Earlier post wrong, tonight's debate stayed on track

Tonight's Republican debate was far better and more focused than I had earlier expected. The roundtable forum worked and Charlie Rose and his colleagues did an excellent job. The debate stayed almost totally on topic, jobs and the economy. I have just made these notes before listening to the follow-ups, so here they are:

---The focus on the regulatory burdens of Dodd/Frank, Sarbanes/Oxley, and Obamacare were all worthy of discussion, especially as they apply to small and mid-size businesses. A core debate for the future was almost maturely established as to costs, compliance, and business uncertainty. Were these acts designed to reign in, hold responsible, and in some cases punish big business, but are now handcuffing the real job engines of our economy, community banks, small and mid-sized businesses, and potential creative start-ups.

---The uniform "balanced budget" talk of the last debate was less pronounced, indicating that some of the participants realize that this is not a one year deal, especially as we are on the edge of another recession.

---Romney---may well be the most knowledgeable and even capable candidate but came across as arrogant and chameleon-like. His answers were the ones most designed to be in line with my earlier post of pandering to all. His smirks that at times he made while others made remarks reminded me of George H.W.'s look at his watch in the debate with Clinton. I for one don't like him, although he may be the best of the bunch.

---Cain---I can't believe his continued poll numbers. All he kept saying was 9-9-9 with no real explanation or back-up. What was refreshing to me in the other debate that I saw made him look like a simpleton this time.

---Bachman---this time a much better performance, less stridently self righteous and right wing when scripted to stay on economic issues. She remained unconvincing as a real thinker or leader, but was well prepared and did not pander to the evangelicals as I had expected.

---Perry---really had so little to say of any consequence. Every comment began with a minute of near blather as he collected his thoughts, which always went back to his stories of his "accomplishments" in Texas that would have been even better without any Federal aid. Following a video clip of a Ronald Reagan comment that was an exceptionally slow pitch, he completely whiffed.

---Paul---strange as this may sound, I think that while he is not a viable national candidate he could make some mark in New Hampshire. He remains the most unpredictable and at times interesting participant, even with his answers that for the most part lack viability. He is the one that brought up the Republican's passage of Sarbanes-Oxley being just as damaging to business as the pending Dodd/Frank.

---Gringrich---still just having a good time being there, with an occasional comment of some value.

---Huntsman---I like him but he's just not a player at this point.

---Santorum---his attempt at a conversion to passionate family man from the backstabbing vindictive extreme right wing politico that he was as a Senator just has no chance of working.


That's it from me. I'll see what Bloomberg news and the NYT say tomorrow. Signing off.