GOP debate this evening in Iowa. Any comments?

[mav]

Did anyone watch the debate this evening?

I have heard several things that I did not like, and a few things I did. Although I wouldn't vote for Newt, I did think he did well. I enjoyed how Gingrich was attacking the media, and I thought it was funny when Paul started schooling Santorum.

Any comments on what you heard this evening?

[Oh Shoot]

...

Any comments on what you heard this evening?

Well, it's still going on, but I think main irony is that the only viable challenger to Mitt and Michele isn't even there. Rick apparently declares Saturday.

It's also ironic that Mitt isn't even in the straw poll of the state in which he's campaigning and debating.

I also find further irony in that fact that religion is going to be as important a voter issue with these three as any of their practical qualifications, but it remains truer than ever that nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public.

- OS

Edited August 12, 2011 by OhShoot

[Guest Lester Weevils]

Didn't hear anything to change my ranking. I like Ron Paul and probably wouldn't get ridiculously tired of Herman Cain over 4 or 8 years.

All the smart people say neither has a chance. I don't like the others. Not even a little bit. Am trying to be open minded. If one of them did something to look better would probably have noticed. Just don't like em. Maybe better than Obama but not drastically so. Though it would be a cold day in hell afore I'd vote Obama.

Which isn't unusual. Can't recall the last time I genuinely liked a front-runner. The average joe apparently has lots different taste than me, for these candidates to survive this far along in the primary process. Maybe the average joe has better taste. I just don't like em. Can't help it.

[bigwakes]

I'm starting to see that Mitt doesn't have much that I can agree with. Am I missing something? He appointed liberal pro-choice judges? He is saying Obama care was right for Massachusets? He won't answer the question of can government force people to buy insurance. Why is he even on the republican ticket?

[mav]

I also find further irony in that fact that religion is going to be as important a voter issue with these three as any of their practical qualifications, but it remains truer than ever that nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public.

- OS

The importance on religion really doesn't surprise me. Social conservatives still have very strong voice in the GOP. However, I don't think the religion issue will be as big, although still important, this next election as in previous elections. I often talk to some of my friends and acquaintances who are very socially conservative that you if don't get the fiscal issues solved then your social issues really aren't gonna mean that much.

Ron Paul is still my guy too Lester.

[kieefer]

Watched it all.

Too bad Dana Carvey is not on SNL anymore, he'd have Pawlenty down to a tee. Timmy reminds me of Bush one and two. Hated that he torn into Bachmann.

Bachmann I liked but can't see her getting elected. A Bachmann/Newt ticket would be cool.

Huntsman a loser, the crowd thought so too.

Newt I liked and probably knows more about how to fix things better than any of them but, he's Newt.

Romney will probably be the candidate the media picks for us, too bad.

RonPaul, he made me laugh, he has some good ideas and some off the wall ideas but be will never be elected either. Sounded like he had a lot of supporters in the house. I'd rather see his Son up there than him.

Santorum I like a little but I can't see him being elected either.

Herman Cain I could vote for. A Cain/Palin ticket would be more cool.

Oh yea, Rick Perry may get in, I'd like to hear more about him.

Still 15 months to go?

Edited August 12, 2011 by kieefer

[Guest Lester Weevils]

I'm starting to see that Mitt doesn't have much that I can agree with. Am I missing something? He appointed liberal pro-choice judges? He is saying Obama care was right for Massachusets? He won't answer the question of can government force people to buy insurance. Why is he even on the republican ticket?

Hi bigwakes

I'm completely missing it too.

Am not deaf to policy discussions. Maybe it would be better to listen without watching. Just call me captain shallow. I don't mind.

What I see up there is a smirking greaser from MA, a smirking greaser from MN, a democrat from Utah, a dam fool from PA, a nice enough church lady from MN, a burned-out history perfessor from GA, a wise old congresscritter from TX, and a man who has paid his dues from GA. But there is hope! Soon a smirking greaser from TX will enter the fray!

Perhaps most mystifying is why Bill Haslam ain't up there smirking with the rest of em? Why not a smirking jerk from TN? Are we chopped liver or what?

Frank Zappa wrote songs about plastic people. Nuff said.

Apologies for being Mr Negative. Would change if possible. It ain't as much fun as it's cracked up to be.

[Guest stevieb615]

No matter what is said, the media (foxnews) will decide the winner of the republican nomination because the majority of Americans are too lazy to be proactive in researching which candidates they agree with on issues. So they just vote for whoever gets the most seemingly positive coverage on foxnews.

[bigwakes]

I have been guilty of staying out of the primary and just vote for whoever the republicans can muster.....and then there was McCain. I'll be paying attention to this one. Are there any candidates that are being supported widely by the Tea Party besides Bachman?

[Guest Lester Weevils]

I have been guilty of staying out of the primary and just vote for whoever the republicans can muster.....and then there was McCain. I'll be paying attention to this one. Are there any candidates that are being supported widely by the Tea Party besides Bachman?

Hi bigwakes

Ideally (IMO) a tea party would concentrate solely on fiscal/budget issues and "no comment" on other issues. In order to have the largest critical mass. Kinda like a National Taxpayers Union on steroids.

National Taxpayers Union

There is no firm definition of the term and tea party means different things depending on who you ask. After tea parties spontaneously sprang up, all sorts came out of the woodwork trying to be "tea party" leaders and attach their own pet hobby horses to the movement. Especially religious and social conservatives. Got nothin against social conservatives except they are not the only fiscal conservative people in the usa. If the tea party gets associated with social conservatism then lots of otherwise good members will stay away thereby weakening the movement.

Like a music fad or hairstyle, politicians are keen to follow fashion and pick up a few votes. If claiming to be a "tea party candidate" shows election advantage, then lots of politicians are suddenly tea party candidates even though they are still the same old same old politicians they were before the tea party. Nothing changed except the name.

Ron Paul is the grandaddy of a tea party fiscal attitude. He speaks noncommittally but positively about tea partiers. He approves of them as long as it doesn't veer into conflict with libertarian principles. Ron may be too libertarian on non fiscal issues to make a majority of tea party folks happy. If a tea party movement were identical to a libertarian movement, then the tea partiers might as well just join the libertarian party and get it over with.

Herman Cain was active with early tea party events and has spoken at many rallies. I think he is very popular with "core vintage" tea party folk, but dunno how he fares with people trying to drag the movement in different directions.

Michelle Bachmann was active early on with tea party events, but IMO she is a prime example of a person trying to dilute the movement by adding too much unnecessary social conservative baggage. Which if successful will make it ultimately irrelevant. The folks in Michell Bachmann's version of a tea party might as well just join the constitution party and be done with it.

Edited August 12, 2011 by Lester Weevils

[Guest TresOsos]

First I'm not a O supporter.

But all I see is the same old retreads with the same old tired retread ideas.

The Repulicans are going to lose this if they don't get some new blood.

A true conservative with true conservative ideas and hate to burst bubbles but I don't see much I like in Perry.

[hornett22]

Voting Ron Paul again. Nothing in this country is ever going to change unless we get someone in like him.

[kieefer]

Voting Ron Paul again. Nothing in this country is ever going to change unless we get someone in like him.

One of the problems with Paul is if he gets elected nothing will get done because there's not that many in government who think like him. Obama is getting his way because the Dims had the majority when he got elected. Paul doesn't have that kind of support on either side.

[Guest bkelm18]

One of the problems with Paul is if he gets elected nothing will get done because there's not that many in government who think like him. Obama is getting his way because the Dims had the majority when he got elected. Paul doesn't have that kind of support on either side.

+1. I'd love to get Ron in office, but as you say, not much would change. The President is only one part of a large gov't. If the House and Senate don't back the President, not much will happen.

[hornett22]

One of the problems with Paul is if he gets elected nothing will get done because there's not that many in government who think like him. Obama is getting his way because the Dims had the majority when he got elected. Paul doesn't have that kind of support on either side.

Been hearing that BS for years,I ain't buying it!

Government not getting anything done? I like the sound of that! Since every time they DO get something done,WE GET SCREWED!

[Guest bkelm18]

hat

Government not getting anything done? I like the sound of that! Since every time they DO get something done,WE GET SCREWED!

That is true, however I would like the next administration to at least attempt to un-f*ck us from the disaster this administration has become.

[Guest ArmyVeteran37214]

Ron Paul did a great job of getting his points across last night. I support Ron Paul! For anyone that needs to see a recap of what he said, I submit for you the following videos.

[Guest Tiny G]

I'm voting for the guy that can do the best work for the economy in the 4 years he'll be there. . that'll be Mitt.

I don't agree with him on a lot . .but he can get us back on track.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

If somebody like Ron would put his foot down, congress would need a super-majority to override a veto. So unless congress can override a veto on their spending increases, a prez old enough not to give a rat's butt could force spending cuts at the very least. "Either cut 10 percent this year or I ain't signing it."

Of course GW Bush could have done that too if he had cared about the debt he was piling up.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I watched it on the second showing after work. Ron Paul did a good job, considering

the way some call him a loon. Actually the ones I really didn't care for were Huntsman

and Pawlenty. The biggest problem I had with the whole debate was its style. That many

in the debate doesn't make me think of a debate very much. I think Michelle held her own

quite well, also. Herman Cain scored a few points. As much as I distrust Romney, he did

well enough to stay in the finals.

I'm curious about Rick Perry and Sarah Palin. It will be an interesting horse race. I can't be

cynical about this.

[mav]

The results from the straw poll are in.

Bachmann: 4,823

Paul: 4,671

Pawlenty: 2,293

Santorum: 1,657

Cain: 1,456

Perry: 718 (didn't announce until later)

Romney: 567 (didn't compete in the straw poll)

Gingrich: 385

Huntsman: 69

McCotter: 35

I was pleased that Paul did well. I was hoping he would win it.

[Oh Shoot]

...

I was pleased that Paul did well. I was hoping he would win it.

Doesn't necessarily mean much. Romney won it overwhelmingly in 07, but later didn't even win the Iowa caucus. Huckabee won that, but of course neither got the nomination.

- OS

[mav]

Doesn't necessarily mean much. Romney won it overwhelmingly in 07, but later didn't even win the Iowa caucus. Huckabee won that, but of course neither got the nomination.

- OS

Oh, I know. I just like seeing Paul doing well even though the media does their best in marginalizing him.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

Oh, I know. I just like seeing Paul doing well even though the media does their best in marginalizing him.

Agreed. Fox news is going to outrageous lengths cramming certain candidates down people's throats. Making no pretense of "fair and balanced". Would love to see Ron Paul do well just to make those jerks out as the fools they are. Admittedly that is petty and shallow, but the talking heads are so annoying. At least they make it easy to identify the candidates Rupert Murdoch believes best for the peons.

If Rupert Murdoch and George Soros could just come to agreement about what is in our best interest then it would be so much simpler. Fox and MSNBC could both elect the same figurehead leader and everything would be wonderful.

Realistically it seems doubtful that people are yet ready for a libertarian president. If they ever will be.

Some folks here with good sense are interested in Rick Perry apparently because they just want SOMEBODY with a chance of beating Obama, and admittedly the current republican lineup is incredibly weak as far as offering up a candidate strong enough to survive a concerted main stream media character assasination onslaught. Maybe Perry would turn out OK. Even if we succeed in beating Obama, its gonna have to turn around FAST in four years or we will have an even-more-commie democrat president four years later. Beating Obama can't be the only goal or we could win the battle and lose the war. If Perry gets it, I hope he is up the the job.

Driving around Friday was listening to a Sirius Patriot channel talk show where many callers explained "there is something not quite right" about Romney. They couldn't put their finger on it-- The guy does not strike them the right way. Thought I was the lone ranger thinking thataway. If lots of people think thataway then he can't beat Obama regardless of how much a man crush Rupert Murdoch has for Romney.

Then there was a caller who claimed that there are too many primary candidates and that the republican party should talk with all but the three front runners and tell em to quit so our choices would not be so confusing.

The coup de gras was a big-brained northern republican caller who was elitism incarnate. He stated that voters, especially southern voters, do not like intelligent candidates. They are merely intimidated by Romney's vast intelligence, good looks, and staggering wealth.

Hmmm, well I don't care about his wealth. Guess anybody who gets rich is probably smart. I think he is ugly as sin but a buzz cut would marginally improve the situation. He's got that aged politicians and TV preachers hairdo. A mix between Oral Roberts and Robert Byrd. Young men can look good with long hair. Old men not so much. An old man with such ridiculous hair going on-- How can you take that seriously? It is basically John Edwards with vitalis rather than hair spray.

I still think there's something wrong with the dude but can't put my finger on it.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Hey Lester

I like the Patriot Channel on there, too. Whenever I get in my wife's car, that's where it goes.

I've felt that way about Romney all along although I would vote for him against Obama or

even Hillary. I definitely would take anyone else at that debate over Romney, otherwise.

I can't wait for the crowd to thin out, way too congested right now, but that's the process.