Friday, January 11, 2008

I Really Hope These Focus Groups Are Not Representative of the Rest of Us

By Jason Jones

Shortly after wrapping up the Fantasy Draft Help Insider show, I decided to jump over to Fox News and see what the reactions to tonight’s debate were. It is not my place to tell you or anyone else what’s going to happen or what should happen, however I had to chime in on the responses and point out how stupid America is being. The following is a word for word account of Questions and Answers from a focus group care of Fox News/Hannity and Colmes. My comments in red.

Q: A word or phrase that stood out to you regarding Fred Thompson’s performance?

A1: Nice awakening, but too little too late.

I don’t want to hear “too late.”

A2: The “Big Bear” in Fred Thompson awoke.

He was always here, you just weren’t listening.

A3: Entertaining but not convincing (that woman is really STUPID).

Again, not listening…you’ve already decided and are a drain on the process.

A4: Very prepared and it showed.

He’s been very prepared since the day he got in.

A5: His charisma finally surfaced.

Again, since Day One. Where have you been?

A6: Showed his intelligence, he was organized and prepared.

…Day one…

A7: Sarcastic and curt with no substance.

You are probably one of the Jackasses who has been waiting for a sound bite.

A8: Surprising, a little too late.

You’re an idiot, there’s not one thing surprising about anything he said.

A9: Began to contrast himself.

The answers are the same, he just had to turn up the volume for those of you that ride the short bus.

A10: Believed he was very strong and passionate, he was ready to go.

Since when does “sounds passionate” mean squat? Is he the right man for the job?

A11: Very dynamic and great, but late.

What’s with this late crap? We haven’t even gotten to the S.Carolina primary yet?

A12: Very strong on conservative issues, very strong on immigration.

Again, no change. He’s been here since the beginning.

A13: Presidential and very convincing.

Now there’s one I cannot disagree with.

Don’t tell me he’s too late. That is complete bull@#$%. Sure every candidate and the voters who vote for him/her would love to start fast and end fast. In politics, it's rare like in NFL football that one is the ’72 Dolphins. Remember when McCain was getting his ass kicked routinely in the fall? How about when Mitt Romney was afraid to really mix it up, then he began the attack on Hillary? Where was Huckabee 2 months ago? I also think I remember everyone thinking for a large chunk of time leading up to now that this was a 2-pony race between Romney and Guiliani. Where’s Guiliani now? Holding every one else’s jock strap. And Ron Paul. For about 3 and a half weeks, people believed that Ron Paul was for real. No one is now where they started at the beginning. No one. That is clearly a cop-out for those who have put up a mental block on Fred Thompson. Those people who said, shades of Doc Brown in Back to the Future, …The actor!?!?! Get over yourselves. If you just open your minds to what’s really going on, you’ll see that tonight proves that Fred Thompson deserves to be in this race just as much as anyone else. Seriously, if you quit waiting for soundbites and personal attacks you’d see that Thompson should have South Carolina and Iowa (but people got caught up in the flavor of the week with Huckabee). Don’t believe me, ask George Foreman if Muhammed Ali got serious and passionate too late in the Rumble in the Jungle.

Q: How many of you switched your vote to Fred Thompson (show of hands-less than ½)?

Q: I want to know specifically, why?

A1: He’s shown us a turnaround. He has shown us his voice. He has shown us a seriousness on a lot of the issues that were wavering.

First off, I don’t want to scare anyone who’s now jumping on the bandwagon. He’s always been here. His voice hasn’t changed. He is the Tom Landry of this race. He should not be discredited because he is stoic and steadfast on everything, he should be rewarded for it. Since when has he wavered on anything? He just had to speak loud enough so that the Springer-Minded People could hear what he was saying. I really don’t think a man should have to call out another and get personal before you start listening.

A2: I believe he was sincere and showed real wisdom and candor.

That’s what he is. Sincere, no nonsense, stoic, educated, and everything we should be looking for in a candidate.

A3: I finally found out where he really stands.


Q: So what was it? Why do you think he waited this long? You complained he was too late, what was going on?

A1: He chose the perfect state to do this in, South Carolina is very conservative and they are looking for a very conservative candidate; I think he played to it.

Need I say “Rope-A-Dope?”

A2: South Carolina is the Dickville Notch of the country. (apparently I haven’t followed enough politics to get that inside joke).

…Yeah, I got nothing.

A3: (the stupid woman) I simply think he had a good day, and it actually concerns me that he has not been this consistent throughout the campaign. (You know what concerns me? Why you deliver your stupid comments with that lame-ass Jodie Foster “I need to spit it out” manner of speaking).

The only thing he has not been consistent on is the stuff that doesn’t matter. Since you’re not listening, you don’t see that. The only thing that has changed is the volume and inflection of his voice, him singling out particular candidates to tear apart, and providing some soundbites so that you could remember tomorrow what happened tonight. This is why people should have to pass an aptitude and political current events test in order to vote. (that’s a little harsh, but am I the only one listening to the answers?). Short of saying, I don’t care if the candidate looks like a he’s high on Quaaludes, if he has the right answers, Volume and Passion should have no relevance. Some of these people are acting like, Fred thought he’d take up a hobby for a couple of months. Like some colorblind kid trying his hand a putting together a puzzle. C’mon America, you can’t be this ignorant.

A4: I mean, he made it clear when he brought everyone from his campaign down here to South Carolina, this was his last stand. He’s got to make it or break it.

A5: He came to South Carolina. It’s a strong state for him, he was confident, it showed, he looked presidential. I think he’s a tough opponent.

A6: Nice candor and wit but I don’t think he has the dynamism to be the long-term leader of this country. (you’re ignorant and clearly haven’t been paying attention).

DYNAMISM????? Wow, you shouldn’t talk…As is in having a dynamic characteristic, within the context of this race…He has exactly the DYNAMISM that we are all looking for.

A7: Fred Thompson is smarter than anyone thinks, earlier in the beginning of this whole talk said, “no one who’s ever become president has lost South Carolina." He came to South Carolina, because that’s where the winner’s gonna be found.

Even the stoner in the back gets it. How come the woman and the uninformed men in this focus group cannot see their head for their ass. I’m not generalized with gender, it's just an observation from this particular focus group.

A8: (some elderly woman making some comment on sacrificing his Hollywood career to become president. Blah blah blah)

Anyone who brings up the “sacrifice Hollywood for the Oval Office” angle clearly just showed up for the free coffee and donuts.

A9: That’s funny, I never thought he was passionate at all. It seems to me, that up until tonight, when he was forceful, he was only in it because other people forced him in to it.

WHAT THE F@#% DOES PASSION HAVE TO DO WITH IT?My chiropractor is not passionate about his job, but I know there is no one else I'd rather have doing the job. And forced him into it? You couldn’t force me to spend $1 on anything if I didn’t want to do it. You really think Fred Thompson is going to waste time and money on this because someone else told him to do it, while he opposed running? You, ma’am, are dumb as paint.

A10: I agree, I don’t think he had enough passion, he came off tonight wonderfully, I think he was very aggressive, but he is just too little too late. We also have to think of who’s electable. Who is going to put up a fight against the Democrats?

Listen stupid, as unbiased as I can be, Fred Thompson, John McCain, Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee, Rudy Guiliani are all electable. The only one who isn’t is Ron Paul. On top of that, I think that Thompson, McCain, and Huckabee could defeat Hillary without over extending themselves too much. Same could be said for Obama, unless minorities and the youth vote come out in ridiculous numbers.

Q: Does electability matter?

A: (in unison) YES!

Q: More of you think the Democratic candidate will be Barack Obama, so should be the republican candidate?

A: (jumbled mess of all the candidates)

Q: (Colmes) I am fascinated by what is going on there, specifically with Fred Thompson, and his showing here, but for those that thought he won the debate, but then would be reluctant to vote for him. Why if you thought he was so strong would you be reluctant to vote for him?

A1: Let’s start here in South Carolina.

Q: (interjected followup) Why?

A1: Let’s show the rest of the country that we are not afraid to elect the best candidate.

This may be the best sentence uttered all night. Forget the frills. Forget the sound bites and the inflection in each candidate’s voice. Can we just listen to the questions, then listen to the answers and formulate a solid opinion on what was said and not how it was said. I could say, “the chicken ate poopie-cahcah for brunch with the Anderson’s” and if I said with a passionate inflection and directed it at someone, America would think I really had something to say. The point would remain, IT DOESN’T MATTER HOW ITS SAID, ONLY WHAT IS SAID.

A2: I don’t think that any of the previous campaign’s (primaries/caucuses) matter. We are an independent state and we’ve shown that before.

Then secede from the nation, hillbilly boy.

Q: You said too little too late, I want to know why?

A1: Too little experience, he’s just been in the government in the legislature.

Go off yourself. Or at least Google him. Lack of experience my tookus. Lack of experience, we have a governor and a mayor running. A first lady who’s only been a senator for a short while, and what seems to be a freshman who’s only held his office for 2 years. I should slap you in the face with your own experience comment.

A2: (stupid Jodie Foster woman again) He’s an entertaining man, by all means. The consistency has not been there and that makes me nervous. I don’t know that he will handle things consistently in a forthright manner.

The consistency has been there, you are too naïve and dumb to see. Its like people have a Jerry Springer filter on. If it isn’t loud, personal, or abusive, then it's not worth listening to.

A3: I want the candidate to start strong and end strong, and he hasn’t had a strong start.

When was the last time the person who was elected President held the pole position throughout the duration of the entire process, beginning to end? It’s a lot like a basketball game. One team can win convincingly or even dominate, but it is foolish to think the other team didn’t at least go on a run from time to time. Look, I hope Fred Thompson is the San Antonio Spurs of this process. No flash, no glamour, but when the dust clears, whether you like him or not, you will recognize that he is the most complete well-rounded candidate from top to bottom and in 360 degrees. Even if his performance doesn’t come with the high-flying sparkle you’d wished it had.

A4: And I also think that with all of these situations around the world we need someone who is used to thinking about it before just jumping in and reacting to it. (you should not procreate, it might bring down the national average).

Q5: (by a show of hands) Was it right to include Ron Paul in this debate?

A: (5 to 1 in unison) YES


Ron Paul should go away. At least go as a tertiary party member. Ron Paul is not a Republican. It may be too harsh to call him a Democrat. When your answer to Iran is to not do anything for fear of starting World War III over a miscommunication, then I’m done. I have written you off. That’s exactly what Bob Dole would have said when the planes crashed into the trade center buildings. Let’s not get too hasty, it could have been a misunderstanding. The leader of the free world should not be the guy at standing in the corner quivering out of fear.


Fred Thompson-Mike Huckabee would be a Christian leader. But he would also bring about liberal economic policies, liberal foreign policies. He believes we have an arrogant foreign policy, and in the tradition of “Blame America First." He believes that Guantanamo should be shut down and those enemy combatants should be brought here.

Mike Huckabee-The Air Force has a saying, “If you’re not catching flack, then your not over the target," well I’m catching the flack so I must be over the target. Fred, I appreciate the analysis of my record.

Mike Huckabee-If you think you are going to engage the United States military, be prepared not simply to have a battle, be prepared first to put your sites on the American vessel…and then be prepared for the next thing you see will be the gates of HELL, for that is exactly what you will see.

Fred Thompson-You know how you can tell the news is good coming out of Iraq? Because you read so little of it in the New York Times.

Fred Thompson-You cannot take the judgment out of the hands of the forces on the ground, I think one more step and they would have been introduced to those virgins they are looking forward to seeing…Iran was clearly testing us, they took British hostages under similar circumstances. They are testing our resolve, they know they are dealing with a nation that will not put up with that sort of thing.

Let’s talk about the word change. Change to me is just a buzz word. Change is the transitional word that becomes a catalyst for a candidate to say “hey, look at me over here, if you don’t like the current situation, vote for me because I will change things." Change is just a word. This is an election process. Despite popular, and yet naïve, belief, you will never see change. You won’t see it because this is AN ELECTION PROCESS. All we have to go on is words. If you are a more stringent follower of political news and events maybe you can rely on voting record. It's an election, you will not see change, see change proven, feel change, visualize change. And the reason is, words are pretty much all we have to go on. Once we’ve listened to all of the words and we as a nation have made our decision, then maybe you will see some change. That’s how our political system works. Obama or McCain, Clinton or Huckabee cannot SHOW us change, and here’s the kicker, so pay attention.


Here is another comment from the dumb Jodie Foster woman:

“I don’t even pay attention to the word change. Because I can sit here all the live long day, guess what? If you elect me I am going to change Global Warming. It won’t happen anymore. PROVE IT. No one does”.

I wish I could have 2 minutes with this woman. Have her feeling like an infant who just slammed its head into the corner of a coffee table…Lost and confused in a pool of her own disillusioned tears. I wonder if she would feel better if the candidates would close their responses with “Q.E.D.” This is not a mathematical equation or the proof of a scientific theory. These are candidates trying to say what they need to within there own belief structure (unless we’re talking about Mittens, he says whatever he has to regardless of the integrity of his true beliefs. No one should take anything he says seriously.) to convince you WITH THEIR WORDS that they are the right candidate for the job.

Some other major thoughts on tonight’s debate.

-Fred Thompson finally showed up.

-Mitt Romney was somewhere between unimpressive and detrimental to himself.

-McCain, Huckabee did not hurt themselves and held their own.

-Ron Paul officially has no shot to win.

-If these results translate to S. Carolina primary, we could be at square 1.

Keep in mind, Ron Paul not only looked like a senile old fish out of water, but also registered the worst singular response to a question since the campaigns began for 2008. Ron Paul is as I said he was, he is a Democrat in Republican clothing trying to hide his true tendencies. In a time when Republican voters want their candidate to stop apologizing for being conservative and take back the party to the ideals that drew each individual to that side, you have Ron Paul. Party affiliation aside, issues aside, personality and appearance aside, Ron Paul is the Ross Perot of this election process except Ron Paul doesn’t have the money to buy his way into the nomination of this party just so he can stick his head into the camera and say, “Look I matter," because Ron, you don’t.

With all that was said about the debate. All of the opinions uttered both by experts and random voters, here are the results of the Hannity and Colmes Text Message Poll…

Tonight Winner? (of the debate)

1 Ron Paul 32%

2 Fred Thompson 22%

3 Mike Huckabee 18%

4 Mitt Romney 13%

5 John McCain 6%

6 Rudy Guiliani 5%

This proves either, Ron Paul supporters are hackers and rigged the poll or America really doesn’t know what a win looks like. I’ll give you a hint, in football when a group of teammates dump the Gatorade on the coach, that’s not a consolation prize for the loser.

No comments: