The Ugly.

Paul - Lost any hope of being a political force last night. Moronic is the kindest word that comes to mind. He makes me think of Perot on drugs.

Thompson - I’m sorry but he looked and acted constipated all night. “Buffonery” is the right word. I’m amazed he ever got elected to anything based on his performance last night. He brings nothing exceptional to the table and I’m sorry but he looks like a cross between Dumbo and a very old shar-pei. Not at all “presidential”.

McCain - He looked terrible up against the two listed above. Dave is right…any of the leading Dems would eat him alive. Is it just me or is having to turn up the volume every time he speaks his sneaky little way at getting back at me for believing that advanced interrogation techniques sometimes work? Seriously John, get a megaphone or something. If you arms are too short, have a staffer hold it for you or something.

The Bad.

Gilmore - No way I have him in last place after last night. He was unremarkable but not the worst. He wasn’t far from it but you need specifics to put him in last place. If he completely blundered the third question and neither of us can recall it, then maybe it wasn’t the worst blunder of the night. If he truly is the “consistent conservative” then he has to rate above some of the more liberal wannabes.

Tancredo - Here’s where my Brother and I part ways big time. I like him but he just didn’t really perform in a “presidential” manner. He had poor delivery at times, very little energy…not #2 in my book after last night. His answers just seemed canned to me. They were the “right” answers but he just didn’t strike a chord with me last night. He looked tired. He might be #2 based purely on platform and content of his answers but he’s around #5 if delivery, look, etc. count for anything. I need more energy from him and he’ll have to have it to move on in the race.

Guiliani - If abortion is a litmus test, he has to be taken out of consideration. He cannot reconcile his position with a Biblical worldview and a respect for life. More adoptions? Good on ya. Still ok to murder the unborn? I must do everything in my power to prevent you from being elected. He gets points for putting Paul in his place for his moronic 9-11 statement but it doesn’t forgive his pathetic stance on abortion, gay rights, and backing of Democratic candidates. He’s the worst choice of all in my book. He’d be in the “Ugly” category if it weren’t for the fact that he performs well enough to just be in the “Bad” category.

The Good.

Hunter - I was very impressed. He had energy. He looked presidential. He was decisive and he knew without hesitating exactly what he believed when asked. He earned my vote with his performance last night and I think he has the potential (key word being potential) to gain some momentum. From a content/platform standpoint, he rivals any of them. The only one who beat him from a performance standpoint was Romney. Yes, I thought he was that good.

Romney - Movie star looks (a little too too Ted Danson-ish maybe but he looks the part of a president….especially in our media-driven society). He looks like a president and is the most camera-friendly of the bunch. He was calm, cool, and collected the whole night. Nobody beat him from a purely performance standpoint. Like Dave, he comes across as very convincing but he’s still lacking when it comes to answering some of the tough questions. I wish they’d have used Dave’s question. It likely would have been the only time he got flustered last night. As it was, I don’t think he got a single question he wasn’t prepared for. He is in the “Good” category based solely on his performance in the debate. His platform still needs a lot of work and doesn’t really qualify him for this category.

Huckabee - Dave gives him no love but based on what? He handled himself well from what I could tell. No specific criticism is offered but he’s #5? He’s worthy of the vice-presidency but no higher than #5? I don’t see it. He did well. He was overpowered by the performance of Hunter (as was everyone but Romney IMHO), but he was better than 5th especially when you look at his performance through the lens of a Biblical worldview as was stated at the outset.

Brownback - If abortion is a litmus test, he has to be better than #4. I really appreciated his stance on the importance of life at all stages of development. He was better/stronger than Tancredo on the abortion issue and I didn’t catch the mess-ups that Dave saw (he’s right…it was late!). I thought his performance was better than he was given credit for especially when he’s criticized for looking nervous and uncomfortable when answering a question that was completely forgettable. He got a perfect 10 on an issue that carries more weight than most when considering a Biblical worldview.

If I were pressed into rankiing the potential candidates based on the content of their message first and their delivery second, this would be how I rank them:

1. Hunter….by a long shot.
2. Huckabee.
3. Brownback.
4. Romney.
5. Tancredo.
6. Gilmore.
7. McCain.
8. Thompson.
9. Giuliani.
10. Paul.

That’s my story and I’m stickin’ to it! At least until Dave grabs a nap and comes back and blows me out of the water! Seriously, great analysis Dave…very much appreciated.

God Bless Brother!

…