Republican debate on ABC

[ProfJohn]

This is the first debate that I have been able to watch.
Just wondering if anyone else is watching and what they may think.

 

[FoBoT]

I'm at work, can't check it out here.

drudge has a "poll", looks like Paul has a good internet following. he is too nutty for me

{{{{DRUDGE POLL}}}}WHO WON THE REPUBLICAN DEBATE IN IOWA?

Brownback

2% 95
Giuliani

23% 1,411
Huckabee

4% 249
Hunter

2% 131
McCain

2% 137
Paul

42% 2,590
Romney

19% 1,141
Tancredo

4% 237
Tommy Thompson

2% 118

Total Votes: 6,109

 

[HeXploiT]

{{{{DRUDGE POLL}}}}WHO WON THE REPUBLICAN DEBATE IN IOWA?

Brownback
2% 111
Giuliani
23% 1,636
Huckabee
4% 290
Hunter
2% 165
McCain
2% 149
Paul
44% 3,197
Romney
18% 1,306
Tancredo
4% 270
Tommy Thompson
2% 134

Total Votes: 7,258


ABC

Who do you think won the Republican debate?

Ron Paul
3,795
Mike Huckabee
680
Mitt Romney
652
Rudy Giuliani
464
Nobody won. I'm voting Democratic.
399
Tom Tancredo
197
John McCain
153
Nobody. I'm waiting for Fred Thompson or Newt Gingrich to enter the race.
128
Duncan Hunter
55
Tommy Thompson
44
Sam Brownback
27

 

[ProfJohn]

Those polls are worthless, just look at the results.

Huckabee and Tancredo in second and third?

 

[ProfJohn]

Ron Paul was virtually non-existent in the debate. Remind me which one he was please.

 

[Atomic Rooster]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Ron Paul was virtually non-existent in the debate. Remind me which one he was please.

The one who makes sense.

 

[daveymark]

another online "republican" poll where democrats are voting...meh

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: daveymark
another online "republican" poll where democrats are voting...meh

I don't think it is that, it is people voting over and over for Paul.

They should remove Paul's name from these polls, call it punishment for his supporters trying to 'fix' them.

 

[daveymark]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: daveymark
another online "republican" poll where democrats are voting...meh

I don't think it is that, it is people voting over and over for Paul.

They should remove Paul's name from these polls, call it punishment for his supporters trying to 'fix' them.

what's even funnier is dems aren't smart enough to continue on past the "Ron Paul" selection

there is a "Nobody won. I'm voting Democratic." selection, after all

 

[Lemon law]

I just watched the WHOLE THING. And a more disgusting and clueless bunch can only be found on the democratic side; where the dems are only slightly less clueless.

As for the Republican side---THEY ALL LOST because they are intellectually and morally bankrupt. And advocate in slogans exactly the same stinking thinking that has us in the messes we are now in.

 

[umbrella39]

Originally posted by: daveymark

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: daveymark
another online "republican" poll where democrats are voting...meh

I don't think it is that, it is people voting over and over for Paul.

They should remove Paul's name from these polls, call it punishment for his supporters trying to 'fix' them.

what's even funnier is dems aren't smart enough to continue on past the "Ron Paul" selection

there is a "Nobody won. I'm voting Democratic." selection, after all

LMAO that you (2) think democrats give a shit enough to "taint" your online polls. Pst, go vote more if the guy you like didn't win. Coming here and crying about it and spouting your conspiracy theories just makes you look like a dem.

Congrats! You have become what you dispise.

 

[Lemon law]

Hey I don't get crying crapola----Ron Paul is the cross the Repubs have to bear---and the Dems have to bear the Lieberman cross. We all may not be all the happy about it but thats the way the cookie crumbles so get over it.----or all get together and expel them from the party.

GWB&co. is a far more dangerous crown of thorns we all have to bear. And its far harder to get over the damage already done. And Lieberman and Paul are prophets without honor we can safely reject; Thereby avoiding the dangers implicit in their thinking.

 

[FoBoT]

but Lieberman is a good guy

 

[ProfJohn]

I thought Rudy, Romney and McCain all came across ok.

I was impressed a little with Tommy Thompson. In a year without the three I just mentioned he might have a chance.

Missed the first part of the debate, but the rest just seem to make some noise and not much else.

Tancredo will never be able to explain his idea about using a nuke on Mecca without looking like a crazy man.

Only remember Paul answering one question and I was not impressed.

Huckabee (I think it was him) went all crazy on the ?fair tax? interesting idea but not going to happen.

Overall there is just too many of them. Need to ditch about half the field so we can get some good answers and better give and take.

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: Lemon law
Hey I don't get crying crapola----Ron Paul is the cross the Repubs have to bear---and the Dems have to bear the Lieberman cross. We all may not be all the happy about it but thats the way the cookie crumbles so get over it.----or all get together and expel them from the party.

GWB&co. is a far more dangerous crown of thorns we all have to bear. And its far harder to get over the damage already done. And Lieberman and Paul are prophets without honor we can safely reject; Thereby avoiding the dangers implicit in their thinking.

Kucinich is the cross the Dems have to bear. He just doesn?t have the vast on-line following.

At least our crazy guy has some support

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: Atomic Rooster

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Ron Paul was virtually non-existent in the debate. Remind me which one he was please.

The one who makes sense.

The Democrat who the Democrats like and vote for in Republican-only internet polls.

How does one get a real GENERAL poll with a list of PRIMARY (1 party) candidates? As soon as Hillary or Obama enter that poll Dem?s support is removed from Ron Paul and he gets nothing.

 

[Gaard]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Overall there is just too many of them. Need to ditch about half the field so we can get some good answers and better give and take.

Are you on the same wavelength as Clinton & Edwards?

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: Gaard

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Overall there is just too many of them. Need to ditch about half the field so we can get some good answers and better give and take.

Are you on the same wavelength as Clinton & Edwards?

Pretty much.
Create a standard on which to judge candidates and then allow them in or out on that standard.

It could include multiple variables so as to allow as many people in as possible, as long as they achieve one realistic indication of support.

For example:
Must poll above a certain level in more than one acceptable national poll or even state poll if the debate is in that state.
Must have raised a certain level of funds as reflected in FEC fillings.

To this you could add exceptions such a home state rule that allows candidates to participate in any debate that takes place in their home state.

 

[jman19]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Lemon law
Hey I don't get crying crapola----Ron Paul is the cross the Repubs have to bear---and the Dems have to bear the Lieberman cross. We all may not be all the happy about it but thats the way the cookie crumbles so get over it.----or all get together and expel them from the party.

GWB&co. is a far more dangerous crown of thorns we all have to bear. And its far harder to get over the damage already done. And Lieberman and Paul are prophets without honor we can safely reject; Thereby avoiding the dangers implicit in their thinking.

Kucinich is the cross the Dems have to bear. He just doesn?t have the vast on-line following.

At least our crazy guy has some support

Oh please. Paul is a RINO anyway, not one of "your guys"

 

[CaptnKirk]

All I saw in the debates were a bunch of ass-kissing, water-carrying, yes-men who are clinging to their version of what Bush has led us into.

Do the Republicans really think that they have a chance to win in either branch of Congress, let alone the Executive branch of Government
when over 70% of the entire population has already rejected their approach?

They are essentially fighting over who can pander the most to the Conservative Extremists that have captured the leadership of the GOP.

If this is the direction that the GOP wishes to pursue, where they ignore their moderate majority and continue to embrace the fanatics,
you might as well stick a fork in them . . they're already done.

Gullianni - Gag
Romney - Puke
McCain - he rolled over and played dead in the 2000 election, nobody believes him anymore.
Thompson - he ain't Reagan, he ain't even electable

Then you've got all those fruitcakes dwelling in the cellar . . not an original thought among any of them

The GOP cut their own throat when Bush took Cheney on to be the Veep - a despicable man who could never be elected again,
and consciously chose to have no person in the background that could rise up from the VP office to make a show of continuity in leadership.

 

[Lemon law]

To Non-Prof John who says----I thought Rudy, Romney and McCain all came across ok.

Anytime you say I think, PJ---you leave everyone retching over that contradiction in terms.

In case you failed to notice---Kucinich was almost the lone voice in the wilderness crying bullshit about invading Iraq.

And Kucinich may still not have any support but he may be the only one that was undeniably right all along.

So PJ, next time you do some thinking---maybe you should worry a little more about being right for a change. And worry more about where your thinking has led you
astray. When your thinking leads to bad outcomes, there has to be something wrong with your thinking. Or is that too simple for you to understand?

 

[Hacp]

Romney showed his true flip flop colors.

 

[ProfJohn]

You know Lemon? I thought that the Democrats taking over congress would result in nothing changing? and well? nothing has changed.

On the night of the election I thought that Rumsfeld would be gone, and look at what happened.

I thought that the surge could lead to a change in Iraq, and it has.

I think the best indicator of my success as a poster is the amount of response my posts generate. If I was some crazy off the wall lunatic people would just ignore me. Instead people feel compelled to respond and comment on what I am saying. That implies that I must be at least some what effective in getting my ideas across.

 

[umbrella39]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
You know Lemon? I thought that the Democrats taking over congress would result in nothing changing? and well? nothing has changed.

On the night of the election I thought that Rumsfeld would be gone, and look at what happened.

I thought that the surge could lead to a change in Iraq, and it has.

I think the best indicator of my success as a poster is the amount of response my posts generate. If I was some crazy off the wall lunatic people would just ignore me. Instead people feel compelled to respond and comment on what I am saying. That implies that I must be at least some what effective in getting my ideas across.

Yeah, keep running with that! You divert and don't address anything just like Zendari. Oh, wait a minute... :roll:

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: umbrella39

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
You know Lemon? I thought that the Democrats taking over congress would result in nothing changing? and well? nothing has changed.

On the night of the election I thought that Rumsfeld would be gone, and look at what happened.

I thought that the surge could lead to a change in Iraq, and it has.

I think the best indicator of my success as a poster is the amount of response my posts generate. If I was some crazy off the wall lunatic people would just ignore me. Instead people feel compelled to respond and comment on what I am saying. That implies that I must be at least some what effective in getting my ideas across.

Yeah, keep running with that! You divert and don't address anything just like Zendari. Oh, wait a minute... :roll:

What would you like me to address?

Maybe we can state a "Ask ProfJohn anything" thread