My observations on he debate:
The losers:
Tancredo couldn’t stop talking about immigration. Don’t they call that a one trick pony in Colorado? Of all the GOP candidates, he scares me the most. Fred Thompson is a close second. His answers are rather vague and hollow. Further, they reflect a shallow understanding of international affairs and creating effective public policy. Thompson seems to try to appeal to the middle without saying much.
The muddy top of the heap:
I hope you can’t win the GOP nomination based on such meaningless platitudes.I heart Huckabee. Its no mystery. He sounded smart and principled. Giuliani and Romney both sound smart, professional. Giuliani consistently demonstrated a persuasive edge over Romney, particularly on the taxation and line item veto issues. Giuliani also continued his attack on Hillary to set the stage for what he perceives to be his eventual opponent. McCain and Brownback performed decently as well. McCain was probably the biggest surprise, given his campaign struggles of late. CNBC even labeled him a “comeback kid” due to his “resurgence.” I continue to think that Huckabee makes the most sense as the best evangelical candidate from the republican field.
Libertarians v. Conservatism:
I don’t agree with Ron Paul. However, why do Republicans give Ron Paul such a hard time? (generally by underhanded name calling instead of engaging him in rational argument) He’s the only candidate that takes Republican fiscal conservatism seriously? He is the logical extension of their economic principles. So my question for each and every GOP voter is: why is he so crazy? Why are his policies so misguided? And what makes the other candidates better at solving those issues
Your take on the winners and losers:
So who won the debate? Who sounded the worst?
5 responses so far ↓
Thomas Nikl // October 9, 2007 at 10:43 pm |
I would answer the Ron Paul question by saying that any group of people who can elect George W Bush- TWICE- obviously isn’t rational enough to engage anyone in a serious debate, particularly Ron Paul.
Giuliani is winning a campaign founded on 9/11. I think that speaks volumes in and of itself about the a large volume of the GOP.
Volunteer Voters » Now They Really Hate Him // October 9, 2007 at 11:19 pm |
[...] bloggers seem to distaste Ron Paul so much and, after watching the Republican debate in Michigan, Nathan Ketsdever concurs: I don’t agree with Ron Paul. However, why do Republicans give Ron Paul such a hard time? [...]
Dick Hanson // October 10, 2007 at 12:00 am |
I believe Ron Pauls stating that he would withdraw American troops from Iraq immediately discounts his chance of ever being president. All of the democrats running for president have stated now that they would not start withdrawing troops from Iraq until the Iraq government is stablized.
Giuliani will win the Republican nomination because he is a hawk on the war and his heroitic actions during 9-11. I believe he won the debate and is the only one who can beat Clinton.
James Hutchison // October 11, 2007 at 1:33 pm |
I agree with all of Ron Pauls policies but I am a Libertarian. I do find it very entertaining to see everyone break out in a sweat when he takes the stage. Ron Paul does know the issues quite well, and he also is the only one that is actually FOR THE PEOPLE, LIBERTY, JUSTICE, SMALL GOVERNMENT, LOWER TAXES, and what I believe is THE TRUE AMERICAN WAY.
Only true Americans vote for Libertarian / Constitutionalist principles… VOTE FOR RON PAUL IN 2008 !!!!
marilyn mangan // October 27, 2007 at 10:26 pm |
duncan hunter is for the american people. check his voting record past and present. he will bring jobs back to the u.s. you might even be able to buy american products here. mike huckabee is for amnesty and open borders, that is for the illegals(no thanks).