TNR Gets It Right: Graph Refutes AP, Media Spin On Attacks

There's a brief video I edited below. TNR's Noam Scheiber suggests attacks in last night's debate might play differently with voters than they did with some media types. Several media pundits felt multiple attacks on Mitt Romney in last night's debate were very effective. The Politico's Jonathan Martin was particularly vocal, forcefully carrying his personal observations over onto Fox News. The edited video below contradicts that interpretation by displaying real time measurements of live viewer reactions to attacks on Romney by both McCain and Huckabee and Romney's response. Thanks to WMUR for the raw video.

McCain's viewer ratings tank as he snidely laughs at his own remarks. Likewise, Huckabee's ratings take a real dip and viewer reaction through Romney's response not only elevates, it displays a turn around documenting how Romney clearly won the exchange in the eyes that matter most - those of New Hampshire voters.

Too bad the AP apparently watched an entirely different debate, entitling their report Romney Goes After Huckabee, McCain, providing readers who didn't watch the debate with a totally distorted view of events. One might question what it is they fear about Romney to undermine his candidacy with spin, or perhaps some are just reacting the way a typical liberal, or McCain supporter might?

Comments

[Fred Beloit]

This is how Brietbart described the Repub discussion: "Republican presidential candidates squabbled heatedly on US foreign policy on Saturday, as anger boiled over in a high-stakes debate just three days before the New Hampshire primary."

This is how the McClatchy newspapers described it: "Democratic presidential candidates sparred, sometimes intensely,...while their Republican counterparts held a virtual tea party Saturday night..."

So much for objective reporting via McClatchy. So much for expecting anything worth learning from these kinds of "debates".

[CK MacLeod]

Last time I did this, I was a little abrupt, so, let me say that I think you do a disservice to your usually so very thoughtful and intellectually penetrating blog by granting so much credibility to the Pander Meters. They record real-time responses, not lasting impressions. That doesn't mean that McCain handled the line well, or even that it will help him, but, regardless of how people reacted in the moment, it still reinforces the dominant theme harming Romney's candidacy.

[Dennis]

I agree with TNR's analysis. Both I and the person I was watching the debate with thought that McCain's "candidate of change" comment was juvenile and more befitting a high school spit ball champion than a war hero and presidential candidate.

Romney's response was weak, too. It's not really a personal attack. Romney takes whatever position he thinks will win him votes at any particular time. But there are better ways of exposing that than how McCain did it.

[Roy Mustang]

I'm suprised people, conservatives no less, are still reading TNR after they accused our troops of being dog killing, Iraqi baby skull crushing monsters.

In any case, are you guys disputing the fact that Mitt is the "candidate of change"? It was hilarious. Lighten up, Romnites.

[Cory]

McCain and Huckabee won't be able to spin away their actual attacks on Romney this time (like they did in Iowa). Romney compares positions, while McCain and Huckabee engage in personal (and very immature) attacks. It's very clear to anyone (as long as they don't have an agenda...yeah, that means you AP).

[D2Boston]

McCain is past it. He stunk up the room last night. No winning policies, no new ideas, and clearly no understanding of a free market economy -- he's just a bitter old man who has been on the wrong side of some pretty critical issues, e.g. taxes and immigration -- if that's what he means by calling himself a "maverick," then he can have it. Yeah, I respect his service to our country and that's about it -- I was glad when Bush cleaned his clock in 2000 and I'll be glad when Mitt does it this year once and for all.

[Michele]

I was shocked when I read various pundits who thought McCain did a good job last night. I thought he came across as childish and snarky and I thought it was beneath the dignity of the office. I'm not surprised that the audience reacted the way they did.

Now on the flip side I don't think Romney handled the attacks well at all. He came across as thin-skinned and irritable. He looked like your typical bully, able to dish it out but he couldn't take it when he's victims ganged up on him.

And I'm not a Romnite, I'm a Fredhead (though, I really don't like that term :-)

[Emily]

My reaction was the same (McCain as Nixon's crankier brother to Romney's J.F.K.) and it was all my family members talked about, two of whom were undecided. A veteran of the Massachusetts Gubernatorial race that Mitt lost, at another blog, reflected that the personal attacks against Mitt, his wealth, and his religion, are of the very same quality and hostility, but with different words (no flip-flopping charge). He said it was deja vu despite very different circumstances and asked, "What is really going on?"

BTW, the only one on that stage of the four attackers who showed some class was Rudy Giuliani. Giuliani's attack was lame and perhaps he's hurt a little by being in the "pile on", but he did not come across as angry or hate-filled when pulling the punch which makes sense because Giuliani is one tough S.O.B. and doesn't take anything that might go on in the campaign personally. The more I see of Giuliani, the more I like him.

[Roy Mustang]

Hell, yes. We need a snarker-in-chief.

I bet you guys also didn't laugh when a certain someone called for an outbreak of botulism.

These men need to be called out on their BS. Romney needs to be called out on his complete 180s just as McCain needs to be called out his Illegal Amnesty Programs. It will make them a better candidate come the general election.

[ajarizona]

McCain showed he is the same old nasty hothead he always was. Romney nailed him on immigation. Romney made everyone else look stupid on health care, the economy and yes even geo-politics.

Hucacabee looks inept on the major issues. Huck was out of his league tonight.

Romney had command of every issue put forth. Even made McCain and Huck look silly. It looked like 5 ugly school girls picking on the beauty of the school.

Romney was cool and collected, and simply the smartest guy on the stage. Romney has changed on some positions or flipped, if you will, but, he has not flopped back. Every shot talken at Mitt, he answers with clarity. He tells you why he has changed his position. Isn't that what growth and being teachable, is all about?

Every critique taken at Mac Or Huck is dodged. They never engage in the discussion, rather, they throw diversions with smart ass remarks and "personal" attacks on Mitt. Mitt's criticisms are about the issues!

Huck has changed his position "this month" on immigration and McCain is all over the map on immigration.

His bill granted:
1-z-visas, which allowed 90% of illegals to stay here forever!
2-Those who stole others Social Security numbers (identity theft) were forgiven!
3-Those who had worked here and cheated with others SS numbers were allowed to collect SS benefits.
That's McCains bill.
If that's not amnesty, then what in the hell is?

I'm afraid this country is just too stupid to even follow the issues. Since when does five punks taking cheap shots at Romney make them the victors? Romney not only took all of them on and aswered their shots, but he did so with class and intellect. The others looked like 8th grade schoolyard bullies.

There was one grown up on that stage last night

ajarizona and it was Mitt Romney!

[AZCoyote]

It will be interesting to see how many times McCain is going to lie about his support for amnesty. I've already lost count. He seems to subscribe to that old saying that if you repeat a lie enough times, it will eventually become the truth. Too bad for him there are so many recorded accounts of his support for amnesty--in his own words--to come back and show him up for the liar that he is.

[Roy Mustang]

I think McCain geninuely thinks his CIP wasn't amnesty. I guess in the same vein that Clinton didn't think oral sex constituted sexual relations.

I think Fred said it best. Amnesty is any reward for breaking our immigration laws.

[Igro R.]

McCain has a Shamnesty addiction. He can't fight it, he can't even lie about it, and he can't fully tell the truth. Romney did get him to implicate himself. Still, based on the record and the white paper, Fred is the only one I trust.

[seekeronos]

"--- I think Fred said it best. Amnesty is any reward for breaking our immigration laws. ---"

And Fred couldn't have said it any better. :)

[I Like Mike]

Gov. Romney does not appear to have been candid in responding to Gov. Huckabee during last night's debate.

Gov. Romney said: "I do not support and have never supported a timed withdrawal from Iraq."

However, on April 04, 2007, the Hill magazine reported: "Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney . . . on Wednesday endorsed setting 'timetables and milestones' for Iraq policy but keeping them private - an approach notably supported by Democratic Sen. Mark Pryor (Ark.)."

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/romney-supports-secret-iraq-timetable-2007-04-04.html

If the debate were a court of law, Gov. Romney's testimony would have been impeached.