Reply With Quote
And that's all it will be, a performance. Does nothing to help America though. But the millions will be impressed by a performance.
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 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.
If his performance helps him win the nomination it may very well help America. No?
Yes, it will help us deteriorate faster.
Gingrich just pwned the moderator!! Wow!
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
Last edited by SA210; 01-19-2012 at 08:58 PM.
Whether Newt likes it or not his scandal is an issue it speaks loudly about his character and lack thereof.
I am appalled!!!
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.
Well, I must admit that I did "oooooohhhh" when he responded.
Santorum going at Romney for romneycare.
Newt and Santorum going at each other this whole darn debate. In the meantime Romney gets away scott free and Ron Paul is ignored.
I think I saw a tumbleweed roll by Ron Pauls podium
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.
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.
I thought Paul did well, but they hardly even let him speak.
Comrade Hornets nails it.
Paul had his best debate even though he was blatantly ignored by ing 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
Last edited by cheguevara; 01-19-2012 at 11:18 PM.
The crowd booed when Ron Paul was ignored on one question so the moderator caved and let him answer the question.
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.
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)
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)
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 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.].
Here is from another uppity liberal 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 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.
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 about like abortion and gay marriage when the economy is about to completely itself?
Gay people getting their way and killing unborn babies are more important than fixing the economy and job creation?
Who was ing about abortion and gay marriage?
You can go away with yourself, too. You're not one bit sorry for the rant.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
