Republican Presidential Candidate Debate #2 - Columbia, SC 05/15/07

“Ron Paul is finished after his gaff tonight, Regardless of DU nutters who are skewing the poll.”

ROFLMAO! That’s what y’all spout in his Congressional district every year, yet somehow he gets reelected without your help.

2,081 posted on 05/15/2007 8:18:11 PM PDT by LibertarianInExile (If ‘He can win,’ is your first defense, obviously, that’s his one plus--not his conservatism.)

2,082 posted on 05/15/2007 8:18:31 PM PDT by jwalsh07

To: CounterCounterCulture

Giuliani really pissed me off when he said that it must be easier to manage NYC than the entire USA. What a stuck up New Yorker (I lived there for 30 years, bash away if you must). For some reason that’s what’s sticking with me after that debate. Giuliani needs more than just happening to be ‘there’ on 9/11. The whole country was attacked that day. I happened to be ‘there’ when it happened, but I always realized, and never forgot, we all were attacked. The WTC should have been restored by now, maybe a little taller. It’d be done by now if they started in June 2002! Giuliani, Pataki, the LMDC, and the Port Authority decided to let OBL reshape the NYC skyline. Wimps. I had to leave the area, couldn’t stand looking at Downtown without the WTC there. Constant reminder. Left last June, I ain’t looking back, and there’s no way I’d vote for Giuliani.

I liked when Tancredo said you have to put fear in your enemy. I wish he had a chance, I could push the button for that guy.

Mitt comes off like John F’n Kerry to me. Much tougher, could catch a ball or whatever, he’s always flinging credentials and time spent, blah, blah. He says lots of good sounding stuff, but I don’t believe him. The things he speaks of, like shrinking government drastically and benchmarks.... No one could pull that off even in a double term presidency, quit bs’n me man. Say something real and achievable. Your going to double Guantanamo? I like the idea, but not gonna happen. Washington’s screwed up and he’s going to fix it, yeah right.

Good debate overall. Fox did a nice job with moderating.

McCain’s living in an earlier time or something, not happening, seems like a nice enough guy though.

/rant off!

2,083 posted on 05/15/2007 8:18:31 PM PDT by Imperialist

Mike Huckabee continues to impress me as do Duncan Hunter and Mitt Romney.

I agree about Mike Huckabee. He's said some things that make me think he's too soft on illegal immigration, but he's perfomed well in both of the debates.

2,084 posted on 05/15/2007 8:18:46 PM PDT by WFTR (Liberty isn't for cowards)

The Boston Globe reported Mitt Romney saying this.

"I believe that abortion should be safe and legal in this country. I have since the time that my mom took that position when she ran in 1970 as a US Senate candidate. I believe that since Roe v. Wade has been the law for 20 years we should sustain and support it."

Were they correct?

Slick Willard attempts to flank Teddy Kennedy on the Left

2,085 posted on 05/15/2007 8:18:49 PM PDT by EternalVigilance ("THERE IS NO CHOICE FOR SILENCE!" - Alan Keyes)

What did I say that warranted that response?

2,086 posted on 05/15/2007 8:19:07 PM PDT by Pyro7480 ("Jesu, Jesu, Jesu, esto mihi Jesus" -St. Ralph Sherwin's last words at Tyburn)

Goodnight, gotta run folks. I’ll check the rest of the thread tomorrow.

2,087 posted on 05/15/2007 8:19:09 PM PDT by DocRock (All they that take the sword shall perish with the sword. Matthew 26:52 ... Go ahead, look it up!)

I like Huckabee.. I just have to see more of him in the future.

2,088 posted on 05/15/2007 8:19:42 PM PDT by Sprite518

To: All; Right_in_Virginia; DocRock

Good night realm, it was fun.

2,089 posted on 05/15/2007 8:19:44 PM PDT by DCBryan1 (Arm Pilots&Teachers. Build the Wall. Export Illegals. Profile Muslims.Kill all child molesters RFN!)

To: MountainFlower

Bottom line is people will vote for whoever will keep this country from being blown up . As anti abortion as I am I can’t see that issue as the determining factor in my choice for president.I truly believe this country could be in serious serious trouble if we don’t nominate #1 someone who will be hard on Islam and #2 electable enough to beat Klinton.I’m sorry , we will not get a candidate that will embrace ALL that we conservatives want ..not one who will win anyway . A Dem win will be the begining of socialism in the US.I also doubt that roe V Wade will be overturned no matter who wins in 08. Just being realistic here.

2,090 posted on 05/15/2007 8:19:46 PM PDT by sonic109

To: EternalVigilance

Who knew it would take Ron Paul to make Rudy look good.....sheesh

2,091 posted on 05/15/2007 8:20:16 PM PDT by AuntB (" It takes more than walking across the border to be an American." Duncan Hunter)

On the future President FRed Dalton Thompson....

“Where does he stand on the issues that are important to you? Do you know? Because, I certainly do not”

He was my senator and I joyfully voted for him..

And I will again.....

And since you dont know where FRed stands..

Just do some research lazy thing..

2,092 posted on 05/15/2007 8:20:29 PM PDT by Tennessee Nana

So what?

How does that change the fact that you’re supporting a liberal former Governor who supports and assault weapons ban and the Department of Education?

2,093 posted on 05/15/2007 8:20:37 PM PDT by EternalVigilance ("THERE IS NO CHOICE FOR SILENCE!" - Alan Keyes)

To: The_Eaglet; LibertarianInExile

BWHAHAHAHA!! Now it’s an autodialer that puts Ron Paul in first according to Carl Cameron. Heaven forbid people actually agree with him! Why, why, that would just be horrible....

2,094 posted on 05/15/2007 8:20:38 PM PDT by billbears (Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it. --Santayana)

Ron Paul is correct that Congress abdicated it's responsibilty by not declaring Full War.

However, His blaming America for 9/11 shows his utter lack of awareness about reality. He comes across as a stingy uncle who is completely tone deaf about the issue.

It's too bad because he actually has some good Constitutionalist Principles. He killed any legitimacy he had before now in tonight's debate.

2,095 posted on 05/15/2007 8:20:59 PM PDT by Rameumptom (Gen X= they killed 1 in 4 of us)

To: No Blue States

I admire Pauls steadfast ideals but he is rigid in the wind.
He comes off as a kook.

You cant just please your fans in a presidential election.
You must have NATIONAL appeal

2,096 posted on 05/15/2007 8:21:09 PM PDT by mylife (The Roar Of The Masses Could Be Farts)

I felt very uncomforable when Ron Paul was spewing.

2,097 posted on 05/15/2007 8:21:11 PM PDT by Saundra Duffy ( Mitt has the best hair!)

2,098 posted on 05/15/2007 8:21:15 PM PDT by SE Mom (Proud mom of an Iraq war combat vet -Fred'08)

To: DCBryan1; George W. Bush

Well, here's my take.. (Ping to GWB continuing the conversation from the first debate)

First off, as I've said, everyone looked much more comfortable this time around. This is both due to their increased experience and to the more conservative-friendly forum. This was a much better debate as well.

Giuliani got himself behind in the count in the first debate and part of this one, but Ron Paul floated one over the plate for him, and he knocked it, along with Paul's chances, out of the park. Rudy didn't help himself on abortion, but the exchange with Paul is what people are going to remember, so I'm reluctantly going to have to call him the winner here. Ron Paul is the biggest loser, unless you consider his chances at winning some third party votes. He's done as far as the Republican nomination is concerned, masses of internet poll-stuffers notwithstanding.

Romney looked just as polished this time, but with the other candidates catching up in that regard, and with more of his philosophical malleability being exposed, I'm going to say he loses a few steps here. His exchange with McCain didn't help him, either. McCain holds serve here. He looks good on Iraq and on spending, and I think he explained his opposition to the tax cuts well. His answers on torture showed conviction, but were wrongheaded, and I think that's how the voters will see it. He explained CFR about as well as he could have, but he won't win many converts to his point of view. His composure was much better this time around than last time. He came across as a man of conviction, which contrasts him with Romney, who seems to be targeting him, as expected. He gets a little bump up this time, but not enough to give his campaign serious momentum, as his some of his convictions don't square with those of most Republicans.

Duncan Hunter came up big here again, showing some gravitas and looking good on the key issues. He stuck to his talking points, which are good talking points for the base, but he's going to need to expand them or risk sounding repetitive. He also needs to be a little more dynamic, as he still seems a bit stiff and rehearsed. Still, he built on what he did last time, and I think his campaign might gain some real momentum if he keeps this up and corrects his problems.

Huckabee scored points as well, though maybe I'm biased because he mentioned the FairTax again. He looked competent on every issue, and I can't remember any real stumbles. His explanation of his tax increases in Arkansas was adequate, if not inspiring. I think he helped himself tonight, and is still in the race.

Tancredo looked much better this time around, even if no one will be confusing him with Cicero. He had some of the best lines of the night, as has been noted elsewhere, and probably earned himself quite a few fans. He's still a million to one shot, of course, and he didn't come up big enough to change that.

As for the rest, Tommy Thompson was his usual honest, straightforward self, looked competent and even a little presidential. He's continuing to flog his record, but nationwide he's not turning many heads. He's putting all his chips on Iowa, which I believe is a losing strategy. Brownback is showing himself to be a one trick pony. Like last time, he shows great conviction and passion on the life issue, but looked lost on other issues, pandering to narrow constituencies in such an obvious fashion as to make himself look more like a politician than a President (I know, false dichotomy and all that...). He's really falling off in my book. I know he has fans here, but Jim Gilmore wins my "What the hell is he doing here?" award. At least Paul has moonbats to impress. Gilmore's "consistent conservative" message isn't going to play outside of his groupies.

So, here are my power rankings after the first two debates..

1. Rudy Giuliani (+)
2. John McCain (+)
3. Mitt Romney (-)
4. Duncan Hunter (+)
5. Mike Huckabee (+)
6. Tom Tancredo (++)
7. Tommy Thompson (=)
8. Sam Brownback (-)
9. Jim Gilmore (=)
10. Ron Paul (---)

Going forward, I expect Rudy's bump to fade as he fails to win over conservatives, but as of right now, his smackdown of Ron Paul will be the story of the campaign, and has salvaged his momentum. Romney's campaign is in big trouble, as, in this debate, he was just "one of the guys", and he can't afford that. If Hunter can translate his performance in the debates to the polls, he may even overtake Romney at some point in the near future.

We'll see how this all plays tomorrow.

2,099 posted on 05/15/2007 8:21:21 PM PDT by The Pack Knight (Duty, Honor, Country. Thompson/Franks '08)

Bottom line is people will vote for whoever will keep this country from being blown up.

I argue that ending Islamic immigration is the only way this can be accomplished. Which candidate do you think has the courage to do that?

2,100 posted on 05/15/2007 8:21:22 PM PDT by James W. Fannin

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794