Within the first 10 minutes of debate punches began to fly between new and old leading candidates, Mitt Romney Rick Perry. Hitting each other back and forth on their records of job creation, it looked like Perry had Romney up in that exchange, though Romney later explained that the differences between Texas and Massachusetts were so extensive that the registration of Perry may have been less a product of it, and more a product of Texas itself. This argument seemed to have land, but it was very detailed and, unfortunately, probably on the minds of many voters.
One thing that surprised me was the appearance of Jon Huntsman as much more viable than previously thought. Huntsman did everything possible to have hits in the two main candidates, compare their registration records in Utah, Texas and Massachusetts, and staying out as a candidate with a more moderate point of view. He did everything possible for the points against all the arguments under discussion and prove himself as capable of leading. I was surprised because before this debate, which seemed to be just a fly on the wall without any hope of gaining traction. Last night proved much more viable as a candidate. Unfortunately, making a much more moderate candidate, your chances of success in winning the nomination when the primary electorate is more inclined to the right and partisan as always, is thinner better.
Another startling announcement was Herman Cain new tax plan (I missed it when it was announced on Labor Day). Calling 9-9-9 plan, his plan to replace the current tax code with a nine percent tax on corporate income, a nine percent tax on personal income and a tax of nine percent of domestic sales . This was surprising to me because Caine has always been a staunch supporter of the FairTax. Not sure if this means that no longer supports the FairTax. My guess is that his advisers told him he needed a plan of their own and not a plan is already there. I would like to see the numbers run in 9-9-9 plan to see if enough revenue is collected. It would seem, as it is in the middle of the flat tax, which is 17% on all income, and the FairTax, which is 23% of all sales.
Either way, I firmly believe that the best and possibly the only way out of this mess is fundamental tax reform. If it is a flat tax, FairTax, or Cain 9-9-9 plan, I can support either. The main point is that it must be swept through the comprehensive tax reform and fiscal adjustments in the existing code.
The last thing that stood out for me was the discussion of Perry's executive order requiring girls to be vaccinated against HPV. Almost everyone on the stage Perry ruled against the mandate, in the way it was carried out (through an executive order) and had the social implications. In what was a rare moment in the debate, Mitt Romney seems to agree with the intent of the requirement Perry said, "his heart was in the right place," but planned to do so by executive order was the wrong way do.
For me this is another case of Republicans being anti-science. Perry said: "I hate cancer. Cervical cancer is caused by HPV." These are scientific facts, but for many in the party that does not matter. Since HPV is a sexually transmitted disease, the argument is that vaccination against HPV clears girls is now normal to have sex. To me that's a start. If we had a vaccination against HPV as did diseases like polio and smallpox, the incidence of cervical cancers will most certainly fall from 70% are caused by HPV. Just another example of how the Republican Party's stance on social issues get in the way of science.
republican debate-1
republican debate-2
republican debate-3
republican debate-4
republican debate-5
republican debate-6
republican debate-7
republican debate-8
republican debate-9
republican debate-10
republican debate-11
republican debate-12republican debate-13
republican debate-14
republican debate-15
republican debate-16
republican debate-17
republican debate-18
republican debate-19
republican debate-20In the end, I would say that the winners were Romney and Huntsman. Unfortunately, I think Huntsman is too moderate to win the Republican nomination, but life is stranger than fiction sometimes. Perry would not say I lost the debate. In fact, the first half of the debate that looks pretty good. Towards the end, however, began to stumble and lose focus. Because of that, I would not perish, but did not win. Although Cain went out with his new tax plan 9-9-9, which certainly could support, I do not have enough support to gain traction. Everyone else on stage, including Michele Bachmann, who appeared to be an afterthought, both during and after the debate. That makes them the losers on this occasion.