Why all the negativity on the SC debate?

[dvalukis]

The audience was ridiculous and he wasn't asked 1 flattering/pos question. He did good, considering.

 

[Badger Paul]

"This wasn't Ron Paul's best performance. On the other hand, it wasn't bad either. "

Agreed. That's the best way to sum it up after watching the highlights myself.

 

[Dsylexic]

yes.not a tour de force like the ABC NHampshire one. nor one to forget. it was a middling performance.we have one more chance on thursday. we should also wait for polls coming out this week to decide if it hurt at all(most likely no).romney did get hurt.masterdbator grinch got some applause,but he lied a lot.lets see how much the people are fooled.
i'd give the booing no credence.the ones with a little sense of decency will see the profound hypocrisy of christians booing the golden rule.i hope jon stewart skewers them for it.

 

[Kurt Evans]

--

 

[jeremiahj13]

Im confused? I watched the highlights of Paul, and I loved it when he said "You call building a $1,000,000,000 embassy in Iraq in defense; I call it waste"

 

[Cabal]

Just got done watching, not sure what everyone is so emo about. It was an average RP performance overall, in my estimation. His mind was moving faster than his mouth, he jumbled some thoughts, but he got many of his core points across. He got plenty of cheers, had other candidates agreeing with him, and spoke his mind. It wasn't stellar, but his debate performances rarely are. He probably could have responded to a couple of things a little better, but he's never going to be perfect--he never has been perfect in the past. He didn't lose anything here; in fact, he probably gained.

Stop whining and get back to work.

 

[lilymc]

Ron Paul made Republicans boo Jesus. It was amazing.

I don't think people grasp the ramifications of that yet.

Me neither. That was a Biblical event. I'm still processing it and the implications.

Republicans booing the golden rule may end up being the best part of the debate. It didn't feel like it at the time, but what louder clarion call can you imagine to wake up borderlines than learning that the GOP audience booed Jesus Christ?

Wow, I missed that. (I did see some of the debate, but not that part). Is there a tube of it yet? This is what I've been trying to tell a couple of my friends who profess to be christians yet support the wars, etc. That we have departed from the just war theory and basic christian principles.... Like you said, maybe that moment will be a wake-up call for those who are still on the fence about all of it.

 

[rnestam]

honestly i think when we watch these debates we dumb ourselves down too much to try and catch the "sheeple" angle of it all. Yeah, there are a lot of blockheads out there, but as bad as we thought the Bachman exchanges sounded etc. etc. the fact is RP keeps rising. After all the newsletter hit pieces...RP rising. After the combined effort to label him dangerous...RP rising. Starting to think there is hope. And after this, Romney's first signs of dropping will appear and again....RP Rising. I can feel it

 

[luctor-et-emergo]

I really don't understand what all the fuzz is about... I just watched the recap, granted, it only shows Paul... It might not have been is single best debate, but he came out well. He made some great points, about the negative ads, 0% tax, bring them home, 1bln$ embassy etc.

I don't get why they boo'd the golden rule, but at the end, when he started about bringing them home, they gave him a huge applause...

 

[Jingles]

Is this the video you're talking about? If so, look at all the comments favoring Dr. Paul. Like others have suggested this could end up helping the good doctor.

Ron Paul Booed by Insane Debate Audience for Endorsing the Golden Rule


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7v8qtZ3I5AM

They boo the golden rule but cheer not starting another war, ending wars, and bringing or troops home in the same minute? I can only imagine the war of personalities going on within their minds... "KILL KILL KILL... WAIT SAVE LIVES! NO KILL! SAVE LIVES!!!"

 

[Dsylexic]

They boo the golden rule but cheer not starting another war, ending wars, and bringing or troops home in the same minute? I can only imagine the war of personalities going on within their minds... "KILL KILL KILL... WAIT SAVE LIVES! NO KILL! SAVE LIVES!!!"

it is probably "KILL THE RAGHEADS," followed by "SAVE OUR SONS AND DAUGHTHERS DYING OVER THERE"

 

[olsonly]

I thought his Bin Laden answer was a disaster. It was totally convoluted and made him look confused and weak. I was sad and embarassed for him.

 

[dcjones]

Its a shame that nobody is discussing MONETARY POLICY in these debates. It seems they only ask RP about foreign policy issues. This is the major difference between RP and any other candidate and I bet only a small minority of the GOP blockheads understand these differences. The major issue of our day is how are we going to reverse the disaster that was created due to the Fed policies and ultimately create a system that will not destroy itself. I would like to see RP force the issue into discussions during these debates.

 

[Anti Federalist]

It happens every debate night. It's usually the same people being rude and doom-and-gloom negative too.

It's possible to be critical without predicting failure, swearing off future support, or just plain insulting. I don't see how that's supposed to help. Those people should just leave.

That^. Every debate has the exact same reaction. Truth is a big paddle and it hurts the hindend a bit.

That and that

 

[KingNothing]

He could have done better, but that doesn't matter.

I'm only negative because of how the crowd reacted. If they're representative of the Republican party or America as a whole, we're screwed and we don't deserve peace, prosperity and liberty. Yuck to them.

 

[JohnGalt23g]

It was Ron's worst debate performance this year, that's why. Usually he does better, that's why. He had an off night, that's all. And the f#cking audience was packed with Neocons.

Would you like some cheese to go with that whine?

 

[Zevi]

People sometimes forget how much of an impact peer pressure has. He could say the exact same thing in two debates but if the audience reaction is different for whatever reason, then on some level yours will be too.

 

[jersdream]

I'll post what I said in the other thread:

I know I'll get neg repped and chastised for this, but I need to vent this:

When our we going to be honest with ourselves? I have been frank when Ron has done great or when Ron has done shaky. However, I know my analysis spot on last night. Especially the commentating on the morning shows and articles. It was a tough night for Ron. We keep on only looking at the debates with our grassroots lenses. It really is ridiculous and does us no good. It borderlines on lying to ourselves.

People forget we do actually have support among other Republicans besides us, the grassroots people. People say that once we get someone to support us, we can't lose them. That's untrue. Of course the independent, youth, libertarian, and other of us Ron Paul Grassroots people will support him full on. However, we do have a lot more support than that, that is why we are doing MUCH MUCH MUCH better than 2008. A lot of these people are strong supporters, however we still have a lot of light supporters and leaners through the republican party. We are capable of gaining more of them and losing them too. Those that are tired of wars and the like will agree with RP, but when we got into the nuances of the Osama Bin Laden issue....this is where Newt hurt us, as I mention below.

Ron had a tough debate last night, particularly on foreign policy. It really doesn't have much to do with his beliefs, philosophy or even the content of the answer. However, he was off last night. There is no way to get around this. He stuttered, stammered, and was on the defensive on foreign policy. He did not get out a clear answer. His answer on Osama Bin Laden really turned people away from him, and his delivery had a lot to do with it. A lot of us were worried and concerned about the exchange with Bachmann in the last Iowa debate. However, I wasn't that worried because he was very strong and powerful in his answers. He was clear in his answers and was strong on the defensive and almost made his strong defense into an attack. Then he goes on to tell us we shouldn't be angry with the Taliban because it was the Al-Qaeda. Of course that is true, but seriously to go out of your way to make that point? What was with that. Instead he could have used that time to say these people have been killing our soldiers and they are a repressive regime.

This was hardly the case last night, he was searching and going in circles for an answer. He couldn't capture and word a straight forward answer on the question. Gingrich, Perry and Romney were strong, powerful and to the point on what to do with Osama. The analogy using the Chinese dissident make sense, and it wasn't a good analogy. Perry's gong comment was a stinger, and what really hurt was Gingrich talking about the USS Cole attack and the fact he killed 3000 citizens. There was no other way around it. There was no oomph behind it. He again gets called by Bret to being the left of Obama on foreign policy, and he doesn't challenge the premise. He could have really gotten strong there.

Couple his foreign policy part of the debate with his answer to Santorum on the 2nd Amendment. Santorum unjustly attacked him on the 2nd Amendment, but Ron didn't tout his pro-gun record. He said for about two mumbled seconds that he is against all the anti-gun laws, and then went into how tort law is a function of the state. That national laws are unconstitutional, etc. When you are attacked on the 2nd Amendment, saying that you are trying to get rid of it, you don't get into a discussion of tort law, which most people don't understand anyways. I mean what average South Carolina primary Republican voter knows what tort law is and federal versus state jurisdiction. He compares it to medical malpractice suits, yet doesn't talk about his support for the 2nd Amendment. What particular laws he opposed. Doesn't go into the right itself, he doesn't talk about it. He lets the attack pretty much stand. He didn't ward off the attack with his talk about tort law and medical malpractice being left up to the states.

Now where I thought Ron did well was his hit on Santorum (though he should have used his full time), and standing firm on it. He threw in a lot of humorous quips that got laughs from the other candidates and the audience. He did nail his second question and his first foreign policy question. It was a real gotcha question by the dude on the left, and Ron destroyed him on it. He clearly mentioned the difference between defense and militarism. He got tons of applause on calling the Bagdad embassy waste and I thought he did a great job on that. Had he sustained that throughout the foreign policy section of the debate, it would have been a great performance. We have time to recoup, but this hurt. The moderators were horrible granted, and put Ron in tougher situations than anybody else. They really asked framed, gotcha questions to him, however that is the name of the game. This debate will be seen by more republican primary voters in South Carolina than the CNN one will be on Thursday. They just watch Fox News that much greater. Ron always speaks the truth and is right all the time, however the style and framing it must change.

Though I must say the kick a$$ statement of the night was when Ron seized the opportunity to say that the income tax should be 0%. He took advantage of the situation, and went full throttle. He also explained himself on it, instead of giving a Michele Bachmanesque answer without explanation. He also talked about the inflation tax and said that should be 0% as well. It just shows how much more powerful on the economy his views are and in style and the ability to answer the questions. He is powerful and straight forward on those issues. He is also confident in his answers. He doesn't stutter, stammer or search for answers when he is talking about the financial world, taxes, spending, monetary policy and the federal reserve.

 

[LawnWake]

Ron Paul has rarely come across as more confident in a debate than he has here. Period. He did go on way too long on the Osama Bin Laden question, but Paul's gonna Paul.

 

[PastaRocket848]

paul is paul, sure, but if we plan on winning a republican primary, the foreign policy message has to change. at least the delivery of it has to. that is a simple fact.