Debates don’t always have clear winners and losers, and much of that is because every candidate comes in with different expectations and goals. So I think a more accurate question going in to tonight’s Fox News/Washington Examiner Republican debate is: what does each candidate need to accomplish? I’ve tried to answer that question below.
Cool Hand Mitt: Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney’s steady performance in the last debate, which benefitted from the experience of his 2008 presidential campaign, helped solidify his position as a frontrunner. He needs a similar performance tonight. Not doubt, he’ll have to step up his game once Texas Gov. Rick Perry formally enters the race and comes gunning for him. But for tonight, not making news is good news for Romney.
Michele’s Great Expectations: Going into the last debate, expectations were quite low for Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn. Most people anticipated that Bachmann would feed red meat to conservatives, but critics were waiting for her to go off the rails and say something totally nuts. But it didn’t happen. Instead, she came across as polished and knowledgeable and had a disciplined message. Now, in no small part as a result of her debate performance, she has emerged as the frontrunner in Iowa and the main alternative to Romney. So the bar is higher for her. Not only will viewers be expecting more from her, the other candidates will be aiming for her. So, she’ll have to show that she can step up her came and come off unrattled. Additionally, she has to begin to make the case to skeptics as to why they should trust a member of the House of Representatives to be president when they have other options on the stage who have executive experience. This will be especially true with Perry coming into the race, because he not only has executive experience, but strong conservative bona fides.
Fredo Pawlenty: In the last debate, former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty erred big time when he passed on the chance to critcize Romney’s health care plan, even after lining up the attack going into the debate. Ever since then, he’s been trying to shake the image of being the Fredo Corleone of the field — somebody who means well, but is ultimately too weak to be a leader. He’s tried, awkwardly, to toughen up his image since then by refererncing his ice hockey playing days. But more importantly than coming out swinging, he needs to ditch the one liners, be himself and try to connect with people on a gut level.
Army of Pauls: Rep. Ron Paul, R-Tex., is not running to actually be president, but to advance his essentially libertarian message. Debates are the ideal forum to communicate to a wider audience. So what he needs to do is find a way to talk about his pet subjects like Austrian economics and non-interventionist foreign policy in a way that’s more persuasive to a general audience that isn’t already inclined to agree with him.
Why am I here? The rhetorical question infamously asked by Ross Perot’s 1992 runningmate James Stockdale applies, in some degree or another to the rest of the field. Former Godfather’s Pizza CEO Herman Cain, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, former Sen. Rick Santorum and former governor Jon Huntsman have to justify why they’re bothering to run for the presidency. Bachmann’s entrance has narrowed the space for a candidate like Cain, who is attempting to appeal to tea partiers, as well as Santorum, who appeals primarily to social conservatives. Huntsman needs to explain why he’s any better than the other former governors on the stage. And after a series of missteps and exit of his key staff, Gingrich has to explain why at this point, he doesn’t just drop out of the race and go back to offering his views and solutions for America as a speaker, TV analyst and author.
