Romney's company buys clear channel [now with FURTHER CLARIFIED and VALUE ADDED INFO!]

http://blatherwatch.blogs.com/talk_radio /2007/12/romney-buys-cle.html

Progressive Blue

This is like "A Very Special Survivor".

Huckabee continues to sound the best.

Fred Thompson should really have a nickname like "blue balls".  I can see what the right wing bloggers went gaga over him.  He always sounds like he's just about ready to sound like Ronald Reagan.  He sounds like you're just about to get that happy, comfortable, drawling mom and apple brand of conservatism.... Then he trails off into an inane claptrap that's so disjointed, so minimalist, or so just completely uninterested.

Now Ron Paul is debating the GOP moderator.

All the Obama, Edwards, and Clinton supporters should really be watching this... It's a health diversion... I think we all could use the giggles.

Republicans who most certainly are NOT frisky should not use the word "frisky".

Rudy's only chance -- if it still exists -- is to play law-and-order, I'll kill all the islamofascists tough guy.

He's not projecting that tonight so far.  He sounds almost like a technocrat.  

If Thompson is "blue balls", Rudy is the seesaw -- whipsawing from fear-mongering crazy man to jabbering technocrat.

This is my goal... a new nickname for all the GOPers.

Two down - 4 to go.

WTF?!?!

The moderator asks about the recent Hormuz incident.  Standard GOP talking points -- but certainly no one singing "bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb-bomb Iran" --

Paul just goes OFF - you'd have think all the other GOP candidates just whipped out their sabers and yelped "To the ramparts!"

I mean - the moderator is right...Ron Paul is the argument against a point never made.

My goodness Ron Paul is cooky. A friend of mine is a "truther" and I accept his stuff with a grain of salt, but Ron Paul is just coming off as the crazy uncle who makes his own sausage.

This thread is mine!  All mine!

...so I will analyze for myself.

John McCain seems strangely subdued - really lacking energy, almost monotone.  It's not confidence or relief that it's back in the race -- it's almost like relief that he wasn't drummed out of the race before now.  

Maybe I'm reading too much into tone and body language... hell the man is seventy-something... but he just seems like he's satisfied with getting a win... anything more is gravy.

Blue Balls again!

Here's my line, here's my red meat... now watch while I muck up the rest of this answer.

Foreign policy is like 3-D chess... which apparently is straight-from-the-ivory-tower neocon foreign policy v2.0.  

Mitt didn't quite provide release notes on what makes his v2.0 different from the beta we got from Bush... I think they actually just changed the marketing -- all reported bugs have now been renamed as "features".

My impression so far.

Fred sounded better in the second half, but overall -- is still embarrassing himself and all the RW bloggers that tabbed him as a savior.

Rudy seems really off his game.

Huckabee's been solid - but I think more because no one's been able to tie him up close.  I think only Fred really went after him -- and that's a big ol' hanging breaking ball, thigh high.

Ron Paul has been Ron Paul... I'm wondering if perhaps he hasn't actually gotten the most time in thus far?   Like I said above -- it's almost like Fox, the GOP, and the other candidates said to themselves "Geez.  This is a disaster.  let's bring Ron Paul in."

McCain has been uneven... subdued.

Romney?  He DOES sound like a CEO.  My company's CEO does an annual slide show and year in review.  It's incredibly boring, incredibly full of meaningless MBA drivel.

Winner so far?

Probably Huckabee.

Wow, Rudy takes on McCain on Iraq. That will be a nice fight if...well, we all know. Those two guys are nasty and I want to see them fight.

Interesting....

He said "Republican Principles" NOT "Conservative Principles".   Is this a factor of ditching SC and going all in for MI?

Does "Republican" play better than "Conservative" in MI?

just invoked Jack Abramoff!!!

"Ask Jack Abramoff...mumble...mumble...fumble...bu t you'll have to do it during visiting hours."

I'm not sure I see the point of that.  I imagine any GOP voter that knows who Abramoff is would probably be against it being mentioned by a GOPer.

An Abramoff reference in the GOP debate? Never in a million yeasr will we ever hear that again. McCain's advisors are not going to like that. Even if he was super tough on that scandal.

viewpoint- I really, really like the presentation of Mike Huckabee.

He doesn't sound at all like an ideologue.  If you knew nothing about him, you'd think he was an old time southern Democrat.

Thompson just went after Huckabee again...and Huckabee just smacked him aside again.  It's almost unfair.

Geez Fred... look around... Paul's the TRE, not Huckabee.

For the hell of it, I surfed over to the Fox link and immediately felt my chest tighten up.  Seeing Fox in the address bar is so repulsive.

Fox apparently just went all-in with the GOP establishment.... Question about a letter in the NYT signed by the ministers (Huck included) talking about a "wife should submit to her husband".

...and Huckabee parried it nicely.

He's good.  

That was a pitch-perfect answer on the evangelical question.  

Of course -- he didn't really answer the question -- and he won't (hopefully) get away with that in a 1 on 1 debate.

But seriously - if I didn't know better about who Huckabee was, if I didn't know better about where the evangelical movement wants to take us - I would listen to that answer and say to myself he's a pretty good guy... what's worse - I think I might start to buy into the media/secularism is picking on religion.

Carl Cameron is one cold mofo.

On electability, "Do you have any?"

Now Fox turns the hit machine onto Ron Paul -- and Paul also turned it back.

This must be driving the GOP establishment absolutely freaking nuts.  Scaife's gotta be having chest pains.  Coors is probably slamming vodka.  Buckley's probably pounding his head on the table.

Almost over - and so far - I say this in all honesty, Mike Huckabee and Ron Paul are the only two candidates that have really shown much.  Paul probably comes out about even -- some really crazy, some really spot on... but ultimately even.  Huck's been solid all night.

seems to have given up on Rudy.

They seem to be desperately trying to throw the game for Romney.

Amnesty up now.  First McCain... more subdued McCain... then over to Romney, where the mod might just as well have said "Senator McCain has no plan to deport 12 million illegals.  Why is he so crazy?"

...and then good ol' Fred -- Who am I!?! Why am I here?!?!  

Wonder how many illegal immigrants work for Clear Channel radio stations.  

This why McCain can't win SC. This issue is red-hot in this state and he will be easily smeared by the other candidates with mailers and backroom talk.

Rudy gets to talk as long as he wants.

The winner of SC has always won the nomination. Since its creation, in 1980, the winner gets the big prize. It will be nasty folks.

My goodness, another dial-group?

I don't really "get" any of these guys... but here are my thought/my picks:

WINNERS

Mike Huckabee... by far... He's dangerous because he doesn't sound like an ideologue.   Maybe this doesn't work in a GOP debate/GOP primary -- I didn't hear much red meat for the conservatives, but if you're not a GOP idealogue - he's gotta be your guy.

LOSERS
Romney... If he weren't such a plastic, soulless, gazillionaire -- I'd almost feel sorry for him.  Oh how the mighty have fallen.  He felt like an afterthought.

McCain... He just seemed awfully subdued.  One would think his goal tonight was to keep his NH momentum going.  He certainly didn't do that.

....and apparently -- I'm an idiot when it comes to reading the GOP voter's mind.

The focus group loved Fred Thompson, hated Ron Paul.

"Marriage is not a 50-50 proposition.  It is 100-100...All in.  This is what teaches us to love and why the institution is so important."  Paraphrase.  Nice answer, sort of.  Nice follow up question would be:

Wouldn't this lesson be good for gay people too?  Or aren't they entitled to go through the pains of marriage in order to learn how to love?

...and my final thoughts are that this has to be one giant freakout for the GOP.

I'd probably be putting some folks on suicide watch.

Even if the focus group was right -- does the establishment honestly think that out-of-money, no-energy, falling like a stone Fred Thompson is the best person to toss the Hail Mary pass to?

If I were a GOPer - I think I'd make my peace with Huckabee.  I think I'd take him aside, extract some promises for certain cabinet posts, and find a way to sign a truce.   He's the only hope I see for the GOP.

I don't buy into the maverick mythmaking of John McCain -- but he's got an iota of a soul and morality to him, so I probably respect him as well as I can any of these guys.   Too bad he really, really, really just looks too old.  Maybe he's been like this all season and I jsut missed it, but he seems tired.  Old.  Subdued.  Resigned.   If I had been on Mars for the last week -- I'd have thought he lost New Hampshire based on his performance tonight.

Romney is never going to catch fire.  The only way I see him winning the nod is if 1)he wins MI... and it probably takes people really pushing the crossover idea and sabotaging the GOP, 2)all the other non-Huckabee candidates drop out and endorse him.  I just can't see Romney winning in any way that doesn't require a floor fight.

Fox News appears bent on electing Fred Thompson.  Is this an attempt to undermine Huckabee, or is this a product of the RNC's financial and political relationship to that organization?

Vindication from the txtmsg poll results.

Paul ahead by a wide margin, Huckabee #2.

Thompson a close 3rd, though -- which I just don't get -- but I suspect it's just the drawl.... which is fine.  I dated a southern belle once and, though she was quite smart -- I know there were occasions when this Indiana farm boy would just sit back and listen dreamily to her inflections and accent - not hearing a word she said.  If the GOP is going to pick candidates the way I dated, well -- best of luck with that.

Grampa Fred is on with Sean and his bitch now.

Colmes and Fred are "arguing" about something, Fred is just making sounds. This is the way my Grandpa argues with my three-year-old brother. Yawn.

Thompson is going to do shitty in the next one, drop out and endorse Rudy. Fox is proping him up tonight to make his endorsement mean something the for the anemic Giuliani campaign.

Also, did Rudy buy time in Florida for the Super Bowl even though their primary is a week before the game?

zonk -  your comments are greatly appreciated.

I cannot watch a repug debate unless its part of a drinking game.  Everytime a dem candidate, reagan, or 9/11 is mentioned, you take a drink.

I am surprised some Dems are so scared of McCain.  That guy looks an acts 100 years old.  How is he going to act after months of campaigning?  The only candidate he could be beat is Clinton.

huck is a neanderthal but there are few politicians as gifted in front of a camera. it's actually amazing to watch.

Sarkozy doesnt leave the gossip columns

for the poll results. I couldn't find it .... someone must have won that Fox didn't want to win.

Ron paul winning the tex vote: Proof that Liberals need to stop watching Fox News. We are making them money.

I can't believe the extent to which they are all willing to assert that "tax cuts increase revenues."  They already eschew facts in relation to myriad social policies ("abstinence education works!"  "terri schiavo is fine!"), but this is basic economic policy.  The Bush administration itself doesn't even claim that its tax cuts increased revenues.  It's a flat out lie and it should be laughed off the stage.  

Thanks for the compliments on my admittedly amateur and likely off base analysis...

...having slept on it - "it" being how I clearly didn't "get" Fred Thompson's performance.  I think Huckabee thoughts were pretty close, but it's pretty obvious from the focus group, the phone poll, and this morning's winger reaction on RW blogs that I wasn't watching the same Fred Thompson as the standard GOP voter.

I think what I missed is that the GOP voters didn't want to listen to the whole answer.  I suspect that we Democratic voters probably have the same problem evaluating our candidates... It's not that we don't really "listen" -- it's that we come to the table with pre-conceived notions, especially now that all of us have more or less lined up behind a candidate.

In other words... we hear the first sentence, clause, or clip -- and sort of tune out the rest of the answer.

As someone who -- no possible way in hell even with a gun to my head -- isn't going to be voting for any of these jokers, I'm listening and watching from a different angle.  I'm listening and watching from a more 'critical' angle.  The GOP voter probably WANTS to hear something, and therefore -- is much, much more willing to latch onto a shred, a sliver, an opening quip and run with it.

I don't think this is unique to GOP voters -- like I said, I bet "we" do the same thing... it's definitely something I'm going to watch for from my OWN POV next Tuesday.  I'm an Obama backer - but do I listen to the WHOLE answer, or jsut the first sentence?  Same with HRC and Edwards -- do I hear the whole answer - or do I listen for what I want to hear and tune out the totality?

My completely amateur analysis is that this is why Grandpa Fred seemed to score so well.... Conservatives were desperate to hear someone - Fred Thompson starts every answer with this comforting drawl, a lazy quip, and this sort of authoritative "I'm above all this" tone... never mind that he then goes nowhere after the opener.  He's like an armored spearhead with half a gallon of gas - plunges through the front line, but then runs out of gas.