Elephant Ears

This blog is dedicated to the political happenings in the Valley and Southwest Virginia. As the the name implies, this blog will have posts based on what is heard by this elephant's (GOPer's) ears. It is also a great treat to get while at the county fair or a carnival.

Wednesday, August 17, 2005

The Fair Debate

Congratulations are in order for Matt Lohr. I was not at the first debate, but he did a great job at the Fair Association debate today. He had Fulk on the the defensive, and did a good job of hitting his talking points. I think Matt sounded more like a politician than Fulk did too (I don't know whether that is good or bad). Also, almost all the questions were from Fulk supporters.
To be fair, Fulk did a reasonable job himself. He made his points very well also.
NBC 29 covered the debate and tonight on the 11:00 news Lohr got some good comments in. He talked about being proud of being a Republican and being for lower taxes and being a social conservative. Fulk talked about how he wants to bring the democratic party to the center.
WHSV was not there from everything I can see.
It will be interesting to see what the DNR says in the morning about it (not to mention the Republitarian's opinion of it).
I'm sure glad something has went right with the campaign this week!

posted by GOPHokie @ 11:46 PM  

17 Comments:

  • At 8/18/2005 12:12 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    I was there, too. Matt should not have said that Lowell was a "different person" than the man whose campaign he (Matt) gave money to two years ago. It made Matt seem mean and the crowd appropriately spoke their disapproval. Nobody believes that Lowell is "different" now. And the side show of Sen. Obenchain throwing a fit with the guy running the mike around was interesting. What was that about?

     

  • At 8/18/2005 9:37 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Kudos to Lohr for saying he was proud to be a Republican. People like to know where somebody stands, whether or not they agree with it. Fulk's statement pretty much says that he realizes he is the nominee of a party that a lot of the Valley doesn't like, but don't worry because he's different then the rest of them. IMO, there's nothing wrong with sounding like a politician, why should that be a dirty word? It's only a bad thing if you think all politicians are crooks and liars. But as Americans we can and should expect our politicians to be honest stewards of the public trust. I'm not saying they ARE, just that there is no reason to lower expectations.

     

  • At 8/18/2005 9:53 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Oh my friend there is every reason to expect little of a politician. Part of what Bush ran on 2000 was bringing some civility back to DC. Hasn't happened because the leaders of both parties act like children. Remember the Contract with America and the term-limits talk? All in the dust now. Once the conservatives got power, they started acting like the liberals -- running up the debt, putting integrity-challenged people like Karl Rove and Tom DeLay in power. History keeps showing that power corrupts, no matter who has it. That's why most Americans DO NOT like politics or trust politicians and it's not great to sound like one. I believe the power corrupts problem does apply to local politics, on a smaller scale, but still applies.

     

  • At 8/18/2005 10:08 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    What I said was that we, as Americans, should not lower our expectations. I was referring to Hokie's comment about whether or not it was good to sound like a politician. Of course both candidates, and indeed anyone running for office is a politician. You become one when you decide to get into politics!!

     

  • At 8/18/2005 10:14 AM, Blogger GOPHokie said…

    I didnt mean we should lower our expectations, I just meant that Matt sounding more like a politician and Fulk sounding more like the common man might not necessarily help Lohr.

     

  • At 8/18/2005 10:16 AM, Blogger GOPHokie said…

    Anon 1:12, I think Obenshain was trying to get them to ask a few questions from some other part of the seats than just the Fulk cheering section. If you noticed, every single question, with the exception of Sheriff Farley and the guy in the back, came from the front left side (in front of Fulk).

     

  • At 8/18/2005 11:20 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Obenshain's thing came very early in the debate. How could he know where the questions would come from? People should have lined up at a mike. The roving mike thing cut into time.

     

  • At 8/18/2005 11:30 AM, Blogger GOPHokie said…

    Yea I kow but the first 3 questions came from the front section too. I don't know anyway, that was just my guess.
    I agree it should have been a line for the mike.

     

  • At 8/18/2005 12:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    GOPHokie,
    The people came in and sat down before anyone knew where Lohr and Fulk would be placed. Lohr went onstage ahead of Fulk and chose where to sit. I saw lapel stickers from both camps all over the crowd. Are you saying that Jim Britt of WSVA (the moderator) was purposely choosing Fulk supporters? I came to the event not knowing who to support so I really don't consider myself to be part of anyone's "cheering section" and I resent the insinuation on your part. I will say this however, your commentary speaks volumns. Another way of phrasing your statement that Lohr "did a good job of hitting his talking points" would be to say that Lohr never answered any of the questions but instead danced around them to repeat what he said before...
    Your remark that Lohr "He had Fulk on the the defensive" is only about 180% off base. There were several times when Lohr's face went deep red and he looked at the floor and once he became so agitated that he even managed to almost knock the mike over and when the stand came back it almost hit him in the nose.
    You are correct in that Lohr looked absolutely like a slick politician and Fulk comes across as real. Fulk also addressed each question asked, and there were quite a few that were meant to put him on the defensive.

     

  • At 8/18/2005 12:05 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Oh yes, since I have seen both candidates side by side and heard how they speak and answer the questions asked, I have made my choice. First time in my life I vote for a democrat.

     

  • At 8/18/2005 12:24 PM, Blogger GOPHokie said…

    Well I don't think Jim Britt was doing it on purpose but when most of the questions are asked by people with Fulk stickers on their shirts, I would say its a good chance they were Fulk suporters.
    And by the way, how many time have you voted for Republicans?

     

  • At 8/18/2005 12:37 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    In every election since Nixon's first successful campaign for the White House. (off year and city council included) I voted against Fulk the first time he ran. I now regret that one. I just didn't know him.

    Let's see, eminant domain-no sticker, Kerry support-no sticker, Lohr support of Fulk last time-no sticker, school lunch-no sticker, school board record-no sticker, Don Farley-no sticker (the sheriff is believed to be a supporter of Fulk though, I'll give you that) values question-no sticker. Perhaps I missed some, what questions were asked by people wearing Fulk stickers? I saw quite a few of the Fulk people trying to ask but who weren't called on... I thought Mr. Britt did a very balanced job. His job depends on it.

     

  • At 8/18/2005 12:48 PM, Blogger GOPHokie said…

    I stand corrected.

     

  • At 8/18/2005 1:06 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    gophokie,

    I like the way you respond to people of all ilk on this board. Very polite and respectful, giving credit and placing blame where you think its due, backing off when appropriate.

    Great job. Have a good semester at Tech!

     

  • At 8/18/2005 1:27 PM, Blogger GOPHokie said…

    Thanks saywhat. I am a Republican and a Lohr supporter, but I still try to "call 'em like I see 'em". I hope to continue to do a good job on this blog and I hope everyone out there will let me know when they think I have stepped over the line.

     

  • At 8/18/2005 2:25 PM, Blogger Megan said…

    uh, actually Matt has been caught in another falsehood. I have made mention of it on my blog but will refrain from any further comments until the "media" talks about it.

     

  • At 8/23/2005 1:21 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    I attended both debates. The "dumb farmer" kicked the "professional speaker"'s butt in both. I am beginning to believe again.

     

Post a Comment

<< Home