Mr. Media Training

During halftime of Sunday’s Super Bowl game, Chrysler aired a stunning two-minute commercial featuring Clint Eastwood.

The ad was a masterpiece of political writing. It acknowledged in stark, unequivocal language that the United States is in rough shape – but it wrapped that tough message in optimistic language that aimed to rally the nation.

Here’s the ad:

“It’s halftime. Both teams are in their locker room discussing what they can do to win this game in the second half.

It’s halftime in America, too. People are out of work and they’re hurting. And they’re all wondering what they’re going to do to make a comeback. And we’re all scared, because this isn’t a game.

The people of Detroit know a little something about this. They almost lost everything. But we all pulled together, now Motor City is fighting again.

I’ve seen a lot of tough eras, a lot of downturns in my life. And, times when we didn’t understand each other. It seems like we’ve lost our heart at times. When the fog of division, discord, and blame made it hard to see what lies ahead.

But after those trials, we all rallied around what was right, and acted as one. Because that’s what we do. We find a way through tough times, and if we can’t find a way, then we’ll make one.

All that matters now is what’s ahead. How do we come from behind? How do we come together? And, how do we win?

Detroit’s showing us it can be done. And, what’s true about them is true about all of us.

This country can’t be knocked out with one punch. We get right back up again and when we do the world is going to hear the roar of our engines.

Yeah, it’s halftime America. And, our second half is about to begin.”

So what lesson can President Obama and the eventual Republican nominee take out of this ad? That this is the precise type of language Americans demand from our presidential candidates.

There have been eight general elections since the beginning of the 24/7 media age in 1980. In all eight, the candidate with the more optimistic message has always won. That’s not to say we can’t handle tough truths – we can. But we want them delivered from a sunny candidate with a “can do” message, not from a dour candidate who fails to inspire us.

1. THE OPTIMISTS
2. Ronald Reagan, whose 1984 “Morning in America” campaign was the obvious inspiration for this ad
3. George H.W. Bush, who promised a “gentler, kinder” nation in 1988
4. Bill Clinton, who encouraged “don’t stop thinking about tomorrow” in 1992 and promised to “build a bridge to the 21st Century” in 1996
5. George W. Bush, who ran on a platform of “compassionate conservatism” and who almost never allowed a pessimistic word to cross his lips.
6. Barack Obama, whose “hope” and “yes we can” campaign was a salve in 2008, during the worst economic downturn in decades
7. THE PESSIMISTS
8. Not coincidentally, all of the presidential losers since 1980 have been perceived as pessimists: Jimmy Carter, Walter Mondale, Michael Dukakis, George H.W. Bush (as compared to Bill Clinton), Bob Dole, Al Gore, John Kerry, and John McCain.

It’s easy to see the theme here. President Obama has started to pivot to this type of optimistic language, and he demonstrated in 2008 that he has the capacity to deliver it well. Mitt Romney, assuming he gets the nomination, will need to quickly pivot to this type of rhetoric as well. His attacks on President Obama are fine and expected. But they’re not enough.

When trying to predict the outcome of the 2012 election, you can almost forget about the economy and foreign affairs. Ask yourself one question: Which candidate’s rhetoric is most like Clint Eastwood’s? The answer will likely determine which man is sworn into office on January 20, 2013.

It’s only January. You’d think that public figures would have made a New Year’s resolution to leave their disastrous media gaffes in 2011.

No such luck. This month, a taco-loving mayor, layoff-loving presidential candidate, and threat-loving politician put their feet firmly in their mouths.

Without any further ado, here are the five worst media disasters of January 2012!

(And if you missed the 10 worst media disasters of 2011, click here to catch up.)

5. Michael Moore: Older Voters Are Racist Homophobes

Michael Moore is right that younger people voted for President Obama in larger numbers than older generations did. But his conclusion that older people didn’t vote for President Obama because they’re racist homophobes is an offensive generalization.

Some older folks likely match his characterization – but many others voted for John McCain for his pledge to end earmarks, his foreign policy bona fides, or for hundreds of other legitimate reasons. Castigating them all as bigots is a perfect example of the small-minded reductionist politics that Mr. Moore blasts in his movies.

4. Nancy Pelosi’s Empty Threat

When Nancy Pelosi was asked whether former House colleague Newt Gingrich could become president, her tone became icy, responding, “That will never happen.”

When CNN Host John King asked why she was so sure, she offered a not-so-veiled threat: “There is something I know.” After Newt Gingrich responded by telling the press that she should come out with whatever she thinks she knows, Ms. Pelosi backtracked on her threat.

Her distasteful threat was tantamount to a childhood game of, “I have a secret and I’m not telling” – and it’s beneath her position as a former House Speaker.

3. The Marines Who Urinated on Dead People (And Their Defenders)

That four U.S. Marines urinated on dead Taliban insurgents (while laughing about giving them a “shower”) was bad enough. But the incident was made even worse when some conservatives suggested that it wasn’t a big deal. Former GOP hopeful Rick Perry said so, and CNN’s Dana Loesch went a step further, saying, ‘I’d urinate on dead Taliban too.”

No matter that Marine Gen. John Allen, the top U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan, said that, "These actions are in direct opposition to everything the military stands for.”

Or that Army Lt. Gen. Curtis M. Scaparrotti, commander of the International Security Assistance Force Joint Command, said, "Defiling, desecrating, mocking, photographing or filming for personal use insurgent dead constitutes a grave breach of the LOAC (laws of armed conflict), violate basic standards of human decency and can cause serious damage to relations with the Afghan government."

2. Mitt Romney Likes Being Able to Fire People

Republican frontrunner Mitt Romney can’t help himself. If he’s not making $10,000 bets, telling people that he’s unemployed, boasting about putting his political opponents into debt, or bragging about living on the “real streets” of America, he’s threatening to fire people.

So it’s not so much that he uttered the words, “I like being able to fire people.” In fact, that sound bite alone is out-of-context. But it’s an oddly worded way of making his point (about being able to switch underperforming health care providers), and it’s little wonder that many people viewed it as revelatory, not accidental. You better believe his Democratic opponents can’t wait to use it against him.

1. One Mayor’s Pledge to Eat Tacos

When four police officers in East Haven, Connecticut were indicted on charges of beating Hispanic residents, a reporter asked the town’s mayor, Joseph Maturo, “What are you doing for the Latino community today?”

Mr. Maturo’s shocking response led to him being blasted by members of the community, the governor, and the media. 

I hope he was drunk when he gave this interview – at least that would give him an excuse. It’s only January, but his train wreck may end up as one of the worst media disasters of 2012. 

BONUS DISASTER:

If you’re the captain of the Costa Concordia and you abandon ship after running aground in Italy, you might not want to come with an excuse so ludicrous as to dishonor the men and women who died on your ship. That didn’t seem to bother Francesco Schettino, who claimed that he didn’t want to leave the ship, but…

Avoid committing your own media disaster! Join us in New York City on March 20, 2012 for our small group media training workshop.

I’ll admit it.

After 19 debates, I’ve become jaded. You may have noticed that if you read my review of Monday’s debate a few days ago. But tonight’s debate actually mattered, and it may prove decisive.

We may be able to look back to January 26, 2012 as the night Mitt Romney became the Republican nominee.

The candidates sparred energetically this evening, and the polls are doubtlessly going to shift after tonight’s performances. The question is in which direction they’ll move – and my scorecard below may help answer that question.

Here are tonight’s grades in order of best to worst:

RICK SANTORUM (1st Place, Grade: A)

If this Rick Santorum had shown up to each of the previous 18 debates, he’d probably have cleared the field already and been marching toward the presidential nomination by now. Yup, he was that good. 

Sen. Santorum’s finest moment came after a battle royale between Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney, when he passionately jumped in and scolded the two men:

“These two gentleman are out distracting from the most important issues we have by playing petty personal politics. Can we set aside that Newt was a member of Congress and used the skills that he developed as a member of Congress to go out and advise companies, and that’s not the worst thing in the world, and that Mitt Romney is a wealthy guy because he worked hard and he’s going out and working hard, and you guys should leave that alone and focus on the issues.”

The audience erupted at his line, showing how Santorum won Iowans over three weeks ago. But he wasn’t a one-trick pony tonight. He also took Mitt Romney to task for “RomneyCare,” saying, “Folks we can’t give this issue away in the election. It’s about freedom….Your mandate is no different than Barack Obama’s mandate.”

He had other fine moments, name-dropping the name of the Puerto Rican governor after an audience question (he had even gone to church with him), and knowledgably discussing Central and South America with great passion.

But his finest moment may have come when he was asked a throwaway question about what his wife would bring to the White House as First Lady. Unlike the other three candidates, he offered a truly heartfelt answer that likely melted the hearts of many a voter.

This is not only Mr. Santorum’s best debate, but it may be the best of any candidate so far this election cycle. Unfortunately for him, it may be too late. So any votes he picks up after tonight – and he will likely pick up many – will likely reduce Newt Gingrich’s total and pave the way for Mitt Romney to win Florida’s primary on Tuesday.

MITT ROMNEY (2nd Place, Grade: B)

Mitt Romney started the debate strong but had a couple of off moments that knocked his grade down a bit.

Early on, he schooled Newt Gingrich on the immigration issue when the former House Speaker accused him of wanting to send grandparents who had been in the U.S. illegally for years back to their home countries. “The problem is not 11 million grandmothers,” Gov. Romney said to great applause.

When Mr. Gingrich accused him of making money off of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, Mr. Romney responded, “You also own mutual funds that invest in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.” Mr. Gingrich meekly said, “right,” and retreated. 

Mr. Romney hired a new debate coach recently, and it showed in his performance. He was much stronger, looked genuinely angry at moments tonight, and was better prepared.

But even a new debate coach couldn’t stop Mr. Romney from committing a few mistakes:

1. 1. He denied putting an ad on the air about a quote in which Mr. Gingrich appeared to call Spanish “the language of the ghetto.” Wolf Blitzer quickly corrected him, saying that not only did he run the ad, but that it said, “I’m Mitt Romney and I approved this message.”
2. 2. He responded to Newt Gingrich’s idea about a moon colony by saying, “I spent 25 years in business. If I had a business executive come to me and say they want to spend a few hundred billion dollars to put a colony on the moon, I’d say you’re fired.” Can he seriously not get through a public appearance without threatening to fire someone?
3. 3. On health care, he told Rick Santorum, “It’s not worth getting angry about.” That line will likely be used against him for the rest of the week. 

Overall, thought, Mitt Romney may be the big winner tonight. His relative strength, combined with Newt Gingrich’s weakness and Rick Santorum’s master performance, may help seal his nomination.

RON PAUL (3rd Place, Grade: C)

Let’s end the fantasy that Ron Paul has a chance to be the next president. He’s running to get attention for his issues and broaden the movement – laudable goals, but not winning ones for 2012.

At this point, CNN may as well use one of its famous holograms to replace the actual Ron Paul and just press play. We know the old familiar soliloquies by heart by now, and they were there again tonight on Fannie and Freddie, monetary policy, and a non-interventionist foreign policy.

That’s not to say he didn’t have some terrific moments. When asked about his health, he challenged his opponents to a 25-mile bike ride in the Texas heat. On the colonization of the moon (yes, a real topic at this debate), Dr. Paul said. “I don’t think we should go to the moon. I think maybe we should send some politicians up there.”

Increasingly, he’s running as the libertarian Bulworth – less interested in winning than in being intellectually honest. That’s admirable. But to grade him as a serious contender at this point seems like a stretch. If he truly wanted to win, he wouldn’t go into Florida and offer a tepid defense of Israel.

NEWT GINGRICH (4th Place, Grade: D)

Tonight may be remembered as the last evening Newt Gingrich was ever viewed as a serious presidential contender.

He delivered a limp, restrained, and uncertain performance in which he wildly vacillated between offering truces to his fellow candidates and attacking them, often within seconds of each other. That he did so poorly after insisting upon a live audience (and getting it) made him look even worse. He simultaneously looked both defensive and unable to defend himself.

Not only did Mr. Gingrich lose this point to Mitt Romney, he also lost it to moderator Wolf Blitzer:

When Ron Paul later accused Mr. Gingrich of not balancing four budgets in the House as he’s been claiming, Gingrich responded that he had indeed balanced the budget, “Under the system that was used.” That’s right, folks, that perfectly parsed, Clintonesque line earned him the boos of the Republican crowd.

Finally, Mr. Gingrich said his investments are a "tiny mouse" compared with Romney’s “giant elephant." That may well be a perfect metaphor for the rest of this campaign.

COMMENTS? Do you agree or disagree with my analysis? Please leave your opinion in the comment section below, but remember the blog’s comment policy – no ad hominem attacks or pejorative name-calling will be posted.

Did you miss the 10 worst media disasters of 2011? Click here to catch up!

After Newt Gingrich’s unexpected blowout in South Carolina on Saturday night, tonight’s debate promised to be a barnburner.

Instead, tonight’s debate – the 18th of this election cycle – was the most insufferably boring, and likely the least newsworthy.

Well, one thing was newsworthy. For the first time in 18 debates, NBC decided to mute the audience, ostensibly to lend much-needed gravitas to the proceedings. I appreciate their intention, which helped focus attention on the candidates instead of on audience misbehavior. But the silence managed to suck the life out of the debate – and audience members were reduced to being, as one former journalism boss once called them, “potted plants.”

This was supposed to be an exciting Republican debate in a suddenly tumultuous field. Instead, it was a tough-to-grade snoozer. How dull was it? One of the GOP frontrunners discussed the fine distinction between beet and cane sugar. Really.

Here are tonight’s grades in order of best to worst:

MITT ROMNEY (1st Place, Grade: B)

Gov. Romney had a much more sure-footed performance tonight than he has in the past few debates. It’s not that he came across as particularly appealing tonight (he was far too negative for that), but he at least wasn’t particularly unappealing tonight. That’s progress.

He came out of the gate by launching a frontal assault on Newt Gingrich. About the former House Speaker, Mr. Romney reminded viewers that, “It was Republicans who replaced him in the House, voted to reprimand him.” He twice said that Mr. Gingrich resigned from Congress in disgrace, and accused him of being a lobbyist for Freddie Mac.

He was steadier tonight on the now-predictable question of releasing his tax returns, but still refuses to put out 12 years of tax returns as his father did when he was a presidential candidate in 1968. I’m not convinced that releasing two years worth of tax returns will fully put this issue to bed. Nor did his conventional talking point, “The real question is not so much my taxes, but the taxes of the American people” work. A more gifted retail politician could have finessed it better; from Romney, the line looks scripted and insincere.

Mr. Romney had at least two off-pitch moments tonight. First, he again bragged that he put Ted Kennedy into debt during his failed bid for Massachusetts in 1994: “I didn’t beat him, but he had to take out a mortgage on his house so he could beat me.”

Second, he said that illegal immigrants are, “…going to find they can’t get work here, and if people can’t get work here, they’re going to self-deport to a place they can get work.” Critics are already seizing on Mr. Romney’s awkward phrasing of “self-deport,” saying it’s a ludicrous notion that people will deport themselves. It’s an unfair interpretation of his meaning – and he’s right on the facts – but that won’t prevent from some people trying to turn it into a, “I was for it before I was against it” moment. 

But the big picture tonight for Mitt Romney was generally positive. He didn’t deliver anything even remotely close to an inspiring performance – but at least he stopped the bleeding tonight.

NEWT GINGRICH (2nd Place, Grade: B-)

Speaker Gingrich clearly doesn’t do as well without an enthusiastic audience to play off of. He was oddly muted tonight, playing the role of “above it all” frontrunner and barely defending himself against Mitt Romney’s attacks. When the roles were reversed, Mr. Romney’s failure to strongly defend himself against Gingrich’s attacks didn’t work so well, so it’s curious why Mr. Gingrich would adopt the same strategy in reverse.

To the degree Mr. Gingrich launched any “attacks,’” they were meek. Alluding to Mr. Romney’s low tax rate, Gingrich said that he was prepared to call his tax plan the “Mitt Romney Flat Tax,” since he proposed to bring all Americans down to Romney’s tax rate.

He also defended himself badly against charges that he accepted $1.6 million from the unpopular housing lender Freddie Mac. At one point, he turned to Mr. Romney and challenged whether any of the money he had earned with Bain Capital was from the government. Romney said “no,” and Gingrich didn’t follow up. A candidate should know better than to ask a question to which he doesn’t know the answer and can’t follow-up upon.

His strongest moment came when, after being scolded by Romney for accepting money from Freddie Mac, Gingrich asked Romney how much money he made with Bain Capital. Romney seemed genuinely surprised by the question, stumbling a bit before saying he had earned a “substantial” amount.

In the end, he didn’t do much to hurt himself, and Mr. Romney’s punches didn’t land hard enough to change the state of the race. Still, I’m not sure Mr. Gingrich can afford to be so laid back in Thursday’s debate.

RICK SANTORUM (3rd Place, Grade: C)

Rick Santorum is languishing toward the back of the pack with no discernible path to the nomination. He did nothing tonight to change that.

Although Mr. Santorum did nothing wrong tonight, he didn’t do anything to stand out. And for a guy polling a distant third, that’s a losing performance.

RON PAUL (4th Place, Grade: C-)

After 18 debates, there’s little new to say about Rep. Paul. He meandered, attacked the Fed, and discussed monetary policy. Here’s a prediction: He’ll do the same in the 19th debate. And the 20th. But like Santorum, he did nothing tonight that will help him suddenly surge and win the White House – and he seems to know it, acknowledging that he doesn’t “daydream” about being President.  

COMMENTS? Do you agree or disagree with my analysis? Please leave your opinion in the comment section below, but remember the blog’s comment policy – no ad hominem attacks or pejorative name-calling will be posted.

Did you miss the 10 worst media disasters of 2011? Click here to catch up!

Newt Gingrich may have done Mitt Romney a favor by winning the South Carolina primary tonight.

If Mitt Romney had won, he would have become the de facto nominee earlier than any other presidential candidate in U.S. history, meaning that he alone would have had to endure more media scrutiny – for a longer period of time – than any of his predecessors.

Instead, he’ll now continue to share the media’s harsh glare with Newt Gingrich, a severely flawed candidate who will steal some of the limelight and help buffer Mr. Romney’s coverage. More stories about Mr. Gingrich’s angry ex-wife and messy leadership as House Speaker means fewer stories about Mr. Romney’s tax returns and Bain Capital.

If Mr. Romney had won tonight, he would have had to endure the media scrutiny alone for the next ten months. That would have been bad news for the Romney campaign for one reason: Mitt Romney does not wear well.

The more people are exposed to him, the more they dislike him. That’s not a personal view, but the conclusion of a Pew Research Center survey, which found that Mr. Romney is viewed favorably by only 33 percent of the public and unfavorably by 47 percent.

But now, Mr. Romney will have the advantage of appearing side-by-side in media stories with Mr. Gingrich, allowing voters to see a stark contrast between the two men.

Mr. Gingrich will be seen as an exciting politician who says unpredictable things that excite the base, traits that didn’t exactly rocket Pat Buchanan or Howard Dean to the nomination. Mr. Romney, who comports himself more like eventual nominees Al Gore, Bob Dole, and John Kerry, will likely be viewed as more presidential in comparison, likely helping to pave his way to the nomination. Of course, those three men eventually lost their general elections – but not before capturing their parties’ nominations first.

Assuming the wheels don’t fall completely off the Romney campaign, the comparison between the two men will help him and will shorten the length of time he has to endure the spotlight on his own.

I know some people will say a quick win would have been better for Mitt Romney since his campaign would have been able to save its money for a general election run. That’s true. But the bigger problem for Mitt Romney isn’t cash-on-hand. It’s likeability.

Note: For comparison’s sake, here are some of history’s earliest “clinch” dates:

• January 27, 2004: John Kerry wins New Hampshire, becoming the de facto nominee.
• February 1, 2000: Al Gore narrowly beats Bill Bradley in New Hampshire, becoming the de facto Democratic nominee.
• February 5, 2008: John McCain becomes the de facto nominee after his Super Tuesday wins over Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee.
• February 29, 2000: George W. Bush finally becomes the de facto nominee after beating John McCain in Virginia and Washington.

COMMENTS? Do you agree or disagree with my analysis? Please leave your opinion in the comment section below, but remember the blog’s comment policy – no ad hominem attacks or pejorative name-calling will be posted.

Did you miss the 10 worst media disasters of 2011? Click here to catch up!

This might be the last debate that matters during this primary season.

South Carolina’s primary is this Saturday. If Mitt Romney wins, even Newt Gingrich admits the race will probably be over. If he doesn’t, we could be in for a long nominating fight.

So the big question coming into tonight was whether Newt Gingrich could capitalize on his well-reviewed performance in Monday night’s debate.

So, did he continue his debating success? Did Mitt Romney recover from Monday’s near-disastrous debate? And did the other two candidates do anything to change the dynamic of the race?

Here are tonight’s grades in order of best to worst:

RICK SANTORUM (1st Place, Grade: A-)

Rick Santorum had his best debate tonight. It won’t be enough to help him win South Carolina (or stay in the race), but he had a great night nonetheless.

Sen. Santorum has gotten much better at hitting his opponents with a cudgel while still managing to appear humble. His attacks on Mitt Romney’s “RomneyCare” landed strongly, as did his attacks against Newt Gingrich for supporting the individual mandate.

Mr. Santorum tried to establish himself as “old reliable” while simultaneously whacking Newt Gingrich’s perceived instability by saying:

“I don’t want a nominee where I’m going to look at the newspaper and wonder what he’s going to do next….Something’s going to pop and we don’t need that in a nominee. I’m steady, I’m solid.”

Toward the end of the night, Mr. Santorum was asked what about his candidacy he would have done differently. After thinking for a moment, he said, “I wouldn’t have changed a thing.” His answer was sincere, natural, and authentic – and it stood in marked contrast to Mitt Romney’s more calculated answer.

Mr. Santorum has a lot of political enemies. But even Dan Savage would have to conclude that Mr. Santorum is sincere in his beliefs.

NEWT GINGRICH ( Place, Grade: B+)

This debate will be mostly remembered for the very first question and answer, an exchange Speaker Gingrich used to castigate CNN Host John King. When Mr. King asked Gingrich about accusations made by his second wife, who claimed Mr. Gingrich requested an open marriage before divorcing her, he lit up:

“Every person in here knows personal pain. Every person in here has had someone close to them go through painful things. To take an ex-wife and make it two days before the primary, a significant question in a presidential campaign, is as close to despicable as anything I can imagine…you and your staff chose to start this debate with that.”

Although a lot of pundits believe he won the debate with that attack, but I’m not so sure. Mr. Gingrich already has the largest discrepancy between male and female voters in South Carolina (men support him more than women). Displays of anger typically turn off female voters, so I’m less sure how this will play in South Carolina.

Did that clip earn him a standing ovation? Yes. Will the moment be talked about? You bet. Will it yield him votes? Maybe not, especially if his ex-wife appears credible on tonight’s Nightline.

Two other moments warrant comment.

First, when Rick Santorum attacked him as “too grandiose,” Mr. Gingrich embraced the language instead of fighting it by saying we “need grandiose thinking.” I have a name for what he did – “media jujitsu.” It’s a terrific debating technique of taking your opponent’s negative language and spinning it into a positive.

Second, he released his tax returns at the very beginning of the debate. That allowed the attack on Mitt Romney to stick that much more – and that topic became Mitt Romney’s worst moment of the debate.

MITT ROMNEY (3rd Place, Grade: C+)

First, the good news. Gov. Romney had a better debate tonight than he did on Monday night.

But that’s hardly enough. Mr. Romney had yet another platitude-filled performance, using the same tired lines he’s used dozens of times in his stump speeches, such as: “Obama wants an entitlement society,” Obama “takes from some, gives to others,” America is the “hope of the Earth,” “I believe in free enterprise,” “I’m going to defend capitalism,” and “I believe there’s nothing wrong with profit.”

Those hackneyed lines make him look calculated and insincere, as if he’s simply regurgitating poll-tested lines that some focus groups liked. He needs to abandon the lines that are by now more familiar than a child’s pull-string doll and develop some fresh material. Stat.

Mr. Romney’s worst moment unfathomably came when he was asked, yet again, when he planned to release his tax returns. He had to know that question was coming – yet he bumbled and stumbled through his answers, earning boos from the live audience. In the end, he said he would release this years’ tax return in April, but refused to commit to releasing earlier years, as well.

Although it won’t do much damage, Mr. Romney displayed yet another lack of self awareness when he said that he, unlike Washington insiders like Newt Gingrich, has "lived in the real streets of America." Sure, real streets that have 11,000-square foot homes on them. He’s still trying to appear like an average Joe, and it backfires every time.

He did have a couple of good moments tonight: One when he was defending our nation’s obligation to veterans, and another when he was asked what he would have changed about his campaign. “I would have worked to get 25 more votes in Iowa, that’s for sure,” he quipped.

RON PAUL (4th Place, Grade: C)

When asked what one thing he wishes he had done differently in this campaign, Rep. Paul said he would work on the delivery of his message.

See, Ron Paul fans? You’ve attacked me for criticizing Dr. Paul’s debating skills, and even the candidate knows he needs to improve in that area! 

He’s right, of course. His wonky answers live in the weeds, and he lacks any of the soaring and optimistic rhetoric that voters demand from their presidents.

That’s not to say he had a terrible night. He gave a compassionate answer about our returning veterans instead of his typical non-government rant, and had a couple of terrific quips throughout the night, including one which rightly labeled Rick Santorum “over-sensitive.”

But Dr. Paul did nothing tonight to change the dynamic of his candidacy. He appears to be running as an issues candidate, not one who has a real chance at winning the White House.

COMMENTS? Do you agree or disagree with my analysis? Please leave your opinion in the comment section below, but remember the blog’s comment policy – no ad hominem attacks or pejorative name-calling will be posted.

Did you miss the 10 worst media disasters of 2011? Click here to catch up!

I know, I know. The Republican race is over, so why am I still covering these debates?

Well, although Mitt Romney will probably be the Republican nominee, he hasn’t earned the nomination quite yet. And it’s important to place this nominating race in a historical context:

• In 2008, Barack Obama was “definitely” going to be the nominee after his Iowa win – until Hillary Clinton won the New Hampshire primary and complicated his path to the nomination for months.
• In 1984, Walter Mondale (who eventually won the Democratic nomination), won the Iowa caucus before losing seven of the next ten primaries to Gary Hart.
• In 1968, Ronald Reagan earned the most votes in the Republican primaries but didn’t win the most delegates, allowing Richard Nixon to become the party’s nominee.

My point? Weird things happen in politics, so it’s still just a bit too early to declare Mitt Romney the winner.

Here are tonight’s grades in order of best to worst:

NEWT GINGRICH (1st Place, Grade: A)

Recent polling shows Gov. Mitt Romney pulling away in South Carolina (which votes this Saturday), with Speaker Gingrich in a strong second place.

With time running out on his chances, Mr. Gingrich made the most of tonight’s debate. He had the single most dramatic and memorable exchange of this election cycle, during which he defended his attacks on President Obama as a “food stamp president.”

The moment occurred when moderator Juan Williams accused Speaker Gingrich of racial insensitivity – but instead of backing down, Mr. Gingrich doubled down. The strength of his reply – which led to a standing ovation – evoked President Reagan’s infamous 1980 “I paid for this microphone!” moment.

Mr. Gingrich’s response gets stronger as it goes on – it’s worth watching the complete clip as a memorable example of political rhetoric:

Mr. Gingrich looked weak when he went after Mr. Romney on his Super PAC’s incorrect ads; Romney confronted him by asking what he could do differently, and Gingrich admitted there was nothing else Romney could do.

But that didn’t matter. Mr. Gingrich won the night in a performance that is likely to play very well with South Carolina Republicans.

RICK SANTORUM (2nd Place, Grade: B)

Sen. Santorum remains an eager and effective attack dog.

In one notable exchange tonight, he put Mitt Romney on the defensive regarding whether or not felons should be able to vote once they paid their time (Santorum said yes). Romney’s Super PAC had attacked Santorum’s views on the issue, but Santorum attacked hard, backing Romney into a corner which had him fecklessly stumbling for the right answer.

He also put Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich on the defensive about their unambitious plans to curb entitlement spending.

Unfortunately for Mr. Santorum, Speaker Gingrich emerged as the conservative star tonight, likely diminishing his shrinking chances for an unexpected South Carolina victory even further.

RICK PERRY (3rd Place, Grade: B-)

Gov. Perry earned the second most enthusiastic applause from the local crowd tonight when he proclaimed that, “South Carolina is at war with the Federal Government.” He attacked the Obama Administration for going after South Carolina on right-to-work issues, and said it had declared “war on religion.”

Mr. Perry also scored pointed when he challenged Gov. Romney to release his income taxes, saying, “We cannot fire our nominee in September. We need to know now.” Mr. Romney limply replied with a non-committal and overly-cautious “maybe.”

The problem for Rick Perry is that this relatively good performance is too little, too late. He, like Rick Santorum, suffered from being outshined by Speaker Gingrich tonight, and as a result, Perry will likely have little impact on the remainder of this nominating contest.

MITT ROMNEY (4th Place, Grade: C-)

Mitt Romney started strong tonight, deflecting a few early attacks with agility and ease. His game plan coming into the debate was clearly to appear magnanimous. But when his opponents began attacking him – and most of them did – he began to look increasingly agitated, like a man who didn’t have any place to duck.

That’s not to say he didn’t try to duck:

• He refused to commit to releasing his tax returns, suggesting he might release them in April but that “time will tell.”
• When confronted by Rick Santorum about his views on whether or not felons who served their time should be allowed to vote again, he stalled for time, clearly calculating what the correct answer should be.
• When asked if he’s hunted since he famously claimed he hunted “small varmints” in 2007, he said he had recently been moose hunting. The he corrected himself and said he had been elk hunting. 

Gov. Romney is still in the pole position, both in South Carolina and nationally. But just as Bill Clinton became known as “Slick Willie,” he’s at risk of becoming “Slick Mittie.”  He can’t continue answering every question by transitioning to a vague but patriotic-sounding and platitudinous talking point, and he should stop trying to “out-bellicose” Newt Gingrich – it ain’t going to happen. 

Finally, he had a curious moment when he proclaimed that “McCain-Feingold is a disaster.” Funny that the legislation didn’t seem to bother him when he proudly accepted John McCain’s in-person endorsement earlier this month. Overall, a lousy performance that could hurt his vote totals on Saturday.

RON PAUL (5th Place, Grade: D+)

What happened to Ron Paul tonight?

He started the debate strong, blasting one moderator’s question by saying, “Your question suggests that you’re very confused about my position.” He continued by giving a solid answer on the difference between defense spending and military spending, offering an effective analogy that, “The embassy in Baghdad is bigger than the Vatican.”

But Dr. Paul was awful during the rest of the debate, giving long and winding answers that lacked both energy and a central thesis. Overall, a bad night that may cost him a few votes in South Carolina, and one of his worst performances of this election cycle.

COMMENTS? Do you agree or disagree with my analysis? Please leave your opinion in the comment section below, but remember the blog’s comment policy – no ad hominem attacks or pejorative name-calling will be posted.

Did you miss the 10 worst media disasters of 2011? Click here to catch up!

Mitt Romney has run a remarkably gaffe-free campaign.

Until today.

In what might be the most damaging single sentence to emerge from a frontrunner’s lips since John McCain’s 2008 claim that the “fundamentals of our economy are strong” (which he uttered as Lehman Brothers was collapsing and the stock market was plummeting), Mitt Romney said this morning that he “likes being able to fire people.”

“Wait a minute,” you might think, “that’s taken totally out of context!”

That may be true, but it doesn’t matter. Gaffes that reinforce an existing narrative about a candidate are almost always the most harmful ones, and Gov. Romney is already enduring increasing attacks from opponents and Democrats alike for being more of a job “cremator” than job creator during his tenure at Bain Capital.

As pundit Michael Kinsley once said, a “gaffe” is when a politician tells the truth. Mr. Romney’s comment will hurt him because many voters will view it as revelatory, not accidental. 

You may remember that back in 2008, days before the New Hampshire primary, Sen. Barack Obama sarcastically quipped during a debate that Sen. Hillary Clinton was “likeable enough,” paving the way for her unexpected win in the Granite State.

It’s less likely that Mitt Romney will lose tomorrow night’s primary – but his gaffe could narrow the margin and complicate his “inevitable” march to the nomination.

Did you miss the 10 worst media disasters of 2011? Click here to catch up!