Peter Schiff's First Political Speech (HD video, comments on opponents and race)

Jeremy

Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2007
Messages
12,580
YouTube - Peter Schiff - West Hartford - 9-26-09 PART 1 [HD]

YouTube - Peter Schiff - West Hartford - 9-26-09 PART 2 [HD]

Subscribe to my channel - http://www.youtube.com/user/LightOfLiberty

All Republican candidates for U.S. Senate spoke at The Federation of Connecticut Taxpayer Organizations. Each candidate had 20 minutes to speak. Peter Schiff went first. The audience responded well. Most people were undecided and did not support any candidate yet. My estimate is that he had the second most supporters in the audience. I think Sam Caligiuri had the most, which is good since he's not the front runner.

My temporary SD card filled up after about 17 minutes. I bought a 16 GB SD card but it broke right before Schiff's speech in Valley Forge. Soooo I will be able to get the entire speeches eventually, I am going to send it back to the company. It wasn't cheap! (HD camera -> 1GB = 17 minutes)

The audience gave a good cheer at the end of his speech, but this will still be a tough battle! Fortunately the support is very spread out, so Peter can win with help from the grassroots. I will try to go to and record as many Peter Schiff events in Connecticut as possible, so subscribe to my channel.

Peter Schiff was one of the only candidates to arrive in the beginning and leave at the end. There were a few people talking to him before it started (there was a continental breakfast). His introduction was an introduction that any supporter would give him, but pretty much every candidate got a nice intro like that. People knew from the intro that he predicted the economic collapse and is apparently well known for it. Peter's speech was entirely about the economy. People cheered him at the end. He didn't get the absolute best response of the day, but it was a good one and the older ladies sitting behind us said "finally, someone who speaks the truth" as he walked down. He did not hold back... he was dissing Bush in his speech. I'm not sure if that was a good idea, but we now know that Peter Schiff will be running as Peter Schiff.

After Peter spoke, Rob Simmons went up. Audio here: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=212165 In my opinion, his speech started out quite boring, but it was pretty good in the end. He tried to come across as the tea party candidate and a Constitution defender. He pulled out a pocket Constitution, etc. On himself he mentioned his experience in the Vietnam War and the CIA. The issues he stressed were debt and taxes. He explained how he almost ruined his political career by trying to stop the state income tax. He was really mad about the death tax as well. Simmons for Senate pamphlets were passed out by someone to each table before any speaker. Kind of inappropriate in my opinion, but that's coming from someone who definitely does not support him. His biggest asset is name recognition / connections.

John Mertens, an independent, spoke after this. He was foolish enough to talk about more taxes, forced insurance, and national healthcare at an anti-tax event. This was worse than the Hartford tea party, where he was booed by neocons for wanting to end the war on drugs. Since he is not in the primary, we don't have to worry about him.

The next speaker was Sam Caligiuri. He was definitely the best speaker. He was the only candidate to get applause during the speech, not just after. If I didn't know anything about politics or economics (in other words, if i was ignorant enough to not support Peter Schiff), I might have leaned towards supporting him after hearing him talk. This was a surprise to me because he is nowhere near frontrunner-Simmons and does not have the money Linda McMahon does. This is good news in my opinion because he will mostly take away from Simmons. He had the most organized supporters there. It's also my prediction that he had the most. There were at least two people wearing stickers for his campaign, and they had a sign. I suppose us Schiff supporters could have had that... well Schiff said they are working on it! Anyway, he got the best response from the audience because of his speaking ability. He came across as the anti-corruption candidate. I would not be surprised if he started doing better in the polls. In his speech he said they have amazing grassroots support. I laughed to myself because I know he isn't ready for the Schiff campaign! His biggest asset is his speaking ability.

Linda McMahon spoke next. Let's face it, the fact that she is a woman is going to be a plus for her in this race since she is the only woman running. Oh, also, she is extremely rich. I think her speech was pretty bad. Audio here: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=212165 However, I was talking to somebody at the end who liked her. Her speech was only 12 minutes and then she left! This will not hurt her in the Republican primary, but she was basically the biggest war monger. Her biggest asset is her money. She had paid campaign staff with her, etc.

The last candidate to speak was Tom Foley. He sucked! There is no reason for me to waste my time talking about him, lol.

So that's about it. There is something positive I got from this event. This is a VERY crowded race. Even better, the candidates' assets are spread out. By that I mean this:

Rob Simmons has connections.
Linda McMahon has money.
Sam Caligiuri has a speaking ability.
Peter Schiff has intelligence.
Tom Foley really doesn't have anything and I feel bad for him.

If one of these candidates had two of these assets it would be bad news for us! But it is all spread out. This is going to be a very fierce race. And I am hoping to see Peter's grassroots bring his campaign into the center of the race, where it belongs.
 
Last edited:
LOL thats the coolest update I've ever read! Rlly funny too! You should be a journalist jeremy!
 
good writeup, thanks for covering.

I think Schiff should have added "I brought (x number of) jobs to CT when I moved my firm here from CA" in order to give him more appeal to the locals, and he should have added maybe one or two sentences about Hoover to educate maybe who forgot or never knew what his policies were ("Hoover had the reputation of a free market president, but in fact FDR's Treasury of Sec. (or whoever it was) later said the basically the New Deal was an extension of Hoover's policies. In his private journal (I think) he wrote that we've spent and spent, but it hasn't done the economy any good' ")
 
I spoke with someone who was at the event yesterday (I couldn't go, but I really wish I could have) who also said that Tom Foley was awful and by far the worst candidate who spoke. I wish there was video of him because now I am curious as to just how bad he was!

In regards to Schiff, I just finished watching both videos and I thought he did very well. However, at the same time, I thought he focused a little too much on the problem than the solution. His speaking about the problem was amazing no doubt, but if he had gone into "solution" mode like he did on Fast Money on 9/17, then he would have hit it out of the park! Nonetheless, he did great for his first speech in Connecticut in campaign mode. Something to build on and no doubt - This is going to be a battle!
 
"That's like your son coming home and he says he has a new education plan. He plans to flunk every test for the next ten years. What kind of plan is that?"

Hahaha, Peter got jokes.
 
John Mertens, an independent, spoke after this. He was foolish enough to talk about more taxes, forced insurance, and national healthcare at an anti-tax event. This was worse than the Hartford tea party, where he was booed by neocons for wanting to end the war on drugs. Since he is not in the primary, we don't have to worry about him.

He isn't an independent. He has the ballot-line for the Connecticut for Lieberman party (he is its chair I think despite the fact he is anti-Lieberman), and is seaking the Green and Libertarian[gasp!] nominations at least.
 
He isn't an independent. He has the ballot-line for the Connecticut for Lieberman party (he is its chair I think despite the fact he is anti-Lieberman), and is seaking the Green and Libertarian[gasp!] nominations at least.

In his speech he said he was an independent ("Independent Party?") and trying to get the nominations from the Lieberman, Green, and Libertarian Parties.
 
There's a lot of kudos in this thread, so I'll offer some criticism:

1. Too much bragging

The audience doesn't want to hear 10 minutes of Peter talking about how he was right about the real estate crisis, the dot com bubble, and all the other calls he's made. A casual mention, sure, that's great, but for the entire first half of his speech he did little other than brag about his predictions.

2. This is my first political speech

Is it just me, or did Peter forget he was giving a political speech the moment after he uttered those words? He was supposed to summarize his issues and declare why he is running. We got none of that. All we got was 20 minutes about why our economy is bad, which is good, but that's just one issue. Which brings me to...

3. One issue pony

Much like a one trick pony, in politics we have one issue ponies. Peter Schiff must, to use an investing term, DIVERSIFY the issues on which he talks, because right now he's coming off as a one issue pony trading on his calling of the economic downturn.

4. Foreign investments

I cringed when he talked, at length, about how he has abandoned the US in his investment strategy. A casual mention, if asked, because it is the truth, but to bring it up and go on at length about it, especially so early in the speech, isn't a good idea. Though I'll admit he did segue out of that into a quick statement about why he ran for the seat.
 
These comments are so perfectly spot on and capture my reaction exactly. For a first speech, I'll cut him some slack, but beyond that, it was pretty weak.


There's a lot of kudos in this thread, so I'll offer some criticism:

1. Too much bragging

The audience doesn't want to hear 10 minutes of Peter talking about how he was right about the real estate crisis, the dot com bubble, and all the other calls he's made. A casual mention, sure, that's great, but for the entire first half of his speech he did little other than brag about his predictions.

2. This is my first political speech

Is it just me, or did Peter forget he was giving a political speech the moment after he uttered those words? He was supposed to summarize his issues and declare why he is running. We got none of that. All we got was 20 minutes about why our economy is bad, which is good, but that's just one issue. Which brings me to...

3. One issue pony

Much like a one trick pony, in politics we have one issue ponies. Peter Schiff must, to use an investing term, DIVERSIFY the issues on which he talks, because right now he's coming off as a one issue pony trading on his calling of the economic downturn.

4. Foreign investments

I cringed when he talked, at length, about how he has abandoned the US in his investment strategy. A casual mention, if asked, because it is the truth, but to bring it up and go on at length about it, especially so early in the speech, isn't a good idea. Though I'll admit he did segue out of that into a quick statement about why he ran for the seat.
 
I, too, wish Schiff would briefly mention his track record on predicting the economic crisis but he must go ahead and offer solutions. I know he thinks highly of himself as do I, but try and not be so pompous. A political game can't be won by the me, me, me route. Even when you're right, people typically don't like the conceded routine. I never thought it would borrow me, but it's coming to light. Don't ruin this opp Schiff, plz.
 
3. One issue pony

Much like a one trick pony, in politics we have one issue ponies. Peter Schiff must, to use an investing term, DIVERSIFY the issues on which he talks, because right now he's coming off as a one issue pony trading on his calling of the economic downturn.

I didn't have a problem with him sticking to the economy. I think he just needs to explain how the current policies are going to effect the everyday lives of people. China is going to stop lending us money.....okay how is that going to affect Suzy Jo raising her 3 kids? He needs to simplify and bottom line it.
 
There's a lot of kudos in this thread, so I'll offer some criticism:

1. Too much bragging

The audience doesn't want to hear 10 minutes of Peter talking about how he was right about the real estate crisis, the dot com bubble, and all the other calls he's made. A casual mention, sure, that's great, but for the entire first half of his speech he did little other than brag about his predictions.

2. This is my first political speech

Is it just me, or did Peter forget he was giving a political speech the moment after he uttered those words? He was supposed to summarize his issues and declare why he is running. We got none of that. All we got was 20 minutes about why our economy is bad, which is good, but that's just one issue. Which brings me to...

3. One issue pony

Much like a one trick pony, in politics we have one issue ponies. Peter Schiff must, to use an investing term, DIVERSIFY the issues on which he talks, because right now he's coming off as a one issue pony trading on his calling of the economic downturn.

4. Foreign investments

I cringed when he talked, at length, about how he has abandoned the US in his investment strategy. A casual mention, if asked, because it is the truth, but to bring it up and go on at length about it, especially so early in the speech, isn't a good idea. Though I'll admit he did segue out of that into a quick statement about why he ran for the seat.


I agree with this criticism.

I cut him slack since he was originally supposed to speak for only 5 minutes.
 
Back
Top