Tag Archives: Ron Paul

Super Tuesday Preview: Romney/Santorum To Win Lion’s Share of Super Tuesday States

Posted on by Ryan Kantor

With ten states up for grabs on March 6th, it has been dubbed “Super Tuesday.” As the name suggests, it’s a critically important day in the race for the GOP nomination. Georgia, my home state, is a part of the election’s big day. As such, it’s only appropriate that I share a little preview of what we may see on Super Tuesday.

Alaska, Georgia, Idaho, Massachusetts, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Vermont, and Virginia are up for grabs.

In Alaska Todd Palin has officially endorsed Newt Gingrich while Sarah Palin has all but endorsed the Georgian. In 2008 Mitt Romney won over 43% of the Alaskan vote, and while Gingrich and Romney have their advantages, Santorum’s principled conservatism should play well with the blue-collar Republicans in our most northern state. Alaska’s 27 delegates are determined by caucus, which generally seems to favor candidates with more passionate followings. If not for the format of the election, I’d probably favor Romney, but given its quirky nature everyone has a chance, including Ron Paul who is still searching for his first victory and spending time and resources in Alaska. Polls are unavailable, making a prediction just about impossible.

Georgia is much easier to predict. Newt Gingrich’s home state is expected to fall his way. Santorum can’t be counted completely out in Georgia as his social conservatism helps him in southern states, such as in Tennessee where he is expected to win.

It’s critically important that Newt fails to regain his momentum and doesn’t get another shot at the nomination. Of the four remaining GOP candidates, Gingrich has the highest negatives and the largest deficit against Obama in hypothetical general election polls. It is in the GOP’s best interest to nominate one of the other three candidates. A loss or (more likely) a slim win in Georgia would quell hopes of a Gingrich surge.

One would expect Ohio, not to far from western Pennsylvania where Santorum has always made his hay, to support former Senator Santorum, but with Romney’s effective campaign working hard in the Buckeye state, it’s a nearly toss up right now. Either way, Santorum is ineligible for many of Ohio’s delegates due to procedural error on his campaign’s part and will suffer as a result.

North Dakota, Idaho, and Oklahoma are tougher to predict. North Dakota is free game for Ron Paul, where his strong ground game and resources make him competitive, but Romney has to be the default favorite. Oklahoma and their Evangelical voters are expected to go to Santorum.

“Idaho may end up in his [Romney's] column because any state with a sizeable Mormon population is in play,” said Larry Sabato of the University of Virginia. “They’re motivated and they turn out.”

Massachusetts, Vermont, and Virginia are just about locks for the front-runner Romney. Mitt Romney was fairly dominant in New Hampshire and I expect his moderate, “best to beat Obama” appeal to continue to play well in New England. In Virginia, Santorum and Gingrich did not make the ballot so it will be a two-man race between Romney and Ron Paul. Given the situation, I can’t fathom Romney not winning by a large margin. Even without the ballot fiasco I would have expected Virginians to support Romney.

Anything can happen on what will be an interesting day in American politics. Gingrich really must win Georgia and do it by 10+ points. He is expected to win Mississippi, Texas, North Carolina, and a few other post-Super Tuesday states, but he can’t lose all his budding momentum before then. Santorum has said he just needs to avoid “being voted off the island.” To do that he’ll need to win multiple states.

I think you’ll see Romney earn more Super Tuesday delegates than any of his competitors. It’s not at all unreasonable for him to win five of the ten states that will be voting or caucusing on the day, leaving just five states for the other three to squabble between. If Gingrich only wins Georgia, which seems to be the case, it’ll be hard to look at him as a viable candidate, but if Santorum has a poor showing he may retake the mantle as Romney’s chief rival. Regardless, we’ll have an exciting day that hopefully can go a long way towards wrapping up the nomination for someone, so the Republicans can stop arguing about minor differences in records and start going after Obama on blocking deep-sea drilling, stopping nuclear power growth, nixing the Keystone XL Pipeline, and blocking oil shale development as US gas prices shoot past an average price of $3.70/gallon.

Rough Predictions

Romney: Five States
Santorum: Three States
Gingrich: One State
Paul: One State

As always, please subscribe to this blog by clicking the “Follow” button at the top of the right sidebar. If you don’t have a WordPress account, you’ll have to enter your email address. You can share your opinions in the comment section below or by tweeting to @Ryan_Kantor. Thanks for reading! 

Santorum Sweeps Three States, Reframes Race

Posted on by Ryan Kantor

Last night (Tuesday, Feb 7th) was another game changer in a wild race for the GOP nomination. Newt Gingrich had his big night back in South Carolina, then lost momentum as Romney won Florida and Nevada back-to-back. Santorum though, never really had his time. His win in Iowa wasn’t known until after the votes were certified. By then, the opportunity for momentum and publicity was largely diminished.

Now, Rick Santorum will get his belated moment in the spotlight. Three wins in one night have given his campaign second life. Santorum exclaimed “Conservatism is alive and well…We doubled him up here, and in Minnesota.” He even managed to win Colorado, where Romney won handily in 2008.

Newt Gingrich has been attempting to cast the election as a two-man race between a moderate, Mitt Romney, and a true conservative–himself. Negative ads coupled with heaps of baggage and an “angry” approach to the campaign have led many to look away from Gingrich, making this anything but a two-man race. Those looking for a true conservative are finding that Rick Santorum holds genuine convictions where other candidates (save Ron Paul) seem more like wind socks.

Santorum showed principle and discipline when he avoided attacking Mitt Romney for his work at Bain Capital, this while Gingrich and Rick Perry were pounding away and it was the in vogue thing to do. I find it very hard to believe that Newt Gingrich really has a problem with a venture capital firm buying ownership of a company, streamlining the business, saving the company, and selling it for massive profits. Few, if any, real economic conservatives have a problem with this, but Newt has relentlessly bashed Romney for this while also claiming to be the true conservative in the election.

Rick Santorum is largely known for his social stances, especially his defense of the unborn. He contrasts boldly with Barack Obama (who is currently in a battle with the Catholic Church) when he talks about the Declaration of Independence and God-given rights. Santorum referenced this bold contrast as a key to beating President Obama in the general election.

I’m not sure how I feel about that. There’s no doubt in my mind that Rick Santorum is the most honest, consistent, and genuine conservative in the race, but will his “bold contrast” with President Obama help or hurt him in the general election?

If Santorum is the nominee President Obama will likely try to focus on social issues, which is not what the Republicans want. Obama is much better off if the election is about Santorum’s social views instead of his own record handling the economy. Any way the President can minimize talk of the Keystone XL Pipeline, a Canadian oil pipeline that would have crossed America’s breadbasket and provided much-needed jobs and energy, is a win for him. His decision to block construction of the Keystone XL Pipeline could be a political nightmare for him as gas prices inch up and the general election inches near. He’d also probably like to avoid talk of Solyndra, a solar energy company his administration sought to boost though government funding that ended up filing for bankruptcy. Will Santorum’s bold stances allow Obama to move the focus of the election to more favorable issues?

The problem with nominating a moderate is the lack of passion you get from your base. You need passion to get people to knock on doors, donate money, and otherwise contribute to your campaign. Gingrich warned that all the areas that Romney won in Florida had especially low turnout relative to the areas he lost. The positive to having a moderate as your party’s nominee is that they are more likely to do well with independent voters. That’s not to say that Rick Santorum can’t attract moderate voters though. His economic plans, which I believe he needs to extenuate more, and his personality seem to attract blue-collar “Reagan Democrats.”

Santorum has proposed cutting corporate taxes on manufacturing to 0%… again to 0%. This would bring a ridiculous amount of manufacturing jobs back to America and help a good many Americans. This coupled with Rick Santorum’s vote against right-to-work laws while in Senate and Obama’s blocking of the Keystone which was expected to create 20,000 new jobs, many of which would have been union jobs could make Rick Santorum a very strong candidate in the rust belt. Is it unrealistic to think he can win states like Ohio and Indiana? I’d venture to say no.

Do you think Rick Santorum could give Obama a solid battle in a general election, or do you (like current national polls) think he’d lose badly? You can watch his full victory speech on Youtube by clicking here.

As always, please subscribe to this blog by clicking the “Follow” button at the top of the right sidebar. If you don’t have a WordPress account, you’ll have to enter your email address. You can share your opinions in the comment section below or by tweeting to @Ryan_Kantor. Thanks for reading! 

Pros and Cons of Mitt Romney Becoming the GOP Nominee

Posted on by Ryan Kantor

Today’s New Hampshire primary is historic. Mitt Romney’s win makes him the first non-incumbent Republican to win both Iowa and New Hampshire since Iowa became the kick-off state in the election cycle. (Update: Recount has shown that Rick Santorum actually edged Mitt Romney in Iowa) While that doesn’t mean he’s the nominee–Rick “Sweater Vest” Santorum, Ron Paul and to some extent Newt Gingrich still have a viable shot–but at this point you have to bet on Mitt Romney over the field.

With that being said, I’m not a Romney-hater searching for the best “anti-Romney,” nor am I a supporter of his. That gives me an open mind to evaluate the pros and cons of him as the GOP nominee. I may go back and add more later, but here’s what comes to mind. Please add pros and cons that you can think of in the comments. For every con try to add a pro and vice versa.

PRO

CON

PRO

  • Mitt Romney has committed to cutting spending to 20% of GDP.
CON
  • Government revenues are typically 18% of GDP meaning even if Mitt accomplishes this goal we’ll still be running a deficit. His ideas are not bold enough, and he’s rather moderate.

PRO

  • Mitt Romney‘s experience in the private sector is stellar. Some, including fellow Republicans Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry, have attacked his tenure at Bane Capital and called him a corporate raider. Romney has proven that he created a net job growth while there, thoroughly debunking that argument. Rick Santorum called the criticism unfounded last night on Fox News. Mitt did great work for Staples while working with Bane Capital and then worked with the Olympics. He really understands business at a level that President Obama simply does not and is much more qualified to handle the economy.

CON

  • While his private sector experience is fantastic and his tenure as Massachusetts governor seems to have been quite successful, he lacks foreign policy experience. We haven’t heard him say much about foreign policy in speeches or debates either.

PRO

  • He has unequivocally stated conservative social values, yet hasn’t been viciously attacked and demonized by the media like someone with similar views such as Rick Santorum.

CON

  • As much as he wants to say about his social views, it’s hard to believe they are strongly held convictions when they differ so wildly from what he said about his social views when running in the very liberal state of Massachusetts.
PRO
  • Mitt knows how to make political allies and get things done. His historic run through the first two primaries was aided by endorsements from conservative politicians in key states. He was able to work with liberal Democrats while serving as Governor in Massachusetts and is a better hope to end the partisan strife in Washington than any very liberal Democrat or very conservative Republican.
CON
PRO
  • Romney has the strongest organization among the GOP nominees. He has the biggest war chest, the best advisers, and the strongest get-out-the-vote effort. These will be critical if the GOP nominee is to give President Obama a worthy challenge.
CON
  • His aforementioned advantages over GOP rivals won’t stack up as advantages against Barack Obama and his powerful political machine. If Romney is winning the GOP nomination simply by outspending his rivals, having a stronger ground game, and crushing them with negative ads, what will he do when President Obama outspends him, has a stronger ground game, and runs more negative ads? Rely on $4.00 gas?

Feel free to share more in the comments and I may add them to the list. Thanks for reading.

As always, please subscribe to this blog by clicking the “Follow” button at the top of the right sidebar. If you don’t have a WordPress account, you’ll have to enter your email address. You can share your opinions in the comment section below or by tweeting to @Ryan_Kantor. Thanks for reading! 

#NHDebate Recap Jan 7, 2012

Posted on by Ryan Kantor
Less than 72 hours until the New Hampshire primary, the six remaining major candidates for GOP nomination gathered in Manchester, New Hampshire for a nationally broadcast debate. Here were the key points and most interesting tidbits.
  • When asked if he would stand behind his negative ads against Rick Santorum, Ron Paul didn’t back down. The ad accuses Rick Santorum of being a corrupt big government guy among other things. Paul cited a liberal activist group (CREW) that called him corrupt, his vote against right-to-work laws, and five votes for raising the national debt limit.
  • Rick Santorum defended himself by pointing out that the corruption charges came from a very left-wing organization saying (paraphrasing) ”you’re not conservative if you haven’t been attacked by CREW.” He explained that he was one of the few guys working on entitlement reform back when we were running a surplus, and that the debt ceiling increases were necessary to keep the government running and he always worked to tie-in spending decreases. He also noted that unlike Ron Paul, he is not a Libertarian, he is a conservative.
  • Rick Perry claimed to be the only outsider that has not been part of the Washington problem (despite sending lobbyists to Washington to lobby for earmarks for Texas).
  • Jon Huntsman argued for congressional term limits.
  • Ron Paul claimed that our drug laws and judicial system are racist, because many more African-Americans are arrested on drug charges than Caucasians, despite comparable drug usage. He went on to ask, (paraphrasing) “when was the last time you saw a rich white man get the electric chair?” He said this in response to accusations about his 20 year-old newsletters which apparently contained inappropriate racial commentary.
  • Newt Gingrich explained that the sacrament of marriage is of enormous, 3,000 year old, foundation for our country. He also said that everyone should be treated with respect, and there should be ways to give hospital visitation rights, include partners in wills, etc. Multiple candidates including the “moderate” Mitt Romney endorsed a constitutional amendment to define marriage as between a man and woman.
  • Newt Gingrich informed the audience that following Massachusetts’ decision to guarantee the right to marriage for same-sex couples, the state government attempted to force the Catholic Church to comply with a state law saying that homosexual-couples must be allowed to adopt children. The church’s non-compliance forced the shutdown of their adoption services in the state. The Catholic Church was responsible for about half of the adoption placements in Massachusetts. This was one of the more interesting talking points. Everyone on the stage seemed to agree with Gingrich when he pointed out how same-sex marriage has repercussions that aren’t being talked about by the biased media.
  • Santorum argued that the foreign policy weakness displayed by the Obama administration is culpable for what we are seeing from Iran, with their military exercises practicing closing the Straight of Hormuz.
  • Rick Perry literally said “I would send troops back into Iraq.” When asked if he agreed, Newt Gingrich flatly said no without showing up or confronting Perry.
  • Gingrich said we need to be more energy independent so “an American President never again bows to a Saudi king,” referencing Obama bowing down to a Saudi king earlier in his Presidential tenure.
  • Mitt Romney said something that all conservatives will love, (paraphrasing) ”government can do some things to create jobs, but by-in-large they get in the way.”
  • Rick Santorum said he would repeal all of Obama’s 150+ regulations (something he can do immediately) and replace them with more reasonable ones or not replace them at all.
  • Mitt Romney continued to push his new slogan, exclaiming that “this election is about the soul of America.” He makes a good point and makes one question where the country is headed, a question he likely wants voters to ask themselves as most have indicated that they feel the country is headed in the wrong direction.
  • Newt Gingrich pointed out that the Wall Street Journal called Mitt Romney’s job creation plan timid and more like Obama’s in comparison to his own. Santorum agreed that Mitt’s plans aren’t bold and added he didn’t like to talk about “middle-class,” “upper-class,” etc, as he has grown tired of all the class warfare (referencing recent rhetoric from President Obama).
  • “I’d be at the shooting range” was Rick Perry’s response to the final question, what would you be doing on a Saturday night if you weren’t running for President.

What did you think? Did I miss anything big?

As always, please subscribe to this blog by clicking the “Follow” button at the top of the right sidebar. If you don’t have a WordPress account, you’ll have to enter your email address. You can share your opinions in the comment section below or by tweeting to @Ryan_Kantor. Thanks for reading! 

Santorum Surges In Iowa As Caucuses Approach

Posted on by Ryan Kantor

As the Iowa caucuses approach, it appears there was time for one more candidate to surge to the forefront. Conservative Republicans–likely feeling disillusioned with a field that doesn’t include Chris Christie, Paul Ryan, Marco Rubio, or Bobby Jindal–may have finally found a consistent conservative in Rick Santorum, who after hovering below 5% for much of his campaign, has leaped as high as 16% in some polls of Republican Iowans. Santorum has earned key endorsements which overtime have eroded what could be the biggest obstacle he faces, the perception that he can’t win the nomination.

According to his own website:

“Sarah Palin praised Rick for his ‘consistency on protecting the sanctity of life.’ Mike Huckabee said he ‘adores Rick Santorum’s conviction.’ Glenn Beck called Rick Santorum the ‘next George Washington,’ and encouraged voters ‘to take a look at him.’ And Rush Limbaugh said it would be ‘great’ if Rick Santorum became President.”

In addition he earned a big endorsement from  a popular conservative radio talk show host in Iowa who said that Rick Santorum was the only one who fit the criteria for his ideal candidate:

“My ideal candidate must be a conservative who believes in a constitutionally limited government, fiscal responsibility, strong national defense and unflagging devotion to life and traditional marriage.”  - Sam Clovis

The momentum from the endorsements and surging Iowa polls is causing conservatives finally give Rick Santorum a serious look. Many Republicans feel that Romney is the most “electable” candidate so much of Santorum’s plausibility will depend on if voters choose the candidate they feel is best or the most likely to beat Obama. For those willing to vote for the best candidate Santorum offers consistency that many of the other candidates do not.

Mitt Romney has proclaimed himself to be a “moderate” with “progressive views.” Comments like that coupled with some liberal stances on social issues while serving in super liberal Massachusetts have troubled some Republicans.

Newt Gingrich filmed the now infamous global warming commercial with Nancy Pelosi, which he has said was the “dumbest thing I’ve ever done.” He’s also been lampooned for his work with Freddie Mac (which frankly has been overblown) and criticized for more personal issues including a reprimand and $300,000 fine from the House Ethics Committee and multiple extramarital affairs–the latter of which hurts perceptions of his electability. According to Ann Coulter, “Gingrich is almost certainly unelectable based solely on his having cheated on and divorced two wives.“

Ron Paul has also surged in Iowa, taking first place in most polls, but isn’t considered a conservative by many, especially on foreign policy issues. A true libertarian competing in the Republican primary, Ron Paul is not directly fighting for the same core group of voters as Santorum.

Rick Santorum’s most direct opponents are Rick Perry and Michele Bachmann, who compete for similar voter blocks. Some have predicted that if one or two of them were to drop out the remaining candidate(s) would win the majority of their supporters about become a real force. This seems unlikely though. Rick Perry rocketed in the polls shortly after entering the race, but has faded since liberal streaks regarding immigration (in-state tuition for illegal aliens) and a state mandate for a HPV vaccination were exposed. Bachmann is proving her consistent conservatism, however other problems exist. In a recent debate she offered skewed attacks at best, dishonest ones at worst. After her assertions were called factually incorrect multiple times, she felt the need to tell the audience that she “is a serious candidate,” which to me made her seem much less serious. She also has been by far the most negative candidate, perhaps thinking she could be more aggressive and negative without rebuke due to her gender. While her attacks may have hurt opponents, they do not seem to have helped her candidacy.

For conservatives looking for the best candidate–the one that best represents and articulates their views–that leaves Rick Santorum. He’s been consistent on social issues, disagreeing with Ron Paul on the war on drugs, authoring the partial birth abortion ban act, and standing up for traditional marriage. Santorum has expressed better than all the other candidates that he understands the seriousness of a nuclear Iran.  Meanwhile, a high-tech US drone was captured and is being reverse-engineered by the Iranian government while President Obama sits idly. Santorum has offered real solutions to help the US manufacturing industry and in turn many union members, while Obama plays politics supporting unions with unionization laws, but hurting actual union workers more directly through economic policy (i.e., blocking construction of oil pipeline that would have require thousands of US jobs, many union jobs).

Liberals really loathe Santorum. They’ve gone as far as to conjure up incredibly disrespectful stories about him and his family. Possibly in response to Santorum calling abortion ban exceptions for health reasons “phony”–mental health issues like anxiety are often classified as a health reason–a story was circulated that calls Santorum a hypocrite for authorizing his wife to have a life-saving abortion amid a family tragedy. Aside from the story being untrue and tasteless, the real story is incredibly sad and touching. (6% of abortions in the US are done for health reasons, 1% for rape/incest, 93% for social reasons.) They’ve also attempted to tie disgusting vulgarity to his last name.

It will be interesting to see what they have to say if the most consistently conservative candidate in the GOP field continues to rise in the polls. How do you feel about Rick Santorum’s sudden emergence?

As always, please subscribe to this blog by clicking the “Follow” button at the top of the right sidebar. If you don’t have a WordPress account, you’ll have to enter your email address. Thanks for reading!

The ‘Bomb’ Burried in Obamacare That Will Leave The Liberals Laughing

Posted on by Ryan Kantor

Tom Kirszenstein shared this article with me and suggested I blog about it, so here you go Tom…

This Forbes article, written from a left-wing perspective, explains how a provision in the Affordable Care Act will dictate how private insurers allocate their resources.

“…the medical loss ratio, that requires health insurance companies to spend 80% of the consumers’ premium dollars they collect—85% for large group insurers—on actual medical care rather than overhead, marketing expenses and profit.”

The author happily explains that this provision will sap their profits, put many of the private insurers out of business, and nudge America the rest of the way to a European style single payer system. In his own words…

“…the medical loss ratio will, ultimately, lead to the death of large parts of the private, for-profit health insurance industry.”

While this deceitful way of socializing a major American industry should come as no surprise given that it took plenty of dirty dealings (most notably the Cornhusker Kickback and the Louisiana Purchase) to get the bill passed, what should surprise you is that the self-proclaimed “different kind of politician” now occupying the White House would condone such activity. We’d later see Obama postpone a decision on an oil pipeline for purely political reasons, something I took offense towards.

After seeing the last Republican spend like a liberal, and the current President combine even greater excessive spending with the dishonesty explained above, my faith in the government has shriveled. If not for his offbeat foreign policy stances I might even consider supporting Ron Paul because he’s principled, honest, and understands the role of the federal and state governments.

Do you think Mitt Romney is "fake"?

So with the Iowa Caucuses set for January 3rd, we enter one of the most important election cycles in modern American history. If the next President does not get involved and block the Affordable Care Act it will become law, and according to Ann Coulter set us on a path to becoming a “mediocre Western European country.” As your state’s primary nears, who do you think has the best policy viewpoints? Who do you think would run our country with honor?

Be sure to check out my last post on voting for the best candidate vs. the most “electable” candidate before deciding who you’ll support. I am still somewhat unsure of who I’ll vote for, and that post is not meant as a knock on Mitt Romney. Sure, Romney did and said some liberal things while running for Massachusetts Governor, but the article on Ann Coulter’s website makes Newt look just as liberal, Ron Paul holds the aforementioned offbeat foreign policy stances, and Santorum may not last until Super Tuesday.

As always, please subscribe to this blog by clicking the “Follow” button at the top of the right sidebar. If you don’t have a WordPress account, you’ll have to enter your email address. Thanks for reading!

Mitt Romney Big Winner in 9/12 CNN Tea Party Debate

Posted on by Ryan Kantor

A few notable things came of the September 12th CNN debate sponsored by the local Tea Party organization.

  1. Ron Paul’s campaign essentially came to an end when Rick Santorum highlighted a blog post on Ron Paul’s website that essentially said it was largely America’s fault for our involvement in the Middle East. Ron Paul didn’t back down from the post on his website and was promptly booed. That’ll probably be it for him.
  2. Michele Bachmann was much more aggressive. She attacked Rick Perry multiple on multiple points, but most harshly on a mandate that Gov. Rick Perry enacted in Texas requiring young girls to be vaccinated for HPV, a STD that leads to cervical cancer. She tied the issue to Obamacare and big government. She even pointed out possible political dishonesty from the Perry administration in Texas. Perry denied any dishonesty, but admitted some fault in the policy itself.
  3. Mitt Romney was a big winner with all the attacks focused on Rick Perry. Rick Santorum also did well, but has a lot of ground to make up. Mitt and Bachmann could move up slightly in the polls. Ron Paul probably won’t move much, but no longer has any chance to gain ground outside of his base.

Impressing an Uninformed Electorate: Be ‘Cool’

Posted on by Ryan Kantor

When a news article claims that “dropping obscure subjects like ‘Keynesian bubble’ and  ‘monetary policy’ into the conversation” at a debate hurt a Presidential candidate by making him sound “fringe,” you’re reminded that the American voter is pretty uninformed. They’re referring to Ron Paul, a true Libertarian who ran for President in 2008 and is trying again in 2012, and to be fair, they’re right, but it shouldn’t be so. I didn’t vote for Paul in last year’s primary, but it saddens (and scares) me that when a Presidential candidate explains how the government’s involvement in the economy created a “Keynesian bubble”–a false boom–or how the Fed is intentionally watering down the dollar because it is the world’s currency and they can (our main export is basically the American dollar) voters are turned off.

This is not to say you should go out and vote for Ron Paul, it’s simply to point out that the two most intellectual candidates in last night’s debate (obviously subjective), Ron Paul and Newt Gingrich, performed the worst. Go figure…