Didn't see the early debate, watched the main event.
It's pretty clear that the Fox news moderators were really out to prove they weren't "Republican supporters" the way they attacked and drilled several of the candidates in the debate; we wouldn't see ABCNBCCBSCNNPBS anchors going after Democrats this way during their debate, unless they deliberately set out to anoint Hillary.
In any case, here's my take:
Jeb: Anyone else catch that he was on Bloomberg's education foundation, because he thought "Mike" was doing some good there? Associating with "Mike" Boomberg in any way, shape, or form makes him toxic.
Christie: Pugnacious when pushing for expanded government. His comment about "means testing" for Social Security benefits was the big-government kleptocrat talking.
Rand: The couple of good points he made were lost in what sounded like his whining. Still, like his dad, while I like him as a legislator, I don't want him anywhere near the Oval Office.
Cruz: Thoughtful answers that may have gone over the heads of some people.
Trump: Seemed to duck some questions and talk around them - had a hard time when confronted with his past comments and behaviors. (It was obvious that Megyn Kelley absolutely loathed him.)
Rubio: Seemed poised and well-mannered, and treated kindly by the moderators. But I still see him as too soft in dealing with illegal aliens.
Huckabee: Pretty good for the most part. The FAIR tax is something which, however imperfect, would be an enormous improvement on our current system.
Carson: Not very polished or rehearsed - he'd probably make a better V.P. or Cabinet official than POTUS right now.
Walker: Nice guy on stage, but kind of hard to see him as President. Got attacked for his WI record.
Kasich: Lied - again! - about balancing the Federal budget. (National debt increased every year the budget was "balanced" . . . you just can't have a "balanced budget" let alone a surplus when you finish the year deeper in the hole than you started. And . . . didn't he vote for the Clinton AWB?)