Posted on 11/30/2007 10:05:54 AM PST by FocusNexus
Hey I get this. It is lunacy otherwise, but unfortunately he either has to step up his energy or get rid of the floppy saggy skin, together they scream tired, old, back pasture, not warrior, front runner. Which we need. Unfortunately externals do matter.
“Disagree if you must, but insults are for the one that can not effectively make their point and shows weakness. “
You read the article about the experts data on the impression that Fred made,
‘Frank Luntz’
“So they were truly attuned to what was going on last night. Now, if you want to understand what Republicans are looking for, passion, principles, and pithy commentary. And the candidate that stood out yesterday was Fred Thompson.”
Then you write a phony “insulting” reverse description, you even did that little sad thing that people do when they try these silly posts.
How can you make points against someone’s perception? It is all an opinion game. I can strongly disagree with their opinion, and then you say that isn’t a good argument,when a good argument wasn’t put forward in the first place.
Circular reasoning friend.
Rush said yesterday he wasn’t going to try to argue with someone’s perceptions. But every time someone puts forward a perception, they are trying to hurt the candidate they are negating. Fred Thompson is presidential, not the energizer bunny. It is shallow to want something like that, especially from someone who should be an educated voter.
Former Education Secretary Bill Bennett: "I thought he came across very strong. I think you guys are absolutely right. That opening debate between Romney and Giuliani was, I think, the pivotal point of the evening. And I think points to Romney. Giuliani came across badly." (CNN's Post-Debate Coverage, 11/28/07)
ABC News Live Blog: "Romney is engaging very, very directly - and dare I say he's getting the better of Giuliani in this exchange, funny accents and all." ("Live-Blogging During GOP Debate," ABC News' Political Radar, Posted 11/28/07)
MSNBC's Domenico Montanaro: "While the sanctuary mansion line got good laughs, Romney's explanation and questions left Giuliani without an answer." (Domenico Montanaro, "Giuliani Flustered?" MSNBC's First Read, Posted 11/28/07)
National Review's Rich Lowry: "Rudy let his temper get the best of him - clear winner of the exchange: Romney." (Rich Lowry, "Mitt V. Rudy," National Review's The Corner, Posted 11/28/07)
I am confident Mitt will find just the right tone to take with Hillary. He already waged and won an election against a woman democrat.
wow...so that is what it has come to?
Honesty and integrity take a back seat to died hair and botox....Lord help us.....
Good lord, I am glad Abraham Lincoln wasn’t in the debate and judged on his appearance.
Agreed...but the point is well taken...two words...
Bill Clinton
...and for two terms. ugh.
Republicans are looking for, passion, principles, and pithy commentary. And the candidate that stood out yesterday was Fred Thompson.”
Honey, you need to learn to read. This was highly selective editing and dishonest.
I hate to be personal about this, but Fred doesn’t look very healthy and I still fear the stress will reactivate his lymphoma.
Call me names, I won’t read your post to me anyway.
“Honey, you need to learn to read. This was highly selective editing and dishonest.
Call me names, I won’t read your post to me anyway.”
What in the world are you talking about? Read the transcript yourself. See the second paragraph of Luntz’s opening.
>Frank Luntz Shares Results Of His Debate Focus Group
Hannity & Colmes
COLMES: Welcome to “Hannity & Colmes.” And we get right to our top story tonight. The Republican candidates debated in Florida last night. We have extensive coverage of CNN’s disastrous charade in just a few minutes. But we start tonight with how well the candidates did. Our own Frank Luntz was in Florida with a focus group. He has got the results.
Frank, according to your group, how did it go?
FRANK LUNTZ, WWW.LUNTZ.COM: We had a lot of people participate and they are mad as hell. I have got to tell you something, in listening to what the Republicans have to say right now, they are very nervous about the future. They are not happy about the direction in Washington. And they really want a change.
So they were truly attuned to what was going on last night. Now, if you want to understand what Republicans are looking for, passion, principles, and pithy commentary. And the candidate that stood out yesterday was Fred Thompson. We have used our patented the FOX News dials.
The higher that you see the lines go, the more favorable the reaction. The red line represents conservatives, yellow line, independents. If the lines climb to an 80, it’s a political home run. Watch how favorable they respond to Fred Thompson when he talks about wasteful Washington spending. <
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
See you are dealing with Mitt love...
Infatuation at it’s finest.
Mitt love has not just made you blind, but goofy...
Understandable when trying to push a non conservative loved one on a Conservative site...
Awesome results from Luntz’s research, the republican subjects were infatuated with the hunk, Fred Thompson.
“Now, if you want to understand what Republicans are looking for, passion, principles, and pithy commentary. And the candidate that stood out yesterday was Fred Thompson.”
CNN/YouTube Debate Features Hillary Plant ( and other demo backers- words from the organizer)
Nobody should vote based on how a candidate looks.
However, we live in the real world. If you don’t think a candidate who looks like he’s about to either take a long nap or go to his eternal resting place is going to be negatively impacted in the real world, you would be mistaken.
Interestingly, I think his career as an actor hurts him. They obviously dolled him up for his Law and Order appearances — so when people see him NOW, and compare him to the re-runs on Law and Order, he looks a lot older.
On the other hand, my daughter likes him, thinks he looks like a grandfather, which makes her think of “trustworthy”.
So I think looks can play both ways.
I disagree. Fred Thompson is about my third or fourth favorite candidate, but I thought he won the debate. He looked healthy and engaged with the flow of questions. His first answer scared me because he looked down as he spoke. I thought, "Oh no, we're going to spend all night looking at the top of his bald head." Instead, he kept his head up for the rest of the debate and gave good answers. I'd give Mr. Romney good marks for standing firm in the points he made against Mr. Giuliani, Mr. McCain, and Mr. Huckabee, but Fred Thompson wasn't afraid to confront Rudy Giuliani. The fact that he didn't get involved in many confrontations helped Mr. Thompson. His answering fewer questions likely helped him avoid supposed "mistakes," but the nitpicking stuff isn't a big deal anyway.
Until he answered the Confederate battle flag question, I thought Mr. Romney was doing equally well. His answer to that question will cost him a few votes in the South where he needs votes. Even with that question, Mr. Romney scored a solid second place. I tend to agree with the Luntz focus group. Fred Thompson and Mitt Romney improved their chances at the debate.
While Rudy Giuliani didn't have a good night, I'm worried that he didn't do poorly enough to lose many votes. We're at the stage of the campaign when we have to start making conservatives who support him realize that he isn't a conservative and that they need to find another candidate. We need him to do poorly enough that he'll add no undecided voters to his side. I don't think he did poorly enough to hurt himself that much.
Bill
I agree. Rudy Giuliani does well when he's in a position to control the debate and the agenda. When he's put on an even footing with others, he has problems.
Bill
I agree with all. It is insanity and stupidity the appearance and energy thing, but as Nixon discovered they do influence. When anyone goes to a job interview, as these men are doing, they do all they can to fit the role in which they are applying. Being president of the United States takes considerable energy. We can all measure it differently when it comes to behavior and appearance, but when Fred's energy is a bit slower and his face is marred in deep wrinkles, sagging skin, no glow from his skin or gleam in his eyes it can influence people's perception of how much energy and youthful vigor the man will bring to the office.
His slower country talk will be to his advantage as there have been studies done that show many Americans have some sort of country twang to their dialect and thus are more responsive and trust more intuitively someone like Bush that talks more like themselves versus a John Kerry for example that sounds (and of course we all know is) like a snob. Along with this advantage that Fred has is a perception of slowness by others which of course is not true. However in my opinion one may find others perceiving them as less energetic combined with his appearance which honestly looks down, tired. Reagan looked strapping and very healthy, he had a very sharp eye and speech. I remember I grew up watching him, cheering him on, knowing he was our man. Reagan made us trust everything about him with his total presentation. He was an actor who knew that all of these details influence. Having the content, the values, the ability and experience should be and is the measuring stick in my opinion, however we can not negate a candidates need to put his best foot forward during a job interview.
This comment is not meant toward you marsh2 (nor probably anything above. I'm just going off here really :-) but just on a general note: Kill the messenger if one must, however the truth is Fred may win with us conservatives now, but he must step up his game for the larger national public. How he is operating right now may work. I am just saying as a staunch conservative if I find him a bit lackluster in his presentation and unexciting energetically how are others that aren't fully on his side going to react? Just stuff to toss around.
I want a real conservative in the office of the presidency. So I am more then willing to say things that others may not like to hear. Whether it is seen as truth, fact, or perception. It is the candidates' staffers I prefer to weight how strong my perceptions are and how valid.
Fred supporters . . . the more you sound as though you are making excuses the more turned off I am. If you so strongly support his views then argue them. Why Fred versus Mitt or Romney? What about his record and experience makes him more qualified or better qualified? Why is he so talented that his appearance should not matter, nor his perceived tiredness? If you hate the appearance stuff than lets talk about how incredible he is that these things should be overlooked and or will not even stand out.
If there was a clearly defined candidate that I was already supporting I would not treat others on this site poorly. I would be as an advocate for the candidate knowing my fellow Republicans and Libertarians are the ones to influence for the primaries. May want to consider who you are representing here and what your goal really is before treating others poorly and personally attacking them. It is one thing to disagree and make well reasoned argument or just respectful disagreements and another to attack and be disrespectful of others. If your want others to see the greatness of your candidate don't turn others away by being less of a person yourself. You more then you realize now represent that candidate and the type of person that supports them. We all have sway and impact. Be the greatness, integrity, and warrior you so desire in our next president. We don't need to act like DU mmies.
Interesting point along with the previous one mentioning he is more control freak than scrapper. I will definitely keep an eye out for this in his next debate. I do however notice he seems to handle spontaneous reactions well when he quickly responds to unplanned comments from the audience.
By the way I though it was funny when Fred Thompson made the comment about being grateful that dumbas- cartoon about Cheney wasn't him. That was hilarious. Good use of humor and very fitting. (The youtube cartoon however was NOT!)
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.