Drunkblogging CNN's GOP Debate

Drunkblogging CNN's GOP Debate

Closing statement, which is MEGO city for those of us who watch this stuff every day.

The bad: Too many candidates by half. There should have been five, top, on stage. Too long, by an hour. Probably a result of there being too many candidates, but also of CNN and the candidates wanting to milk these things for all they're worth.

The good: This was a serious and substantive debate, well-hosted by Wolf Blitzer and by his co-moderators. More like this, please -- but 60 minutes and four candidates shorter next time.

If you had a favorite candidate going in, they probably reinforced why they were your favorite. If there's an exception to that, it might be Donald Trump who again exposed his ignorance on two basic-but-vital issues (internet intel and nuclear weapons) and showed no desire to fill in those gaps in his knowledge. He also threw a temper tantrum against the otherwise feckless Jeb Bush.

On the other hand, reading Trump supporters isn't easy, so maybe they got more of what they wanted.

Next time edits need to be made. Kasich, Paul, Christie, and Fiorina need to be dropped from the main stage. Jeb gets a pass, but only because he has (for now) enough money and (barely) strong enough polls to get through NH and maybe SC, too.

As someone who doesn't (and likely won't) support a candidate other than the eventual nominee, tonight was a welcome change from the usual shouting matches. Or at least mostly so. In the end, viewers got a better feel for all the contenders, and CNN's crew gets a lot of credit for that.

More like this, please -- except for the parts we need less of.