November 30, 2007
Candidate Huckabee: Mastering the New Format (A.B. Stoddard)
Let's admit it, the YouTube debates are a strange experience. I find myself on edge, worried as the candidates take questions from snowmen, people hugging guns or wearing strange costumes. Why? Because the questioners tend to be more hostile, more hostile than a moderator would be and more hostile than a hostile audience member who is looking the candidate in the eye.
I was surprised at how well the Republican hopefuls faced down this challenge at the CNN/YouTube debate the other night. But there were moments — Mitt Romney's answer to a question about what the GOP will do about the other war of black-on-black crime crystallized the Anything Goes South nature of this format. In fact, Romney was tense a lot; so was Sen. John McCain (Ariz.), so was Fred Thompson, so was Rep. Tom Tancredo (Colo.). But an article in The Guardian, about a Democratic consultant's take of the debate, described well how comfortable Mike Huckabee is in such a setting, and declared him the clear winner.
Julia Piscitelli, who has consulted with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) and other Democratic members of Congress and senators, was watching body language, fashion and other cues that influence "the way viewers take in candidates' words," said the Guardian story. Piscitelli noted Huckabee successfully, gently corrected a questioner before answering. "He's telling someone she's wrong and it doesn't sound like an affront," she said. "It sounds like a mild correction. Now we're ready to listen to what the correction is. He makes us ready to listen." Piscitelli also noted Huckabee's rhetorical style, that he paces his answers with "pregnant pauses," which help the audience digest what he is saying. "His face is very open, his eyes are open, he's being very thoughtful and compassionate. He's answering with understanding."
I think Huckabee stole the show that night, even without his wonderful line about Jesus being too smart to have considered running for public office. I know style doesn't win you the nomination, but I bet the YouTube debate picked Huckabee up a lot more votes, and his story — in the wide-open GOP presidential primary — is far from over.
***
Where are the Huckabee fans? Critics? What will happen to Huck? Write to me at askab@thehill.com to join my weekly video Q & A.
Permalink TrackBack EMail This Post
Share this post
What's This 15 Comments
»
The Hill welcomes comment from anyone and will almost always post it whether it is favorable or critical, as long as it is substantive and advances debate.
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Now isn't that special: the election has truly turned into American Idol. The singing voice, the winks, the cute facial expressions, the "young, clean, and articulate" feeling is what we need in our next President. Let's chose a court jester to be the new king, that's the ticket!
Comment by Igor R. — November 30, 2007 @ 2:05 pm
And those who won't play the game? Yes, we admit they have the best ideas, courageous, intelligent ideas, but now IT'S JUST NOT WISE TO AVOID THE AMERICAN IDOLIZATION OF POLITICS!
http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/kstrasselpw/?id=110010926
Comment by Igor R. — November 30, 2007 @ 2:51 pm
At least part of it was carefully staged in terms of planted questioners. Where's the outrage in the press?
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — November 30, 2007 @ 4:54 pm
Huck is playing with fire:
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2007/11/29/huckabees_ready_for_the_fight.html
Comment by Igor R. — November 30, 2007 @ 9:24 pm
That's what we need, a president who believes that every word in the bible is historically and scientifically accurate and who takes phone calls from God. Stupid is as stupid does.
"Stole the show" is right–as unusual I agree with Igor.
Comment by Don Bacon — December 1, 2007 @ 12:25 am
Robert…HELLO?????. Outrage in the press? Where was their outrage when we had a POTUS appointed by the Supreme Court? what about when they helped beat the drums for an illegal war against a country that did nothing to us? Signing statements? Ignoring subpoenas?
Your looking for outrage from the press over debate questions?
Comment by Chris Calbi — December 1, 2007 @ 9:02 am
The outrage should have been at Al Gore. He lost and all his liberal loser friends can't handle it.
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — December 1, 2007 @ 3:11 pm
Chris, that Bush was "appointed" by the Supreme Court is plainly unsupportable. He won the majority of legally cast Florida votes pure and simple.
Comment by Igor R. — December 1, 2007 @ 5:53 pm
Igor,
I agree, Huckabee is a oompassionate conservative, just like George Bush. As governor, he raised taxes 20 times in Arkansas.
Why should a baptist minister be looking to be President of the U.S.?
I think Hunter is underrated and really needs to be elevated to tier one.
Any way you slice it, he is pretty impressive. The Republican Party needs to forget polls and look at the original Republican Party Planks. If that does not happen, they will see movement from Republican to Independent.
Comment by Cheryl O — December 1, 2007 @ 8:44 pm
A.B.
Surely you don't think any cable station would allow TOO hard of a question to be asked — do you? CNN, FOX and MSNBC want to STAY ON LINE. THey want to continue hosting debates too.
There is no way they'd allow some really tough questions to be asked. That's why they are ALL screened, several times over.
Haven't you noticed that the topics or words that make headlines after a debate are those the made the BEST JOKE, or those that GAVE the worst STARE at the other candidate.
The ISSUES are never what makes the debate - it's the ACTION.
Coonsey's View
www.freewebs.com/coonsey/
Comment by Coonsey — December 1, 2007 @ 10:36 pm
Huckabee's political rock star charisma is limited by his strong social conservative beliefs. In another election, the pro-life slick willabee might be a threat. However, the rejection of the Bush Administration includes a distrust of social conservatives pushing a polarizing agenda (Rove redux, if you will). Charisma can't hide views of which a majority of Americans have become leery after 8 years.
However, for my own personal enjoyment, I would love to see Huckabee and Hillary Clinton debate just to hear Huckabee set up Hillary for the "Let me tell you Gov. Huckabee - it's convenient for you to talk about what you'd do with my body but I am a woman, I have always been a women, and you are no woman" sound bite. For that mere entertainment value alone, I'll cross my fingers for him.
Comment by WM — December 2, 2007 @ 4:54 pm
Cheryl, Huck is worse than Bush on illegal immigration and taxes. He is a skillful Baptist minister who knows how to push the Iowan Evangelicals' buttons. He is the biggest threat the to the Conservative cause at the moment. His record and recent double talk on illegals just today on Stephanopolous needs to be exposed before the Iowans launch him to a higher trajectory. He is now #2 on Rassumssen. Pretty good for an anti-abortion liberal Gomer Pyle!
Comment by Igor R. — December 2, 2007 @ 6:03 pm
WM, while I disagree with you politically it disgusts me far more that your want the future of your country decided in such a way as to provide you with the most entertainment value. That's what I meant by the American Idolization of elections.
Comment by Igor R. — December 3, 2007 @ 2:26 pm
Great characterization! See my #1 comment:
http://www.politico.com/blogs/jonathanmartin/1207/Fred_camp_deems_Huck_court_jester.html
Comment by Igor R. — December 4, 2007 @ 9:55 pm
Your perception of the strangeness of the YouTube debates is not an aberration, AB. As usual, CNN made some pretty bad choices about which questions were televised. An example is the question about whether the candidates believed in the literal interpretation of the Bible passages. What relevance does this have to a presidential debate especially in a secular government that does not base its existence on any particular religion? Anderson Cooper saved CNN's reputation by his skillful handling of the debate. I rated Giuliani and Ron Paul as the winners providing the most intelligent responses and answers. Huckabee was overrated as usual by the post-debate analysts. His statement that being kicked in the rear is equivalent to being out in front of the rest is about as asinine a response as one could expect from a presidential candidate.
Comment by Ralph — December 4, 2007 @ 10:00 pm