Ron Paul chants at end of debate

[Brian]

This is part of my criticism of Paul. Obviously the questioner (and many people) are concerned that America isn't doing enough to help in Darfur. Paul had two ways to respond to this:

1. Speak to the problem, or

2. Say it's not our job.

Paul always says #2 when asked about overseas troubles. He should say #1. He touched on it early in his response when he said that individuals should help, but he drowned out that point by going back to the "its not the job of the federal government". Of course it's not the job of the federal government, and he should mention that along with his very good point that our government aid, even in the form of food aid, works against us. But he should focus on our individual moral responsibility to donate and be active, and it is that line that he should conclude on.



That image stood out for me as well.

Do you always speak to other people like you know everything ? That can be appreciated if it is clear that you do know everything, but you don't. My impression is that you don't even know 50% of what you think you know. There are too many people on this board that know 90% of things that 50% just doesn't cut it. Are you carrying a beer bottle in your back pocket?

 

[devil21]

Shining moment of the night for me: Camera cut to First african american female combat pilot applauding, smiling, and shaking head in agreeance when Paul spoke of his view on Iraq.

Not long after one of the other guys said she might be in Afghanistan next. Im sure she wasnt happy to hear that!

 

[ButchHowdy]

Attn: Armchair Debateers . . .

Don't fix it if it ain't broken . . .

 

[Ron Paul Fan]

Do you always speak to other people like you know everything ? That can be appreciated if it is clear that you do know everything, but you don't. My impression is that you don't even know 50% of what you think you know. There are too many people on this board that know 90% of things that 50% just doesn't cut it. Are you carrying a beer bottle in your back pocket?

Well said my friend. You know what I'm talking about and you are a true patriot and champion of liberty. It's like we've got an army of speech coaches on here and they all know what's best for Ron Paul. He's got a small group of people around him advising him and he's been in politics for 20 years! He's raising dollars in huge amounts and it's working like Butch said! The best thing we can do is continue to support, continue to donate, continue to spread the message of freedom. Unite together in this revolution for freedom.

 

[slantedview]

wow, i missed chanting!? ahhhhhh. is there video?

 

[The Good Doctor]

Yes I was to a degree. He still did get loud applause. Everyone has a bad "game" once in awhile. Although this was kind of big.

But the more I think about it, everyone is equal, so I am kind of glad he used that quite often.

Was anyone else less than impressed with RP's performance tonight?

 

[stevedasbach]

I was at the debate tonight. There was NO visible support for any of the other candidates. No signs - no T-shirts - no buttons - nothing. RP signs were everywhere, with 1-2 dozen people waving signs to passing cars. Lots of honking, shout-outs, and thumbs-up.

Most of the people in line were RP supporters. We ended up in the balcony. The floor was reserved -- I suspect each campaign got some floor tickets, along with Republican VIP's, people from the college, sponsoring organizations, etc. There were emply seats so they invited people in the balconies to move to the floor. We decided to stay in the balcony.

 

[Thom1776]

I noticed that too, the others all huddled together like the last few cheerios in the bowl, while Paul went out to the crowd. That was the best move he made all night.

Four Cheeri-Os and a Cocoa Puff.

 

[sparat1k]

i've been under a rock sorry, what was the debate called?

youtube'd?

 

[briatx]

Do you always speak to other people like you know everything ? That can be appreciated if it is clear that you do know everything, but you don't. My impression is that you don't even know 50% of what you think you know. There are too many people on this board that know 90% of things that 50% just doesn't cut it. Are you carrying a beer bottle in your back pocket?

I think that Nathan posted constructive and valuable criticism. Criticism is how you make good, better.

The points are valid. Even I as a supporter can get lose Ron Paul in some of his responses. Sometimes he nails it. sometimes i'm like, huh?

More focused responses are a good thing.

But what I think we're seeing here is a symptom of the mainstream debates where Ron got very little time to speak, and so had to make the most of his actual time by diverting into other parts of his platform. It just didn't fit here because everyone got a shot at the questions.

 

[itsnobody]

Yeah man that was great, when I was there I was on the 2nd floor balcony yelling out "Ron Paul" it was like the greatest thing ever, I've never seen any support like this for any candidate ever

 

[Dary]

He doesn't form complete sentences.

There is a difference between incoherently babbling, and having a problem with your mouth being able to keep up with you brain.

Ron's brain moves faster than his mouth.

Even yet, if you were to read a transcript of the debate rather than watch it, you would see that Ron’s answers are always spot on.

Some people said that Ron did poorly in the O'reilly interview. But I transcribed the interview and found that Ron owned it.

Also, Ron won this debate in another way. Rudy McRomson didn’t attend. That cost them big time.

Peace.

 

[shadowhooch]

Regarding Darfur answer.....

I think he answered it brilliantly! Basically, he said....we shouldn't get involved in a civil war, aid most often ends in the hands of the military and is used against the poeple, and private citizens are free to help.

That's a perfect answer to me. Who wants to get involved in another civil war????

And he ended it with saying we should get out of Iraq now because he didn't make that point abundantly clear in his last answer.


Finally, I thought this debate format and the questions asked were the best yet of all the debates I've seen -- equal time, wide-ranging and relevant topics, specific questions, and a good moderator who didn't let anyone step over their bounds.

The only downside was the length of speeches before the debate started. But I understand why they did it -- it was their time to shine on TV.

 

[DrNoZone]

Yes! Some notes:

1. His cheering section did a poor job. Tonight's RP cheers sounded like a cheering equivalent to the canned laughter sitcoms play after the actors make a lame joke. It seemed automatic and forced, even when Paul mangled an answer (which he did a few times).

2. He ducked questions, whether intentionally or accidentally. Paul rarely answered the question asked or tried to identify with the perspective asking the question. He just recited one of his talking points. He did this flagrantly with his very first answer. When asked about the candidates who didn't attend, Paul gave one sentence to the topic and spent his remaining 55 seconds giving a stump speech. If he only spent the time allotted answering the question asked with an appeal to the perspective of the person asking the question, he'd come out on top, every time. But he fails at this.

3. He goes off on tangents. Even when Paul does speak to the question, he goes off on tangents. One time tonight he segued into the Iraq War for no reason whatsoever. Paul needs to finish his minute with a sentence directly addressing the initial question. Unfortunately, more often than not Paul's final sentence is so far from the initial question that, if read out of context, one would have no idea what question was even asked.

4. He doesn't form complete sentences. I notice, when listening to Paul, that he frequently changes tense and direction mid-sentence, as if the content of his sentence offsets the fact that he's not speaking an actual sentence. It's important to use your time to convey ideas, but it's just as if not more important to convey those ideas in a way that grabs attention and holds it. Paul doesn't do this, and his garbled answers cause many to lose interest, myself included.

I agree with every one of your points here, if only in different degrees. I think RP needs to get away from trying to stuff as much of his message as possible into every answer. I understand why he got into this habit, considering the little time he has been given in the past, but that is starting to change and I think he needs to adjust with it.

 

[Nathan Hale]

Do you always speak to other people like you know everything ? That can be appreciated if it is clear that you do know everything, but you don't. My impression is that you don't even know 50% of what you think you know. There are too many people on this board that know 90% of things that 50% just doesn't cut it. Are you carrying a beer bottle in your back pocket?

Did you plan to counter my statement with any logic, or just attempt to undercut me by saying that I act like I know more than you think I know?

 

[Nathan Hale]

There is a difference between incoherently babbling, and having a problem with your mouth being able to keep up with you brain.

Ron's brain moves faster than his mouth.

I agree with this. But often regardless of the problem, it manifests itself with the same symptom, and that symptom is often incoherence.

Even yet, if you were to read a transcript of the debate rather than watch it, you would see that Ron’s answers are always spot on.

I disagree with this, because Ron does drift from the question asked quite often.

Some people said that Ron did poorly in the O'reilly interview. But I transcribed the interview and found that Ron owned it.

I read the transcript and I totally disagree. Twice he ducked back to his stump speech when he could have and should have answered specific questions.

Also, Ron won this debate in another way. Rudy McRomson didn’t attend. That cost them big time.

I wish this were the case, but unfortunately Rudy McRomson calls the shots. Because they didn't attend, this debate got about as much coverage as the Values Voters debate. Though we might be mixing up cause and effect, because there's a very good chance that they didn't attend simply because of a confluence of two factors:
1. Limited reach - PBS isn't FOX news or CNN.
2. Tough crowd - too many hard questions.

 

[0zzy]

I think he did great. I was having freegasms. His first two answers sucked, the rest rocked. All the people were nodding their head and clapping when he was talking about the War on Drugs (end it) and the Iraq War (take care of the troops, reason why they arent getting healthcare is because all the money is going to Iraq). It was mindgasmsic.