Ron Paul chants at end of debate

[brandon]

Anyone else here the ron paul chants as soon as the debate ended? I loved it.

[torchbearer]

yup. made me smile!

[dsentell]

Sure did! Wonderful!!!!!!!!!!

[RP4ME]

is there a poll we can vote in

[Trassin]

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

[Cindy]

Yup! My daughter and I were smiling. He had a hearty support base their in the audience. Did you hear the applause for HIM, when he was introduced? It was awesome.

I am so glad he went to this debate.

[DahuiHeeNalu]

Great Job Dr.Paul and good job people in the audience that was amazing!!

[JosephTheLibertarian]

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

He did very well.

[TheIndependent]

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

He finally got plenty of questions nobody in the previous debates would confront him with. I'd say his performance was a B+.

[Richie]

He finally got plenty of questions nobody in the previous debates would confront him with. I'd say his performance was a B+.

I'd say A-. It wasn't perfect, but it was very confident and convincing. Miles ahead of everybody else, who all sounded the same.

[Stealth4]

He did very well.

I dont think so. He could have done much better. To new RP viewers, I dont think it was impressive nor do I think it would create much interest.

[Stealth4]

He did very well.

I dont think so. He could have done much better. To new RP viewers, I dont think it was impressive nor do I think it would create much interest.

[texasbelle]

I missed the debate (work:rolleyes: ) I am dying to see something on You Tube! Any links yet????

[ross11988]

um did he get a big donation boost were over $600K

[njandrewg]

Was anyone else less than impressed with RP's performance tonight?
thats because unlike other debates there was no back and forth. This isn't a debate, its a 30 second time window to say what you think...so under those rules he did fairly well

[JosephTheLibertarian]

I dont think so. He could have done much better. To new RP viewers, I dont think it was impressive nor do I think it would create much interest.

no? pbs has an overwhelmingly liberal audience "just come home" appeals to them.

[Stealth4]

thats because unlike other debates there was no back and forth. This isn't a debate, its a 30 second time window to say what you think...so under those rules he did fairly well

His ideas require explanation, they are hard to reduce to soundbites, but the campaign staff and Dr. Paul need to work a lot hard on this because he will get more attention soon due to donations and he needs to use that attention well. Hopefully after tonight he will improve his speaking. I know he can do better, the message is right, the delivery just needs some practice and improvement.

[Spike Kojima]

Remember to vote for Dr Paul in the post debate poll.

link= h ttp://76.7.79.91/voter/go.html

[FluffyUnbound]

I dont think so. He could have done much better. To new RP viewers, I dont think it was impressive nor do I think it would create much interest.

I don't know.

All the liberal liveblogs I saw tuned most of the debate out, and noticed only certain points that stuck out:

1. Ron Paul - End the war on drugs

2. Ron Paul - No tax on tips

3. Ron Paul - End the war in Iraq

4. Ron Paul - Death penalty applied to minorities disproportionately

Nobody else said a damn thing that anyone will remember.

[Nathan Hale]

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


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

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.

[Ron Paul Fan]

There's always people who come in and stop nothing at bashing Ron Paul after a debate, but he keeps on going strong. Dr. Paul had another great debate performance and had a good crowd presence. He has called on us to join us in this victory for liberty and I will stand by him and not criticize him when I know he gave it his best effort. This campaign will stutter to a stop without us and I don't want that to happen. Let's rally behind our candidate and not trash him every opportunity we get.

[max]

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

60 second bites arent Ron's forte...although i would like to see him slow his speech down and not yell as much

[RPatTheBeach]

Remember to vote for Dr Paul in the post debate poll.

link= h ttp://76.7.79.91/voter/go.html

That poll says "PRE-Debate" poll, not post-debate.

[quickmike]

voted...............................for Ron Paul

[Akus]

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

I don't know.

He spoke directly and to the point. All the questions raised he directed to the money, the real root of most of the social and economic problems of this country. And he sounded very sound, forgive the pun.

404 poor performance not found.....

[pcosmar]

The only thing I saw was when Brownback said that Congress declared war, He did not challenge it.
I don't know if he was able to, but it would be nice.
It looked like he walked out to the audience, while everyone else walked off stage. That would be good. He is very good with people, up close and personal.

[JosephTheLibertarian]

remember.. the viewers are overwhelmingly liberal "end the war on drugs" "bring the troops home" "opposed to the death penalty"

[Nathan Hale]

There's always people who come in and stop nothing at bashing Ron Paul after a debate, but he keeps on going strong. Dr. Paul had another great debate performance and had a good crowd presence. He has called on us to join us in this victory for liberty and I will stand by him and not criticize him when I know he gave it his best effort. This campaign will stutter to a stop without us and I don't want that to happen. Let's rally behind our candidate and not trash him every opportunity we get.

Criticism helps a candidate improve. Simply accepting a candidate for the sake of unity isn't helping the candidate, it's just setting the stage for inevitable failure. Of course baseless trashing doesn't help, but my post was critical and based on specific line items designed to help the candidate improve.

[jmunjr]

Anyone else here the ron paul chants as soon as the debate ended? I loved it.

yes and this is unfortunate..sort of. If you judge the winner by the audience response, Paul was the winner, but the Ron Paul chants generally mean most of the people cheering him on already were RP supporters(and passionate about him), so a lot of the cheering wasn't from new RP people, it was from established RP supporters, who as we all know are pretty loud..

Still I'd take this over having the support all the others on that stage have..

[john_anderson_ii]

I believe he did very well.

I do wish he would slow his speech. It would lead to less stumbling over words, and make him appear more relaxed and rational.

[RPatTheBeach]

The only downside I saw to the night was the question regarding Darfur. The crowd erupted when Brownback opposed Paul. Aside from that, and Paul pitching his whole platform on the opening question unrelated, I think he did an excellent job.


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.

[JoshLowry]

I agree, it wasn't his best debate. I think this debate just hurt the four that didn't show up. No one made any big leaps tonight.

[Nathan Hale]

The only thing I saw was when Brownback said that Congress declared war, He did not challenge it.
I don't know if he was able to, but it would be nice.

This was a problem, not specifically Paul's lack of a response, but rather the format itself. I liked that each candidate was given equal time, but unfortunately they were given that time in the form of a rigid format. It wasn't a debate between them so much as a series of short speeches in response to questions. The only opportunity to engage a comment was to respond to the person who spoke immediately before you, and because of the format that was always the same person. At least the big corporate debates, for all of their inequality, allow candidates to chime in when addressed.


It looked like he walked out to the audience, while everyone else walked off stage. That would be good. He is very good with people, up close and personal.

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.

[ctb619]

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.

She even went up to RP after the debate to have her picture taken with the good doctor!

[Ron Paul Fan]

Criticism helps a candidate improve. Simply accepting a candidate for the sake of unity isn't helping the candidate, it's just setting the stage for inevitable failure. Of course baseless trashing doesn't help, but my post was critical and based on specific line items designed to help the candidate improve.

You suggested that the audience not applaud their candidate. What are they suppose to do? Boo him? LOL! He had a good debate performance and he needs us to support him to promote the freedom message. Criticizing someone after every single debate does no good. Dr. Paul is not going to read it, the campaign is not going to read it. Even if they did they wouldn't change anything. Congressman Paul is a 20 year politician for Christ sake. Dr. Paul has called on us to help him raise $1,000,000 by Sunday. He needs it to compete in the primary states so let's help him in his time of need and not say that we're losing interest in the liberty message.

[Nathan Hale]

The only downside I saw to the night was the question regarding Darfur. The crowd erupted when Brownback opposed Paul. Aside from that, and Paul pitching his whole platform on the opening question unrelated, I think he did an excellent job.

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.



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.

That image stood out for me as well.

[RP4ME]

The only downside I saw to the night was the question regarding Darfur. The crowd erupted when Brownback opposed Paul. Aside from that, and Paul pitching his whole platform on the opening question unrelated, I think he did an excellent job.


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.

yeah i dunno - i am not sure how I feel about this....i think it woul be best if private groups do thsi but when there is genocid ethey dont want to go in b/c they are not armed.....seems liek a better job for blackwater...go deliver some food.....

[trispear]

I think Paul did fine but he was rushed (they all did). He needs to project a calmer, more assertive air and it all starts with the tone of his voice. He gets too excited.

Perhaps I never noticed before or that he was just extra nervous, but Tancredo was the poorest speaker, he kept restarting and rambled sometimes. I didn't know what he was on about.

I liked how Alan Keyes said he wanted to respect life therefore the death penalty was important to carry out:/

[Nathan Hale]

You suggested that the audience not applaud their candidate. What are they suppose to do? Boo him? LOL!

I never said this. I said that the cheering section lacked spirit and spontaneity. Their cheers were automatic and rehearsed, sometimes erupting long after Paul finished speaking, as though the Paul crowd forgot they were supposed to cheer.


He had a good debate performance

Debatable.


and he needs us to support him to promote the freedom message. Criticizing someone after every single debate does no good.

Yes it does. It highlights where there is room for improvement. In fact, debates such as these that are paid less attention are the PERFECT time to highlight problems so that Paul does better when he's in a "bigger" debate.


Dr. Paul is not going to read it, the campaign is not going to read it.

I'll bet that pertinent information filters into the campaign better through these forums than through a direct email. I'm willing to bet that somebody in the home office checks these forums. Perhaps they're not trolling to ideas, but they're tracking the core of the support base. It's just a matter of hoping the right eyes see the right messages.


Even if they did they wouldn't change anything. Congressman Paul is a 20 year politician for Christ sake.

If the person who reads it find the information helpful and has the ability to suggest the change, it just might happen. I noticed after the first FOX debate, Paul was criticized heavily on this board and another major Paul board for his body language and stance behind the podium. In the CNN debate that followed, he corrected his mistakes, in fact, he used the stance and technique that most people in the online debate approved of. Perhaps this is coincidence, perhaps not.


Dr. Paul has called on us to help him raise $1,000,000 by Sunday. He needs it to compete in the primary states so let's help him in his time of need and not say that we're losing interest in the liberty message.

I never said that I was losing interest in the liberty message, but good luck setting up your straw man.

[jumpyg1258]

I was one of the lucky few that attended tonights debate. Just got home to see what peeps thought. BTW I did my part with the "RON PAUL!" cheer at the end, heheh.

[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.