Mary Katharine Ham:
2. Fred: I actually thought Fred was strongest, but Mitt had more to gain, so I gave the first place to him. The focus group says I'm dead wrong, but I thought he was knowledgeable and made the others look less mature with the depth of his answers. I think he's got a more comfortable style that works for him in debates and ought to serve him well in South Carolina, where voters are more predisposed to the rambly country-boy style.
Erick at Red State:
I think Fred Thompson and Mitt Romney did the best tonight. Mitt seemed even paced all night. Thompson was the adult in the room, willing to talk about the tough truths.
Jim Addison at Wizbang:
Fred Thompson ~ continued his strong performance from Saturday. Some people dislike his speaking style, but his remarks were substantive and on point. This is the man many conservatives expected.
Of all the top tier candidates, Fred Thompson is the only one who understands the true problems of illegal immigration and what the meaning of amnesty is. Letting those who commit a crime to come here and pay a fine to stay here is Amnesty.
Last nights ABC News debate spend a nice amount of time on illegal immigration and after hearing many of the candidates gift wrap there amnesty plan for illegal immigrants, Thompson gave them a lesson on amnesty:
“Here’s my definition of amnesty. If you get something that you otherwise didn’t have, to the extent that you get it, that’s amnesty. You steal a television and a radio and get caught and have to give back the television, that’s amnesty. That’s not as much amnesty as if you get to keep everything. But if you get citizenship, or a pathway to citizenship and get to remain in this country because of your illegal activity, that’s amnesty to that extent.”
Win, Fred, Win