ABOUT FIRST READ

First Read is an analysis of the day's political news, from the NBC News political unit. First Read is updated throughout the day, so check back often.

Chuck Todd, NBC Political Director

Mark Murray, NBC Deputy Political Director

Domenico Montanaro, NBC Political Researcher



Post-Midnight TiVO'd Thoughts

Posted: Thursday, November 29, 2007 12:44 AM by Chuck Todd

From NBC's Chuck Todd
Big night for Mike Huckabee. On a night when many voters were looking at
him in a different light thanks to the dramatic increase in attention  the media's been giving him, he delivered big time. Unlike previous debates, he didn't open with a joke but instead sounded very presidential in his first answer; He had his share of one-liners, but he seemed to balance the funny with more presidential rhetoric.

Huckabee stepped up his game tonight. The rest of the field better  be glad that the GOP debates end on Dec. 12, a full three weeks before  the Iowa caucuses and that's enough time for his potentially dominant  debate performances to fade from voter memories.  Surprisingly, he didn't get attacked too much. Romney took a shot, but  nothing too harsh (Iowa nice, right?). Most importantly for Huckabee, he'll likely be declared the winner of this debate by every member of  the Amtrak Corridor media elite and that should get him some serious  buzz. The question for the rest of the field: when will others begin to  take him as a more serious threat.

Two other candidates stood out simply because they seemed to dominate  most of the conversation: Romney and Rudy. If someone was watching this debate without knowing the standing of the candidates in the polls, one would easily assume the two frontrunners were Romney and Rudy with no one else really a close third. 

Giuliani was not at his best, really started off slow as his "santuary  mansion" line was not delivered very well; Al,so, someone in his campaign should help him learn to give a MUCH shorter answer when talking about guns.  The best part of Giuliani's performance was his YouTube video; it was the funniest of the bunch.

Romney had an uneven night as well, at some moments, he was outstanding
and at other times, just awful. It was THAT uneven of a performance. He seems to be struggling with getting very aggressive against Giuliani and  trying to softly jab at Huckabee. He's not in an easy position.

The other candidate that certainly made an impression was McCain, thanks to his sobriety.  It's interesting, Huckabee-McCain would be a fascinating ticket because Huckabee likes to be the sunny good cop while McCain seems to be getting comfortable becoming the (sometimes) pessimistic bad cop.  McCain was strong but bordered on angry too many times to make me think he's going to play well in Iowa (a place that he needs to start getting some traction). 

The other major candidate, Fred Thompson, seemed more comfortable in  this debate than in his first two outings but just because he was comfortable doesn't mean he enough great moments. He seemed like a supporting member of the cast rather than a centerpiece of the debate.  His shots at Giuliani and Romney were probably lines that sounded better in his head than when he delivered them. 

As for the rest of the field: Paul does a pretty good job of sounding rational when posed with somewhat irrational questions. His trilateral commission answer didn't sound conspiratorial even though the whole premise of the question is just that: conspiratorial.

And Hunter and Tancredo really don't belong on stage anymore. Guys, it's time to go; the other six have proven viability; the two of you haven't and if it wasn't for the debates, you'd have no platform. Frankly, many people probably forgot the two men were still running since it had been so long since the Republicans last debated.

A final thought on the editorial content of the debate. CNN probably didn't win over any conservative viewers who tuned in to find out if the network was friendly toward conservatives. The abortion questions were questions that Planned Parenthood and NARAL would have posed to pro-life candidates, not what Republican voters would have posed to these Republican candidates. Ditto with some of the gun question and the gay rights questions. The candidates probably weren't happy that CNN chose to linger on the retired general who asked about gays in the military.

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

Chuck Todd can't be serious.  This shows your bias to Huckabee.  Most conservatives are saying Romney won.  Matthews was right, liberals in the media love big government Huckabee.
I listened to you on Morning Joe this morning discussing the credibility of the media and how the American people distrust the coverage. I have become very distrustful lately because of the bias of the media.  Issues aren't discussed.  Polls are used that are outside the the norm.  For example, the Zogby poll. I follow pollster.com so that I know that this poll was not indicative of the race, however, most people aren't that interested and if you believe the news media, you do not get the correct picture.  Chris Matthews and Tucker Carlson spend almost their entire show bashing a certain candidate. All we hear is about the horse race.  I feel that the news media is selecting our candidates.  In a 24 hour news cycle, there should be time to discuss the issues from all candidates - not just a few. There is no in- depth coverage regardless whether it is CNN, MSNBC or Fox.
I admit I didn't watch the debates. But what's with the whining about the questions.

Republicans can't be asked hard question about abortion??? They're the ones who want to change the law! Except for Republicans, there would be NO controversy over abortion whatsoever, because the majority of Americans support the law as it stands this minute.

As far as the gay general, I also don't understand the problem.  REPUBLICANS are the ones who have a problem with gays in the military. Why shouldn't they have to answer a question from a decorated general about the issue?
Also, guns. It's Republicans who think we're all trying to take their HUNTING rifles away when we say the word ASSAULT rifles.  If it wasn't for Republicans, I don't think we'd have a controversy over guns whatsoever either.

Personally, I'd rather hear from them about one of the major issues on the minds of Americans -- health care. But none of them have a health care plan they are able to articulate, so they probably didn't want any questions on that either.

Maybe they were better off when they just outright refused to have that debate with the black folk and the relatives of undocumented workers lured into our country to pick strawberries for pennies.
Huckabee was the obvious winner of the debate.  He was head and shoulders above the rest.  What happened to Romney?  I thought he was supposed to carry the mantle of Ronald Regan?  How many questions did he ACTUALLY answer?  Also, take another look at his answer about what guns he owned.  Talk about awkward!

Huck can go the distance, bottom line.
Concerning Mitt Romney's disrespect for our flag, noone in South Carolina who takes pride in our heritage will vote for him.
Why was there no questions on health care? Do the republicans not care about our health or is it because all those at CNN have adequate health care?
They didn't come to debate questions asked by responsible Americans...they came with their one liners to get a laugh.  Except for Paul and sometimes McCain no one answered the questions that were being asked.  
Mike Huckabee would be a shoe-in, if we were interviewing candidates for a manager's position at Applebees.'

None of the Republicans look presidential to me. None have the vision to lead the people. Bunch of wanna-be CEO's of corporate America, (except Ron Paul, whose presence just serves to highlight the lack of original thinking in the top tier candidates.)
Hmmn.....this was the first Repub debate I had the stomach to watch.  Even though I felt quite ill after.  The questions about guns, the bible and abortion were absolutely off the wall.  Of course, the worst part of the evening was when that poor retired general got up to make a speech and they cut off his microphone.  Mistake?  I doubt it.  I liked Huckabee and McCain, although I have to admit I have serious disagreements with many of their policies.  The rest are just a bunch of NUTS!!!
Do any of you really believe that Mitt Romney OR Rudy Giuliani sound intelligent and presidential?  There was no detailed talk on Iran, Iraq, Israel/Palestine, Russia, education, the economy, etc.  All I saw were a bunch of hackneyed bumper stickers standing in front of podiums.
I hope they nominate hucksterbee...wait until the rest of america gets a load of his plans to convert this to a christian nation or else...he'll pull 30% in the general
Romney and Giuliani were both lying through their teeth, both had the largest sanctuary cities in the country. Huckabee has the highest record of tax hikes in his home state (over 1/2 a billion) and supported amnesty he's a liar to, no wonder he was under investigation for ethics violations.

McCain reminds of Bush, with his blind denials he's completely unelectable

The only one I was impressed with last night was Ron Paul. He did a wonderful job and was so compassionate!

He's the only one that I feel truly cares about the American people
If it were a Huckabee/McCain ticket, it would remind me some of GW & Cheney, except that Huckabee isn't an idiot & McCain is no tyrant.  Hey, and Chuck Norris likes Huckabee!!  And I don't care what any of you jerks out there say, I like Chuck Norris!!
The Republicans are a "joke". Thanks G.W. !
Go back to sleep Fred, there will not be another debate until a couple of weeks.
I want to know who's paying for last nights bar bill ?
Hey honey, please make sure to pack some warm cloths for the National Convention in Minneapolis/St. Paul.
Memo to all Republican Candidates; When you arrive at the airport in Minneapolis this Summer for the National Convention.Please do not use the "mens" bathroom on ramp D2.
It's never to late to come over to our side. It's easy, just go to hillaryclinton.com. "we'll keep it our secreat".
Absolutely right Mr. Todd. Huckabee did win, I believe by a wide margin. Romney looked so confused, especially on the question, "Do you believe every word in this book (The Bible)? Also, Romney cannot be taken seriously about abortion no matter what he says or does because of his pro-life stance in MA that helped him become governor. Fred Thompson showed that video of a younger Romney talking about how he is pro-life, yet Romeny says he.... changed. Please. I did like the exchanges between McCain and Paul too. I think McCain definitely won the battle between the two and I wish that if McCain doesn't win the nomination, then if a republican end up winning next November, they name McCain as either Secretary of State or Secretary of Defense (Only if Gates doesn't want it again, Gates is GREAT at what he is doing). As a young man (27) in this great country, many people I speak to say the same thing - If Obama wins the Democratic nomination, they will vote for him. If Hillary wins, then it really doesn't matter who wins the GOP nominaton because that's who they will vote for, be it Romney, McCain, Huckabee, or Rudy. Anything to have this monarchy of Bush/Clinton/Bush/Clinton stopped.    
The continual channeling of Ronald Reagan's spirit is hysterical to watch. Reagan was a mediocre actor, a passable governor and a terrible President. All the Republican candidates claim to be like Reagan while their predominate policies line up with President Bush the Lessor.

While this may work with the sheeple in the Republican primary, they will get crushed in the national election when they have to talk more about their policy beliefs and the independents realize they all really want to be George the III.
Huckabee's joke response to the reiteration of the question of Jesus and the death penalty was offensive. The man is spending time and money in Iowa with commercials that stress how his interpretation of Christianity is his guiding principle, but when he was asked to explain the rationale that allows him to support something that other Christian leaders DON'T support based on theological standards, he throws up a one-liner and avoids the question.

He's not a serious man. If the GOP lineup wasn't as weak as it is (and if Rove hadn't been so successful at fostering a fundy al Sadr-esque wing of the party), there's no way he'd be getting any traction at all.  McCain, meanwhile, has gravitas and a record to run on. Let's hope that the sniping at the top results in strengthening of McCain's position in the field. Put him up against Obama next fall, and it makes the race much more competitive for the 40% of us in the middle of the political spectrum.
This was not a debate it was the Swarmy/fake smile Romney, Gigolo Rudy, Golly I am nice/funny warm kind of guy minister,and the not ready for prime time second rate neo-cons( Hunter and Trancredo) show. Angry McCain and a totally lost Thompson along for the ride. Paul is the standout in this group of scary panderers;however; essentially ignored.  
I've noticed (like everyone else) that Huckabee has been rising in the polls.  It seems like the media actually believes he has the opportunity to win now.  

Huckabee is just a regular guy with an incredible message.  I checked out:

www.mikehuckabee.com
and
www.hucksarmy.com

and got some good info.  I didn't know that Huckabee was a supporter of the fair tax...kinda cool.


I don't think many conservatives tuned in to see if Anderson Cooper and CNN would give them a fair shake.  

Maybe the spineless Democratic candidates were onto something when they refused to debate on FOX.  If they are afraid to try to win an ongoing war, they certainly couldn't take the kind of questioning Chris Wallace gave Fred Thompson Sunday.
Oh Yes! Big night for Huckabee. On her way to the bank, Hillary is going to steam roll over him and the rest of the Republicans over his stupid comment. What are you guys thinking? Is Huckabee paying the media somehow, to present dumb, moronic comments as a good performance. OK Mike I gotit! It was suppose to be a joke. Nobody is laughing........clean it up.
My favortie part of the debate was when the undecided voter picked John Edwards over the Republican candidates! It was great!

I thought the CNN Republican debate was as bad as the last one they did for Democrats. Allowing the audience to interfere with the debate was totally out of bounds. I also thought the questions that were picked were silly.

I hope CNN never stages another debate (and I do mean stages). The whole event had a circus like atmosphere.
If Jesus was so smart as to keep religion and politics separate, why can't Mike do the same?
the real question is how bad are the PACKERS gonna kick dallas *ss tonite?
Does anybody ever do a poll or other type of questionaire on the effectiveness of TV debates? I would be interested to know if any voters actually change their minds based upon responses from the candidates to debate questions.  
Spot on about Huckabee. I am a life-long-never-ever-voted-for-a-Republican-for-even-dogcatcher Democrat. But I think I am going his website and send him $25. He is a conservative that is not mean. I am a Fifty-something year-old African American who like most AAs tend to be conservative on social issues. We however tend to reject Republicans because they generally dont care "about the least of these". Huckabee appears to be different. If all Republicans were like him I might be in the party of Abe Lincoln. He and Obama are surging in Iowa because of their transparency. While the true politicians, Romney and Hillary, are falling cause can't you trust anything they say.
I disagree..... Huckabee's performance was NOT inspired, or even credible.

He delivered nothing.
Agreed.  Huckabee added depth to the package tonight.  I have always felt you can't win elections in debates, but you can lose them.  Guiliani did himself more damage, particularly with clumsy answers to gun control questions that are sure  to show up in opponents ads soon.  Look for Huckabee and Romney to fashion a ticket in the end...just have to work out who's on top..
Huckabee did look good last night

The candidates probably weren't happy that CNN chose to linger on the retired general who asked about gays in the military.

And bad enough he was a plant from Hillary Clinton.
I have to take my hat off to her though; she will burn her bridges to win the White House and BBQ her husband over the ashes.
Chuck...you nailed it.  Huckabee was the clear winner last night.  People are tired of the kind of fighting we saw betwen Rudy/Romney/Thompson. Political dogfights are entertaining, but nothing is getting accomplished except attacks and counter-attacks. This country needs to change some things, but all Wash can do is fight.  Have you noticed Huckabee's demeanor?  He does not engage in the kind jugular attacks we saw last night (Romney/Guilini/Thompson)...he's diplomatic, he's presidential, he tempers his answers, but he gets his point across in a manner that is disarms his enemies.  Huckabee CAN work with both parties and he CAN get something done!  He's the most articulate and smartest speaker in either party.  He's the republicans only hope to beat Hillary.  You're going to see his poll numbers rise even more after this.  He's definitely on the way to the nomination.
Great debate! Fortunately, most Republicans could see through the bias on many of the questions. Giving the general the microphone for 4 minutes to make a statement instead of asking a question was clearly planted. My take: 1. Huckabee. 2. McCain. Rudy is who he is, but not for me. Romney had too much of the new car smell (plastic). Thompson can't debate. Rest of the field insignificant.
You probably already know this and it should be included in your article. That gay general was associated with the Hillary Clinton campaign. Anderson Cooper apologized for using him in the debate, claiming CNN did not know. I will give them the benefit of the doubt about that.  
Dan, are you serious?  Huckabee has won or came in second in EVERY debate.  As a conservative, let me tell you, not only did Romney NOT win, he was extremely dissapointing, as someone who hasn't picked sides yet... Huckabee really spurred me to move, not any of the others, except Paul who spurred me to move to the bathroom to puke...
I'm a Fred head and I promise you Huckabee dominated.  To anyone but the most devote conservative what Huck said sounded a lot better than the rest.  If he could convice fiscal cons (and a no tax pledge helped), I could easily see him winning.  The man is smooth as butter.

Huckabee/Mike Steele 08 would win by a landslide.  They'd get more minority votes than any republican since Lincoln.

If Fred could speak like Huck, you would have a new Reagan.
One thing for sure the Republican debate now, more than ever made possible the transfer of undecided and an avalanch of new voters to the democrats. Each of the issue was a sure win-win for the democrats.
To my view the Republican presidential wan-a- be are lost in their  own mini world.
Issues hlping democrats:
Immigrants: All immigrants have relatives, friends or are inteconnected (more voters for Dems. I know, becuase I am up to date with the Hispanics/latinos way of thinking
Abortion: Women rights violation: More votes for Dems.
Iraq: Family and friends not happy with the war and killing votes for Dems.
Religion: The majority of followers are finding out that they been used by Republicans, especially the religios Mid class and those that represent the majority of religion followers.
TAx Issues: The majority of the hard working American already know who is been receiving the benfits and they wiil show a support for the Democrats whom they beleive represent them better.
Pick any issue and you will see that the shift is on the run to democrats.
On the other hands the debate shows that and is apparent that the presidents want-a- be don't have any real social issues that could improve the existing conditions in which this administration has driven this nation to be.
For sure there will be anew sheriff in town in 2009
I wonder, my dear friens, what is the todays definition of (conservatives) Do they really exists or there is a use of a prostituited issue. For what I see The radical right wing took over not only the Repoblican Party but the good old conservatives. We could say that the republican today is concentrated in an extreeeeeeeme elite with fascist and totalitarian impliications.
The truth is that if we care about our America we need to over take ther ight wing and tream thier wings very short
I think McCain deciding to attack Ron Paul, and Huckabee taking his no IRS platform shows the effect Ron Paul is having on the campaign.  Even though he only got 7 minutes Ron Paul spouted more factual intelligent info than any other candidate and didn't need to resort to "poo-slinging".  I think that people will be surprised when they see which candidate inspires people to actually vote.
"No war can stop an idea whose time has come."
As always Ron Paul did win this debate simply because of being honest and the only real candidate with an honest agenda. Everybody else was there to trash him including the media. So shameful. He deserved better. Nevertheless, he was the winner in my opinion.
If any of these guys wants to win the primary, they need to become a Bush loyalist, quick.

While Bush's approval rating is low, among the gop primary voters, it remains incredibly strong.

Rudy's acceptance by the gop voters largely stems from his close association with bush, post 9/11.

McCain's problem: his message on Iraq is "It's rumsfeld's fault."  This is a strange assault on Bush, as it comes accross as Bush-bashing by proxy.  When rumsfeld left, his approval rating may have been low, but the same people who supported Bush, also supported rummy.

Huckabee is risng in Iowa, but is running fifth in NH.  He has 5 days, if and after winning Iowa, to stop the disaster in NH.

Things go in reverse for Romney-a decent showing, but failing to win in Iowa will draw attention to him, and then he can make the mini-'comeback-kid' if he goes on to win in NH.

20% undecided?  I think they are split between Thompson and McCain...both huge figures in the gop and well known by party members but Mccain's criticsim of Bush policy, by attacking rumsfeld is a losing recipe.

Fred?  He looks older.  You see law and order episodes, and he looks great, and then you see him on tv and he looks like he could make it thru half of his first term.  I don't doubt his credentials, but the guy makes mcain look young.
Huckabee clearly WON that debate last night.  Romney and Rudy couldn't say where they stood on basically anything! But.......WHY, with polls now in Iowa and Florida saying Huckabee is in the lead does the media CONTINUE to assign him as a "VP" candidate?  It just blows my mind!
I can't believe any honest observer would declare Romney the winner of this debate.  His answers seemed either woefully unprepared or over-rehearsed.  He was obviously scared-stiff when answering the bible question, afraid it would expose him as - GASP a Mormon!  And his deer in the headlights expression after the Thompson attack ad was priceless.  He seems to say whatever he thinks will be necessary to win an election.

The vast majority of online and telephone "flash" polls put Huckabee in first place (or 2nd after RP thanks to the dozen web-savvy maniacs who pump RP in every online poll).
To Jan in Nashua, NH....

Turns out CNN was taking questions from people involved in Edwards' and Clinton's campaigns.  Where do I start?  

First, why would these people want to hear the Republicans' answers to their questions?  They won't be voting in any Republican primary.  It's not like they were honestly trying to decide which candidate to vote for.  Clearly they were trying to make candidates look bad and/or generate a quote that could be used in the general election.

Second, there is a certain irony surrounding your point about the campaigns complaining about tough questions.  Your side of the aisle wouldn't even show up on FOX because they were affraid they wouldn't get thrown the normal debate softballs they're used to (aside from Tim Russert - and boy did we hear the Clinton campaign whine).

Third, you point to several issues where there is active debate within the Republican Party.  Debate is a good thing.  The Democratic Party requires strict adherence to its doctrines, which will be its ultimate un-doing - Intellectual Stagnation.  Try being a pro-life Democrat.  You won't last long.
I tried to watch the debate on CNN but it was painfully obvious to me that the whole thing was set up by liberal Democrat producers who selected questions THEY have of conservative Republicans.  It was inappropriate for a Republican primary debate.  It would have been inappropriate in a general election debate if all of those questions were the only ones asked.  The questions would be appropriate at a breakout session at the DailyKos convention titled "understanding conservatives", where the presenters and the attendees alike have a preconceived picture of conservatives to ratify in their heads.

And then I wake up this morning to Michelle Malkin's information that at least four of the questioners were not even Republicans, they were declared, public supporters of Edwards, Obama and Clinton.  And one of the showcase questions CNN devoted the greatest time to and followed up from the audience was from a Clinton steering committee member.

Now I know why the Democrats refuse to do a debate on FOX: the think that FOX would be as biased and underhanded against them as they know CNN is for them.  Kind of like the serial cheater accusing his wife of cheating when she notices another man's glance because he knows he finds a way to get the number when a women glances at him.  It's called projection of their own bad behavior.  Never mind that FOX wouldn't stoop to that level of unrelenting bias, since they know CNN does (and did spectacularly last night).

Last night's debate was simply not informative to me as a Republican.  The issues were not the ones I cared to learn about, they were trivial and trite.  They were issues that only people with caricatures of Republicans would find important.  Last night's debate served only to highlight just how biased CNN and the mainstream media are, and to what lengths they'll go to coronate the Democrat this cycle.  Planting nothing but Democrat hacks as "ordinary Republican questioners" convicts them of the charges leveled.
To me, Huckabee is the only choice. No one else came close.  And, if he gets the nomination..we won't have a mud sling fest... I doubt he has much mud on his boots. For once, in politics, that will be a welcome change.
Huckabee may be very well spoken and articulate;however; do all you who are even considering voting for a baptist minister truly believe he will be elected? Are you kidding me? Our founding fathers would be rolling in their graves. We are suppose to be a secular nation and not a president who believes that life began 6,000 years ago, outlaw all abortions, and some kind of force re-education camps for gays because it is a choice. If I wake-up on 11/4/08 Huckabee and/or Romney is President I am heading North to Canada.


SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=486402

First Read e-mail alerts


Sign up for First Read alerts
The first place for key political news and analysis

Syndicate This Site

Add First Read to your news reader:
live.com xml
myyahoo msn
bloglines newsgator
google