Posted on 06/05/2007 2:50:43 PM PDT by CounterCounterCulture
Republican Presidential Candidate Debate #3 - Manchester, New Hampshire 06/05/07 - Official Discussion Thread
WMUR-TV, CNN, and the New Hampshire Union Leader will host a Republican debate in Manchester, New Hampshire on the campus of Saint Anselm College. Moderated by Wolf Blitzer. Debate begins at 7 p.m. EDT (4 p.m. PDT) and will last two hours.
“I did not catch that! I say Boo to McCain.”
I heard it, it was at the very end. But I thought he chose the word “wall” not barrier.
Either way, the crowd, typical of Conservatives, did not boo. I did though LOL
Wow, what timing. I just turned the channel away from FOX, because, I thought, why should I listen to Thompson on FOX when he hasn't declared and participated in the debates. I'll hear what he has to say is he declares and participates. The others had to deal with the debate to be heard. No free rides!
Paul was attempting to articulate not JUSTIFY some of the reasons claimed by Bin Laden in his declaration of war against the United States. Something the Clinton and Bush Administrations didn’t fully appreciate or comprehend.
I know what you mean and I don’t even particularly support Romney (I’ll take him over the other big two any day of the week). But I refuse to get emotionally invested or even think about in “FRed” until he actually gets in the race (if ever).
Good grief - you can disagree with him on foreign policy but the man does espouse a strong conviction for protecting citizens' civil liberties (Bill of Rights). Can't say that about all the stuffed suits up there - some, but not most.
National Review says Rudy won....
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MzI3NTFkZTE0NGVhZGUzMDM3YTQyOWE3ZDFhNTNlYWE=
Debate [John Derbyshire]
The format didn’t seem very satisfactory to me. Perhaps this 10-candidate filed just can’t be shoehorned into any kind of debate format.
Rudy looked great. Romney a tad too well oiled—but good on health care. McCain not my friend. The occasional 4 o’clock in the morning temptations I had to support Ron Paul have evaporated. Tom Tancredo better than previously. Huckabee, Brownback I’m still having trouble telling apart. Hunter said some good things, but I can’t remember what they were. Gilmore, Thompson, zzzzz.
Go Rudy.
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NjliZTY5MzE4NGRjMzNmMGI4NzhmNWY2YjY0ZjY3MDA=
Excuse Me While I Check Out Fred on Fox, But... [Kathryn Jean Lopez]
Rudy won. After a breakout first-debate win, Romney hasn’t been as good as his first showing, but he remains thoughtful and intriguing on a lot of issues. I think you look at him and Rudy and McCain and think “these are serious people. We might be O.K. if it’s one of them.”
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZGFkZGY2Zjc0NmNhZjRjODc2OGQzYWIxZWRmNjNhNTU=
“TWO BIG PRINCIPLES” [Kate O’Beirne]
Rudy finishes strong.
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NzBlOWU3MmY1M2FiODNjMzg0MWM0ZDBkMGNmNmMyNTc=
“Nominate Me” [Rich Lowry]
Self-confident, good-natured—that sums up the Rudy of the last two debates.
I hope that the media will at least put him at the top of the second tier this time! (we all know they won’t elevate him to the top tier outright!)
Don’t have cable, so I can’t really comment... sorry! (o:
Hey, how did you like Hunter getting in Ramos & Compean for Pardon.
Fred has the highest chance IMO of taking the Republican ticket and would have a great change at beating which ever communist Dem comes forward.
Not to mention the interview seems a cheap shot. If could have been in the debate. He chose not to, yet comes up with his own interview right after the debate. That's weak. Not to mention he was interviewed by Hannity of all people. Not good for Thompson. I watched a few minutes, and was not impressed.
“Fred T should have been on that stage answering the hard questions.”
Agreed. Either he’s running or he’s not...no way he’s still thinking about it, that’s just laughable. Must be waiting for all the debates to be over, then he’ll announce. Not the kind of person I’d vote for.
Agreed. Paul is an arch-conservative once you get around his turtleshell foreign policy. While some of his claims have credence, he doesn’t communicate it coherently enough.
To say President Bush is defeatist is to say that George Washington and Abraham Lincoln were defeatist as well. President Bush is one the greatest President and he is a great leader. Iraq is the center front of the war on terror and both Iran and Syria are heavily involved by supporting and arming the terrorists there whether they are locals Iraqis or Al Qaeda. Once we crush the terrorists there, both the Iranian and Syrian terrorist regime will fall in a year or two after that.
Also before his term is over the President will unleash a massive air and naval war against the terrorist regime in Tehran to destroy their nuclear weapons and military infrastructures which will hasten the fall of this regime.
Sorry, I don't buy it. I heard what Paul said and I want to hear Ron Paul articulate the difference, not someone on the internet.
Which is another example of his gross mental incompetency and complete unfitness for the office. You cannot "Declare war on Bin Laden". War's are fought between nations. For someone who claims to be all about "Original Intent" Paul seems wonderfully ignorant of just how the US System of Govt works.
Civil liberties? I remember those.
Paul is excellent on civil liberties. Unfortunately for him, America needs a Patton, not a philosopher to crush the islamo terrorists.
Such a cynical response, lol. Personally, I don’t believe in “polls”.
Quality, not quantity.
I’ve had morons babble at me for hours. Telling them “Shut The — Up” takes 2/3 of a second.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.