Values Voter Debate Review (Candidates)

As noted in Values Voter Debate Review all the candidates had ample time and opportunity to answer questions. The only candidates who were short changed were the four not participating. In Values Voter Debate Review (Extended), covered some of the questions and answers I thought were interesting.

In this post will try to concentrate on each candidate, in no order, just as they come to my mind. Video clips of the debate are starting to show up on YouTube. Search page results of debate videos.

Alan Keyes - The newcomer to the race, but not to campaigning. Powerful speaker, maybe a bit overdone for a debate forum. Sure he's great at speeches and on the stump. Much the same positions as the other participants, just more insistent on their place in our nation and government. Could only help himself by participating. Doesn't have a chance.

Duncan Hunter - Usual solid performance. Emphasis on building the fence and stopping illegal immigration, tying it to strong families and values. Consistent in hitting on unfair trade agreements with China and the looming military standoff.

John Cox
- Someone most of the public isn't even aware of. A businessman, non-politician. Says the GOP has lost it's way because there are too many career politicians. Running as true outsider. Took to task the Congressmen on the stage for losing their way along with the rest of the party and not making enough of an effort to stop it as it was happening.

Mike Huckabee - As noted in the initial review, the runaway winner of the straw poll of the Values Voter delegates. Right in his element in this setting, in front of the sponsoring groups. The guy has perfect timing and pitch. I think most of his answers ended and the chime went off indicating end of his time. Emphasized his ten years as governor and three as lieutenant governor. When informed he had four minutes for his closing remarks, always the Baptist preacher, quipped, "With four minutes, I have time to take an offering. If I could ask the ushers to come forward."

Sam Brownback - Played to Sam's strong suit: Abortion, family, values. No surprises from Sam. Emphasized the work he's done in the Senate on these issues. Losing points advocating for guest worker programs while the nation's sentiments are distinctly 'secure the border first'. IMO, his best debate performance, but not good enough to help him among primary voters.

Ron Paul - No surprises. Had more time than usual to explain and expound on his position and beliefs. Paul hammered on his usual smaller government theme. He's not losing any support there. But, he went into his illegal war in Iraq, leave everyone alone, mind our own business routine. Emphasized the Christian them of the just war and says ours is not. Got a direct question concerning libertarianism and he answered it quite well. Wish I had a transcript. Maybe it's in one of the video clips.

Tom Tancredo - Of course, Tank hammered home the illegal immigrant issue and tied it in with American values and family. Addressed his controversial stance on suspension of all immigration until we are able to assimilate the immigrants now here. Thought he had one of the best closing remarks. Said even though he didn't agree with everything all the other candidates believed, he was proud to among them as he considers them all men of integrity and principle. I liked that.

If you think I didn't capture the essence of a particular candidate, oh well. As I said, my observations and impressions. So, what you read is what stuck with me and what I recalled from reading my notes. I'm sure everyone who watched garnered different things from each candidate.

All in all, I liked the whole debate and think it was great the non-top tier candidates got so much time to answer questions. The shame is that more people couldn't have seen it. I'd be interested in finding out how many viewers and listeners the debate had.

The only real losers in this debate were the four candidates who didn't show up.