Anyone Watching The GOP Presidential Debate Right Now?

It's clear those people that Fox hand selected didn't pay any attention to Ron Paul. He's not even #2??? lol, wow.


The crowd told me otherwise, where are they??

So #1 is a guy who worked a head of the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City and #2 is a guy which said homosexuals do not deserve liberty, supports the wars enthusiastically, and said women working was a result of radical feminists.

Yeah these people were either set up or complete morons.

reply to post by Misoir


And you're surprised?

Anyone still thinking the GOP are about any of the 'conservative' things they claim they are has not been paying attention the past three decades.

reply to post by Misoir


:shk: not good...

Also.. the chair that Rep Paul sits in is not the one I thought he held...

He's only chair of a subcommittee.. Domestic Monetary Policy and Technology

The chair I thought he was in position to hold was.. House Financial Services Committee

I know I heard that Paul was up for the that position and assumed he secured that seat, my apologies, that explains why the FED is still unchallenged...

Thanks to the members for getting me up to speed...

I havent been paying full attention to the post-debate talks, but has Ron Paul even been mentioned at all?

reply to post by buni11687


It has made me furious that he has not been mentioned AT ALL after the debates. Unless I missed something.

Checked out the Sean Hannity post-debate focus group, almost all of them went in not even know who Herman Cain was and left all wanting to vote for him.

I think Ron Paul's PR guy needs to buy him some new wardrobe items, his image needs a makeover for our superficial society to even accept him.

Ron Paul had a lot of supporters showing up to the debate and inside too so he got great fanfare from the audience, good to see that. Wish I could watch the debate, video link is dead, it was probably only a live stream.

reply to post by eLPresidente


The debate is up on youtube

www.youtube.com...

Edit - Theres 4 parts. Thats part 1

reply to post by American-philosopher


Like it or not the Constitution makes no provision on defining marriage. The Constitution is about rights and personal liberty. All Ron says with regards to this, and so many other issues, is that this should not be a federal issue. And if we are to REALLY believe in this piece of paper we hold so dear, then we aren't going to cherry-pick how it is used. Personal liberty is just that, your ability to choose what is best for you.

You know he also said that you can believe what you want but don't impose your view on me if I don't believe that way. Unfortunately, how many minority groups have had nothing but an agenda to impose their views on other in the name of tolerance. This is not what the Constitution provided for.

Now, Ron is also a HUGE supporter of State's rights. So, if a State as a collective unit wants to define the institution of marriage as between a man and woman, it is their sovereign right to do so.

The problem with the way we've been raised and taught, is that we believe it IS the job of the federal government to make these types of distincitions or laws when the Consitution clearly does not state that this is one of its functions.

Personally, I don't believe in it [gay marriage], but I am not going to impose my view on others. Likewise, I do not want the gay and lesbian agenda shoved down my throat. I get along with all kinds of people and I don't need to be made to feel that I am not mentally healthy or intolerant if I don't believe in gay marriage.

reply to post by ViperChili


Santorum comes accross as tense and angry. Not a good showing for him.

The ones that seemed the most rehearsed were Cain and T-Paw. I was eager to hear T-Paw because he seemed like he might have some fresh ideas. Nope, standard political mold.

Make no mistake, Cain likes to count. Almost every question asked of him he rattled off a 3 or 4 point list of what needs to be done. But, all too general. No specifics and seemed more like a Sunday sermon where you leave feeling good but are hungry again come Monday morning.

Suprisingly, Johnson picked it up towards the end of the debate and I was plesantly surprised by some of his answers, although I was distracted byhis flamboyent behavior.

Paul, again, the experience shows. Just wish I could take that brain and stuff it in a younger person with a tad bit more charisma. I absolutely believe a Ron Paul type President would do our country a world of good. We have to end the entitilement nation that's been created since the 30's.

reply to post by TheDarkestHour


Yeah, Lutz hand picks his audience, what do you expect. And I love how Paul dissed Fox and went to the Tea Party rally after the debate.

GO RON PAUL!!!!

I watched last night and I was not too impressed with any of the candidates. Though a good idea or two may have been tossed out, those ideas were pipe dreams (i.e., Paul's desire to legalize drugs, Cain's 23% sales tax plan)

Ron Paul - Was the best of the night, still is a poor speaker. Probably too radical for mainstream America.

Gary Johnson - Soft spoken, nice guy, but did not come across as having strong leadership skills

Cain - Has a 3-point plan for everything...the same 3-point plan. He is not a Washington insider, but most of his thoughts lacked real substance.

Santorum - Holier than thou, you can have liberties so long as they are in line with my beliefs, little substance and no originality. (Worst of the night by leaps and bounds)

Pawlenty- Consistently went over his allotted time which was annoying, dodged questions, very robotic in his movement (a la Al Gore), lacked originality or original thought.

After watching this debate, I don't see any of these guys getting the Republican nomination. But what do I know...I'm not a Republican. Just an American.

reply to post by buni11687


As Hannity would say, "Let not your heart be troubled".

FOX can't STAND Ron Paul. They didn't mention him because he went to the Tea Party rally instead. Ron is more interesetd in connecting with voters.

He has my vote.

Originally posted by Aggie Man

Ron Paul - Was the best of the night, still is a poor speaker. Probably too radical for mainstream America.

It seems that's all most people are interested in. A good charismatic speaker. Despite lack of substance, as long as they sound good with catchy phrases and generic answers to problems people cheer. Worked for the Dems last election and I don't see it being any different this coming election.

Have we really strayed so far as the founding Constitutional principles are now considered "radical?" Wow.

Originally posted by Freenrgy2
reply to post by buni11687

 

As Hannity would say, "Let not your heart be troubled".

FOX can't STAND Ron Paul. They didn't mention him because he went to the Tea Party rally instead. Ron is more interesetd in connecting with voters.

He has my vote.

There's one throw away vote...

Ron Paul kicked ass, but I was amazed to see the review after the debate, with those people in the back room stating they thought Cain was the better candidate that night...say Whhaaattt? That guy was a douche?

Originally posted by Soldier of God

Originally posted by Freenrgy2
reply to post by buni11687

 

As Hannity would say, "Let not your heart be troubled".

FOX can't STAND Ron Paul. They didn't mention him because he went to the Tea Party rally instead. Ron is more interesetd in connecting with voters.

He has my vote.

There's one throw away vote...

Care to ellaborate on how its a throw away vote, considering Ol Ron won the straw poll for the second year in a row, and has more following than he ever did in 2008.

reply to post by Realms


Of all of them RP has the largest grass roots following.. He's been trying for president for a long time now and for the first time I actually think the guy has a chance..

He kicked some serious butt in this debate.. I think all the other candidates are definitely taking notice...

Personally..

1. Ron Paul

2. Johnson

Ron Paul 2012

reply to post by Freenrgy2


The reason why I disagree with ROn on the gay marriage issue is he says lets leave it tot he states. I normally agree leave most things to the states. My problem is that every six months or so the gay agenda or some gay lobby is getting an pushing some type of initiative. And then they are pushing in the courts all the time so some different type of ruling has to be passed. And then a counter lobby has to come and push back.

I thin there just needs to be an up or down federal vote maybe of the people. Just like the presidentail election where this will be the rule for the entire country on what marraige is and what it is not.

Looks like Herman Cain is the new surprise fave.