Observations on a Dead Debate

Plus, a new ad following the debate.

We’ll do the video first because I love this piece:

If last night’s pathetic debate proved one thing, it’s that as doomed as Chris Christie is as a candidate, he’s at least going out with all guns blazing. I was genuinely embarrassed for Ron DeSantis and Vivek Ramaswamy as Christie tore them — and their orange master — to shreds on the stage.

It was painful.

Christie — who is, once again, utterly doomed as a candidate — had some fire in the belly and is making a gamble that telling the truth about Donald Trump will, in the end, feel better than bending the knee as the rest of the candidates on the stage did all night.

I realized that the real difference between Christie and the rest was simple; he knows the music has stopped, the GOP is dead, and the era of Trump ends in pain. The others still hold some secret — or not so secret, in the case of Ramaswamy — desire to somehow end this race in Trump’s good graces.

Haley is painfully evident in her desire to be Vice President, and to be candid, she would be an intelligent pick for Trump, which is why he won’t. Vivek wants to the the Secretary of anything, and DeSantis is still betting that his brand of trolling will appeal to the weirdo anti-woke loonbuckets and Trump will put him in as VP.

DeSantis, who it must be said had his best debate of the season (a low bar, to be sure) is utterly disqualified in Trump’s orbit not only for his betrayal of Trump by merely entering the race but also by his continued performance art catalog of verbal tics, weird tongue gymnastics, strange expressions, centaur-like posture, and smarmy pre-planned lines that play like regional dinner theater acting.

Trump, weirdly, actually respects people who hate him and who are good at it. DeSantis is too odd for Trump, too clunky as a performer. Trump knows that everyone on that stage but Christie is his political property to dispose of as he pleases.

Since, as my grandmother used to say, false modesty is the worst kind, my piece for The Economist was pretty damn spot-on, particularly the conclusion:

In debates before the Trump era, candidates came armed with a vision, not merely with on-stage gags and canned attacks. Robust presidential debates enrich a democratic political process, and arguably, in the age of social media, could have more reach into the body politic than ever before. It’s one of the few opportunities for voters to watch candidates work on their feet and to see how the men and women applying for the top job in America perform under pressure.

That model went out the window in 2016, when Mr Trump’s crude japes, game-show host affect, schoolyard bullying, and proud ignorance of Republican policy and principle left the other GOP candidates, the political media and the donor class in shock while the Republican base cheered for more.

Mr Trump’s decision not to participate in the debates is strategic. It is not rooted in fear of attacks from rivals but rather a calculated understanding that his absence reinforces the debates’ inability to alter the campaign's trajectory.

The primary is over. It’s just that nobody on the debate stage, hoping for a last flicker of attention, wants to admit it.

P.S. I must take a moment to note that Vivek Ramaswamy was not just running for the GOP nomination last night but also for a gig with InfoWars or some QAnon news outlet. He vomited out some of the most instance conspiracy twaddle imaginable, and in case you missed it, those were some of the best applause lines of the night.

A lost boy for a lost party.