Romney Wins In Orlando???? Really? Woke up the morning and had to hunt for a while until I found the last posting of the fox news poll on who won the
debate last night. Here it is. Its pretty clear that Dr. Paul ran away with this one and from what I saw several other polls.
Who won the debate?
Mitt Romney 23.38% (20,106 votes)
Rick Perry 13.17% (11,328 votes)
Newt Gingrich 7.31% (6,287 votes)
Ron Paul 37.44% (32,197 votes)
Rick Santorum 1.56% (1,340 votes)
Gary Johnson 1.91% (1,639 votes)
Herman Cain 11.33% (9,745 votes)
Michele Bachmann 2.34% (2,009 votes)
Jon Huntsman 1.56% (1,340 votes)
Total Votes: 85,991
Return To PollShare This
Read more: www.foxnews.com...
So imagine my surprise when the only piece on the winner I find is one praising Romney on winning the debate.
Romney Wins In Orlando (edited for size)
Perry has been coming back to Earth lately, partly on the basis of his uneven debate performances. Orlando didn't do anything to change that
dynamic--indeed may have accelerated it. In the first two debates, Perry stood out for his sheer stage presence even if his answers weren't always
crisp or deep. Thursday night, he faded more into the line-up of the other candidates at the same time he wasn't any better on the substance. His
weak performance will stoke more speculation about New Jersey Republican Gov. Chris Christie possibly entering the race.
Romney has weathered Perry much better than anyone would have expected. By pushing the Texas governor on his more adventurous positions in his book
"Fed Up," especially on Social Security, he's kept him in an awkward spot. Sometimes, Perry sounds like he's adopting the standard Republican
position that the program merely needs to be reformed over time; at other times, he says he's sticking by his contention in the book that the program
is an unconstitutional failure and perhaps should be devolved to the states.
It's become clear that Romney has an advantage over Perry in these forums simply because he's more articulate, detailed and authoritative-sounding
in his answers; he's like a boxer with a reach advantage.
Romney also benefits from the current dynamic in the race: Since Perry is ahead in the polls, the lesser candidates tend to aim all their barbs at the
Texan rather than him.
Among those second-tier candidates, Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich, and Herman Cain all had good nights--especially Santorum who got a lot of airtime
and has been consistently strong in the debates. Michele Bachmann didn't have much of an impact at all.
Unless I'm blind, the entire (opinion) article doesn't mention a thing about Ron Paul and doesn't even include him in the second tier candidates.
Read it all for yourself if you havn't already.
Read more: www.foxnews.com...
I'm trying to temper my outrage with the fact that this was an opinion piece and Rich Lowry is entitled to his opinion and all but to not mention one
of the candidates at all is just beyond belief. What can we as "free" people do to fight against the media monster? When 86,000 people vote and
one man wins 37% of their vote, nearly double of all other candidates I think he deserves the nod.
OP, Fox, Debate, Sham, you said it all!