For those who didn’t watch last night’s forum/debate on Fox News Channel’s Huckabee, this thread’s for you. The two-hour forum was hosted by Mike Huckabee and featured three  Republican Attorneys General: Ken Cuccinelli of Virginia, Pam Bondi of Florida, and Scott Pruitt of Oklahoma.  The format, in my opinion, was vastly superior to the silly spectacles we’ve witnessed thus far where mostly liberal media personalities try to make a name for themselves by asking vapid, moronic questions in the hope of eliciting a gaffe or newsworthy soundbite.  The format was not conducive to a regurgitation of pithy, rehearsed 30-second soundbites that a candidate could fall back on when he or she didn’t have a relevant answer to whatever question was being posed.

Mitt Romney, in particular, appeared much less comfortable in this format.  He could no longer be saved by the bell as it were, and was forced to answer follow-ups which didn’t inure to his benefit.  He looked decidedly less comfortable than in previous debates and much more like the peevish prima donna who couldn’t be bothered to answer Bret Baier’s simple questions earlier in the week.  I’d be surprised if Mitt agrees to this type of format in the future.  I thought Gingrich and, surprisingly, Rick Perry both did pretty well.

What do you all think?  Who “won” last night? Who lost?  Is this format an improvement?  Should it be used in the future? In my opinion, the biggest winners were those of us who vote, since we were finally given an opportunity to see the candidates stay on topic and, for the most part forced to answer the question posed.  Cuccinelli, in particular, was not inclined to let the candidates slide off the hook as they could in previous debates, although all three questioners were an enormous improvement over the vacuous media personalities who asked the questions in the previous debates.   Bondi asked some excellent questions, I thought.  OK, enough of my yacking. Let’s go to the video, via 2012 Election Central: