Poll: How well did Ron do on Meet The Press

[Ksuperneau]

10/10
Dr. Paul commands respect from his works not through bravado or force.

 

[deehrler]

I think that RP did marvelous under the circumstances.

On the IRS, I felt that he did not come across as convincing as I would have liked.

On earmarks, though convincing if you could follow his words...he seemed a little flippant.

I wish he had said that as President of the US he would fight to stay out of a World Government. But if that were the case, he would get any damned earmark that our nation is entitled to while working against that destructive system.

The answer would have been much simpler and less apologetic.

He also had his awesome messages.

 

[j.b.]

In retrospect I think that he fared much better on the Glenn Beck show, then on Meet the Press”. Tim Russert was putting on a full court press with some of the quotes being obscure quotes out of the 1980’s. Unfortunately it was not more of a discussion on his positions as they apply to today’s world. I felt I was being charitable giving it a “7”. I have to admit it had been years since I last watched Meet the Press.

 

[Jobarra]

I gave him a 6, only by taking off my Ron Paul, libertarian bias off first. From the perspective of an uneducated viewer, I think he came off weak on the earmarks, cutting budget programs like Dept of Ed, fanciful notion of eliminating all income tax. The Reagan quotes were kind of misleading, and he handled himself OK, but repubs think he is a mesiah, and is beyond reproach, so this will hurt some with them.

I think he scored well on points of us becoming a fascist empire. I think that will resonate with most libertarian leaning democrats and repubs. For the party loyalists, I don't think Dr. Paul changed their minds much. For those not much attuned with politics, they will likely find him eccentic and interesting, or some will be turned off. I think he nailed it at the very end though at may allow some to research him further.

Russert is tough as nails, and most go away with a haircut in their poll standings. Look at Giuiani's poll numbers since he soiled his pants with his grilling. Huckster will run the same guantlet and will face just as tough a grilling. I'm actually surprised any Repub would subject themself to it since Russert shows no mercy.

Last I heard, they only interviewed Dr. Paul because Huckabee CANCELLED his appearance on the show. They had Dr. Paul take Huck's spot. I doubt he'll go on the show now. He's a bit smarter than the other attention seekers. He thinks he's at the top and he just needs to hold out for another week or so and win a state.

For the interview, I think Tim is right to ask tough questions, HOWEVER, some of the questions were too manipulative to be considered honest criticism. Cutting what Dr. Paul said after the Sinclair quote was one. Reading "George Bush is a bum..." but not showing the statement after the ellipsis. Forming the statement about Reagan as if Paul said traitor(at least they put the article up where it showed that traitor was outside the quote marks).

This is just a tiny fragment of what will happen when Dr. Paul gets the nomination for the general election. Expect attacks like this. Thankfully, there isn't much to attack with so hopefully it will get repititive to the general public. Anyone else think that they will STILL ask him if he is going to run third party when he gets the nomination for the general election?

 

[allyinoh]

I have to let people know that my family who is not all that political savvy, watched the interview and after said, "He has my vote."

If people who don't really know much about politics can say afterwards that they will vote for him, it couldn't have been that bad.

 

[Kombaiyashii]

This was just on CNBC Europe and my mum watched the second half of it and said that he seemed nice and would do more research (if she was american). She watched part of last weeks Giuliani interview and absolutely hated the guy.

My mum would probably fit into your liberal progressive type so it seems like the interview was pretty good.

 

[filmmaker58]

I graded it a 5. If the hope for this interview was to influence new people to the cause (which should be the focus of every interview now), rather than just defend his positions. I think it was a 5. Overall, the thing new people will take from this is that eliminating the income tax is not really possible, and that his other ideas probably fall into that same category.

 

[UCFGavin]

i went with a 7. there were some questions i wished he answered differently, but he held his own quite well.

 

[Enzo]

I thought Paul did well to explain and defend his past and current positions.

Tim Russert is just brutal. I think he did deliberately try to dig up past statements to try to make Paul look bad... but it's nothing new. That's what he does.

For example, this nice piece of ownage with John McCain:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ajm5JTf7jZs

 

[Corydoras]

I don't see that Russert was at all hostile. This was like a martial arts match, not a grudge match.

 

[Leslie Webb]

I gave him a 7. Very good on many points, such as foreign policy. Was disappointed there was no discussion of monetary policy. Probably because Russert would have been out of his league.

- I think the campaign needs to write up a 30 second-1 minute sound bite for him on the earmarks question.

- In future debates it would be better to have a few more hard numbers about the IRS abolition. Paul mentioned a study that backed him up. Next time give a little more information about the study, such as what think tank did it, when it was done, and what the main conclusions were.

- Many people remember not what a candidate says but how he says it. I think in future debates or tough interviews Ron should speak more slowly and smile more while speaking. He is very winning when he is relaxed and answering questions, like in the John Stossel interview or the Jim Cramer interview. In future debates or high pressure interviews, if he could get into more of a comfort zone, like he was in the Stossel and Cramer interviews, I think he would be more persuasive.

- This interview is a good warm-up for future debates and the general election. We know what the grenades we'll be tossed are.

 

[bgoldwater]

5/10. The earmarks killed him. However, that is not that bad since it is impossible to do good on MTP. Russert grills everyone.

 

[Minnesotastan]

For the public response, look at the paulcash graph

Russert's questions were tough, but I don't think there was any answer (earmarks, Reagan, civil rights included) that will dissuade any current Ron Paul supporter. When most candidates are one MTP they gain some supporters but lose others; Ron Paul is likely to have a net gain, perhaps in the tens of thousands. More importantly the simple face and name exposure will prompt the unwashed public to pay more attention to him in the future, and when he does well in IA/NH they will know who he is. That's the best one can ask for in these early stages of the process.

Of note, the paulcash graph shows a bump upward during and after the Meet The Press interview. This may continue for a while since the program airs at different times in the western time zones.

 

[bootstrap]

can't be perfect under such incessant attack

I've never seen anyone attacked so unfairly, viciously and incessantly by Russert or any other supposedly serious interview - especially of a presidential candidate!

Clearly somebody read Russert the riot act and told him in no uncertain terms that he better "trash that guy and trash him good". Russert didn't give Ron enough time to explain himself clearly on any topic - he just kept his finger down on the trigger of his automatic weapon of "loaded questions", all of which were carefully prepared to make Ron look crazy or corrupt.

Ron gave reasonable answers to the earmark question, though Russert made sure it wasn't clear to the average listener (and some of you in this forum). To make the point more exactly and clearly for those you didn't "get it", I'll give my interpretation here. The government has stolen the money from the taxpayers already. Ron Paul doesn't want the money spent - he'd rather the money pay off the debt (and eventually not even be needed for that, and therefore returned). So Ron votes AGAINST the bills - does his best to make sure the money for those "earmarks" do not get spent. However, if he FAILS to stop the money from being spent, he can at least have some of the spending benefit his district. After all, they paid their taxes - so if they can't pay down the debt with it, they should at least get something for them. That's NOT what he wants, that's his way to limit the damages.

 

[Jobarra]

I thought Paul did well to explain and defend his past and current positions.

Tim Russert is just brutal. I think he did deliberately try to dig up past statements to try to make Paul look bad... but it's nothing new. That's what he does.

For example, this nice piece of ownage with John McCain:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ajm5JTf7jZs

Went to that youtube and then found this.
Conan: Meet the Press - For Idiots

I couldn't help laughing out loud. A nice comic bit after watching the interview.

 

[itsnobody]

I think he horrible on the Reagan thing and ok on the Earmarks thing...so I have to give him a 7/10

He's running as a Republican candidate, Republicans won't like him saying Reagan was a failure

 

[DrNoZone]

I gave him a 6...pretty disappointed by this one actually. I was hoping he'd done his homework and had prepared for Tim's hard style of questioning, but he looked totally unprepared.

 

[itsnobody]

If Tim grilled Ron Paul this badly, just wait next week and see what happens to Huckabee

 

[thoughtbombing]

Well that's your opinion. The opinion of myself and most people who saw this interview is that he did a phenomnenal job. He answered EVERY QUESTION in the interview perfectly.

you must have been watching the "RON PAUL RISING" video for too long and just ignored how bad he just did... by bad I don't mean terrible, I mean he did OK... and OK doesn't win votes, it keeps the votes you have. He gained no votes from this interview.

 

[krott5333]

Russert was throwing hardballs and bean balls.

Dr. Paul hung in there and made the best of a tough situation. He even hit a few back at the pitcher.

It's too bad he didn't charge the mound!