Others will need to offer detailed dissections, since I have an early morning tomorrow:
- I think Huckabee won. Front-runners Giuliani and Romney at various times came off as childish, hardcore politicians, or as dancing around uncomfortable questions. Thompson, Hunter, and Tancredo didn’t strike me as being particularly memorable. Ron Paul gets credit for sounding not too much like a nut, and doing carrying the banner for his netroots; those ranks may expand a little, but I doubt that he gained support with Joe Average Mainstream Republican.
At least Huckabee held true to being likeable, and on the surface seeming fairly straight-talking. Although he didn’t do much to dispel my reservations about him…I do like the guy.
- I had hoped that this debate would redeem the concept of the YouTube debate. I’ll give CNN credit for doing a better job in question selection (no snowmen, and the silliness was kept to a minimum), and I do like how using citizen-submitted questions seemed to cover a broader range of topics than we’ve seen in other debate formats. However, the overall effect seemed spoiled by the crowd. (I’d be interested in hearing if there’s a back story there.)
- Giuliani gets credit for being the only GOPer that really got the idea of a YouTube-style campaign ad. The others were all just regular ads…save the strategic attack ad from Thompson.
1 response so far ↓
1 Gary Danelishen // 28 Nov 2007 at 11:52 pm
Please consider contributing on the 16th of December.
Ron Paul needs the publicity of another big fund raising day.
I’m a veteran of the U.S. Air Force active duty (4yrs) and I currently serve as a traditional guardsman in the Air National Guard. All military personnel upon enlistment take the oath: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic…” A vote for Rep. Paul does just that. Ron Paul has my support.
There is an obvious media bias and it is sad. Rep. Paul is the one candidate of the crowd who has substantially differing views and he was not given much of a chance to articulate those views. Much time was given to marginal issues and small differences between other candidates’ positions on the issues. I suspect many special interest groups have much to lose if a President Paul had a chance to use his veto pen. This is reflected in the lack of time given to Rep. Paul.