Rate Ron's Performance in the Debate

[Dave Aiello]

1-10.. Let's try to put our bias aside

[dvictr]

a few home runs, a few stumbles - 7
showed he had the most debate experience


gave a lot of bait for the haters

[Koz]

He didn't get asked very many questions that suited him. He did answer well except for his closing remarks he fumbled and rushed them.

[pauladin]

6/10

ron paul really needs to improve his speaking skills. too many elmer fudd moments. he still won the debate imo.

[brandon]

10/10

He is the only candidate truly speaking extemporaneously and not from prepared talking points. He is the only candidate that comes across as having an in depth understanding of history and modern issues.

[brandon]

10/10

He is the only candidate truly speaking extemporaneously and not from prepared talking points. He is the only candidate that comes across as having an in depth understanding of history and modern issues.

[parocks]

What is Ron Paul's policy on drugs?

He should be able to have a sentence prepared, and ready to say.

If "There is nothing in the Constitution that says that Federal Government can ban drugs.
These laws are Unconstitutional, and I believe in Limited Constitutional Government.
States can still ban drugs if they want. I doubt many, if any, states will legalize Heroin. But many
will legalize Marijuana, and many others won't. Voters in each of the states should decided themselves."

The key point to get out there is that Heroin will still be illegal even without a Federal Law.

He argued about what would happen if Heroin was legal. Would it be legal if we got rid of all the Federal Laws regarding it?
Is Ron Paul arguing against State laws regarding Heroin? Because his argument "would everybody in South Carolina start using Heroin,
and then he started waving his arms around. It was pretty funny, but it was off point, I think.

[mello]

I thought he crushed it! He was concise and even managed to get some laughs.
He was getting a lot of applause. He even got a round of applause for heroin
which I thought was friggin' amazing!

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

nt

[outspoken]

Unfortunately most watching don't know much about history or true liberty. All they know is that them there dark skinned non-christians in the middle east bombed us because they hate we are rich and free. Ron Paul's philosophy cannot begun to be digested in 30 second rebuttals.

[Rothbardian Girl]

I voted 7. There were a few stumbles here and there, which adds to his charm for me, but he definitely performed better than the other candidates at the debate. I felt Santorum in particular made himself look foolish on a lot of issues. But as dvictr mentioned, there were definitely some moments where RP showed his trademark tremendous passion for the constitutional agenda. I do also agree with Koz in that some of the questions that I was dying to hear him answer weren't directed at him, which was disappointing, but all in all they did give him a good amount of coverage compared to 2008.

[Kludge]

9/10 - 10/10, and you know how negative I am. His performance was very exciting. He was very clever and energetic. His points were solid, and there wasn't a single time where I was feeling uncomfortable with Paul's rhetoric, even with my Baptist-Reaganite grandparents in the room. His position on Israel was particularly well thought-out. He made sure to point out that more money is going to Arab nations and that Israel should free to do as they please to truly be sovereign. Fantastic rhetoric the whole way through.

The segment of FNC with Luntz afterword was absolutely ridiculous, so much so that I think even "casual" voters will reject its legitimacy, and hopefully most turned off the TV after the debate. It was a very powerful statement for RP to skip the FNC panel and instead go to what FNC called (with a surprisingly positive smile) a "Tea Party rally."

Overall, FNC coverage of Paul (with the exception of Luntz's nonsense) was extremely favorable. Their treatment of Johnson was terrible, but I could laugh at it this time, at least. "If you could host any type of reality show, what would it be?" - "I know you run a lot of marathons.... What are you running from?" (paraphrased)

While my thoughtful grandparents will probably come up with a more favorable opinion on Paul, my mom said she won't vote for him because he can't win, and that was because Paul isn't likeable. She said she'd vote for Rand (who has almost no record) after complaining none of the candidates are experienced enough. Four years later, my heart is much lighter, and I can just shrug it off, because even though she's still... herself... we've increased the support for RP by tenfold, and I think between that debate and the news coverage by this moneybomb, it's going to grow a lot more.

I'm very, very excited by Paul's performance, and hope he'll continue with this standard in coming debates.

[Jeremy]

I didn't like Ron's performance as much as I thought I would. I blame it on the questions, though. They weren't very good questions for him, but hopefully the next debates won't repeat them over and over. I think Ron should say the word "Constitution" as much as possible. He didn't do that tonight.

[sailingaway]

Several pwns of fox, but some good answers to bad questions (for that audiance) and some stumbles. Santorum was the most composed at set questions, but Ron was the only one who didn't fluster. Loved how he handled the Bachmann question!

[R3volutionJedi]

7/10

If only he had a bit more time. It's hard to answer questions so fast, I think he did fairly well though.
I am very disappointed that fox does not has a test to vote poll :P

[fcmagic01]

Ron Paul needs a speech coach.

His message is by far the best, but he needs to work on delivery in order to win.

Hit on major talking points, instead of rambling.

[Kludge]

I'm also very, very impressed with the campaign's performance just in keeping the website up. - And it isn't just "up" - It's snappy!

This server has been UPGRADED (significantly) since the '08 run. This was a relatively minor debate, and the server's overwhelmed. I think that speaks volumes about Paul's performance and our odds this year. I had no intention to prior to seeing the debate (actually I forgot about it and was @ Lowe's at the beginning), but after seeing the game Ron's bringing, am going to make a solid donation to the pool today.

Congratulations Ron Paul, C4L, and all of us. Solid performance by people in the audience, too! Nothing but positivity, I heard. No shouting, just clapping and cheering. Great job!

[kliquid]

Pretty good night for him, in my opinion. I gave him an 8.

But apparently Herman Cain "won" the debate. I don't know what those people were watching, but okay.

[alex_florida]

Dr. Paul should work on the bugs - he could do better. Unfortunately, the most people who watches such debates do not know a lot about liberty issues, etc. They looked at this debate as a TV political show where Cane and even Johnson looked more likable.. He should be more prepared. I hope he will do better at the next debates but for now I would give him 5-7 points only, unfortunately

[The Dude]

8, would be a 9 or 10 if he had a stronger closing statement. Ron showed humor and that he's an immensely likeable person. Should have referenced the CNN poll at the end.

[Joseph]

I voted 10 because Ron Paul showed a consistent principle of not wavering even among unpopular issues. Ron Paul answered the questions in that Ron Paul way which is why we love him so much. I thought second place was Gary Johnson, Herman Cain 3rd, and the other two losers deserve to be set up with strait jackets and put in a rubber room together.

[Andrew-Austin]

I didn't like Ron's performance as much as I thought I would. I blame it on the questions, though. They weren't very good questions for him, but hopefully the next debates won't repeat them over and over. I think Ron should say the word "Constitution" as much as possible. He didn't do that tonight.

I think he should limit his Constitution talk, as its easily one of the most boring talking points the greater libertarian leaning crowd has come up with. Always talking about the Constitution makes libertarianism look a lot more shallow to outsiders.

People only care about the morality and utilitarian effects of policy. Some people care about appealing to authority figures ("the founding fathers"), but I think these people are in the minority.

[SimpleName]

Ron did great in the likability department. Jokes, charisma. Much better than the 08 campaign with the wording and organization of answers. 8/10, trying to part with all possible bias. The others, though, did enough. Empty rhetoric all over, as expected.

[HarryBrowneLives]

He did fine, but agree (for a long time now) he needs a coach. If you watch him live he does very well. A lot more one liners a lot more relaxed in front of a Revolution crowd. I think he needs a coach to work the bugs out a little and settle his mind down a little. It's kinda like a great 3 point shooter being too jacked up before or at the start of a game.

[HarryBrowneLives]

He did much better than anytime I can remember at being spontaneous, likeable, and funnny. Which lead me to give him a 7 vs a 6.

[PineGroveDave]

I gave him a "7". He did well, but not great. Yes, he stayed "on message". Yes he answered the questions and didn't dodge like Santorum and Pawlenty....BUT!

I'm gonna say this 'til I'm blue in the face...His image is in dire need of polishing. I want RP to win so badly I can taste it, but I can't do anything for the man but support him. Somebody else (are you listening admins and mods?) needs to get in front of his handlers and effect some changes or else he will most assuredly lose (much to my chagrin). I'm not so concerned about his speaking ability as I am more about his projected "image". Get your hand out of your pocket Ron! Stand up straight! Face the camera!

He should, IMHO, "dumb down" some of the topics he speaks about. The concept of "sound money" is foreign to most Americans. How do I know? I'm a manager and I used the very same term in a discussion with my crew one day (8 technicians)...not one of them knew what I meant by "sound money".

[sailingaway]

Pretty good night for him, in my opinion. I gave him an 8.

But apparently Herman Cain "won" the debate. I don't know what those people were watching, but okay.

I'm thinking there was a little under the table pizza involved for a hungry crew....

[sailingaway]

I gave him a "7". He did well, but not great. Yes, he stayed "on message". Yes he answered the questions and didn't dodge like Santorum and Pawlenty....BUT!

I'm gonna say this 'til I'm blue in the face...His image is in dire need of polishing. I want RP to win so badly I can taste it, but I can't do anything for the man but support him. Somebody else (are you listening admins and mods?) needs to get in front of his handlers and effect some changes or else he will most assuredly lose (much to my chagrin). I'm not so concerned about his speaking ability as I am more about his projected "image". Get your hand out of your pocket Ron! Stand up straight! Face the camera!

He should, IMHO, "dumb down" some of the topics he speaks about. The concept of "sound money" is foreign to most Americans. How do I know? I'm a manager and I used the very same term in a discussion with my crew one day (8 technicians)...not one of them knew what I meant by "sound money".

I was on justintv chat with a bunch of Dems who came on to hoot and they were impressed by ron, one said he'd vote for Ron in the general. I suggested that since Dems didn't have primary it couldn't hurt to register GOP and vote in the primary, then they could still vote however they wanted in the general. They specifically liked his hand in his pocket on the Bachmann answer. They liked that he was spontaneous and natural.

We are used to it with him, but everyone else is only used to politicians...

[John Q Public]

I gave him an 8. He didnt get many questions and he did stumble a little at the end. I would like to mention that Herman "Mr. Fed" Cain would get a 1, Tim "0 chance" Pawlenty gets a 1, Rick "clueless" Santoro gets a 1 and Gary "Libertarian but not close to Ron Paul" Johnson a 4.

[sailingaway]

Welcome to the forums, JohnQ!

[LisaNY]

10/10

He is the only candidate truly speaking extemporaneously and not from prepared talking points. He is the only candidate that comes across as having an in depth understanding of history and modern issues.


My thoughts exactly.

[Paul4Prez]

10 out of 10. I was shocked at how well he did. He slowed down and explained himself clearly and defended liberty unapologetically. He seemed far more confident and comfortable than the other candidates, and owned the crowd. He seemed much more Presidential than he did in 2007. Wow.

[PineGroveDave]

They specifically liked his hand in his pocket on the Bachmann answer. They liked that he was spontaneous and natural.

We are used to it with him, but everyone else is only used to politicians...

Don't get me wrong, I loved it too. It projects a degree of "casualness" and comfort rarely displayed in someone who is "propped up" in front of the media machine (Santorum?)...So yes, I agree...but this isn't about me. Hell RP could be up there on stage in PJs and slippers and I'm still voting for the man. It's mainstream America that counts. Back in the 60's Nixon and Kennedy debated. "Technically" Nixon stayed on task and performed well but Kennedy creamed him....wanna know why? Nixon was shown on TV as tired and slow (bags under his eyes...etc) whereas Kennedy was vibrant and polished...Image is everything. Perception is reality. This campaign needs people with their heads rooted in reality and aren't so delusional about the mans ideology.

[nate895]

a few home runs, a few stumbles - 7
showed he had the most debate experience


gave a lot of bait for the haters

+1

[FreedomProsperityPeace]

I give an 8/10. He wasn't very clear in his answer to defaulting on the debt, which was a question right in his wheelhouse. He also tripped up a bit in his closing statement. But overall he was great. The rest of the questions, I was really impressed by his answers.

[svobody]

I'd say 7.5. He looked comfortable, at ease - almost like he realizes this is his last go around, and at this point in his political career, the haters can truly F off. He also looked like a man, who unlike last go around, realizes this his moment. Just seemed really at peace with the situation. I felt he had a good rapport with the crowd as well, and that the audience seemed to anticipate his responses.

Also, he crushed the Bachman and drug question. They avoided feeding him any real economic policy questions, but no worries, those will come. Yes, he stumbled in the closing remarks, but only because he was eager to talk about issues, not pump his website or pander for donations. Definitely seemed the most authentic out of anybody on the stage, and you could tell he had "been there, done that".

[Dave Aiello]

I really enjoyed reading through the responses so far. Did anyone watch the post-debate coverage? Besides the room full of godfather pizza employees, how'd it go?

[Kludge]

I really enjoyed reading through the responses so far. Did anyone watch the post-debate coverage? Besides the room full of godfather pizza employees, how'd it go?
According to Luntz's dial-worshiping focus group from Retardistan, Cain won (something like a 80%+ majority) and he's now everyone's first pick. They're also ANGRY at Mitt Romney for not attending.

[Chowder]

I give him a seven. He stumbled and that cost him points. On the drug issue why didn't he talk about prohibition?

Of course, they only gave him 30 seconds in each response. (I timed it myself) They told the crowd to hold the applause but didn't do the same for Puck Fawlenty. They asked him only 4 questions 3 of them were stupid irrelevant and designed to trip him up.

Ron Paul was so excited he spoke too fast but also he was aware of that fact that they were going to cheat him of his time.

Still Ron Paul won the debate. Santorum acted silly. Pawlenty got mostly softballs plus he gave droning instances of his family (who cares about that). Cain was the best speaker but I didnt' like his answers. Johnson did okay but got treated like Ron.

This was not a debate. This was a stupid Q/A session where NO body debated. This was crap!

MSM: new plan to defeat Ron Paul. Give him the stupidest questions to answer. Make him trip up by cutting his time. Give him the least amount of questions and make him stand off to the side. Not in the middle.

[ForLibertyFight]

I give him a 6. He needs a coach to polish up his messages

[DeadheadForPaul]

He is speaking over the heads of the audience, and as a result, speaking only to the choir

He must simplify the message and must also direct the message in his favor

There were zero mentions of low taxes or abortion - he could have easily worked those into the various questions

[S.Shorland]

Juan Williams lied about his position on Israel and Ron didn't correct him but his answer was that Israel is free to take whatever action it sees fit (as a sovereign nation) so I think he got away without being tarred with Williams' smear.They're out to get him so he needs to always be on guard and not fail to point out loaded questions.

[eleganz]

I wish that I could watch the debate, link @ fox isn't working.

[ronpaulitician]

I think he did well. The "winner" is, sadly, up to the polls and people like that Luntz's audience. "Cain really knew the problem, presented a solution, and knew the people to do it." Um, no, Cain SAID he would analyze the problem, figure out the solution, and then put the right people to work.

It's no wonder people like John "I'm thinking of the letter N... M... O... P.... that's it, right P?" Edwards can market their 'talent'.

But things are definitely looking more positive than they did in 2007.

Felt bad for Gary Johnson as he got a lot of "me too, the same as Ron" kind of questions, plus that idiotic "what kind of reality show would you have". I guess he's this year's "electability... do you have any?" victim.

Santorum makes me understand the "if that one dude wins, I'm leaving this country" sentiment.

Pawlenty didn't impress me, but also didn't unimpress me. Guess that's not good either way.

[trey4sports]

Here's the way I look at it......

Ron slid under the radar. I watched the full Fox News coverage after the debate and there was no mention of Ron being smeared and although Cain got a lot of praise, Ron Paul was not attacked and DID NOT hurt his campaign at this debate. The drug war response was killer in my opinion, but again that is MY opinion and i have no clue what the american idol drones thought.

Overall, Ron didn't win the debate (in terms of broad appeal)but he also didn't shoot himself in the foot either.

[Badger Paul]

The important thing to remember with these debates is not making a gaffe that will play in the media for weeks on end and forcing the campaign to spend valuable time defending the candidate. I didn't get to see the debate but just judging from what I've seen on these boards that didn't happen tonight which is good. Because what will win Iowa and New Hampshire is not so much these debates but the contact the campaign makes with voters in the first few states, both the grassroots volunteers and the candidate himself, which is the most important. RP has to use the skills he has as a retail campaigner to get voters in the early states to support him and that he has to spend more time in these states than he did in 2007-08. So far we're off to a good start in that front because I think he's made as many appearances in Iowa as he did in the last campaign cycle.

[dirknb@hotmail.com]

I gave him a 7. Not stellar, but some great moments. Yet more good exposure, an overall positive.

[Johnnymac]

9-10 10-10: i liked how Ron told it how it was, everyone else seemed to be bragging there tails off. especially Rick and Tim, Herman Cain tended to get the really important questions, and made a huge impact with his speaking on the audience. Gary was thrown to the dogs after speaking out(when he spoke out about not getting questions he was about 4 -5 questions behind Rick and Tim), but so weren't we in 07-08 so he will have to fight to get to where we are now. That chick asked Herman a question that was sort of a dis on Ron and didn't even let Ron Respond which was very rude. I recorded the questions asked Tim got the most Rick 2nd, Herm 3rd, Ron 4th, and Gary 5th, Tim and Rick kept talking past there limits the most. I wish i could've recorded the times but I didn't have multiple stop watches to use.

[MadOdorMachine]

I voted him a 1 out of 10.

This may sound a bit harsh, but I was really disappointed with that debate. Ron Paul had the chance to really knock it out the park, but he completely failed. He was the most experienced person there and was out performed by pretty much everyone except Rick Santorum. Bottom of the line, I have never seen RP look so bad in a debate. I felt like he had no heart in it and almost like he feels he's going to be given the nomination. The over exuberant supporters don't help in this situation. I don't want to see a re-run of the last election and I really do feel that he is the only candidate that can truly bring America out of the mess we're in. It seems like he has no focus on what he should be campaigning about. I think he should:

Focus everything on the economy.

It doesn't really matter what question he's asked he needs to bring it back to that. He has the experience and has worked his whole life for this. He has the answers to fix this country, but I don't think he realizes it. Someone needs to give him a pep talk before these debates.

[rp08orbust]

His average rating is 7.68 at the moment with 173 votes.

[WilliamC]

Went with an 8.

He didn'dt make any gaffes, except for rushing his closing remarks.

He was very comfortable and at ease, more so than the others.

He looked respectable and and was decisive in his answers.

He obviously knows what he is talking about.

And he used humor well.

This is the Ron Paul that can actually win elections I saw last night, and I'm pumped!

[Kludge]

One thing mentioned worth mentioning again was when RP used the word "Jews." That did cause a brief split-second of discomfort in me, mostly because my family's Evangelist. "Jew" turned into a slur, apparently. I had a Jewish English teacher who actually marked me down once for using the word "Jew." The "nigga" form of Jew is Jewish person. "Christ-killer" equates to "spear-chucker," I guess.

[MadOdorMachine]

This is the Ron Paul that can actually win elections I saw last night, and I'm pumped!

I was thinking the exact opposite. When he was running in 2008, you could hear how passionate he was about what he was saying. He could have won in 2008 had he done some things differently. It seems he might not have learned from those mistakes. He has to get a political advisor to help him focus on what he needs to campaign on. He'll never win if he doesn't and that's a shame because quite frankly it's now or never and he's the best shot we have at fixing the economy and saving our national sovereignty.

[Kludge]

I was thinking the exact opposite. When he was running in 2008, you could hear how passionate he was about what he was saying. He could have won in 2008 had he done some things differently. It seems he might not have learned from those mistakes. He has to get a political advisor to help him focus on what he needs to campaign on. He'll never win if he doesn't and that's a shame because quite frankly it's now or never and he's the best shot we have at fixing the economy and saving our national sovereignty.
Couldn't disagree more. In 2009, he tried repeating the same condensed points over and over and over on MSM. It was terrible because it wasn't Ron. He droned on and I quit tuning in to listen to him. Last night, though, he was Ron, and it was the only debate I ever actually laughed out loud from the candidates' (Ron Paul's, rather) response. He got roaring laughter and very loud applause, which is really unprecedented.

He was actually strongly encouraged to be coached before and he refused. You can't homogenize his responses because of his stubborn independence, but I think he turned that into a benefit, not a detriment last night, because his wit allowed him to give very original and witty responses to the questions posed.

[MadOdorMachine]

Couldn't disagree more. In 2009, he tried repeating the same condensed points over and over and over on MSM. It was terrible because it wasn't Ron. He droned on and I quit tuning in to listen to him. Last night, though, he was Ron, and it was the only debate I ever actually laughed out loud from the candidates' (Ron Paul's, rather) response. He got roaring laughter and very loud applause, which is really unprecedented.

He was actually strongly encouraged to be coached before and he refused. You can't homogenize his responses because of his stubborn independence, but I think he turned that into a benefit, not a detriment last night, because his wit allowed him to give very original and witty responses to the questions posed.

I'm not talking about coaching him in what to say. You're right, it wouldn't be him. I would coach him to stick to certain points, namely the economy which is his strong suit. Nearly every single issue (foreign policy, experience, etc) can be tied to this. It's what's on most people's mind right now. He also needs to differentiate himself from other candidates. In that debate, I felt Herman Cain stood out the most and apparently others did as well. I'm not trying to bash RP though. I wouldn't be here if I didn't want him to win! :)