Remarkable GOP "debate" for a change

I had a difficult time following the "undercard" session because it was all stuff I'd heard before, and I wound up wondering why Fox expended so much air time on broadcasting stuff we knew they were going to say before they said it.  Face it: the main complaint among all the contestants was that none of their "debate" appearances covered the content they'd have to buy ads for. Sheesh.

The overcard session was interesting in that it became quite clear why each candidate enjoyed the supporters that each had earned--even Jeb--but it also showed why none of the candidate contestants were capable of unifying support behind a clear leader.  For every outstanding response they gave to certain policies, they also each gave outstanding deal-breaker answers.  If you're a one-issue voter,  you'll have no problem supporting one candidate.  However, the problem lies in the fact that the lot of folks who have the same one-issue issue who agree on a single solution to that one issue are divided on the approach to the issue.  The only way out of this is to take what's good about each candidate, put those in a mixing bowl, separate that out from the deal-breaking junk and concoct a single candidate from all those disparate parts.

Yeah, that's not going to happen.  Although each candidate had a moment when they hit an issue out of the park, the rest of their response outweighed their one or two good ones and that's just that.

Sorry, guys, but you're going to continue to balkanize the Party and be unworkably unrealistic. A single shot issue does not a president make.

What amazed me most is that Fox let Maria Bartilomo out of the cage after ripping her apart the last time she was moderator on a GOP debate...but that was on CNBC, which I thought was an unforgivable sin in their view because of inherent bias.  Apparently that bias of CNBC they complain about miraculously disappeared from Bartilomo and they actually let her out in public on a debate stage--surprise surprise surprise.

Rand Paul made a lot of sense until he advocated shrinking government to anarchy size.  Somebody should tell that boy that anarchy isn't conservative; it's LEFT of the Dems.