2007-11-29 03:34:28 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
This is how I rank them which are different after a day of consideration.
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. 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.
3. John McCain - affirmed that he is the well respected veteran and would lead well.
4. 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.
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. Ron Paul - didn't respond well to McCain's attacks; rant about North American Union conspiracy made him seem too extreme.
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!
2007-11-30 07:29:07 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
Started out weird, then got really weird with the youtube nuts and just wasted a night, didi get to see some of them at best and worst. The fight deal looked insane and then the cartoon network answer is classic. tAke care.
2007-12-01 13:00:54 · answer #2 · answered by R J 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The question about which Presidential Candidate has the best ammo or weapons is an example of the poor judgment and alienation that the Republicans are promoting.
YouTube has some scary people, I think most people should not be heard from, not given TV time
2007-11-29 04:40:35 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Seems to me that questions about important issues should be asked in a straight forward manner. Not like a reality game show contest to ask a question. Can't we just get to the issues with no childish bickering? Our country needs change and voters need candidates that will stand up and answer our questions. McCain maybe.
2007-11-29 05:08:14 · answer #4 · answered by EC HERE 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
It's great to see politicians actually debate at a debate. Instead of standing around for an hour and a half a spewing talking points.
2007-11-29 03:45:49 · answer #5 · answered by labken1817 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Overall the candidates handled themselves pretty well, but the forum sucks. They need to toss the YouTube format. It's juvenile and demeaning to the process.
2007-11-29 05:02:57 · answer #6 · answered by kathy_is_a_nurse 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I thought it was interesting. I don't know why people are saying it was biased, all the questions sounded like legitimate questions that they will have to answer in the general election should they be the party nominee.
2007-11-29 03:45:41 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Youtube and Republican, now that is funny.
2007-11-29 03:45:45 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
Got to expose Rudy and Romeny as liberal. Early on it was like watching a cat fight. Two chicks pretendig to be men but clawing at each others eyes.
The rest did well, Thompson I think got some support. He is rock solid, and derives his postitions from the constitution. At least he uses it to argue from.
Trancado and Hunter both looked decent as well as Ron Paul.
2007-11-29 03:40:18 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 5⤋
Good Debate but ruined by the liberal moles
2007-11-29 03:49:23 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋