The Man With a Plan Dominates Team McThompsabee in New Hampshire Debate

It was clear that Mitt Romney dominated the ABC and Fox New Hampshire debates on Saturday and Sunday. He stuck to the issues while team McThompsabee and, to an extent, Giuliani teamed up on him, attacking him at every opportunity (like a pack of ravenous hyenas on a three-legged dog). It's pretty laughable that these guys who are whining about Romney's negative attacks on them, calling them "desperate", are now the ones on the offensive. But as Mitt said in the debate, he is not attacking them personally through his ads, but showing the public FACTS about their records, important for voters to know in order to make wise and informed decisions. At first I found it unfair that everyone (except Ron Paul) was teaming up against Mitt, but soon realized that all the attention puts him in an excellent position. As voters watched that debate, they must have really thought that Mitt was big news as he was the object of so much attention. By all joining against Romney, they made him look totally unique, and gave up key opportunities to show why they differed from each other. For the most part the majority of their comments were fairly generic and relatively unimpressive. Heck, I thought Thompson was going to drop dead half way through one of his comments....that guy could put a kid to bed that just finished drinking a couple cans of Coke (McCain too, but not because he's boring, but just extremely old, bitter and likely suffers from extremely high blood pressure).

What also made Mitt unique, besides the fact that he focused on the issues instead of attacking others' character, was that he is the 'man with a plan'. He is one of the only candidates, Republican or Democrat, who actually says he wants to do something and then talks about HOW he plans to accomplish it. This is where the businessman in him really shines. In contrast, take Huckabee for example. He is notorious for quoting Abraham Lincoln, the Bible, or spouting off some other inspirational words for five minutes, and then talking about what he actually wants to DO for one minute, but almost NEVER tells us how he actually plans to make it happen. Take the ABC debate where he said that he wants America to become totally non-dependent on foreign oil in 10 years ("anything is possible in America", he says), but gives absolutely no strategy on how to do it. That's like saying, "I'd like to have all the children of the world join hands in a spirit of harmony and peace, but don't ask me how to do it, I'd just said it because it looks good." Conversely, when you hear Romney's ideas, he is clear, concise, to-the-point, and wastes less time with a semi-inspiration preamble and more time in Realityville, telling us how it's gonna go down. The last thing Washington needs is another talker. Talk is cheap. Mitt Romney does what he says and does it well.

The other major thing that impressed me about Romney were his words about leadership. Paraphrasing, he said that America doesn't need an expert in a specific field, it needs a leader. For example, John McCain makes about 100 (times pi) references to his military experience every time he opens his mouth. No disrespect to McCain for his service (it's very honourable), but half the time it's not exactly pertinent to the discussion at hand. There is nothing wrong with his experience, but it doesn't necessarily make him the right man to sit in the Oval Office. I mean, maybe with his military expertise he should apply for some national position in the military. What Mitt Romney said is that we need a leader in power, someone who can make executive decisions, listen to others, perform well under pressure, and inspire others. McCain is not that guy (especially with that nasty temper of his and excessive winking). Romney has these traits. He has the skills needed to be a great leader and will be able to gain any experience he lacks quickly.

Romney demonstrated in the New Hampshire debates that he has the goods, and made many of the other candidates look foolish in the process. After the debate was over Fox News showed how voters in New Hampshire reacted to the debate. In a room full of New Hampshire residents the question was asked "how many of you were planning to vote Mitt Romney before the debate?" A few hands went up. Then they were asked (after the debate was over) "how any of you want to vote for him now?" Almost every single hand shot up, and several individuals were interviewed explaining why they thought Mitt was the best choice. At this pace, Mitt is well on his way to victory.