Comment On Courier Interviews With Trey Grayson And Rand Paul

Yesterday I linked to the video of the Courier Journal's editorial board interviews with the four candidates for US Senate.  This comment concerns the republicans.

As I have said many times, I have tried to limit the focus of my observations to the campaigns, not the individuals.  However this set of interviews reveals more about the candidates than their campaigns. They had no handlers, their message was unedited, this was not a commercial or a prepared speech.  As such this comment will focus on the impression one gets from the interviews of the men themselves.

Ardent supporters will see what they want in each interview and have plenty of ammunition to spin for their guy and against the other.  But I have a one word summary of my comment on each.

Rand Paul: Senatorial

Trey Grayson: Student Council

TREY GRAYSON:

Trey's appreciation for the complexities of the issues appeared very shallow.  His answers resembled talking points, buzz words and more than one example of vacillating.  As some comments to the earlier post point out, his desire for the endorsement was patent and his willingness to be moved off of his message by the press bordered on pandering.

If his goal was to play the part of a cavalier school boy he performed adequately, but his immaturity, lack of personal resolve and his air of entitlement were unavoidably obvious and did little to inspire confidence that Trey is the right man, at this time, to provide the kind of leadership Kentucky, and America, need to deal effectively with our staggering financial condition.

And though he would like to claim that he is the kind of republican who believes in peace through strength, he appeared weak, boyish and as if he was merely reciting words he'd heard before spoken by someone else.  He was unconvincing.

For some reason the board pressed him hard on "don't ask, don't tell", gay marriage and discrimination  based upon sexual preference.  Again he spoke the words of a social conservative but his trailing answers left the impression that he was doing his best to avoid a more meaningful discussion of the topics for the sake of what he perceived to be "conservative correctness".

Compared to either democrat, Trey should win.  Compared to Rand Paul's performance, Trey didn't come close.

RAND PAUL:

Perhaps the first and the most lasting impression one gets from Paul's interview is that he is neither strange, nor kooky nor deserving of any further disparagement of similar sort.  He appears as a very serious mature individual who thinks logically, feels passionately and articulates clearly his true beliefs.  These are all things which inspire trust and an interest in hearing more.

His response to questions and follow ups demonstrated a clear command of the issues, perhaps even greater understanding of the details than those asking.  His performance reassured that his self declared philosophy as a that of a "constitutional conservative" was not merely a label. Rand Paul revealed over the course of an hour that his deep commitment to our republican form of government was grounded on principle, constructed from logic and as he cited to several sources for his opinions, he demonstrated that his philosophy was the one which had thus far stood the test of time.

It was obvious that he had thought deeply about the problems facing our nation and that his solutions were real, not mere platitudes, as he recognized the limitations he would face in Washington DC against the entrenched machine.  But he was not discouraged, nor likely to give in as he talked about how even though he might not be able to accomplish the biggest goals in a short time, that he felt confident he could build a coalition to get votes on some smaller goals all working toward the same end to an ever expanding, financially failing, government.

And while the board seemed interested in pursuing a few of his views which might have been characterized before the interview as "libertarian", hearing Paul explain them made it very clear that his message is a populist one, well within the mainstream thinking of a large majority of everyday republicans, and democrats.

I've met Rand Paul and quite frankly this interview revealed more smiles, more humor and more confidence than I have seen before.  So far in the campaign he has been a very serious man running for office in a culture that has come to expect a certain kind of "politickin".  Against that backdrop of history he did not fit the mold.  But now that both men have been interviewed for all voters to see it is quite clear that Paul has a personality voters can warm up to but he places much more emphasis on principled performance in office than the politics of personal achievement.

The Interviews are a must watch for all concerned voters.  The Courier Journal Board should be congratulated for doing this service and for the quality of the questions and the video record.

If you have not watched the interviews, please do so.  And please feel free to comment here about your impressions.  I am certain that sharing our views freely will be of great assistance to our Commonwealth and our nation as we move closer to the primary elections on May 18th.

Here is the link to the videos again for your convenience:  CLICK HERE

Comments

[Study in UK]

This is truly a great read for me. I have bookmarked it and I am looking forward to reading new articles. Keep up the good work

[Term papers]

Great series. A bit out of my league, but I’m learning stuff each step of the way. Can’t wait to get to it

[MOSJW]

Grayson has an repeated inability to definitively state what exactly he would do should he be elected. He regurgitates newspaper articles and plays Monday morning quarterback. which is essentially mindless, not to mention lazy, campaigning. The only thing I know that he would do is NOT vote for Rand Paul. He also chides Paul for making kooky remarks when he (Paul) is the ONLY one making concrete comments and not skirting an issue. That's not kookiness, it's confidence in your ideas. Trashing your opponent doesn't instill a lot of confidence in this voter. It just highlights desperation and substance. We need a principled bulldog in the Senate, not a Gumby candidate who is willing to be agreeable and make nice to the Democrats who seek to destroy this country. The gloves have come off.

In addition, Paul runs a more accessible campaign whereas Grayson is only accessible if you have a press card or are willing to fork over a sizeable check in admittance to a catered fund raiser. I have yet to see Grayson campaign at a local Perkins. That says a lot. No, my vote is going to Paul.

[MB]

I watched three interviews of the Courier with our Republican candidates. This is most refreshing of the Courier to televise each session without editing.

I thought Rand Paul thoughtfully answered all questions in depth. He had a good flow with his answers to the questions asked by their panel. His interview was somewhat longer than Grayson's due to the flow of questions and answers. Rand really made his case to be our next senator with his command of issues and his clearcut explanations.

Trey seemed unconfortable with some of the questions and the Courier's team bore in on him with followup questionns.
On the whole he escaped with a passing grade
but he was clearly off his game. He seems to be shallow on the issues.

The Republican candidates to run against Yarmuth in the 3rd District did well with Todd Lally and Jeff Reetz being the front runners. Those other guys should bail out now due to their lack of fund raising and inability to wow the audiences

[Mr. Scott Ryan]

A little off topic, but it is a little known secret that newspapers will endorse the front runner unless their own internal polling suggests that their preferred candidate has a shot.

Just an FYI.

It is not partisan to a certain extent, because they almost always endorse the front runner.

It is partisan, if and only if, it is a close race.

Conway is a good example of this. He is not the front runner, but he has the momentum and the money.

Bottom line, they will endorse Paul.

And in the general ...

Unless Conway gets close, they will endorse Paul.

They will make up some ideological excuse for their endorsement, the bottom line is they want to be right and on the winning side.

[stephen fritz]

Marcus
I have invited my email friends to listen to each interview and then evaluate Paul and Grayson and then read your comments.
I have received over twenty reply's and all have agreed that you are dead on.
Now comes the but "but I bleieve the CJ will endorse Grayson" They will not let McConnell down in this fight. Steve

[Arthur]

@John Wayne

"i have to think Trey was pressed harder than Rand"

Examples? I think Trey was most uncomfortable when asked about questions related to gays and discrimination laws.

Rand was asked both questions. He responded that he supported the Marriage amendment, and was also very brave saying that he doesn't support discrimination laws in private property. Trey was probably uncomfortable because he tried to evade or not answer.

I'm not trying to be confrontational, I just want to know in which situation Trey was more hard pressed than Rand, because I didn't see it.

I'd argue Trey was not hard pressed at all. He wasn't even asked about whether he had people running Push Polls! He also wasn't asked about whether he received money from lobbyists for AIG. I'd say they were very soft on Trey.

[Proud Conservative]

Trey just did terrible. He isn't convincing on anything. The so called social conservative didn't even stand up strong for social issues. He danced and said I'm sorry and blau blau.. Instead of laying it down.

[John Wayne]

Not trying to spin anything, just telling you what is being told to me by people on the inside of the CJ. And yes, i have to think Trey was pressed harder than Rand. Sorry, just my opinion.

[spinnikerca]

John Wayne, that sounds very much as if you are trying to spin a CJ endorsement in advance that you figure no one in their mind would give to Trey over Rand. I tend to agree with you... but only about that last part.

[TJ]

@ KyExpat

Both interviews were an hour. Not sure how you got 2 hours from Rand unless you watched it twice.

[Carol Fell]

The CJ will be sorely disappointed when their prediction" that Rand is the candidate a Dem can beat"-----I wage them a bet on the outcome of a Conway/Paul race---I think the people in Kentucky will soon realize that Conway would be more of the same----We've had enough of the slick ram it down your throat politics of this administration---it's time for a change---Rand Paul would provide that change!

[KyExpat]

@John Wayne
Interesting you say that when Trey Grayson's interview was only 1 hour while Rands was nearly 2 hours long
Trey wasnt really pressed like someone said he was trying to do the Texas 2 step.
I think Rand not only nailed all the questions with amazing answers. but Rands answer on the Civil Rights Act was knocked out of the park. That was stellar performance and a stellar answer.
Rand was unfairly pressed on some citizens who went out with their AK 47s as if he asked them to bring their semi autos but he handled the question very well

[InAwe]

Marcus you have once again done a supurb job. If, after watching these interviews, any Republican is left undecided then something is very wrong and they may want to lie down on a couch and talk to someone about their problem. Clearly Rand Paul will be comfortable holding the line on the growth of government. Even if he is found in the position of doing it alone on the Senate floor.

[John Wayne]

No doubt Trey's interview was not his best moment. However it is disingenuous (sp?) to judge him based on one interview where it is obvious the questioners were loading questions against him. Anyone who watched both interviews and is non-biased can see that Rand got a much easier way to go. Now, with that being said, I have a former school mate that works for the CJ. They told me that the CJ is in very much a tight spot. They think Rand is the only person a Dem can beat in the fall, but they shutter at the thought of him possibly being the junior senator from Ky. So, they are somewhat in flux about their endorsement. Judging by their questions and Conway's latest surge however, it appears they think Conway can beat Rand and they will probably support Rand in the primary.

[kent smith]

view from another state:

Grayson looked like he was doing the "texas two-step" from "the best little whorehouse in texas" play. He didn't answer one question directly. Rand Paul not only came across senatorial but presidential. --and it would be great for the people of kentucky to replace mitch next.

[john adams]

Grayson is a former Clinton supporter?? That pretty much sums it up doesn't it?

[marley eversole]

Now what will we do with Mitch next term?

My opinion is he really needs to find a rocking chair? Let's help him find it.

[TJ]

Something else I noticed is that it seemed like Trey was purposefully long winded in an effort to take up more time so that he would lessen the number of questions he would have to answer. I would like to know how many questions each were asked.

Also, he tiptoed as he navigated himself through the question of "Would you have done what Bunning did?" without ever really answering the question. The reporter stayed on it trying to get an answer and after she moved on we still never received a clear answer. "I agree with him on principle." Great. Ok, so would you have done what he did? "I agree with him on the principle." The way I understood it was that he would NOT have done it yet his very last response to the reporter was that he would...or something. I don't know. It wasn't clear at all.

[Proud Conservative]

Do you think the Courier will endorse the conservative, Paul?

Or the liberal, Grayson?

[TJ]

"even greater understanding of the details than those asking"

- That is the impression I got as well.

[Andrew]

I've been saying this all along, Grayson is not a good politician, even though he so desperately desires to be one. His campaign has been a disaster, and they made a huge mistake for not replacing Hodson after the first of the year. If he keeps putting out crap like this, I think that call from McConnell will come: "Son, I think it's time we reevaluate things..."

[spinnikerca]

Trey Grayson seems to pride himself most on going along to get along. I just don't see a principled line in what he says, so you can project: he would go along ONLY THIS FAR, then stop. That slippery slope has taken many well meaning politicians once they got to DC.

You are likely correct that he is better than the Dem candidates, for a variety of reasons. However, Rand Paul clearly has principled reasons for his positions, and defends them. I think a principled Senator who defends those principles is someone to vote FOR, not merely a fall back for when you are voting AGAINST someone else.

[Josh]

Once again Marcus Carey plays it down the middle and calls it straight. I'm not kidding, if the Lexington and Louisville TV shows don't put Marcus on instead of the usual print reporters, they are missing the boat.

Hey Mr. Carey, your analysis of politics is very much appreciated. Thank you.

[Ole Boy]

Dead on analysis Marcus. Some of your best work.

I have heard Grayson is telling his supporters that he knows he did a poor job interviewing with the Courier. Grayson even threw his campaign staff under the bus because he says he didn't know the Courier was going to tape the interview.

[Nick]

"Student Council" is the most accurate description of Grayson and for that matter most dumbed down neocons(Romney, Palin, Huckabee).