Last night's GOP debate....

Bubblehead1980 · 08-12-11, 10:35 AM

What did everyone think?

I rather enjoyed Newt Gingrich calling Chris Wallace out for the crappy questions.Every campaign hits a snag and his example of Ronald Reagan's campaign troubles was priceless.Enjoyed him calling them out for not including what he said on Greta's show two weeks before that fully explained a quote he made later on about Libya.

I do wish Gingrich could up his likeability and escape his baggage because he is what we need.

Pawlenty, Santorum, Romney, Huntsman are jokes.Esp enjoyed Pawlenty getting owned by Bachman.

kraznyi_oktjabr · 08-12-11, 10:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bubblehead1980

What did everyone think?

I rather enjoyed Newt Gingrich calling Chris Wallace out for the crappy questions.Every campaign hits a snag and his example of Ronald Reagan's campaign troubles was priceless.Enjoyed him calling them out for not including what he said on Greta's show two weeks before that fully explained a quote he made later on about Libya.

I do wish Gingrich could up his likeability and escape his baggage because he is what we need.

Pawlenty, Santorum, Romney, Huntsman are jokes.Esp enjoyed Pawlenty getting owned by Bachman.

Is this debate or transcript of it available in internet?

August · 08-12-11, 11:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kraznyi_oktjabr

Is this debate or transcript of it available in internet?

http://foxnewsinsider.com/2011/08/12...-news-channel/

Growler · 08-12-11, 11:26 AM

I wasn't in a position to see it, though I've heard some about it on the radio on the way into work this morning.

I think the GOP is experiencing an bit of a Reformation/Renaissance, maybe, though I don't suspect it will be gentle, quick, nor complete enough in time for the 2012 election. The Tea Party have had an undeniable influence on the GOP, and the growing disillusionment of Americans with the politics in the country will exert a continuing effect on both parties. The one that adapts sooner - which right now appears to be the conservatives - will ultimately succeed.

I do have to queston the timing of running the debate as the NFL preseason was kicking off, though.

Growler · 08-12-11, 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by August

http://foxnewsinsider.com/2011/08/12...-news-channel/

Good find, August, thank you. Reading now.

Purely an aside: Cheesy graphics on the sidebars!

kraznyi_oktjabr · 08-12-11, 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by August

http://foxnewsinsider.com/2011/08/12...-news-channel/

Thank you!

Growler · 08-12-11, 12:30 PM

Initial thoughts, please bear in mnd that I'm reading this and not watching/hearing it, so some of what I'm taking from this is absent the tone of voice and body language that one would get from TV:

Opening Statements:
Bachmann backed down a bit on her three month recovery statement - she started off giving ground, then diverted from the answer into the debt ceiling debate. That concerns me. She was completely spot on about the disaffected of all political stripes, but telling the current President that "he's finished" in '12 is only going to galvanize those disaffected Dems against her, not bring them into alignment with her. So are you trying to help the disaffected, Ms. Bachmann, or alienate half of them?

Romney asserted himself right out of the gate, and backed it up with a concise description of his vision for economic recovery. Didn't see too much equivocation there. He fielded Mr. Baier's "Mittness Protection Program" follow-ups pretty decently, at least in words.

I like what Paul had to say in his opener, and he didn't seem insecure about it, either. Took him a few sentences to get warmed up, but he made his points on the economy pretty well, and said some things that I think people wanted to have acknowledged, specifically, "You don't bail out the bankrupt and then dump the debt on the people."

Mr. Cain really didn't impress me - he seemed a rehash of Bachmann's three-month plan, but at least he put some kind of a plan out there. 'm just not sure it's the right plan. I like the maximum tax idea, but I really dislike the repat tax removal - that doesn't put jobs on American shores, it encourages them to go off-shore since there'd be no tax on those profits coming back in.

Huntsman presented well, alluded to his plan, (even if it's not on their website yet) and stated his experience. No bullpucky, no mincing words, no dancing about. I like that. I just wish he'd made some concrete statements about his plan, even if it isn't complete. He told us to look at what he'd done for and in Utah, but other than saying that he'd cut taxes historically, he really didn't give us much to go on.

Mr. Gingrich seemed to be taking a lot of credit for things that weren't entirely his to claim - it was a divided Congress under Reagan and Clinton, not the Newt Gingrich show. Yes, he was there and participated in the issues he referred to, but he didn't single-handedly save the day.

Pawlenty didn't give us anything but a lofty goal and a "where's Obama?" rant - we can get that anywhere, Mr. Pawlenty, we want to know where YOU are in this debate.

Santorum started strong. He hearkened to his small-steel-town roots, never a bad way to go. He emphasized his goal to help manufacturing. But he really didn't give us much to go on - the whole country isn't in a manufacturing industry, nor did all of us emerge from the shadow of a steel mill.

The initial Bachmann - Pawlenty exchange in re: their records struck me as two brats fighting over attention from Mommy and Daddy (that's the way it read to me, anyway). Bachmann seemed shrill, and Pawlenty just seemed... milquetoast. In ennumerating her Congressional stances and her opponents (Pelosi, Reid, et al) Bachmann appeared almost defensive, like a victim rather than a leader. Not the strength of character from her that I expected. Pawlenty was just... meh. Weak, not very aggressive - right up until, "If this is your version of results, stop. You're killing us." [emphasis mine]. That reveals a deadly weakness in GOP unity at a time when, in order to beat Obama, they need to show more solidarity.

Back to reading.

Armistead · 08-12-11, 01:56 PM

Didn't know if I should laugh or cry. I see no one in this field I like but Paul, but he's wasting his time in the GOP, never get the extreme christian right vote. I like Newt, writes great history books...I think he's smart, has his past issues of politics, but my second choice. The rest, a mix of extreme religious nuts or corporate businessmen. I liked when Huntsman said he was a job creator that it was pointed out 10,000 of the 12,000 jobs he created, he did so in China. Bachman is another Palin with a lil more brain matter. Romney, a walking $500 haircut, comes across out of touch and an elitist.. Perry ever shows up, do well early, too radical to beat Obama.

Paul would win it, but they'll give into ideals and we'll put up a religious ideals person that will lose.

Takeda Shingen · 08-12-11, 02:16 PM

The shame of it is that Barack Obama is becoming an increasingly enfeebled incumbent, but the Republican field is so weak that it will make the election a real horse race when it should be a GOP runaway.

08-12-11, 10:35 AM	#1
Bubblehead1980 Navy Seal Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Florida USA Posts: 7,100 Downloads: 605 Uploads: 44	Last night's GOP debate.... What did everyone think? I rather enjoyed Newt Gingrich calling Chris Wallace out for the crappy questions.Every campaign hits a snag and his example of Ronald Reagan's campaign troubles was priceless.Enjoyed him calling them out for not including what he said on Greta's show two weeks before that fully explained a quote he made later on about Libya. I do wish Gingrich could up his likeability and escape his baggage because he is what we need. Pawlenty, Santorum, Romney, Huntsman are jokes.Esp enjoyed Pawlenty getting owned by Bachman.

08-12-11, 11:26 AM	#4
Growler A long way from the sea Join Date: May 2005 Location: Iowa Posts: 1,913 Downloads: 21 Uploads: 0	I wasn't in a position to see it, though I've heard some about it on the radio on the way into work this morning. I think the GOP is experiencing an bit of a Reformation/Renaissance, maybe, though I don't suspect it will be gentle, quick, nor complete enough in time for the 2012 election. The Tea Party have had an undeniable influence on the GOP, and the growing disillusionment of Americans with the politics in the country will exert a continuing effect on both parties. The one that adapts sooner - which right now appears to be the conservatives - will ultimately succeed. I do have to queston the timing of running the debate as the NFL preseason was kicking off, though. __________________ At Fiddler’s Green, where seamen true When here they’ve done their duty The bowl of grog shall still renew And pledge to love and beauty.

08-12-11, 12:30 PM	#7
Growler A long way from the sea Join Date: May 2005 Location: Iowa Posts: 1,913 Downloads: 21 Uploads: 0	Initial thoughts, please bear in mnd that I'm reading this and not watching/hearing it, so some of what I'm taking from this is absent the tone of voice and body language that one would get from TV: Opening Statements: Bachmann backed down a bit on her three month recovery statement - she started off giving ground, then diverted from the answer into the debt ceiling debate. That concerns me. She was completely spot on about the disaffected of all political stripes, but telling the current President that "he's finished" in '12 is only going to galvanize those disaffected Dems against her, not bring them into alignment with her. So are you trying to help the disaffected, Ms. Bachmann, or alienate half of them? Romney asserted himself right out of the gate, and backed it up with a concise description of his vision for economic recovery. Didn't see too much equivocation there. He fielded Mr. Baier's "Mittness Protection Program" follow-ups pretty decently, at least in words. I like what Paul had to say in his opener, and he didn't seem insecure about it, either. Took him a few sentences to get warmed up, but he made his points on the economy pretty well, and said some things that I think people wanted to have acknowledged, specifically, "You don't bail out the bankrupt and then dump the debt on the people." Mr. Cain really didn't impress me - he seemed a rehash of Bachmann's three-month plan, but at least he put some kind of a plan out there. 'm just not sure it's the right plan. I like the maximum tax idea, but I really dislike the repat tax removal - that doesn't put jobs on American shores, it encourages them to go off-shore since there'd be no tax on those profits coming back in. Huntsman presented well, alluded to his plan, (even if it's not on their website yet) and stated his experience. No bullpucky, no mincing words, no dancing about. I like that. I just wish he'd made some concrete statements about his plan, even if it isn't complete. He told us to look at what he'd done for and in Utah, but other than saying that he'd cut taxes historically, he really didn't give us much to go on. Mr. Gingrich seemed to be taking a lot of credit for things that weren't entirely his to claim - it was a divided Congress under Reagan and Clinton, not the Newt Gingrich show. Yes, he was there and participated in the issues he referred to, but he didn't single-handedly save the day. Pawlenty didn't give us anything but a lofty goal and a "where's Obama?" rant - we can get that anywhere, Mr. Pawlenty, we want to know where YOU are in this debate. Santorum started strong. He hearkened to his small-steel-town roots, never a bad way to go. He emphasized his goal to help manufacturing. But he really didn't give us much to go on - the whole country isn't in a manufacturing industry, nor did all of us emerge from the shadow of a steel mill. The initial Bachmann - Pawlenty exchange in re: their records struck me as two brats fighting over attention from Mommy and Daddy (that's the way it read to me, anyway). Bachmann seemed shrill, and Pawlenty just seemed... milquetoast. In ennumerating her Congressional stances and her opponents (Pelosi, Reid, et al) Bachmann appeared almost defensive, like a victim rather than a leader. Not the strength of character from her that I expected. Pawlenty was just... meh. Weak, not very aggressive - right up until, "If this is your version of results, stop. You're killing us." [emphasis mine]. That reveals a deadly weakness in GOP unity at a time when, in order to beat Obama, they need to show more solidarity. Back to reading. __________________ At Fiddler’s Green, where seamen true When here they’ve done their duty The bowl of grog shall still renew And pledge to love and beauty.

08-12-11, 01:56 PM	#8
Armistead Rear Admiral Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: on the Dan Posts: 10,880 Downloads: 364 Uploads: 0	Didn't know if I should laugh or cry. I see no one in this field I like but Paul, but he's wasting his time in the GOP, never get the extreme christian right vote. I like Newt, writes great history books...I think he's smart, has his past issues of politics, but my second choice. The rest, a mix of extreme religious nuts or corporate businessmen. I liked when Huntsman said he was a job creator that it was pointed out 10,000 of the 12,000 jobs he created, he did so in China. Bachman is another Palin with a lil more brain matter. Romney, a walking $500 haircut, comes across out of touch and an elitist.. Perry ever shows up, do well early, too radical to beat Obama. Paul would win it, but they'll give into ideals and we'll put up a religious ideals person that will lose.

08-12-11, 02:16 PM	#9
Takeda Shingen Navy Seal Join Date: Mar 2000 Posts: 8,643 Downloads: 19 Uploads: 0	The shame of it is that Barack Obama is becoming an increasingly enfeebled incumbent, but the Republican field is so weak that it will make the election a real horse race when it should be a GOP runaway.