May 04, 2007

5/4: When Showing Up Is Overrated

The Blogometer doesn't care what Survey USA says. The conservatives we read are near unanimous: Rudy Giuliani had a very bad night 5/3. Whether it was a strained Sunni/Shiite explanation, evasiveness on the influence of Christian conservatives in the party, or equivocation on Roe, conservatives just were not buying what Giuliani was selling. For the most part, Giuliani has limited himself to set pieces so far in the campaign. If the unscripted performances he must endure ahead all go like 5/3's debate, expect to see big smiles from the only real consensus winner 5/3: Fred Thompson.

GOP DEBATE: The Biggest Loser

RedState hosted a "Who lost the debate?" reader poll:

Giuliani   38%	
McCain     16%
Romney     10%
Tancredo   10%	
T. Thompson 9%
Paul        8%
Gilmore     4%
Brownback   3%
Huckabee    1%	
Hunter      1%

On a more positive note, The Drudge Report asked who won the debate, and his readers chose Mitt Romney at 35% with Rudy Giuliani in second at 20%.

Most conservative bloggers shared RedState reader assessment that Giuliani was the clear loser of the night:

• NY Sun's Ryan Sager: "At this point, it's hard to escape the conclusion that the Giuliani campaign is in a full meltdown."
• RedState's Erick Erickson: "Rudy totally and utterly self-destructed tonight. He had many chances to get in good with the core base of Republican voters and ignored every moment."
• The Corner's Kathryn Jean Lopez: "I've been willing to consider the possibility of Rudy. But not tonight. And unless he has a real dramatic political awakening, I just don't see this happening."
• The Corner's Peter Robinson: "On one point, though, the agreement seems general: Rudy Giuliani had a very bad night."

Drudge polling aside, the only consensus winner from 5/2 wasn't even at the debate. RedState's Erick Erickson writes: "But let's be honest. Who really won? Fred Thompson. None of the men on that stage really stood out tonight. Tancredo, Ron Paul, Tommy Thompson, and Jim Gilmore just made you wonder why on earth they were there."

DEBATE GIULIANI: Like Watching LT Break Theisman's Leg

• NY Sun's Ryan Sager: "The former mayor simply wasn't himself on that stage, trying to contort himself into something the religious right can accept, while at the same time refusing to pander to them in any way that would actually help him win the nomination."
• NRO's Jim Geraghty: "[W]atching him try to explain the difference between Shia and Sunni was as painful as watching Joe Theismann have his leg broken by Lawrence Taylor back in the 1980s. Rudy's better than this performance; the question will be whether this really hurt him."
• The Corner's Jonah Goldberg: "Giuliani's Roe answer will haunt him. It probably seems unfair to him, because I'm sure he had a more finessed answer ready, but the question format caught him off guard."
• The Corner's Peter Robinson: "Tonight Rudy hasn't proven memorable, funny, or even-his usual strength-compelling. He's phoning it in."
• Christian Broadcasting Network's The Brody File: "On Roe, Giuliani didn't do himself any favors with religious conservatives by saying "It would be OK" when asked what his reaction would be if Roe was overturned. That seemed real lukewarm but true to Giuliani's real feelings so at least he was genuine."

Townhall's Matt Lewis was in a distinct minority offering up to "good points" Giuliani made: "1. Bush and Republicans don't get enough credit for keeping us safe since 9-11; 2. During the entire Democrat debate, the words radical Islamic fundamentalist were probably never uttered."

DEBATE MCCAIN: The Cranky Warrior

• Townhall's Mary Katharine Ham: "McCain showed up without his good humor, and the finger-stabbing was awkward. I'm inclined to like McCain most when he's both tough and good-humored. Tonight, he was tough, but no fun at all."
• The Corner's Rich Lowry: "If you're mad as hell and won't take it anymore, McCain is your guy tonight."
• Townhall's Dean Barnett: "The debate was at the Reagan Library, so the natural inclination was to try to channel the Happy Warrior ethos that defined the Gipper. I think the memo to McCain somehow got garbled, and McCain thought he was supposed to be a Cranky Warrior."
• The Corner's Jonah Goldberg: "To hammer his points home McCain should hold his hand over an open flame - like G. Gordon Liddy - for the duration of each of his answers just to prove his steely resolve and his willingness to go to eleven in defense of America."
• Power Line's Paul Mirengoff: "Frankly, I think John McCain had the best night. He seemed a bit nervous at first, but soon found his stride. He managed more ably than his chief rivals, McCain and Romney, to give answers that will appeal to a reasonably full spectrum of Republican voters without seeming to pander to anyone."
• NRO's Jim Geraghty: "I've got big gripes with McCain on some issues, but I think he gave a grade-A performance. Fired up, some good lines, and in command."

DEBATE ROMNEY: Well Cast Guy Running For President

• Captain's Quarters: "Mitt Romney won this debate. He looked relaxed, answered clearly, showed real warmth and a sense of humor, and actually answered the questions asked of him -- even the stupid ones, to which I'll return shortly."
• The Brody File: "The debate is over and I thought Mitt Romney really came across well. He was comfortable, funny and somewhat free wheeling. "
• Krusty Konservative: "Solid performance, gave Rudy some hell on his abortion answer when he said, "There are plenty of things that a pro-life President could do in office to push pro-life policies." I found it odd that Romney said this and not Brownback, good move by Romney."
• NY Sun's Ryan Sager: "If anyone stood out from the other candidates, in terms of looking polished and poised, it was clearly Mr. Romney."
• NRO's Jim Geraghty: "Romney had some strong answers, good humor. I'd be surprised if he didn't help himself tonight. Maybe the audience will see what attracted his fans. Clearly, this was a format he seemed at home in."
• Townhall's Mary Katharine Ham: "Romney seemed to speak the most of any of the big three, give most of the basically right, rote answers, and managed not to make any gaffes. He's still not doing it for me, but I think he probably gained the most tonight."
• Race 4 '08s DaveG: "I remain unconvinced that Romney gave us anything new tonight. ... He's changed his views on abortion over time. He believes in fiscal conservatism and an aggressive social conservatism. But we already knew that. And all of that's only gotten Mitt to 10 percent in the polls of GOP primary voters. Again, where's the beef?
• The Corner's Jonah Goldberg: "I'm sorry but Romney still comes across like a well-cast actor in a movie of the week about a guy running for president."
• The Corner's Peter Robinson on Romney's "I've always been personally pro-life" statement: "That sure isn't what he tried to convey in his debate with Ted Kennedy, citing his mother's pro-choice activities and the death of a family friend as the result of a botched abortion. Courtesy of YouTube, hundreds of thousands have now seen that debate with Kennedy, watching with their own eyes as Romney asserted a personally pro-choice position. But he still can't admit it? A highly intelligent, immensely accomplished, and hugely likeable candidate. But this? Appalling."

THE SEVEN DWARFS: Good Government Defined

• IA's Krusty Konservative on Sam Brownback: "Someone wake me up when he is done speaking. The guy just lacks energy. He could give the best answers of the night but it will not register with me because I was probably getting popcorn, checking my email or taking a nap while he talks."
• The Corner's John Podhoretz on Jim Gilmore: "What on God's good earth is Jim Gilmore talking about? He may just have delivered the worst debate answer I've ever heard."
• Podhoretz on Mike Huckabee: "It's hard to know whether a debate watched only by a few million people can really launch someone, but I'd say halfway through that he is far and away the most likable and eloquent candidate on that stage."
• Townhall's Mary Katharine Ham on Duncan Hunter: "Hunter had my favorite line of the night, and came across as presidential. When asked to name one thing the government does well, he said, "Those precision-guided munitions on Zarqawi's safehouse. That was done very well."
• The Corner's Jonah Goldberg on Ron Paul: "I'm no huge fan, but he did a very good job of making his quasi isolationist position seem hawkish and American. I think it was the best answer given so far."
• The Corner's Rich Lowry on Tom Tancredo: "No fair! They're not asking him immigration questions (and it's not working out very well for him)."
• RedState's Erick Erickson on Tommy Thompson: "Is there a bigger jerk in the debate than Tommy Thompson? The man just went after George Bush over healthcare policy after being Secretary of HHS and bolloxing up the whole job. And he gave the crummiest answer ever on stem cells."

GIULIANI: Bigger Than 9/11

Steve Forbes posted his pre-debate case for a Rudy Giuliani presidency at RedState: "I think Rudy Giuliani will be a superb president. There are many reasons I support Mayor Giuliani's candidacy - his leadership after September 11th, his turning around of New York City and his fight against crime - but what I most admire is his record of fiscal conservatism."

MCCAIN: But Do Primary Voters Care?

Andy McCarthy posed a pre-debate "mischievous question" at The Corner: "Does it matter to anyone that Sen. McCain is, as we speak, the plaintiff in a case before the Supreme Court in which he is trying to shut down the message of a pro-life group (Wisconsin Right to Life) because it had the audacity to mention the name of Russ Feingold - a major pro-choice Senator who is McCain's friend and cohort in his assault on the First Amendment (aka "campaign finance reform") - during its campaign to get up-or-down votes in the Senate for Bush judicial nominees?"

ROMNEY: YouTube Wars

The Corner's Kathryn Jean Lopez links Mitt Romney's official page claiming "is drowning in surrogate YouTubes from Simi Valley."

Also on YouTube patrol, RedState's Hunter Baker links to video a compilation of Romney clips embracing "the pro-choice position," distancing "himself from the Reagan economic record," and blathering "on about the glass ceiling."

CLINTON: Useless Gestures Department

Daily Kos' mcjoan is not impressed with Hillary Clinton's legislation to "end the authority for the war in Iraq" on 10/11/07: "[D]oes it mean ... Clinton will not vote for any funds authorizing the war after October 11, 2007? Because each funding bill for the Iraq war is, in effect, a reauthorization of the AUMF. If you are going to declare the war illegal as of then, you simply cannot provide continued funding for it. That's putting aside the obvious--this legislation is subject to a veto by Bush. The only thing not subject to a Bush veto would be no bill at all, presenting no more funding bills or timelines for him to veto."

EDWARDS: Killing Them Softly

Mike Allen's Timearticle on John Edwards rejection of the phrase "global war on terror" is helping convince more netrooters he has the most progressive foreign policy, but its not sealing the deal either:

• MyDD's Matt Stoller: "His instincts are better than that of any other major candidates, pushing against the war on terror frame. I'm impressed and want to see and hear more, though I still have a deep sense of caution because of his embrace of somewhat clueless liberal internationalists. ... Still, every step he takes against the false war on terror metaphor warms my heart."
• Matthew Yglesias: "It does make me think somewhat better of Edwards, but it's also a bit orthagonal to my main concerns. ... What I want to hear from Edwards, though, is something about the evolution of his thought. Why is it that in the 2004 campaign he was for creating a domestic intelligence service and for invading Iraq, and now three years later he's not for those things?"
• The Washington Monthly's Kevin Drum: "Well, good for him. Unfortunately, the phrase is unlikely to go away until someone comes up with something good to take its place. Unfortunately, the phrase is unlikely to go away until someone comes up with something good to take its place. ... Maybe Edwards's message gurus will figure something out."

Also on the anti-GWOT front, CaliticsTodd Beeton tells readers Edwards forwarded this question to the GOP debate 5/2: "Has the Bush doctrine of a Global War on Terror backfired? Does the president's focus suggest a fixed enemy that can be defeated through a permanent military campaign or do you think we need a broader approach as many military leaders believe?"

Also, many in the netroots are linking to a Glenn Greenwald attack on The Politico for their ongoing coverage of Edwards' hair: "This is at least the eighth time that The Politico -- which gloriously "broke" the story -- has referenced Edwards' haircut. ... The Politico's Senior Political Columnist tries to claim that there is some sort of groundswell of interest in the Edwards/haircut story compelling him to write about it, when in reality, it is nothing more -- as usual -- than the fact that he and his colleague Matt Drudge and other similar types are chattering about it, and they mistake that chatter, which is all they know and understand, for what the "ordinary people" find important."

OBAMA: Establishment Meme Echoer

The Barack Obama-MySpace saga seems to be drawing to a quiet but unflattering conclusion. MyDD's Chris Bowers is frustrated the details about the negotiations between the page's owner (Joe Anthony) and the campaign are still murky since "for many people is the crux of the issue." MyDD's Jerome Armstrong argues the campaign "obviously" made a decision not to go on record about key aspects of the negotiations and concludes: "The Obama campaign messed up in a lot of ways, but most importantly at the end."

Armstrong admits he probably overvalued Anthony's work at first, but not totally: "I don't think the list of 160,000 members, now that I've actually got a experienced-based opinion, is worth $44K, but it's worth $20K." For Bowers, however, the issue of payment for Anthony is key to the story:

Nothing bothered me more in the discussion yesterday than the argument that Anthony's work wasn't valuable. That line of argumentation had strong overtones of implying that all internet and netroots work conducted on behalf of a campaign was not valuable, a meme which we in the netroots have struggled against for years. What made it worse were the many Obama supporters in the netroots who were echoing that view simply in order to defend their candidate. Some of you may not consider that a fair characterization, but the degree to which it echoed many establishment arguments about the lack of importance and general irrelevancy of the netroots disturbed me greatly, and seemed to hold the seeds of our own destruction (or at least self-marginalization).

IRAQ: Loose Lips Sink Appropriation Negotiations

TPM's Greg Sargent obtained denials from Speaker Nancy Pelosi's (D-CA) and Maj. Leader Harry Reid's (D-NV) on The Washington Post's headline "Democrats Back Down On Iraq Timetable." Both offices told Sargent no decisions had been made on what to include in new legislation. When contacted, author Jonathan Weisman stood by the story pointing out: "By the way, nobody has contacted me about it. That should tell you a lot."

Sargent attacks Weisman: "I have no problem believing that these aides said this, or that the withdrawal language is likely to be taken out in the end. But the question remains: If this offer hasn't actually been made yet, why is WaPo saying it has been? It's one thing for the aides to be saying that the language will have to go; it's another to say even before the negotiations have started that the concession has already been offered to the White House."

Firedoglake's Jane Hamsher and Daily Kos' mcjoan also attack WaPo's framing of the story. From Hamsher: "I have no idea of the veracity (or lack thereof) of the Washington Post's sourcing on the "Democrats Back Down on Iraq Timetable" story. Their source(s) may be perfectly solid. But to say that the Washington Post has no agenda with regard to the war is like saying the fox has no agenda when guarding the henhouse."

From mcjoan: "I'm glad to see Pelosi and Reid standing firm to Sargent, but who in the hell is talking to WaPo? At least half of the battle in politics is message control, and the leadership has apparently not gotten that beaten into the heads of staff and other Members. Who is this coming from and who can make them shut the hell up?

Talk Left's Big Tent Democrat tracks the story and comments: "No offense but when MyDD was cheering for this House Supplemental did it NOT know this headline was inevitable?"

More BTD: "Let's be clear, the Dems bill did not set a firm deadline and no binding conditions that the President could not waive. The only theoretically firm deadline was that troop withdrawal START, without saying how many, in October. ... All this DRAMA about whether the Dems backed down is funny. But the need to end the Iraq War is not. The Reid-Feingold framework which, for those of you just tuning in, does NOT require passage of a bill, is the way out. Announce April 1, 2008 as the date certain for NOT funding the war. Forget about strings, conditions, benchmarks and goals."

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: Love The One You're With

The Washington Monthly's Kevin Drum wonders why Ronald Reagan is the only GOP pres. ever invoked and concludes: "But the bottom line is that aside from Reagan, there's literally no Republican president in the past 70 years that Republicans really feel comfortable with. The unpopular ones (Hoover, Nixon, Bush Sr., Bush Jr.) are toxic and the popular ones (Eisenhower, Ford) are far too moderate for today's crew. So Reagan worship is in full swing because, really, they don't have any other choice, do they?"

LEST WE FORGET: David Arquette In Carbonite Would Be Nice...

Star Wars.com sat down with Conan O'Brien. Ensuing hilarity includes:

• SW: Which Star Wars film is your all-time favorite and why? - CO: As a real aficionado, my true favorite is the obscure, never released Episode 2A: The Passive-Aggressive Email Chain of the Sith.
• SW: Which character do you think could fill in for you on your show if you were to swap lives? - CO: Boba Fett -- if a guest cancelled at the last minute, he could go out, capture David Arquette and bring him back to the studio encased in carbonite.
• SW: Which character do you identify with the most in the entire Star Wars saga and why? - CO: Princess Leia -- because I almost made out with my brother once, too.
• SW: Which character do you think is the most-underrated and under-appreciated and why? - CO: Salacious Crumb! He laughed at everything Jabba the Hutt said even when Jabba's material was sub-par. He'd make a great sidekick.

Posted by Conn Carroll at May 4, 2007 12:37 PM