No matter what party you are with, you have to admit it don't you?
2007-05-16 08:16:43 · 23 answers · asked by stepped on the Third Rail 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
After watching BOTH debates (R and D) the Republicans had MUCH tougher questions, oh and they weren't allowed to answer questions that weren't asked either. If they did, Dodd came right back and asked them to answer the SPECIFIC qustion that was asked. Rudy really had his day when he dispelled the buffoon comment that WE were responsible for 9/11. That was a great comeback. I gained some much needed respect for him. He handled the abortion question as well as could be expected.
2007-05-16 08:24:25 · update #1
ummm someone tell Rabble that the Dem's already had one debate. There are prerequisites for answering my questions...Like having a clue
2007-05-16 08:26:02 · update #2
PS I'm a indie. Oh and for the record being black doesn't mean anything to me except...you're black. Just because there was white guys out there doesn't mean a thing. If the best qualified guy is white..oh well. If he is black...oh well. if he is a she oh well. But you score no extra points ofr being black or a woman.
2007-05-16 08:29:07 · update #3
I have to agree that the republican debate was much better. I don't know if they changed the format after the democratic debate or what but this one was much more informative and the candidates did not get a chance to ramble on about things that were not asked of them. I thought there was alot more answers to real questions then the democratic debate and I got to see and hear the candidates and have a clearer picture of what their views are on the different issues, after the democratic debates I was left feeling like I didn't know much about anyone.
2007-05-16 17:22:09 · answer #1 · answered by tnlstn 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I actually believe it is just the opposite. None of the candidates resinated with me on any level. It all seemed very safe, no one managed to emerge as any real threat to the democrats.
The democrats however also had a pretty boring debate...but all of this is to be expected this early in the game. No one wants to make an error.
But just to mention it....come on....three of the republicans don't believe in evolution....really?? That sounds promising.
2007-05-16 15:42:20 · answer #2 · answered by Meggerz 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I wouldn't say that. Most of all the candidates from both parties so far seem a bit weak. Bill Richardson, a democrat, impressed me. Ron Paul and Gilmore of the Republican side impressed me as well. The rest of the field I wouldn't vote for.
2007-05-16 15:37:37 · answer #3 · answered by Perplexed Bob 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Stronger smelling, maybe. No, they're all a bunch of flag-waving nuts who can't wait to get their hands on the great symbol of all power, the suitcase with the codes for nuclear launch. Two voices approximating rational thought were Ron Paul and Tommy Thompson, yet their affiliation with the Republican party makes their sanity highly suspect.
2007-05-16 16:05:10 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Good Joke Stepped, I laughed out loud. The repubs need to regroup after the election, and stop being so corrupt and gain some credibility back to be of any influence in the future.
2007-05-16 15:21:03 · answer #5 · answered by World Peace Now 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
You're absolutely right, because the Republicans have Ron Paul. And with no competition for the nomination except a bunch of moronic war mongers, he just might go all the way.
2007-05-16 15:20:58 · answer #6 · answered by Ray Eston Smith Jr 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No I do not have to admit anything of the sort. Quite frankly I believe they are very even with the Democrats having a very slight edge.
2007-05-16 15:21:21 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
No supporting arguments to back up your claim, and attempting to coach those who answer you with a "you have to admit it, don't you"? Why am I not surprised. I'll grant you this, however: in your mind, and in those of the people who can't get enough of Dubya, the answer to your question is undoubtedly yes.
2007-05-16 15:21:44 · answer #8 · answered by David 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Yes there is. Larry Bud Melman could've hit those softballs out of the park. That "debate" was lame.
2007-05-16 15:20:35 · answer #9 · answered by Garth Rocket 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Ummm.... I'll reserve my judgement until after we've heard from the dems....
Just typical of you to jump to conclusions after hearing one side...
Besides, If you think that the right-wing Christian fundamentalists will actually vote for a Mormon, then you have another thing coming...
I do agree, Guliani was their strongest... but once again... hard core cons are trying to sink him...
2007-05-16 15:20:03 · answer #10 · answered by rabble rouser 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋