Reply With Quote
Thought Ron Paul took a hit with his Timothy McVeigh comment. Newt nailed him on that one.
I think some of these guys done ed up by actually taking a side on Racial Profiling...the media is gonna have a field day with this...
Thought Ron Paul took a hit with his Timothy McVeigh comment. Newt nailed him on that one.
Santorum has been doubling down on his Radical Muslims...
Last edited by fraga; 11-22-2011 at 10:09 PM.
I think Perry has had his best debate, but that's not saying much. Still not a strong debater.
Paul needs to use his big picture message more when it comes to foreign policy. He hasn't done that yet. Getting involved in narrow points which lets his compe ion off of the hook.
Newt is towing the party line and doing it calmly. I think he will get a big jump from this debate.
Bachmann does her usual campaigning while making a point. Annoying and bersome. Time for her to get out of this race.
Not much from Romney tonight. Didn't do enough to blow the lead yet.
Huntsman is basically a younger Ron Paul.
Cain hasn't done much to impress. His lack of experience shows.
I think Paul will take a hit in the polls unless he finds a way to counteract Newt. That's his big compe ion for number two.
Holy crap if I was Perry I would punch that stupid smirk off of Mit's face everytime Perry talks.
its like romney didnt exist for a while. he has really fallen off he didnt get much questions. paul just made his fans happy but thats about it. surprised newt moved away from the right on immigration. maybe this is the 2nd place gaffe that has haunted the past candidates. the tea party side of the party will not stand for that type of language, perry got booed when he tried the same. romney is all in on the right on immigration.
I'm not going anywhere!!!
I agree with DJ about Paul just appeasing the fan base. I think the Patriot Act part will hurt him more than anything else. Also, he really needs to bring more substance now instead of just his usual Libertarian stuff.
i don't really see what more Paul needs to say. His foreign and monetary policies are pretty straighforward. By voting for Paul you are voting disestablishment about as clear as it can get.
Huge reductions in domestic subsidies, military, foreign, and law enforcement spending. The dissolution of most major federal ins utions including the fed, fda, dea, nasa, ss, and medicare.
We know exactly what Paul wants to do. Can you say anything remotely about the other candidates?
Rick Perry = GWB. I think he will do basically what his hawkish advisers tell him just like Bush did.
Bachmann. Tows the social conservative party line. Not sure what else she stands for.
Gingrich changes his mind often. Unpredictable.
Cain has no clue. That's what he stands for.
Huntsman is similar to Paul for the most part other than some foreign policy issues.
Romney. I think he's similar to most Republicans now, but probably a better candidate and the one who has the best chance to beat Obama. Still, not sure what he really stands for.
Here's what I don't get... why do conservatives think Ron Paul is crazy? He's for reducing the debt, and he's for doing that by gutting numerous government ins utions. What don't think like about him?
Romney's for whatever you're paying him to be for today.
That he'll probably try to tear down Medicare, SS and the Military. Obviously, it will never happen with Congress in his way. But let's be frank here, when it comes to cutting spending, the GOP is just as averse to touch those programs as much as the Dems.
Huh? The GOP loves the idea of taking down Medicare, as long as it doesn't touch the baby boomers.
There's always a "but". Which is the reason they're all talk but no walk when it comes to voting. I also think Paul is simply for completely getting rid of it, no exceptions.
The Ryan plan passed the house by a huge margin.
Well aware it wouldn't pass the senate.
Here's the problem:
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner...-andrew-stiles
I thought WH posted a similar poll not that long ago.
What the people want doesn't matter an ounce in this country.
That I agree with
But back to the point, Paul scares people on the right as much as anywhere else in the political spectrum.
Huntsman won the debate last night, IMO. Newt's stance on immigration isn't going to go over well with conservatives. Bachman did well and put Perry in his place. Cain is lost and will soon be forgotten and the Secret Service can protect a legitimate candidate. Paul was libertarian all the way. Perry didn't make up any ground. Santorum was almost forgotten.
http://www.theamericanconservative.c...ial-democrats/It certainly is a myth that Republicans lost in 2006 or 2008 because they were too big government, but small-government ideology, which was neither preached nor practiced then, can hardly be blamed either. Lest Ponnuru forget, the doomed Republican Congress in 2006 staked its re-election on a bundle of legislative nonsense called the “American Values Agenda,” which included attacks on online gambling and homeowners’ associations that limited displays of American flags. The GOP wanted a replay of 2004 — dupe the evangelicals and values voters into supporting the party of war and Wall Street.
The truth that hardly gets spoken is that certain Republican pundits who consider themselves social conservatives have a vision for this country that amounts to a hybrid of European-style Christian Democracy and Chilean semi-privatization of the welfare state, along with a values-hyping foreign policy delegated to outright neoconservatives and a managerial-therapeutic approach to the poor. The Bush administration, especially in its first term, was the closest these pundits ever came to getting what they want. And it was a strategic, fiscal, and moral disaster for the country.
aka, Repugs' polling problem. Killing Medicare and/or SS to hand their $Ts to for-profit scammers is extremely unpopular.
...even with self-styled conservatives.
Herman Cain's performance in a nuts :
Perfect summary IMO.
Perry strikes me as a Bush clone. As someone else said, he will do whatever is handlers tell him to. Scary. Romney still comes across that "The guy I'll vote for if there's no other clear leader.". Paul is a bit too honest for most peoples tastes. I think his message is a bit too edgy as well. I like most of his points tbh. Bachmann? lol
Newt has the inside track I think. I do think he will blow it though, much like I knew Cain would eventually. If he can avoid too many "WTF" moments, he might have a shot.
I saw a few minutes and read the summaries:
- papa newt - acts like he don't give a , so sure of himself. did pretty good except amnesty won't fly with tea baggers - B
- Mitt - his head shakes like he got parkinsons when someone is lapping him. and he got slapped by Hunstman in a big way. Why does he look at Perry with a ty smirk everytime Perry talks? Perry needs to deck that niga - C
- Hunstman - doesnt get his due because he is not as radical. best performance yet. B
- Perry - He is like the dog that everyone kicks and laughs at. sad. D
- Paul - the most black and white guy out there. never backtracks, never fails to answer the question - B
- Santorum - angry radical nutbag. which means he'll win points with tea baggers - C+
- bachman - angry radical nut . extra nut this night which will boost her base. - C+
I heard the pizza delivery man was present last nite but I did not see proof.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
