Posted on 05/04/2007 7:15:28 AM PDT by Rameumptom
Check the numbers again, try to get around the terrible formatting.
Nope, just correcting for the second time the same formatting error by telling people to go to the source. Not doing any "jumping" no matter how you read it.
It's a formatting boo-boo. Romney's the one with >30%
But former Massachusetts Gov. Romney "had a certain good-natured command, a presidential voice, and a surprising wiliness. He seemed happy to be there, and in the mysterious way that some people seem to dominate, he dominated.” www.newsmax.com
He did appear comfortable, confident and committed to conservatism.
This is the second posting of this information that completely gets it wrong. The percentages shown should start with Brown back, not Gilmore. Sonsequently, Ron Paul is getting Romney’s percentage.
Try this:
Brownback
2% 2,145
Gilmore
1% 1,432
Giuliani
20% 19,046
Huckabee
4% 3,432
Hunter
3% 2,611
McCain
6% 5,521
Paul
18% 17,113
Romney
36% 34,749
Tancredo
5% 4,662
Tommy Thompson
5% 4,794
Total Votes: 95,505
I think Chrissy has a man-crush on Romney.
Just sayin’.
Memo to self. Subsequently.
I have friends in Virginia who like Jim Gilmore but say he is about as exciting as watching paint dry.
Huckabee has disqualified himself with his embrace of the open borders lobby.
All things considered, I find Duncan Hunter to be the best candidate, Mitt Romney to be an acceptable one.
McCain, on the other hand, needs to preserve what little dignity he has left by bowing out. He would make a great secretary of defense. But he embarasses himself and the party by continuing to pursue this thing when it is clear he has faded out.
Guilani would make a great Secretary of State, but should have nothing to do with domestic policy. A pushy New Yorker with facist tendancies versus another pushy New Yorker with facust tendancies simply won't energize the base.
How about that 18% by Ron Paul, though? Pretty impressive for a guy that can't crack 2% in any national poll.
Like it or not, with the mushy middle, the ability to debate is directly correlatated with the ability to get votes. This is why Lurch came as close as he did in 2004. This is why we need to pick someone who is a good speaker.
Tancredo ... just don't see him getting any traction
He won't, without people supporting him. He's got my vote right now, though I realize it's one of a few.
I have friends in Virginia who like Jim Gilmore but say he is about as exciting as watching paint dry.
I thought he showed well last night. I really like Gilmore.
Huckabee ... embrace of the open borders lobby.
I didn't realize that. He was one of two (Tancredo the other) who said "Fair Tax" last night, so that moved him way, way up in my estimation.
All things considered, I find Duncan Hunter to be the best candidate
All things considered, you're probably right. He's not my favorite, but I'll gladly vote for him in a general election.
How about that 18% by Ron Paul, though? Pretty impressive for a guy that can't crack 2% in any national poll.
That blew me away, too, until I realized it's all the moonbats who pissed themselves over a Republican criticizing the War in Iraq. That 18% represents people who will never actually vote for him.
“Noonan, Pundits: Romney Won Debate
Political pundits have been weighing in on Thursday night’s Republican debate, and there appears to be heavy sentiment favoring Mitt Romney’s performance.”
If you read the Peggy Noonan article posted on Drudge it is clear she is for Fred Thompson.
http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/pnoonan/?id=110010023
So?
She started and ended her article with Fred Thompson and seemed to be comparing him to Reagan.
I wasn’t disagreeing with you, just pointing that out.
Which candidate Peggy Noonan supports does not interest me at all though. I used to love her, but recently she seems to have gone sideways on us on many issues.
Part of a word freq analysis I ran on the transcript. This will give you a rough idea of how the breakdown was for overall attention to individual candidates (assuming that the questioner says the candidate's name and the transcript then has the name in a response- it's rough but one easy way to break it down):<P>
|
Word |
Frequency |
% |
|
Brownback |
32 |
0.14 |
|
Bush |
8 |
0.04 |
|
Bush's |
1 |
0.00 |
|
Catholic |
3 |
0.01 |
|
Chris |
22 |
0.10 |
|
Clinton |
13 |
0.06 |
|
Clintons |
1 |
0.00 |
|
Clinton's |
1 |
0.00 |
|
cloning |
5 |
0.02 |
|
Democrat |
3 |
0.01 |
|
democratic |
3 |
0.01 |
|
Democrats |
10 |
0.04 |
|
Gilmore |
33 |
0.14 |
|
Giuliani |
48 |
0.21 |
|
Hillary |
6 |
0.03 |
|
HillaryCare |
1 |
0.00 |
|
Huckabee |
31 |
0.14 |
|
Hunter |
21 |
0.09 |
|
Matthews |
190 |
0.83 |
|
McCain |
49 |
0.22 |
|
McCain-Feingold |
1 |
0.00 |
|
me |
33 |
0.14 |
|
Paul |
29 |
0.13 |
|
Romney |
50 |
0.22 |
|
Ron |
1 |
0.00 |
|
Ronald |
21 |
0.09 |
|
Tancredo |
42 |
0.18 |
|
Thompson |
27 |
0.12 |
|
Thompson's |
1 |
0.00 |
|
Vandehei |
38 |
0.17 |
|
VanderHei |
2 |
0.01 |
|
VendeHei |
1 |
0.00 |
|
Zogby |
1 |
0.00 |
Different words/items counted: 2633
Total Words: 19018
Total Punctuation: 3457
Total Other Text: 99
Total Characters: 106001
Total Paragraphs: 1322
We have a winner!! /sarc
Matthews Freq. 190 % 0.83
lol I wonder how many times he said his own name!
btw if anyone wants the whole analysis I can freepmail it- it’s too ugly to post as a thread item.
Mitt Romney is so forceful and compelling that even Chris Matthews couldn’t interrupt him.
Even in the video people are using to try to destroy Mitt with the abortion issue, what you get out of the tape is how he refuses to let anybody else set the agenda. He was going to answer the question, and nobody, not the moderator, not the opponent, was going to get away with mis-characterizing his position.
Mitt is a really smart guy, an excellent speaker, and thank God has come around on the abortion issue.
As much as I’d love to see Fred Thompson enter the race, I’m not sure we need him. Romney can be the Next President, and our country would be much better for it.
(However, I’d also be happy with a Thompson/Romney ticket if if came to that).
chrissy didnt even try to interupt Romney...thats my point ..a few times i even looked for a count down clock as was at times shown for other candidates and there was none. its just something that kinda makes me go hmmmmm....especially when dealing with chrissy. i just kinda wonder why?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.