is the banner at the bottom of the MSNBC screen right now. Great minds think alike.

Be the debater you want to see.

by Ross Smith on 05/03/2007 07:34:12 PM EST

I've got to hand it to the GOP.  Staging counts for a lot (before the debate begins) and they could not have picked a better place officially kick off the 2008 primary.  In the shadow of Air Force One, a replica oval office, and flanked by Mrs. Reagan, there is a certain sense of "gravitas" that was not in evidence last week in South Carolina.  

by Tim ODonnell on 05/03/2007 07:39:51 PM EST

A few minutes before the debate it was "the Missing Men" which was then interrupted for the photo op?  And then back to Eugene Robinson for further discussion of Thompson, Hagel, and Gingrich.  Why undercut the significance of your "exclusive" event by leading with those who aren't there?  

by Tim ODonnell on 05/03/2007 07:48:32 PM EST

Chris Matthews is now addressing the audience.  This is information that viewers should be hearing.  This is substantive commentary and instruction about the rules of the game for candidates and the audience.  

by Tim ODonnell on 05/03/2007 07:50:40 PM EST

...if you are candidate.  Standing awkwardly with no way to displace nervous energy.  Okay, perhaps its worse for a jockey at the starting gate...

by Tim ODonnell on 05/03/2007 07:54:17 PM EST

Gotta love it!

Be the debater you want to see.

by Ross Smith on 05/03/2007 08:00:07 PM EST

1. Staging is everything.  Every candidate was just dwarfed by Matthews opening pan through the Library and Reagan legacy.  Getting out from behind that shawdow is going to be tough.

2. 60 seconds is hardly enough time to respond.

3. Why does the public get only a 30 second answer?

by Tim ODonnell on 05/03/2007 08:03:48 PM EST

His answer is largely incoherent and all over the place.  He is trying to quote Reagan, take a shot at democrats, while giving an opening speech about his credentials.

by Tim ODonnell on 05/03/2007 08:05:28 PM EST

...in his opening answer.  But to whom is his anger directed?  The democrats?  The present administration?  

by Tim ODonnell on 05/03/2007 08:06:26 PM EST

... words per minute is quite high in these opening speeches.  That plays well with debate types who can process, but I wonder if the 60 second time crunch is forcing the candidates to speak too quickly.  

by Tim ODonnell on 05/03/2007 08:08:20 PM EST

Which?  Matthews shoots back with polling data on hatred, but Brownback has no substantive reply.  What is the engagement plan?

by Tim ODonnell on 05/03/2007 08:11:32 PM EST

Okay, so what is the plan?  "Engagement" in the Middle East rhetoric is empty without specifics.  Next year, college debaters around the country will be researching and exploring precisely that topic.  Perhaps the candidates will be able to learn from our many bright undergraduates.

by Tim ODonnell on 05/03/2007 08:15:43 PM EST

Reagan, Reagan . . . .HOSTAGES!!!!!!

Yikes -- will pay for Iran/Contra????????

Be the debater you want to see.

by Ross Smith on 05/03/2007 08:20:58 PM EST

Regarding how to deal with Iran: "They looked in Ronald Reagan's eyes and in 2 minutes they released the hostages."  He is playing fast and loose with history here, but he who first mobilizes history...

by Tim ODonnell on 05/03/2007 08:21:53 PM EST

A lack of thematic unity means we are bouncing wildly from topic to topic in a fast paced virtually impossible to follow fashion.  You can't go from bin Laden to Arnold to Welfare to Climate to organ transplants, etc. in 30 second soundbites.  The inclusion of the public may very well lead to the eclipse of the public.  This is a very poor format choice.  

by Tim ODonnell on 05/03/2007 08:28:12 PM EST

Values portion.  When thinking about arrangement, the things you stick in the middle are the things you are willing to risk the audience forgetting.  So why stick these in the middle?

by Tim ODonnell on 05/03/2007 08:32:11 PM EST

"I want to be president..." decent coaching here, but there are delivery gliches and awkward nonverbals that detract fromt his message.  He does get points for looking at the camera.  Eye contact is crucial and the audience isn't Chris Matthews, but those listening at home.  All candidates would do well to keep their eyes trained on their camera.

by Tim ODonnell on 05/03/2007 08:37:34 PM EST

Huckabee got the shaft here from Matthews.  Its not at all clear that Huckabee was caught in a contradiction - as he tried to point out there was no inconsistency.  And then Matthews gave Romney a response?  That's not even handed.

by Tim ODonnell on 05/03/2007 08:41:53 PM EST

Giuliani is pretty well coached here.  A quick answer on the "influx of Christian conservates" and then back to his message (smoothly).  Generally speaking, this is smart strategy especially if you have a polished sound bite that you can wiggle in.  The next question to Thompson demonstrates that Matthews has lost control.  The reason why this is happening is that there is no thematic grouping on questions.  That makes it tempting for a candidate to wrestle control away from the moderator.  Tancredo also demonstrates his chops here.  

The problem for the audience: The debate lacks all coherence.

by Tim ODonnell on 05/03/2007 08:48:38 PM EST

of the time limits

Be the debater you want to see.

by Ross Smith on 05/03/2007 09:02:59 PM EST

Down the line - Look Mrs. Reagan in the eye...

Nice question... and the first two get to answer:

Romney: Altered Nuclear Transfer (that will certainly confuse the audience).
Brownback: Adults stem cells sufficient.

BUT, then Matthews decides he's running out of time and asks for yes/no answers.

McCain's answers is awful.  If he is going to support federal funding and distinguish himself from the others, then why is he taking so long to get to a quick answer.  Giuliani in contrast is much quicker at getting to his answer.

by Tim ODonnell on 05/03/2007 09:03:42 PM EST

McCain wasn't quick enough here.  He appeared perplexed by the question and hesitated.  Any time someone asks you to say yes or no, you need to deny the premise that the question can be answered sufficiently as a yes-no question.  He should have begun there and then...

by Tim ODonnell on 05/03/2007 09:14:31 PM EST

Clinton's answer last week was better.

Brownback is trying to rise above the fray in a free response because he was wearing a frown.

by Tim ODonnell on 05/03/2007 09:16:01 PM EST

...why are we asking about this?  Giuliani works in his strength (I've done more on security...) and then gets sucked back in. Most seem to like it.

Okay, so Ron Paul gets to distinguish himself on this one.  10 minutes to go and we finally see Paul is on the stage.

by Tim ODonnell on 05/03/2007 09:20:46 PM EST

Why are Brownback and Romney charging prosecutorial misconduct?  That's risky.

Why is Matthews even asking this question?

Everyone has to answer the pardon Scooter question, but we don't know what all would do about things like climate change, health care, etc. ???

by Tim ODonnell on 05/03/2007 09:24:13 PM EST

That's a cheap shot by Matthews.  Why ask them to tee off on Hillary via Bill?  

McCain and Giuliani are smart about their opportunity to answer.  McCain works in his judge answer.  Giuliani works in his terror answer.  The others don't distinguish themselves and aren't thinking about playing offense (i.e. pusing their agenda).

by Tim ODonnell on 05/03/2007 09:30:51 PM EST

Quick reaction:

No clear winners.  Giuliani was the most polished given the rapid fire response.  McCain was his eager self.  Romney looked good, but what did he really say?

The losers: those  not named Giuliani, McCain, and Romney

by Tim ODonnell on 05/03/2007 09:36:16 PM EST

Republicans are much better at staging.

Even when debating, they look more unified than the Democrats.

Coaching for this debate looks improved. Speed is picking up. Time limits and the need to get the right reminders in is having an impact on the delivery speed of the candidates. I'd like to see a word count comparison.

Chris Matthews asks more hard hitting policy questions that Brian Williams, making the questions more predictable and the answers better scripted.

Big winner...Hillary. They are all running against her. No mention of other candidates. Running against Bill and Hillary is no accident. They clearly believe that Reagan v. Clinton works well for them. Bush is a good, but misguided, man according to most. If the situation is bad for the incumbent party, do not run as an incumbent.

Alan Coverstone, Debate Coach, Government Teacher, and Academic Dean Montgomery Bell Academy Nashville, TN

by Coverstone on 05/03/2007 10:03:13 PM EST

this one is done

Be the debater you want to see.

by Ross Smith on 05/03/2007 10:10:41 PM EST