GOP Debate Aftermath
My Candidate Won! Yours Didn't! (Or Vice Versa)
By Dan McLaughlin Posted in 2008 — Comments (128) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Well, everyone will have their own take. I thought, having caught only parts of the earlier debates, that this was an excellent debate. I wouldn't presume to declare a winner, but my guy Rudy had a very good night, benefitted from his command of the details and gave a heartfelt answer in defending his performance as Mayor during and despite the ugly eruption of his personal life. But the debate covered a lot more ground than just that, for all the participants. I personally thought Hunter and Huckabee both auditioned well for the VP job, although I know some people found some of Huckabee's answers on the war off-putting.
In fact, other than Tancredo (who stammers too much and who doesn't have a real role to play with Romney and Hunter carrying the immigration-hawk banner) and Brownback (who has been largely marginalized to his pet issues and isn't aggressive enough in this forum), most of the candidates played fairly well to their pre-existing images: Romney worked at exposing the fissures between himself and the others (notably his sustained attacks on Rudy on the "sanctuary cities" issue), McCain was both grave and wisecracking in turn, Huckabee was eloquent and got off some great lines as always, Hunter was serious and tough, and Paul was shrill but made sure the others had to answer his unique perspectives. (I didn't much like Romney's performance but that's mainly because of the issues I had with him going in). As a field they work a lot better with 8 than with 10, and hopefully that field will continue to narrow - my vote would be for Tancredo to pull out next.
Probably the best line of the night was Huckabee's response to Paul on the idea that Iraq was hurting the party at the polls ("Even if we lose elections we should not lose our honor"). Chris Wallace sounded like he had it in for Paul, going after him with a zeal rarely applied to marginal candidates.
Finally, I have to think that Fred was a loser with the people who watched this - unavoidably, perhaps, but we need to get him out there and see what he's made of in these things. Fred needs less tell and more show. The only candidate who really gave a full preview of his line of attack against Fred was Rudy, who lumped him in with Hillary, Obama and Edwards in lacking executive experience (a distinction that drew a smile from Romney). If nothing else, Rudy's willingness to throw a punch at a guy who wasn't even on the stage was vintage Giuliani.
« Dueling June Obama fundraising claims? — Comments (2) | GOP Debate Open Thread — Comments (193) »
GOP Debate Aftermath 128 Comments (0 topical, 128 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
It's still just September.
"No compromise with the main purpose, no peace till victory, no pact with unrepentant wrong." - Winston Churchill
They'll watch the next one too which will include Fred, and it will matter not that he skipped this one.
___________________________________
The CIA has better politicians than it has spies - Fred Thompson
without even being there, when he was quoted by Wallace(?) as having said that Va. might want to consider allowing students to bear arms.
Interesting that the first question of the night was about his absence. All the answers were well-delivered and well-rehearsed.
We've traded our National Sovereignty for cheap roofing and yardwork.
The reward for good performance at the would easily out stripped a large audience of the whole political stream. First is the exposure of his potential message. And second is his impression on potential donors. I don't see Leno was a better choice.
Hunter is not going to be VP and neither is Huckabee. Brownback and McCain are deadweight and I hope both of them withdraw soon. Rudy bored as usual with his mindless recitation of statistics and his usual "my family hates me, but that doesn't matter" line. I loved the exchange between ROn Paul and Huckabee. Paul many never be the frontrunner that Huckabee is, but you have to respect honesty and ability to say what nobody else will even though Huckabee was clearly right on Iraq.
Btw, Fred is finished!
11 minutes and you already know that Fred Thompson who is near the top in most polls is finished... wow....
but I bet he doesn't "work" for Paul, just one of the poll spamming texters :)
___________________________________
The CIA has better politicians than it has spies - Fred Thompson
Yes, it's so shameful to volunteer for a candidate. Why we ought to insult people for supporting their candidate! That's the right way to behave, isn't it? Weren't you raised better than that?
...to resist shenanigans is not "supporting" a candidate. It's vandalism. It also doesn't "help" a candidate. Not to let the cat out of the bag, but the major reason why this site is significantly more contemptuous of Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! these days is precisely because of the antics of his acolytes.
You Ronulans really want to help your guy? Then shut up. It'd be too late to save his candidacy, such as it is: but right now you're just sinking his chances and putting yourself in a wider and wider orbit around the mainstream.
I make this statement secure in the knowledge that it will not be heeded. Pity, in its way.
The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!
You simply are out of touch with the marketplace. There's no spamming going on, and there's no "shenanigans" as you call it. This is all the result of real people catching on to a message of change. Most of you realize that change is needed and that the current Faux-Con in the White House is not living up to our standards. But then there's the war, and you can't see past that. So, it's easy for you to discount Ron Paul and find things to hate.
Trouble is that you're in the minority. Yes, a lot of Republicans support the war, but not all of us. Many of us remember the ideal of "no nation building", "no no-win wars", and "no undeclared wars". I will once again offer this up: if you can define for me, clearly, what constitutes a "win" in Iraq, beyond what we've already done, and it is feasibly attainable, then I'll reconsider. Until then, I'm convinced that we're plunged into an endless struggle with an ever-increasing crowd of new recruits, and that our presence there plays right into the hands of the enemy.
But my personal opinions on the war isn't the issue. The simple fact is that 70% of this country is now opposed to the war in Iraq, and that includes 70% of independents. This, plus the 20% of Republicans who area also opposed to the war, represents the bulk of Ron Paul's support. It's real support, and growing. The problem is that you're so blinded by your support for the war that you can't see how the rest of the country is thinking. In your (shrinking) Republican circles, you're all gung-ho, and reinforce each others' ideas. But support for the war is plummetting nationwide.
If we can leave Iraq on a positive note, I'm sure all of us would prefer that, but some of us no longer believe that this is possible. The best way to leave at this point is to just leave. That in itself would earn a lot of goodwill.
So, no, we're not going to shut up. Frankly, we're the only voice of reason remaining in the party (although, admittedly, Huckabee made some good points last night too). If we shut up, this party is doomed to go down in ignominious defeat. We're still hoping that enough people will wake up (or enough independents re-register as Republicans) so that we can win this thing. It's not going to be easy, but it's still possible. Why? Well, if you really think all those millions of Giuliani supporters are actually going to show up on the fateful Tuesday, you've got a surprise in store for you. Point is, there's just no motivation for most of the other campaigns. Fred may change that, but as far as I'm concerned, he's still an untested candidate.
So, yes, we infuriate you. You're not going to vote for Ron. We get that. But you're not the end-all-be-all of the Republican Party. For most of us, the idea of dismantling the Department of Homeland Security doesn't sound all that wacky, and the idea of using our troops to defend our own country instead of fixing someone else's sounds responsible, not backwards.
Remains to be seen who is in the majority, right? But I'm not willing to give my party up to the people who have been mismanaging it for the past 8 years. I don't think anyone's going to lay down for this one.
Text and online polls that allow anybody to vote as many times as they choose are giving accurate results while all the scientific polls that show Ron Paul not breaking out of margin of error territory are all faked.
Quentin Langley
Editor of http://www.quentinlangley.net
International Editor of
Now hear this: Ron Paul has a snowball's chance in hell of winning anything. The little fantasy-land that you and your fellow Paul acolytes live in will come crashing down when the real primaries begin. You can stuff as many ballot boxes as you want, but the real polls that measure real voters with real measurement methodologies plainly show that Paul has virtually no support with the real world.
...when they see me they'll say, "There goes Loren Wallace,
the greatest thing to ever climb into a race car."
but, in fact, there are NO democrats in the real world. And certainly no RonPaul™ supporters.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.
...if you think that you have the right to power, then come and take it.
Moe
PS: Almost forgot. You folks exasperate me. "Infuriated" is reserved for violent enemies of the United States of America.
The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!
Sorry Oz, I don't "work" for anybody...but I bet YOU do. ;)
Fred's poll numbers are just the result of name recognition. He doesn't want to go to the debate because then he'd have to discuss real issues, people would see him for the phony that he is, and his numbers would tank immediately. They have already been dropping for weeks and he's just gotten in! :)
Maybe you know more than the rest of us, but I'm not only saying that you're wrong, but way wrong... This spectacle of a debate should not even have occurred until maybe Feb of next year (just how long do we have to endure this), but Fred's entry is still early. While you listen to all the liberal media pundits, I'll (and probably most others) will wait to see what he says. I hate Washington pundits (types)!
Formally known as Deagle... "Golf is a way of life..."
You may disagree, but if a guy wants to be my President, I want him to answer as many tough questions as possible. What's a few more debates matter for somebody who's trying to become the leader of the free world?
I judge by the candidates character and honesty first...ie, what does it matter what he says if he is not honest to begin with? So, you can listen to the politically correct answers (during debates) and I will judge my President by his honesty and integrity - mostly by his past, but somewhat in his response to questions on the candidate trail...debates are not all that reliable.
Formally known as Deagle... "Golf is a way of life..."
I judge them much more by their past... Anybody can lie during a debate. Your welcome to your choice... The debates only make you question or solidify your choice.
Formally known as Deagle... "Golf is a way of life..."
I did not know that I was conversing with a ghost...
Formally known as Deagle... "Golf is a way of life..."
with the candidates, yet you criticize Fred Thompson for not hurrying to be part of the boredom.
We've traded our National Sovereignty for cheap roofing and yardwork.
That won't do much good for the people who have to vote in January. If you want to move the primaries up to June, so be it, but given where we are, debates in 4 months out from the voting are not early in the least. If they waited any longer, you might as well forget about having debates at all.
Use "Reply To This" when you are replying to someone, otherwise you might look clueless.
___________________________________
The CIA has better politicians than it has spies - Fred Thompson
cuz who wants to be in 2nd place with 5 months to go, much better to be in last, right?
___________________________________
The CIA has better politicians than it has spies - Fred Thompson
Newbies who throw a lot of elbows immediately upon arrival have a short life expectancy on this site.
"No compromise with the main purpose, no peace till victory, no pact with unrepentant wrong." - Winston Churchill
It's time to apply the Hinz rule.
...when they see me they'll say, "There goes Loren Wallace,
the greatest thing to ever climb into a race car."
...when they see me they'll say, "There goes Loren Wallace,
the greatest thing to ever climb into a race car."
If you notice, I have not insulted anyone like bs. Since when is being actively involved in different cinversations bad? :)
Romney - C+
McCain - B+
Giuliani - B
Hunter - B-
Tancredo - D
Brownback - C-
Huckabee - C+
Paul - D-
no grade inflation here!
___________________________________
The CIA has better politicians than it has spies - Fred Thompson
What debate were YOU watching?
Romney - C+
McCain - B+
Giuliani - B
Hunter - B-
Tancredo - D
Brownback - C-
Huckabee - C+
Paul - D-
i was hoping i wouldnt have to type all this out...but i will make it quick.
Romney did not do well tonight. To his defense, he did get the hardest questions, but they guy still seems to calculating to me and when you seem calculated and still dont answer well...thats a problems. Plus his stance on Iraq is beginning to baffle me.
McCain did the best. He didnt knock anything out of the park but he was strong, consistent, and presidential tonight. His knowledge of foreign policy shone tonight and it helped him big i believe.
Rudy also did well. I dont think this was his best debate, but his answers are always detailed and precise. They did not really ask him a question about Iraq which hurt him I think. Also, he needs to tone down his New York record just a bit. What he did was incredible in NYC but he needs to be careful of overkill with it.
Hunter gave good answers and I love his optimism about the iraq was and the military in general. Both are always good with republican voters.
Tancredo always seems pissed off. Besides the immigration issues he really does not have much substance. Hes too bitter to preform well.
Brownback did badly tonight I think. I dont really know what he is running on. If he thinks family values are more important to people than iraq or immigration, he is living on mars.
Huckabee did not shine like he did last time. I think he was trying too hard tonight. The little skirmish with Ron Paul was entertaining, but Huck was too philisophical tonight.
Ron Paul was Ron Paul. Enough said.
does that help?
BRADMNEGS, I think you are right on for the most part. I completely agree with your assessment of Rudy's over reference of NYC. While he had many remarkable achievements, his answer to every question seemed like every one of his previous answers. I, however, would give Huckabee more credit. Emerging from a pack of eight can be hard, but I think he managed to do it as well as any other person on that stage, aside from perhaps McCain and crazy uncle Ron.
As far as Ron Paul goes, he strikes me as the conservative / libertarian version of that "pie in the sky" liberal, hippy college professor everyone has at some point. He may be interesting in an academic setting, but the guy has no sense of reality or pragmatism. The one somewhat valid argument he made all night was about the Department of Homeland Security just adding more bureacracy. I may not necessarily agree with him, but I can at least see where he's coming from. Aside from that, his presense was only good for entertainment value.
I think you're right about Huckabee. He definitely stood out for a lot of people last night, and the toe-to-toe with Ron Paul did both candidates a lot of good. Both were able to articulate their positions well, which was valuable since the moderators were virtually shutting them both out of the questions.
The fact that Paul and Huckabee were #1 and #2 in the post-debate poll says something. Yes, there's probably a little raw support going on in polls like this, but I think the dust-up helped them both a lot among those who watched.
On a side note, there's no doubt that Paul looks at things from a more academic perspective, but that doesn't mean he's unaware of reality. I think he realizes that many pie-in-the-sky ideals aren't going to be immediately achieved, which is why he talks about offering alternatives to Social Security for young folks, instead of doing away with it entirely. Obviously, there are too many people too dependent on it to pull out the rug entirely. But, at the same time, we've been running on emotion too much lately, and it's really time for us to take some time and re-examine how well our actions as a party fit with our core principles.
For myself, I'd rather have either Huckabee or Paul, both of whom are willing to deal honestly with the issues, than these empty frontrunners who have no thoughtful positions on anything unless the polls tell them to.
He missed a great opportunity to stand out when he muffed the question about how he would use his VP; if he would give him as much authority, etc., as Dick Cheney has had. I think he could have made a strong statement about his own ability to select capable people to assist him, thereby allowing him to do an even better job.
We've traded our National Sovereignty for cheap roofing and yardwork.
what debate were you watching! Ron Paul again was the only candidate who actually answered teh questions and who stands for the ideals of the republican party.
At being Paul. At least the guy is consistent and a true believer. The problem is he believes that we should not only follow the Constitution, but live in the times the Constitution was drafted.
It would be hard to say Paul did poorly though, heck we could have given his answers, I know I could have done so. Foreign Policy = leave, have no foreign policy. Domestic Policy = get rid of the Federal government.
Paul would not even have to show up if he became president, he could program a Commodore 64 with about five possible answers to all the world issues.
Molon Labe!
...a long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right...
---Thomas Paine---
He's cracked a couple of good Thompson jokes (in good taste of course).
www.scottbomb.com
Click here to donate to the Fred Thompson campaign.
when Leno was taped, that's probably the only thing he could say.
-- A true evolutionist would let endangered species die off.
-- I see abortion as a pro-choice issue: the baby's choice would be life.
-- imwithfred --
1. Giuliani (best overall)
2. Huckabee (best sound-bite)
3. McCain
4. Romney
5. Hunter
6. Brownback
7. Tancredo
8. Paul
Absent: Fred
Brownback, Romney, Rudy, and McCain were boring. Paul seemed a little emotional but was fun to watch, as was Huckabee.
Tom Tancredo certainly won the category of least air time during the debate.
In the only event of the campaign season that was anything close to a test of the strength of the campaigns, Tom Tancredo received 1,961 votes and 13.9 percent of the vote in the Iowa GOP straw poll. He finished only 231 votes and 1.6% behind third-place finisher Sam Brownback.
When there are candidates that actively participated in the Iowa GOP straw poll that finished behind Tom Tancredo, including Duncan Hunter who received 174 votes and 1.2 percent of the vote, I don't believe Rep. Tancredo should be the candidate to pull out next, nor will he be.
Rep. Tancredo is going to finish ahead of several candidates in the Iowa caucuses.
"The defense of our nation begins with the defense of our borders." - Rep. Tom Tancredo
So if Giuliani, McCain and Thompson decide not to run, then Tancredo can come in a close 4th place against Romney, Brownback, and Huckabee.
Altogether, that puts Tancredo in a strong 7th place. It's not impossible, but it is not a rosy picture. Of course Tancredo wasn't playing to win.
______________________________________
Bobby Jindal Saves Louisiana
For fourth place, Adam. Not seventh place.
I feel some Tom-mentum coming on.
"My heart was here...I feel like I have unfinished business here." - Roy Hibbert
AdamC, what presidential candidate do you favor?
Mr. McLaughlin believes that Tancredo should be the next candidate to pull out of the race. The point of my post is to question why Rep. Tancredo should be the next one to pull out. Rep. Tancredo did far better in the Iowa GOP straw poll than many of the Tancredo haters predicted he would do.
Duncan Hunter finished with 174 votes and 1.2% of the vote. He actively participated in the Iowa GOP straw poll. How is that Tom Tancredo should leave the race before Duncan Hunter? How is that Tom Tancredo should leave the race before Ron Paul?
Your "strong 7th place" assertion makes a few assumptions with which I do not agree. I believe that Rep. Tancredo will finish ahead of McCain in the Iowa caucuses. Tancredo would have beaten McCain in the Iowa GOP straw poll if McCain had competed. I believe many people in Iowa and many others across America are now fully aware of the pro-illegal alien positions that have been taken by John McCain. I believe that Rep. Tancredo can finish ahead of Sam Brownback in the Iowa caucuses. Rep. Tancredo finished only 1.6% behind Sen. Brownback in the straw poll.
The Tancredo haters have consistently predicted that Rep. Tancredo would do little or no better than winning one percent (1%) of the vote. When Iowans vote in the caucuses, we can see how well the Tancredo haters performed in their predictions.
If he doesn't win the GOP presidential nomination, I look forward to Rep. Tancredo being re-elected to represent Colorado's sixth Congressional district. In that position, he will continue to lead the fight against rewarding illegal aliens with legal status and the fight to secure this nation's borders.
"The defense of our nation begins with the defense of our borders." - Rep. Tom Tancredo
While I like Hunter, I don't think he's going anywhere. My larger point is less about odds of winning than about influencing the debate. Tancredo's really a one/two issue candidate, and nothing he is saying adds all that much given the presence of Hunter and given that Romney is basically echoing Tancredo on immigration and radical Islam.
Of the two, Hunter is the more serious and has a broader portfolio of issues; he's been a chairman of a major committee, he could - unlike the Tank - plausibly be a VP candidate or hold a major Cabinet post in the next administration. And frankly, Tancredo's style is too jittery to get anyone but his true believers to warm to him.
I would dearly love to get the Ron Paul circus off the stage as well, but I can at least understand how you justify the idea that Paul has ideas nobody else on the stage shares. And he arguably provides useful target practice.
"No compromise with the main purpose, no peace till victory, no pact with unrepentant wrong." - Winston Churchill
"Even if we lose elections we should not lose our honor"
Even if we lose another 5,000 soldier and civilian lives?
Even if we waste another $450 billion in taxpayer dollars to achieve nothing?
All this for a "country" put together by a colonial power that could only be held together by the state terror of a brutal dictator that will never be a democracy as we know it, that is currently in a sectarian religious civil war between two sides that distrust or actively hate us.
As soon as an ethnically and religoiusly homogenous Arab country becomes a real democracy, let me know. Seeing as how Palestine can't seem to pull this off, one has to have low expectations for Iraq.
You have to be blind not to notice that almost all Iraqis with real skills have left the country.
700,000 Iraqis left for Jordan. 500,000 to one million went to Syria (whose dictator reminds them of the "good old days"). 20,000 to 80,000 went to Egypt, and up to 40,000 went to Lebanon (I suppose they prefer the milder civil war there).
The difference between Iraq and Vietnam is that in Vietnam, there was an anti-communist government to fight for, there was something to "win". The current democratically elected government in Baghdad is a bunch of Shi'ite islamic extremists who have no problem killing as many Sunnis and Kurds as they can get away with. Of course, the same thing happened when the Sunnis were in charge. There is no winning.
...Ron Paul did not win, at least not with the Republican Party.
5 years of Limbaugh, Hannity, and Beck banging the drum for war in the Middle East has made pre-emptive war and nation-building the GOP position. The candidates last night that intoned that we are not safe from terrorists received the warmest response. Paul received many boos.
There may be no empirical point when we can all agree that Iraq is "free" or "safe" or "terrorist-free" or "democratic". Conservatives used to be more reluctant to get involved in the affairs of other nations--many now believe the best defense is a strong offense.
Ron Paul still believes the best defense is a strong defense--I wish we had more like him.
__________________________
Faith is the highest passion in a human being. Many in every generation may not come that far, but none comes further.
- Soren Kierkegaard: Fear and Trembling
As soon as our Zionist overlords give permission, we'll go Mossad all over that guy!
HTML Help Central for Red Staters
I voted Harry Browne in 2000, but will never vote Ron Paul.
...I support Israel's right to defend itself. I support their right to nuclear weapons. I support Israel's right to repay nickel crimes by its enemies with a dollar's worth of retribution.
Another clever tactic to hint that someone opposed to Middle East involvement has some anti-Semitic ax to grind...
Are you saying you're SoCon or the tedwards guy who got banned?
HTML Help Central for Red Staters
Reality: Thompson/Romney Dream: Santorum/Watts.
I think that Rudy and Romney both did well in the debate. They got some tough questions and had very intelligent answers. I thought Huckabee and McCain did very well. I don't particularly like either candidate, but I have to acknowledge the great answers that McCain gave on the war and Huckabee winning the back-and-forth with Ron Paul. Hunter was his usual serious and experienced self. He seems like a more likeable Cheney to me.
Brownback and Tancredo? Who?
I think Thompson had the worst night personally. The fact that he had twice as large of an audience might boost him in the polls, but it wasn't a great performance. He has had a rap as a depressing, uninspiring speaker in his speeches so far. It turns out that there may be a reason for that. He was very eloquent on a couple questions Leno asked him, but the rest of the time I nearly fell asleep. If I was bored, imagine how the non-political audience of The Tonight Show must have felt.
--
I'm looking for an entry level job in D.C. or Maryland.
I earned a Government and Politics major at the University of Maryland, College Park and have experience interning on Capitol Hill.
Excellent analysis. I'd take issue only with your comment about Tancredo's lack of a role in the debates. He does have a very key role, IMHO, to keep raising the questions concerning illegal immigration and border security, which insures the other candidates will thus continue to address them.
Compared to Rudy Guiliani, maybe Romney is an "immigration hawk". It wouldn't take much for someone to be called an immigration hawk, compared to Rudy, though.
According to Michelle Malkin:
"When Congress enacted immigration reform laws that forbade local governments from barring employees from cooperating with the INS, Mayor Rudy Giuliani filed suit against the feds in 1997. He was rebuffed by two lower courts, which ruled that the sanctuary order amounted to special treatment for illegal aliens and were nothing more than an unlawful effort to flaunt federal enforcement efforts against illegal aliens. In January 2000, the Supreme Court rejected his appeal, but Giuliani vowed to ignore the law."
Rudy called Proposition 187 "inhumane". It's really not surprising that Rudy would have called a measure that removed benefits from illegal aliens "inhumane".
Rudy opposed H.R. 4437, the enforcement first legislation passed by the House in December 2005. That legislation was overwhelmingly supported by House Republicans. Rudy, though, on April 27, 2006, said “I think the compromise the Senate was looking at, something along those lines makes sense.” Rudy supported the Senate plan that would have rewarded millions of illegal aliens with legal status and a path to citizenship that was also supported by Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, Barack Obama, Patrick Leahy, Barbara Boxer and Hillary Clinton.
I hope Mitt Romney continues to point out the truth about Rudy's record on illegal aliens.
"The defense of our nation begins with the defense of our borders." - Rep. Tom Tancredo
...I saw several good picks for Fred Thompson's Cabinet.
and Ron Paul.
I do not know, but I suspect that Ron Paul would be a fun ambassador to the UN (I think that is a cabinet position).
...a long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right...
---Thomas Paine---
Although I kind of liked Paul early on, he did seem wacko yesterday.
Didn't he say if he thought there might be a risk that Iran had nukes and was going to harm Israel that the first thing he would do is consult Congress? Oh yes. Let's have lunch first. Then a committee meeting. That will stop the attack.
OMG.
I understand his position on the war and the role of the federal government.
But he was wacky yesterday.
That is an argument to leave guys like him in the debates. We do learn about these guys as time goes on.
I think I realized Ron Paul probably wouldn't win when I read someone describe him as "elfin". The author may have intended the term as a diminution of the man or maybe the author just saw a slight man with a squeaky voice and long thin nose and thought "elfin". EIther way...
A Pittsburgh-accent and high-pitched voice worked for 3 decades for legendary Pittsburgh Steeler color commentator Myron Cope, but these days we are more seduced by the height and girth and baritone of Fred Thompson when we see a Presidential candidate.
Rick Santorum once said something like, "Liberalism is an ideology. Conservatism is just common sense."
Ron Paul does have an ideology and understanding of the issues honed over 30 years on years of reading and writing books and fighting for less government on the front lines of Congress. Many folks with considerably slimmer resumes are awfully critical of him it seems.
on the front lines in Congress. He hasn't had any more effect on the Congress in the last 30 years than my dead white cat. The guy votes no. OK. But has he managed to get even one CongressCritter™ to join with him to eliminate a federal department? Nope. Has he managed to accomplish the layoff of one federal employee? Nope.
There is no candidate who has a "thinner resume" than RonPaul™. The guy makes Obama look like a real contender.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.
Your dead white cat didn't manage to bring home wild shrimp subsidies to his district.
---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman
He loved shrimp. And he could have absolutely been bought cheap.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.
The absence of any congressional support for his actions clearly marks him as a weak candidate. I'm sure Hillary can find enough people to cooperate with her in the new Democrat-controlled house - maybe you should look into her, seeing as how she has so much more experience.
___________________________
Faith is the highest passion in a human being. Many in every generation may not come that far, but none comes further.
- Soren Kierkegaard: Fear and Trembling
"Didn't he say if he thought there might be a risk that Iran had nukes and was going to harm Israel that the first thing he would do is consult Congress?"
I noticed it, too. Seems to me that under the terms of the question, his answer should have started with "I would TELL Congress...."
Paul really lost me when he tried to argue we could solve all our problems by just leaving the Middle East.
We've traded our National Sovereignty for cheap roofing and yardwork.
I kept expecting and some-what wished that John McCain would end every answer with “you little jerk!”
And btw who was laughing into the mic through out the debate? Every time Ron Paul was asked or answered a question, a small but clear chuckle was distinctively heard in the background.
to "win" this debate primarily because he was a little more relaxed, making him seem more human and less like a tightly-wound automaton. He does have a likable sense of humor, and it came out last night, and he was thrown some softballs that let him play the war-hero/military-expert card, which he took good advantage of.
I think he was more relaxed, because he had realized he's out of the race but he just hasn't decided to throw in the towel yet. If he becomes convinced he has a chance (which he doesn't, if anybody stops to consider his answers to immigration questions), I think he'l tighten up again and sink back into his true one-dimensional persona.
Overall, I thought almost everybody on that stage did well last night (not RonPaul). I don't know where Fox News found that group of zombies to fill their "focus group restaurant." I couldn't disagree with them more.
We've traded our National Sovereignty for cheap roofing and yardwork.
I'm a long time lurker here, first time poster, (please be gentle)
Michelle, I've watched Special Report enough to be pretty sure the mystery laugh came from Britt Hume.
He has shown a wicked sense of humor in the past, and let's face it Chris Wallace pretty much skewered Paul.
Love the site, from a red stater living in a big time blue state (MI)
Madness takes its toll. Please have exact change.
Not only did the debate last night cause me great uneasiness with Paul, I am liking Huckabee more and more.
I'm waiting and watching Thompson right now. But more and more Huckabee is looking pretty good to me. I think he could be a secret weapon. He hasn't flip flopped. There are no questions about his religion. He has experience 'governing'. And he has conservative credentials.
I don't trust Romney. I don't know why. I don't even think it is the press coverage of him. Watching him speak, I just don't trust him.
I'm starting to dislike Rudy less and less. Although I don't mind his stance on social issues, he seems to fit the role of attorney general better than president.
Maybe the ticket should be Thompson Huckabee 08.
A quick correction here for those in the back.
"Even if we lose elections we should not lose our honor"
Republicans have NO honor, never have, never will. So no worries there and oh yes you will lose 08 by a land fall.
By the way Ron Paul WON the debate with over 33% of all calls received but the folks at the GOP and FAUX News don't want you to think for yourselves; just keep regurgitating there completely inept talking points.
My wager is on "Under".
-------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.
is 24.
"A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition." -- Rudyard Kipling
And I actually thought of setting the bar at "25". Oh well, that's what I get.
-------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.
It's funny how they don't think we can tell the difference between a real libertarian and a Daily Kos 'libertarian.'
HTML Help Central for Red Staters
I voted Harry Browne in 2000, but will never vote Ron Paul.
That Ron Paul is "the only real conservative" with your diatribe about "FAUX" news and how we will lose 08 "by a land fall."
---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman
What is an electoral "land fall?" Are you ESL, or did you just fail your high school government class?
...a long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right...
---Thomas Paine---
The Democratic National Convention.
HTML Help Central for Red Staters
Reality: Thompson/Romney Dream: Santorum/Watts.
...a long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right...
---Thomas Paine---
He'd certainly set a new tone (tonus) to the debates as he tears into his opponents arguments (ligaments) and leaves an unforgettable impression in their minds (not to mention their arms, legs, torso, etc.)
Rudy Guiliani? I was ambivilent about him until tonight. He was so disappointing it wasn't even funny. He came off as cocky, authoritarian, liberal and honestly, disgusting. I was incredibly repulsed by him. I like Ron Paul but am not sure I agree with him on Iraq. The thing is, I don't vote based on what happens halfway around the world. I vote on domestic policy and on that, he cleans the rest of the candidates up. Tancredo seems alright.
Are you aware of his views of money and gold? Or his failure to achieve any actual reduction in government during his time in the Congress?
HTML Help Central for Red Staters
Reality: Thompson/Romney Dream: Santorum/Watts.
You heard the man Neil. Ron Paul is a true conservative. He walks the walk unlike Rudy McRomney.
Ron Paul has:
-never voted to raise taxes
-never voted for an unbalanced budget
-never voted to raise his congressional pay
-never taken a gov. paid junket
-voted against regulating the internet
-not participated in the lucrative congressional pension system
-repeatedly been named the "Taxpayers' best friend in Congress
That's record second to none.
Allan Bartlett
Raise your hand if your candidate never earmarked taxpayer money for shrimp subsidies?
Not so fast Allan...
HTML Help Central for Red Staters
Reality: Thompson/Romney Dream: Santorum/Watts.
What a loser. What a disingenous loser.
HTML Help Central for Red Staters
Reality: Thompson/Romney Dream: Santorum/Watts.
when he probably had the votes for the earmark. Now that's didingenuous.
"What most people really object to when they object to a free market is that it is so hard for them to shape it to their own will. At the bottom of many criticisms of the market economy is really lack of belief in freedom itself."
-- Milton Friedman
He's NEVER accomplished anything.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.
Do you know anything about how our monetary system works? Are you aware that one person in congress can do very little? Do you even know how bills get put up for a vote?
I didn't think so.
I know that if Ron Paul was given a chance as president, he would bring the republican party back together, not to mention, restore the rule of law to this country. Why do people not realize that this country is going bankrupt? It just amazes me how stupid some people are, those who actually want the federal government running their lives, those who want social security and medicare expanded not disbanded.
I can forgive Ron Paul for every crazy thing he says about foreign policy because I know in the long run, he will keep America strong. He knows the purpose of the federal government.
I know that if Ron Paul was given a chance as president, he would bring the republican party back together
Yes, just look at how he's unifying the Republicans on this very blog.
------------
This kind of liberty is, indeed, but another name for justice; ascertained by wise laws, and secured by well-constructed institutions.
-Edmund Burke
Oh, the unification wouldn't be immediate. After a couple years in office, when we haven't been attacked because the bureaucracy has been trimmed and our agents can do their jobs, when we all have more money in our pockets, where democrats reel at the shrinking size of the federal government and their party, thats when this grand old party will regroup. Trust me, the republican party cannot stand another Bush. This party will be destroyed if Guiliani is elected. I guarantee it. I still have faith in the party, that it will realize its missteps and correct them.
Because Dr. Ron Paul™ has been sooooooooooo successfull in bringing these very things about from his perch in the US House of Representatives lo these, what, 24-years or so.
You know, the place where they actually file, debate and pass legislation.
You know, that place where Dr. Ron Paul™ has made a very nice career for himself doing, well, nothing in particular.
You'll forgive me, I'm sure, for thinking you're little more than the latest in a looooooooooooong line of 1-day wonders we've had here, enjoying their New-and-Improved RedState Experience® for sometimes a whole hour, who have been Republicans about as long and claim to be the latest-greatest genius telling long-time activists (yep, we've got a few of them here) how we move forward from here - with Dr. Ron Paul™ leading the way.
Or you won't forgive me - I really don't care.
Either way you're not likely to last the day. Happy trails.
-------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.
Your right. I just recently joined redstate. I've been subscribed to human events for 2 years now. over the summer I was unable to receive it so I began looking at this site as it is linked to human events.
But you didn't answer my questions. Why? Because you can't. You're completely ignorant as to how things are done in the house and you don't understand how legislation is brought up for a vote. Here are my questions again:
"Do you know anything about how our monetary system works? Are you aware that one person in congress can do very little? Do you even know how bills get put up for a vote?
I didn't think so."
You failed to answer them just as I knew you would. If you have any desire to save face you can either go to wikipedia and cut and paste responses or you can admit your ignorance and go vote for Guiliani or the progressive Huckabee. If you are really lost, you'll vote for Thompson. He stands for nothing and is only in this race to stroke his own ego. I tried to like him. I can't. Listen to an interview with him. Listen to Laura Inghram's interview. Or Hannity's interview. You will be so underwhelmed by him it's truly amazing. Romney is acceptable. Tancredo is good. Paul is great.
I think you're talking to the wrong guy.
I've never seen this non sequitur question before addressed to me - a nominal Romney supporter, by the way.
Try to keep up.
-------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.
At times it seems as though the Republican party is concerned only with foreign policy, and has put issues like illegal immigration and abortion on the back burner. Foreign policy stances do not make a conservative alone.
___________________________
Faith is the highest passion in a human being. Many in every generation may not come that far, but none comes further.
- Soren Kierkegaard: Fear and Trembling
But in the age of terror that is the only issue that matters. Now, illegal immigration, Energy independence are all key components the the war on terror.
Speaking for myself, I am voting for the best terror warrior.
"The nine most dangerous words in the English language are 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help'"
Ronald Reagan
Ron Paul could be very valuable in a republican administation just not president. He could be the head of the department of education, head of the Enviomental Protection Agency, Labor Secretary, Secretary of Housing and Urban Development and Secretary of Health and Human Services all at once and do a fine job. He would shut them down.
I think he's just as likely not to show up, it being an unconstitutional office and all, thus letting the bureaucrats have their way unimpeded.
HTML Help Central for Red Staters
Reality: Thompson/Romney Dream: Santorum/Watts.
that he would a) draw his salary, b) still direct funds to shrimps. Shrimps stick together. It's called loyalty.
Quentin Langley
Editor of http://www.quentinlangley.net
International Editor of
Fred's attempts to run on the coat-tails of "contract with america" (CwA) and Reagan is real ugly. In recent interviews and stumps Fred wants to associate his de minimis record to anything. So he grasps for "CwA" and Reagan.
A core component of "contract with america" was tort reform--something not on the priorities of Fred, his votes, and his tort laywer friends. ["9. THE COMMON SENSE LEGAL REFORM ACT: "Loser pays" laws, reasonable limits on punitive damages and reform of product liability laws to stem the endless tide of litigation."] I know--"federalism". Well how does he vote for No Child Left Behind if "federalism" is such an important priority?
Finally the coat-tails of Reagan--this is real ugly folks. Fred in an interview with Laura Ingram reinvents Reagan to fit the Fred Thompson mold--saying in swipes at other Republicans Reagan would not have changed his mind. Reagan was all about change!
Reagan would have stood next to John McCain to call for change to our Iraq War strategy in 2003. Fred left. Reagan changed his view on abortion--gasp a tonal shift!
Fred still has no message and he is still floundering with a path of wrecked careers in his path.
(Hinz rule, I know, I know...)
I find it amusing that the core of this guy's argument is "his tort lawyer friends," "Reagan was all about change," and the same old misrepresentation of Reagan on abortion.
There are some people VERY unhappy with Thompson being in the race...
HTML Help Central for Red Staters
Reality: Thompson/Romney Dream: Santorum/Watts.
Y'all hyped this person for months. Why? So what does Fred have? It ain't a message or organization or money or principles or communication.
Y'all are the same demographic of haters that visit Free Republic that hammered John McCain for decades only now to support some pol that runs away from his vote on the war.
You are the evangelicals that shouted liberal and bias when Fred's abortion lobbying hit the stands only to stare at his billing record.
At this point in the game, Fred is noise. Hunter and Huckabee all have more crediblity to this race than Fred.
with Thompson being in the race..."
I had noticed that, too. Is it fear, perhaps?
We've traded our National Sovereignty for cheap roofing and yardwork.
His record? his southern accent? his fight for conservative principles?
I have to think that Fred was a loser with the people who watched this
That's the reason Fred! skipped it and was on the Tonight Show... he's going to have a bigger audience. 2 Weeks from tonight, no one will remember this debate (I don't remember the last one or if I watched it).
___________________________________
The CIA has better politicians than it has spies - Fred Thompson