Fox News Oct. 21, 2007 Republican Debate Notes
Posted on October 22nd, 2007 by bile Categories and Tags: Uncategorized, cellular telephone, debate, Entertainment, Florida, FoxNews, healthcare question, Iraq, Ron Paul, Rudy Giuliani, Sean Hannity, TV- 8:16 - Ron Paul’s first question. Makes clear his position that marriage is not something government should be involved with. It’s a private, religious institution and the government aught not be dictating who can or can not associate.
- 8:30 - Paul finally gets a healthcare question but doesn’t get the chance to really go into detail.
- 8:57 - Paul mentions tha 70%+ of the public wish to get out of Iraq which brings a round of booing. However, he receives applause after continuing with his normal speech about our interventionist foreign policy.
- 9:06 - Paul is the only candidate who mentions offering people to actually opt completely out of Social Security and receives a decent round of applause.
- 9:20 - Guiliani claims we need to increase military spending to show our enemies and possible enemies that we are not to be messed with.
- 9:23 - Paul again receives boos for bringing up the need for non-interventionist foreign policies.
It was an all around crappy debate. No one really did all that well. The ‘front-runners’ spent more time bashing Clinton and cracking jokes than talking about their platforms. Paul was particularly disappointing. He was given again few questions and he didn’t take full advantage I felt of his time. The crowd however was extremely hostel to his views on foreign policy and he was booed at least twice. The group of people Fox had rounded up seemed pretty far to right. One guy called Paul ‘certifiably crazy’ and several outright called Hillary socialist and/or communist. Paul came away winning the cell phone texting poll with 34%. Huckabee in 2nd with 27% and Giuliani 3rd with 11%. Sean Hannity again accused Paul supporters of ’stacking the deck’ or otherwise mischievous behavior but stopped short of again accusing them of ‘hacking’ the system. He was far nicer to Dr. Paul in the post interview than times before which was refreshing and while he wasn’t the liveliest during the debate he seemed to have woken up a bit. Interestingly he made a comment on the number of tickets received to give to supporters. He seemed to imply that other candidates got more when Hannity brought up that he was booed. Saying that if given twice as many tickets he could have packed the house.
Overall it was probably the worst debate so far. I’m not familiar with Florida politics but the crowd seemed very neo-conish and hostel to Paul’s platform. The same statements in other debates got him large applauses got him a hardy round of booing. It interesting given Florida is 14th in per capita donations and 3rd in total contributions in the nation to the Paul campaign (including DC.)
USA Daily has a good summary of the event.
8 Responses to “Fox News Oct. 21, 2007 Republican Debate Notes”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.





October 22nd, 2007 at 7:42 am
i kept some notes myself:
. reagans name was dropped 14 times (mostly by mitt romney)
. hillarys name was dropped +20 (i stopped keeping track)
October 22nd, 2007 at 8:54 am
Heh, that reminds me of the conservative talk radio in Boston, where they flat-out call Hillary an “enemy of the state”.
I realize folks like Sean Hannity are there to bloviate (as O’Reilly would say) rather than educate, but really, at this point in the election considering the amount of support Paul has, Hannity is just being childish. These network guys do the same to Kucinich, who probably has even an lesser chance than Ron Paul… but at the very least, these are intelligent candidates who bring interesting opinions to the table.
If Sean Hannity truely understood the electorate, especially those motivated enough to attend a debate a full year before the election, he would know that most are tired of mainstream candidates. But hey, I guess maintaining the status quo keeps him in the position of coming on TV/radio every day to bitch about it.
October 22nd, 2007 at 9:52 am
I’m confused. They cheered for his non-interventionist speech @ 8:57, then they booed it @ 9:23?
October 22nd, 2007 at 9:58 am
It’s not easy to figure out exactly what they are responding to. Paul ties in foreign with domestic policies so you can’t tell if they boo what he last said or the whole of the statement. They were more hostel toward Iraq than non-intervention I think.
October 22nd, 2007 at 10:32 am
NYTimes has an interesting transcript graphic. After reading his answers, I’d have to agree w/bile here.
October 22nd, 2007 at 10:40 am
That’s really sharp. Little clunky though.
October 22nd, 2007 at 10:57 am
it seemed to be deliberate hostility towards paul specifically. it appeared a little staged as the boo’s were inconsistent with the discussion.
October 22nd, 2007 at 1:05 pm
I like that transcript thing, but does it work in w3m?