Sunday night roundtable: The Fox News/GOP debate
Update 1/7 9:09am Eastern. Questions about one of those focus group members.
9:35pm Eastern. Wow. Interesting. Frank Luntz’s focus group was just asked about Romney. Only a few raised their hands to say they supported him before the debate. Almost all raised their hands to say they were supporting him afterward. Look:
Loud agreement among focus group members that Huckabee came across as slick and evasive. I’m telling ya: Shuckabee. The New Hampshirites also agreed that while Fred was good on policy, he didn’t set them on fire. “I just want to shake and wake him up,” one guy said. That’s a regular citizen saying that, ok? Not the Evil Conspiratorial Media.
Last observation: McCain was wearing fangs for the ABC News debate. He left them on the nightstand for tonight’s debate. Must have been difficult not to snarl, though.
9:26pm Eastern. Wallace asks McCain the age question. Wallace: Would you pledge for running for only four years? McCain: No. I’ve got the vigor. It’s exhilirating. I’m excited. I’m older than dirt, more scars than Frankenstein.
Huckabee: I’ve met McCain’s mother. She’s got more vigor. (Crosstalk with McCain.) Wallace breaks up the lovefest.
Told you we wouldn’t get through this without Huck slobbering on McCain.
Bleeeech.
Candidates now giving closing statements. Recycling their talking points. Yawn. Maybe I shoulda had that Red Bull after all. McCain’s last–and I swear he sounds sick and tired of hearing himself. He heaved a big sigh as he launched into his stump mini-speech. SIIIIIGGHHHH. Weird.
Hot Air has vid of some of the livelier moments up here.
9:24pm Eastern. Wallace to Rudy: “Do you have too much baggage to lead the Republican party?” Rudy laughs nervously.
The answer is: Yes, he has too much baggage.
9:15pm Eastern. Back after another short commercial break. Wallace turns to the negative campaign ads. McCain: “I’m running a positive campaign…Everybody runs their own campaign.” Huckabee talks about his negative-positive-flip-flop decision. “I think the people of Iowa rewarded me…looking for a positive, vertical president.”
Who has nasty Ed Rollins running his campaign.
Romney makes distinction between issue ads that scrutinize records and ads that attack character. Romney jokes about Rollins’ threat. Huck: “Chuck Norris is standing outside.” Romney addresses flip-flop charges. “I’m certainly not the only person who has ever changed their mind on an issue.”
8:58pm Eastern. Finally, we move to immigration after everyone has recited their lifetime travel itineraries and CVs. McCain: “I have never, ever supported amnesty and never will.” (It depends on the meaning of “never.”) Wallace is letting him filibuster with his “I will secure the borders” pie-in-the-sky talk. Recycles his Geraldo Rivera line about not wanting to call up a soldier and telling him that he’s deporting his mother.
Romney: We are a compassionate and humane people, but we are also a people who believe in the rule of law. Amnesty in any form–technically or de facto–just doesn’t work. It just attracts more people to do the same thing past people have done. McCain quotes Romney from 2005 saying McCain’s plan was “reasonable” and not amnesty. Wallace turns to Huckabee over DREAM Act endorsement compared to his new, tough on enforcement plan. He reiterates his support for DREAM Act. Romney asks: What about the children in school? Huckabee doesn’t want to respond to Romney. Huck seems rattled. He’ll only talk to Wallace. Wallace says he was going to ask Romney’s question. Instead of asking about conferring special benefit via DREAM Act, Wallace lets him reframe and stick to talking about what he says is his legal obligation as governor to educate illegal aliens. Amnesty rhetoric is “pure nonsense,” says Huck. His is, sure.
Refresher on their immigration/border security records is at Numbers USA.
Giuliani whines about how “complicated” and “difficult” immigration enforcement is. He’s allowed to filibuster on building a fence, introducing tamper-proof ID without addressing what exactly he’d do with the 12 million already here.
This discussion gets a D minus. All platitudes, few reality-based, policy specifics.
How about:
- Should the government continue to provide funding to cities that adopt sanctuary policies or not?
- Should illegal alien ID cards issued by foreign consulates continue to be acceptable in the face of strong opposition from homeland security and law enforcement experts?
- Do the candidates support or oppose the expansion of the federal employer verification system being challenged by the ACLU?
- Would they support increased funding for the 287(g) immigration enforcement training program?
- Are they for or against the DREAM Act?
- Would they repeal Clinton’s Executive Order 13166 – yes or no?
8:51pm Eastern. Wallace brings up McCain’s attack on Rudy for not visiting Iraq. Rudy: “I am the only one here who has had to face an Islamic terrorist attack, at the center of it.” In case you didn’t know about that. He also brings up his return of the Saudi prince’s money again, which he mentioned during the ABC debate last night. In case you didn’t know about that. Thompson gets his turn to recite his curriculum vitae…and then turns to challenge Huck on closing down Gitmo and challenges Romney on Ted Kennedy’s attendance at his health care signing ceremony. Time’s running out and he wanted to cram it all in, I guess. McCain crams in all his endorsements from retired admirals, generals, and secretaries of state.
8:41pm Eastern. Back from a short commercial break. Wallace raises a McCain attack ad on Romney re. national security. Romney answers challenge to his lack of Washington experience, debate between governors vs. senators. Talks about leadership traits–calm under fire, temperament, executive leadership, etc. McCain responds that we haven’t always gotten the best outcomes with governors ascending to White House (Clinton). McCain: I know Musharraf…I’ll leave it to American people to decide whether that’s important. McCain defends his attack on Romney in which he said Romney was looking at his shoes during war; criticizes Romney for not criticizing Rumsfeld. Romney responds: He was running a state. Mentions he did go to Iraq. “I wasn’t looking at my shoes, I was running a state…There have been great governors, Ronald Reagan being one of them. It does not take a US senator to become president of the US.”
Wallace turns his sights on Huckabee–cites all of his foreign policy shortcomings, ignorance of NIE, Pakistani martial law. Huckabee interrupts. OUCH. Huck’s not liking it. Huck cites all the countries he’s been to, executive experience, chairman of Natl Governors Association. Wallace: But what about your pattern of not knowing things or getting things wrong? Huck: Not a pattern. Maybe a slip of the tongue. But not a slip of morals.
8:30pm Eastern. Changechangechange alert. Wallace wants to go back to change. McCain declares that he’s proud to be an Agent of Change. McCain cites change in Iraq tactics, surge. I have been an Agent of Change in Washington. I know how the system works. Agent of Change. Agent of Change. I think we need a t-shirt. Romney: Washington is fundamentally broken. Can’t have someone inside Washington turn Washington inside out. Sending the same people to Washington, but in different chairs, isn’t going to change. Romney talks about executive leadership skill. Fred and Rudy are giggling that Romney is describing Rudy, not himself.
Wallace throws it to McCain. McCain says he has leadership–in military, not management. “Not for profit, but for patriotism.” Ouch. No matter how you feel about McCain, it’s an effective response. Fred gets a chance to make a bland statement about change. Rudy’s statement about change attacks the Democrats. Good call. Rudy: Change is a slogan. The question is: Is it change for good or change for bad?
***8:23pm.*** Romney challenges Huckabee’s class-warfare demagoguery: “You’re not going to help the wage-earner in America by attacking the wage-payer in America.” Very strong, clear defense of free enterprise. Good moment for Romney.
Wallace asks Giuliani about consumption tax, fair tax. He answers with his stump speech about workfare in NYC. He’s dragging on. Wallace should really move on…and he does. Skips to Fred to ask about consumption tax. Giuliani is not a factor in this roundtable.
8:14pm Eastern. Well, Huckabee lost that exchange with Mitt, who quips that the Arkansas governor “makes up facts faster than you can speak.” Should have just answered the question, Gov. Shuckabee. Wallace moves to Giuliani. He reels off his record, cites George Will’s endorsement. Thompson talks Social Security reform. Romney doesn’t want to cut benefits. McCain praises Bush for attempting SocSec reform. Wallace switches topics…shows a video of Huckabee pitching economic populism.
Wallace to Huck: Does Romney remind you of someone who wants to lay you off? McCain’s cackling in the background. Can’t help himself. Huckabee channels John Edwards.
8:02pm Eastern. Here we go. No lengthy intros, no opening statements, no photo-ops. Chris Wallace jumps right in. You can watch the livestream at FoxNews.com. The first question is on tax cuts. Romney jumps right in with a defense of his tax/fees record in Mass. and launches into a challenge to McCain on his opposition to the Bush tax cuts. McCain calls himself a Reagan foot soldier, emphasizes cuts in spending. Wallace is pushing McCain on his opposition to tax cuts. McCain repeats spending cut talking points, mentions the Bridge to Nowhere, pork barrel spending, line item veto. Romney pushes back on tax cuts.
For those of you playing the Change Drinking Game, we have our first mention of “change.” Romney: “Change has to begin with us.” McCain touts his spending cut successes. “I have a record of saving billions for the American taxpayer.” Wallace turns to Huckabee and his tax-raising record. “Does Mitt Romney have a point?” Huckabee challenges the “semantics of taxes versus fees….I’ve cut taxes 94 times.” Brags about Taxpayer Bill of Rights.
It is true that Governor Huckabee fought for an $80 million tax cut package in 1997 that was passed by the Arkansas legislature (Cato Policy Analysis No. 315, 09/03/98); cut the state capital gains tax in 1999 (The Commercial Appeal 02/29/99); and passed the Property Taxpayers’ Bill of Rights in the same year, limiting the increase in property taxes to 10% a year for individuals and 5% per taxing unit (AP 03/16/99). However, his record over the rest of his ten-year tenure tells a starkly different story.
* Immediately upon taking office, Governor Huckabee signed a sales tax hike in 1996 to fund the Games and Fishing Commission and the Department of Parks and Tourism (Cato Policy Analysis No. 315, 09/03/98).
* He supported an internet sales tax in 2001 (Americans for Tax Reform 01/07/07).
* He publicly opposed the repeal of a sales tax on groceries and medicine in 2002 (Arkansas News Bureau 08/30/02).
* He signed bills raising taxes on gasoline (1999), cigarettes (2003) (Americans for Tax Reform 01/07/07), and a $5.25 per day bed-tax on private nursing home patients in 2001 (Arkansas New Bureau 03/01/01).
* He proposed another sales take hike in 2002 to fund education improvements (Arkansas News Bureau 12/05/02).
* He opposed a congressional measure to ban internet taxes in 2003 (Arkansas News Bureau 11/21/03).
* In 2004, he allowed a 17% sales tax increase to become law (The Gurdon Times 03/02/04).By the end of his ten-year tenure, Governor Huckabee was responsible for a 37% higher sales tax in Arkansas, 16% higher motor fuel taxes, and 103% higher cigarette taxes according to Americans for Tax Reform (01/07/07), garnering a lifetime grade of D from the free-market Cato Institute. While he is on record supporting making the Bush tax cuts permanent, he joined Democrats in criticizing the Republican Party for tilting its tax policies “toward the people at the top end of the economic scale” (Washington Examiner 09/13/06), even though objective evidence demonstrates that the Bush tax cuts have actually shifted the tax burden to higher income taxpayers.
Finally, Governor Huckabee opposed further tax cuts at a 2005 gathering of Iowa conservatives (AP 09/17/05). On January 28, 2007, Governor Huckabee refused to pledge not to raise taxes if elected President, first on Meet the Press and then at the National Review Conservative Summit. The evidence suggests that his commitment to protecting taxpayers evidenced in his early gubernatorial years may be a thing of the past.
Huckabee and Romney engage over their state tax records. Net-net, did you raise taxes in your state by half a billion dollars? Huckabee refuses to answer. Huckabee complains about Mitt’s campaign ads. Four times, Romney asks. Huckabee won’t answer. Finally mentions a court order…
***
Another GOP presidential debate kicks off at 8pm Eastern tonight on Fox News. Will Rudy continue to be a non-entity? Can Fred turn amiable performances into real momentum? Can Romney defend himself with more zeal without pulling a McCain and looking churlish? Can Huckabee appear in a forum with McCain without leaving slobber all over the floor?
I’ll liveblog again (seems to me there will be enough fireworks to eliminate the need for Red Bull) and Hot Air will have all the video highlights/lowlights. Chris Wallace is hosting–and you can be sure he won’t do the schoolmarm routine. Charles Gibson earned some praise for his hosting duties during yesterday’s debates. But I found him to be, well, unctuous, at times–and I agree with the observation that he tended to tamp down heated disagreement just when things were getting good. Gibson’s superficial knowledge of the immigration issue left him completely unequipped to challenge John McCain’s slippery rhetoric on shamnesty; he also failed at several moments to follow up on the candidates’ sweeping claims (like Giuliani’s 12 commitments).
I’d like to see some tough follow-ups to some of the candidates’ doozies last night (Huckabee’s mischaracterization of his position on the surge, for example, and John McCain’s pharmaceutical company-bashing). What do you think Wallace should ask? He already had a dress rehearsal with Huckabee this morning on Fox News Sunday:
WALLACE: In last night’s debate, you said that you supported President Bush’s troop surge when he announced it in January of last year. But let’s take a look at what you actually did say in January, and this is when Mitt Romney had already said that he approved the surge.
You said, “Well, I’m not sure that I support the troop surge, if that surge has to come from our Guard and Reserve troops, which have already been overly stretched.”
Governor, you were not the supporter of the troop surge that you represented yourself as last night.
HUCKABEE: Well, I supported the surge. I questioned the use of our Guard and Reserve in repeated deployments because as a governor, I’d seen what that had done to our own Guard troop.
About 90 percent of our Guard have been deployed now to Iraq, and some repeated deployments, long periods of time, three out of five years. These are citizen soldiers. These are people who certainly are willing to go. I’ve never heard any of them complain.
But it’s a real incredible, I think, challenge for not only the soldier but, more importantly, for their families, their employers and their communities.
And what we’ve done with Guard and Reserve forces has got to be changed. It’s one of the things that I would do as a president.
And my point was and remains that if we’re going to have the kind of war we’re going to have, we’ve got to have more troops at the beginning.
WALLACE: Governor, I’m not saying you’re right or wrong. I’m simply saying that you misrepresented yourself last night when you said you approved the troop surge. In fact, days later you said you weren’t sure you supported the troop surge.
The fact is the Guard and the Reserve have been part of the troop surge.
HUCKABEE: They have been a part of it. And my point was and remains that we need regular Army. We’ve got to beef it up. The surge is working.
I think one of the things we’ve seen is it’s been a dramatic success, and hats off to General Petraeus, and I’m grateful that he’s been in that position.
Stay tuned.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- Suitably Flip
- No Runny Eggs » Blog Archive » Fox’s turn with the Pubbies - Live Thread
- Riehl World View
- Betsy's Page
- » New Hampshire Debate II: Affirmations Hennessy’s View: the conservative prescription
- Keith Burgess-Jackson » Politics
- The Sanity Blog
- Hot Air » Blog Archive » Videos: Mitt and Mike go a couple of rounds Update: Fred’s speech on immigration added
- Stop The ACLU
- Stop The ACLU
- Fox News Roundtable Live Blogging (Lots and Lots of Updates) : The Sundries Shack
- PrestoPundit » Blog Archive » Romney Closes The Deal
- The Unalienable Right » New Hampshire debates
- Macsmind
- Macsmind
- Liberty Pundit
- "What do you do with a candidate like Huckabee?" Pt. 2 [Karl]
- Dave Lucas' Notes
- Michelle Malkin » A focus group campaign plant or a professional undecided voter?
- Captain's Quarters
- politicalpartypoop.com » Blog Archive » Focus group campaign crap - Fraud and Deception
- Mark My Words
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: 2008 campaign, GOP
Legal Insurrection
» Calling For Sparkman Apologies
Power Line
» More From the East Anglia ArchivesRiehl World View
» Update2: No Cancer?? Suicide! Staged As Homicide - Live Stream Of Sparkman News ConferenceAmerican Thinker
» The Wilding of Sarah PalinFounding Bloggers
» Did The New York Times Just Tell Glenn Reynolds To “STFU”?Radio Equalizer
» Media Matters Admits Rush Didn't Make Key Racist RemarksHot Air
» 3rd quarter GDP 2.8%, not 3.5%Mudville Gazette
» Leakiest administration ever?
The reason Mitt attacks everyone else’s record is that he is running from his own record as fast as he can.
He talks about everyone else’s record and about his plans for the future, but not about his record in Mass.
I can’t blame him. Anyone would be ashamed to have his record.
Yesterday, I noted that the Carolina Silk Merchant was channeling Slick. When I have McCain off screen, he seems to be doing an imitation of Reagan with that halting chuckle.
Rudy’s out…..McCain is out…..
I like Fred but he could never energize enough people to vote him over obama. Mitt has it all together. Showed it tonight.
Irish,
ain’t that sumpin…kinda like when the MSM supports a politician.
As a Republican, I am not feelind dispirited. I think a Thompson/Romney ticket could defeat any Dem (who would still be defining their favorite word, you guessed it: change.
“Older than dirt, more scars than Frankenstein…” -Sen. McCain
I think we will see that in a campaign commercial in the future.
So inspiring.
Are the going to walk back and forth over the border with buckets of water with holes in them?
Lindsay, I pray we’re right on!
I’m afraid that the illegals from OK are deporting themselves to TX. I don’t know
where the ones from Arizona are going. I do know the bracero program worked
because my father talked about working braceros and he liked the program. I
suppose that I am hardhearted but when they are deported, if the families don’t
want to be broken up, they can all go.
Mitt said “America” more than he said “change”…how is that possible?
Gayle, keep praying. Lindsay, you’re on to something, kiddo. Fred and Mitt should consider a combining of forces.
The last president elected with charm and energy was, er, Clinton. I’d rather have someone like Thompson. I don’t need energy, I need leadership.
Mookie … believe it or not they return to Mexico through the border checkpoints with no problem … it happens every Christmas period in every border state … we don’t stop them with their Mexico ID from returning to Mexico … then after the holidays they sneak back across the border …
Emptying the country without securing the border. Sieve. Analogy.
Bigurn, I stated the same thing earlier!
Scroll back!
Mitt and Fred win it.
OK – who are winners, and who are the losers?
Yes, Thompson and Romney are the only two folks in this debate who have their stuff together.
They’re also the only two folks on that stage who act as if serving as President is a sacred duty for them and not merely the final stop on an ego trip. (As opposed to McCain in particular, and to a lesser extent Huckabee.)
Prediction:
The early favorites will falter and Fred will be the last man standing.
Wow – they don’t care for fred. Love Mitt.
Romney looking a winner to NH undecideds???
Focus group doesn’t like Fred. They love Mitt. Are they wrong because I think they are in disagreement with the readers of this site.
1) Fred
2) Mitt
3) McCain
4) Huck
5) Rudy
That wasn’t good feedback on Fred by this focus group.
Wha a bunch of dolts … griping about not talking about health care? … I don’t recall any questions about health care … did I miss them?
Mitt will pick Fred as his VP, I hope!
It seems to me that McCain and Huckabee have had some backroom talks about teaming up as running mates.
How Fox’s in-house group of Repub primary voters can call Fred Thompson the weakest candidate in the race is just beyond me. I’d say that was Huckabee.
Or is the fact that they may be more familiar with and used to Romney just skewing their reaction toward Romney and away from Fred?
And Romney is the clear debate winner once again! Go Mitt!!!
Did those folks see the same debate i did.
Thompson is on point, precise and upfront…what are they saying…”he rambled”?
Desert, Fred didn’t get the airtime the others received.
That should account for their reaction, although not a fair assessment of him.
#1 – Fred (by a hair)
#2 – Mitt
#3 – Rudy
#4 – Huck
#5 – McCain
Dear Dark Knight :Yes, we are all either stoopid or more of a sample of how the country may be thinking. In case you did not notice, Romney is high on our list,too.
Fred didn’t expect to do well in NH and the focus group proved him right. I’m not worried. Fred’s strengths lie elsewhere.
Ditto, Bigurn
This site is predisposed to like
Fred – myself included – but Mitt took it away. The BIG story is that Huck and McCain failed so miserably – they were terrible.
gayle
I agree … seemed like it was all Romney and McCain talking … followed by Huck … then Rudy … Fred got very little opportunity to talk …
Oh, I know. I was just talking about Doug’s Danaides suggestion. One of punishments for for the Danaides was that they had to wash off their sins but the buckets of water always had a leak.
I think you need to fully secure the border first, including the damn fence and putting the National Guard along the border. Then deport the two million illegals that are in our prisons. Then start the corporate crackdown. But I’ve pretty much given up hope that the problem will ever be solved because American businesses don’t want it solved and they’re the ones that control the purse strings.
I’ve never given to any political campaign before, and I’m not exactly flush right now, but I am seriously considering donating (even though it will be a very small amount) to Fred Thompson. I don’t recall any healthcare questions, either. I really hope he can pick up some momentum.
My guess is Ron Paul won the debate!
(as many of you know, I am a Ron Paul supporter, but you have to like the humor!)
Fed Up
Fed Up … you are joined by a number of Hunter and Tancredo supporters here as well … so don’t feel like the Lone Ranger there …
Perhaps Hunter and Tancredo can be in the Cabinet? Tancredo as Homeland Security director? Hunter as Secretary of State?
I’m hoping that Fred can pick up steam once NH is over and done with.
Meanwhile, here’s hoping that Huck’s true colors start showing.
There’s a reason why the candidates are all going after each other but none are going after Rudy at this point, who, being the closest thing to a national frontrunner in the polls, should be the natural lightning rod: he has a record of getting things done – manifestly, tangibly, things you can see and understand as actual – which surpasses the rest of that crowd rolled together, and no one wants to give him more time to spell those things out and diminish them, because his record does diminish them.
Talk is cheap for politicians, but expensive for us if we get conned. I disagree with Rudy on a couple of fundemental issues (and to prove it I’ll tell what they are: abortion and 50% of where he stands on immigration – he has it half right by insisting on thowing out the lawbreakers immediately and making a multi-system boarder protection arrangement), but unlike any of the others, at least I know where he stands and what he can do in terms of manifest accomplishment, which is more than you can really say substantially about the others.
I won’t argue these points – it seems to me that they must become self-evident in the long run.
Michelle said
Is it permitted to respectfully disagree with the host? I define baggage politically as being in great part much windage with little manifest, tangible accomplishment to back it up. In that respect Rudy has without question the least baggage of them all. I’m tired of all the damn talk which changes as the wind blows: he did an amazing job with a crumbling city and the 3rd largest economy in the nation – much larger than the others presideed over. He isn’t perfect but we know he can handle terrible situations and a crisis which none of the others have actually proved – that’ll be good for a change and I for one wouldn’t give that up for what I admit are admirable ideals – ideals as represented by other candidates without gurantees in a dangerous world.
Mort Kondracke just sounded like he was repeating the Dem talking points regarding Huck on the economy … sating that was the reason Huck won in Iowa … not the evangelical vote … I have to question that stand on the economy …
I’m behind you guys because I recorded this but Huckabee is far too liberal for me.
He even sites the NYT who wrote something in favor of him? Doh! They’re libs Huck! They want you to win because they think they can cream you.
Even without John Edwards, the GOP has been doing a good job proving the old adage about more style than substance. I keep hoping that, as we narrow the field a bit, it will be more about the issues. I have yet to be impressed. Still, there was no schoolmarm, and it was fun to read about the fireworks. Being in China for the next two weeks, I’m having to *read* about most of them. The only news stations we’re getting here are CNN and CNBC. (Anyone surprised by this?)
Speaking of — thanks for liveblogging this, Michelle. Your sacrifice is much appreciated, at least from this corner of the universe. Where do you want the case of Red Bull delivered? It’s going to be a long 10 months… =)
I don’t think Fred did as well as the last debate (I liked Charlie Gibson better as moderator) and he wasn’t given as much airtime. Seems it was the Mitt vs. Huck party.
BUT I still think Fred’s answers were strong and to the point (especially about Mexico and immigration) and he gives people a lot to think about.
I still can’t stand Mitt Romney because he comes across as the slick politician.
I think McCain did good on Iraq and Nat’l security, but so miserable on immigration which floors me since he is from out here in Arizona and knows how much we HATE illiegal immigration.
I am STILL a BIG Fred supporter and I think that focus group was either going for Mitt or McCain no matter who else was there. I cringe when I think of what Hugh Hewitt’s site is going to be like in the morning: “Mitt Romney Wins New Hamphsire and the Presidency!! Everything Else is Just for Show!!!”
He’s so pathetic.
Go Fred!!!!!!
Me:
Absolutely didn’t mean you, Michelle or anyone here – I meant the candidates, just to be clear.
My sentiments exactly. I can’t give much, but I really want him to keep going. This guy’s worth giving to.
I agree Michelle as host.
Fred reminds me of the story of the old bull and the young bull standing at the top of the hill looking down on the herd of cows below. The young bull says to the old bull ‘Lets run down there spend a little time with the ladies.’ The old bull responds ‘Lets walk down there and spend a lot of time with the ladies.’
To me Fred is the majestic old bull on top of the hill. All the rest are various flavors of the young bull.
This was an excellent debate, which is what happens when the fringe kiddies exit the stage (voluntarily or kicking and screaming).
The adults had a discussion, and it was an intelligent one. Huckabee lost, and looked petulant.
The other four…it was a four way tie. There was no clear winner to me.
Respectfully,
eric aka the Tygrrrr Express
Brett needs to ask Mort “which state are you in? ” what’s the date?”
“Are you ok, Mort?”
Last night, I posted something I wrote to an old high school teacher of mine, in response to an email from him on his views about the current presidential contest: What I like (and don’t like) about the Republican candidates, and what I don’t like about the Dems.
Huckabee and Obama are singing the same song…McCain’s coming across as just a bitter OLD guy…Fred is smart but semi-comatose…and Rudy, bless his heart, is just waiting to get to another state. Mitt won the night.
Michelle and Allahputz joined the NR and Hewitt Romney cheer leading cadre long ago, they have become the esteemed “more insightful class” complete with pom-poms.
So much for objectivenesses.
But who are the fools? Consider that there are more of us conservatives who are not in the tank for Romney than there who are.
et
nice rework of that old joke …
I have tried to visualize what these candidates would be like if there was another 9/11 type attack …
Here’s what I would expect to see …
Mitt and Huck would fall apart …
McCain would take forever putting together a response …
Rudy would go off half-cocked …
Fred would respond in a measured and forceful manner befitting the President of the United Ststes … then would simply turn the military loose to go kick some terrorist butt …
IMHO …
After tonight’s roundtable, this is all I have to say:
Romney-Thompson 2008!!!
Desert Lover…based on your own comments, Rudy’s response seems fine to me.
Scorched Earth…sounds good.
Respectfully,
eric aka the Tygrrrr Express
After tonights debate I feel like I was being broad cast from the Bunny Ranch, ( Ron was busy) … I need a shower how disgusting. Do they truly think we are that stupid? On a lighter side I would like to wish everyone a very Merry Little Christsmas ( The Feast of the Epiphany)! Now one chrous of We Three Kings. We three kings of orient are, bearing gifts we traverse afar field and fountain… No light shining bright tonight. I just want someone with a pair, a Very Big Pair.
blacktygrrrr
No problem … I just want to make sure we go after the responsible group of terrorists …
I’m leaning towards Fred Thompson and will probably vote for him when the PA primaries come around.
Thanks Michelle for live blogging these events. It’s a big help to me and I appreciate your good efforts.
Desert Lover, and Ron Paul would stop printing money.
Hillary and Obama would send diplomats.
Edwards would cry and condition his hair.
The New Hampshire contest has never been about nominating a true social and economic conservative. So, the contest is between McCain, Huck, and Romney.
Given that, the Frank Luntz “study” doesn’t provide anything but an echo chamber. The telemarketing survey folks rank right up there with tax collectors and ambulance chasers.
They do provide one service however. They provide reinforcement to those inflicted with cognitive dissonance who glum onto their “scientific research study” in order to bolster their preconceptions.
I ment it was be ing broad cast from the Bunny Ranch..
Lindsay
LOL … one minor correction though … I think Paul would take DK up on that free ride on his UFO … beam ‘em up Scotty …
Desert…we’re good…and I like Fred as well.
Rudy is objectionable to some on social issues, but on terrorism he would be fine.
Respectfully,
eric
Jarhead
If it was from the Bunny Ranch it would have to be a BROAD-cast …
Michelle and all—thanks! This was fun!
I agree, jarhead. Strong standards and values, and Big Brass Ones to back them up. I would vote for that, even if I don’t agree with everything they say.
Once Again MM,Thank You, your the best!
And I don’t care what Whorealdo says…or slobbers out of that sick mouth of his.
blacktygrrrr
I hear ya … I just want someone with the guts to continue standing up for this country against the America hating Islamofascists … and the Dems will not do that for sure … verdict is still out on some of the GOP’ers …
Eric, I agree re: Rudy.
I hope to vote for someone who is strong on terrorism and who can defeat Obama as I think Hillary is done.
Hannity and Colmes are interviewing Huckabee and his wife. I look at her and see Madeline Albright.
What is Fox News’s deal with Fred, not to sound like sour grapes, and I am a Fred fan, but I thought they really gave him a raw deal, both in the inital post-commentary, and the ‘tracker’ crap. Let’s see how the numbers went when he said ‘Mexico’s biggest export is their people.’
I read Fred Barnes every week when the Standard shows up, now I’m considering not having either.
Artbyruth, I don’t remember what site I read it on, but there was an article
about Arizona that said (and don’t yell at me, because I didn’t write it) that
people in Arizona apparently weren’t all that upset about illegals because
there had only been a handful of calls turning in employers that hire illegals.
I think that when push comes to shove, illegal immigration is going to be
one of if not the defining issue in the election after the nominations.
If not Hunter, Fred is the only one I trust on immigration.
Laura, with all due respect, as of right now at least… it’s the voters of New Hampshire whose opinion matters. New Hampshire can provide a much-needed boost to whoever wins the state. The focus group opinion matters.
I think that when you put the two debates together, you get a pretty clear picture of how the candidates behave on the whole. ABC even put on their company manners for the republicans, and I liked that they were able to flesh things out without that carbunkle, Mr. Paul, flinging his crazy around. I liked that Thompson was given time on social security, but was pissed when Wallace kept interupting him. S.S. reform scares the willies out of everyone, and to have him gumming-up what Fred was trying to convey did not help. As for Thompson’s lack of animation, it seemed he was sitting back and enjoying the fray. His chances of New Hampshire are slim to none; so aside of weakening Romney, New Hampshire is a loss. Conviction and Animation are seldom the same things. It seems the more you have of one the less you need the other- logically speaking.
Dean, Fred Barnes is a White House echo. He wanted amnesty.
TXRose
Don’t know where you read that but on Friday it was pointed out that Sheriff Joe had already received over 2500 calls regarding illegal hirings …
Lindsay/Desert,
For those galvanized by abortion, illegal immigration and other red meat social issues, yes, the field can be troublesome.
As for the war on terror, and taxes, Rudy, McCain, Fred, and Mitt are all fine men. Any one of them would be fabulous.
Respectfully,
eric
I’m still a bit piqued…..after watching the focus group though, on HotAir, I realize why I thank God I live in Missouri.
Oh, and NEVER count out Hillary. She is married to the Bill Bellichick of politics. Until the stake is driven through the heart, I maintain Hillary will be the demagoguic nominee.
I have said before that when her minions are dome with Obama (she will disavow her own surrogates who will fall on their swords), people will believe he molests puppies and kittens.
eric
I’m in Texas. I like what AZ and OK are doing. If the illegals just go to another state instead of going back to Mexico, the people of those other states will start demanding the same thing that AZ and OK have done. If enough states pass those laws, more and more WILL go back to Mexico instead of going elsewhere within the US.
I’m hoping for Thompson to win the nomination,of course….but what Fred did tonight…and is in the process of doing…is making himself the one indispensable man that the GOP must have on the ticket to win this year.
Miss Ladybug
B I N G O ! ! !
Unfortunately with so many hispanics and illegals already in TX and more coming in
from OK, I don’t look for TX government to do anything about illegals because they
would be too afraid of losing votes, and not being reelected. For sure, while we have
Perry in the mansion, and yes, I do know that the governor doesn’t have that much
power in TX, I don’t look for him to push anything in that direction. When he was
running for reelection, it was, we’ll stop the illegals from taxing our state services.
As soon as he was reelected, we heard that they DON’T tax our state services, our
schools or our health care systems. We heard that the state had plenty of money to
pay for anything illegals and their children use but at the same time, I’m hearing about
how impoverished the state is when it comes to paying for things.
Well, those are the issues that galvanize conservative voters. If you spend more time around us I think you will come to appreciate and even approve of that fact.
Because there is no Republican party without them.
Strictly speaking, nobody is likely to win the state. Its delegates will be divided between the top finishers.
Rudy is objectionable on a whole lot more than “social issues”, and there is no reason to think he would be good on terrorism.
Haven’t begun to make up my mind yet, however will offer my opinion….
1. Mitt – Seems presidential but I just can’t embrace him, I think he has some liberal blood running in his veins.
2. Fred – Like him, the best Statesman of the bunch but question his will to win. On his debating style, I believe the reason he’s not getting more facetime is that he is a gentleman. Tends to speak when addressed, doesn’t butt in when others are talking.
3. Huck – One Arkansas governor was too much. A passing fancy, will fade.
4. Rudy – On terrorism and national security, love him. On alot of other stuff including “baggage”, don’t like him. Met him in person once here in NJ at his kids football game, shook hands but he just kinda blew me off when I tried to ask him a question.
5. John M – Amnesty, amnesty, amnesty and too old. Oh and did I say amnesty.
6. Rupaul – And people said Ross Perot was a kook.
7. Others – Hunter and Tancredo, love’m both. True conservatives, but no traction, unelectable. Would be great VPs or Cabinet secretaries.
Just my opinion yet I thought Romney clearly won the debate tonight.
While Thompson seemed hesitant go after McCain on immigration, he gets an honorable mention for schooling Huckabee on Guatanamo and habeas corpus.
I’ve very sure neither you nor Rudy have forgotten 9/11. Many, including me, think he would be very good against terrorism yet have doubts about him on other issues.