Open Thread: GOP Presidential Debate
by Publius**UPDATED – Bumped**
MANCHESTER, N.H. (AP) – Republican White House hopefuls condemned President Barack Obama’s handling of the economy from the opening moments of their first major debate of the campaign season Monday night, and pledged emphatically to repeal his historic year-old health care overhaul.
“When 14 million Americans are out of work we need a new president to end the Obama Depression,” declared former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, the first among seven contenders on stage to criticize the president’s economic policies.
Rep. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota, invited as an unannounced contender for the 2012 nomination, upstaged her rivals for a moment, using a nationwide television audience to announce she had filed papers earlier in the day to run—a disclosure in keeping with a feisty style she has employed in a bid to become a favorite of tea party voters.
Obama was hundreds of miles away on a day in which he blended a pledge to help companies create jobs in North Carolina with a series of campaign fundraisers in Florida. He won the two states in 2008, and both figure to be battlegrounds in 2012.
The New Hampshire event unfolded more than six months before the state hosts the first primary of the 2012 campaign, and the Republicans who shared a stage were plainly more interested in criticizing Obama than one another.
Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who first sought the nomination in 2008, was the nominal front-runner as the curtain rose on the debate. But the public opinion polls that made him so are notoriously unreliable at this point in the campaign, when relatively few voters have begun to familiarize themselves with their choices.
Already, this race has had its share of surprises.
Several likely candidates decided not to run—Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour and Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels among them—and at least one who ruled out a race is reconsidering. Texas Gov. Rick Perry has said he will decide after the state Legislature completes its current session, and former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin’s plans are still unknown.
Gingrich, quick off the mark in attacking Obama, suffered the mass exodus of the entire top echelon of his campaign last week, an unprecedented event that left his chances of winning the nomination in tatters.
All seven flashed their anti-abortion credentials, and were largely unified in opposition to same-sex marriage, which is legal in New Hampshire.
Several praised a proposed amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would define marriage as between one man and one woman, a position popular among conservative voters. Bachmann said she supported that, but she added that states have the right to write their own laws and said that if elected president, she would not step into state politics—a nod to tea partyers who cherish the Constitution’s 10th Amendment.
Obama’s rivals found little if anything to like in what the president has done since taking office in the midst of the worst economic recession since the Great Depression.
Former Sen. Rick Santorum accused Obama of pursuing “oppressive policies” that have shackled the economy.
Former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty labeled Obama a “declinist” who views America “as one of equals around the world,” rather than a special nation.
“If Brazil can have 5 percent growth, if China can have 5 percent growth, then America can have 5 percent growth,” he added, shrugging off criticism that his own economic projections were impossibly rosy.
Businessman Herman Cain, a political novice, called for eliminating the capital gains tax as a way to stimulate job creation.
Romney stressed his experience as a businessman over 25 years as evidence that he can lead the nation out of a lingering recession.
Said Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, the seventh contender on the stage: “As long as we are running a program that deliberately weakens our currency, our jobs will go overseas. And that’s what’s happening.”
As front-runner of a sort, Romney could well have expected criticism from his rivals.
But Pawlenty, a few feet away on the debate stage, at first sidestepped a chance to repeat his recent criticism of Romney in connection with the Massachusetts health care law that Romney signed as governor. It includes a requirement for residents to purchase coverage, a forerunner of the “individual mandate” that conservatives loath in the new federal law.
“My using `Obamneycare’ was a reflection of the president’s comments,” Pawlenty said, referring to a word he coined in a Sunday interview.
Bachmann—newest to the race—drew one of the loudest rounds of applause Monday night from a partisan debate audience when she predicted that Obama would not win re-election. He is “a one-term president,” she declared.
Instead, the most conservative presidential field in memory all but said what Ronald Reagan once preached—that government was the problem.
Romney said the auto bailout was a mistake, and said more generally, “Instead of thinking in the federal budget what should we cut, we should ask ourselves the opposite question, `What should we keep?’”
Santorum criticized the financial bailout that Presidents George W. Bush and Obama backed, and Bachmann said she had worked in closed-door meetings in Congress to defeat the legislation when it was originally passed.
Pawlenty said politicians had caused the housing price bubble that contributed to the recession, and Paul blamed the recession on the Federal Reserve.
“As long as we do what we’re doing in Washington it’s going to last another 10 years,” Paul said. “What we’re doing now is absolutely wrong,” he said of federal programs meant to support the housing industry.
Even when they differed, the White House hopefuls did so in muted terms.
Santorum said he wholeheartedly supported Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan’s proposal to turn Medicare into a program in which the government subsidizes beneficiaries who would seek coverage from private insurance companies. Under the current system, the government pays doctors and other health care providers directly.
Pawlenty said he would have a plan of his own that shared some features with Ryan’s but would differ on other points.
The program’s finances are perilous, and Republican calls for fundamental change are at the heart of a roiling debate in Congress that is expected to extend into the 2012 campaign for the White House and both houses of Congress.
Cain bluntly told one questioner he was unlikely ever to receive in benefits from the money he has paid in through payroll taxes during his working life.
Gingrich, who was attacked by fellow conservatives when he criticized Ryan’s proposal for being mandatory, said, “When you’re dealing with something as big as Medicare … you better slow down. … If you can’t convince the American people it’s a good idea, maybe it’s not a good idea.”
Gingrich, Bachmann, Romney and Pawlenty all pledged to seek repeal of the health care law that Obama won from Congress earlier in his term. The others on stage hold the same position.
Romney and Paul both said the United States should withdraw U.S. troops from Afghanistan, but disagreed on a timetable.
Romney said that generals in Afghanistan should guide the pullout schedule of American troops based on conditions on the ground. He said the troops should come home as soon as possible under those conditions. Paul said the president must tell generals what to do. He said if he were president he would begin withdrawing troops almost immediately. He said the United States has no purpose fighting a war in Afghanistan.
Former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman did not participate in the event. He is expected to announce his candidacy within a few weeks.







Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
216 Comments
How is Romney considered the front runner? Who besides the wall street crime lords actually like this guy?
And WHERE IS GARY JOHNSON…???
Gary met the requirements CNN posed, but wasn't invited…
I don't think Gary is Presidential material, and he was my Governor for eight years…but he has the right to compete…
Unless the GOP is AFRAID he might actually make sense, and prove to be too difficult to control in the fiscal war that is coming…
Romney…?
Only if it comes down to him and Obammy the Anointed…and I'm gonna make DAMNED SURE the Congress is up to controlling him…
I am hoping Bachmann and Cain will look good.
Romney is a quitter. I can't trust him with my vote.
I'll vote for anyone running against the poser though.
Just remember folks, the Left wants you to believe they are afraid of Romney. He is their internal operative and they would like nothing more than Obama or Romney as POTUS.
America has been fooled in the past with smooth talking politicians, let us make sure it won't happen in this next election.
I won't vote for Romney, the man is slick like a snake.
Let me know how it turns out.
I'll be doing what my candidate is undoubtedly doing tonight: watching the Yankee game.
And they're on the same time as WWE's Monday Night RAW. Wow, that's a tough choice. The GOP Debate on Clinton News Network or RAW….I'll be watching RAW tonight.
Operative? Don´t be silly. Actually, these days you need a smooth talking politician in order to win an election. But he should be saying the right things and be honest about where he stands. Even Romney would be an improvement on Obama but he is too much of a weathervane to be credible as a conservative. He is hardly the first opportunist in politics though. No need to use the language of conspiracy theorists.
Just as McCain was ordained the front runner by the lib media, and then shot down as the weakest candidate so goes Romney…..says I.
Republicans should not allow liberals to set the narrative. The moderator will undoubtedly have a liberal point of view therefore the questions will be in typical biased leftwing fashion. In many instances Republican politicians recognize this ploy when it applies to the economy for example but on anthropogenic global warming many will entertain the fraudulent premise for reasons I cannot fathom. The fact that the scientific illiterates on the Left have to manipulate data, conceal evidence that refutes their claims and intimidate others into accepting this scam should cause any cognitive individual to be highly skeptical. Especially when AGW was pushed by a politician instead of being a consensus reached by scientists worldwide.
The best example I’ve seen of a Republican forcefully setting the record straight in a way that schooled the leftwing reporter and utterly rejected his notions was by Newt Gingrich several years ago [I believe it was at the Republican convention]. It was “buy that guy a beer” good.
Romney is towing the AGW line.
The media picks the supposed front runners. They pick the most milk-toast candidates they can find that have zero chance of winning.
Don't trust the DOA traditional media…. they are the enemy.
Like Palin and her $17,000 vacations.
Though, I will agree that after Palin, Pawlenty and Santorum, Romney is the guy who seems most fake and manufactured.
You assume too much, why is it my comment makes you instantly think I was referring to Palin? I'm actually more of a Bachmann supporter at the moment not that it's really anybodies business but my own.
Or Obama and his 15 million dollar vacation……..on the tax payer dime?
You probably drive a Chevy "Dolt".
That was not my intention. It's just that these sites give her so much attention, I like to play contrarian because I don't think she appeals as broadly as Komrade Obama and I tire of seeing her talk, thus I hope she doesn't run (I think she'd win the Republican nomination).
While I'm a little troubled by her ties and some of her interviews and appearances, I still really respecting her as a person and she and Todd seem like she would be fun to hang out, hunt or fish with.
We need a fiscal conservative in the White House, and Romney has RomneyCare and “I like ethanol subsidies” under his belt. Fu$k. That.
yet Gore can charge $1500 a handshake and I don't see you call him greedy. How about Michelle and her million dollar vacations?
Bachman is my choice from this debate as a straw poll. She's running circles around these establishment duds.
I tire of seeing her talk,
Yeah I was over at the Sarah Palin Post reading some articles —-
OH I AM SORRY I MEANT HE HUFFINGTON POST!
I was naturally confused by the VAST NUMBER OF SARAH PALIN ARTICLES AT THAT WEBSITE.
Gosh if people are tired of seeing Palin perhaps they shouldn't be propping her up in the news day in and day out.
I agree with him meeting requirements, and he ought to be heard. I completely disagree with him on the drug issue though. Every one has their pet peeve, and political leaders using drugs is one of mine.
Inspite of my reservations, however, he has every right to be heard. His absence is a disgrace.
I agree.
I'm in the same vein…when Gary stops being Libertarian, and sticks to Fiscal Reform Policy, he's a tiger…
He turned this state off of deficit spending, and left office after two terms with lower taxes AND a Billion plus in the bank…and NM is NOT a wealthy state by any means…
He could do it in the US too…but that Libertarian crap just SO gets in the way…
We HAVE to get Obammy out…
But we HAVE to hold on to the HOUSE and flip the Senate more…
Romney IS Obammy "lite", no doubt about it…but he's steerable with a solidly Constitutionally Conservative Congress…Obammy isn't, he'll obstruct and defy at every turn…and work the overthrow of the US through subterfuge and deflection…
If we end up with Romney, okay, I'll deal with it…especially with a Conservative Congress…and I would hope the new Congress starts prosecuting the posers of the Obammy Administration…
Obammy is too great a threat to allow another term…and if the House were to flip back, its game over…
the man on the moon, the green men from mars and any other cult follower he makes me sick to my stomach
What's the name of this CNN moderator? Is he the one I hear in the audio who keeps mumbling "ah……ah…..ah…." while a candidate is trying to answer? He doesn't do it to all the cands……..
both supporting cults
Romney is an a$$ an idiot and a bloody RINO
As I would hope from him, trouble is Rove has him as his first target after Palin
I love seeing Pawlenty – a big advocate of the War on Drugs – talking about where government shouldn't reach. Ron Paul makes a scintillating blitzkrieg of the last decade of economic regulation. John King asks Tim Pawlenty if he agrees and Tim talks about his meatpacking experience. Lots of people have experience in the private sector. It doesn't make them experts on it.
Mitt dodged a question about his ideas so he could attack Obama. Really makes me wish Huntsman was here. He has ways of specifically, tactfully attacking Obama.
LMAO, that Muslim trap they're setting for Cain is gonna backfire on the LSM…
He'll gain points, big time on that one.
.
I think he's doing alright tonight, but he still didn't explain why he said he would ask the questions to Muslims and not Christians or Jews. I would explain that there are militant Christians out there (the Seven Mountains/Joel's Army/Wasilla Assembly of God people) and that they would need to pass the same test and be asked the same questions. Same with fringe Jews.
Ultimately, I hope Cain wins if Paul or Huntsman don't but there are some views you should keep to yourself to gain voters. Defeating Obama the President isn't hard, but Obama the Candidate is going to be a force unfortunately.
My point was that Cain was set up to put his foot in his mouth, but WE THE PEOPLE will rally
around him against the media's best attempts to brand him racist.
The LSM may not like his answer, but the peeps loved it. IOW, the LSM shot themselves in the
foot with that one.
.
A few questions for Mr. Barack Obama :
Do you have any friends/comrades/associates who are not self-proclaimed Marxists/Maoists/Weather Underground bombers ?
What are your real feelings about America, and what do you want to do with Presidential powers ?
Sincerely,
Joe the Plumber
Choir practice
What the hell was that little soft bark John King kept doing while the candidates were speaking…
it was quite distracting… I thought he had a Yorkie in his pocket. ; )
Sadly, if it's between him and his exulted Field Marshall-ness of the Special Op,…
I gotta pull the lever for Rrrrrr……Rrrrrrr……Rrrrrrrr….
Rrrrrommeny.
There, I said it.
How obvious was it that CNN has no idea of government's role in the U.S.? Almost every question was framed in a manner that suggested the Federal government is the solution to everything.
I'm proud of all the candidates, because they didn't allow CNN to form the narrative.
It always amazes me just how foreign the concepts of the free market and states' rights are to the big media.
Ron Paul is a documented Kook. Cain is a bit of a wild card, need to see him run a bit to determine if I can support him. Romney is too RINO for me. Bachmann is solid, I like her best of all the "declared" candidates. Pawlenty leaves me luke warm, Santorum might be a solid conservative, but he has personality issues at best. Newt is a UBER-RINO and he needs to just go away.
Allen West is the most exciting candidate I've ever seen, he makes me interested in serving in his administration (pretty nobody else does that).
I like Sarah (especially because the proglodytes and dumbocrats DESPISE her, and so do the RINOs!)
ANY Candidate smart enough to Pick Allen West as his VP is 80% likely to capture my $$$, support, and my Vote.
The sound you heard was John King, trying to politely as possible inform the candidates that their time to respond was over. They used an "honor" system at the debate, and ditched the bells, whistles and lights to tell the candidates their time to answer a question had ended.
Santorum, Pawlenty, and Romney didn't pay much attention, though. These three were the most verbose, and that's why King didn't do this with some of the others.
I'll repeat what I said to another asking the same thing – King was attempting to verbally inform the candidates that their time was up. Overall I think his verbal cues weren't quite as distracting as the bell, lights or whistles they've used in past debates.
ouch………
Jeters hurt………not good
This *Debate*…..Was Controlled by the "Powers that be" "Progressives"..All of the victims/participants recognized it, yet played along with it, without calling them out for what they are, in a Diplomatic way, of course!!! They are all lacking that!!!! This went over as the "Progressive" operative asking how the So-Called Conservative would defend The "Progressive' agenda!!!! They all obliged by answering without questioning!!!
Grades:
Santorum – D- Candidate with most non-specific, rambling non-anwers to questions.
Pawlenty – C- or D Second most rambling, non-answers to direct questions.
Paul – C Some direct answers to questions but nutty come-across @ mother-ship level. past prime.
Cain – C Political thin crust – definitely not deep dish. If Ann Coulter continues to like him so much after tonight I'll be puzzled.
Bachmann – C Pretty; decent, sincere, sweet, but Commander in-Chief? Nope. Her laughter evokes Phyllis Diller.
Romney C / B – Third place for most rambling, non-answers to direct questions. Romney, Pawlenty and Santorum split the award for the most wasted time "waxing eloquent" in campaign-mode with non-substantive answers.
Gingrich – B / A- Answered most questions directly; different, more authoritative tone than the rest. Clear winner IMO.
nah, he had his phone in his pocket takin tweets from Wiener in "leech rehab", lol.
I think after watching Newt in tonight's debate he's definitely back in the race. He answered more questions in an informed, direct, authoritative manner than the rest. He was the clear winner IMO.
I commented my disappointment over Johnson's being snubbed in an another post. You're right – CNN should've let him participate, especially since they let Bachmann, who wasn't declared until tonight on stage.
His job was to try to disrupt any good points that would resonate. Which he tried to do. Not too well, mind you, I think they all did pretty well. Certainly ending up with ANY of those people as President will be a DRAMATIC improvement over the thin skinned manchild from Chicago.
Romney is a marxist dog who hung a scam around the necks of people in the stalinist hellhold of Massachusetts and should be immediately taken out of contention for his crimes against freedom. And why aren't his sons of in Iraq and Afghanistan killing rag heads like normal kids their age?
That's because they are liberal statists. Their worldview is that all good comes from government. Conservatives believe that good comes from God.
A brief comment about the debate format – I didn't find the format satisfying in that each candidate wasn't permitted to answer every question. I think this is unequitable and didn't offer the electorate the opportunity to hear how each candidate would respond to each query.
John King is a dufus. I'd like to see him do his disruptive "ah-ah-ah" to Obama.
TROLL. Go away with your lame arguments. Go and suck some more obamanocchio koolaid.
I respectfully, HIGHLY disagree, except on Santorum. Ha ha ha. He always sounds irritated when he speaks. Look, it's nice if you believe in no abortion at all (I believe that), it's a little ignorant but well-intentioned if you are against gay marriage (I agree with Ron Paul about getting rid of marriage licenses), but it's 2011. Santorum comes across as sanctimonious. My Biblical view of total depravity makes it hard for me to find anything sanctified about most heterosexual marriages. He voted for the war in Iraq (at least he didn't try to re-paint it like Pawlenty tonight; MY GOODNESS), Rick just is on the unpopular end of too many issues. He can't win. End of story. What Pawlenty, Bachmann and Romney failed to do was separate themselves from Rick. They all seemed almost identical on every issue.
I thought Paul did best, by far. I would love for him to be President as a corrective measure. A+.
I'd put Gingrich next. IDENTICAL TO PAUL in that, even if you'd never vote for him, you cannot deny that he far outperformed many of the others on the stage. Gingrich sounded like you were talking to him at a bar and he was the expert on so many issues. He was warm, smart, and shifted so coolly from relaxed to stern. I'd likely vote third party if Gingrich was the best shot against Obama but I'd love to talk to him about changing his war beliefs to add a good VP candidate. B+
Herman Cain entered the night as the only other guy I would vote for – since Huntsman declined – but he missed a chance to soften his Muslim criticism. He needed to highlight the fact that there are dangerous ideologies that emerge from Christian and Judaism camps. Are they Biblical? No. Are they as widespread as Islamic terrorism? No. But, Herman got me SO HIGH with his announcement and the weeks afterward, only to try to reverse that momentum with his comments on legislation, Muslims and gays. You gotta pick and choose your battles and try to win over as many as possible. He needs to stop talking about solutions and start giving them. I still love and respect him but he's almost the opposite of Paul on foreign policy chops. He rarely is as thorough as Paul. Other than the Muslim fumbling, I liked everything else he said even if it was pretty surface level and he is very assertive. He acquitted himself hardcore on TARP, getting incisive and attacking the President's union buddies. C+
Romney did OK, Pawlenty seemed out of touch with reality, and these are my Bachmann thoughts:
She shouldn't have announced on the show. Her joke about France fell flat. She had baggage – anti-gay, Zionist – that she didn't dispel which, I understand, it didn't come up. But then she's talking about government's reach. Uh, you voted for the Iraq War. Ya know? And the Patriot Act. She has zero credibility about government reach and the Constitution.
CNN's ratings just got a blip they'll never see again. I feel dirty from have to watch them demagogue the issues with their slanted, accusatory questions. Just about as bad as Juan William's disgraceful behavior on Fox.
While I didn't see the entire debate, I feel Bachman, Cain and Pawlenty were the most poised and gave the best answers. As much as I loathe the Fig (newtion), he was able to make a couple good zingers too.
I totally agree. Good catch, I kinda forgot about that but it would have helped expose how little some of these people differentiate (Romney, Pawlenty, Gingrich, Bachmann and Santorum), making you wonder why they are all running. Paul mentioned this at the end, that he didn't get to hear their views on the Federal Reserve (self-deprecating) or the preemptive wars.
Independent thumbs up to you, buddy.
Can't have no damn outsiders barging in on us elites!
TROLL.
My Toe Jam is better Presidential material then Otraitor. Go ahead and knock the Republicans all you want I for one don't trust any politician. But after seeing what the Muslim traitor in the White House is doing to destroy this country I will vote in anything to get rid of him.
I think they could easily borrow a prop from a hollywood movie and have 'cones of silence' that drop down over the candidate when the time allotment has expired. It would shut them up and be funny as hell when they keep talking under the cone! It could become a hit reality tv show….
Muslims are old t is OK to lie to infidels to further the cause of Islam… the telling of untruths is no a tenant of the other faiths you mentioned.
Who cares what you think you were stupid enough to vote for the prompter reading Soros puppet. My pet Yorkie has more common sense then you, Away with you back to Daily Kos.
I can make a much better argument for gays in the military or women in combat than I can muslims in the military.
And I disagree with all three…
Cain has made clear his stance on no Muslims on his cabinet s they are religiously bound to swear allegiance to Islam over all over things… and that means they are ordered to lie to further their faith………….
Why would any Republican would go on the Communist News Network for any debate. The moderators are Marxists and the station was started by a total leftist nutcase Ted Turner. But the Redumblicans just can't pass up taking it up the Keister from any Marxist. They like pain.
Welcome to the world of progressivism.
If the GOP nominates Romney, my vote stays home or goes third party.
Tell us who you really fear?
I voted for McCain/Palin, unfortunately (I won't vote for a candidate with that war policy again).
I have never been to Daily Kos. I think Media Matters is a joke and any time someone links me there, I immediately groan because – if I want to debate them on the issue – I'm going to have to do some research to explain why the article is wrong before I even get to my argument.
Well at least FOX has a Juan. In fact I had respect for they man at least he seemed honest in his opinions. Until tonight when he defended Weiner. Come on Weiner is a lying sack of garbage. Even if he was a Redumblican I would want him out of there. I need to purge this honor out of me to fight the Marxists it is a weakness we need to overcome when fighting the scum on the left. They have no honor or morals.
Read my posts. Thank you.
It seems to me that if you put Newt's brain in Bachmann's body (and I do think Bachmann is almost as smart but focuses too much on Israel and invoking God), it would be the best the preemptive war candidates have to offer.
As is, if the neoconservatives and Bush-backing Tea Partiers want to win, I think their best chance is to get Gingrich, Santorum, and Pawlenty to drop out and support either Romney or Bachmann. I hate the way Romney and Bachmann make these flimsy digs at Obamacare and Obama. They think that by being vicious and hyperbolic, they are really crushing him. Gary Johnson and Ron Paul make stronger arguments by going into specifics about Libya, the economy and health care and they have the small government credentials that Romney and Bachmann don't have.
As for the non-interventionist candidates, I think Jon Huntsman is the guy but he has to climb over a lot of candidates and he isn't going to get Tea Party help. The best bet may be for Herman Cain to sit down and make a bribe with Ron Paul to get him to be his running mate. If this happened, imagine the intelligent, PUNISHING criticism from Gary Johnson and Ron Paul campaigning FOR Herman Cain, AGAINST the social conservatives in the primary, then AGAINST Obama next year. I pray something like this would happen.
I knew what he was doing MW, I was poking fun at his obviously ineffectual method of cutting the
participants off.
Are you always so serious?;-D
Happy Trials!!!
.
That is EXACTLY what we cannot do. I loathe the weasly peerick as well, but, getting obamanocchio and about 15 dem senators out the door is objective number one. We have a better chance of getting the government to do what we want then, and, IF romney ended up being our guy, I would cast the vote for him. We simply cannot let the traitorous bastard in for another term.
I have, thank you. Agitator/propagandist.
"And I disagree with all three…"
Me TOO!!!
#5900
05/13/11
I support Huntsman, so I'm a bit afraid of SOME OF the Tea Party voters in South Carolina, New Hampshire and Iowa who I've seen intimate their nuggets of "wisdom" about the Republican candidates.
They are so zeroed in on getting an ultra-social conservative who knocks Obama (Herman Cain, who I love, and Bachmann, Pawlenty and Palin, who I will never vote for) but isn't too big on specific solutions or foreign policy acumen. I admire the zeal of these voters but getting someone the Republican nomination means nothing. And you need someone who STANDS on their record. The dumbest faction of the Tea Party are the ones who cannot explain why they talk so much about a return to the Constitution yet love candidates who supported the bailouts, Bridge to Nowhere, the Patriot Act, gay marriage bans, and the war in Iraq.
I've said it at least twice on here that I think Palin would win the nomination if she ran but I don't see any way she gets elected. So, no, I'm not afraid of her. I am afraid of ignorant voters and of four more years. You're free to disagree, and part of me hopes you're right because I think I'd rather have Palin than Obama.
I guess calling him Komrade Obama revealed my undying thirst for his Kool-Aid.
Why even have any of those seven candidates up there tonight? If you don't support Palin, you must be an Obama voter. Sure that isn't Kool-Aid in your hand?
Taquiyya…..troll.
Based upon your posts, it seems quite evident that you are an agitator/propagandist. You are a paid TROLL. Buh-bye
Gingrich? Where were you in 1995 when he folded like a lawn chair?
Good point. With such a large field, I'd rather hear fewer questions but give everyone a chance to answer.
Sarah does it even better. She doesn't attack Soetoro, she just tells the blunt truth about him and leaves it at that.
P.S. The Huntsman angle isn't going to work anymore than the Romney angle is.
States having rights is foreign and it should remain that way. For they have but delegated powers, while people, Citizens, have rights.
Indeed.
Contenders? How about "entrants" instead? Romney or Santorum have a chance – the others? Not so much…
Me? I want Sarah…
So they all agree that obamacare should be repealed. Coming from Gingrich, Romney and Pawlenty (and also Huntsman), those words ring hollow in my ears. They've all supported a healthcare mandate of one kind or another in the past. It shows that they don't oppose obamacare because the idea of government control and mandates (i.e. force) is wrong in principle, but because they think they can do it better.
Beware of RINO's in Tea Party clothing. People, especially politicians, will often speak words that are in conflict with their true intentions or beliefs; but they rarely take actions that conflict with their intentions of beliefs. Actions speak louder than words. Believe what they do, not what they say.
exactly why did all these candidates agree to a debate hosted by left-wing cnn ? why do i doubt that we will be seeing the first dem debate hosted by foxnews ? the format was designed to trivialize the candidates with its flashing tweets, constant grunting of the moderator, and questions that ranged from biased to the ridiculous 'coke or pepsi' variety.
despite all that though, i never for a nano-second had a gut feeling of "now THAT's who i want as my president".from anyone tonight. it's very dis-heartening that 'the best we have' are either lackluster, certifiably nuts, completely inexperienced, or a 'social issues' throwback. this election should be a cakewalk for the oposition to our failed president but all i saw onstage was a panel of losers. how frustrating and sad ! unless there's somebody waiting in the wings that can inspire and energize this race, we may be doomed to another four years of barack.
he displays the same 'common sense' as that 'the rent is too damn high' fellow…and has as many solutions.
I want the democrats to win. This whole process is a waste of time. The titanic hit the iceberg. A switch in captain seats is not going to do any good.
Democrats will go out of their way to lose in 2012. Its the same good cop/bad cop garbage over and over. The democrats will bail, crawl back into their coffins and let the republicans come in AFTER the entire economy is trashed and the country is bankrupt then pin the whole thing on the republicans. NOBODY wants to make the hard choices like cutting welfare, medicare and SS but it has to be done. The democrats certainly won't. Instead they will play the sweet angels who 'tried to help everyone" while the republicans try to do the dirty work.
Its like a mom and dad. Mom gives the kids ice scream and spoils them rotten but steps aside to let dad dish out the spankings. Dad is unpopular while mom is the sweet angel.
No more. When this country collapses like Greece I want people to see who was in charge when it happened.
Mark my words, the democrats will THROW the election to get the heck out of dodge before Rome burns.
it was, supposedly, an alternative to using a light or a bell to signal 'time's up'…except that he began his grunting after the first couple of words out of a candidate's mouth which exposed this method as nothing more than another way to trivialize and cast a negative light on anything said by the participants in the debate. if one of the candidates would have called him on it, they would have had my vote… but alas, for some reason we keep walking into these traps like lambs to the slaughter.
What's MW?
romney is obamas white half think obamacare romneycare they both beleive in global warming so expect cap n trade fro both
Yes, anyone but Obama. Having said that, at this point it doesn´t have to be Romney. He rubs many people the wrong way, not just because he isn´t conservative (I think he is in many ways) but because he is too eager, too willing to say anything and do to get elected. People see through that (I hope).
Compare these two governors: Romney went to Iowa and praised ethanol subsidies, which we know he knows are stupid. Pawlently didn´t. Both Romney and Pawlenty governed blue states. Pawlenty governed far more conservatively and he got reelected. I don´t know who will be the best candidate but that alone tells me we do not need Romney.
At first I thought King was thinking too much about Weinergate. There were a few missed opportunities for all the candidates to pile on Obama and his administration, but all and all I thought the debate was pretty good. Sure wish the answer to the last question about if you could pick one of the other candidates for your administration they all should have responded; “Anyone on this stage would do a better job then President Obama, and that includes you John.”
Indeed, I share your sentiment about "Anybody but Obama". Romney might look good to some, but I just don't think he has the guts or the gusto. A Cain/Bachmann ticket would be truly effective and, in my opinion, unstoppable. Remember, as Rush says, Obama isn't just beatable, he's LANDSLIDABLE.
ANYBODY BUT OBAMA. Even if the office of president were vacant for four years, that would be preferable to another Obama term. I myself am backing Herman Cain, but if I have to hold my nose and vote for Romney just to keep Obama away from another term, then I will do so. If Obama wins another term, I really don't have confidence that our country can survive.
Draft Col Allen West
America needs to be led by warriors , not by lawyers
Or partnered with Pelosi on Global Warming!
No Newt!
You must be logged in to post a comment.