***Official*** CNN/YouTube GOP debate

[owsley]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Ur8F_c5PQg

Paul's Ad tonight.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks much. My Tivo cut off the debate after the allotted time ran out.

[/ QUOTE ]

Great ad imo. About 1,000 times better than the last one.

[foal]

Why do I watch this [censored]?

Romney was terrible compared to last debate. I no longer view him as much of a threat if he wins, unless he was just having a really off night.

Giuliani actually handled himself very well, except for the dumb cheapshot he took at Romney early on. On the other hand he was attacked a lot more than usual. As a dem, I don't care who he loses the nomination to as long as he loses. He's really got the best shot by far, besides Paul of beating the democrats. He's the best debater, the most moderate and not a fundie Christian..
(If Ron Paul wins the nomination then I'm fine with him beating the dems)

Thompson was nervous (he kept touching his face whenever he said anything), talked super slow and didn't say anything interesting (basically just "me too").

Huckabee, yeah, he did well. I don't know how to feel about it though. Is it good or bad for Giuliani? That's all I care about really.

McCain got badly "pwned" by Ron Paul early on and less badly "pwned" by Giuliani later on but did pretty well between. But Republicans dislike like McCain strongly enought that his performance doesn't really matter. Lol, so funny how he just randomly threw out "RON PAUL WHY ARE YOU AN ISOLATIONIST LOL WHAT ABOUT HITLER" in the middle of answering a completely unrelated question.

Paul never got to fugging talk. I think he got asked like three questions. Ugh.

Tancredo: All I can remember is that he doesn't like illegal immigrants and also doesn't like legal immigrants. Not a big fan of foreigners apparently.

Hunter: His commercial reminded me of a used car dealership ad. I laughed.

[Ineedaride2]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
lots of words about why Paul can win

[/ QUOTE ]

Totally staying away from any personal opinions whatsoever:

http://www.thecherrycreeknews.com/content/view/2063/2/

I assume Paul has spent lots of money in Iowa - not as much as in NH, but it has to be a significant outlay. Results:

[ QUOTE ]
Among those likely to take part in the Iowa Republican caucuses, Romney is viewed favorably by 77%, Huckabee by 76%, Giuliani by 68%, and Thompson by 71%. Those numbers reflect an eleven point-gain for Huckabee and a six-point decline for Giuliani while impressions of the other candidates is essentially unchanged.

As for unfavorables, just 20% offer a negative assessment of Huckabee. Twenty-one percent (21%) have an unfavorable opinion of Romney, 24% say the same about Thompson, and 30% have a negative opinion of Giuliani.

McCain’s numbers have fallen since the previous Rasmussen Reports survey. Among Republicans likely to participate in the caucus, 54% have a favorable opinion of the Arizona Senator while 44% have an unfavorable view.

Ron Paul is viewed favorably by 39% and unfavorably by 52%.

[/ QUOTE ]

His ratings are dead last in what is technically his own party.

[/ QUOTE ]

Adanthar,

Because 2+2's search function sucks so bad (not your fault), I can't find a post that exemplifies why you hate Ron Paul so much.

I've read the Redbean posts, so I understand your views there. However, that's one issue among many, and I was wondering if you would be willing to divulge why you are so adamantly against him in every politics thread I see you in.

Granted, in this thread you simply posted some random poll results. I'm generally drawing from your passing comments in several other threads where Ron Paul has been the subject.

Posting a link to a former thread in which you opinion is adequately explained would be perfectly acceptable.

If you fail to respond to this post, I will take that to mean you have no response to this question, and do, in fact, admit defeat.

[elwoodblues]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
lots of words about why Paul can win

[/ QUOTE ]

Totally staying away from any personal opinions whatsoever:

http://www.thecherrycreeknews.com/content/view/2063/2/

I assume Paul has spent lots of money in Iowa - not as much as in NH, but it has to be a significant outlay. Results:

[ QUOTE ]
Among those likely to take part in the Iowa Republican caucuses, Romney is viewed favorably by 77%, Huckabee by 76%, Giuliani by 68%, and Thompson by 71%. Those numbers reflect an eleven point-gain for Huckabee and a six-point decline for Giuliani while impressions of the other candidates is essentially unchanged.

As for unfavorables, just 20% offer a negative assessment of Huckabee. Twenty-one percent (21%) have an unfavorable opinion of Romney, 24% say the same about Thompson, and 30% have a negative opinion of Giuliani.

McCain’s numbers have fallen since the previous Rasmussen Reports survey. Among Republicans likely to participate in the caucus, 54% have a favorable opinion of the Arizona Senator while 44% have an unfavorable view.

Ron Paul is viewed favorably by 39% and unfavorably by 52%.

[/ QUOTE ]

His ratings are dead last in what is technically his own party.

[/ QUOTE ]

Adanthar,

Because 2+2's search function sucks so bad (not your fault), I can't find a post that exemplifies why you hate Ron Paul so much.

I've read the Redbean posts, so I understand your views there. However, that's one issue among many, and I was wondering if you would be willing to divulge why you are so adamantly against him in every politics thread I see you in.

Granted, in this thread you simply posted some random poll results. I'm generally drawing from your passing comments in several other threads where Ron Paul has been the subject.

Posting a link to a former thread in which you opinion is adequately explained would be perfectly acceptable.

If you fail to respond to this post, I will take that to mean you have no response to this question, and do, in fact, admit defeat.

[/ QUOTE ]

I try not to troll here. I try not to overly criticize a forum member. But really, this has to be the dumbest [censored] thing I've ever read on this forum. "I'm calling you out. Answer my stupid [censored] question or you lose."

[JayTee]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
lots of words about why Paul can win

[/ QUOTE ]

Totally staying away from any personal opinions whatsoever:

http://www.thecherrycreeknews.com/content/view/2063/2/

I assume Paul has spent lots of money in Iowa - not as much as in NH, but it has to be a significant outlay. Results:

[ QUOTE ]
Among those likely to take part in the Iowa Republican caucuses, Romney is viewed favorably by 77%, Huckabee by 76%, Giuliani by 68%, and Thompson by 71%. Those numbers reflect an eleven point-gain for Huckabee and a six-point decline for Giuliani while impressions of the other candidates is essentially unchanged.

As for unfavorables, just 20% offer a negative assessment of Huckabee. Twenty-one percent (21%) have an unfavorable opinion of Romney, 24% say the same about Thompson, and 30% have a negative opinion of Giuliani.

McCain’s numbers have fallen since the previous Rasmussen Reports survey. Among Republicans likely to participate in the caucus, 54% have a favorable opinion of the Arizona Senator while 44% have an unfavorable view.

Ron Paul is viewed favorably by 39% and unfavorably by 52%.

[/ QUOTE ]

His ratings are dead last in what is technically his own party.

[/ QUOTE ]

Adanthar,

Because 2+2's search function sucks so bad (not your fault), I can't find a post that exemplifies why you hate Ron Paul so much.

I've read the Redbean posts, so I understand your views there. However, that's one issue among many, and I was wondering if you would be willing to divulge why you are so adamantly against him in every politics thread I see you in.

Granted, in this thread you simply posted some random poll results. I'm generally drawing from your passing comments in several other threads where Ron Paul has been the subject.

Posting a link to a former thread in which you opinion is adequately explained would be perfectly acceptable.

If you fail to respond to this post, I will take that to mean you have no response to this question, and do, in fact, admit defeat.

[/ QUOTE ]

Complete speculation to follow.....

People like Adanthar are opposed to Ron Paul because to support him is to admit that individuals are capable of taking care of themselves. That a government isn't needed to force people to take the correct course of action. It would be to admit that an elitist group of liberal minded people aren't necessary to make sure that the hoi polloi won't cause there own extinction due to their small minds.

[adanthar]

wow, that's a random hijack, but okay. rather than go dig up my posts here, I'll give you a link:

http://forums.somethingawful.com/sho...readid=2619669

warning: this thread is on a $10/registration forum - though I think you can read w/o registering - and has like 8 billion replies (in fact, it's one of around half a dozen of those threads) so you're probably not going to care. if you feel like trawling through the whole thing, though, feel free. I know I have a bunch of posts on the subject there.

[foal]

[ QUOTE ]
People like Adanthar are opposed to Ron Paul because to support him is to admit that individuals are capable of taking care of themselves. That a government isn't needed to force people to take the correct course of action.

[/ QUOTE ]
lool. supporting someone is not "admitting" that you agree with them on everything. are anarchists who support Ron Paul admitting that a state is necessary?
I tentatively support Paul and I'm like, near socialist.

[adanthar]

[ QUOTE ]
Complete speculation to follow.....

People like Adanthar are opposed to Ron Paul because to support him is to admit that individuals are capable of taking care of themselves. That a government isn't needed to force people to take the correct course of action. It would be to admit that an elitist group of liberal minded people aren't necessary to make sure that the hoi polloi won't cause there own extinction due to their small minds.

[/ QUOTE ]

hmm, yes, that seems to be exactly what I think and not trolling at all*, please do go on

*see, *this* is actually a troll. look, I used the word correctly! yay!

[JayTee]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
People like Adanthar are opposed to Ron Paul because to support him is to admit that individuals are capable of taking care of themselves. That a government isn't needed to force people to take the correct course of action.

[/ QUOTE ]
lool. supporting someone is not "admitting" that you agree with them on everything. are anarchists who support Ron Paul admitting that a state is necessary?
I tentatively support Paul and I'm like, near socialist.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hmmm, If you are "near Socialist" I don't understand how you can support Ron Paul. Care to explain? The ACists who support RP do so from a standpoint of practicality and the knowledge that limiting the state is not condoning its existence (or at least thats my reason). Also, if you disagree with the two points that you quoted I don't understand why in the hell you would support RP (unless you consider the US foreign policy to be so important that it vastly outweighs the other points.)

[Ineedaride2]

To summarize:

Giuliani - is going down regardless of what this debate does for him. People have figured him out and realize that he's barely a republican, he's at LEAST borderline corrupt, and he has no other platform than 9/11.

McCain - He knows he's beat. I think he's a decent person, and he's simply not about to change his unpopular platform when he has VERY little chance to win. Bush Jr. broke his spirit when McCain lost that nomination, and he's never recovered.

Hunter - lol.

Paul - I didn't get to watch the very end of this debate, but considering that these debates are meant to pander to the unwashed, unlearned masses, I don't think he did very well. He has an uphill battle trying to debunk the MSM and conventional wisdom in 90 second sound-bites, so I don't envy him. He's my favorite candidate by far, but I don't believe this showing helped him very much tonight.

Hopefully, it didn't hurt him much.

Romney - by far the highlight of the debate to me. To see him flipflop at LEAST 3 times in one debate was extremely satisfying to me. I don't think he had one original idea the entire time, and to see him crash and burn made my night.

Anybody who would vote for this guy after watching tonight's debate simply likes his hair and is secretly infatuated with his masculine profile.

Tancredo - LOL.

Huckabee - I don't necessarily agree with him, but the night was definitely his. If I were a betting man, and I am, I would place money on him on any of these odds-making sites. Fortunately for me, he is not one of my bottom picks, so my world wouldn't be completely shattered if he got the nomination. It would simply be left in disarray for a time.

Fred Thompson - I think he did well tonight. He called some people out, and nobody could retaliate against him....mainly because nobody knows a god damned thing about him. He's some guy that was in the Senate once, he was also the guy on Days of Thunder, and he has a magical ability to pull hot young tail. How are they supposed to respond to him?

Honestly, this was his best showing to date.


Tancredo - LOL! Wait....I already said that.