Candidates gathered in South Carolina last Thursday to participate in a pivotal debate that took place just two days after the New Hampshire primary, five days before the primary contest in Michigan and a full 10 days before South Carolina voters go to the polls. With so much on the line, a good debate performance was critical for each candidate. Here’s how the candidates matched up:

Mitt Romney

The former governor from Massachusetts needed to shine in this debate. Following disappointing, if not deafening, losses in both Iowa and New Hampshire, Romney must win Michigan and have a strong showing in South Carolina in order to continue a viable, successful campaign for the Republican presidential nomination.

That being said, this was not Mitt Romney’s best performance. In the debate that took place on Jan. 6, prior to the New Hampshire primary, it seemed as though all of the candidates set their sights on the once front-running candidate. But in South Carolina, Romney was relegated to an afterthought throughout most of the event.

But Romney supporters shouldn’t be too glum; there were positive notes from Thursday’s debate. Most of the questions that were posed to Romney allowed him to either enunciate his position (in the case of the economy and jobs in Michigan) or clarify and strengthen campaign messages.

Overall, Mitt Romney was neither helped nor hurt by this debate. Although a strong performance could have helped him surge past John McCain in the polls in Michigan, he missed the opportunity and chose, instead, to maintain the status quo.

John McCain

This senator from Arizona capitalized on strong momentum from his New Hampshire win just two days prior and kept the pending Michigan contest in mind throughout the night.

Often throughout the campaign, many of the Republican Party’s faithful have questioned McCain’s Republican ideals. He has been chided for co-sponsoring legislation with liberal icon Ted Kennedy (D-MA) that allowed for amnesty to illegal aliens, restricting campaign contributions with his Bicameral Campaign Finance Reform Act in 2002 and his positions on spending and appropriations.

During Thursday’s debate, McCain was able to focus on issues that worked to his benefit to make him seem like the candidate who could uphold conservative principles. Cutting government spending, supporting our military and having a strong background in national security were all points McCain touched on throughout the night.

Unlike Mitt Romney, McCain was the target of attacks and took center stage for much of the debate.

Were there any detractors? A few. Some of what came out of McCain’s mouth Thursday seemed wrought with rhetoric.

Pair that with his assertion that he is known as “the sheriff” among his colleagues in the capitol and has never made a pork barrel earmark in his four terms in the Senate and you may find yourself questioning how authentic anything John McCain says actually is.

Mike Huckabee

Huckabee’s record as a Baptist preacher and former governor of Arkansas for 10 years has not always been in his favor. Despite his upset victory in Iowa and his solid third place finish in New Hampshire, Mike Huckabee joins John McCain in still struggling to brand himself a conservative and must break free of his mold as the one-issue evangelical candidate.

He gave the quote of the night saying, “I think we need to make it very clear, not just to the Iranians, but to anybody, that if you think you’re going to engage the United States military, be prepared not simply to have a battle. Be
prepared, first, to put your sights on the American vessel. And then be prepared that the next things you see will be the gates of hell.” The audience loved it.

Huckabee was the target of many attacks several times during the debate, including several digs by Fred Thompson, who pointed out that Huckabee was unwilling to sign the pledge against no new taxes earlier in his campaign—but then signed it several months later to align himself more with the Republican Party.

In addition, debate organizers reminded viewers of his divisive past as a Baptist preacher by asking about the declaration he signed in a full page ad in the New York Times declaring, “A wife is to submit herself graciously to the servant leadership of her husband.”

Rudy Giuliani

The former New York Mayor participated in this debate much the same as he has participated in this primary election recently: low-key and in the background.

Although relevant at some points during the night, Giuliani joined Mitt Romney in the list of candidates that weren’t worth attacking. Contributing to his low-key performance is the fact that he has not been competitive in any of the primaries yet and does not plan to be until the early primaries move to Florida Jan. 29. Even there, John McCain has overtaken his position at the front.

Giuliani's opponents have attacked his Republican values, pointing out that he favors amnesty, gun control and gay marriage. Luckily for him, social issues were not on Fox News’ agenda Thursday night and he was able to paint himself as someone who will give Americans a major tax cut and be tough on national security.

Ron Paul

Representative Ron Paul, the 10-term Congressman from Texas, participated in the debate Thursday in his usual role: being the whacky candidate who is supported by Republican fringe and often-intoxicated college students. His performance Thursday exemplified his mentality that he must distance himself from his opponents on every conceivable issue, regardless of what they say.

The low point of Paul’s performance this time came during the discussion on Iran, during which he accused his colleagues of being too eager to attack Iran. Even after moderator Britt Hume pointed out, rather embarrassingly, that every other candidate had endorsed the Navy’s passive response, Paul still took the issue as an opportunity to chide Republican Party faithful, President Bush.

Particularly crippling was the question from Carl Cameron as to whether or not the Congressman thought he was a viable candidate. His response seemed devoid of the idea that his ideas were far from mainstream and he seemed almost offended at the suggestion that he receives little support across the nation.

Fred Thompson

Last is the former Senator from Tennessee, Fred Thompson. If there were to be a true winner from the debate Fred Thompson would take home the trophy.

Thompson’s performance can be attributed to the fact that South Carolina is pretty much it for his campaign. After a distant third place showing in Iowa and a dead last finish in New Hampshire (even behind Ron Paul and write-in candidates), the South’s native son must do well—if not win—South Carolina. This fact was evident in Thompson’s performance Thursday night.

Pollster Frank Luntz—who conducted a focus group during the debate and shared them with Fox News’ Hannity and Colmes during their post-debate coverage—found that even though only a handful of people supported Thompson before the debate, nearly all of the focus group ended the debate with a far more favorable opinion of him.

Among Thompson's brighter moments were the several parts of the debate where he took the lead in being confrontational. Following the debate, former Virginia governor and Thompson supporter, George Allen, pointed out that until Thompson took the initiative, none of the candidates were actually debating each other. But Thompson used wit and strong policy positions to get his message across.

Unfortunately for Thompson, his poll numbers have not changed. He is stuck in fourth place, behind Mitt Romney, with just 9.3 percent of the support, according to realclearpolitics.com.

Reporter: Nick Ochsner - 01/16/07