Well most people say it was a toss up between Romney and Huckabee, I disagree with you and them. There can be no winner of a debate if there is no debate. What MSNBC showed was a long boring politically biased question and answer session. A debate is when a question is posed and the answers are given and they get to discuss with each other, even if briefly because of time constraints, the opposing views on that question. See dictionary definition of dbate below.
2007-05-10 14:35:11
·
answer #1
·
answered by Wilkow Conservative 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
Advertisements took much of the space for the candidates on Yahoo. Thus, only a limited number of aspirants were listed grossly omitting Ron Paul who was deemed to have won the GOP debate.
VOTE for your choice as US President on my 360 degrees blog and know who will likely win.
2007-05-10 21:36:23
·
answer #2
·
answered by FRAGINAL, JTM 7
·
0⤊
2⤋
You are just going to have to vote for him and not care what party represents who. Their choice for who they want to represent the republican party is already cut and dried. It's Mitt Romney in case you were wondering. Ron Paul has my vote as well.
2007-05-10 21:49:02
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
His traditional values are now considered too revolutionary.
Edit: Sorry buttercup....he's running as a Republican. Glad to know you're weighing each candidate's policies before you make an educated decision....
2007-05-10 21:32:09
·
answer #4
·
answered by evans_michael_ya 6
·
0⤊
2⤋
Who!! No one won that debate. And he is a no name candidate.
2007-05-10 21:23:12
·
answer #5
·
answered by GrapeMSH 3
·
1⤊
2⤋
waste of time.
at what point do you close number of candidates to be in a debate.
the more you have the less time for answers.
someone must make the decision of how many and who.
2007-05-10 21:23:36
·
answer #6
·
answered by MR TADS 4
·
1⤊
2⤋
Probably because he's neither a Republican or a
Democrat, which are the two parties voting is set
up to accept.
2007-05-10 21:26:19
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋