Published on November 5th, 2011 | by Luis Cavalcanti0
Watch Cain, Gingrich Lincoln-Douglas Republican Debate
HotAir wrote up a great analysis about the debate. So, if you want some awesome commentary, go right on over there and find yourself a replication of what I came away from this debate thinking.
I would add, though, the reason Gingrich won is not because Cain looked weak, but because of the he elevated the discussion. Despite what looked like deep knowledge gaps in the middle of Cain’s campaign, what is clear is that having an intelligent, well-spoken policy wonk like Newt sitting next to you, vouching for your qualifications and intellect, you end up being elevated. Herman Cain looked better because he was parked next to Newt, he sounded coherent and congenial as did Newt. Cain’s biggest mistake, I think, (and this is a rare thing for a Presidential debate) was essentially endorsing Newt as his vice President. I mean, if Cain thinks that Newt would be a valuable Vice President, it means that he approves of Newt, and thinks he would make an excellent front-runner as well.
What I found to be most appealing, though, was the idea of two stalwart men, one a well-spoken, policy-loving politician with a track record of bipartisan successes, one a businessman with a string of successful splitting their talents, taking two sides of the country, and getting buy-in for solid policy-based, business savvy ideas that are innovative and well thought through. What I saw tonight were two men that could, in a sense, act as co-Presidents. Is that good? I’m really undecided.
I’ve not loved Cain, he seems too unprofessional and uninformed for me to be excited about him. But maybe I’m wrong. I’m not sure. And Newt? I mean, I’ve not ever been excited about the former speaker. I am generally excited by ideas and consistency of ethic. But I’m also an incrementalist. If they run with each other, maybe it would be the right mix. Who knows?