Your monthly support provides voters the knowledge they need to make confident decisions at the polls. Donate today.
Fox Business News Republican debate: analysis and commentary
Ballotpedia's scope changes periodically, and this article type is no longer actively created or maintained. If you would like to help our coverage grow, consider donating to Ballotpedia.
Ballotpedia's scope changes periodically, and this article type is no longer actively created or maintained. If you would like to help our coverage grow, consider donating to Ballotpedia.
The columns below were authored by guest columnists and members of Ballotpedia's senior writing staff. The opinions and views belong to the authors.
Trump’s New York Moment
January 15, 2016
By David Kusnet
David Kusnet is a former chief speechwriter for former President Bill Clinton. He is the senior writer and a principal at the Podesta Group, a government relations and public relations firm in Washington, D.C.
Donald Trump won the first nationally televised debate in which he was fully engaged by dominating one exchange with his closest rival, Ted Cruz, and by making a cogent defense of the anger that appeals to much of the electorate and appalls most of the establishment.
While Trump, as always, sounded less scripted than his rivals, he was, in his own way, well-prepared to answer two (contradictory) questions that were sure to be raised: whether he is a pessimistic populist and an Eastern elitist.
In his exchange with Cruz, Trump was better prepared than his usually well-rehearsed rival to address an issue that both had debated at a distance during interviews earlier this week.
Campaigning in Iowa, Cruz had attacked Trump as representing socially liberal “New York values,” while Trump had responded by recalling the suffering and sacrifice of September 11, 2001.
Much like previous debates, where Jeb Bush repeated attacks he’d already made against Marco Rubio, Cruz explained that, “…everyone understands that the values in New York City are socially liberal or pro-abortion or pro- gay-marriage, focused around money and the media. And, and I would note indeed, the reason I said that, is I was asked—my friend Donald has taken to … playing Bruce Springsteen’s ‘Born in the USA’ [at his rallies], and I was asked what I thought of that. And I said, ‘Well, if he wanted to play a song, maybe he could play, “New York, New York”?’ And, and you know, the concept of New York values is not that complicated to figure out.”
In a response that he must have mulled over, if not memorized: Trump counterpunched: “New York is a great place. It’s got great people; it’s got loving people, wonderful people. When the World Trade Center came down, I saw something that no place on Earth could have handled more beautifully, more humanely than New York. You had two one hundred, ... you had two 110-story buildings come crashing down. I saw them come down. Thousands of people killed, and the cleanup started the next day, and it was the most horrific cleanup, probably in the history of doing this, and in construction.”
“I was down there,” Trump continued, “and I’ve never seen anything like it. And the people in New York fought and fought and fought, and we saw more death, and even the smell of death -- nobody understood it. And it was with us for months, the smell, the air. And we rebuilt downtown Manhattan, and everybody in the world watched and everybody in the world loved New York and loved New Yorkers. And I have to tell you, that was a very insulting statement that Ted made.”
Not only Trump’s message but also his manner were pitch-perfect. He spoke slowly and sadly, a New Yorker recalling a tragedy and defending his hometown. Implicitly, he connected his own successes as a builder with the self-sacrificing construction workers who cleared the site of the 9/11 attacks.
While Trump’s tribute to his fellow New Yorkers was more in sorrow than in anger, his defense of his anger was also resonant: “I’m very angry because our country is being run horribly and I will gladly accept the mantle of anger. Our military is a disaster. Our healthcare is a horror show. Obamacare, we’re going to repeal it and replace it. We have no borders. Our vets are being treated horribly. Illegal immigration is beyond belief. Our country is being run by incompetent people. And yes, I am angry. And I won’t be angry when we fix it, but until we fix it, I’m very, very angry.”
To be sure, these two remarks were Trump’s high-points last night, and Cruz, Rubio, Chris Christie and even Bush also had their moments.
Reflecting his usual painstaking preparation, Cruz dominated his exchange with Trump about his eligibility for the presidency. Rubio added a dash of anger to his articulate answers. And Christie, who doesn’t have to feign anger, spoke well throughout the evening.
A few points other pundits haven’t stressed:
- Even though he defended Manhattan, Trump’s great strength is that he’s from what used to be called “the outer boroughs,” having been raised in Queens and worked with his father in Brooklyn. He still has a non-Manhattanite’s mix of awe and resentment for what people in Brooklyn and Queens used to call “the city.”
- Trump isn’t a conventional conservative and rarely, if ever, attacks his Republican rivals, or even President Obama, Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders, in ideological terms. This is part of his appeal to disaffected Democrats.
- Trump fills the space that Rudy Giuliani was expected to occupy in 2008 and Christie in this cycle: the tough, brash, pragmatic Northeasterner, scarred and steeled by 9/11.
Before you think Trump can’t travel, remember how many non-New Yorkers wear NYPD or NYFD caps. He can connect with the heartland, in a New York minute.
GOP’s Top Three All Score Points In Charleston
January 15, 2016
By Karlyn Bowman
Karlyn Bowman, a widely respected analyst of public opinion, is a senior fellow and research coordinator at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank in Washington, D.C.
A new national poll sponsored by NBC News and The Wall Street Journal came out a few hours before last night's debate. Donald Trump led the field with 33 percent, followed by Texas Sen. Ted Cruz at 20 percent, and Florida Sen. Marco Rubio in third place with 13 percent. Of course, we don’t have a national primary and the contests to come in Iowa and New Hampshire and beyond could upset those rankings.
It wasn’t obvious to me that there was a clear winner last night, but the debate in North Charleston, S.C., clearly showed why these three are the top contenders.
Donald Trump, like the others, is a formidable counterpuncher. His response to Cruz’s charge that he embodies “New York values” was sincere and his reference to New Yorkers contributions in the wake of 9/11 should resonate broadly. His defense about being “angry” at so many things in America today, in response to South Carolina Republican Gov. Nikki Haley’s warning in her State of the Union rebuttal about “the siren call of the angriest voices," no doubt struck a chord with many, and especially Republican primary voters.
Cruz was effective on the issue of whether his birth in Canada disqualifies him for the highest office was effective. He hasn’t put the issue to rest, but he won that exchange with Trump. And Rubio, always articulate, scored many points, particularly when he followed up on former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush’s criticism Hillary Clinton at the opening of the debate. Rubio was stronger than Bush, something we have seen before in these debates. I don’t think Bush did much to erase perceptions that he is not top tier in 2016. His knowledgeable and reasoned views about policy on Muslim immigration don’t match the GOP audience’s mood today. Rubio was also effective in raising questions about Cruz’s flat tax proposal. He is a talented debater, but his sharp attacks last night made him seem less likable and more rash than in past debates.
Ohio Gov. John Kasich was less frenetic than in past debate performances, and he and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie made solid points. But this is a race among the top three, and it is unclear to me how or where Kasich or Bush can really break out. It is possible Christie could do so in New Hampshire, but I don’t see his strength in subsequent primaries and caucuses.
I thought one loser last night was Fox Business Network. The network clearly was interested in stirring it up in the way they did not in their first debate. Maybe that’s inevitable as we get closer to Iowa and New Hampshire, but for this viewer, it was less compelling.
It’s crunch time. What these debates can’t tell us is who has the best organization on the ground in Iowa and New Hampshire, and that is critically important. But what we heard last night, especially from the top three, will energize their supporters.
See also
- Presidential candidates, 2016
- Insiders Poll: Winners and losers from the sixth Republican debate
- Presidential debates (2015-2016)
- North Charleston, South Carolina Fox Business Republican debate (January 14, 2016)
- Presidential election, 2016/Polls
- 2016 presidential candidate ratings and scorecards
- Presidential election, 2016/Straw polls
