Replies

My apology for sounded harsh. But yeah, the current candidates have so many holes that journalists can cherry pick whichever fit their arguments. I’m not for Perry, as I’m still deciding, but I start to see having too many debates probably are not that beneficial for the eventual Republican nominee. There are just too many things that journalists can harvest.

I'm just the opposite concerning the debates.

As has been shown in Perry's case, it causes the candidates to have to think on their feet and get away from their carefully polished Fake PR created facades.

Perry's real weakness on the Illegal Alien issue was uncovered as a result of the debates, that alone has been worth everything negative that may have/may not have come from the left-wing journalists.

We need a conservative leader, not a pretend conservative leader who parses his words on issues that are important to conservatives.

Oh, I’m not against debates. I agree that debates help us to decide. I just think there are too many of them. IIRC, there are still 13 debates in the future? Which means there are a total of about 20 something? I’d prefer to have at most 10 debates, with at least half of them are dedicated to certain areas, such as economic situation, foreign policy, immigration, and so on. That way, we can get more time for each issue, candidates are forced to shape their views on those areas, and not just journalists throwing things at them.