Issues & Insights

Miami Debate: The Surprisingly ‘Smart Party’ (Mostly) Struts Its Stuff

This correspondent, who departed the GOP, stage right, 10 years ago this month, generally delights in trafficking in former Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal’s characterization of his can’t-shoot-straight comrades: “The Stupid Party.”

Yet the Republican presidential debate in Miami Wednesday night offered no occasion to apply that label.

Instead, in one of the best beginning-to-end, top-to-bottom, left-to-right ensemble performances this pundit has witnessed in his 45 years in and around the political game, America watched a collection of candidates come across as substantive, slick, savvy, sensible, self-assured, at times swinging-for-the-fences, and – yes – smart.

To illustrate: moderator Lester Holt inserted himself into the debate with a moron-omics claim that Tim Scott’s proposal to restart the Keystone XL Pipeline and reintroduce certainty and predictability into energy leases would not immediately reduce prices.

The South Carolina senator demonstrated his superior understanding of market function by gently smart-splaining: confidence from renewed ability to ramp up production would quickly show up in current pricing. Former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie – as usual confident and thoughtful throughout the debate, especially with cogent observations on the fentanyl epidemic – later specified that this production potential would be reflected in energy futures.

Further underscoring the candidates’ sophistication and preparation for the role of commander in chief: asked if the Navy had sufficient ships to credibly deter a Chinese attack on Taiwan, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis off the top of his head produced precise facts and figures on inadequate current and future force levels and his plans to increase them. Erstwhile United Nations Ambassador Nikki Haley – in her strongest debate showing to date – then raised the ante by rattling off corresponding counts for China’s naval assets.

Haley in general depended less on her customary woman-card tropes (with one notable, defensive exception discussed below) and more on well-considered, well-rehearsed, and unhesitatingly delivered position statements. 

She and DeSantis both wowed in answering the opening question – why they would be stronger general election candidates than Donald Trump – by using the opportunity to focus on economic woes top-of-mind with American families. In addition, the former diplomat topped the fevered competition to raise the bar highest on China, calling among other measures for an outright trade ban until the Middle Kingdom ceases supplying Mexican cartels with fentanyl ingredients.

Haley also largely dispensed with her previous hyperfocus on irritating attacks and frustrating cross-talk, as did most of the other candidates. Although naturally, much coverage has focused on the usual attention-grabbing personal repartee (Vivek Ramaswamy: Haley is “Dick Cheney in 3-inch heels.” Haley: actually 5-inch heels, and not a “fashion statement” but rather “ammunition.”) 

Still, the comparatively fewer ad hominem exchanges among the contenders were mostly in-bounds. Including Haley questioning DeSantis’ bona fides on a drill-baby-drill overall energy policy that he opposes within the Sunshine State’s boundaries. 

Ramaswamy implying that Haley’s migration from government service to lucrative defense contractor board membership colors her gung-ho attitude toward arming Ukraine. 

And both the youthful entrepreneur and the Florida governor highlighting her apparent flip-flop from having previously dubbed China America’s “friend” and “welcoming” CCP-backed enterprise into her state.

As a matter of fact, the night’s hardest and squarest blows landed off the stage. Ramaswamy channeled George Bush versus Dan Rather, vintage 1988, by confronting the NBC moderators for having fed the anti-Trump Russia collusion hoax. And even more daringly, charged Republican National Committee chairwoman Ronna McDaniel face-to-face with being a “cancer in the party establishment” responsible for Republicans becoming a “party of losers.”

Which brings the discussion to the one area where the output of assembled brainpower sailed “just a bit outside” of the mark: the party’s Achilles heels of Social Security and abortion, the latter demonstrated again in the GOP’s latest election rout.

None of the White House wannabes managed to finger the real culprit in Social Security’s woes – plummeting fertility caused by the demise of marriage and family formation. Connected in a direct line to the Democrats’ abortion fanaticism and the Republicans’ stubborn cluelessness on the issue.

How should Republicans, especially conservatives, be addressing abortion? Not through a cowardly, full-scale retreat from their generational victory in Dobbs, as the frontrunner and other party lights (including Haley) are suggesting under withering Democratic assault.

Rather, go directly at the other party, in kind, and contextualize abortion. Because the D in their name should stand for their three-fold, of-a-piece platform: Not just Death to babies in the womb. But also Deviance in doubling down on transgender child mutilation and drag-queen story hours for kindergartners. 

And Defeatism for their pinched Green New Deal vision: depriving families of their cars and gas stoves, inducing energy poverty, and generally burying the American Dream under a mountain of devalued dollars and government mandates.  

Then, contrast those three Ds with — excuse the phrase — an audaciously hopeful vision of supercharging family formation, demonstrated since creation’s dawn to be the healthiest, most happiness-inducing and most prosperity-generating of relationships. (And one in which the young adults so overwhelmingly backing abortion amendments actually make human connections and have sex.) 

Pro-life bonus: Barely more than 4% of married women’s pregnancies end in abortion, as opposed to nearly 40% of single women’s. Plus, married women vote GOP.

As your correspondent has previously suggested in this space, a pro-family policy package would be the very essence of smart (there’s that word again) government. 

But perhaps this observation is quibbling. After all, the debate revealed the depth of the GOP bench compared to the woeful, radical-led opposition – especially the relatively youthful DeSantis and self-described “fresh leg(ged)” Ramaswamy.

In fact, a final word goes to the final word – both DeSantis’ and this scribe’s own. The Floridian’s closing statement, the last due to his poll standing, was magnificent in re-emphasizing his own commitment to service that started with his exemplary military record, and in insisting that he would not let voters down. 

Your correspondent’s last entry in his notes on the evening, describing Guv Ron’s pièce de résistance: “presidential.”  A quality which more than anything else, is what the otherwise generally Stupid Party™ needs about now in its champion. 

Bob Maistros is a messaging and communications strategist, crisis specialist, and former political speechwriter. He can be reached at

We Could Use Your Help

Issues & Insights was founded by seasoned journalists of the IBD Editorials page. Our mission is to provide timely, fact-based reporting and deeply informed analysis on the news of the day -- without fear or favor.

We’re doing this on a voluntary basis because we believe in a free press, and because we aren't afraid to tell the truth, even if it means being targeted by the left. Revenue from ads on the site help, but your support will truly make a difference in keeping our mission going. If you like what you see, feel free to visit our Donations Page by clicking here. And be sure to tell your friends!

You can also subscribe to I&I: It's free!

Just enter your email address below to get started.


Bob Maistros

Bob Maistros, a messaging and communications strategist and crisis specialist, is of counsel with Strategic Action Public Affairs, and was chief writer for the Reagan-Bush ’84 campaign, three U.S. Senators, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. He can be reached at


Rules for Comments: Getting comments posted on this site is a privilege, not a right. We review every one before posting. Comments must adhere to these simple rules: Keep them civil and on topic. And please do not use ALL CAPS to emphasize words. Obvious attempts to troll us won’t get posted.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  • It won’t matter, you know. President Trump is enjoying 60% support from likely Republican voters. So unless the party kingmakers contrive to “deal him out,” or somehow steal the primaries, Donald J. Trump will be the GOP’s presidential nominee for 2024. The debaters are competing for second place, at best.

  • While it may be acceptable for Haley to criticize Desantis about his record of allowing drilling in Florida, I don’t know that it would be a fair issue. I don’t know that there has been much exploratory drilling in Florida, and there certainly hasn’t been any program to produce what is believed to not be there.

  • Glad you enjoyed the show. I haven’t watched any of McDaniels loser debates and think it is mostly just media people watching them. None of those people are even close to being a choice of Americans and I don’t want to waste my time.
    Trump 2024!

  • Plummeting fertility?

    One question we need to debate is what should be the optimum population for the USA. You decry a declining birth rate.

    What is wrong with fewer people here?

    We have housing shortages, traffic jambs, roads too small, too many cars and trucks, too much sprawl into farm lands, too many people encroaching on flood plains, dangerous areas prone to slides and forest fires and whole sections of our cities are almost ungovernable and unpoliceable. Too many people with terrible problems such as mental derangements, causing homelessness, crime and things no society would want. We have abandoned the Melting Pot brilliance of being an American. Whole cities have been built where there is no water.

    Much of this seems to be exacerbated by having too many people.

    We had 140 million in ’48 when I was born; now we have 335 million, more than twice as many. And consider the social, cultural and political and assimilation problems now that we did not have 75 years ago.
    Every farm near where I grew up and around all of our towns and cities, is gone and covered with things we really may not want. Shopping, housing, roads, warehouses, and awful stuff!
    Farmland and forests destroyed.
    Open space gone.

    Immigration, legal and illegal, is criminally out of control and the Green Card Lottery is still, idiotically, open for another 50,000 people a year and then each winner of the lottery adds their families, sometimes they bring their second wives, doubling and tripling that number. Why not shut down the Green Card Lottery? Did it ever make any common sense?

    Let us take a stab at what an optimal population could be? Should be.
    Pick a reasonable number which is fewer than 335 million, which could be our national target through voluntary policies, suggestions and incentives.


    All the best,
    Gardner A. Cadwalader

About Issues & Insights

Issues & Insights is run by the seasoned journalists behind the legendary IBD Editorials page. Our goal is to bring our decades of combined journalism experience to help readers understand the top issues of the day. We’re doing this on a voluntary basis, because we believe the nation needs the kind of cogent, rational, data-driven, fact-based commentary that we can provide. 

We Could Use Your Help

Help us fight for honesty in journalism and against the tyranny of the left. Issues & Insights is published by the editors of what once was Investor's Business Daily's award-winning opinion pages. If you like what you see, leave a donation by clicking on donate button above. You can also set up regular donations if you like. Ad revenue helps, but your support will truly make a difference. (Please note that we are not set up as a charitable organization, so donations aren't tax deductible.) Thank you!
%d bloggers like this: