09-05 Fox News Debate Thread

[angus]

anybody watching?  the exchange that just occurred between my two favorite candidates, Ron Paul and Mike Huckabee, was one of the simplest debates about Iraq I've ever heard.  And, it was one of the few moments during any of the "debates" in either party worth of the name.  Good stuff, that exchange.  Real debate.

[angus]

I had to get a drink and missed who was speaking...

story of my life.

I don't know.  I never know who "won" and so I wouldn't be a good guest on one of those instant-analysis, short-attention-span shows which always follow both parties' debates.  I think Duncan Hunter wins the Most Partisan award.  And I think that some distinctions are starting to come into focus.  I noticed the same phenomenon evolve with the most recent Democrat debate:  there's the occasional attack-the-other-party line, but mostly they draw distinctions between themselves.  Romney is nearly, but not quite, in a position in which he has to actually outline his position on US military involvement in Iraq.  Irrelevant for me, because he lost my vote some time ago, but for his own aspirations it's good that he's being forced to take a position.  I will say that FOX news seemed to favor McCain, and panned and cast in such a way as to optimize his presence and his comments.  I've noticed this sort of thing before, both in Democrat and Republican debates, but the pro-McCain bias of FOX was particularly hard to ignore tonight.  Ultimately, I think we all come away more convinced that the guys we liked are more worth liking, and the guys we don't like just remind us why we don't like them.  (By we, I mean us junkies following the show, and not the great unwashed masses not yet paying attention.)  I'd have a hard time believing that this particular debate changed anyone's mind about any particular candidate.  I still like Paul, and I still don't like Giuliani. 

[angus]

HOW THE HECK DID PAUL WIN THE FOX POLL!!!!!

I'd rather ask, HOW THE HECK CAN ANY AMERICAN, DEMOCRAT OR REPUBLICAN, PICK ANY OTHER CANDIDATE OVER RON PAUL.

of course, I'd usually ask in lower case letters.  and I'd probably punctuate it with a question mark rather than several exclamation points. 

[angus]

Yes, they roared.  They may even have been teary-eyed.  I nearly was.  Huckabee's an honorable man, and as much as he disagrees, for example, with the scorched earth John McCain, he has the decency to recognize McCain's service.  "Not losing our honor" was a great line.  And Huckabee's a great candidate, and for the life of me I can't understand why he isn't doing better.  He seems to have all the right tag lines to win over not only the traditionalists, like yourself, but also the centrists and unaffiliated and weak republicans, as for example me.  In fact, as much as I disagree with Huckabee, I come off every debate feeling warmer and fuzzier about him, as I have posted here before.  He's, along with Ron Paul, one of the few Republicans who'd probably win my vote.  You guys really ought to nominate carefully.

[angus]

And at what point will Ron Paul supporters realize that text message polls are a poor indicator of election performance?

I don't think there are many who don't realize that, especially among Ron Paul supporters, who tend generally to be very well educated and thoughtful.  It may be obvious that Sean Hannity doesn't realize that they're a poor indicator, but he doesn't strike me as a Ron Paul supporter in the first place.  So your comments are a bit misdirected.

I'm excited that Ron Paul features prominently in nearly every post though.  Delighted, even, because I have been pushing his candidacy on this forum for a long time.  But I have no illusions about his success in the primaries.  No one has mentioned that he's in New Hampshire.  If the same debate had occurred at, say, Texas A&M university or Brigham Young Uniersity instead of UNH, I'm not sure that there'd have been so much applause for Ron Paul.  Not that he'd have said anything different, but that the audience would have had a different mindset.  And the different audience would, with our without Chaos Theory, have resulted in a different vibe and a different perception of who "won" the debate.  Remember, New Hampshire primaries will be counterbalanced by caucuses in Iowa, Wyoming, and Nevada, and primaries in South Carolina, all closely spaced.  So even if he pulls of a plurality in NH he will probably end up with fewer delegates than, say, Rudy Giuliani or Mitt Romney after those five contests.  The resulting distribution of delegates will be known by the night of February 2, in time to influence donors and voters in the huge supermegatuesday on February 5 when something like 20 states have primaries.

[angus]

When is the next debate -- Republican or Democrat on any of the major networks (Fox, CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS)?  Is it September 17.  If so, what channel is it on?

Apparently the YouTube debate originally scheduled for September 17 was postponed due to general lack of interest on the part of the candidates (Romney was going to be in Iowa milking a pig and Giuliani had a previously scheduled event with the Mafia.  Or something like that.)  I think that YouTube thing will happen in November. 

According to WaPo there's a Values Voters debate on September 17, but it's only going to be on some channel that about five people get.  Apparently PBS is doing one on September 24. 

Here's the latest schedule I could find for Republicans:

http://leadusforward.wordpress.com/2007/06/08/debate-schedule/

And this is from the DNC:

http://www.democrats.org/a/2007/05/dnc_announces_d_2.php