Percent Debate Time By Candidate

[LinuxJedi]

I watched the NBC debate, and I had the sense that things were fishy in terms of the amount of time each candidate got to talk. So, this time I timed how long each candidate got to talk, and put together some percentages of time for you here. I did this as I watched the debate, so I don't pretend this is "scientific", but should be "about-right".

Here are the numbers from the Tea Party CNN debate:

Total candidate talking time (in seconds): 4041

Percent of time by candidate:

Perry: 21.3%
Cain: 8.2%
Bachmann: 12.7%
Gingrich: 10.8%
Huntsman: 11.3%
Paul: 9.6%
Santorum: 10.4%
Romney: 15.7%

Hope this helps... go forth and make pie charts. Also, I would suggest that we should put this "finding" to the news outlets and ask them to explain why candidates are not getting equal time, as Wolf promised?

I took timestamps of the time of each talk also, so if anyone wants to plot a sequence of when people got to talk vs others, I can provide that info too :-)

[Brian4Liberty]

I'm surprised Bachmann got that much time. It seemed like they hardly asked her anything, especially in the first hour.

[BSU kid]

Wolf lied...not fair at all time wise.

[RonPaul101.com]

The best way for me to combat unfair advertising is by purchasing some signs from the Ron Paul store...

Thank you for your generous donation!

Amount: $97.50
Transaction ID: 307763135
Transaction date/time: 2011-09-12 22:50:50

[Sola_Fide]

Wow. The guy polling third had the second lowest time to speak? Horrible.

Actually, I think there were a few moments that Ron could have interrupted when he was being ignored. I like when he buts in like that.

[mczerone]

I'm not gonna go around and shout about equal time, what I'm more upset about is the questions posed. Someone asked about the FED, and Paul was ignored. Then someone asked, philosophically, how much of their income they should keep, and they let some tool go on about the Fair tax.

Then Paul gets asked about executive orders. Juicy. (though his answer was great and well received)

And beyond that, how many mentions do the candidates get in the "postgame" show where CNN tells you what to think about who won. These have to be 95% or more Romney on perry. Erick Erickson is the tool bent on marginalizing Paul this go around. David Frum must be busy.

[bolidew]

Paul really needs to "create" some rebuttals.

[Sola_Fide]

I'm not gonna go around and shout about equal time, what I'm more upset about is the questions posed. Someone asked about the FED, and Paul was ignored. Then someone asked, philosophically, how much of their income they should keep, and they let some tool go on about the Fair tax.

Then Paul gets asked about executive orders. Juicy. (though his answer was great and well received)

And beyond that, how many mentions do the candidates get in the "postgame" show where CNN tells you what to think about who won. These have to be 95% or more Romney on perry. Erick Erickson is the tool bent on marginalizing Paul this go around. David Frum must be busy.

Good points.

The only fair debate is a debate where every candidate gets asked the same question and has the same amount of time to respond to the same question. We haven't had a fair debate yet this year.

[LinuxJedi]

I had just wanted to measure the bias while I watched anyways, and I do agree that a proper debate is more important than anything... something Wolf also promised.

[TheTexan]

I'm surprised Bachmann got that much time. It seemed like they hardly asked her anything, especially in the first hour.

I'm not sure if you noticed this, but they called Bachmann a frontrunner when they introduced her in the debate, and the CNN poll only offered Perry, Romney and Bachmann as options (not even an "other" option).

They are starting to push Bachmann hard, even though Paul is polling better in nearly all national polls.

[Ronpauljones]

They are using the fact that theres 8 candidates to hide the fact that they are ignoring Ron.

[mikeycgto]

Here's a quick graph of the data.

http://digitape.net/cnn-debate-time-graph.png

[Dianne]

I'm surprised Bachmann got that much time. It seemed like they hardly asked her anything, especially in the first hour.

Bachmann bulldozed Blitzer... She was talking when not called on, and forcing attention upon herself. Paul needs to do the same thing. First........................mistake Paul made tonight, was he was excluded from the questioning about the Federal Reserve (which is a major strongsuit for him). When they asked him the question about sick peeps with no insurance, he should have responded to the Federal Reserve question. Paul needs to set the forum, not let those losers in the media set it for him. He should have said "sorry Wolf, but economics are my strong suit; and I can't let that question go by unanswered by me" .... I've been introducing legislation to audit the fed since _______...

Paul needs to control the media !! He has to stop believing there is fairness, or honesty in the media. I stopped believing that two years ago, and I was a late bloomer.

He's a great man, with a great message. I've been looking through the spin, and what I'm seeing are people yelling to "let the guy die" that has no medical insurance (which I believe was totally contrived by CNN to destroy Paul's democratic support).

F their questions.. He needs to know by now, the questions they ask him are not necessarily the questions he wants to answer..

[TheTexan]

Frothy mix of fecal matter and lube guy got more talking time...

[ProfNo]

Here's a quick graph of the data.

http://digitape.net/cnn-debate-time-graph.png

You should overlay this with the poll numbers. That shows how much this time distribution makes no sense.

[KramerDSP]

Good points.

The only fair debate is a debate where every candidate gets asked the same question and has the same amount of time to respond to the same question. We haven't had a fair debate yet this year.

Demint's forum came the closest by far. I think instead of podiums, there should be soundproof chambers, and every candidate comes out one-by-one to answer the same question with the same time limit.

[mikeycgto]

You should overlay this with the poll numbers. That shows how much this time distribution makes no sense.

Do you have any links to recent and accurate poll data? I have some cool ideas for some interactive charts with this data.

[mport1]

Demint's forum came the closest by far. I think instead of podiums, there should be soundproof chambers, and every candidate comes out one-by-one to answer the same question with the same time limit.

Agreed.

[Sola_Fide]

Demint's forum came the closest by far. I think instead of podiums, there should be soundproof chambers, and every candidate comes out one-by-one to answer the same question with the same time limit.

Yep, you're right. DeMint's forum was the fairer format.

[MJU1983]

Thanks, made a good Tweet!

http://twitter.com/#!/mju1983/status/113470592128270336

[Maximus]

Paul really should have butt in on the Federal Reserve question

[TheTexan]

Paul really should have butt in on the Federal Reserve question

I think, like many of us, he thought they were "surely" going to ask him next. How could they not? He literally wrote the book on the Fed.

By the time it was clear they skipped over him he lost his opportunity.

[mikeycgto]

Spent a bit of time and made a more interactive graph. Here is a screenshot:

http://digitape.net/cnn-debate-time-graph-2.png

The chart itself is available here:
http://digitape.net/cnn-debate.html

Been some talk in the ##RonPaul channel on Freenode and I think a few of us are going to put together some more data and graphs like this.

[ProfNo]

Spent a bit of time and made a more interactive graph. Here is a screenshot:

http://digitape.net/cnn-debate-time-graph-2.png

The chart itself is available here:
http://digitape.net/cnn-debate.html


Been some talk in the ##RonPaul channel Freenode and I think a few of us are going to put together some more data and graphs like this.

+ rep. Great comparison. Especially since it was CNN's poll! You would think they would at least follow their own numbers.

[centure7]

It seems to me that those numbers are vastly less unfair than the previous debate. While Perry got a lot more time, he also was fielded a torrent of jabs from competing candidates which he deserved additional time to respond to. I'm very happy with the numbers!

[Bruno]

Spent a bit of time and made a more interactive graph. Here is a screenshot:

http://digitape.net/cnn-debate-time-graph-2.png

The chart itself is available here:
http://digitape.net/cnn-debate.html

Been some talk in the ##RonPaul channel Freenode and I think a few of us are going to put together some more data and graphs like this.

+ rep and welcome!

[Hospitaller]

Spent a bit of time and made a more interactive graph. Here is a screenshot:

http://digitape.net/cnn-debate-time-graph-2.png

The chart itself is available here:
http://digitape.net/cnn-debate.html

Been some talk in the ##RonPaul channel Freenode and I think a few of us are going to put together some more data and graphs like this.

Holy mother of god, its undeniable +rep

[mikeycgto]

Going to try and put together some more charts and graphs like this. Will probably get a more suitable domain and place to host this stuff as well if I put enough of these together.

Was also told about the project for auto screen scraping on various MSM web pages and I think I may be able to help out in that department as well ;)

[heavenlyboy34]

Good points.

The only fair debate is a debate where every candidate gets asked the same question and has the same amount of time to respond to the same question. We haven't had a fair debate yet this year.
The '08 debates weren't fair either. This is something that should be expected going into the debates, IMO.

[Cleaner44]

Do you have any links to recent and accurate poll data? I have some cool ideas for some interactive charts with this data.

http://thecaseforronpaul.wordpress.com/

I gather the info here.

http://thecaseforronpaul.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/september-graph.png

[banks11]

Wow. The guy polling third had the second lowest time to speak? Horrible.

Actually, I think there were a few moments that Ron could have interrupted when he was being ignored. I like when he buts in like that.


Exactly what I was thinking, especially on the fed question........Thanks for the info and the second chart.

[CaptainAmerica]

Rick Santorum has little dog syndrome.

[Crickett]

Demint's forum came the closest by far. I think instead of podiums, there should be soundproof chambers, and every candidate comes out one-by-one to answer the same question with the same time limit.

I agree. I really liked that set up more than any of the others, so far. It sux when they do not ask all of them the same questions. Maybe it will get better when more drop out. sigh.

[evadmurd]

These debates are only publicity stunts for the network involved. They are devised to provide entertainment and ratings for the agency/network that sponsors it. THat is all they are. Nothing else. They are not interested in fairness or 'equal time' or anything else other than making money. They can get more spin off of the odd questioning of Ron rather than the stuff they already know he is going to say. After all, he has been saying the same thing for 25 years, with very little, if any, variation.

We need to quit wasting our time with these things. If we really wanted to give Ron a fair chance, maybe we should sponsor a forum like Demint did.

[Article V]

I mean my heading literally: Ron Paul needs to bring props to get attention.

If they start asking about healthcare, he should put on his stethoscope. If they skip him, the visual shows how dumb they are for skipping a physician. Or, if they skip him on the FED, on the next question he needs to pull out a copy of his book and say,
The last question was about the Federal Reserve System. I'm the only candidate up here who wrote a New York Times Best Seller on that very topic, but I guess the moderator must not have know that when he skipped me. If I get more time on that issue later on, I'd love to discuss it; because the issue of the Federal Reserve is THE primary focus of my campaign. Now, <insert name of moderator>, to answer your last question...

[helmuth_hubener]

Here's how Ron Paul is doing in the campaign:

https://docs.google.com/uc?id=0B53TNvGgitKyMmNlMTNjZDQtYzM5MS00NjU3LTgxZjc tMzQ2MmI5MTlkMjRl
https://docs.google.com/uc?id=0B53TNvGgitKyZWNlOGE1ODAtMDVkMC00NThkLWI5Njg tMWFkZGFjZjI3N2Uz
https://docs.google.com/uc?id=0B53TNvGgitKyZjBlYTQ0MzktNjQxZS00MmMwLWEwYzE tZDI3MzNiYTEzZmZm

Here is how the media is treating him:

https://docs.google.com/uc?id=0B53TNvGgitKyOWZhYmZlOTktZDdiZS00MmM3LTk5ODY tOTMzYTMwMDkxZjc4
https://docs.google.com/uc?id=0B53TNvGgitKyM2Q5NmNhOGQtZmI3OC00M2ZlLTlhNjU tNDRmMGM5ZjEwMjY2

Feel free to use!

[AmberH]

Some of the reason Ron didn't have much time is because he actually answered his question instead of dancing around it.

Bachman went on and on with each question

There were about 3 or 4 questions that Ron didn't get cutoff he was just able to give a brilliant answer in about 90 secs. He finished his answer and then said nothing and blitzer moved on. It was the quality of questions that were unfair.

[LinuxJedi]

This might be a more accurate source for numbers than my own: http://www.dailypaul.com/178357/cnn-teaparty-debate-9-12-2011-statistics

[asurfaholic]

I think the biggest problem, and the reason Perry got so much extra time is because a HUGE majority of the questions where asked in this form - "Do you agree with Perry's position?" At that point, Perry had the right to have a rebuttal after so many questions. This is not a Rick Perry debate, its a republican presidential debate. If there was ever proof that there is clear media bias, and media anointing of favored candidates, it is here.

Someone needs to put an end to the corrupt media stranglehold on truth.

[RonPaul101.com]

Wow. The guy polling third had the second lowest time to speak? Horrible.

Actually, I think there were a few moments that Ron could have interrupted when he was being ignored. I like when he buts in like that.

Agreed, when someone mentions RP, like Perry did in his reply to the taxes comment, RP NEEDS to just interupt back with his reply and not wait for a turn. Bachmann did it several times in her exchange with Perry; Santorum ended up being pushed off for another 3 or 4 minutes because she kept the exchange alive. Ron Paul needs to keep his exchanges alive longer when he gets them.

And why is Huntsman getting so much speaking time? I think I poll higher than Huntsman...

[Captain Shays]

It seems to me that those numbers are vastly less unfair than the previous debate. While Perry got a lot more time, he also was fielded a torrent of jabs from competing candidates which he deserved additional time to respond to. I'm very happy with the numbers!

Right but at the same time when Santurom took jabs at Ron Paul he either didn't step up and respond and or Blitzer didn't give him a chance like he did when Perry and Romney were attacked. RP really needs to take off the gloves in these debates.

[OpiateoftheOne]

I heard Blitzer interviewed on the Neal Boortz show morning of the 12th. He mentioned every single candidate of the eight by name with the exception or Ron Paul. Not once but on two occasions during the short interview. It was almost like he had been told by his handlers that if he mentioned RP's name he would be fired or if he just wouldn't mention his name he would go away. Blitzer even admitted to Boortz that it was his natural tendency to give more time to those who were leaders.

I guess that means leaders as in whomever the media decides is the leader regardless of how the poor ignorant people might vote in poles or with their meager contributions.

[KEEF]

Right but at the same time when Santurom took jabs at Ron Paul he either didn't step up and respond and or Blitzer didn't give him a chance like he did when Perry and Romney were attacked. RP really needs to take off the gloves in these debates.

Also Wolfe even asked Perry to chime in on what he thought about other candidates rebuttals. One time sticks out with me, I think it was BAchman calling out Romney and after Romney responded, Wolfe asked Perry what his opinion was?

[KEEF]

I heard Blitzer interviewed on the Neal Boortz show morning of the 12th. He mentioned every single candidate of the eight by name with the exception or Ron Paul. Not once but on two occasions during the short interview. It was almost like he had been told by his handlers that if he mentioned RP's name he would be fired or if he just wouldn't mention his name he would go away. Blitzer even admitted to Boortz that it was his natural tendency to give more time to those who were leaders.

I guess that means leaders as in whomever the media decides is the leader regardless of how the poor ignorant people might vote in poles or with their meager contributions.

Maybe Wolfe just doesn't know how to count correctly..."1, 2, 4, 5, 6, etc."

[Carole]

I think the biggest problem, and the reason Perry got so much extra time is because a HUGE majority of the questions where asked in this form - "Do you agree with Perry's position?" At that point, Perry had the right to have a rebuttal after so many questions. This is not a Rick Perry debate, its a republican presidential debate. If there was ever proof that there is clear media bias, and media anointing of favored candidates, it is here.


Someone needs to put an end to the corrupt media stranglehold on truth.


Spot on. I noticed that, too. Nearly every question had his name in it. LOL

[KevinHarlan]

https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0BxQfAR3W6t4_NzViZWZmZTQtMjJjMi00NzAwLTg0Z DctMWY2YzZjYWZjNjI5&sort=name&layout=list&num=50
Pie graph rounded up.

[LinuxJedi]

Can someone put together a very simple mix video, showing Wolf's very adamant pledge to give people equal time, along with some a little scoreboard that shows how much candidates actually talked? I remember Wolf promising to give equal time, and I would really like a little video to spread around the Internet in an effort for future debates to have a timer up on the TV, along with a score to show how many times each candidate has spoken. Perhaps we can use these numbers as fuel for the blackout money bomb, by putting a link to the pledge site at the end?

Again, I do think the Daily Paul numbers might be more reliable than my own :-)

[kylejack]

I'm surprised Bachmann got that much time. It seemed like they hardly asked her anything, especially in the first hour.
She got a chance to hammer Perry repeatedly.

[romacox]

The polls run similarly to the time the candidates were given. The time given likely has to do with who the parties want elected, and I really question the polls. Before Rick Perry announced his candidacy, the news kept saying Romney was at the popular choice. But Tea Party leaders kept saying no, they considered Romney too much like Obama. I think it is more propaganda than fact to discourage us from voting for the best man thinking that he is so low in the polls that he hasn't a chance.

See Article below from Glen Beck Interview:
"Texas Governor Rick Perry has made quite a stir since entering the 2012 race last month, and though his poll numbers are fairing quite well, the GOP establishment has spoken, and Mitt Romney is their man.

“Rick Perry may be surging in the polls of Republican primary voters, but his party insiders aren’t convinced he’ll be the best general election candidate. More than two thirds of Republican insiders say Mitt Romney has a better chance than Perry of defeating President Obama,” Glenn reported on radio this morning.

Its all well and good that the party leaders have their pick, but should we really be listening to them?

Seeing as this is the same establishment that has lended its support to the like of Bob Dole and John McCain, probably not.

PAT: So, same party insiders, I’m guessing, they always know what they’re talking about. So

GLENN: Well, they — one thing they failed to recognize is Americans don’t buy into their bull crap anymore.

PAT: I think they do fail to recognize that. I think they really do. I think they believe that they’re just as relevant.

The bigger question at hand is why the GOP would be so quick to support a Romney, over say Perry, Bachmann, or other Tea Party favorites?"

Read more at Glen Beck.com (http://www.glennbeck.com/2011/09/02/gop-establishment-wants-romney/)

[wes_h]

I'm a DPer, but I registered just so I could let y'all see some more stats that I took during the CNN and also the MSNBC debate as well. Have a ball:

CNN Debate:
http://www.dawnoftheweak.com/2011/09/cnn-teaparty-debate-9122011-statistics.html

Talking Time (mm:ss):
Perry 13:54
Romney 10:56
Ron Paul 07:34
Bachmann 08:35
Newt 07:32
Cain 05:42
Santorum 07:06
Huntsman 07:50
Total 1:09:09


MSNBC Debate:
http://www.dawnoftheweak.com/2011/09/msnbcpolitico-9-7-2011-debate.html

Total Time Spent Talking (minutes):
Perry 14:59
Mitt 11:57
Paul 09:19
Bachmann 09:05
Newt 06:53
Herman 05:41
Santorum 06:11
Huntsman 08:52

There's more stats on the blog if you're interested. Cheers!
RP2012

[LinuxJedi]

I actually forwarded these times to Cain and Gingrich :-)

I pointed out that I would like all candidates to have equal time, and that I felt it was unfair that I was unable to hear more from them. I suggested that it might be advisable for all candidates to have a time slice allocated to them, and once it's used up it's gone... I wrote this as a concerned citizen, without mentioning my own political leanings.

For the next debates, I think we should do this again if it is reasonably quick to get these numbers... how did you do it? I just used a stopwatch which isn't the best way per se ;-)

[wes_h]

Nice, I sent them to Cain as well. Yep, used my iPhone to time it and kept it to only when they started talking and when they finished. Tracked it on a spreadsheet. I have a DVR of course when I think I need to pause or rewind, always helps. But overall, I don't think it's an exact science, a second here or there won't hurt anything unless it's used to intentionally undercut someone, which isn't our way of doing things of course. Equality baby, that's where it's at.

[LinuxJedi]

I wrote a python script to help me keep up with the rapid changes in the debate. Perhaps for this next one we should post the times we get here, and we'll figure out any large discrepancies we get.

If anyone wants the Python script, let me know.

[wes_h]

Started teaching myself Pyton a couple months ago, haven't quite gotten the hang just yet as I had to stop to learn After Effects for a contract project. So much learning, so little time.

I'll post an update here and we can compare notes after the next debate.

[wes_h]

For latest Fox Google Debate:

If one looks at the polls as an indication as to how much debate allotment should be doled out to whom, then Fox has failed. Perry, Romney, Ron Paul, Bachmann are the order of the candidates in the polls, yet Ron Paul was only above Gary Johnson in his talking opportunities with only 6 total turns talking. Without the 3 blanket questions this left Paul with only 3 questions directed specifically to him, whereas Santorum, Huntsman, Bachmann, Gingrich and Cain were given more opportunities. It should then come as no surprise that Johnson and Paul came in as the longest to wait between turns talking. Johnson waited an average of 14:05, and Paul waited an average of 9:31.


Total Talk (mm:ss)
Romney 12:09
Perry 11:10
Huntsman 07:41
Santorum 07:06
Cain 06:23
Bachmann 06:13
Gingrich 05:44
Ron Paul 04:33
Johnson 04:10
Total 1:05:09

% of Total Talk Time
Romney 18.65%
Perry 17.14%
Huntsman 11.79%
Santorum 10.90%
Cain 9.80%
Bachmann 9.54%
Gingrich 8.80%
Ron Paul 6.98%
Johnson 6.40%

Turns Talking
Romney 15
Perry 13
Santorum 9
Huntsman 9
Bachmann 8
Gingrich 7
Cain 7
Ron Paul 6
Johnson 5

Sad, isn't it?

More stats and commentary available:
http://www.dawnoftheweak.com/2011/09/fox-news-google-debate-9222011.html

[GunnyFreedom]

more people are noticing this time around though. That's what energized us in 2008. :D

[RonPaulFever]

More stats and commentary available:
http://www.dawnoftheweak.com/2011/09/fox-news-google-debate-9222011.html

I don't like spamming Drudge with RP stuff, but I had to send this in. The Jon Stewart piece was great but the same sh*t is still going on and after 4 years it's reeeeally starting to piss me off.

[Article V]

For latest Fox Google Debate:

If one looks at the polls as an indication as to how much debate allotment should be doled out to whom, then Fox has failed. Perry, Romney, Ron Paul, Bachmann are the order of the candidates in the polls, yet Ron Paul was only above Gary Johnson in his talking opportunities with only 6 total turns talking. Without the 3 blanket questions this left Paul with only 3 questions directed specifically to him, whereas Santorum, Huntsman, Bachmann, Gingrich and Cain were given more opportunities. It should then come as no surprise that Johnson and Paul came in as the longest to wait between turns talking. Johnson waited an average of 14:05, and Paul waited an average of 9:31.


Total Talk (mm:ss)
Romney 12:09
Perry 11:10
Huntsman 07:41
Santorum 07:06
Cain 06:23
Bachmann 06:13
Gingrich 05:44
Ron Paul 04:33
Johnson 04:10
Total 1:05:09

% of Total Talk Time
Romney 18.65%
Perry 17.14%
Huntsman 11.79%
Santorum 10.90%
Cain 9.80%
Bachmann 9.54%
Gingrich 8.80%
Ron Paul 6.98%
Johnson 6.40%

Turns Talking
Romney 15
Perry 13
Santorum 9
Huntsman 9
Bachmann 8
Gingrich 7
Cain 7
Ron Paul 6
Johnson 5

Sad, isn't it?

More stats and commentary available:
http://www.dawnoftheweak.com/2011/09/fox-news-google-debate-9222011.htmlSome of this is due to the format. When Perry attacks Romney, Romney gets an additional 30 seconds speaking time. When Romney and Bachmann each attack Perry, Perry gets an additional minute of speaking time. Add up all these additionals rebuttals after personal attacks, and the numbers are bound to favor the challenged frontrunners disproportionately. No one is attacking Ron Paul because no one could pull any votes away from Ron Paul; it would be a fruitless effort. That's less an indication of media bias than it is of good politics on the part of the GOP field.

I'd be more interested to see how many direct questions each candidate received from the moderators not including rebuttal remarks from other candidate's attacks.

[Diashi]

We simply need candidates to drop. Santorum, Cain, Huntsman, they need to go. As soon as we get down to 5 or even 6 candidates, we can get some better talking time.

[GunnyFreedom]

Some of this is due to the format. When Perry attacks Romney, Romney gets an additional 30 seconds speaking time. When Romney and Bachmann each attack Perry, Perry gets an additional minute of speaking time. Add up all these additionals rebuttals after personal attacks, and the numbers are bound to favor the challenged frontrunners disproportionately. No one is attacking Ron Paul because no one could pull any votes away from Ron Paul; it would be a fruitless effort. That's less an indication of media bias than it is of good politics on the part of the GOP field.

I'd be more interested to see how many direct questions each candidate received from the moderators not including rebuttal remarks from other candidate's attacks.

http://www.dawnoftheweak.com/2011/09/fox-news-google-debate-9222011.html




Questions
Responses
Follow-ups


Perry
8
4
1


Romney
8
5
2


Bachmann
7
1
0


Gingrich
7
0
0


Cain
7
0
0


Santorum
7
1
1


Ron Paul
6
0
0


Huntsman
6
2
1


Johnson
5
0
0


Total
61
13

5

[MJU1983]

Thanks for the figures...tweeted about it and promoted BLACK THIS OUT! :)

http://twitter.com/#!/mju1983/status/117121097211715584

^^ RT?

[heavenlyboy34]

Good points.

The only fair debate is a debate where every candidate gets asked the same question and has the same amount of time to respond to the same question. We haven't had a fair debate yet this year.
Aye, that's the way debates SHOULD be handled. I've never seen a presidential debate handled properly, though. I don't expect it to anytime soon-especially with anti-establishment folks like RP.

[RonPaulFever]

As soon as we get down to 5 or even 6 candidates, we can get some better talking time.

It didn't happen in 2007 and it won't ever happen until the MSM is absolutely forced to give him equal time. How that will be accomplished is beyond me. :confused:

[wes_h]

Some of this is due to the format. When Perry attacks Romney, Romney gets an additional 30 seconds speaking time. When Romney and Bachmann each attack Perry, Perry gets an additional minute of speaking time. Add up all these additionals rebuttals after personal attacks, and the numbers are bound to favor the challenged frontrunners disproportionately. No one is attacking Ron Paul because no one could pull any votes away from Ron Paul; it would be a fruitless effort. That's less an indication of media bias than it is of good politics on the part of the GOP field.

I'd be more interested to see how many direct questions each candidate received from the moderators not including rebuttal remarks from other candidate's attacks.

As GunnyFreedom pointed out, those stats are also included. I would note, however, that the moderators also hold the keys to the topics that trigger back 'n forth, and they often ignited what turned into frequent responses using the line of questioning as the fire powder. I do agree with you, it's definitely good politics for a candidate to ignite a feud on-stage to get some back 'n forth going, but I also think the moderators play a large role in picking the topics that allow this.

[RileyE104]

On the bright side, 'libertarians' in general came out in third during this debate... Paul and Johnson together got 8:43 of talking time. That accounts for about 13.5% of the debate.

I think this last debate was great for libertarians and the anti-war/fiscally-responsible foreign policy crowd thanks to Paul, Johnson and Huntsman.

[Xenophage]

Combine Ron Paul and Gary Johnson's numbers. Eleven questions asked of true defenders of liberty! Third place in terms of speaking time! I'm amazed. I love it.

[wes_h]

On the bright side, 'libertarians' in general came out in third during this debate... Paul and Johnson together got 8:43 of talking time. That accounts for about 13.5% of the debate.

I think this last debate was great for libertarians and the anti-war/fiscally-responsible foreign policy crowd thanks to Paul, Johnson and Huntsman.


Combine Ron Paul and Gary Johnson's numbers. Eleven questions asked of true defenders of liberty! Third place in terms of speaking time! I'm amazed. I love it.

haha! Love the optimism! Thanks, needed some silver lining. :)

[Article V]

http://www.dawnoftheweak.com/2011/09/fox-news-google-debate-9222011.html




Questions
Responses
Follow-ups


Perry
8
4
1


Romney
8
5
2


Bachmann
7
1
0


Gingrich
7
0
0


Cain
7
0
0


Santorum
7
1
1


Ron Paul
6
0
0


Huntsman
6
2
1


Johnson
5
0
0


Total
61
13

5

Thanks! Looking at this chart, I don't think the debate was all that bad. It's sort of swell knowing that Ron Paul's answers were so clear that they needed no further clarification and were not attacked by the others like they normally would be. What a great job Ron Paul did!
As GunnyFreedom pointed out, those stats are also included. I would note, however, that the moderators also hold the keys to the topics that trigger back 'n forth, and they often ignited what turned into frequent responses using the line of questioning as the fire powder. I do agree with you, it's definitely good politics for a candidate to ignite a feud on-stage to get some back 'n forth going, but I also think the moderators play a large role in picking the topics that allow this.True. And I think some questions were meant to create a back-and-forth with Ron Paul, but they failed to spur controversy. Had they done so, Ron Paul would have received more time.

But let's also not forget that sometimes the back-and-forth helps candidates, and sometimes it destroys them. I predict Perry's numbers will drop significantly while Paul's numbers rise finally above the much-sought-after 15% threshold. All that time showed how woefully unprepared Perry is as a candidate; while we shined every time the spotlight came on us. We literally stole the show! Give the people what they want and keep them begging for more! RON PAUL 2012!

[LinuxJedi]

I wanted to post my analysis, but did it on a different thread, sorry... I used the figures from that thread also:

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?317804-Fox-News-Debate-Failed-in-Candidate-Time-Appropriations&p=3584224&viewfull=1#post3584224

[wes_h]

Thanks! Looking at this chart, I don't think the debate was all that bad. It's sort of swell knowing that Ron Paul's answers were so clear that they needed no further clarification and were not attacked by the others like they normally would be. What a great job Ron Paul did!True. And I think some questions were meant to create a back-and-forth with Ron Paul, but they failed to spur controversy. Had they done so, Ron Paul would have received more time.

But let's also not forget that sometimes the back-and-forth helps candidates, and sometimes it destroys them. I predict Perry's numbers will drop significantly while Paul's numbers rise finally above the much-sought-after 15% threshold. All that time showed how woefully unprepared Perry is as a candidate; while we shined every time the spotlight came on us. We literally stole the show! Give the people what they want and keep them begging for more! RON PAUL 2012!

Great, great points! And I agree, Perry got more time but he definitely was blown up in the process. I fully expect his poll numbers to drop significantly in the next week. I wouldn't be surprised to see Gary Johnson get some press and maybe a bump in the polls, and hopefully the same for our guy.