[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7B83tTpAUZg]Republican Debate On National Security 2011 pt.1 (REPOST! AUDIO FIXED!) - YouTube[/ame]
Thoughts? Opinions?
Thoughts? Opinions?
So Who Watched the Republican Foreign Policy Debate Last Night?
- Thread starter xmcp123
- Start date
I'm a political junky, so I'll bust out my opinions first:
Ron Paul - I love this man, but he did himself no favors amongst the Republican faithful. He delivered exactly the performance you'd expect and they will be loved by the RP faithful. The Heritage foundation questions were loaded questions ("The Patriot act prevented XYZ attacks, should we lengthen it?") coming from his perspective. If he can hold onto his 25% in Iowa after this, he's a solid chance to win the state.
Michelle Bachmann - Came off as much more competent than she normally does. Her position on the intelligence committee allowed her a lot more background. She may take some heat for leaking classified information about how many nuclear sites Pakistan had and attacks against them, but politically it will be worth it. She probably gained a little bit, but not enough to be a real contender again.
Newt Gingrich - I don't agree with him much, but he put on a very strong performance. He will be the main competitor to Romney for awhile at least. He was the only candidate(aside from RP) that seemed to have both original ideas and an understanding of the issues. He seems to be banking on the moderate Republicans(he allowed for some illegal Immigrant amnesty and held firm to it) probably banking that the evangelicals are going to go with Bachmann or Perry. It's a solid strategy and he appealed to his target.
Rick Perry - Is completely done. He seemed like a middle schooler who had forgotten to complete his presentation and was just free-wheeling it on stage. At one point he committed to a no-fly zone over Syria(Syria uses tanks against it's citizens, not planes) and wanted to put sanctions on Syrian oil, which wouldn't have a strong impact(oil has been declining in Syria).
Rick Santorum - His campaign never fully started but now it's fully ended. He's dead in the water.
Herman Cain - Made it abundantly clear that he knows absolutely nothing about foreign policy. Every answer he had came down to "I'll check with XYZ and decide later". He has no solid positions, no real plan. He tried to bring the debate back to economics because that's the only leg he has to stand on.
Jonathon Huntsman - I completely forget his answers. That's not a good sign.
Ron Paul - I love this man, but he did himself no favors amongst the Republican faithful. He delivered exactly the performance you'd expect and they will be loved by the RP faithful. The Heritage foundation questions were loaded questions ("The Patriot act prevented XYZ attacks, should we lengthen it?") coming from his perspective. If he can hold onto his 25% in Iowa after this, he's a solid chance to win the state.
Michelle Bachmann - Came off as much more competent than she normally does. Her position on the intelligence committee allowed her a lot more background. She may take some heat for leaking classified information about how many nuclear sites Pakistan had and attacks against them, but politically it will be worth it. She probably gained a little bit, but not enough to be a real contender again.
Newt Gingrich - I don't agree with him much, but he put on a very strong performance. He will be the main competitor to Romney for awhile at least. He was the only candidate(aside from RP) that seemed to have both original ideas and an understanding of the issues. He seems to be banking on the moderate Republicans(he allowed for some illegal Immigrant amnesty and held firm to it) probably banking that the evangelicals are going to go with Bachmann or Perry. It's a solid strategy and he appealed to his target.
Rick Perry - Is completely done. He seemed like a middle schooler who had forgotten to complete his presentation and was just free-wheeling it on stage. At one point he committed to a no-fly zone over Syria(Syria uses tanks against it's citizens, not planes) and wanted to put sanctions on Syrian oil, which wouldn't have a strong impact(oil has been declining in Syria).
Rick Santorum - His campaign never fully started but now it's fully ended. He's dead in the water.
Herman Cain - Made it abundantly clear that he knows absolutely nothing about foreign policy. Every answer he had came down to "I'll check with XYZ and decide later". He has no solid positions, no real plan. He tried to bring the debate back to economics because that's the only leg he has to stand on.
Jonathon Huntsman - I completely forget his answers. That's not a good sign.
Loved Ron Paul, hated everyone else. Probably the first debate the Newt (at least that I remember) berated the moderators. No one up on that stage besides Ron Paul can even articulate his or her position. It's all a lot of double speak and avoidance I often found the rest of the candidates using. RP got a lot of applause for his ideas, and I think he got more than 89 seconds this time but they did not let him rebuttal as much as I would have liked.
It's the same as always- you have good vs. evil on that state IMO, and really only 1 right answer.
Was wondering about this. I thought the general rule was that if you are addressed directly, then you will have a chance to address who ever called you out. Every single person up there called him out and he got to rebuttal only to Newt.
Was wondering about this. I thought the general rule was that if you are addressed directly, then you will have a chance to address who ever called you out. Every single person up there called him out and he got to rebuttal only to Newt.
I have to agree with Ron Paul. Although it may sound a bit hard to swallow for most, he tells the truth. That's all there is to it.
Does Michelle Bachman really think interrogation was outsourced to the ACLU, does she even know where Guantanamo Bay is and what it does? Something about her makes me want to break something......
The world is on fire, I would love to get a president that excelled in fixing the country we live in over those we don't
I haven't watched a political debate since high school. It's like watching people on a first date (front-load the good stuff, hide the bad stuff, and hopefully get laid/elected).
However, a few thoughts:
Ron Paul - he clearly understands the machinations of the state. He also has a keen understanding of economics. Were I a voting man, he would get my vote.
Michele Bachmann - she's off my radar. She professes a love of Mises, but talk is cheap. Saying she reads "Human Action" is not the same as understanding, and being able to explain, economic law.
Newt Gingrich - Very adept at debates. He can eat whomever he chooses. But I don't trust him (not because of his personal baggage). Among all the GOP candidates, I would most like to see him in a debate with Obama.
Rick Perry - Good grief. I never felt this guy had a chance. He's best a pandering from a script. Catch him in the open, and he's easy prey. It's like listening to a guy who has never changed the oil in his car explain how to overhaul your transmission. You get the feeling he just read an eHow article on the topic.
Rick Santorum - Nothing to add here.
Herman Cain - Rabidly anti-Muslim. Ignorant in economics. Cannot express intelligent ideas regarding foreign policy. Rattles offer rhyming one-liners as if he's Eminem. The perfect candidate for boobus Americanus.
Jon Huntsman - Nothing to add, except he pimps his wife and daughters to the press a little too aggressively.
However, a few thoughts:
Ron Paul - he clearly understands the machinations of the state. He also has a keen understanding of economics. Were I a voting man, he would get my vote.
Michele Bachmann - she's off my radar. She professes a love of Mises, but talk is cheap. Saying she reads "Human Action" is not the same as understanding, and being able to explain, economic law.
Newt Gingrich - Very adept at debates. He can eat whomever he chooses. But I don't trust him (not because of his personal baggage). Among all the GOP candidates, I would most like to see him in a debate with Obama.
Rick Perry - Good grief. I never felt this guy had a chance. He's best a pandering from a script. Catch him in the open, and he's easy prey. It's like listening to a guy who has never changed the oil in his car explain how to overhaul your transmission. You get the feeling he just read an eHow article on the topic.
Rick Santorum - Nothing to add here.
Herman Cain - Rabidly anti-Muslim. Ignorant in economics. Cannot express intelligent ideas regarding foreign policy. Rattles offer rhyming one-liners as if he's Eminem. The perfect candidate for boobus Americanus.
Jon Huntsman - Nothing to add, except he pimps his wife and daughters to the press a little too aggressively.
Yes that is the rule. Everyone else got to rebuttal against each other, often many times. There was long exchanges especially in the first half. The one I was specifically angry about was an exchange between Paul and Santorum early in the event which left Paul unable to rebuttal because they went to commercial and did not pick it up after.
I thought Ron Paul killed it.
If Ron Paul wins Iowa all these Neo-Cons will have to STFU about RP being unelectable. If he can get to the general and get his message out he will DESTROY obama. It will be RP and the American people against the media/establishment and I would love to see that showdown.
The fact that the government/wall street nexus completely destroyed confidence in futures, farmers are pissed off right now, big time. This is great for RP.
NOTE: This is also why I eyeroll at people saying that RP didn't appeal to these moronic talk radio drone/endless war everywhere republicans. He's not going to EVER do that people! He is principled and those people are going to have to wake up and move to his positions. That IS happening in some measurable amount...how much by Iowa is the question. Most people stand on a very shaky foundation and are easily swayed.
If you follow the psy-ops of the intelligence community, you know what they will do if Ron Paul surges....they will swoop in to save you from the evil Iranians overnight.
If Ron Paul wins Iowa all these Neo-Cons will have to STFU about RP being unelectable. If he can get to the general and get his message out he will DESTROY obama. It will be RP and the American people against the media/establishment and I would love to see that showdown.
The fact that the government/wall street nexus completely destroyed confidence in futures, farmers are pissed off right now, big time. This is great for RP.
NOTE: This is also why I eyeroll at people saying that RP didn't appeal to these moronic talk radio drone/endless war everywhere republicans. He's not going to EVER do that people! He is principled and those people are going to have to wake up and move to his positions. That IS happening in some measurable amount...how much by Iowa is the question. Most people stand on a very shaky foundation and are easily swayed.
If you follow the psy-ops of the intelligence community, you know what they will do if Ron Paul surges....they will swoop in to save you from the evil Iranians overnight.
I try hard to watch them, but I just end up getting enraged knowing that Mitt or some other hack will end up getting the nod. Hearing the audience boo him when he talks about blowback or how racial profiling is idiotic makes my blood boil.
my favorite part of the debate was the face romney made when paul responded to his rhetoric on obamacare vs. military spending.
Ron Paul Highlights - CNN National Security Debate - YouTube
Ron Paul Highlights - CNN National Security Debate - YouTube
I'm amazed that people still watch this and analyze these people as if they are actually speaking their views.
Besides RP of course
Besides RP of course
