My Night At The Orlando Fox News Presidential Debate

Myself | 10-22-2007 | my favorite headache

[My Favorite Headache]

I am going to post just a small review of my night with 23 Republicans at the Fox News Orlando Republican Presidential Debate.

Luntz was angry early on before camera's went live when he polled the group to make sure everyone there was undecided. A 21 yr old guy raised his hand and said he was supporting Ron Paul. Luntz absolutely lost it on this kid and said "Why in the hell did you not put that on your questionaire that was e-mailed to you? Why does it not shock me that a Ron Paul supporter would pull this kind of crap?"

"If someone else shows up you are being replaced and out of here...this room is for undecided."

I was originally placed in the second row towards the end of the row next to a man named Fred Hawkins Jr. who is running for Osceola County Commissioner. Luntz asked us a bunch of questions with a camera crew and producers in tow behind him and I was the first to answer. I was the first person to use the word "socialism" and it spread like wild fire.

I said the concept of America voting a socialist like Hillary Clinton as President should be motivation enough for Republicans to get their act together. I reminded Luntz of the Hillary quote saying "This is the same woman who is quoted by the San Francisco Chronicle saying "We will have to take things away for the common good." Luntz had this smirk on his face and he knew I handed him gold.

After 3 segments it was time to go live. By the time you saw what you did at home we had already gone through 3 rounds of questions and I was lighting up the joint with what I call the biggest crisis this campaign.

What do any of these men who are running for President plan on doing to combat the extreme hatred of anyone who is a Republican by the mainstream media and how bad the liberal blogs, Soros, and just about everyone who has some sort of journalistic power slimes Republicans on a daily basis. Who is going to have the spine to stand up to it and how do they plan on doing it when the Bush Administration has been knocked out time and time again with no fight.

WHO IS GOING TO PREVENT THE PERCEPTION THAT REPUBLICANS ARE NOT WAR MONGERING NAZI'S WHO ARE OUT FOR OIL COMPANIES AND THE RICH?

Luntz definitely told us through his polling and research that as of today Hillary Clinton will win in a landslide. He was putting all of his money on her. I said you are going to go broke. He said Republicans are too disorganized and the focus group proved that.

I said not it does not. I said if you want to see motivation and organization? Put Hillary Clinton against any Republican and you will see Republicans vote like you have never seen before, the alternative is too grave. Whether we can stand it or not Republicans will do everything in their power to elect anyone else but Clinton.

You saw my exchange later on saying we have long memories and do not want to live through that hell again.

The Ron Paul comment I made was simple and sweet and every single person except the Ron Paul supporter all said "perfect" with regards to that remark.

Luntz walks over and says "you are good...you are going down to the front row...keep talking."

We taped about 70 mins worth of discussion. More clips will be aired at 6:20 AM on Fox and Friends First and then 8:20 AM on Fox and Friends. Then more clips from the debate will be aired on tomorrow's Hannity and Colmes as well from 9-10.

I am sure this is when you will see how hardcore it got in there.

I called out the room at the end of it all..when I saw how many people put their hands up that Rudy was the only one who could beat Hillary I said "I am really saddened to see how many people think he is their answer. That is very telling that the fire that was there earlier tonight for all of us agreeing that we want a true Conservative is gone already and that makes me sick as a true Conservative."

To me the top winners tonight were Romney, Huckabee, Thompson, and blech...I hate to say this but Rudy. His night was not that bad but he certainly is not my top choice for President.

I called for a thining of the herd. Paul, Tancredo, and Hunter need to go. They virtually played zero in the room. It was sad because I really like Tom and Duncan and said that if a Republican wins the White House in 2008 they should all be given cabinet posts ASAP.

Except Paul...which who by the end of the night lost his one supporter...the 21 yr old guy who didn't raise his hand when asked if anyone supported him.

Finally...Luntz. A nice guy but can be insulting. When he compared a moderate conservative to a major serious conservative he wanted a show of hands...then he added "When I say major serious conservative I mean you can hear the German Nazi marching bands and get excited", I then said to him "There it is..exactly what I was talking about." Luntz said "Relax I was only joking." I said "I know you were and it is that kind of talk that I am absolutely disgusted by and sick of...sick of it Frank...enough is enough with the nazi conservative comparisons people have got to speak up for conservatives...true conservatives."

That in a short capsule is it. Met some really nice people and we had a discussion at the end of everything and went our own ways.

I thank Luntz for letting me say whatever I wanted to on camera and speak up for Conservatives and letting me call Ron Paul out on global television.

[oh8eleven]

His second strike is the whiff of class warfare pandering you get from him. Minor in Sunday’s debate but blatant in the Oct 9th debate.
I hear you, but I still think he's closest to the Conservative center than any other candidate.
I'll vote for whomever the GOP runs. In fact, I'd vote for my dog before I voted for a Dem - especially the Evil One.

[CPT Clay]

Well said!

[sitetest]

Oh my. What a devastating reply.

[olde north church]

“What is amazing is Hunter is the one candidate we all agree we would vote for, and who we all agree is 100% on the Republican platform. But then we all say he can’t win and split up, each of us choosing a lesser candidate we feel can win, but who 15% or more of Republicans say they will never vote for. And 9 times out of ten we’re choosing the lesser candidate to stop someone else’s lesser candidate, whom we could never vote for ourselves.”

You are SO right! Why on earth are so many willing to settle for less that what America deserves? If the media were to be touting him, he would be in the top tier in one day, so why are we so willing to allow the media to dictate who we vote for? We don’t trust the media on anything else, why oh why would we trust them for this?? It suicide for the party.

I believe Hunter suffers from "Stevenson Syndrome", as in Adlai Stevenson II. He has all the qualities and correct positions for the base but will have little reach beyond that base and those who are willing to take the time to think about the issues. There are also going to be people a lot of people who he will turn off.

There is one story about a man who told Ambassador Stevenson he had the vote of every thinking man, to which Stevenson replied, "Unfortunately, I need a majority to win the election." or something to that effect.

There isn't an "anti-Hunter" conspiracy as there isn't an "anti-Huckabee" conspiracy or "anti-Paul" conspiracy (although the Paulists ...). Giuliani and Thompson have name recognition. Romney can buy what name recognition he doesn't already have.

[BarnacleCenturion]

Thanks for the report. Maybe I missed it but was there a final verdict about who won the debate? Fox only showed that McCain tanked and only 5 people raised their hands for Rudy. There was no info on how the others did but I’m guessing Huckabee must have won judging by the reactions here.

[Chunga]

I wasn’t trying to devastate you. It isn’t possible to devastate anyone willing to enable another Clinton presidency.

[WVNan]

http://www.zogby.com/news/readnews.dbm?ID=1376

Sorry I can't make a link, but all the info is on Zogby's site.

[My Favorite Headache]

I am Pro-Thompson? I am truly undecided but I really like how you tell me how I got played when I said clearly in the forum that if you watch at the end of the video that Huckabee was my choice at the end of the debate. I didn’t raise my hand in the beginning and neither did anyone else. The only person who was decided walking in was the Ron Paul kid who didn’t even support him at the end...the video speaks for itself.

If you check my comments on FR you will see I like Romney one week, Huckabee another week, Thompson the next week, Tancredo another week, Hunter another.

But then again..I always have people like yourself to tell me that I am already decided.

[My Favorite Headache]

Whom would you NEVER vote for for President of the U.S.?

ZOGBY Poll
%

Clinton (D)

50%

Kucinich (D)

49%

Gravel (D)

47%

Paul (R)

47%

Brownback (R)

47%

Tancredo (R)

46%

McCain (R)

45%

Hunter (R)

44%

Giuliani (R)

43%

Romney (R)

42%

Edwards (D)

42%

Thompson (R)

41%

Dodd (D)

41%

Biden (D)

40%

Obama (D)

37%

Huckabee (R)

35%

Richardson (D)

34%

Not sure

4%

[CharlesWayneCT]

I like Huckabee as a person, and he’s really solid on some issues. I could even believe he “sees the light” on some immigration issues, because frankly immigration is a POLICY issue, not a philosophical one.

What I mean by that is that any person, liberal or conservative, can be on either side of that issue, just because of what facts they deem important and how they THINK different solutions will work. So all you need to do is demonstrate that the solution we espouse will work, and you can bring a lot of people to our side.

I’m most concerned about his approach to using government as a “parental figure” to help us child-citizens to do what he knows is right for us, like stopping smoking, eating healthy, etc. And his willingness to raise taxes to help pay for that service.

That’s a philosophical position, and one that does not bode well. It’s actually the thing I like most about Fred Thompson. He’s so committed to the idea of Federalism that he sometimes goes against the “conservative” policy view because he thinks it clashes with the Federalist view.

That’s commitment, and it tells me that when something NEW comes up that I haven’t thought to ask about, Fred will probably choose the limited-government approach.

The one BIG exception to that was campaign finance reform. And to defend Fred (only slightly), that did DEAL with the federal government, namely how we elect the leaders, so it’s not technically a federalism issue, or a government meddling in our affairs issue. It was still almost entirely wrong.

[sitetest]

Dear Chunga,

Your attempts to discuss the subject by way of insult are amusing... almost.

Should you actually come up with an actual argument, let me know.

sitetest

[GeorgiaDawg]

Honestly...I think the field is pretty thin on both sides. The best the dems can do of electable candidates is Hillary and the best we can do of electable candidates is a field of Guiliani, Thompson, Romney, McCain, etc.

The best and brightest are no longer inspired to run....

[jeffprice]

Thompson hopefully will get the Nod. IMHO If elected he will be the only one that wont take any BS from the Dems.

I hope we make the right choice next year.

[Chunga]

Here's the deal sitetest:

You're one of my top 5 favorite posters I've ever read on Free Republic. Your arguments are usually compelling and insightful...but you're dead wrong here, and it really infuriates me to see a normally brilliant guy like you flub the dub so preposterously .

I hope Fred Thompson can wrangle a GOP nomination in '08. If he doesn't and Rudy is the nominee, there are few arguments that can be made in favor of voting for Rudy...taxes, national defense and prosecution of the War On Terror being among them. Also, we have a few recent statements he's made suggesting that it would be "okay" with him if Roe Vs. Wade were overturned, that he is against partial birth abortions, that he is against Universal Health Care, that he is against Federal attempts at gun control and that he is in favor of school choice. His prior record as mayor indicates that we have reason for skepticism.

There is, however, no room for skepticism regarding Hillary's statements and votes, and there are hundreds of reasons to vote against her, in the only real sense...by voting Republican at all costs. She voted for partial birth abortions. She is against school choice. She is for universal health care. She is intent on nominating Living Document proponents to the Supreme Court ensuring the upholding of Roe.

You know that either Hillary or the Republican nominee will be elected President. You know that with a Clinton presidency we get the maximum number of abortions possible. You know that taxes will go up, that we'll stab every traditional international ally we have in the back, that she'll attempt (with Democrat coattails in Congress) to abolish The Electoral College...and she'll have at least two years to do it. You know spending will increase and entitlements we've never imagined will run amok.

Without hope of a viable Third-Party conservative, Rudy would be the better choice between these two candidates:

With Rudy, there is a chance that the number of abortions would be lower than they would be under a Clinton presidency. Hillary is clear: No opposition to Roe will be tolerated. Rudy is less clear, but has indicated that overturning Roe would be "okay," as I mentioned earlier...so check it out:

Since under the scenario of these two as their respective party's nominees, I have to err on the side of life...because I believe that there's a chance that under Rudy there will be less infanticide than there would be under Hillary.

I won't let my vote go to waste to enable the election of this scoundrel of a woman. The opportunity for the possibility of one less death etches my vote in stone.

There are only two possibilities for the upcoming election's outcome. I will vote Republican period. So should anyone concerned with reducing abortions.

[Chunga]

Ignore “Since” at the beginning of the third paragraph from the bottom of my post just above. I have no idea from whence it came.