Video: Best/Worst from the South Carolina debate
posted at 10:55 am on January 11, 2008 by Bryan
Send to a Friend |
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
It’s another Luntz clip. Takeaways include the fact that any of the candidates can score well with the right rhetoric. You see Thompson and Huckabee both score highly for their answers. You also see just how poorly most Republicans think of Ron Paul’s nonsensical, nearly insane answer on Iran. He scored off the charts in the negative, Mr. Derbyshire, because he obviously hadn’t been listening to the other candidates and because he leaped to blaming the US rather than understand the threat that even small craft can pose to our large warships after the attack on the USS Cole. Real terrorism and real attacks on the US just don’t enter into Paul’s calculus. It’s always the US plotting something nefarious as far as he’s concerned, which incidentally is one more piece of evidence that he had more of a hand in those newsletters than he’s letting on. They’re consistent with the paranoid thinking he exhibits now.
At the end, I find it heartening that several of the focus group folks see right through the Democrats’ “change” crapola. It is empty nonsense. These South Carolinians aren’t buying any of it.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
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
But wait…Ron Paul won the “text vote” last night! *sigh*
I still predict a win for Thompson in South Carolina…but I still don’t know if, as Luntz pointed out, that those who didn’t support Thompson going into the debate…but then thought he did win the debate…if they changed their minds, and NOW support Thompson.
That, and how many South Carolinians (?) watched it last night? Meh…either way, it’s a must-win, or place, for Fred.
JetBoy on January 11, 2008 at 11:04 AM
I find these Luntz focus group presentations interesting, but often times, disappointing. It seems most people in the groups aren’t focusing on the issues, but on esoteric “feelings” about candidates.
Having said that, I did find the comments on “change” encouraging. The comments shown in the clip above tell me that they do “get it” when it comes to these generic slogans. I especially liked the comment about conservative need to stop apologizing about being conservative.
Nineball on January 11, 2008 at 11:07 AM
Romney? No soundbites?
I assume with his resources, he’s in it until the end.
But he may be toast.
Your Jewish Master on January 11, 2008 at 11:08 AM
Hey! Alan Colmes is using BKennedy’s talking points!
MadisonConservative on January 11, 2008 at 11:10 AM
Once again it looks like Huckabee had the best night. He is too smooth on his feet and the jabs thrown by Fred were only glancing blows. Fred did fine but not enough to move the chains and time is getting very short.
sweeper on January 11, 2008 at 11:11 AM
I like the way Beaker had to remind us all at the end that nobody’s actually voting for Thompson. They’re all so afraid of him.
World B. Free on January 11, 2008 at 11:13 AM
Nah, Ron Paul had no hand in writing those newletters.
Nah…
Why is it that he is constantly whining. Every time I hear him, he is whining in that stupid squeaky voice.
To the first change babe…I like what you’re talking about.
benrand on January 11, 2008 at 11:13 AM
Which ones were those, MC?
Fred proved he can beatdown on a phony demagogue last night.
Which is cool and all, and its nice that he showed up awake for once, but it doesn’t seem to have won him much.
BKennedy on January 11, 2008 at 11:13 AM
I watched that last night and was disappointed in how many of the people spoke of Fred getting into the race ‘too late’. Hey, he was in before the first caucus and primary, wasn’t he? And SCarolina is getting ready to vote. What’s ‘too late’ about that? You just walk into the booth and execute the vote for Thompson and then, all of a sudden, it’s not ‘too late’. Sheesh.
Does Luntz administer IQ tests before he picks these people?
pistolero on January 11, 2008 at 11:15 AM
From Iran with love: Paul: US seeking excuse to bomb Iran
bnelson44 on January 11, 2008 at 11:16 AM
Hey buddy! :)
So how about that Mitt skipping SC thing? ;)
MadisonConservative on January 11, 2008 at 11:16 AM
Mitt made a mistake. Paul isn’t taking his point from Iranian press releases…he WRITES the Iranian press releases. He just doesn’t write racist newsletters. Yeah, that’s the ticket!
MadisonConservative on January 11, 2008 at 11:17 AM
“Change means one thing to me: It means for a Republican to become a conservative.”
“The one thing I want to see change is conservatives apologizing for being conservative.”
OORAH!
benjamin on January 11, 2008 at 11:17 AM
How do you figure? Fred called it. Huckabooboo is a liberal and Reagan conservatism is not dead. Plus, how many times can he recycle the same old boring zinger lines? He sounds like an old guy repeating the same stories over and over and over. That taking flak over the target thing is so, um, Iowa caucus.
pistolero on January 11, 2008 at 11:19 AM
General Question:
Has anyone else noticed a downturn in the quality of reporting on “The Drudge Report“?
If Huckabee wins the nomination it will be a clear loss for the republicans…and he is the guy with the headline over there today.
Again and again, it seems that Matt (or whomever is running that site now) is working for the other side.
Any opinions?
Dorvillian on January 11, 2008 at 11:19 AM
Those two guys absolutely nailed it. Bravo you two, whoever you are - and I hope there’s many more like them.
thirteen28 on January 11, 2008 at 11:21 AM
I noticed it over a year ago when every other story and headline involved either Paris Hilton or Britney Spears.
MadisonConservative on January 11, 2008 at 11:21 AM
I think you’re right about most voters wanting a feel-good instead of a know-good. That’s what is so dangerous with candidates… hmm I don’t know, shedding tears and making statements like “no women is an illegal”.. It’s sad but true..
whiskeytango on January 11, 2008 at 11:23 AM
He is so good on his feet and he instantly connects to his target audience. It is difficult to watch debate without preconceived notions. But from a non political junkie viewpoint, Huckabee said exactly what he needed to say.
sweeper on January 11, 2008 at 11:23 AM
I’m not trying to defend Paul here because I was disappointed in the other candidates for being such wusses by saying we shouldn’t have done anything for fear of what everyone would ‘think’ about us. I appreciate them deferring to the Commander’s judgment. but with McCain and his ‘I can’t believe we torture people’ stance, I wonder if they would have been as forgiving if the Commanders had sunk those boats. I’d have blown all of them out of the water to send a message.
What Paul would have said is that our ships shouldn’t have been there in the first place to be in this danger. It is a point that is valid whether you agree or not.
ThackerAgency on January 11, 2008 at 11:24 AM
And he stole it from McCain to boot. He isn’t even using his own zingers anymore.
BKennedy on January 11, 2008 at 11:27 AM
I watched that last night and was disappointed in how many of the people spoke of Fred getting into the race ‘too late’. Hey, he was in before the first caucus and primary,
They simply parrot what the hear in the MSM and on sites, like, well, HotAir.com
Ten years from now, if a candidate doesn’t get into the POTUS race 3 years in advance of an election, the same critics, commentators, compilers and pollsters will claim it is too late. After all, covering and commenting on POTUS races is fast becoming big business.
Montana on January 11, 2008 at 11:28 AM
It’s a valid point only in a fairy land where the spineless Euroweenies aren’t exploiting America as the world’s only international police force. Cause hey, I’d certainly love to pull America out of everywhere and let Europe take back control of their own damn continent and surrounding areas again, but you know that’s never going to happen. They’re too busy sleeping under a cradle to grave welfare state protected by a security blanket known as the United States Military.
BKennedy on January 11, 2008 at 11:31 AM
The Huck quote as a Headliner for the debate is curious. However, it took your comment to actually go to that site since I have long since lost interest as The Drudge Report is so not interesting. Besides, it was more of a link site to me than an opinion site.
geckomon on January 11, 2008 at 11:32 AM
Really? I watched it and I can’t even remember what he said. Something about him being a foot soldier in the Reagan Revolution, I think. Well, Benedict Arnold was a loyal soldier during the American Revolution at first, but evolved into a traitor over time. I’m not saying that he’s Benedict Arnold, but people can change over time.
Besides it’s not so much what he says, it’s what he’s done that matters to me. I was just happy that somebody finally called a spade a spade. Huck is a liberal who oozes liberalism out of every orifice of his body. He speaks liberal platitudes, governs like a liberal and characterizes Reagan conservatism as old school, no longer relevant.
pistolero on January 11, 2008 at 11:33 AM
Mitt denied it from the horse’s mouth on his post-debate interview with H&C earlier.
BKennedy on January 11, 2008 at 11:34 AM
The difference between Benedict Arnold and Mike Huckabee is that Benedict Arnold served his country dilligently, competently, and effectively before he turned traitor whereas Huckabee has always been a seedy religious demagoging turncoat.
BKennedy on January 11, 2008 at 11:35 AM
He addressed that by talking about all the great improvements that occurred in Arkansa while he was supreme leader. And he did it effectively while playing on the “I make government work better to help the downtrodden” theme. Unfortunately this is the theme that same to excite the rank and file.
sweeper on January 11, 2008 at 11:37 AM
Further, how many more times is McCain gonna use the “Miss Congeniality” bit?
He also repeats the same, I believe, three things he accomplished or wants to be recognized for: The killing of some “tanker” funding, supporting the surge before there was a surge, and “Jack Abramoff is not my BFF.” Is that all he did his 20+ years in Washington? (He fails to mention the campaign finance bill, or am I mistaken?)
geckomon on January 11, 2008 at 11:38 AM
I am from SC and watched the debates last night. I thought Fred was great, and plan on voting for him. I didn’t exactly agree with the “too late” comments either. It is getting late in the game for Fred to come on strong, but it is never too late to vote for him.
SCGOPgirl on January 11, 2008 at 11:39 AM
And what was that about calling him the Sheriff?
sweeper on January 11, 2008 at 11:40 AM
Would you asupporter before the debate, or did he change your mind last night?
Just curious.
sweeper on January 11, 2008 at 11:41 AM
That’s “were you”
sweeper on January 11, 2008 at 11:41 AM
Heh. Politico is nothing if not consistent.
MadisonConservative on January 11, 2008 at 11:42 AM
No, I supported Fred before the debate.
SCGOPgirl on January 11, 2008 at 11:45 AM
Although I was comtemplating if Fred is still polling third, voting for McCain to prevent a Huckabee win. That would have been a very last minute decision.
SCGOPgirl on January 11, 2008 at 11:46 AM
I can live with McCain- hate his immigration position, but definetly do not want Huckabee.
SCGOPgirl on January 11, 2008 at 11:48 AM
Gregor on January 11, 2008 at 3:12 AM had this observation which I don’t understand how this was not picked up or featured –
At first you would think he misspoke. I’m not sure what his point was, cuz I only inferred he has already failed in his own state.
geckomon on January 11, 2008 at 11:50 AM
You know I used to believe that Ron Paul really didnt believe that 9/11 was an inside job. After last night, Im not so sure. On the national stage he proclaimed the Bush administration was “Disappointed” about the NIE and they are looking for a Gulf of Tonkin. If he is spouting conspiracies in a national debate, he must be a 9/11 truther.
broker1 on January 11, 2008 at 12:01 PM
fred has reached his stride (and not a moment too soon).
jimmer on January 11, 2008 at 12:09 PM
These were likely Republican primary voters. We pay these people to see through crapola. It’s heartening to know they stay bought.
km on January 11, 2008 at 12:17 PM
I have to say, after last night I think I’m turning into a Fred convert…
JohnTant on January 11, 2008 at 12:19 PM
Both were obviously pandering for votes, lets just hope that them pandering for votes doesn’t cost someone their life by having this used in Jihadi Propaganda against us..
Not sure, the connection that fred was making, are ALL Muslim’s now Jihadi’s?
It’s a nice Pander for a vote, thats about all.
Chakra Hammer on January 11, 2008 at 12:30 PM
OT (but funny)-A Hooters a few blocks from the Myrtle Beach Convention Center had “Hey Hillary, Bill’s in here” on their sign. I’m wondering if they will leave it up for the Dem debate on 1/21.
KelliD on January 11, 2008 at 12:30 PM
Not Very Presidential.
Chakra Hammer on January 11, 2008 at 12:40 PM
They should have two lines: people who understand Huck’s record, and people who vote without informing themselves. Would have had different results.
joewm315 on January 11, 2008 at 12:57 PM
What it shows is that Southern voters are much more saavy than New England or Iowa voters.
heh
William Amos on January 11, 2008 at 1:27 PM
There are a couple of issues here. One, by delaying his entry, the good organizational campaign people are already working for other candidates, so your pool of experienced people to draw on is much smaller. Second, your fundraising machine is starting off at a disadvantage. Third, name recognition is hurt, though not so much for Fred since he is a well-known actor.
Lastly, and most importantly in my mind, is the impression that he is in this only half-heartedly. If Fred had been in from the start I would be a strong supporter of his because I like his message and his style is okay too. Because of his late start I am less inclined to support him.
Snidely Whiplash on January 11, 2008 at 1:39 PM
Yeah! It really blows my mind that in Iowa, those people just run from group to group, depending on who’s ahead at the moment! Sheez, base your decision on facts and stick to your candidate for goodness sake!
kcd on January 11, 2008 at 1:46 PM
On the other extremes we have Clinton and Edwards, who have ALWAYS wanted to be president and have scripted their entire adult lives to that end. I still believe Fred when he says that he accepted the call to duty after surveying the Republican field and seeing no conservatives in the race. Especially during these consequential times. If it took him a while to finally decide and finally roll out a campaign, so be it. He’s in now and I’m on the bandwagon.
pistolero on January 11, 2008 at 1:52 PM
I totally agree. I feel like Fred is really in the race for the right reasons, because he cares about this country and where it’s going. People like Hillary Clinton salivate at the thought of being President so they can finally start the Socialist revolution in this country. This is why I’m SO turned off by Democrats. All they want to do is take more power from the people and put more in the hands of the government. That’s it. They aren’t running to actually support people and give people more freedom, they’re running to start all their social programs and implement their ideas and tell us how to lives our lives, because they know better than us. And I mean, anyone who looks at Hillary’s career can see the Presidency has always, always been her goal. She is trying her damndest to get in that White House, and she’ll do anything to get there - stay with a lying, cheating husband because he’s well-liked and influential, and immediately run for Senate in New York of all states (because of their “strong tradition of welcoming people from all parts of the world”….riiiiight) or because if she has the support of a huge state like New York behind her, that fits right in for her plan to become the Socialist Savior of America. Scary.
mattyj86 on January 11, 2008 at 2:50 PM
Why is it that we conservatives are told by the elites that the conservative candidates aren’t going to win while the elites fawn over the liberal ones like the Huckster and McPain? TWO STATES have voted and they are telling us its over! C’mon!
sabbott on January 11, 2008 at 3:13 PM
I have some optimistic news for you! You are able to modify your first impressions! It’s allowed! It’s called informed decision.
One, He was in it from the start, he just chose to start at a time he wanted to. Most importantly before any primary had begun.
Two, he is full heartedly into it, he wouldn’t be running if he didn’t want to run. He has said it time and time again. I implore you to not write off a candidate for the reasons you have described, it’s time to get past that.
Compare his platform to your platform desires. Compare his record to a record you desire. Make your decision from that, not because some pundit or anchorman say otherwise.
I just can’t fathom why people are stuck on the “late start” myth.
If you still can’t support him after reviewing his platform and record, at least you were able to go beyond your initial prejudicial justifications for losing hope in Fred.
geckomon on January 11, 2008 at 3:16 PM
There is also the fact that he doesn’t seem to be working very hard at running. I’m also worried about his health. He smokes too much and he’s constantly clearing his throat. He doesn’t look healthy. Otherwise, I would agree that he’s a good man and I’d certainly be fine with him winning — I’d support him in the general election. But, I’m not going to vote for him in the primary.
Wise Golden on January 11, 2008 at 4:47 PM
My personal live chart spikes whenever I eat a bowl of fresh chocolate pudding.
Doesn’t mean that later I’m going to remember to vote for chocolate pudding as my favorite thing.
I think this kind of live surveying only encourages ADDmerica.
bobby04040 on January 11, 2008 at 4:52 PM
two things:
1) These focus groups seemed stacked with voters for one candidate everytime. I beleive they say they are not sure who they would vote for just to get in these groups and sway the outcome.
2) Ron Paul is CLUELESS on foreign policy. Get him off the stage. I am not wasting my time on the tin foil hat brigade.
jdsmith0021 on January 11, 2008 at 8:56 PM