Tim Scott’s Poor Debate Performance Seems to Doom Campaign – The American Spectator

There have been occasional smatterings that there exists a lane for South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott to win the GOP presidential nomination. The cover of the most recent print magazine for the Washington Examiner, for instance, was headlined “Scott’s Shot: An intriguing but tricky path for a new Trump challenger.” Conservative New York Times columnist Ross Douthat penned an op-ed at the end of last month headlined “With DeSantis Reeling, What About Tim Scott?” It was speculated elsewhere that Scott could be an alternative choice for a GOP donor class that is alienated by Ron DeSantis’ struggles in the polls as well as the Florida governor’s decision to pursue a Trumpian lane and an isolationist position on foreign policy.

But hopes that Scott could be an alternative all but collapsed Wednesday night with his poor debate showing. When the camera panned across the candidates upon the opening of the debate, Scott looked confused and surprised that his name was called, and that halting appearance continued throughout the debate.

Scott seemed low-energy and unconfident in his words. His demeanor was nervous, and his lack of a smile contrasted with businessman Vivek Ramaswamy’s near-constant grin.

The senator’s most memorable moment came when he pushed back against the debate’s moderator, Bret Baier, to ask for more time, stating: “I’m a Southern boy. I talk slow.” He let out a chuckle in a much-needed departure from his otherwise expressionless composure. In that moment, his awareness of his more subdued personality was able to come across as a cordial and dignified contrast to the other candidates’ bombastic tendencies. In other moments, however, Scott’s disinterest in getting involved in the raucous arguments left him out of the conversation.

Another strong moment for Scott came when he spoke out unapologetically against abortion. “Our Declaration of Independence says our creator gave us inalienable rights, including life,” said Scott. “That is an issue we must solve.” Unlike other candidates, he pushed back against the notion that the federal government should permit states to have whatever abortion laws they would like. “We can’t allow states like California, New York and Illinois to have abortion on demand up to the day of birth,” he said. However, when he attempted to butt in and push for a 15-week federal ban, he was all but ignored.

A weaker moment came in the senator’s first debate response, when he gave what seemed to be a canned answer. Scott was asked about what he has done to rein in the increasing size of government, and he called for “turning the spigot off in Washington.” Moderator Martha MacCallum pushed back, pointing out that he had been part of spending trillions on COVID relief, and made his answer seem insincere.

Perhaps a debate is not the best forum for the soft-spoken senator. But with Scott averaging 3.6 percent in the polls, he needed a breakout performance. In this case, not — as he put it — “going back and forth and being childish” may have left Scott in the dust.