PDA

View Full Version : I am a little worried on this Iowa debate




PlaytoWin
12-12-2007, 01:25 PM
The two questions were perfect for Ron Paul and the other candidates frankly took his position and articulated it better than him. He needs to step up his public speaking skills.

Primbs
12-12-2007, 01:28 PM
Ron Paul still has time to get some debate coaching. This has been suggested in the past. I hope the candidate does something about this. The media has already written stories on his speaking style and image.

Image can be changed with just a few modifications from a good coach.

slantedview
12-12-2007, 01:28 PM
Audio link for anyone not listening/watching:

http://www.cnn.com/audio/radio/cnntv.html

jenninlouisiana
12-12-2007, 01:28 PM
I disagree. I think his honesty and sincerity is unmatched by anyone up there. He speaks the truth in plain language. That's part of his charm.

hawkeyenick
12-12-2007, 01:30 PM
I disagree. I think his honesty and sincerity is unmatched by anyone up there. He speaks the truth in plain language. That's part of his charm.

People don't want the truth

Eric21ND
12-12-2007, 01:30 PM
what happened to him railing against the IRS??

zumajoe
12-12-2007, 01:40 PM
is it me or does it seem like Ron Paul did way better in the summer debates? he used to answer the questions, and he had much more strength it seemed.

coffeewithchess
12-12-2007, 01:41 PM
I disagree. I think his honesty and sincerity is unmatched by anyone up there. He speaks the truth in plain language. That's part of his charm.

It may be plain to us, his supporters, but not to the majority of Americans.

musicmax
12-12-2007, 02:32 PM
Ron Paul still has time to get some debate coaching. This has been suggested in the past. I hope the candidate does something about this. The media has already written stories on his speaking style and image.

Image can be changed with just a few modifications from a good coach.

I've written the campaign.

I've written to Carol Paul.

I've typed up a page of debate suggestions (drop toxic buzzwords like 'neocon', 'competing currency' and 'empire') and handed it directly to Dr. Paul.

And still his debate answers and style remain the same: steer everything to foreign policy and currency with the same strained high-pitched whine :(

Cam
12-12-2007, 02:55 PM
The two questions were perfect for Ron Paul and the other candidates frankly took his position and articulated it better than him. He needs to step up his public speaking skills.

It is the message and not the man. Hit the streets and help spread the word . . . "Freedom."

Peer pressure is more effective than a 1 and a half hour debate.

Cardinal Red
12-12-2007, 03:13 PM
I've written the campaign.

I've written to Carol Paul.

I've typed up a page of debate suggestions (drop toxic buzzwords like 'neocon', 'competing currency' and 'empire') and handed it directly to Dr. Paul.

And still his debate answers and style remain the same: steer everything to foreign policy and currency with the same strained high-pitched whine :(

Unfortunately, we go to war with the candidate we have, not the candidate we wished we had. (And to be clear I'm talking about RP as a Politician where in my opinion he is only OK, rather than as a statesman and purveyor of ideas, where he is wonderful). It's unfortunate, that RP seems reluctant to take coaching and suggestions that would help him communicate his ideas more effectively. Part of that stubbornness is the same stubbornness that has allowed him to be bravely right on issues where the rest of the field is wrong. But it's sad for the campaign that he can't separate the message from the way he delivers it. I adore RP's sincerity, but a bit more "smoothness" would go a long way.

JosephTheLibertarian
12-12-2007, 03:15 PM
The two questions were perfect for Ron Paul and the other candidates frankly took his position and articulated it better than him. He needs to step up his public speaking skills.

Articulated it better? Then how come I think Ron Paul won? lol

Liberty
12-12-2007, 03:18 PM
I disagree. I think his honesty and sincerity is unmatched by anyone up there. He speaks the truth in plain language. That's part of his charm.

I agree. Hard to expect more given the format.

Derek
12-12-2007, 03:23 PM
I think some of us are expecting too much from Paul or expecting him to change too much. Sure, he's not the most polished speaker up there. But you know what? That hasn't stopped his campaign from getting to where it is today -- if anything, his unvarnished style has helped him because it separates him from the obviously rehearsed and smarmy answers of certain other candidates. Why try to change that now?

Suzu
12-12-2007, 03:31 PM
I think some of us are expecting too much from Paul or expecting him to change too much. Sure, he's not the most polished speaker up there. But you know what? That hasn't stopped his campaign from getting to where it is today -- if anything, his unvarnished style has helped him because it separates him from the obviously rehearsed and smarmy answers of certain other candidates. Why try to change that now?

Because it would only add to his success?

Gimme Some Truth
12-12-2007, 03:36 PM
THe difference is. Paul has so much to say ,in the small time allotted, that at times it can become a little jumbled. The other candidates have so little to say that they cant really get jumbled up.

THe reason is because Paul understands how economics and freedom ,etc, work and how they affect each other. The others dont.

DirtMcGirt
12-12-2007, 03:40 PM
I agree he needs to articulate a little better but i f he comes out screaming and yelling he might turn some people off

skinzterpswizfan
12-12-2007, 03:43 PM
I agree he needs to articulate a little better but i f he comes out screaming and yelling he might turn some people off

He doesn't have to come out screaming. He just has to come out speaking in clear sentences.

tfelice
12-12-2007, 03:46 PM
THe reason is because Paul understands how economics and freedom ,etc, work and how they affect each other. The others dont.

True, but by now he should have learned how to sell himself to the voting public. All that knowledge on economics and freedom is meaningless if he doesn't win the nomination.

Paul had a nice run where he was beginning to get some attention in the media. The grassroots/internet phenom was talked and written about - at that point he needed to vault himself to the top, but it doesn't seem like that has happened and we are weeks away from this race being all but over.

dfalken
12-12-2007, 03:48 PM
Yes, his delivery could be much better, and remember who we are dealing with. The average voter is pretty much retarded...heck they elected W for a second term remember? Many people will vote on what the candidate looks like or if they consider him to be "presidential" or not. To us this sounds like complete stupidity...which it is...but the average person is stupid and unfortunately they outnumber us. Ron Paul is hands down the best candidate that has run for office that I have ever seen but does he appeal to the sheeple masses? I hope somehow they see the light.

Paulitician
12-12-2007, 03:48 PM
is it me or does it seem like Ron Paul did way better in the summer debates? he used to answer the questions, and he had much more strength it seemed.
Agreed. He needs to slow and calm down.

Richandler
12-12-2007, 03:49 PM
The debates have shown that they really don't affect much except when someone says they believe in god. These debates are mostly style over substance. Remember John Kerry swept the debates for the presidency in 2004, but that didn't make a difference in the end against evangelicals.

dfalken
12-12-2007, 03:50 PM
True, but by now he should have learned how to sell himself to the voting public. All that knowledge on economics and freedom is meaningless if he doesn't win the nomination.

Paul had a nice run where he was beginning to get some attention in the media. The grassroots/internet phenom was talked and written about - at that point he needed to vault himself to the top, but it doesn't seem like that has happened and we are weeks away from this race being all but over.


I think his campaign staff leaves a lot to be desired. At the end of the day whether we like it or not the elections are a popularity contest and the average voter is more interested in what Britney Spears had for breakfast than in understanding the gold standard. It is sad but it is reality. I hope i am proven 100% wrong and that the sheeple masses completely surprise me.

evadmurd
12-12-2007, 03:52 PM
It is the message and not the man. Hit the streets and help spread the word . . . "Freedom."

Peer pressure is more effective than a 1 and a half hour debate.

Like Emeril sys, "It's all in the presentation." (or somebody says that, LOL). Anyway, points over and above just the "good message" will be gained with a good presentation. I love him, but he needs help in this area.

Mahkato
12-12-2007, 04:16 PM
The guy is 72 for crying out loud. He's had two full-time jobs for eight months now. He is very tired no doubt, but he keeps on going and going and going. Forgive him for struggling to fit soundpolicy into a soundbite; it's not an easy task.

Ozwest
12-12-2007, 04:19 PM
Too many new - and - almost new members stirring up shit again.

Sorry, but it has to be said...

Wilkero
12-12-2007, 04:26 PM
George W. Bush isn't the most articulate speaker, yet he still got elected. Dr. Paul doesn't need to turn into a slick-talking snake oil salesman to win. His current speaking style and demeanor add credibility to his message.

atthegates
12-12-2007, 05:30 PM
is it me or does it seem like Ron Paul did way better in the summer debates? he used to answer the questions, and he had much more strength it seemed.

i couldn't agree more. ive been saying this for a while. everytime i go back and watch those first debates, his performances outshine any of his recent ones. but i do have to say that his post-debate speeches, and his speeches in general, are incredible. if the debates featured less candidates and more speaking time for each candidate, Dr. Paul would destroy the competition.

Dave Pedersen
12-12-2007, 05:40 PM
When he gets agitated (easily) he starts to sound like an old granny. He adopts a scolding attitude sometimes misdirected at the audience. He stutters and gets spastic and can't find his words and no self-respecting jarhead/farmer/macho-man can support that image. Most people will judge based on image without even realizing it. They are electing a father image.

He needs to remain calm and presidential. Then he is classy and this the the presidential image we need. He needs to remain calm under all circumstances. Then he is unmatched and speaks very very well.

Malakai0
12-12-2007, 05:44 PM
Needs less negativity.


Personally, Ron's no nonsense very plain 'truth to power' speaking style is one of the things that first attracted me to him. In a world of perfectly rehearsed political soundbytes, someone speaking from the mind and heart off the top of their head was more than a breath of fresh air. It shows understanding of the issues and not expensive speaking coaches and speechwriters.

I'm still not sure why some of you want to turn Ron Paul into the other guys, when he's the only candidate showing constant growth with income and volunteers.

Ixzion
12-12-2007, 05:52 PM
Needs less negativity.


Personally, Ron's no nonsense very plain 'truth to power' speaking style is one of the things that first attracted me to him. In a world of perfectly rehearsed political soundbytes, someone speaking from the mind and heart off the top of their head was more than a breath of fresh air. It shows understanding of the issues and not expensive speaking coaches and speechwriters.

I'm still not sure why some of you want to turn Ron Paul into the other guys, when he's the only candidate showing constant growth with income and volunteers.

I agree 100%. And someone mentioned dropping "buzzwords" like neocon. What for? It is what it is.

Malakai0
12-12-2007, 06:50 PM
The reason RP didn't seem so good to us is because the debate was set up to marginalize him and promote the establishment candidates. It was more subtle this time but perhaps the most blatant so far.

They had the falling graph literally next to his head the entire time he speaks, every time he speaks, throughout the whole debate. I wonder what will happen when you ask 21 pre-screened pro-War pro-Bush republicans to rate Ron Paul? Anyway, with Luntz running these things, we know what they mean right? NOTHING except this subconscious image of Ron Paul and a falling opinion graph. Everything reminds me of Orwell lately.

I promised myself after the last 2 or 3 debates I wouldn't let the blatant misinformation and bias of the media make me angry.

At least for the last debate, I was in the Palladium theater in St Pete yelling @the screen with hundreds of other Paul people. I have nowhere to let my frustration out at now!

Carole
12-12-2007, 09:07 PM
Thank you Jonathan, you are quite right.

Ron Paul is heads and shoulders above the fray. It must be difficult for such an honest man. Think of him as Thomas Jefferson transported to the present and being on that stage.

I think he does an admirable job in these horrible debate formats considering they are aimed toward television viewer mentality of folks who have a thirty-second attention span.

Several of his answers were succinct, to-the-point and within the alloted time. It is just such bad debate formats, but still it was better than the YouTube format.

Goldwater Conservative
12-12-2007, 09:27 PM
Romster is hurting precisely because people think he's too slick. Huckleberry is rising precisely because he has a folksy way of talking.

And frankly, what drew me to Paul was that he not only made sense and spoke the truth, but that he communicated like a human being and not a politician. I'm okay with him getting some polish, it's just that I don't think he really needs it and it might even diminish his appeal.

Our problems are still name recognition and misconceptions about (or misrepresentations of) his beliefs.

trey4sports
12-12-2007, 09:37 PM
Romster is hurting precisely because people think he's too slick. Huckleberry is rising precisely because he has a folksy way of talking.

And frankly, what drew me to Paul was that he not only made sense and spoke the truth, but that he communicated like a human being and not a politician. I'm okay with him getting some polish, it's just that I don't think he really needs it and it might even diminish his appeal.

Our problems are still name recognition and misconceptions about (or misrepresentations of) his beliefs.


you articulated your argument very well. Dr. Paul is a man of no-compromise and i think this was one of his better debates, contrary to most i think he had decent time and he answered all questions he got well and didnt stumble. ABC news listed him as one of the 2 "winners" tonight. i dont have the link but its here on the forum. even the MSM cant underplay how well he did in Iowa today

Pete Kay
12-12-2007, 09:38 PM
I love Ron Paul but I often wonder how he would be doing in the polls if he was a great orator like Ronald Reagan. I've seen interviews with him on the MSM where he was so tired and bland sounding that I could literally see pain in the interviewer's eyes, knowing that he was bad for ratings.

Seriously, if Ron Paul had a magnetic personality he would be on tv more. That's the facts. Even I get bored hearing him speak sometimes and I love the man. Huckabee gets a lot of screen time because people like him. He's somewhat funny for a politician and he knows how to engage the camera and the interviewer. Ron Paul supporters want to discount these things, but the truth is that it helps to be telegenic when you are on television. That's the reason that Ron Paul is so huge on the internet. He's netgenic.

Paulitician
12-12-2007, 09:53 PM
I think Ron Paul talks too much, stutters and stumbles too much, and looks too tired.

If he could work on that, it would be great. I love his performance in this interview: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anmlPvmd1Ew

I think people are right when they insinuate that Ron Paul is too much for the ADD television watcher.

user
12-12-2007, 10:10 PM
How much can we really do about this? Most of the GOP base has been brainwashed into supporting the war, sanctions, etc. Aren't most of the people who can see through the lies already listening to RP, even if he isn't the most polished?

Paul4Prez
12-12-2007, 10:15 PM
I thought Ron Paul was great today. He has done better in 3 or 4 of the earlier debates, but if someone was tuning into the debates for the first time, they would have been impressed.

Here's my recap:

http://paul4prez.blogspot.com/2007/12/ron-paul-strong-in-iowa-debate.html

We're just spoiled because we've watched every debate and every rally speech and every interview, and know how good he can be at his best.

He was awesome after the debate, in the Wolf Blitzer interview.

idiom
12-12-2007, 10:15 PM
In the early debates he was the only one making sense. Now everybody is reading from their Ron Paul Cliff notes, so he doesn't stick out as much any more.

He has Zombified the Party!

Paul4Prez
12-12-2007, 10:16 PM
How much can we really do about this? Most of the GOP base has been brainwashed into supporting the war, sanctions, etc. Aren't most of the people who can see through the lies already listening to RP, even if he isn't the most polished?

His name recognition just went over 50% in the past week or two. We still have a lot of work left.

Billy Budd
12-12-2007, 10:29 PM
It's interesting that we all see something a little different. I thought his was one of his better debates.

As far as his persona goes, I think it's part of his charm. If he was slick like Romney maybe there would be less of us here.

I voted for Bush (stupid me) because he seemed like the type of guy you could have a beer and play a game of cribbage with. Paul gives off a similar "regualr person" vibe. I think it's an asset.

xao
12-12-2007, 10:29 PM
The two questions were perfect for Ron Paul and the other candidates frankly took his position and articulated it better than him. He needs to step up his public speaking skills.

I disagree. He spoke far better than any of them. They just come off as flip-floppers.

xao
12-12-2007, 10:31 PM
Ron simply needs to say,
"Well it's funny that some people are taking what I've been saying for the past 15 years and trying to copy me. But unfortunately those peoples voting records don't match what they are only now saying. Therefore those flip-floppers cannot be trusted. But I can. My voting record speaks for itself"

Something like this but only in better words/syntax and more to the point.

partypooper
12-13-2007, 10:51 AM
I've written the campaign.

I've written to Carol Paul.

I've typed up a page of debate suggestions (drop toxic buzzwords like 'neocon', 'competing currency' and 'empire') and handed it directly to Dr. Paul.

And still his debate answers and style remain the same: steer everything to foreign policy and currency with the same strained high-pitched whine :(

same here. i wrote to campaign, put suggestions in campaign box and wrote to dr paul's son. debates are one of the most powerful weapons at dr paul's disposal and he didn't use them to their full advantage. i understand that we might lose regardless, but i wish we lose with the rest of the country understanding what dr paul stands for. and while msm has a big share of responsibility for not giving dr paul the opportunity to explain himself, a part of the responsibility is on his performance in the debates - especially the last few, which are progressively worse.

dr paul comes to debates unprepared and as as result resorts all too often to formulaic responses that everybody is already familiar with and that are - as all of us noticed - very easy to copy. dr paul needed to use debates to further expand his foreign policy proposal because many republicans are not convinced that it would in fact make us safer. he needs to use more historical examples, good analogies and fresh arguments. instead, he simply repeats himself.

when one does not practice how to answer specific questions he has a difficulty retrieving the best answer when asked that question. dr paul's debate performance basically reflects a failure of memory. he knows the answers to questions but can not retrieve them at the spot. as a result he retrieves whatever is immediately available and those are the items retrieved most frequently - cliches. all too often - and with increasing frequency - dr paul sounds as if he is addressing supporters at the rally - and not a skeptical audience at home.

yes, dr paul can answer all debate questions splendidly when given enough time to think them through and to select the best response over an interview. but these were not splendid answers! rather than being at his best in debates, he is close to being at his worst. his worst can be quite decent but it is obviously not enough.

there is a very easy solution for all this but, sadly, it won't be implemented. dr paul doesn't even need a coach, he just needs to spend more time arguing with people who disagree with him. he appears to be spending a lot of time with people who agree with everything he says. while that is totally natural it is also very counter-productive. many of us here have spend considerable time arguing with hostile audiences on the internet and, as a result, have not only converted some of them but have also become much more skilled in dealing with such audiences. yet, dr paul can not even handle glenn beck and oreilly - people whose hostility is below average neocon forum member and who most of us here would be thrilled to debate. this goes a long way to explaining where the problem comes from.

JohnnyWrath
12-13-2007, 01:39 PM
I have said for months now that Ron needs a speech/debate coach and a voice coach on staff. His voice should not go high or we have the media calling him "squeaky" etc...people want him to sound presidential.

Many of his answers need to be directed at the mainstream morons who live amongst us....the other guys can just shout "America is the best country in the world" and get claps without even having any message...

FreedomAndLaw
12-13-2007, 02:00 PM
I have said for months now that Ron needs a speech/debate coach and a voice coach on staff. His voice should not go high or we have the media calling him "squeaky" etc...people want him to sound presidential.

Many of his answers need to be directed at the mainstream morons who live amongst us....the other guys can just shout "America is the best country in the world" and get claps without even having any message...

Being anti-mainstream is mainstream. Ron Paul has his own appeal, turning him into John Edwards won't convert any of the "mainstream morons" unless the mainstream media tells them to convert. When/If his support rises i guess next suggestion from the wannabe political strategists will be to limit the message of freedom to that of Giuliani's.

Austrian_guy
12-13-2007, 04:15 PM
is it me or does it seem like Ron Paul did way better in the summer debates? he used to answer the questions, and he had much more strength it seemed.

I agree.
He never fumbled for words, or took 3 times to articulate a word, etc.

Which is not to say, that I don't think he's answering the questions very well, just that there was more momentum and energy in the summer debates.

(ps. Though I should add furthermore, that for a man his age, bearing his schedule in mind, he's still doing more than formidably.)

Brian in Maryland
12-13-2007, 05:00 PM
Needs less negativity.


Personally, Ron's no nonsense very plain 'truth to power' speaking style is one of the things that first attracted me to him. In a world of perfectly rehearsed political soundbytes, someone speaking from the mind and heart off the top of their head was more than a breath of fresh air. It shows understanding of the issues and not expensive speaking coaches and speechwriters.

I'm still not sure why some of you want to turn Ron Paul into the other guys, when he's the only candidate showing constant growth with income and volunteers.

What he said.

If I want to buy a used car I will go to one of the others. Dr. Paul knows what he is doing. Donít try to change him.

MadOdorMachine
12-13-2007, 05:58 PM
If someone had never heard of Ron Paul before, then I don't see how they would have been impressed by him in this debate. He didn't stand out at all. As previously stated, the other candidates took his position. This shows that he is a leader, but he needs to get a political advisor to help him with his public speaking.

noiseordinance
12-13-2007, 06:07 PM
If someone had never heard of Ron Paul before, then I don't see how they would have been impressed by him in this debate. He didn't stand out at all. As previously stated, the other candidates took his position. This shows that he is a leader, but he needs to get a political advisor to help him with his public speaking.

I agree. He's not exactly standing above the crowd lately...

LibertyEagle
12-13-2007, 07:12 PM
He did well, but he really botched the whole trade question that he did get. It was very weak, in my opinion. It's too bad that he wasn't allowed to address the later NAFTA question, because I've yet to hear him in the debates, tell people that NAFTA is NOT a free trade agreement. Unless and until he says that, a lot of people will not like his pro-free trade viewpoint. Because, they know NAFTA has hurt us and don't want anymore of it. He needs to distinguish between free trade and our current misnamed trade agreements.

idiom
12-13-2007, 09:23 PM
It is possible he was taken aback by having everything he was going to say being said before it was his turn to speak.

That would freak me out too.

Thomas Paine
12-14-2007, 08:43 AM
Imitation is the best form of flattery so don't be distressed if you start seeing the other GOP candidates starting to adopt Ron Paul positions. What Dr. Paul should do, though, is call them out on it by stating in his debate responses that he is pleased to see so and so finally adopt his position on taxes, or foreign policy, etc.

partypooper
12-14-2007, 11:15 AM
Imitation is the best form of flattery so don't be distressed if you start seeing the other GOP candidates starting to adopt Ron Paul positions.

they are not adopting his positions, they are adopting his cliches. for reasons that i explained (memory failure) dr paul repeats himself a lot in the debates. as a result, he wastes time (of which he is given very little to begin with), doesn't advance the cause and gives others the opportunity to learn how to imitate him.

acstichter
12-14-2007, 12:59 PM
Do not worry over that which you have no control.

Please hit the streets and the phones and lets win over voters in our neighborhoods. Ron Paul needs more exposure to win.

dfalken
12-14-2007, 03:06 PM
Too many new - and - almost new members stirring up shit again.

Sorry, but it has to be said...

Great way to possibly alienate new Ron Paul supporters..congratulations.

Pliny
12-15-2007, 05:51 PM
I doubt that anyone impressionable enough to vote purely on speaking ability and sound bites, rather than research and political principle, would be bothered to watch a debate anyway. I'm not terribly concerned about media coverage and debates because, frankly, we never had those to begin with. If we win we'll win despite those things.