We Don’t Get Bloomberg TV …

Posted on | October 11, 2011 | 42 Comments

. . . but we do get Da Tech Guy who’s in New Hampshire live-blogging the debate at Dartmouth College, where the moderators have been up to the typical “liberals-asking-Republicans-gotcha-questions” tricks.

Does anyone remember when they had that Democratic debate in 2008 with George Will, Rush Limbaugh, Bill Kristol and Byron York as moderators?

No? Me neither, because it didn’t happen.

And yet we get Karen Tumulty questioning Republicans.

Because that’s “fair.”

UPDATE: The post-debate wrapup on Bloomberg, which I found online, seems to indicate Cain got a lot of heat over his 9-9-9 tax plan, but defended it pretty well. Perry did nothing to reverse his slide.

Maggie’s Notebook did some excellent live-blogging and comments: “Sheesh! The moderators were terrible.”

Linked by The Lonely Conservative — thanks!

UPDATE II: Da Tech Guy now has his own Memeorandum thread, which is kinda cool because he didn’t have credentials. He’d told me that the credentialing process seemed to require jumping through too many hoops. So he got there four hours early, set up in the “spin room,” acted as if he belonged there, and nobody bothered to ask for his credentials. As Roxeanne DeLuca said: “You’ve created a monster.”

The Wall Street Journal live-blogged the debate and VodkaPundit drunk-blogged it. Given the weak penetration of Bloomberg TV — what percentage of homes get that channel? — this will almost certainly be the least-viewed of all the GOP debates this year. And considering how lousy the moderators were, that’s a good thing.

UPDATE III: Richard Dunham of the Houston Chronicle:

After being the central figure in his first three Republican presidential debates and a self-described “pinata” for the rest of the field, Texas Gov. Rick Perry was largely a bystander Tuesday night as GOP presidential hopefuls focused their attacks on the new surging conservative, Herman Cain.
While most of the two-hour discussion at Dartmouth College in Hanover, N.H., focused on the former Godfather’s Pizza CEO’s “9-9-9? economic plan and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney’s 59-point economic plan, Perry told moderator Charlie Rose of Bloomberg News that he wasn’t ready to present a detailed plan just yet.
“I’m not going to lay it out all for you tonight,” he said. “Mitt has had six years to be working on a plan. I have been in this for about eight weeks.”
During the debate co-sponsored by Bloomberg News, the Washington Post and WBIN-TV, candidates focused most of their fire on Cain, whose recent rise in the polls earned him a center seat alongside Romney, relegating Perry to the second ring with Texas Rep. Ron Paul.

UPDATE IV: From Michelle Malkin’s debate recap:

Rick Perry once again failed to deliver. He was languid. Passive. Half-hearted. Listless. . . .
I’m really, really trying to be nice. . . .
Fail. Texas-sized fail.

Malkin quotes Philip Klein on Twitter: “Perry makes Pawlenty look like a world champion debater.” T-Paw’s a good comparison, although I could think of a better one, but Malkin and Klein are both too young to remember Ed Muskie, the biggest front-runner flop in American political history.

I don’t know if I’ve said this before, but everything you ever need to know about presidential campaigns, you can learn by reading one book: Hunter S. Thompson, Fear and Loathing: On the Campaign Trail ‘72.

And it’s funny as hell, too.

UPDATE V: John Hinderaker at Powerline:

Rick Perry, during the half of the debate that I saw, bordered on invisible. I don’t know whether the pundits who say this was make or break for Perry are right, but it certainly was not a strong night for him. One thing that strikes me as odd is how little mileage Perry gets out of his job creation record in Texas. He mentioned it a time or two, but, as in prior debates, he didn’t use it effectively as the foundation of his claim to be the strongest candidate.

Perry came into the race on Aug. 13 and had a double-digit lead on Romney by Labor Day — without ever having debated. Perry’s support started to soften after his OK-but-not-great performance in the Sept. 7 Reagan Library debate. Perry clearly lost the Sept. 12 Tampa debate, and his performance at the Sept. 22 Orlando debate was a Hindenburg-at-Lakehurst catastrophe.

It’s simple: Perry is lousy at debating, and these televised debates are the major events of the campaign. Notice by comparison that Cain, while perhaps not an Oxford Union debate champ, has nonetheless learned the trick of deflecting an opponent’s attack, not “getting into the tall grass” of a detailed defense, but rather using it as an opportunity to repeat his own message.

We’ll see if Cain’s rivals, anxious to stop his surging momentum, will be able to land more solid blows next Tuesday in the Las Vegas debate. And we’ll be there in Vegas.

Category: Da Tech Guy, Election 2012, New Hampshire

Comments

42 Responses to “We Don’t Get Bloomberg TV …”

Anonymous
October 11th, 2011 @ 9:43 pm

Just another example of why we need a conservative party after November 2012. The republicans can’t even tell who their enemies are. Conservatives for Cthulhu know who the enemy is.
The Bloomberg/WaPo Republican Debate | The Lonely Conservative
October 11th, 2011 @ 9:45 pm

[…] live blogging it, and so has Da TechGuy who’s there! So he’s getting the inside scoop.Stacy missed it, but asked a relevant question:Does anyone remember when they had that Democratic debate […]
Shawn Gillogly
October 11th, 2011 @ 9:54 pm

I’m already in the ACP. We may or may not work with the GOP nominee, depends on if he can be a real conservative.

Hint, Romney can’t.
Maggie@Maggiesnotebook
October 11th, 2011 @ 10:05 pm

Tumelty forgot her Preparation H.
Maggie@Maggiesnotebook
October 11th, 2011 @ 10:08 pm

One more: I was glad to hear everyone get a chance to talk about the CRA.
Paul Zummo
October 11th, 2011 @ 10:39 pm

Cain was not as effective as some people are suggesting. He didn’t have good answers to the the legitimate critiques of the 9-9-9 plan. But I definitely haven’t written him off yet.

Perry staunched the bleeding, and Gingrich continues to impress. Content-wise Santorum was excellent, but he comes across as a petulant jerk.

As for the rest? Who cares, they all suck in varying ways.
Anonymous
October 11th, 2011 @ 11:00 pm

I sort of raised this question before and got no answer…..take an elderly couple in their eighties, they live on Soc Sec and their modest savings, they pay no income taxes because they really have no income and all of their money was ALREADY taxed, years ago.

Is it fair to tax these people again in the form of a sales tax?

In general I like Cain…..but I don’t know about this 999 stuff. A 20% sales tax is not a joke and that is what we would be facing in California.
ThePaganTemple
October 11th, 2011 @ 11:11 pm

Why wasn’t this televised over any of the major media outlets? I guess you might call that question rhetorical, and here’s the answer.

The media and political elites have collectively decided Romney is going to be the nominee. Therefore, why give anybody else a chance to disrupt their game plan?

I’ve almost decided on Gingrich. I don’t think he’d take any crap from the Democrats, I don’t really like 9-9-9, Santorum is just too stiff, Romney no, Huntsman no, Paul no, Johnson no. Bachmann is my second choice.

So how’s about a Gingrich-Bachmann ticket?
Anonymous
October 11th, 2011 @ 11:32 pm

Read Neal Boortz’s “Fair Tax” books for the answer to that question.

My only objection is that the 16th Amendment must be repealed first.
Anonymous
October 11th, 2011 @ 11:48 pm

But….correct me if I’m wrong….I’m under the impression that Cain’s plan does not include any “prebates.” I’ll admit that prebates could be a work-around for some of the problems I’m raising, but they also seem to raise a whole other set of problems.
Dave
October 11th, 2011 @ 11:56 pm

It was streamed online at Bloomberg’s website, I watched it there.
Brian Henchey
October 12th, 2011 @ 12:09 am

I think I summed it up here:

@brianhenchey

This debate changed absolutely nothing other than we know that BloombergTV absolutely sucks. #EconDebate #GOPdebate

http://twitter.com/BrianHenchey

PS. The viewing options were listed here:

http://www.dartmouth.edu/debates/about/watch.html
Anonymous
October 12th, 2011 @ 12:18 am

The only thing they would only be subject to a 9% tax, and only if they bought new goods.

Ultimately, everybody should pay something into the system, even if it is very modest.

The problem we have today is that 48% of people pay no tax….and thus aren’t particular interested in the financial well being of the country.
Joe
October 12th, 2011 @ 12:23 am

I would respect the GOP candidate who challenged the questioners for being biased, refused to answer an unfair question, and questioned why liberals always get to do GOP debates. Barack Obama and the Democrats would never ever ever agree to GOP questioners. Not ever. Well maybe Huntsman, but that’s my point.
Joe
October 12th, 2011 @ 12:25 am

The problem we have today is that 48% of people pay no tax….

Not true almost all the working people pay social security and medicare. Those are taxes. Unfortunately they are sold as entitlement premiums (which they are not). Because they are spent as soon as they are paid into the system.
Joe
October 12th, 2011 @ 12:26 am

Scozzafava.

No.

But I am starting to think we might get stuck with Obama again.
Anonymous
October 12th, 2011 @ 12:44 am

Forget income taxes, Soc Sec and Medicare. My cigarettes support the SCHIP program. Even bums pay into the system with the alcohol taxes on their Mad Dog 20/20. Hidden taxes are everywhere and I doubt anyone who’s not in a vegetative coma can get by without paying taxes.
McGehee
October 12th, 2011 @ 12:55 am

I’ve almost decided on Gingrich. I don’t think he’d take any crap from the Democrats

Where were you when he was Speaker? He was all right for the first year or so, but then he got seduced.

Send him back to D.C. with a four-year contract and he’ll be re-seduced before he even takes office. NJNBHN.
Joe
October 12th, 2011 @ 1:03 am

Newt’s New Campaign: I suck, but not half as much as the other GOP candidates.
Anonymous
October 12th, 2011 @ 1:39 am

That is correct, Joe.

The 9-9-9 plan provides a tax cut for taxpayers and a very modest increase for non-taxpayers.

I think the best strategy for Cain is to deflect the question if he is asked about Seniors (transition to the broader theme of the 9-9-9 plan) during the Primaries and then open the plan up to minor modification during the General election.

I do not have problem with Seniors paying 9% on new purchases. Their effective rate would not be 9% given that they could avoid that tax buying used goods. It is a very modest tax, and a responsible one given how out of control things have gotten. Additionally, if those Seniors are relying on Social Security, then their monies are already coming from the government so the taxation of the spending of those dollars is a wash as SS benefits would simply compensate for that tax.
Adjoran
October 12th, 2011 @ 2:15 am

Once again we allow leftist media types to set OUR rules and demand our candidates answer THEIR questions. Who died and left them in charge? Why is Huntsman – at 0 or 1% in the polls – asked TWO questions before Cain gets his first? Better yet, why is he even there?

Romney wins the same way he’s won the others: the attacks don’t hurt him, he keeps his cool and comes across well. Santorum and Bachmann are desperate, but they didn’t score here against anyone.

Perry failed to bring it, again, but wasn’t as bad as before. It remains to be seen if he can put together an organization strong enough to overcome the perceptions of these debates. He didn’t hurt himself, but didn’t help either.

Cain isn’t able to defend his 999 plan, and no wonder. The numbers do not add up. His answers on the subject are not sharp or convincing.
Adjoran
October 12th, 2011 @ 2:21 am

I also believe it is time to cut down the field. Paul, Huntsman, Bachmann, and Santorum serve no further purpose being there. They are obviously not going to catch on. It just takes time from the potential nominees (and Gingrich, who I’d leave in due to his serious contributions to the debates and the fact he’s at least slowly rising in polls).
Anonymous
October 12th, 2011 @ 2:45 am

Cain defended his plan well.

Don’t know what you were watching…but I have seen your past comments, and you have generally been negative about this whole process….
Michael
October 12th, 2011 @ 2:50 am

Cain is done. His 9% National Sales Tax is stupid. The 9-9-9 Plan is a piece of garbage and Santorum was right to smack him down. Santorum and Newt are the best of the declared candidates. I wish Palin would reconsider. Cain will never get my support. He defended Greenspan and lied to Ron Paul on the Fed.
Datechguy's Blog » Blog Archive » Dartmouth Debate blog
October 12th, 2011 @ 3:30 am

[…] Datechguy | October 11th, 2011 Update: A Memeorandum thread and linked by friends. If it wasn’t 3 a.m. and I was awake I’d list […]
Zilla of the Resistance
October 12th, 2011 @ 6:52 am

Newt is in my top tier. I could live with a Cain Gingrich ticket. I still really like Rick Santorum, but he hasn’t been dazzling the talking heads the way he’ll need to.
Zilla of the Resistance
October 12th, 2011 @ 6:53 am

Linked here:
http://zillablog.marezilla.com/2011/10/im-getting-root-canal-hooray.html
I’m pissed that it wasn’t on TV where everyone could watch. My computer balks at streaming video.
Anonymous
October 12th, 2011 @ 8:28 am

It’s not just that they are sold as “entitlement premiums”; they are disconnected from feedback because the benefits they pay for are viewed as untouchable. They will always be paid no matter what.
ThePaganTemple
October 12th, 2011 @ 8:51 am

Santorum comes across as too negative and uptight. There’s probably nothing he can do about that, its just who he is, but the country is looking for somebody that can offer than hope, and that’s why Cain is doing so well. Perry is careening towards rock bottom for a different reason. He comes across as a country bumpkin, and the country is looking for somebody that can say shit without having a mouthful of it. That’s why I’m starting to like the Gingrich. He’s upbeat and positive about the way he tells the Democrats and the MSM to kiss his ass, and yet tells them so firmly and in no uncertain terms. He also points out things, and I mean really important shit, that nobody else even touches, such as the old Bolshevik networks in the nation’s universities and how that whole rotten system needs to be reformed. Plus, he has the depth and breath of experience nobody up there has. Plus, he’s positive and optimistic about what needs to be done and where he wants to take the country.

Granted, he’s got some things he needs to work out, explain, and make up for. The Dede Scozzafava endorsement for one, the brief fling with Pelosi over the AGCC thing for another, over which he definitely needs to issue a very sternly worded, no-holds-barred reversal.

But let’s face it, he’s got one great big thing going in his favor that almost makes up and then some for all his fault. And that is he can legitimately claim, at at minimum as much credit for the “Clinton economy” as Clinton can. He ought to be more forceful about taking the credit for that, because it stands in marked contrast to what’s going on now.
Bob Belvedere
October 12th, 2011 @ 9:17 am

While I wouldn’t describe Mr. Santorum as a ‘jerk’, petulant is an excellent description. He has the personality of a tenth grade geometry teacher in a public high school. Too bad, really, because he is so right [pun intended] on so many issues and has a keen grasp of the foreign situation and how to handle it.
Bob Belvedere
October 12th, 2011 @ 9:21 am

Regarding the whole sales tax thing, gentlemen: if it were to pass, the black market would thrive. I don’t think it proper that we penalize people for consuming. The best tax is a straight-up, no chaser, flat tax where every adult is taxed the same amount [not percentage], like a membership fee.
McGehee
October 12th, 2011 @ 10:19 am

My cable system actually does carry Bloomberg TV, and I’ve never understood why. I’d rather they used that slot to carry the actual watching-paint-dry “Weatherscan” version of the Weather Channel.
Anonymous
October 12th, 2011 @ 11:16 am

Ahh…an appearance by a Ron Paul bot.

News flash! Your crazy leader will never be President or even influence the debate.
Richard Mcenroe
October 12th, 2011 @ 11:44 am

The audience liked his comeback on the Bloomberg survey, and I thought his explanation of the 9-9-9 plan and why it would work clear and succinct.

As for his doing well at debating, remember, Cain has spent his life speaking to boards and shareholders WHO CAN FIRE HIM AT WILL. Perry has never had that experience.
Richard Mcenroe
October 12th, 2011 @ 11:46 am

They pay sales tax now, most places. As far as CA goes, as a resident, a 20% sales tax might be the goad needed to get these peons off their asses and voting for real change in this state.
Richard Mcenroe
October 12th, 2011 @ 11:48 am

Now that’s funny.
Anonymous
October 12th, 2011 @ 12:29 pm

The worse, the better!
ThePaganTemple
October 12th, 2011 @ 1:56 pm

But he did do well in that exchange with Cain about the Fed.
Nomination Excitations: They Sold Their Souls To The Company Store « The Camp Of The Saints
October 12th, 2011 @ 2:42 pm

[…] reporting on the debate can be found here and here [the latter one is rather […]
Live Blogging Dartmouth Republican Debate: Live Blogging | Maggie's Notebook
October 12th, 2011 @ 3:24 pm

[…] Linked by The Other McCain – thanks Stacy! […]
Bob Belvedere
October 12th, 2011 @ 4:40 pm

Sometimes that’s what it takes. Think what would have happened if Stacy’s grumpy cousin got elected. Would there have been a TEA Party? Would serious discussion of repealing the 16th and 17th Amendments be ongoing?
Under the Fedora: Protests and Debates in Theory and Practice
October 13th, 2011 @ 1:44 pm

[…] the Sicilian in me was slightly irritated at my friend Robert Stacy McCain for letting the cat out of the bag Tuesday night. I’ve no reason to complain; he’s a reporter and I didn’t say it […]