The audience thought Ron Paul did
---
he also beat the shit out of them the last time

it's too bad he won't abandon the GOP and give himself a real chance
to win

On Jun 14, 7:23 pm, MJ <[email protected]> wrote:
> Who won the GOP debate? The audience thought Ron Paul didBy Luke Broadwater
> 4:00 p.m. EDT, June 14, 2011
> Who won last night's Republican presidential debate onCNN?
> It's a question a lot of pundits have been asking -- and there seems to be 
> some consensus forming among the analysts: Former Mass. Gov.Mitt Romneyand 
> Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachmann.
> But judging by the reaction of the audience in New Hampshire, a different 
> candidate carried the night and he's a candidate many analysts are saying 
> emerged as a loser.
> That candidate? Congressman Ron Paul of Texas.
> An analysis of audience reaction shows Paul was applauded twice as much as 
> any other candidate on stage.
> Throughout the two-hour debate, Paul was applauded 11 times. Romney, 
> Bachmann, and former Minnesota Gov.Tim Pawlentywere each applauded five 
> times. Former House speakerNewt Gingrichand businessman Herman Cain were each 
> applauded four times. Former Pa.Senator Rick Santorumwas applauded the least 
> amount of times: Three.
> After a slow start, Paul earned applause throughout the debate, on a variety 
> of issues, including his opposition to "government assistance to private 
> enterprise," his belief that people should be able to "opt out" of Medicare, 
> his views on the separation of church and state, and his opposition to the 
> United States' various wars.
> "I'd bring them home as quickly impossible," he said of U.S. troops. "I'd 
> quit bombing Yemen andPakistan."
> Romney scored with the audience for his opposition of "too big too fail" 
> economic policies, for his comments about scaling down the war in Afghanistan 
> and for his attacks onObama. Bachmann earned applause when she announced her 
> candidacy for president and when she called Obama "a one-term president." 
> Pawlenty scored applause with his comments about right-to-work legislation 
> and when he praised the Christian faith. Cain was cheered for his comments 
> regarding government bailouts, his statement regarding the strength of 
> theGOPfield and his opposition to Sharia law. Gingrich also pleased the crowd 
> on this issue and for his comments on securing the border. 
> In terms of other audience reaction, Romney earned the most laughs: Twice his 
> comments brought the crowd to laughter (though one was a slip-up about the 
> Taliban). Paul, Santorum, Gingrich, and Pawlenty each earned laughter from 
> the crowd on one occasion.
> I thought each candidate had his moments. Gingrich gave the best intro; Cain 
> overall was the best orator; Santorum was the most combative on the 
> president's economic policies; Romney was the most presidential; Paul the 
> most principled; Bachmann perhaps the most exciting; and Pawlenty perhaps the 
> nicest (he refused to criticize Romney to his face). Even Santorum showed he 
> can have a sense of humor.
> What's strange, though, is how uniformly pundits' opinions have been in favor 
> of Romney and Bachmann -- and how different their reaction is to that of the 
> audience in New Hampshire. (A poll of so-called "GOP Insiders" revealed party 
> establishment minds believe Paul finished last. View that pollhere.)
> Now, I realize Paul's supporters tend to be louder and more enthusiastic than 
> other candidates' and the amount of applause is hardly a scientific way to 
> judge a debate. But to not even consider as a potential debate winner the 
> person who was applauded more than twice as much as any other candidate 
> strikes me as strange.
> Maybe it shows a vast separation between the media and the beliefs of 
> grassroots GOP activists? Maybe it shows that Paul's supporters are simply 
> more enthusiastic, though not larger in number? I don't know.
> What I do know is this: People don't cheer things they don't support. They 
> don't laugh at jokes that aren't funny. They don't cry during movies that 
> aren't sad.
> Paul's large advantage in applause shows that a number of Republicans want 
> smaller government, less foreign wars, no financial bailouts and freedom in 
> their personal lives. He may not be the favorite in the GOP race, but the 
> pundits could at least acknowledge the vocal and growing support within the 
> Republican party on these 
> issues.http://www.baltimoresun.com/entertainment/bthesite/the-ridiculous-report-blog/bal-who-won-the-gop-debate-the-audience-thought-ron-paul-did-20110614,0,419922.story?track=rss

-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Reply via email to