Previous debate threads:
GOP Debate #7 thread: Republican Presidential Candidate Debate #7 – Baltimore, Maryland 09/27/07 - Official Discussion Thread
GOP Debate #6 thread: Republican Presidential Candidate Debate #6 – Fort Lauderdale, Florida 09/17/07 - Official Discussion Thread
GOP Debate #5 thread: Republican Presidential Candidate Debate #5 – Durham, New Hampshire 09/05/07 - Official Discussion Thread
GOP Debate #4 thread: Republican Presidential Candidate Debate #4 - Des Moines, Iowa 08/05/07 - Official Discussion Thread
GOP Debate #3 thread: Republican Presidential Candidate Debate #3 - Manchester, NH 06/05/07 - Official Discussion Thread
GOP Debate #2 thread: Republican Presidential Candidate Debate #2 - Columbia, SC 05/15/07 - Official Discussion Thread
GOP Debate #1 thread: Republican Presidential Candidate Debate #1~ Reagan Library 05/03/07 - Official Discussion Thread
Good for Fred.Fred would not let Chwissie get a slam in without response.
Lightning Round coming up.
[Let’s hope they don’t do the lights thing like last time. That was a total waste.]
It’s a good debate,...matthews hasn’t screwed it up yet....
Huckabee wastes 15 of his 30 seconds trying to be cutsie.
Matthews: Hillary Clinton says.....
Another Hillary says. Is that Matthew’s authority now?
Mathews is Giuliani’s laugh track.
Fred had a good answer for Romney.
I didn’t see it all. It was hard to sit for 2 hours.
Nobody won and nobody lost. Although, no one was outstanding but Fred Thompson did a credible job in spite of anticipation otherwise.
I do wish we could be honest about manufacturing and jobs. First, most of the jobs lost are from productivity gains. Actually, China has fewer rather than more manufacturing jobs than they had two years ago. Second, manufacturing jobs in Minnesota are only 12% of non-farm workers; in Wisconsin, I believe, the figure is 19%. In any case, manufacturing is not addding jobs and neither are big corporations—most jobs are being created in the private economy by entrepreneurs. Third, and finally, as far as autos the Japanese now manufacture many, most (?) of their popular models here; there claim to fame is they produce better and cheaper autos that people want.
For every job protection might save, there are consumers who will have less to spend because they will have to pay more for the same product or service than they would if foreign trade were functioning.
One might also note that 44% of the profits of the S&P 500 result from our exports. By the way, no one of our esteemed candidates noted that the stock market hit another all time high today. At least no one mentioned it when I was listening.
Politicians usually pander to the working class assuming they are dumb enough to believe someone in Washington can either keep their job or create one for them. It always works but it is not true.
| Clinton Outlines Retirement Proposal |
||
| Posted by jobnick On 10/09/2007 3:42:34 PM CDT · 34 replies · 606+ views The Wall Street Journal ^ | 10/09/2007 | JACKIE CALMES New York Sen. Hillary Clinton, continuing to hit on economic themes in her White House campaign, said the government should do more to help people save for retirement, and is proposing an annual tax credit of up to $1,000 to help do that. The Democratic presidential frontrunner's plan would allow households earning up to about $100,000 a year without employer-provided 401(k) plans to open new "American Retirement Accounts," and get a tax credit matching contributions up to a maximum $1,000. But the incentives would be available also to savers with 401(k)s or Individual Retirement Accounts. To offset the revenue lost,... |
||
Fred controlled the debate because his appearance made it clear the race is between Romney, Giuliani, and himself. Thompson made the other candidates marginal even though McCain did a very good job. I am watching Shuster on MSNBC and he is going to tell everyone who won the debate not that knows much about Republican politics.
I think Rudy and Mitt both did quite well. I’d give a slight nod to Rudy. McCain scored well too. Fred did OK.
The other 5 really don’t count.
I just want to say one thing though...DUNCAN HUNTER HAS "HUEVOS." I have waited and waited to hear a candidate say it like it is...with truth, clarity, and passion. It's fabulously refreshing.
And...I'd like to say something else...I'M VERY HAPPY WITH 98% OF OUR CANDIDATES. They answer each question with intelligent, knowledgeable responses. I'm VERY proud.
Wow, I feel more hopeful after reading many of these posts that seem to indicate most people will vote for the Republican who ever it is.
Just watched the entire thing. My candidate-by candidate opinion piece:
Overall: None of the candidates lost or earned any supporters from this debate, IMHO...there were just too many of them. Since we had so many there, there just wasn’t opportunity either for anyone to screw up royally (save for lunatic Ron Paul, more about that later) or knock it out of the park, either. Decent, watchable debate, not a snoozefest, not a whooping fist-pumper either.
Fred Thompson: Fred did very well. Not a grand-slam but he delivered well and had his facts straight. He scored extra points for the well-placed jabs at the commentators/talking heads. He gave the most reasonable answers on China and the Middle East of anyone, realizing the threat without coming across as protectionist. Looked “fine” as in he looked like he always does. Good delivery, smiled, able to laugh at himself after Romney’s rather innocent dig at him at the end. Overall grade: A-
John McCain: Some said Fred looked “old, tired” blah blah...if anyone looked old and tired it was McCain. He had poor delivery, shifty answers, and just didn’t really do much of anything. Overall grade: C-
Duncan Hunter: Very good performance as well. Was impressive overall, I like that even with his disagreements he agreed to support the eventual nominee. Sounded a bit far-off and protectionist on certain things, but I still maintain he’s a brilliant man who’d make a good Secretary of Defense under Fred. :) Overall grade: B+
Tom Tancredo: Honestly, the Tanc rather impressed me, moreso than I imagined he would...even got a little dig in at himself about mentioning illegals so much, I chuckled at that. Didn’t have as much in the way of facts and figures as I’d expect, and was rather dull. Overall grade: B
Rudy Giuliani: Decent command of the facts, didn’t harp too much on 9/11 except when Ron Paul made his *ridiculous* statement about the US never being attacked by a foreign nation. Tried too hard to let it slip in that he has fought against the Clintons. Impressed me more than I’d have expected but that’s not saying much. Overall grade: B
Mitt Romney. Did extremely well in a delivery and fact-checking standpoint, but still too slick to be completely trusted. I thought he played well off of Fred Thompson, enough so that I’d consider him a great VP candidate, or a backup for my primary vote if something happens to Fred between now and then. Good humor, used his numbers well, looked good, but then again that’s what Mitt seems to do well. The package. Overall grade: A-
Ron Paul: The lunatic of the group. Couldn’t get off his “monetary system, military-industrial complex, leftist moonbat on defense” rant. Acted like an escapee from a mental institution. Overall grade: D+. Not an “F” strictly because he was entertaining.
Sam Brownback: Has learned a few things about economics since I last heard him talk. Delivery was so-so, seemed well-rounded, but overall not a standout. Overall grade: C+
Mike Huckabee: More impressive than I’ve seen him. Good tax ideas. Seems to have improved his game. Still a nanny-stater. Overall grade: B-
Fred Thompson - Fred Thompson may have won simply by showing up and not making any major mistakes. To listen to some reports before the debate and even some of the early coverage of the debate, one would have almost expected him to drool on the microphone until his young wife came on the stage to wipe his chin. The campaign may have even tried to create those expectations in order to make any reasonable performance exceed expectations. He didn't look all that good or say anything all that exciting, but he didn't look as if he were trying to catch up. In an uneventful debate, he seemed to be another serious, competent candidate.
Mitt Romney - Mitt Romney may have performed a little better than Fred Thompson did, but he won't gain as much because everyone expects him to perform well. In a debate without much excitement, his businesslike demeanor is going to make him look good. He was in command of his facts and made his points clearly. While asking the lawyers how far he could go without Congressional approval to strike Iran doesn't seem like a strong answer, the answer is reasonable. Mitt Romney is a guy who approaches problems by building a team and finding right answers. That kind of leadership may appeal to the country right now.
John McCain - John McCain didn't score many points, but he didn't lose any support. He didn't seem too old to be there, and the issues that can hurt him with the primary voters never arose. He needs to do something to move himself forward, but nothing that happened tonight will push him backwards.
Duncan Hunter - Duncan Hunter seemed to get as much air time as the other candidates and performed well. He seemed at ease with the whole process and gave good answers. He looked like a man who belonged on the stage, and that appearance can give him credibility. He'll still need something more to move forward in the polls.
Rudy Giuliani - Rudy Giuliani has the advantage of not needing to accomplish anything beyond holding a lead. In a debate with no real exciting moments, nothing happened that would seriously undercut his standing. On the other hand, he had the misfortune of standing between Fred Thompson and Duncan Hunter. His small stature in comparison to those men could hurt him in a country that has elected the tallest candidate in nearly every presidential election. I don't think anyone will say, "I'm going to vote for Fred or Mitt because they are taller," but that comparison may hurt Giuliani in the impressions that people draw.
Mike Huckabee - Mike Huckabee didn't have any real problem in this debate, but he didn't stand out with a great performance either. Because he's done so well in past debates, people's expectations are high. His inability to stand out this time will keep him from building needed momentum.
Sam Brownback - I don't like Sam Brownback, but he did okay in this debate. He needs to do something spectacular in order to change his fortunes, and he doesn't have that capability.
Tom Tancredo - Tom Tancredo seemed to mention illegal immigration in every answer. He reinforced the perception that he's a one-issue candidate who has nothing to offer beyond that issue. If he has nothing else to offer, he will sink further in the polls.
Ron Paul - Ron Paul is just too far wrong on foreign policy to be president. Every time he speaks, he reinforces that conclusion. He will not be president and will not be the nominee of the Republican Party.
Alan Keyes - Alan Keyes had a bad debate because so few people missed him. I've voted for Alan Keyes twice. He's a good man, but he offers nothing that we don't have in other candidates.
In this debate, I was very impressed with firstly, Romney, and I also was impressed with Giuliani and McCain. Again, the “top tier” in most minds regardless of the polls. But I think Thompson has a chance, and with more participation in the debates his chances will improve.
Now, to be truthful, I am not in the Thompson camp – I’m supporting Romney. If Giuliani takes it, however, I think I will be pretty happy with that. I think McCain is again a big winner in the debates, but I don’t think he will win the nomination. I could be wrong, but this is my feel on it.
I really like Romney’s perspective on the dynamics of the economy, and how to promote a future economy. But on this subject, Giuliani really struck a bell for me, making me consider what I usually don’t think of – and that is a positive approach, the idea of really getting on board with what we, as Americans, can sell to the other world . . . in fact, he even made mention of America selling health care to the world. What a wonderful attitude and perspective on the future economy of America. Sure, we need to do things to protect our economy, but really what drives our economy is what we produce and offer as exciting and valuable ideas, products, and services to the world.
Back to McCain – the Papal bulls of excommunication are over.
Tancredo was again very impressive in his words and his solutions, his vision as to what causes the problems and how to solve them.
What I liked about this debate was that this time, the constant harping on the abortion issue was the focus as happened in some previous debates . . . and I’m really very tired of hearing from the moderators the spin about former verse current positions on issues, to tell the truth I don’t even what to hear much more of that sort of line even if directed at Hillary Clinton. I am interested in these Republican candidates, to listen to their positions as of today, where they want to go, and I’m not interested in their former marriages or any sort of thing. I do not agree with James Dobson’s approach or attitude in this 2008 election, I am not interested in any Third-Party at this time, and if Giuliani is the candidate that Republicans select, I will very happily support him. I will put his picture up on my wall, and I will give him my support.
The Republican Party isn’t a party that purges or polices their members, nor their candidates. That is what the Democratic Party does. The candidate we select will be passed or made by the free will of members. The members of this Party. It doesn’t matter how much money the corporate interests put into the process, the members of the Republican Party make their decisions on what they hear and see in the candidates. Yes, there have been some very sore points, and disappointments, anger, and justified rebellion. And that is good, because now we will make even a more educated, thoughtful decision. The right decision will be made. We are going to kick the Democrats butt. Just watch. And yes, there are some who hate “dirty politics”. But I really don’t mind giving the enemy the dirt, because I want to fight, I want to give Hillary hell. I know so many fellow Republicans hate Dick “Commie Killer” Nixon. But there are still some old tricky Dick out there, the old school isn’t totally dead yet, and some old fight is coming for Hillary. Just watch.
Hillary – there is a Republican under your bed. Spooky. Spooky.
Boo.
“India .. new customers, what can we sell to them? Energy independence, health care, there is so much we can sell to them …” – I like it Giuliani …
Yes, Romney (I’m the Romney supporter) and Giuliani boxed it out at this debate. And that’s good. I enjoyed it. And I like them both.
I listened to the debate on XM radio yesterday without the benefit of video. Ron Paul sounds like a little kid. I’m not really a McCain fan but, on radio, he actually sounded better than the rest.
Who is moderating the next one in this year's line up? Anyone know?...probably freegin' Juan Williams? I say we protest the format/moderator until they can get a Brit Hume or equivalent. A GOP primary debate is for the party.
Anybody have a link to the text of this debate? (I don’t have video access on my computer.)