For what it's worth, Romney looks stronger and stronger to me. He's in his zone, he's nailed down his positions, he's confident and articulate, and he has charisma. I thought McCain held his own. He, too, was confident. He did a better job than the last debate. However, his position on interrogations is simply ridiculous when held up to scrutiny. I don't think Rudy gained very much. A forum where 10 candidates get equal attention is simply not helpful to a front-runner. But I am becoming increasingly impressed with Duncan Hunter. He's poised, has a good grasp of the issues, and is consistent. He's solid on national security, and I like his idea about zero taxes for the manufacturing sector (although I don't believe I share his overall approach to economics). In my own mind, it would be nice if he'd move into the first tier of candidates. Being a member of the House, however, his name identification and public exposure remains limited.

UPDATE:

I've received a few emails suggesting that Rudy hit it out of the park in responding to Ron Paul's slur that America brought on the 9/11 attacks. I thought about that before posting my original thoughts. And my view was and is that the other eight candidates were just as anxious to pounce on Paul and no doubt would have said something similar as Rudy's comments. But I should give points to Rudy for being the first out of the box (the others didn't get a subsequent opportunity).