Opinion: The GOP debate’s biggest losers
Opinion by CNN contributors
(CNN) — CNN Opinion asked political contributors to weigh in on the second Republican presidential debate of the 2024 season. The views expressed in these commentaries are their own.
Jeff Yang: The funniest moments on stage were all unintentional
Human civilization has given us a few great unanswerable questions, such as “What is the meaning of life?” and “What came first, the chicken or the egg?” To these, we must now add “Why are Republicans so bad at telling jokes?”
From former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie’s terrible pun targeting the absent frontrunner (“You’re ducking these things … You keep doing that and no one up here is going to call you Donald Trump anymore. We’re going to call you Donald Duck”) to former Vice President Mike Pence’s faux-folksy attempt at a wink-wink-nudge-nudge gag about his wife (“I have been sleeping with a teacher for 38 years”), the candidates showed a remarkable inability to deliver zingers at a debate held in the memorial library of a Republican president who was a master of them. Facing off against Democratic candidate Walter Mondale in 1984, Ronald Reagan famously said: “I will not make age an issue of this campaign. I am not going to exploit for political purposes my opponent’s youth and inexperience.”
Perhaps it’s because so many of the lines on Wednesday night were so clearly pre-rehearsed, like Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’s confusing avalanche of alliteration in support of his energy policy (“We are going to choose Midland over Moscow. We’re going to choose the Marcellus over the Mullahs, and we’re going to choose Bakken over Beijing”).
Perhaps it’s because the candidates had such awkward demeanors and deliveries — with Pence in particular seeming more blankly AI-generated than usual, to the point where I began referring to him in my notes as “ChatGOP.”
But ultimately, the funniest moments on stage were all unintentional, like the weirdly chaotic shouting match that ensued between Nikki Haley and Tim Scott over the cost of the curtains in her UN Ambassador’s residence. High-lowlight: Haley muscling up to the man she appointed to the Senate and saying, “Bring it, Tim!”
For what it’s worth, Haley also had the one laugh line that genuinely landed in tonight’s Republican debate, when she eyerolled at Vivek Ramaswamy and sighed, “Honestly, every time I hear you, I feel a little bit dumber for what you say.” Unfortunately for her, consensus among viewers on social media was that the crack applied to the entire gaggle of back-benchers and wannabes on stage — Haley included.
Jeff Yang is a research director for the Institute for the Future and the head of its Digital Intelligence Lab.
Hal Boyd: Tim Scott was inspiring. But a lot of the rest of the debate wasn’t.
Ronald Reagan won the debate. Republicans didn’t deliver enough moral leadership to compete with him.
The evening began inspiringly enough, with the debate held at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library and opening with a reference to America as “a shining city on a hill” – a favorite phrase of Reagan’s and an allusion to scripture. But if America remains that city on a hill – in other words, a beacon of moral leadership – you’d be forgiven for missing the message.
To hear it from the debate stage, the country is divided, the economy is broken, education is failing, and America can’t figure out how to secure its southern border, stop school shootings, solve soaring healthcare costs or stave off a government shutdown.
But no one offered a vision for how to unite Americans and solve big problems. No one except for perhaps Reagan, who was referenced and quoted throughout Wednesday’s debate, and whose legacy seemed to tower over the Republicans on stage, making them seem small by comparison.
With that said, there were a few brief moments of hope for Republicans yearning for a leader of Reagan’s stature to emerge.
Perhaps the strongest came from South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott in response to a question on education.
After Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis noted his state’s push to remove critical race theory from the school curriculum, Scott took the opportunity to both critique his opponent — something he did well throughout the night — while also pivoting to a uniting and inspiring message.
“Black families survived slavery. We survived poll taxes and literacy tests,” he said. “What was hard to survive was [Lyndon] Johnson’s Great Society … where they decided to take the Black father out of the household.”
“If you want to restore hope,” he continued, “you’ve got to restore the family, restore capitalism and put Americans back at work.”
To audience cheers, Scott addressed the American people: “Never ever doubt who we are. We are the greatest country on God’s green earth. And frankly, the city on the hill needs a brand new leader.”
It was a powerful moment, but such moments were far too fleeting. Scott might have recovered from a lackluster performance at the first debate and established a Reaganesque presence at times. But such glimmers and flickers alone cannot light a city (or a party) on a hill.
Hal Boyd is the editor of Deseret News and a fellow of Brigham Young University’s Wheatley Institute, a think tank focused on fortifying family, religion and constitutional government.
Frida Ghitis: No profiles in courage
There was an unreal quality to Wednesday’s Republican primary debate. Watching the chaotic verbal sparring, one had to pretend that the debate mattered, and that the man who is by far and away leading the Republican field is only a minor factor in the race.
Sure, the contenders managed to lob a few shots at former President Donald Trump. But, as has become the norm in the GOP, they completely ignored his most egregious misdeeds. They mentioned that he added $7 trillion to the national debt, but not that he tried to overturn the country’s democracy. They mentioned that he didn’t finish building a border wall, but not that he has been indicted four times and faces a slew of extraordinarily serious charges, all of which he denies.
Instead, they piled up on businessman Vivek Ramaswamy, whose “surge” in the polls still has him in the single digits. Sure, Ramaswamy’s polished hypocrisy is a tempting target. Some of the shots landed. But too often, the attacks sounded like rehearsed one-liners crafted to make the morning news.
Once again, Nikki Haley, the former South Carolina governor and UN ambassador, put on the most impressive performance. But if she, or any of those on stage, were auditioning to become Trump’s running mate, the former president had news.
Campaigning for the votes of auto workers at a non-union shop in Michigan, Trump mocked his Republican opponents. “They’re all job candidates,” he said, auditioning to become cabinet members, or even his vice president. “Has anybody seen a VP anywhere?” Trump added dismissively, implying none of them would join his ticket.
Most of the candidates looked afraid to take Trump head on. None of them dared to mention the threat he still poses to the country. Instead, they seem to be holding out hope that a possible Trump implosion might give them an opening. It was hardly an inspiring display of courage.
Frida Ghitis, a former CNN producer and correspondent, is a world affairs columnist. She is a weekly opinion contributor to CNN, a contributing columnist to The Washington Post and a columnist for World Politics Review.
Paul Begala: The biggest losers were the Fox moderators
Wednesday night’s GOP debate was not about who can defeat former President Donald Trump in the GOP primaries; none of the seven dwarves on the debate stage at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library can.
This was, instead, a chance to preview what a post-Trump GOP might look like. Does the GOP revert to Reagan, as former Vice President Mike Pence, South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott, former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and former UN Ambassador Nikki Haley seem to want to, or do they go Trump 2.0, as Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy want to? Sadly, the jumbled shout-fest failed to deliver even on that modest goal.
The biggest losers were the Fox moderators. They failed pathetically, allowing candidates to turn the debate into a tower of Babel. (Note to the Republican National Committee: When you put your debates in the hands of right-wing cable mediocrities, you get mediocre debates.)
Now to the candidates: Poor DeSantis. Although he stood in the center spot, he often disappeared, as politicians on either side of him shouted each other down. In the House of Reagan, DeSantis had all the charm of the monkey in Reagan’s movie, “Bedtime for Bonzo.”
Christie and Pence, meanwhile, had a few flashes, and Scott had a surprisingly strong debate, especially when he defended funding the freedom fighters in Ukraine. Still, most of the debate was a spasm of sputtering from utterly forgettable also-rans.
The Republican most Democrats probably fear is Haley. She somehow stayed out of the mindless cross-talk and scored points strategically. The good news for her is that she won the debate. The bad news is, the prize is as worthless as a degree from Trump University.
Paul Begala, a Democratic strategist and CNN political commentator, was a political consultant for Bill Clinton’s presidential campaign in 1992 and served as a counselor to Clinton in the White House.
SE Cupp: Nikki Haley showed up ready to play
With the stunning news that former President Donald Trump and his adult sons have been found liable for fraud, and lost the Trump Organization’s business certification, it seemed like yet another opportunity for his Republican opponents for president to take a swing at him on the debate stage Wednesday night.
None of them specifically brought up the judge’s decision or the 91 charges Trump is facing, though he earned several rebukes for skipping the debate. (Trump denies all wrongdoing.)
I was hoping former UN Ambassador and South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, who’s been so successful at landing injurious blows against her opponents, was going to take on Trump’s significant baggage. She didn’t, but perhaps that was because she was laser-focused on exposing the weaknesses of the candidates who did bother to show up – more so than anyone else on the stage.
She pointedly took on Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis on his fracking record, South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott on what he failed to do in the Senate and businessman Vivek Ramaswamy on his embrace of TikTok and his foreign policy inexperience. The point of debates and campaigning is to create contrasts in hopes of whittling down the field, after all. In that respect, Haley came ready to play in a way that truly set her apart from the rest — and made her the night’s winner.
SE Cupp is a CNN political commentator.
Sophia Nelson: DeSantis did not meet the moment
The key candidate to watch tonight was Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis. With his campaign losing momentum, tonight’s debate was a make-or-break moment for him. DeSantis actually criticized Trump for missing the debate and increasing the national debt by $7 trillion during his term. But otherwise, DeSantis’ performance, at best, maintained the status quo. He didn’t deal effectively with the controversy over Florida’s educational guidelines, which mentioned the idea that there could have been benefits for people who were enslaved. For me, as a Black woman and a direct descendant of slaves, his answer was clueless and offensive.
His delivery was often flat, and his lack of vision and charisma was plain to see. He’s stuck on the culture wars, playing to all the predictable right-wing talking points, with his mentions of America in decline, people in blue states like California getting mugged, and the border being “wide open.” And he will never beat Trump this way.
Bottom line: I just don’t see a presidency in DeSantis’s future.
Overall, the second GOP debate was pretty predictable: Former UN Ambassador and South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley was the best prepared, the most confident and the best communicator of her vision and beliefs. South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott was trying too hard to be the sunny Reagan heir, and his decision to pick an on-stage fight with Vivek Ramaswamy was unproductive. Gov. Chris Christie was true to form and took shots at Trump all night, at one point calling out the former president for failing to show up to the debate by saying, “You keep doing that, and no one up here is going to call you Donald Trump anymore. We’re going to call you Donald Duck.” Meanwhile, watching former Vice President Mike Pence was like watching paint dry on the wall.
As with the last debate, the best person the GOP has in this field who could actually win a general election, is Haley.
Sophia A. Nelson, a former investigative counsel in the US Congress, is the author of the book “Black Woman Redefined: Dispelling Myths and Discovering Fulfillment in the Age of Michelle Obama.”
Jim Antle: The answer that could alienate the GOP’s future voters
At Wednesday night’s debate, multiple Republican candidates attacked President Joe Biden for appearing on the picket line alongside striking United Auto Workers members. South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott said Biden should have gone to the southern border instead. Entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy quipped the workers should picket outside the White House.
These are good applause lines for a Republican audience, of course. But the 2016 presidential election was won in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. Biden won them back in 2020. Republicans will need to take them again in 2024 to return to the White House.
Former President Donald Trump, the frontrunner, skipped the second debate in a row, this time to appear in Michigan, where the auto industry and the UAW are based. Can Republican candidates from right-to-work states, even the relatively popular Nikki Haley, the former South Carolina governor, replicate that support in the Rust Belt?
The GOP is an increasingly blue-collar party. There is a strong working-class presence in the swing states. If Republicans other than Trump have a plan to win those voters and states, talking about Ronald Reagan firing the air traffic controllers or cutting government spending doesn’t make a strong case that they do. A candidate gains little by winning the debate on Wednesday night if they lose the voters the GOP’s future rests on.
W. James Antle III is the politics editor of the Washington Examiner and author of “Devouring Freedom: Can Government Ever Be Stopped?”
Jill Filipovic: The GOP candidates debased themselves
The second Republican debate raised one big question: Why?
Former President Donald Trump remains the leading candidate in the Republican primary, and he didn’t bother to show up. That’s an act of profound disrespect to Republican voters and the democratic process, but GOP voters don’t seem inclined to punish him.
Despite the fact that Trump enjoys more support than all of the GOP candidates in Wednesday night’s debate combined, the candidates who did show up duked it out as though they were fighting for the number-one slot, and not, say, the vice presidency or perhaps a gig as a cable news commentator.
The debate was less an exercise in a genuine exchange and more of a juvenile slap-flight. The candidates interrupted each other and talked over each other. Sen. Tim Scott ranted about former UN Ambassador Nikki Haley’s curtains. Haley told Vivek Ramaswamy, “Every time I hear you I feel a little bit dumber” (an admittedly satisfying burn).
Former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie took a shockingly inappropriate swipe when he said that the president is “sleeping with a member of the teacher’s union” (Biden’s wife Jill is a long-time educator and a member of the National Education Association). And just when viewers may have thought we hit rock bottom, former Vice President Mike Pence piped up to say, “My wife is not a member of the teacher’s union, but I got to admit, I have been sleeping with a teacher for 38 years.”
It was an appalling display of mutual disrespect from candidates who largely embarrassed and debased themselves. Which brings us back to the big question of the debate: Why?
Jill Filipovic is a journalist based in New York and author of the book “OK Boomer, Let’s Talk: How My Generation Got Left Behind.” Follow her on Twitter.
Susanne Ramirez de Arellano: Latino viewers weren’t given a reason to vote Republican
Former President Ronald Reagan reportedly said: “Hispanics are Republican. They just don’t know it.” After the second 2024 GOP debate, where undocumented immigrants were demonized and blamed for everything from crime to border insecurity to the fentanyl epidemic, they still don’t.
None of the candidates were effective in communicating concrete solutions on issues that matter most to Latinos – the economy, health care, gun violence, border security and immigration.
Instead, GOP candidates variously discussed the militarization of the border, the institution of universal deportation – even for young people impacted by DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) – and the elimination of birthright citizenship.
It was telling that, despite the co-sponsorship of the debate by Univision, the largest US Hispanic broadcaster, and the participation of Emmy Award-winning anchor Ilia Calderón, the GOP candidates didn’t take the opportunity to speak directly to Latino voters.
Calderon reminded the candidates that Reagan, in whose library the debate was held, granted amnesty to nearly 3million immigrants. She then refreshed former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie’s memory about something he said when he ran for president the last time: that immigrants should be tracked like FedEx packages. He didn’t deny it.
Latinos need to feel part of the Republican policy agenda, particularly the economy. It didn’t happen on Wednesday night. The second GOP debate was a missed opportunity to talk directly to the Latinos who were watching.
Susanne Ramirez de Arellano, a writer and cultural critic, is a former news director for Univision.
Jon Gabriel: Americans are divided over Ukraine military funding. The GOP candidates were as well
Washington’s military support for Ukraine revealed a stark divide among the Republican presidential candidates during Wednesday night’s debate.
Vivek Ramaswamy voiced support for reducing military aid to Ukraine, which for the past year and half has been fighting efforts by Russian President Vladimir Putin to conquer his country’s smaller neighbor.
“Just because Putin is … an evil dictator does not mean that Ukraine is good,” Ramaswamy said.
Several other candidates jumped on his position however, arguing that America benefits from the ongoing effort to supply funds, arms, materiel and other support to thwart Russia’s invasion.
“Our national vital interest is in degrading the Russian military,” Sen. Tim Scott (R–S.C.) said. “By degrading the Russian military, we reduce, if not eliminate, an attack on NATO territory.”
Former vice president Mike Pence shouted, “Vivek, if you let Putin have Ukraine, that’s a green light to China [to] take Taiwan! Peace comes through strength!”
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, who might best be described as a Ukraine skeptic, told the crowd that “It’s in our interest to end this war and that’s what I will do as president,” — without exactly describing how. He added that “we are not going to have a blank check” for Ukraine’s military endeavors against Russia.
As vague as DeSantis’ stance was, it may reflect the views of a good number of voters. An August CNN poll showed a majority of Americans side with Ukraine, but oppose more federal funding, and this public skepticism has steadily grown since the invasion.
America’s long, bloody engagements in Iraq and Afghanistan appear to have dampened voter enthusiasm for grinding conflicts. Barring a rapid Ukraine victory, a winning 2024 strategy may be — oppose Putin and root for Ukraine, but remember that taxpayer support is falling and seems likely to diminish ahead of the election.
Jon Gabriel is editor-in-chief of Ricochet.com and an opinion contributor to The Arizona Republic.
David Mark: Vivek Ramaswamy surrendered his best campaign asset
Vivek Ramaswamy took a considerably warmer approach to his 2024 Republican presidential rivals Wednesday than in their first debate clash. But in doing so, he left behind a pugilistic and confrontational persona that clearly resonates with the GOP electorate.
“These are good people on this stage,” the 38-year-old entrepreneur said at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library, acknowledging his six GOP opponents at the debate.
“I think we will be better served as a Republican Party if we are not sitting here hurling personal insults and actually have a legitimate debate about policy,” Ramaswamy went on to say.
That’s quite a change in approach. During the first debate, Ramaswamy came out swinging. He attacked his fellow candidates, at one point declaring, “I’m the only person on this stage who isn’t bought and paid for.”
Ramaswamy drew considerable criticism for coming off like a punk kid trying to school experienced lawmakers.
But by changing course and playing nice, Ramaswamy may be giving up one of his greatest advantages in breaking out from the GOP primary pack. Trump’s enduring political success lies with the show he puts on. Many Republican voters want more of the former president’s fight and brazenness — they don’t necessarily want to listen to 10-point policy plans.
Trump’s core supporters are looking for confrontation, not conciliation. Ramaswamy took that approach in the first debate. Republican voters open to a Trump alternative for 2024 are likely wondering what happened to that guy.
David Mark is a political journalist, author and public speaker.
The-CNN-Wire
™ & © 2023 Cable News Network, Inc., a Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All rights reserved.
