RUTHFULLY YOURS

The night belonged to Carly Fiorina. It was too crowded, unwieldy and tediously Trump-focused a forum for there to have been more than a few memorable moments; in retrospect, she got all of them. Mrs. F has a razor sharp mind and a crisp delivery, especially when giving reactive answers rather than scripted ones. She combines these with an attractive dignity –she knew there was no need to lay it on thick in laying out Trump. Her skill set is tailor-made for debate forums. Now that she’s shown she belongs, she is going to get a different kind of scrutiny than she’s had before. It will be interesting to see how she handles it, but you can tell no one will be better prepared – she’s not going to be outworked.

I’ve never taken Trump seriously and last night his lack of seriousness was on display. I know what the polls say, but it’s mid-September. To my mind, what is notable about his candidacy has never had much to do with him. He is an exhibit that shows how angry the Republican base is at the Republican party, particularly over illegal immigration and, overall, the GOP’s fear of taking it to Obama. He is also a major celebrity in a culture sadly fixated on celebrity. But he’s not a conservative, he hasn’t really thought deeply about public issues (which is fine, unless you want to be president), and I just don’t think he has staying power. Maybe I’ll end up being wrong (wouldn’t be the first time) but I can’t get whipped up about him. It would have been a more interesting debate if CNN weren’t so whipped up about him (ditto Fox).

It is very uphill for Jeb Bush. He is a bright guy, has a lot of worthy ideas (to go with some clunkers), and was a good governor. But his most natural advantage is his biggest disadvantage: the two Bush presidencies are not fondly remembered by much of the GOP’s base; even Bush fans wonder if the country would really elect a third Bush to the presidency; and the anti-establishment zeitgeist would be tough for Bush in any event. As last night showed yet again, Jeb is spending more time than he can be comfortable with responding to Trump’s antics and defending his brother’s record (under circumstances where Obama has blamed Bush for every problem under the sun and W is too much the gentleman to criticize his successor, so much of the indictment has stuck). There are fresher candidates who cover the same center-right territory Jeb does and who probably have a better shot at connecting with voters – Marco Rubio leaps to mind, as do Chris Christie and, perhaps, Carly Fiorina.

Sen. Rubio is probably the most gifted candidate in the race. His command of the issues has already been observed by my fellow Corner denizens, but what is most attractive to me is his sense of himself. He does not feel the need to tell you he is young, bright, attractive, and likable – he just is. I do not envy shopworn Hillary Clinton or goofy Joe Biden the thought of a one-on-one against him. Rubio also showed some refreshing humility last night, confessing that it was a misjudgment to address illegal immigration in one massive piece of legislation, and suggesting that the enforcement components have to take priority. Conservatives are already favorably disposed toward Rubio but are suspicious when it comes to his instincts on immigration; he’s obviously working to allay those concerns and it’s effective – at least it’s effective on me. I still have questions about where he may be on radical Islam – not on terrorists but on the “moderate Islamists” that Washington is convinced are out there just waiting to align with us. But Rubio has obviously done his homework on more complicated issues, so there’s good reason to think he’ll get that one right, too.

Chris Christie is not my cup of tea, but there is no denying his talent. Like all good politicians, he can be shameless at times – no one talks about (and overstates) his record more than the governor, so it was a bit rich for him to lecture Trump and Fiorina for touting theirs last night – especially when they did it in answer to a direct question while Christie frequently interjects his résumé gratuitously. (And why do career “public servants” see backgrounds that don’t involve moving from one government job to the next as “boring”?) But this style works for the governor, at least for a while. Over time, he wears thin. And while he can be very charming, there’s something annoyingly Obama-esque about his “above the partisan fray” posturing when you know he’s actually a sharp-elbowed operator. That aside, he is smart and a terrific speaker. He is willing to take on tough issues (at least rhetorically), and he has a way of projecting decisive leadership even when he’s not actually doing much. The current need to appeal to the GOP base has him suppressing his usual projection of bipartisanship and practice of lashing out at conservatives to make himself appear reasonable. Plenty of Republicans with much less skill than he has have gone a long way on that.

Ted Cruz is my favorite of the candidates. He is a real conservative, a brilliant lawyer, and is willing to fight an entrenched bipartisan political class that badly needs fighting. He was fantastic on the Iran deal last night, getting a big assist from the fantasy land inhabited by Rand Paul and John Kasich, who suggested, in respective echoes of the Obama administration, that Iran may comply with its obligations and that the sanctions can be readily “snapped back” when Iran (inevitably) cheats. Like several of the candidates, Cruz was shortchanged on debate time, but he demonstrates great intelligence whenever given the chance. If he has a problem, it is that he is too polished an orator and debater – he sometimes seems to be giving a speech even when the moment calls for something more friendly, informal and spontaneous. He is the most conservative viable candidate, so hopefully he will improve on this score. A conservative can win over non-conservatives, but to do it requires charisma, and coming off as long on common sense and short on lecturing.

I don’t know what’s happened to Scott Walker. He has just seemed to disappear, which is unbelievable in light of his very strong record in a very tough state where he has had to fight, several times, for every inch. Can’t explain it, but he’s just not connecting. Unlike a candidate with Jeb’s advantages, I don’t think he can afford the slow start, and I don’t sense that he has the commanding presence of a Christie to will his way back into the contest.

I really like Ben Carson. He’d be a good president because he is a good man – brilliant, accomplished, and quietly tough. He seems to me, though, like he is still coming to grips with being a presidential candidate – I’m not sure he likes the job. (I greatly admired Fred Thompson, another good man, for having demonstrably more interest in being president than in running for president.) Dr. C disappeared for long stretches last night, and I cannot say the thought “What would Ben Carson say about that?” occurred to me too often. Nevertheless, he is extraordinarily likable, and if his polls hold up, he’ll have a chance to get better. Of course, if the field were to thin quickly, he’d be called on more often and his unsure footing on some of the issues might become problematic. And if Trump fades, Carson’s personification of well-mannered modesty might not be the asset that it is at the moment.

John Kasich did not have the home court advantage like he did in the first debate, and it showed. Ohio is a very important state and Gov. Kasich, who has favorable ratings there, is a formidable politician. He should not be underestimated. But last night, at least, Kasich was not a strong presence, and that cannot bode well since he has not gotten much traction to this point.

Mike Huckabee is endearing and a great speaker when called on. But he was an also-ran in a much weaker field, and he just does not seem plausible in this field. Neither does Rand Paul. He has not been effective in these debates, tussling with Trump and Christie. Plus, the alarming advance of the Islamic State and rogue regimes run amok are largely the result of U.S. disengagement – i.e., Obama’s application of Rand’s policy preference. His candidacy is a 2008 campaign in a very different 2015 world.