Maybe that’s just my view since I thought he won the two previous outings. It’s possible that Luntz’s folks didn’t have such high expectations."
As a Romney supporter, I have to say I agree. He was a bit off his game last night. There were a lot of things I've heard him say elsewhere regarding a lot of these issues that I wished he had said last night, but maybe he was just having an off night. Still, I think he pulled off a pretty solid performance, all things considered. It was very obvious to me that CNN was out for his blood. That audience member who asked about the Spanish ads was a total plant since all of the other audience member questions were broad and not asked of specific candidates--only this one. Coincidence? I think not...especially since CNN screened all the questions.
I find it really interesting that Romney is the one who has mostly been on the receiving end of the "attack dog" type of questions--both in this debate and in the last one. I have my theory on this. I think that CNN, being the liberal cheerleader it is, suspects that Romney could wipe the walls with whomever is the Democratic nominee and are trying to tear him down in the primary. In Fox News's case, it's been pretty obvious that they are pushing Giuliani and that is a major reason in the desparity of the questioning between him and Romney.
What's impressive though about Romney is that he doesn't ever take the bait. He refused to go into personal attack mode with McCain, refused to denounce his Mormon faith, refused to run GWB under the bus, and refused to let Duncan Hunter define him as a Kennedy Republican. He's pretty darn skillful at defining who he is instead of letting other people define him.
I think you are right, though. People who have been following him all along realized that he could have done a lot better than he did, but people (like the ones in Luntz's focus group) are perhaps only really seeing him for the first time and couldn't help but be impressed by him.
He's probably doing better in internal polls than the media wants to admit.
I agree completely with your analysis. The reason Romney was off is because, it seemed to me, he got fewer questions. And when he tried to answer, Blitzer impatiently cut him off. Giuliani and McCain were allowed to complete their answers and b.s. as long as they wanted. I agree the one question deliberately aimed at Romney (nobody else was singled out) accusing him of being a flip-flopper was a plant. The MSM thinks Romney’s the strongest candidate and they want to knock him out.
“I find it really interesting that Romney is the one who has mostly been on the receiving end of the “attack dog” type of questions—both in this debate and in the last one. I have my theory on this. I think that CNN, being the liberal cheerleader it is, suspects that Romney could wipe the walls with whomever is the Democratic nominee and are trying to tear him down in the primary. In Fox News’s case, it’s been pretty obvious that they are pushing Giuliani and that is a major reason in the desparity of the questioning between him and Romney.”
The Liberal Media and liberals overall would prefer to have Guliani, so long as he loses to Hillary.
They were taking potshots at Guliani when early polls showed him most electable ... but NOW POLLS SHOW THAT RUDY IS NO MORE ELECTABLE THAN OTHER REPUBLICANS they will start attacking the main challengers to Rudy.
Expect more liberal media attacks on viable conservatives and complete radio silence on good, solid 2nd tier conservatives (dont want to give them airplay).
I totally agree - CNN is VERY afraid of Romney, and many people in this forum totally underestimate him - he is NOT an empty suit.