So who won? Billionaire Donald Trump (again?)? Texas Sen. Ted Cruz? Florida Sen. Marco Rubio? Can New Jersey Gov. Chris Christy rise in the polls? Should the others get out of the race and Jeb Bush seriously plan an exit strategy because today’s GOP isn’t his dad’s GOP or his brothers? Did any of the candidates show they can fulfill the Republican Party establishment’s dream to be able to dump Trump?

Trying to decipher the true impact from a debate is all guesswork on debate night. The reliably conventional wisdom will set in within a few days, instant voter reaction will be released, and polls will show if someone got a boost. Here’s a roundup of reaction to the Fox Business News debate from a variety of sources and a variety of viewpoints.

The Washington Post:

Before Thursday night’s sixth presidential debate, Sen. Ted Cruz (Tex.) had ascended to the most dangerous position in the GOP presidential race: second place. And during the contentious and sometimes surreal debate, Cruz faced attacks both from below – when rival Sen. Marco Rubio called him a flip-flopper – and from above, when billionaire front-runner Donald Trump questioned his eligibility to run for president at all.

The result was a night in which Cruz, a former college debate champion, found himself repeatedly on the defensive. Trump managed to turn around Cruz’s attack on “New York values,” giving an eloquent – especially for Trump – tribute to New York City’s recovery from the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. All Cruz could do was applaud. And in the debate’s late going, Cruz reacted to Rubio’s list of apparent position changes by saying that half of it wasn’t true. The implication, which Cruz surely didn’t intend, was that the other half was.

The bright side, for Cruz, was that he must be doing something right to be the center of attention, just a few weeks before the first Republicans start voting.

“I’m glad we’re focusing on the important topics of the evening,” he said sarcastically, after being asked whether he qualified as a natural-born citizen, since he was born in to an American mother.

The downside was that so much of the debate, broadcast on Fox Business Network, focused on criticisms of him. That meant less scrutiny on Trump, who is still leading Cruz in most places and has pared back Cruz’s lead in Iowa.

The New York Times:

NORTH CHARLESTON, S.C. — Donald J. Trump and Senator Ted Cruz of Texas sharply attacked each other on Thursday night over the Canadian-born Mr. Cruz’s eligibility to be president and Mr. Trump’s “New York values,” shedding any semblance of cordiality as they dominated a Republican debate less than three weeks before the Iowa caucuses.

Their exchanges showcased the intense and unpredictable new phase of the race as polls tighten and 11 candidates jockey for political advantage — not only over issues like imposing tariffs on Chinese goods and fighting the Islamic State, but also over matters of character and integrity that drew some of the hardest punches of the race so far.

In many ways, it was the darkest debate of the campaign, as the Republicans tried to paint the grimmest possible portrait of an America in decline economically, despite rapid job growth, and militarily, though they praised service members. The ferocity onstage reflected the pressure in the race as it distills into a contest between the anti-establishment Mr. Trump and Mr. Cruz, followed by other candidates like Senator Marco Rubio of Florida and Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey.

Mr. Rubio and Mr. Christie, along with Jeb Bush and John Kasich, are vying to emerge as the leading candidate of mainstream Republicans, yet they struggled to be heard on Thursday night.

Mr. Cruz, who has gained ground against Mr. Trump recently and is now virtually tied with him in the polls in Iowa, charged that Mr. Trump was turning desperate because his standing as front-runner had turned shaky.

After months as Mr. Trump’s closest ally in the race, Mr. Cruz pointedly noted that Mr. Trump had dismissed questions in the fall about Mr. Cruz’s constitutional eligibility given his birth to an American mother living in Calgary, Alberta.

“The Constitution hasn’t changed, but the poll numbers have,” Mr. Cruz said. “Donald is dismayed that his poll numbers are falling in Iowa.” Mr. Cruz added that the law was on his side, noting that Senator John McCain, while born in the Panama Canal Zone, was eligible to run for president. By Mr. Trump’s standard, Mr. Cruz asserted, Mr. Trump himself might not be eligible to run for president because his mother was born in Scotland.

“But I was born here — big difference,” Mr. Trump said.

Mr. Cruz gave his most aggressive performance so far as he sought to protect the support he has built among social conservatives and evangelical Christians. He was relentless in trying to put Mr. Trump in his place, in part to appeal to establishment Republicans who are deeply uncomfortable with Mr. Trump’s candidacy.

ABC’s Rick Klein:

Donald Trump may yet lose the Republican presidential nomination, and Thursday night’s debate offered hints of the fights that could make that possible.

But the first GOP debate of 2016 revealed the extent to which Trump has already won.

The slow-starting evening focused, for a change, on candidates not named Trump. It seemed to involve fewer than even the smallest-of-the-cycle debate field of seven.

Yet when the candidates engaged with each other, they did so on terms Trump set. His chief rival in Iowa forced to respond to spurious doubts Trump has raised about whether Ted Cruz is even eligible to be president.

“There’s a big overhang – there’s a big question mark on your head,” Trump told Cruz.

Cruz seemed to get the better of the exchange, with Cruz noting that Trump last fall said he no longer thought Cruz’s birth in Canada was disqualifying.

“Since September, the Constitution hasn’t changed. But the poll numbers have,” Cruz said.

But the fact that that Cruz answered those questions at all was a testament to Trump’s ability to dominate the conversation in the race, as he’s done from virtually the moment he entered the race. Talking about Cruz’s birth was Trump’s idea –- his insertion into the political conversation, dominating again.

Cruz, moreover, dropped his strategy of non-aggression with Trump, fleshing out his critique of Trump as embodying “New York values.”

“Everyone understands that the values in New York City are socially liberal, or pro-abortion or pro-gay marriage,” Cruz said. “Not a lot of conservatives come out of Manhattan. I’m just saying.”

It allowed Trump to get serious, at least for a moment.

“When the World Trade Center came down, I saw something that no place on earth could have handled more beautifully, more humanely, than New York,” Trump said, drawing a few claps, and a slight smirk, from Cruz. “That was a very insulting statement that Ted made.”

There was some tangling further away from center stage. Marco Rubio locked horns with Chris Christie, with Rubio calling Christie a supporter of President Obama’s policies, and Christie labeling Rubio a do-little senator.

But was The Huffington Post that perhaps best put it into perspective in an article at the top with the big, boldfaced headline “RNC CALAMITY“:

NORTH CHARLESTON, S.C. — After Mitt Romney’s resounding defeat in the 2012 presidential election, the Republican National Committee commissioned a 97-page report that laid out “a path forward for the Republican Party to ensure success in winning more elections.”

It sounded great.

But its drafters probably didn’t envision that the GOP’s “path forward” would involve its 2016 presidential front-runner arguing in a nationally televised debate that its second-place contender is ineligible to serve as president.

That is precisely the attack Donald Trump launched against Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) on Thursday night, echoing the Birther 2.0 charge that he’s been test-driving lately against his Canadian-born competitor.

“You have a big lawsuit over your head while you’re running, and if you become the nominee, who the hell knows if you can serve in office,” Trump said to Cruz during one of many memorable exchanges in the debate, which aired on the Fox Business Network.

That Trump’s prodding came across as somewhat routine tells you everything you need to know about the trajectory of the Republican campaign, which has often seemed more like an especially entertaining reality TV show than a campaign for the nation’s highest office. Trump is still winning. And none of the other Republican candidates knows how to slow him down….

…As the debate finally concluded after more than two hours, there was no indication that the overall dynamic of the GOP contest would change when the sun comes up on Friday.

The Daily Beast:

On Thursday, America’s Sweethearts broke up. And like most celebrity splits, it was messy.

“So I guess the bromance is over,” Donald Trump concluded in an interview on CNN after the Republican debate, reflecting on a relationship that was, that might never be the same.

Before things fell apart for the star-crossed candidates, Ted Cruz and Trump long had a non-aggression pact. It was sweet; Cruz defended for Trump’s outlandish statements when no other Republican would, and Trump staunchly refused to target Cruz because of that goodwill. Trump has started to question whether the Canadian-born Cruz is Constitutionally eligible for the presidency, but even that attack was delivered much more politely than anything he’s said to someone like Jeb Bush.

But now whatever alliance Cruz and Trump had has been replaced by all-out war.

In fact, the exchanges between the two rivals did what many thought to be impossible: Cruz made Trump look reasonable and Trump made Cruz look likeable.

It started out with a protracted back-and-forth over Cruz’s birthplace.

The conservative website Red State listed the winners and losers from the debate. Here are the three winners:

1. Marco Rubio – Rubio was the immediate beneficiary of the fact that Ted Cruz decided to turn his fire on Donald Trump. There is no other candidate on stage who can come close to engaging him on style (with apologies to Chris Christie), and only Cruz has a better ideological pedigree. Rubio got off virtually every memorable line of the night, including “I hate to interrupt this episode of Court TV” and “Well, that sounds a lot like a country where people are afraid the President is going to take their guns.” I think he probably lost the battle of the pre-debate ads with Jeb Bush, but the only person who confronted him at all throughout the night was Christie, who clearly lost. If anyone remembers anything from tonight other than the Cruz/Trump imbroglio, it will be one of Rubio’s answers. Even Trump was forced to concede that Rubio had a great point about trade with China. Late in the debate, when Rubio did engage with Cruz, it was on territory that was much friendlier to voters than immigration, which is Cruz’s problematic support of the value added tax. When Cruz and Rubio finally tussled over immigration, it was 11:09pm ET, and only people who are already decided were probably still watching at that point.

2. Ted Cruz. Cruz finally confronted Trump head on and came off the clear winner. I think Trump won the exchange over “New York Values” (which was not a great attack from Cruz to start with, and he should probably just drop it or apologize). Otherwise, Cruz clearly won the “birther” exchange, pointing out Trump’s embarrassing flip flops on the issue, and taking advantage of the fact that Trump ill-advisedly tried to cite Laurence Tribe as a favorable source for his new position on Cruz’s citizenship. He also flipped Trump’s usual schtick on his head, saying that after he wins the nomination, maybe Trump could be his Vice President. As noted above, at about the 11:09pm ET mark Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio started tearing each other’s face off. I think Rubio came out slightly ahead in that exchange, but I’m not sure who was still watching at that point. I am also not sure of the wisdom of responding to a lengthy broadside from an opponent like Rubio with the statement “half of that was false.”

3. Donald Trump. Trump was frequently booed by what appeared to be a fairly pro-establishment crowd, but I don’t think he did anything tonight to hurt himself with his followers, and that’s all he needs to do to succeed from this point forward. His supporters largely aren’t conservative, so they don’t care that he’s citing Laurence Tribe. He flat out called the NYT Editorial board liars regarding the claim that he supported 45% tarriffs on Chinese goods, and I would not be surprised if the NYT comes out with audio tomorrow that directly contradicts this claim. He yet again chickened out from an in person confrontation with a female Republican politician when he basically bowed and scraped before Nikki Haley, who was in the audience. But none of these things matter. Nothing matters. Trump is Trump, his followers love him no matter what he does or says. Right now, they are more numerous than the followers of any other candidate, as he repeatedly points out and cites as proof that he is factually correct. The center does not hold, Sweet Meteor of Death, take us all.

Go to the link to read about the losers.

The liberal website Think Progress:

In a debate held in Charleston, South Carolina, a city that has witnessed a recent mass shooting, the GOP candidates were asked about how reduce gun violence if elected to the White House. Many responded instead by criticizing President Obama for announcing a set of executive actions last week that increases funding for background checks, investigations of criminal gun vendors, and mental health care.
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) went further than his rivals, floating the popular conspiracy theory that President Obama harbors plans to take away Americans’ firearms.

“I am convinced if this president could confiscate every gun, he would,” Rubio told the cheering audience. “I am convinced if he could get rid of the 2nd Amendment, he would.”
Fox Business moderator Neil Cavuto seemed taken aback, telling Rubio, “Under his presidency gun sales have more than doubled. That doesn’t sound like a White House unfriendly to gun owners.”
His voice increasing in both speed and volume, Rubio doubled down.
“I see how he works with the Attorney General, not to defend the 2nd Amendment but to figure out ways to undermine it. I have seen him appoint people to our courts not to defend the 2nd Amendment but figure out ways to undermine it,” Rubio said. “If there is an act of violence in america, his immediate answer before he knows the facts is gun control.”
Cavuto pressed him again, asking, “What fact can you point to, Senator, that the president would take away everyone’s guns? You don’t think that’s extreme?”
Rubio did not offer evidence of the theory…

The debate must be seen in the context of what’s going on in the GOP. Here’s part of an exclusive in Politico that needs to be read in full:

CHARLESTON, S.C. — A Republican National Committeeman delivered a call-to-arms aimed at Donald Trump during a closed-door GOP meeting on Thursday, urging his colleagues to take a forceful stand against those who he said were destroying the party’s brand.
At a breakfast at the RNC’s winter meeting, Holland Redfield, an RNC committeeman who represents the minority-rich Virgin Islands, rose to address party chairman Reince Priebus. In the five-minute impromptu speech, a video recording of which Redfield provided to POLITICO, Redfield did not explicitly mention Trump’s name. But he made clear that angry voices in the party posed a grave threat to the GOP’s future, and expressed alarm at what he described as crushing pressure to play nice.

“You can argue with me, but we’re almost terrorized as members of our party. ‘Shut up. Toe the line, embrace each other, and let’s go forward.’ I understand that. But there is a limit to loyalty. I am loyal to this party by speaking out on these very issues,” he said at the private breakfast meeting.
At one point, Redfield essentially argued that those in the room have been held hostage by Trump’s threat to run as a third-party candidate if the party hierarchy treats him unfairly.
“As a party we owe it to ourselves to speak up, and not let the tail wag the dog, and not let someone say, all of a sudden, ‘If you don’t play my game, then I’m running as an independent.”

Redfield went on to lament “the tenor of the discussion amongst these candidates reducing our label,” and “the disrespect in many cases for ethnic minorities in the United States, but also religious factions in the United States, we have to draw the line. Because sooner or later, somebody has to pick up the pieces.”

There’s a lot more so read it in its entirety.

The Daily Kos’ Laura Clawson offered these parting thoughts:

Final thoughts:
**There was a whole lot more direct attacking this time around. In some cases, it was clear when a hit landed, but how does it shake out when two people got in hits on each other?
**Ted Cruz owned Donald Trump on birtherism, then Trump owned Cruz on New York values.
**Rubio showed that he can be fast and aggressive as opposed to his usual bright-eyed high-flown rhetoric, but how much of an impact did he make?
**Jeb Bush can’t shake the aura of weakness.
**Chris Christie lied a bunch … so I guess he’ll be getting some next-day coverage in the form of fact-checks.
**Ben Carson was palpably irrelevant even though he was the same candidate he’s been in past debates. If Sarah Palin had been a neurosurgeon …
John Kasich was there.

Political Wire’s Taegan Goddard:

Overall, Trump won the debate. He may not be as practiced as Cruz, but he’s getting better and this was his best debate yet.

The other battle line was between Marco Rubio and Chris Christie. They’re both trying to be the establishment choice but there’s only room for one. I thought Christie prevailed in their exchanges, though a big wildcard is whether his rough personality plays well across the country. The bigger problem for both men is that they’re being overshadowed by Trump and Cruz.

But Trump is also the clear winner when Cruz and Rubio spar on immigration. Trump has staked out a clear, easily understandable position and can sit back and watch as the two senators tear each other apart. Rubio won the exchange but he only really helped Trump.

As for the others, it’s time for Jeb Bush and John Kasich to leave the debate stage. There’s no room left for them. The Republican party has moved away from their brand of politics and it’s why they consistently poll in the single digits. They’re not going anywhere.

And then there’s Ben Carson. He’s never really belonged on this stage in the first place and his performance left me wondering once again why he’s ever been popular.

A CROSS SECTION OF TWEETS:

For more blog reaction go here.

JOE GANDELMAN, Editor-In-Chief

Joe Gandelman is a former fulltime journalist who freelanced in India, Spain, Bangladesh and Cypress writing for publications such as the Christian Science Monitor and Newsweek. He also did radio reports from Madrid for NPR’s All Things Considered. He has worked on two U.S. newspapers and quit the news biz in 1990 to go into entertainment. He also has written for The Week and several online publications, did a column for Cagle Cartoons Syndicate and has appeared on CNN.

themoderatevoice.com/