Please, no; name calling, party politics, diatribe, or ad hominem attacks. Articulate, in a civil fashion, your thoughts and observations on the recent Republican Presidential Debate, and how you thought the individual candidates performed.
2007-11-28 15:40:55 · 7 answers · asked by blursd2 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
Here is how I ranked them.
1. Mike Huckabee - witty, well-prepared, and compassionate and would unite us! He is the man for the job! Death penalty skate, but I understand why!
2. John McCain - affirmed that he is the a well respected veteran and would Lead well.
3. Mitt Romney - bickering with Rudy made him look petty; comments on torture made him seem wise and made McCain seem cold and on the attack! Comments on Confederate flag non-issue.
4. Ron Paul - didn't respond well to McCain's attacks; rant about North American Union conspiracy made him seem too extreme.
5. Duncan Hunter – Faired well, not much time, but all answers were good! He would be a great VEEP to Huckabee!
6. Tom Tancredo – Good on one issue: Immigration, but he ranks high on my candidate calculator, so candidate for VEEP too!
7. Fred Thompson - not heard from very much, seemed poorly prepared and confused. Not very articulate and disappointing. Sounded like he was trying out for VEEP.
8. Rudy Giuliani - bickering with Romney made him look petty, if I have to listen to his stats about NY one more time, I will PUKE!
VOTE TO KEEP AMERICA SAFE!
2007-11-28 18:25:58 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 1⤋
I learned from this debate that WEALTH, POWER and FAME were the three seducers of mankind. I learned the same thing from the democratic debates. What are the alternatives? The pursuit of TRUTH, the appreciation of BEAUTY and the exercise of GOODNESS! All the candidates of both parties could well abide by an adherence to the alternatives.
2007-11-29 00:04:45 · answer #2 · answered by Mad Mac 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
I think McCain won. I liked Huckabee a lot but I think he got easy questions and other canididates seem reluctant to attack him. McCain showed us a glimpse on how he can take on the Democrats on the issue of Iraq by taking on Ron Paul.
2007-11-28 23:55:02 · answer #3 · answered by jason e 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Honestly the front runners looked like little children to me. I was waiting for one to say he was going to tell his mommy. If you thought Howard Dean was unprofessional, and unfit for office, you really have to feel the same way about Rudy, and to a lesser extent even Mitt, but at least Mitt kept a calm level tone Rudy was in a screaming match. Other than that it was interesting because they actually discussed the issues. Mitt and Rudy are both clearly pro-illegal immigration and are trying to hide it. I feel like tonight goes to the dark horses. Huckabee, Ron Paul, and Hunter all were very good at articulating their beliefs and being consistent to their core values. Its a shame that one of these three wont be running for President, they are all better qualified than Mitt and Rudy, Thompson was pretty good, but unfortunately for him, not making any waves is a bad thing, because everybody thinks he is lazy.
2007-11-29 00:06:31 · answer #4 · answered by scorch_22 6 · 1⤊ 3⤋
I liked Paul and Huckabee the best myself. They have very different ideas but they are both very consistent. All the rest seem to be a bunch of mudslinging flip-floppers.
2007-11-28 23:58:21 · answer #5 · answered by Small Victories 4 · 2⤊ 2⤋
I was pleased..They are now taking about issues that matter. Romeny performed best..Huckabee was second.
2007-11-28 23:52:08 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
I liked this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=25JSa30p4VM
2007-11-29 10:13:59 · answer #7 · answered by jtf7793 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋