The discussion has turned to the U.S. relationship with China. Republicans’ opinion of China has been steadily worsening over the last six years, according to polling from YouGov/The Economist. As of their most recent survey, 91.4 percent of Republicans said China is an enemy of the United States, while just 3.7 percent said China is an ally. The last time more Republicans said that China was an ally than said it was an enemy was April 17, 2017.
-Analysis by FiveThirtyEight

Pence and Ramaswamy got into another spat, this time over Ukraine, with the vice president attacking his rival over Ramaswamy's calls to send military resources to the southern border, not Ukraine.

"Anybody that thinks that we can't solve the problems here in the United States and be the leader the free world has a pretty small view of the greatest nation on Earth," Pence said.

"I have a newsflash. The USSR does not exist anymore," Ramaswamy shot back, referring to the Soviet Union.

-ABC News' Tal Axelrod

Haley finally gets a question on foreign policy, a strong suit for the former U.N. Ambassador. She defends American support for Ukraine and ties it to the fight against China. But while the moderators teed her up to attack DeSantis, she instead pivots to Ramaswamy. She's pretty fiery in her back-and-forth with him, saying he has no foreign policy experience "and it shows."
-Analysis from Jacob Rubashkin, Inside Elections

On Russia's invasion of Ukraine, Christie referenced his recent trip to the war-torn country and said that he "wanted to see for myself what [Russian President] Vladimir Putin's army was doing to the free Ukrainian people."

"They have gouged out people's eyes, cut off their ears and shot people in the back of the head," Christie said of the brutality he saw.

"This is the Vladimir Putin who Donald Trump called 'brilliant' and a 'genius,'" he continued. "If we don't stand up against this type of autocratic killing, we will be next."

-ABC News' Meredith Deliso

In the aftermath of a debate, it can be hard to figure out the actual impact of a viral moment or heated exchange. Here are some data-driven approaches that can help cut through the noise:

First, ignore “instant polls” that ask questions only among people who watched the debate. That group is not likely to represent the feelings of the broader population. Instead, look for post-debate polls — (like ours with Ipsos and the Washington Post) — that ask questions among the same group of Americans both pre- and post-debate.

Second, in the days following the debate, look at data that captures attention to candidates, such as trends in search results or media coverage, to determine which candidate made the biggest splash. Media attention is crucial for candidates who aren’t well known to gain traction in the polls and with donors.

Finally, look for changes in horse-race polls in the week or two after the debate. There is a lot of noise in primary polls (especially this time around) and it can take some time for changes in public opinion to be reflected in our polling average.

The big thing to remember is that what’s important to journalists and television pundits may not be what’s important to the public, and we have to wait for pollsters to ask them how they feel.

-Analysis by G. Elliott Morris of FiveThirtyEight