As I think I catalogued pretty comprehensively in an earlier post there were basically two debates last night, or at least two very distinct reactions to the debate.
1. The Beltway media view-which is also shared by GOP insiders
2. The view of the GOP base.
http://lastmenandovermen.blogspot.com/2015/09/the-tale-of-two-debates-beltway-vs-gop.html
The BM thinks that Carly Fiorina was more or less overpowering last night and a large consensus-though not unanimous-is that Trump bombed. Some argue that he was merely undominating and that that may be enough to hurt him.
Then there is the GOP base which thinks Trump won hands down. I mean all the early polls-other than those phony Frank Luntz focus group polls-show that while the base agrees Fiorina did well, they think that Trump lapped her and the rest.
Each poll gives her about 20% or a little more, with Trump over 40% in all and over 50% in at least one.
We will only know for sure in the next few weeks but another important bellweather is what folks like Rush Limbuagh say-obviously his opinion within the base is very important. So what does Rush say happened?
:"Anyway, okay. I'll tell you here just stream of consciousness thoughts. Overall -- and I'm gonna back all this up with detail in a moment -- the overall view of the night is that not a whole lot is gonna change because of what happened last night. Not a whole lot. Meaning Trump is still gonna be in the lead when it's all said and done. CNN is gonna have had a huge audience. I'm now beginning to question this. I'm not sure it's just Trump driving these audiences for these Republican debates. More on that as the program unfolds. "
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2015/09/17/the_only_debate_analysis_you_need
Sorry to interject so quickly but what he says makes a lot of sense except for that last saw-that it wasn't just Trump that drove the huge audience. Sorry, yes it was. You can't tell me without Trump so many would have watched that three hour monstrosity.
Rush's belief that it was about more than Trump stems from his Quixotic hope that the country as a whole is as angry about Obama as he and his friends are.
As Joan Walsh puts it:
"But who am I to criticize? I found my own attention drifting during some of the debate spans where Trump was sidelined. It was very hard to focus on 11 people, plus three very uneven moderators – the de-fanging of Hugh Hewitt was shocking and a little sad, but made for boring television – for more than three hours. Trump claims CNN made the debate longer to milk the clash for ratings and cash; CNN says they devoted more time because they added an 11th contender, Carly Fiorina, late in the game. Both can be true, I guess."
http://www.salon.com/2015/09/17/vince_mcmahon_wouldve_loved_it_what_donald_trump_gets_right_about_last_nights_surreal_gop_debate/
Ok, now I will interject again. Fiorina, or no Forina, three hours was absurd and the last hour-if not hour and 20 minutes or so-was simply unwatchable. I say this having watched the whole thing-but I'm sure I'm an outlier for people who aren't in the mainstream news media-I actually love politics. really, really love politics, and I found it unwatchable. I mean the last few questions were simply hopeless. The making up names thing and woman on the dollar bill? Didn't that feel like filler?"By the third hour of CNN's GOP presidential debate, the candidates looked like long-distance runners fading in the final lap: A sweating Marco Rubio ran his hands through his hair, Chris Christie's face turned red, a sagging Donald Trump grasped his lectern for support and, at times, seemed to crumple into his suit."
"By the time moderator Jake Tapper asked each of the 11 participants to pick a Secret Service code name, a question meant to provoke bright responses but that fell flat, the combatants were out of gas and operatives were getting restless for the post-debate spin room."
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/09/gop-debate-cnn-disaster-213766#ixzz3m2XtPeHA
Ok. Back to Rush:
"Let me qualify that. If you're a Trump supporter, last night was no harm, no foul. Nothing happened last night to damage Trump significantly, and I don't think anything is going to. If Trump is to eventually fade away, it's not gonna happen overnight anyway. It's not gonna happen because of one thing. We know that now. There's no such thing as Trump stepping in it. If there's anything to cause Trump supporters to leave -- and I know that sounds like blasphemy to you Trump supporters -- if anything is gonna cause that to happen, I don't know what it is, but it's gonna slow and gradual. There isn't gonna be this earthquake moment. And I say that because the Regime and the Republican Party is looking for that to happen."
"I mean, the RNC, the Republican establishment, they want a singular event to happen that takes Trump out and be done with it, and I don't think that's gonna happen. If there is to be -- and I'm not predicting it, so hold on to your cookies. I'm just saying "if." If it happens, it's going to be gradual. Watching that debate last night, I thought at times I was actually watching 11 of me. These people were fabulous last night on that stage! I mean, not everybody, some exceptions here and there, but, man, that was something to be proud of last night. You know that CNN went in there, I don't care that they may want to take Trump out, but there's no way CNN wants our people to look good. I got so fed up I almost turned it off in the first hour."
Again, Rush is for once totally on the money until he claims the whole field was fabulous. Nope. It's just Trump. Jeb is a bore. Rubio goes on these sermons about fighting wars everywhere in the Middle East. As usually he's both over studied, and full of sanctimony.
But his point that the RNC's hope for a smoking gun is in vain I think is exactly right. Here Rush is totally on the money in his characterization:
Every question was, "All right, Ms. Fiorina, Mr. Trump said you look like a horse. What's your reaction?"
"Mr. Trump, Ms. Fiorina says you don't know what you're talking about. What's your reaction?"
"Mr. Walker, Governor Walker, Rand Paul says you don't know what you're talking about. What's your reaction?"
Yes, except most of those questions were directed at Trump. A lot of it seemed like Jake Tapper was basically tying Trump's arms behind his back so that the smaller, weaker kids can finally get some payback.
I found Fiorina's big putdown of Trump contrived in exactly that vein-and also highly hypocritical for her to wrap herself at that moment in her gender. She had made fun of Barbara Boxer's hair in 2010, and she totally threw women under the bus last night with all her false attacks on Planned Parenthood.
But I think Rush' overall narrative may prove correct. That there won't be that much upheaval. If you believe the polls-rather than the Beltway pundits-Fiorina did very well but not as well as Trump. So she could be rising in the polls but at someone else's expense.
Like who? To the extent that she is one of the outsiders, maybe Ben Carson? Some think he did fine last night-he certainly did nothing wrong-but nothing right either; that's just it he did nothing. It's amazing how passive his debate style is.
We'll see if this continues to serve him. Paul Waldman goes out on a limb and argues that it won't.
http://theweek.com/articles/577565/ben-carson-rising-how-long-until-falls
1. The Beltway media view-which is also shared by GOP insiders
2. The view of the GOP base.
http://lastmenandovermen.blogspot.com/2015/09/the-tale-of-two-debates-beltway-vs-gop.html
The BM thinks that Carly Fiorina was more or less overpowering last night and a large consensus-though not unanimous-is that Trump bombed. Some argue that he was merely undominating and that that may be enough to hurt him.
Then there is the GOP base which thinks Trump won hands down. I mean all the early polls-other than those phony Frank Luntz focus group polls-show that while the base agrees Fiorina did well, they think that Trump lapped her and the rest.
Each poll gives her about 20% or a little more, with Trump over 40% in all and over 50% in at least one.
We will only know for sure in the next few weeks but another important bellweather is what folks like Rush Limbuagh say-obviously his opinion within the base is very important. So what does Rush say happened?
:"Anyway, okay. I'll tell you here just stream of consciousness thoughts. Overall -- and I'm gonna back all this up with detail in a moment -- the overall view of the night is that not a whole lot is gonna change because of what happened last night. Not a whole lot. Meaning Trump is still gonna be in the lead when it's all said and done. CNN is gonna have had a huge audience. I'm now beginning to question this. I'm not sure it's just Trump driving these audiences for these Republican debates. More on that as the program unfolds. "
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2015/09/17/the_only_debate_analysis_you_need
Sorry to interject so quickly but what he says makes a lot of sense except for that last saw-that it wasn't just Trump that drove the huge audience. Sorry, yes it was. You can't tell me without Trump so many would have watched that three hour monstrosity.
Rush's belief that it was about more than Trump stems from his Quixotic hope that the country as a whole is as angry about Obama as he and his friends are.
As Joan Walsh puts it:
"But who am I to criticize? I found my own attention drifting during some of the debate spans where Trump was sidelined. It was very hard to focus on 11 people, plus three very uneven moderators – the de-fanging of Hugh Hewitt was shocking and a little sad, but made for boring television – for more than three hours. Trump claims CNN made the debate longer to milk the clash for ratings and cash; CNN says they devoted more time because they added an 11th contender, Carly Fiorina, late in the game. Both can be true, I guess."
http://www.salon.com/2015/09/17/vince_mcmahon_wouldve_loved_it_what_donald_trump_gets_right_about_last_nights_surreal_gop_debate/
Ok, now I will interject again. Fiorina, or no Forina, three hours was absurd and the last hour-if not hour and 20 minutes or so-was simply unwatchable. I say this having watched the whole thing-but I'm sure I'm an outlier for people who aren't in the mainstream news media-I actually love politics. really, really love politics, and I found it unwatchable. I mean the last few questions were simply hopeless. The making up names thing and woman on the dollar bill? Didn't that feel like filler?"By the third hour of CNN's GOP presidential debate, the candidates looked like long-distance runners fading in the final lap: A sweating Marco Rubio ran his hands through his hair, Chris Christie's face turned red, a sagging Donald Trump grasped his lectern for support and, at times, seemed to crumple into his suit."
"By the time moderator Jake Tapper asked each of the 11 participants to pick a Secret Service code name, a question meant to provoke bright responses but that fell flat, the combatants were out of gas and operatives were getting restless for the post-debate spin room."
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/09/gop-debate-cnn-disaster-213766#ixzz3m2XtPeHA
Ok. Back to Rush:
"Let me qualify that. If you're a Trump supporter, last night was no harm, no foul. Nothing happened last night to damage Trump significantly, and I don't think anything is going to. If Trump is to eventually fade away, it's not gonna happen overnight anyway. It's not gonna happen because of one thing. We know that now. There's no such thing as Trump stepping in it. If there's anything to cause Trump supporters to leave -- and I know that sounds like blasphemy to you Trump supporters -- if anything is gonna cause that to happen, I don't know what it is, but it's gonna slow and gradual. There isn't gonna be this earthquake moment. And I say that because the Regime and the Republican Party is looking for that to happen."
"I mean, the RNC, the Republican establishment, they want a singular event to happen that takes Trump out and be done with it, and I don't think that's gonna happen. If there is to be -- and I'm not predicting it, so hold on to your cookies. I'm just saying "if." If it happens, it's going to be gradual. Watching that debate last night, I thought at times I was actually watching 11 of me. These people were fabulous last night on that stage! I mean, not everybody, some exceptions here and there, but, man, that was something to be proud of last night. You know that CNN went in there, I don't care that they may want to take Trump out, but there's no way CNN wants our people to look good. I got so fed up I almost turned it off in the first hour."
Again, Rush is for once totally on the money until he claims the whole field was fabulous. Nope. It's just Trump. Jeb is a bore. Rubio goes on these sermons about fighting wars everywhere in the Middle East. As usually he's both over studied, and full of sanctimony.
But his point that the RNC's hope for a smoking gun is in vain I think is exactly right. Here Rush is totally on the money in his characterization:
Every question was, "All right, Ms. Fiorina, Mr. Trump said you look like a horse. What's your reaction?"
"Mr. Trump, Ms. Fiorina says you don't know what you're talking about. What's your reaction?"
"Mr. Walker, Governor Walker, Rand Paul says you don't know what you're talking about. What's your reaction?"
Yes, except most of those questions were directed at Trump. A lot of it seemed like Jake Tapper was basically tying Trump's arms behind his back so that the smaller, weaker kids can finally get some payback.
I found Fiorina's big putdown of Trump contrived in exactly that vein-and also highly hypocritical for her to wrap herself at that moment in her gender. She had made fun of Barbara Boxer's hair in 2010, and she totally threw women under the bus last night with all her false attacks on Planned Parenthood.
But I think Rush' overall narrative may prove correct. That there won't be that much upheaval. If you believe the polls-rather than the Beltway pundits-Fiorina did very well but not as well as Trump. So she could be rising in the polls but at someone else's expense.
Like who? To the extent that she is one of the outsiders, maybe Ben Carson? Some think he did fine last night-he certainly did nothing wrong-but nothing right either; that's just it he did nothing. It's amazing how passive his debate style is.
We'll see if this continues to serve him. Paul Waldman goes out on a limb and argues that it won't.
http://theweek.com/articles/577565/ben-carson-rising-how-long-until-falls
No comments:
Post a Comment