Open thread: The highest, lowest debate expectations evah; Video added: Rudy vs. Romney

posted at 3:35 pm on October 9, 2007 by Allahpundit

4 p.m. ET on CNBC, the elephant in the room finally speaks up. Why they decided to hold an event as momentous as this in the middle of the day, I have no idea. It’ll re-air tonight at 9 on MSNBC but highlights will be all over the web by then, I’m sure. If you’re not in front of a TV but want to watch, the livestream is being carried at CNBC.com.

The question of the hour: Are expectations for Fred sky high or knee high? I figured he’d need a star turn to rehabilitate himself with disappointed Republicans but the CW I’m seeing today is that if he doesn’t bore the audience into a stupor it’ll be considered a moral victory. Which is another way of saying that an unusually strong performance could turn the race on its head and an unusually weak one could sink his candidacy, which is why he’ll probably proceed cautiously to protect his second-place position and go for broke at a later debate if he has to.

While we wait, here’s Howard Kurtz theorizing that Rudy’s rudeness (i.e. pugnaciousness) is a major draw for Republicans, which is silly given that he’s gone out of his way not to show that side of himself during the campaign thus far. If he’s nominated and faces Hillary, you’ll see it in spades. Although I’m not sure it’ll matter — check out the trend in this Angus Reid poll. What was it Bill Kristol was saying yesterday about electability?

He’s still got a fairly healthy lead over Fred, though, whose own trends aren’t encouraging. We’ll see how that looks tomorrow. At least one important number is about to change dramatically — or is it? Mitt’s been in every debate thus far but judging from those figures the public must think he’s part of the set.

As always, sound off below if you’re watching and e-mail us if you see something that deserves to be clipped. An unlikely but possible subplot to watch out for: the candidates smacking Chris Matthews for his comments about Republican “criminals” last week and Matthews, eager to prove his alleged independence, smacking back. Even money says that if anyone does it, it’s Huckabee.

Update: The Rudy/Mitt feud bubbles up over the line-item veto, culminating in a clever applause line for Giuliani. I think he’s right about the LIV.

Link: sevenload.com


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 9

Bartlett named Huckabee the hick. I would have thought that goes to Fred…

Entelechy on October 9, 2007 at 3:40 PM

Does scheduling the debate immediately after the “Closing Bell” send a subliminal message?

d1carter on October 9, 2007 at 3:41 PM

Not playing expectations games. Fred just needed to show up because he has been a mostly blank slate so far.

A good thing to have us hear what he stands for and taking questions

Still would prefer him coming here to debate than some stage somewhere in TV land

BTW I will conssider jumping on the bandwagon of any candidate that slaps down the liberal media or Ron Paul in the debate tonight

William Amos on October 9, 2007 at 3:41 PM

Gotta love Fred…. Gotta love him

msipes on October 9, 2007 at 3:42 PM

From Fred08.com:

Fred is in Michigan for his first debate this afternoon. Watch the debate–not what the pundits say. Fred will look Presidential and be substantive. He will make the case that he is prepared to be President. He will also make the case that he is an authentic conservative with small-town values.

We’ll see.

jaime on October 9, 2007 at 3:43 PM

Still would prefer him coming here to debate than some stage somewhere in TV land

William Amos on October 9, 2007 at 3:41 PM

I hereby volunteer to help “moderate” that debate (actually, Fred Dooley from Real Debate Wisconsin would be a better choice)

steveegg on October 9, 2007 at 3:45 PM

He’s still got a fairly healthy lead over Fred, though, whose own trends aren’t encouraging

National trends via composite of polls

http://www.pollster.com/AUSTopReps.png

William Amos on October 9, 2007 at 3:49 PM

I sure hope Fred! gives us a ‘Reagan Moment’ in this debate.

AHHHH – they are promoting a post-debate analysis with the ober-monster! Jeez, I wonder what olby will have to say about Fred!…

Timothy S. Carlson on October 9, 2007 at 3:50 PM

All I know is that I am looking for one of these men to show they have some real balls, unlike the gimp that is in the White House right now.

americaslaststand on October 9, 2007 at 3:51 PM

National trends via composite of polls

William Amos on October 9, 2007 at 3:49 PM

Dunno how many times the true pros and talented amateurs have told me to not listen to the national trends, but it sunk in.

steveegg on October 9, 2007 at 3:52 PM

Well its certain who has the highest expectations. From the CNBC site

Who do you think will win next Tuesday night’s debate? * 5870 responses

Rudy Giuliani 1.5%
Fred Thompson 4%
John McCain 0.3%
Mike Huckabee 21%
Mitt Romney 2.1%
Ron Paul 71%
Tom Tancredo 0.3%
Sam Brownback 0.5%

William Amos on October 9, 2007 at 3:52 PM

I’m taking the two hours in the middle of the day to watch it. I’m quite curious how Fred is going to do in his baptism by fire. I think he needs to do well to recruit votes, but as long as he doesn’t look a maroon probably won’t lose any of his current support.

Spirit of 1776 on October 9, 2007 at 3:52 PM

We are talking about internet polls, which the Paul-nuts have figured out how to spam.

steveegg on October 9, 2007 at 3:53 PM

Maybe it’s on in the middle of the days so that few people watch it and the MSM can create the first impression and crown the winner/loser.

JiangxiDad on October 9, 2007 at 3:53 PM

I’m comin to ya on a dusty road
I’ll be debatin ‘em with a red pickup truck load
And when I debate ‘um you’ll really see something
So dont worry cause I’m Fred and I am coming

Im Fred man
Im Fred man
Im Fred man
Im Fred man

I got what I got the old fashion way
And I’ll take it to that RINO Rudy in each and every way
So voters dont you fret
Cause you aint seen me knockin Sanctuary City Rudy yet

Im Fred man
Im Fred man
Play it Jeri!
Im Fred man
Im Fred man

Listen
I’m all wrapped up in the things America needs
I learned how to be an American almost before I could eat
I come from American heartland stock
When I become President things will really rock

Im Fred man
Im Fred man
Take that Rudy!
Im Fred man
Im Fred man

I’ll grab your rope and I’ll pull you in
Give you hope and be Americas best friend
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah

Im Fred man
Im Fred man
Youre a Fred man!
Im Fred man
Im Fred man

MB4 on October 9, 2007 at 3:55 PM

The question of the hour: Are expectations for Fred sky high or knee high?

Beware of limbo dancers?

Attila (Pillage Idiot) on October 9, 2007 at 3:56 PM

My expectations for Fred!? are moderate. I have seen him absolutely dominate Senate hearings when he chose to do so. My HOPES are higher than my expectations though.

I hope that after this debate, everyone (other than csdeven, of course) will be forced to drop the ? and write FRED!!!!! from now on.

The only thing I’d like better, is for Duncan Hunter to kick everyones butts so badly that they offer him the nomination and put the full resources of the GOP at his disposal by tomorrow morning.

LegendHasIt on October 9, 2007 at 3:56 PM

Well, so far I’ve determined Fred is tall!

Spirit of 1776 on October 9, 2007 at 3:56 PM

I would love to see Huckabee smack down Two-First-Names once again.

As for Fred, I have no idea what to expect.

I will be keeping count of the number of times Giuliani brings up 9/11 before answering, if the CNBC feed will stay alive.

MadisonConservative on October 9, 2007 at 3:57 PM

Because people are still at work or commuting. Also…if they wanted the public to be informed it would be on broadcast. There daytime ratings wouldn’t suffer.

Limerick on October 9, 2007 at 3:58 PM

I don’t understand how it is possible in the whole NBC stable we have to have Matthews do this for CNBC. Why not Kramer? lol

Spirit of 1776 on October 9, 2007 at 3:59 PM

I don’t understand how it is possible in the whole NBC stable we have to have Matthews do this for CNBC. Why not Kramer? lol

Spirit of 1776 on October 9, 2007 at 3:59 PM

To atleast give one MSNBC comemtator some ratings that arent in the gutter ?

William Amos on October 9, 2007 at 4:01 PM

According to the pundits, Fred either has to:

a) Knock it out of the park OR
b) Just show up and not drool on himself

Stupid pundits. Correct answer:

c) It’s an MSNBC pseudo-debate with the potential to move polling numbers a couple of points, and then only temporarily.

Hollowpoint on October 9, 2007 at 4:01 PM

No reason? Sub-primes are of no concern. Well that’s good to know.

Spirit of 1776 on October 9, 2007 at 4:03 PM

From the angusreid article…

Bush is ineligible for a third term in office.

I laughed…

gekkobear on October 9, 2007 at 4:03 PM

Why not Kramer? lol

Spirit of 1776 on October 9, 2007 at 3:59 PM

That moron was on Crissy’s show last night. He adamantly believes that the silly Saturday Night Live parody cartoon has so much influence that it’ll sink Thompson.

Yes, really. He went on at length about it, repeatedly.

Hollowpoint on October 9, 2007 at 4:04 PM

Is anyone looking at the feed? The link above does not have the debate.

Theworldisnotenough on October 9, 2007 at 4:04 PM

Can someone point me to a live audiofeed?

Hoodlumman on October 9, 2007 at 4:04 PM

Okay, who is the female moderator? She’s HOT. A pleasant respite from Matthews.

MadisonConservative on October 9, 2007 at 4:05 PM

He adamantly believes that the silly Saturday Night Live parody cartoon has so much influence that it’ll sink Thompson.

Ha. That’s funny.

Spirit of 1776 on October 9, 2007 at 4:05 PM

Can someone point me to a live audiofeed?

Hoodlumman on October 9, 2007 at 4:04 PM

cnbc.com

Look for a login at bugmenot.com

Go to CNBC Plus for the feed.

MadisonConservative on October 9, 2007 at 4:06 PM

Theworldisnotenough on October 9, 2007 at 4:04 PM

top and center under top news and analysis, just click the >>live now orange bar and will pop up the stream

Spirit of 1776 on October 9, 2007 at 4:06 PM

Well, first question he gave the right answer, but kind of stumbled a few times. Also, not quite forceful enough, and he should have brought up that the reason that 2/3 of Americans think we are in a recession is because Hillary, Obama and Edwards keep saying that we are, and the liberal media keeps carrying their water.

LegendHasIt on October 9, 2007 at 4:06 PM

Can be watched here

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3096434/

William Amos on October 9, 2007 at 4:07 PM

Why do people think Ron Paul is a libertarian?

DaveS on October 9, 2007 at 4:08 PM

Torre?…….Matthews shut up.

Limerick on October 9, 2007 at 4:08 PM

Fiat money!

Drink!

Drew on October 9, 2007 at 4:09 PM

Damn someone put a time limit on paul

William Amos on October 9, 2007 at 4:09 PM

Hello, Ron Paul…economics are not a zero sum game….

doriangrey on October 9, 2007 at 4:09 PM

I can honestly say I have no idea how Fred will do. The video from the other day showed a great debate, yet MKH and others have said he can put people to sleep, and he had to ask for applause the other day.

amerpundit on October 9, 2007 at 4:10 PM

Bartiromo knocking the wealth-creators is sweet, indeed.

Entelechy on October 9, 2007 at 4:10 PM

I will be very interested to hear Fred! speak, the few times/soundbites I’ve heard from him have been somewhat disappointing. We don’t need a Reagan(pbuh :), we need an Arthur Branch: no-nonsense, stand up for what’s right and pound the stupid!

Califemme on October 9, 2007 at 4:10 PM

“Why do people think Ron Paul is a libertarian?”
DaveS on October 9, 2007 at 4:08 PM

As opposed to what; a nutcase?

LegendHasIt on October 9, 2007 at 4:10 PM

Is anyone looking at the feed? The link above does not have the debate.

Theworldisnotenough on October 9, 2007 at 4:04 PM

Go here…http://www.cnbc.com/id/15839285 use the live feed link on that page…..

doriangrey on October 9, 2007 at 4:11 PM

Two-First-Names is doing great! He managed to reference the war and the military-industrial complex in his first statement! He gets bonus points if he somehow links the economy to how space aliens, Bushitler, and the NeoConservative EEEEEEVILs destroyed the World Trade Center.

MadisonConservative on October 9, 2007 at 4:11 PM

Ha. That’s funny.

Spirit of 1776 on October 9, 2007 at 4:05 PM

I couldn’t believe anyone could be that stupid- does anyone even watch SNL anymore? Even Chrissy was a bit skeptical, but Mr. Mad Money would not be moved.

Hollowpoint on October 9, 2007 at 4:11 PM

amerpundit on October 9, 2007 at 4:10 PM

My prediction: good enough, but not great. Same for everybody.

Big S on October 9, 2007 at 4:12 PM

I couldn’t believe anyone could be that stupid- does anyone even watch SNL anymore? Even Chrissy was a bit skeptical, but Mr. Mad Money would not be moved.

Yeah, he was way out of his element. People who watch SNL probably the block of lower percentage voters anyway.

Spirit of 1776 on October 9, 2007 at 4:13 PM

What are the drinking rules for this debate?

You should at least drink a shot whenever Rudy mentions 9/11.

And – chug the bottle when Fred! tells Matthews to shut-the-hell-up…

Timothy S. Carlson on October 9, 2007 at 4:14 PM

I like Hunter.

Spirit of 1776 on October 9, 2007 at 4:15 PM

Is anyone looking at the feed?

This will launch the feed in Windows Media Player instead of inside the browser.

synycalwon on October 9, 2007 at 4:16 PM

Hunter is “tellin it true”!

LegendHasIt on October 9, 2007 at 4:16 PM

I like turtles.

Bad Candy on October 9, 2007 at 4:16 PM

First attack on Fred………???

doriangrey on October 9, 2007 at 4:16 PM

What are the drinking rules for this debate?

You should at least drink a shot whenever Rudy mentions 9/11.
Timothy S. Carlson on October 9, 2007 at 4:14 PM

Only a sip when Rudy mentions NYC though- otherwise you’ll be in the hospital getting your stomach pumped in the first 10 minutes.

Hollowpoint on October 9, 2007 at 4:16 PM

Dictionary definition:

“Political debate” – See “worthless.”

“Worthless” – See “political debate.”

OhEssYouCowboys on October 9, 2007 at 4:16 PM

No clapping! You heard the lady.

Big S on October 9, 2007 at 4:17 PM

Hmm. Who’s the female moderator?

amerpundit on October 9, 2007 at 4:17 PM

What are the drinking rules for this debate?

You should at least drink a shot whenever Rudy mentions 9/11.

And – chug the bottle when Fred! tells Matthews to shut-the-hell-up…

Timothy S. Carlson on October 9, 2007 at 4:14 PM

I dont have enough beer for that game………. :(

doriangrey on October 9, 2007 at 4:17 PM

Accursed Firefox on Fedora 6…vid ain’t workin’

Tell me when they play the biscuit game

Ochlan on October 9, 2007 at 4:17 PM

Sorry, Fred’s right on trade, protectionism would be a disaster. I like Hunter, but he’s dead wrong on trade issues.

Bad Candy on October 9, 2007 at 4:17 PM

Uh – when is the start time for this?

So far – I’ve only seen a Progressive (heh) commercial, and a
report of some guy who found missile parts in the trunk of a
car.

Timothy S. Carlson on October 9, 2007 at 4:18 PM

Anyone have a link to the live feed that isn’t from msnbc.com? They don’t like me. I can’t watch it :(

Thanks.

Weebork on October 9, 2007 at 4:18 PM

The anchor chick I believe is Maria Bartiromo, unless there’s another one I’m missing.

Bad Candy on October 9, 2007 at 4:19 PM

I don’t like Brownback but good for him for being ready for Bartaroma’s gotcha type, which program would you cut question.

Drew on October 9, 2007 at 4:19 PM

Protectionism isn’t the issue. Free trade is great.

Spirit of 1776 on October 9, 2007 at 4:19 PM

the msnbc/cnbc stream only works from Internet Explorer

zane on October 9, 2007 at 4:19 PM

Why does Tancredo talk to the candidates more than the audience?

amerpundit on October 9, 2007 at 4:20 PM

Bad Candy on October 9, 2007 at 4:19 PM

That’s correct. And remember, no applause.

Big S on October 9, 2007 at 4:20 PM

Stupid pundits. Correct answer:

c) It’s an MSNBC pseudo-debate with the potential to move polling numbers a couple of points, and then only temporarily.

Hollowpoint on October 9, 2007 at 4:01 PM

From a viewership standpoing, MSNBC is basically a cable-access channel. The Republican Party is throwing them a huge bone with this debate. Stupid idea.

Seriously, would it have killed Thompson to miss one more of these worthless dog-and-pony shows? …If you’re going to do a cattle call, at least wait for prime time on one of the big four networks.

Sure, all the self-proclaimed pundits would hate his guts even more than they already do for ignoring an event that only they care about, but who gives a rat’s ass? They’re like movie critics; they create the illusion of their own power, but once the show starts they know full well that only the public’s opinion will matter.

logis on October 9, 2007 at 4:20 PM

zane on October 9, 2007 at 4:19 PM

I’ve got it working in Firefox.

amerpundit on October 9, 2007 at 4:20 PM

I wish Tancredo would shut up, go back to his railcar diner and fry some oysters

Ochlan on October 9, 2007 at 4:21 PM

Can’t watch from where I’m at. The question I’d like to hear Brownback, Tanc, Ron Paul, and Hunter be asked: “What the hell are you still doing here?”

No offense to the Hunter and Tanc supporters, but they’re done. And sorry to both of Brownback’s supporters if they read Hotair. And RP supporters? Don’t forget to take your meds.

Hollowpoint on October 9, 2007 at 4:21 PM

Bad Candy on October 9, 2007 at 4:17 PM

Oh, I missed that on protectionism angle somehow.
Guess I’d be wiser to just watch instead of typing and reading comments until after.

The rest sounded good though.

LegendHasIt on October 9, 2007 at 4:21 PM

Drink up……….Rudy’s talking NYC again…….

doriangrey on October 9, 2007 at 4:21 PM

doriangrey on October 9, 2007 at 4:21 PM

And Mitt’s talking about what he did in Mass.

amerpundit on October 9, 2007 at 4:22 PM

Taxes, spending, taxes, spending…it’s like watching ass cheese ferment

Ochlan on October 9, 2007 at 4:22 PM

That’s correct. And remember, no applause.

Big S on October 9, 2007 at 4:20 PM

Oh, jeeze… sorry! *puts hands in pocket*

Bad Candy on October 9, 2007 at 4:23 PM

Guiliani: Line item veto is unconstitutional?????

Say what???

LegendHasIt on October 9, 2007 at 4:23 PM

fight behind the bike shed at 16:27…Mitt & Rudy

Ochlan on October 9, 2007 at 4:23 PM

neener-neener ……. move on Mitt and Rudy

Limerick on October 9, 2007 at 4:23 PM

Doh…………Rudy attacks Romney..Romney responds with Mayor, thats Baloney…

doriangrey on October 9, 2007 at 4:24 PM

LegendHasIt on October 9, 2007 at 4:23 PM

That’s what the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1998.

amerpundit on October 9, 2007 at 4:24 PM

attack and counter attack!

zane on October 9, 2007 at 4:24 PM

That’s what the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1998.

amerpundit on October 9, 2007 at 4:24 PM

And the new Supreme Court ?

William Amos on October 9, 2007 at 4:25 PM

Rudy just pwned Romney.

DaveS on October 9, 2007 at 4:25 PM

Rudy’s in top form.

Entelechy on October 9, 2007 at 4:25 PM

Give me some Fred!

omnipotent on October 9, 2007 at 4:25 PM

Seriously, would it have killed Thompson to miss one more of these worthless dog-and-pony shows? …If you’re going to do a cattle call, at least wait for prime time on one of the big four networks.
logis on October 9, 2007 at 4:20 PM

Probably, yeah it would’ve been bad. He’s already caught enough flak for missing the debate when he announced, and the pundits do have some influence.

Huckabee could at least make a reasonable case for staying in, but the rest should do what’s right for the party and the nomination process and gracefully bow out. Either that or following debates should institute a rule that only those candidates who break 5% in the polls will be invited. The field is WAY too crowded.

Hollowpoint on October 9, 2007 at 4:25 PM

Best debate so far, by far.

Big S on October 9, 2007 at 4:25 PM

Rudy is looking spry today!

Spirit of 1776 on October 9, 2007 at 4:25 PM

Rudy’s right… it’s really hard to imagine any line item veto that would be constitutional.

DaveS on October 9, 2007 at 4:25 PM

William Amos on October 9, 2007 at 4:25 PM

Hasn’t ruled. Regardless of how a news Supreme Court would rule, what remains is how it was last ruled: unconstitutional.

amerpundit on October 9, 2007 at 4:26 PM

Why don’t they just cut to the chase and have a debate between the candidates and the media on the relative values of Capitalism versus Socialism?

Drew on October 9, 2007 at 4:27 PM

There you BC, that’s the issue. We have to cause the markets to be open on both sides.

Spirit of 1776 on October 9, 2007 at 4:27 PM

I gotta admit, I like Fred’s answers when it comes to Economics…

StoutRepublican on October 9, 2007 at 4:27 PM

amerpundit on October 9, 2007 at 4:24 PM

Dang, I gotta start paying more attention.

Was it decided that it was plain old unconstitutional in general, or just the way it was set up at that time?

LegendHasIt on October 9, 2007 at 4:27 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 9