracy theories. He was called out by fellow debaters as lying. By this morning what Haley pointed out to be a Ramaswamy lie was independently fact-checked and labeled falsehood.
I've never thought Ramaswamy presidential.
Additionally, whereas Christie, Haley and DeSantis can be seen in debate to relate well to one another interpersonally, Ramaswamy hasn't in the three debates I've seen.
Any references not found above are on the page BIBLIOGRAPHY / WORKS CITED in the VotersGettingControl.blogspot.com/ blog.
- END -