http://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-pre...y-monkey-poll-donald-trump-still-lead-n406766 As much fun as the debates were, guaging which candidates did well or badly is purely determined by the poll results afterward. I recall hearing how Trump's candidacy is practically over, and Jeb Bush had a great night by not saying anything wrong and therefore winning the night. Also I heard how Kasich's answers would skyrocket because he led voters to believe that Republicans 'care about people.' So, let's see the numbers. Trump (23%) +1 [From 22% last week] Cruz (13%) +7 [From 6% last week] Carson (11%) +3 [From 8%] Fiorina (8%) +6 [From 2%] Rubio (8%) +0 Huckabee (6%) +1 [From 5%] Those were the winners of the debates, and what's even more interesting are the losers. Bush (7%) -3 [From 10% last week] Walker (7%) -3 [From 10%] Paul (5%) -1 [From 6%] Kasich (2%) -1 [From 3%] Christie (1%) -2 [From 3%] Santorum (0%) -1 [From 1%] I've been saying for months that talking about how successful candidates are going to be is fun, but completely useless until the debates start. And holy shit was I right. Two more things I've been saying is that Bush seems wooden, and that Cruz's numbers would rise once the debates begin. I never guessed they were going to double, and if that's accurate, wow... I was more right than I expected to be after the very first debate. I've said that Bush's script is written by a smooth talker, but Bush isn't a smooth talker, so the deception falls flat. Even when the moderators gave him softball questions, his answers still fall flat. Walker, who I understand is a good potential candidate, also fell flat. He's a good state govenor, but he's a less-than-average speaker on the national stage, and this debate is a prime example of that. Kasich, Christie, and Santorum will probably be out of the race within a month, if that. What's your impressions on the numbers? Also, there's many polls out there, but they basically say the same thing with the percentages off by a point or two.