The Republican debate, no Trump.

I did not particularly like the format where there were lists of questions, and even clips for specific candidates which jumped subject matter and provided only limited and antagonistically focused responses by the participants.

The moderators inserted their own opinions as well: They called Climate Change a Science? Its now separated from long term weather prediction? If so why, what is the difference. Clearly a look for PC responses and an attack on those who do not respond properly.

They brought a Muslim America whose question implied ISIS was caused by America, and no one picked it up: "Muslim American- Hate crimes tripled, many attacks, "culture of hatred has only driving ISIS to radicalize..."  Bush missed it completely. Immediate change of subject prevented anyone else to respond. ISIS is not radicalized by anything we do, but the statement was accepted as if that is the case.

The moderators had clear control of the proceedings which were not a debate, were not focuses on issues, and really seem to lack coherence. Not a very good performance.

Cruz began as usual in excellent fashion preening himself as the most conservative Republican since Lincoln, and lambasting Trump comically in pretty impressive fashion.

He was specific on Obama Care specifying his plans as:
1. Permit buying of insurance across state lines.
2. Increase the availability and the tax exemptions to medical savings accounts
3. Separate employment from medical insurance without specific how.
On Immigration there was a donnybrook with Rubio as to who supported what when with the moderators placing inflammatory  clips in front of both participants.  Why the "Why don't you and him kill each other" approach?
Cruz convincingly showed that he was opposed to normalization of illegal aliens. That he was for controlling both the borders and the ability of illegals to work and get benefits within the country. That has been his position and I may be reading into it what I know from the past since the moderators where directing the conversation instead of promoting it.
On ISIS: He has an insufficient grasp of what is needed, explained carpet bombing as 1000 sorties or 2000 sorties a day not 30. Never promised ground troops. Will provide for growth in the Army, Navy and Air Force.

Ethanol - Cruz only: Pursue all of the above, gas, oil, wind, ethanol. Washington should have no mandates or support for everyone. No subsides for oil and gas, or ethanol.  The EPA's blend wall is to be deleted, which makes ethanol much more enticing. A flat tax law which eliminates all exemptions.

Rubio: engaging and with good ripostes, was at least once beaten by Bush to the punch. He accused Bush of changing his mind, and the replied, correctly, "So did you" He then made it worse by insisting he hadn't and both were clobbered by Rand.

Obama Care: don't recall what he said

Immigration: He denied what was obviously the case. He sold his voters out by being one of the "Gang of Eight".

On ISIS: Really the same as Cruz, both differing from Kasich only in K's reliance on other Sunni powers.  They (Rubio and Cruz) stress it less. The agree  about the use of Guantanamo (not sure Cruz was asked). They have taken over the position of Trump, using softer language.

Rand: as usual, excellent at protecting our freedoms, ignores our needs for a strong army and recommending we never stray from our borders.  He is the only one totally committed to fiscal responsibility.


Governor Christie, I have been evaluated by democrats and achieved with them some conservative goals. Whoopee! These two bozos killing each other over the meaning of words show you need a Governor, not a Senator.

On Terror: Let law enforcement decide if what you saw is significant or not, but if you don't talk, or if you denigrate the law enforcement you can't get there.
On Obama Care: An example of waste in Obama care, supporting Planned Parenthood, give me something more substantial, answer: than not killing thousands of humans? Beautiful response with a total change of subject hidden in it. Not a fiscal conservative!
On Hillary: Great points on Benghazi, she won't be indicted by Obama, I'll indict here during the campaign: The days of the Clintons in public housing are over!

Bush: Impressive in his affect when talking about veterans. He clearly wants to help them, and to clean up the Vet Administration.

Then switch to Puerto Rico? Why the scripted reading of questions instead of a debate on the large items in detail. Cover less, in more depth, show the positions of all the participants.