Saturday’s debate harkened back to the earlier Republican contests, with moderators spending an inordinate amount of time in the beginning trying to get candidates to attack each other. They weren’t disappointed in their efforts to provoke a cockfight. The tamestream media should be more transparent with their agenda and take ownership of the questions they want to use to attack the candidates (I pointed this out in my first blog posting). Muir and Raditz did a great job with the Democratic debate they moderated, but maybe that says more about their political agenda than their professionalism. Tied for a close second in banality was the commentary provided by ABC during the commercial breaks: “This has been a good debate for Trump.” Let’s look at how each candidate fared (in alphabetical order) in terms of their arguments (or lack thereof) during Saturday’s Republican debate.

Bush—Bush would be faring better in the polls if he had begun the debates with the same energy and toughness he demonstrated Saturday. He successfully stood up to Trump’s bullying, let his own knowledge of the issues become evident and honed in on one of Trump’s weaknesses in New Hampshire (championing “eminent domain”). To paraphrase Marlon Brando in On The Waterfront,” “He coulda been a contenda.” Depending on how things shake out in New Hampshire and South Carolina, he still might be.

Carson—Ben Carson has been getting geography lessons from someone and he was anxious to display what he’s learned. If he’s banking on honesty and integrity to help him win the Republican primaries, someone needs to tell him that currency is no longer accepted.

Christie—Whatever else you might think of Chris Christie, you have to applaud the way he was able to call out Rubio (and by implication, Cruz) on rehearsed sound bites. Christie also successfully redefined the “lanes” of the candidates into the governors, the senators (read Washington establishment here) and the outsiders. Even when he eventually “suspends” his campaign, he will have made a strong argument for the Attorney General’s position in a Republican administration.

Cruz—Several fact checking sites (CNN, Politifact, The Washington Post) have called him out for his misrepresentation that CNN reported Carson was dropping out of the race minutes before the Iowa Caucuses, but he repeated it yet again during the debate. Ted Cruz gets the award for talking the most (18:13 minutes) without saying anything. In addition to his usual media bashing, he continued the parliamentary debater’s tactic of refusing to answer a direct question and giving a stump speech instead.

Kasich—As long as we’re handing out awards, I nominate John Kasich for the “True Statesman” honor. Although he had very little speaking time (10:51 minutes), he used it to point to his experience, his success in government service and his desire to put Americans above politics. I predict his best performance to date will move him up in the polls.

Rubio—Rubio may have entered the debate expecting to be the rooster who ruled the roost, but after Christie’s rhetorical surgery, he emerged a capon. He provided dramatic enactment of Christie’s claim than Washington types practice a drive by with inaccurate information, then simply repeat a memorized sound bit. His speaking time (18:10 minutes) barely placed second to Cruz, but he was unable to cite experience and accomplishments during his short tenure as a U.S. senator. Maybe there is something to Christie’s claim that people in Washington talk a lot but accomplish little. While he may turn out to be the poster child for conservative ideology, his lack of experience will continue to be his Achilles’ heel.

Trump—For hosting a reality show, Donald Trump seems to be well divorced from reality. He wins the award for debating by adjectives, stringing together an endless repetition of “bad, good, better, great, massive, tremendous” a total of thirty-seven times during the debate. And for someone who used “win” so often, he definitely needed a whambulance. First, he claimed he actually won the Iowa caucuses because Cruz stole so many of Carson’s votes through his dirty tricks. Then, when he was booed for trying to quiet Jeb Bush, he complained there were only Bush supporters and donors in the audience (RNC put the number of donors in the audience at ten percent). His policy proposals (“musings” would probably be a more accurate descriptor) continue to suffer from a lack of specificity and the premises on which they’re based are often downright false (see for example his claim that Americans pay the most taxes of anyone in the world).

The wagons haven’t been circled, but the candidates have formed a circular firing squad. It will be interesting to see for whom New Hampshire turns out to be the “End of the Line.”