Tonight's CNN GOP Debate 1/19/2012

[JoeChalupa]

With the field narrowed down to four there will be more time for them to go at it and this is the final chance, IMHO, for them to go after Romney because after Saturday we may just see Santorum be the next to go.
Well Newt's open marriage issue come up or will Newt stay after Romney to show his tax returns?
Who the hell knows what Paul will say tonight and Santorum will have to pull out all the stops as this is his final stance to stay alive in this race.
Mitt has to have a much better performance to seal the deal which is already sealed.

[SA210]

With the field narrowed down to four there will be more time for them to go at it and this is the final chance, IMHO, for them to go after Romney because after Saturday we may just see Santorum be the next to go.
Well Newt's open marriage issue come up or will Newt stay after Romney to show his tax returns?
Who the hell knows what Paul will say tonight and Santorum will have to pull out all the stops as this is his final stance to stay alive in this race.
Mitt has to have a much better performance to seal the deal which is already sealed.

And that's all it will be, a performance. Does nothing to help America though. But the millions will be impressed by a performance.

[JoeChalupa]

And that's all it will be, a performance. Does nothing to help America though. But the millions will be impressed by a performance.

If his performance helps him win the nomination it may very well help America. No?

[SA210]

If his performance helps him win the nomination it may very well help America. No?

Yes, it will help us deteriorate faster.

[JoeChalupa]

Gingrich just pwned the moderator!! Wow!

[SA210]

I respect Gingrich's answer to that (only because they have balls to say things like this when Dems don't). That's how Dems should have acted when Edwards' affair broke. Not that i condone cheating, because I despise it, but the issue takes over way more important things. It is pretty hypocritical though that Gingrich can run for Pres doing what Edwards did, but yet Edwards has been shunned by his own party.

Dems = no balls

[redskinfan]

Gingrich just pwned the moderator!! Wow!

Whether Newt likes it or not his scandal is an issue it speaks loudly about his character and lack thereof.

[fraga]

http://www.nypost.com/rw/nypost/2011/12/31/news/web_photos/31.1n004.newt1.C--300x300.jpg

I am appalled!!!

[JoeChalupa]

I'm just sayin' that Gingrich nailed the response. Mitt is doing well. The message from the GOP is loud and clear. They have the upper hand without a doubt.

[redskinfan]

I'm just sayin' that Gingrich nailed the response. Mitt is doing well. The message from the GOP is loud and clear. They have the upper hand without a doubt.

He only nailed it because of the audience reaction, if this had been a Presidential debate with both Dems and Repubs it would not have gone off like that.

[JoeChalupa]

He only nailed it because of the audience reaction, if this had been a Presidential debate with both Dems and Repubs it would not have gone off like that.

Well, I must admit that I did "oooooohhhh" when he responded.

[JoeChalupa]

Santorum going at Romney for romneycare.

[SA210]

Newt and Santorum going at each other this whole darn debate. In the meantime Romney gets away scott free and Ron Paul is ignored.

[SA210]

I think I saw a tumbleweed roll by Ron Pauls podium

[Pelicans78]

I thought Paul had his best debate. The reason why? No foreign policy question. He actually owned Santorum on the Pro-Life question which was supposed to be Santorum's strength. Really, the big reason why Paul did so well was due to the lack of foreign policy's question which is his weakness in this bible-thumping, war-mongering state.

[Pelicans78]

I thought Santorum didn't do enough to make up ground on Gingrich. But Gingrich also didn't help himself tonight with the amnesty issue, but he did enough to gain some ground with Romney who just doesn't debate well enough to please these voters, and Newt did more than enough to bury Santorum.

The question about Paul is how much of the undecided voters he will get after doing so well tonight.

[SA210]

I thought Paul did well, but they hardly even let him speak.

[cheguevara]

Comrade Hornets nails it.

Paul had his best debate even though he was blatantly ignored by fucking CNN but his people had his back. Great to see.

Gingrich is a snake but if you underestimate him, you will be toast. Most dangerous guy out there but do ppl really want him as president and commander in chief?

Romney was terrible, worst part of the night was his laugh after answering the question whether he will follow his dad's footsteps and release multiple tax returns "maybe. he hehe he he" El Che switched the channel in embarrassment.

El Che predicts an ubber close SC. Gingrich wins and the rest are a 3 way tie

[Jacob1983]

The crowd booed when Ron Paul was ignored on one question so the moderator caved and let him answer the question.

[Pelicans78]

I agree with El Che. Newt wins, Romney second, and Paul comes in a respectable 3rd which knocks Santorum out of the race.

Newt would be a dangerous president. His ego would be out of control and who knows what would happen.

[Jacob1983]

If you are a Ron Paul supporter, you wouldn't want to post on that hippie liberal board that I post on. They can't stand him

Here are some of their posts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gray Ghost (View Post) (http://www.fanforum.com/f117/u-s-political-discussion-thread-7-~-so-gop-who-will-63037403/#post60881863)
So do you support Obama's current plan to basically continue nation building and policing the world that Bush started?

Look, you'll find no disagreement from me that Iraq was a wretchedly awful mistake that cost too many lives on both sides for the want of some sense and humanity. However, isolationism on the part of the world power like America with the ideals it claims to represent, is not a defensible path either. Speaking from vested interest, would you be content for someone else to do perform the nation building wholly unopposed, with consequences that would serve both the US and the subject country at the time ill?


What is your view of NPR out of interest, would you term9nate all forms of assistance that it receives?


I myself find look back on the past with a wistful eye, particularly the sense of community which is fast vanishing from society it seems to me. But you can't just compare the demands and duties of 18th Century people and government with today.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Cristofle (View Post) (http://www.fanforum.com/f117/u-s-political-discussion-thread-7-~-so-gop-who-will-63037403/#post60882335)
I don't have to "admit" anything, because I wasn't one who hyped Obama to the extreme. All politicians are somewhat of a disappointment, lol. I usually vote for the lesser of two evils, and for the forseeable future, that's going to be exclusively from the Democratic party because I haven't seen a Republican candidate from anywhere in the national party I'd vote for (it'll be a cold day in hell before I vote for Bobby Jindal or ESPECIALLY Jeb Bush, he's every bit as bad as his brother).

Tell me about it, an MP who i respected whilst in opposition, went down in my estimations in but a matter of a few short months once in government and ultimately had to resign amid a scandal.

I was quite the cynic of the Obama hype back in 08 and got roundly criticised for it, but he's the only one i'd considr giving my vote to at the minute [If i was eligible that is. http://images.fanforum.com/smilies/wink.gif].

[Jacob1983]

Here is from another uppity liberal bitch poster


Well, the economy is actually, if not lightning fast (which I never expected) on the rise- unemployment rates are down, job creation is up. I don't see the Republicans- Ron Paul included- suggesting any realistic plans that are any better (I say realistic because I think Ron Paul lives in his own universe- the FDA certainly needs to be reformed, but cutting it out altogether and depending only on free market is absolutely ludicrous and will kill people). And social issues do still matter to me, and Obama is the only one I'd consider voting for on that front.

I don't have to "admit" anything, because I wasn't one who hyped Obama to the extreme. All politicians are somewhat of a disappointment, lol. I usually vote for the lesser of two evils, and for the forseeable future, that's going to be exclusively from the Democratic party because I haven't seen a Republican candidate from anywhere in the national party I'd vote for (it'll be a cold day in hell before I vote for Bobby Jindal or ESPECIALLY Jeb Bush, he's every bit as bad as his brother).

ETA: LOLOL, this is kind of embarrassing. Colbert isn't even seriously running, he's just making a valid point about super PACs.

[Jacob1983]

So since Ron Paul is pro-life, he hates women according to these dumbasses.


Sorry for the rant but I mean, you're really gonna bitch about shit like abortion and gay marriage when the economy is about to completely fuck itself?

Gay people getting their way and killing unborn babies are more important than fixing the economy and job creation?

[Winehole23]

Sorry for the rant but I mean, you're really gonna bitch about shit like abortion and gay marriage when the economy is about to completely fuck itself?Who was bitching about abortion and gay marriage? :lol

[Winehole23]

You can go away with yourself, too. You're not one bit sorry for the rant.

[AFBlue]

I thought Paul had his best debate. The reason why? No foreign policy question. He actually owned Santorum on the Pro-Life question which was supposed to be Santorum's strength. Really, the big reason why Paul did so well was due to the lack of foreign policy's question which is his weakness in this bible-thumping, war-mongering state.

He didn't get a direct foreign policy question, but he did allude to all the money we spend overseas as a response to another question. I also thought his response to the Apple question was peculiar.

[boutons_deux]

"FDA certainly needs to be reformed, but cutting it out altogether and depending only on free market is absolutely ludicrous and will kill people"

corrupted/captured FDA already kills and maims 100Ks (OBL would love to run the FDA), and BigPharma will not stop trying get a shield law.

[JoeChalupa]

So Gingrich came out on top?

[boutons_deux]

Noot not "on top". He was in a open-marriage sandwich with his last two ladies.

[elbamba]

I'm just sayin' that Gingrich nailed the response. Mitt is doing well. The message from the GOP is loud and clear. They have the upper hand without a doubt.

I knew he would answer the question like that and flip it on the media because Newt does not take responsibility for his actions. However, I thought the question was fair. King's question was whether or not he wanted to comment on the interview. Its not like he asked some leading question full of implication.

I think that it was a good answer for the crowd and maybe a good answer for SC, but remember that Newt's support with white males is 2-1 over women in SC. He will not win points with women for his response. If he cannot win over women to come and vote for him, many of whom are independents, he stands no chance in Florida and beyound. He might win a few southern states, but nothing past that.

[elbamba]

So Gingrich came out on top?

I think yes. I will not hide that I am a Romney supporter. I wanted to give Santorum a chance because I think that he is a stronger candidate than most of the liberal group here gives him credit for. But his answer on right to work and his failure to acknowledge his own hypocracy when he attacks Romney has made me tune him out.

I thoguht Romney had more substance but Newt had more crowd pleasing one-liners. I thought Romeny really nailed it when Newt tries to take credit for creating millions of jobs. I liked that he informed the audience that although his father was succesful, Romney independently made his wealth. I liked his pivot on taxes, turning the issue into an attack on success. That will be his only way to beat Obama is if he can get people to buy that argument.

I did not like his immediate answer to the tax return question. Despite Santorum and Paul not releasing their returns, it matters for Romney because he is very wealthy. Using the "maybe" line came off as a bad joke. He should have said: "yes I will release my taxes, it will be in April and we are going to release taxes for this year and the past 5." He then should have hammered away at why its a non-issue and why the democrates want to punish success and divide voters against those who work hard and have success.

I get why he doesn't release them. I have a semi-complex tax return and I have a small fraction of the wealth of Romney. Romney has to know and be prepared with a solid answer for anything that appears in his tax. Even if it is something that is legal, he does not want to get a question that he cannot answer. I think his team will prep him to death on his returns and be ready to release them in April.

[boutons_deux]

"Romney independently made his wealth"

He was born rich, he grew up connected, got into Harvard, more connections. Hired a bunch of legal/financial aces, got some investors, and started lying his way into buyouts. The objective was to make money at any cost to anything else, not create jobs, which was NEVER Willard Gecko's objective.

[boutons_deux]

So this bogus media event has convinced people which man would make the best Prez?

[cheguevara]

Romney might be scared of the Mormon tithing thing. He is supposed to give at least 10% of his income to the Mormon Church to buy their way into the Kingdom of heaven.

I heard he gave 5+ million already to them in past 5 years. Will he give 10% of the presidential salary to the church? that would mean us taxpayers are giving money to the Mormon Church to reserve Mittens a seat next to the Almighty. :lol

Biblethumpers might not like that

[boutons_deux]

Forget the Primary: All Republican Candidates Are Unpopular


This New York Times story on the latest New York Times/CBS poll suggests that Obama is faltering with independents, portending electoral vulnerability. But their own data show that all the remaining Republican candidates are unpopular with voters nationally. No wonder Republican primary voters continue to be dissatisfied with their choices.

Romney has been popular in the past, according to pollster.com's own tracking of all public polling. Up until a few weeks ago, Romney held steady at roughly even favorable/unfavorable. But now Romney's unfavorables are increasing, with his favorables struggling to keep pace.

Gingrich, as I wrote before, has never been popular. In the latest New York Times/CBS poll, half of voters nationally are unfavorable toward Gingrich. This recent CNN/ORC poll shows close to 60-percent unfavorable toward Gingrich. Familiarity has bred contempt.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/margie-omero/forget-the-primary-all-re_b_1217308.html?ref=daily-brief?utm_source=DailyBrief&utm_campaign=012012&utm_medium=email&utm_content=BlogEntry&utm_term=Daily%20Brief

[elbamba]

Romney might be scared of the Mormon tithing thing. He is supposed to give at least 10% of his income to the Mormon Church to buy their way into the Kingdom of heaven.

I heard he gave 5+ million already to them in past 5 years. Will he give 10% of the presidential salary to the church? that would mean us taxpayers are giving money to the Mormon Church to reserve Mittens a seat next to the Almighty. :lol

Biblethumpers might not like that

That is actually a really good point. I think people will want to use his faith against him will see it as a negative. I think most independent minded voters will be impressed that he lives by the teachings of his faith.

I would also make the argument, if I were Romney, that I give charitably to organizations that I trust to most effectively use my money. Certainly anyone with the ability to fact check can see the humanitarian services the Mormon Church carries out throughout the world.

There will certainly be many that use it against him. Especially because the Mormon church is a weathy institution. But I don't think it will hurt him anymore than the Kennedy's giving to the Catholic Church.

[boutons_deux]

Noot's uncontrolled dicking around got him, campaigning to be Prez, into a tawdry, humiliating "he said-she said".

His defense was as believable as her claim.

Knowing what a moral, ethical scumbag Noot is, her "let me fuck you both" claim is more believable.

[cheguevara]

Romney Underwhelms, Paul Surprises

"I think Ron Paul did better than I expected him to," Boccabello said. "He actually came across as being pretty cogent."

Debbie Jones of Isle of Palms, a former supporter of Texas Gov. Rick Perry's bid for president, also seemed swayed by Paul's debate performance.

"I'm surprised that I liked some of the things Dr. Ron Paul said," Jones said. "He seemed that he would take the country in the opposite direction."

She added that the other candidates seemed "middle of the road." She said she's currently undecided, but her vote will go to either Paul or Santorum.

http://standrews.patch.com/articles/romney-underwhelms-paul-surprises-at-debate

[JoeChalupa]

Ron Paul? Hell, I almost forgot he was even at the debate last night.

[ChumpDumper]

Middle of the road voter for Paul or Santorum?

:lol

[elbamba]

Ron Paul? Hell, I almost forgot he was even at the debate last night.

I thought it was his strongest debate. I don't think he would run third party because it would destroy Rand Paul. But he could completely destroy the republican party if he ran independent.

[Winehole23]

that's sort of why I think he won't do it

[boutons_deux]

how would running as 3rd party vs as independent differ in splitting the right-wing vote?

why would a person vote for Paul as one candidate but not the other?

[JoeChalupa]

I remember more of Santorum's remarks than I do of Paul. But I was doing housework and cooking also so I may have missed some if not most of Paul's responses.

[AFBlue]

I thought Santorum was sharp and unrelenting in his attacks on Romney and especially Gingrich.

[AFBlue]

No doubt he was the winner.

[spursncowboys]

that's sort of why I think he won't do it

Rand Paul has a pretty safe district. I doubt it will hurt him at all. I think he realizes that he will be more powerful and able to actually do more if he did it within the Republican party. However, he has to realize that this is going to be his last presidential election he can run, at his age. He needs to start thinking about the marketing aspect of his branch of the republicans. come up with a catchy name brand. Try and steal some of the tea party and maybe blue dogs and start bringing up others to keep his wing going after he is unable to be a national figure. However if he is just on a power trip then he will go in a third party and marginalize everything he has built (Perot, Buchannan)

[AFBlue]

I thought it was his strongest debate. I don't think he would run third party because it would destroy Rand Paul. But he could completely destroy the republican party if he ran independent.

I'm honestly not sure if Paul as a third-party candidate hurts one party more than another. He gets a large segment of youth and independent voters, which went to Obama in the last election.

[Pelicans78]

The polls show if Paul ran as a 3rd party against Obama and Romney, then Obama would win easily.

[Drachen]

The polls show if Paul ran as a 3rd party against Obama and Romney, then Obama would win easily.

But don't you think it would be worth it? I think that he could pull enough of the vote to get federal election funds in the next election. This could be the beginning of the end of the two party hegemony. This is important to me. I have voted third party in every presidential election since I turned 18 to try to make this happen. Paul has the ability to garner >5% of the vote. I think Nader was the closest in 2000 with like 3%.

Full Disclosure: I would probably be less likely to do this if I lived in a swing state.

[cheguevara]

Paul would get 10%+ as 3rd party. It would be Armageddon for both Dems, Reps. Not gonna happen.

Paul would get assassinated before he tries to go 3rd party

[boutons_deux]

Most Taboo Topic at the GOP Debates: George W. Bush

George W. Bush? Who?

You’d think that the last Republican president — remember, that two-termer who’s only been out of the White House a scant three years — might come up frequently.

Not so. In fact, George W. Bush is the invisible man of the GOP race, the all-but-forgotten Ghost of Administrations Past. He’s its “He Who Should Not be Named,” in Harry Potter parlance.

most Americans still hold Bush responsible for the sorry state of the American economy.

From Dems’ perspective, there’s value in reminding voters that Bush is responsible for nearly all of the messes Obama is trying to clean up, and nearly all of the Republican candidates are eager to bring return to Bush-era policies — only this time, they’ll be even more right wing.

From journalists’ perspective, there’s no reason to play along with the GOP’s willingness to erase Bush from the larger discussion. Indeed, there are some pretty straightforward questions the Republican field should be forced to answer: Do you believe the Bush presidency was a success? How would your agenda differ from Bush’s if you’re elected?

http://www.alternet.org/newsandviews/article/765355/the_most_taboo_topic_at_the_gop_debates%3A_george_ w._bush/#paragraph5

Repugs betting their stupid, ignorant, racist, pissed-off base of Fox watchers forget how horrendously, murderously bad is Repug willful and/or incompetent mis-governance. Actually, it's a damn good bet.

[spursncowboys]

If Paul ran, all it meant is that no one would get the popular vote. Since there are
more states that don't give all their electorates to one candidate, then maybe someone doesn't even get to the magical number and therefore it would go to the house, right? Or Paul could trade his electors to the candidate that agrees to more of his platform. Is that legal or have they made laws agianst all that?

FWIW I rather have Obama as a president with a majority GOP Congress.

[cheguevara]

FWIW I rather have Obama as a president with a majority GOP Congress.

what has that accomplished the last 2 years?

[Wild Cobra]

FWIW I rather have Obama as a president with a majority GOP Congress.
As long as the GOP retains one house, Obama can't harm this nation any more than anyone else. I still want to see him out though. The democrats proved how destructive they are with the House, Senate, and Presidency.

[The Batman]

As long as the GOP retains one house, Obama can't harm this nation any more than anyone else. I still want to see him out though. The democrats proved how destructive they are with the House, Senate, and Presidency.

Who currently has control of the house?

[AFBlue]

The polls show if Paul ran as a 3rd party against Obama and Romney, then Obama would win easily.

Link?

[Jacob1983]

If Ron Paul ran as a 3rd party candidate, how well would he do?
I think he would do better than Ralph Nader in 2000 but probably not as good as Ross Perot in 1992. It would be cool if Ron Paul did it. He would piss off a lot of people if he ran as a 3rd party candidate.

[Wild Cobra]

If Ron Paul ran as a 3rd party candidate, how well would he do?
I think he would do better than Ralph Nader in 2000 but probably not as good as Ross Perot in 1992. It would be cool if Ron Paul did it. He would piss off a lot of people if he ran as a 3rd party candidate.

Perot lost a great deal of his support when he was out of the race and in again. I wonder how much better he could have done if he didn't portray himself as yellow.

[JoeChalupa]

Another one tonight and Romney better step up to the plate and knock it out of the park. Gingrich will be ready with some good one-liners to keep his supporters excited.

[boutons_deux]

one-liners make great national and foreign policy

[SA210]

one-liners make great national and foreign policy

That's been my point exactly

[boutons_deux]

They won't talking about REAL PROBLEMS like the job creation or the mortgage crisis.