Veteran Iowa political reporter David Yepsen thinks that Fred Thompson won yesterday’s debate. Mr. Yepsen has been covering Iowa politics for many a year so I pay particularly close attention to his opinions just prior to the Iowa Caucuses.

Fred Thompson came out on top in Wednesday’s debate among the Republican presidential candidates in Iowa. Of all the candidates, he did himself the most good.

Mike Huckabee and Mitt Romney also scored well. They avoided any last-minute derailments of their front-running candidacies in Iowa and shored up the support they’ve built.

But it was Thompson, the former Tennessee senator, who was specific, good-humored and exuded an executive persona during the low-key, 90-minute session that was sponsored by The Des Moines Register and broadcast by Iowa Public Television.

He had several high points. One of them came when he flatly refused to play the ‘raise your hand’ game in answering a question about global warming. Another came when he said the biggest problem facing education was the National Education Association. (Bashing teacher unions is always popular with Republican audiences.)

Thompson also gets credit for being a stand-up guy willing to take on entitlement programs that threaten to bankrupt the country if left unchanged. He made it clear that wealthy, older Americans could no longer expect full Medicare benefits if he’s elected. Thompson also teased Romney about his wealth and how the former Massachusetts governor is “getting to be a pretty good actor.”

Simply put, Fred Thompson looked authoritative yesterday. When he essentially told the moderator that he wasn’t going to play her little handraising game, he looked the part of a leader. What was impressive was his response:

If you want to give me time to give an answer, I’ll gladly do that.

When the moderator said she wouldn’t do that, he said he wouldn’t play her little game. Simply put, he determined the rules of the debate at that point. It’s the ‘the momment’ that people will be talking about the rest of this week and into next week.

I thought his answers about entitlement reform were particularly forceful. His saying that it’s time to tell Warren Buffett that the government wasn’t going to pick up the tab for his health insurance “because we can’t afford it” was wonderful straight talk. It’s what a leader does.

As Mr. Yepsen said, Sen. Thompson’s lambasting the NEA was particularly forceful, too. The great thing was that he didn’t just chide them. He also threw in why he thought that. After watching the Bush administration communications team go defensive, it’s great to see Republicans going on the offensive.

I thought the other part that’ll help him alot was his answer that he’d talk with the American people about the dangers we’re facing from the terrorists, the disaster heading our direction if we don’t do entitlement reform and his saying he’d first reach out to everyone to reform entitlements but that he’d “go over their heads to the American people” if they balked at reforming entitlements.

I wish more Republicans showed that type of political courage and leadership. If they did, we’d be facing alot better 2008 than we’re currently facing.

Sen. Thompson has alot of ground to make up so I don’t know how much he’ll be helped by yesterday’s performance. It was great seeing him win the debate, though. At least we know that there’s a true conservative leader in the field of candidates.

Technorati Tags: Fred Thompson, David Yepsen, Debate, Entitlement Reform, NEA, Warren Buffett, Iowa Caucuses

Cross-posted at LetFreedomRingBlog

1. Telling off the moderator was classic. Excoriating any union, letting alone the fact it was the NEA, will get him the wrath of all the unions but the love of half or more of the other 150 union members still around.

   Comment by Carlos — December 13, 2007 @ 1:54 pm

2. And his stare down with, whoever that twerp was disguising as a moderator, was worth the watch.

   Comment by T. A. Gray — December 13, 2007 @ 6:22 pm

3. I still believe in Fred. I have been in a state of “suspended disbelief” because of his campaign process. I got rid of the “disbelief” a few weeks ago and am now “suspending” my decision. I like Fred. I hope he can win.

   Comment by John Houghton — December 13, 2007 @ 6:24 pm

4. Since when does not answering the question become brilliant? The best analysis of the republican debate:

   Seance on a Wet Afternoon– It’s like a men’s club meeting in a funeral parlor, this Republican debate in Iowa, a row of dark suits forming a domino rank across the stage as they’re quizzed by a strict schoolmarmish moderator who seems to have a stopwatch ticking inside her head. Her reluctance to lax the rules leads to some shows of resistance from the contestants, Fred Thompson refusing to raise his hand on the issue of global warming, perhaps because his arm is tired. The glossiest domino is Mitt Romney, of course, who does himself no favors by getting testily anal about how much time he’s being alloted, though he’s a portrait in deportment compared to Alan Keyes, who seems to have stored up a pissload of anger, resentment, and righteous petulance until the right camera opportunity came along for maximum martyred posturing. Fred Thompson still acts like an amused/bemused bystander, as if he’s filling in for himself. Rudy Giuliani seems diminished by the format, rattling off his answers as if perforating a dartboard. …

   Comment by Rocky — December 14, 2007 @ 12:27 am

5. Best analysis by Michelle’s counterpart in the left! Right! And Hillary’s dancing about Spitzers jitter bug re Driver’s license/ID cards for illegal aliens was straight up, blunt and spot on. Yessirree!

   This message is brought to you in the spirit of the Fairness Doctrine, Rocky old boy!

   Comment by T. A. Gray — December 14, 2007 @ 1:21 am

6. In answer to Rocky’s question, it became “brilliant” since he alone had the cojones to stand up to that “schoolmarmish” vacuum-head and tell her he wasn’t gonna play her little “gotcha” game.

   And other than showing disdain for any dissenting opinion, you’re your usual vacuous self again, sir.

   Comment by Carlos — December 14, 2007 @ 5:46 pm