Republicans gather for fight night in Vegas

  • Thread starter Thread starter gilliam
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Eh, Newt is what, 5th place in polling right now? Maybe even lower. If Herman Cain, Romney, or Perry made this challenge that would be one thing, this just seems like New is trying to find cheap ways to get noticed.
 
I would love to see whoever the nominee ends up being having a debate on those terms with Obama. No, Newt probably won`t end up being that person but I do think he would have Obama tongue-tied in that kind of a set-up.
 
I voted for Newt Gingrich.

Yes, I can see how Mitt Romney consolidated his position as a frontrunner tonight. But, quite frankly, he isn’t a conservative. And, so far he hasn’t been challenged enough in the debates… but he is probably the one person on that stage who isn’t a solid conservative. And, therefore the one person who doesn’t fire up the base.

Now, I dislike Bachman bc of her personality. And Ron Paul sadly will never win the nomination bc of a lot of his libertarian ideas, especially foreign policy. But, EVERY person on that stage tonight was a true conservative. [And yes, that’s because Huntsman wasn’t there, he is not a true conservative either].

Anyways, so far all of the Anti-Romeny candidates have fallen short. Perry, Bachman, and now Cain when put to the fire simply don’t deliver. They don’t look Presidential (Bachman) or they don’t have a mastery of the issues.

I think Gingrich is the figurative John McCain of this race. He’s in the back right now, but when you look at him he IS the most legitimate challenger we’ve got.

I think also, that ANYONE who wouldn’t vote for Newt Gingrich because of his personal life is missing something here. His personal life does not affect his ability to lead. Past marriages aren’t as important as your faith anyways.

Here again, I say: the faith of EVERY candidate on that stage satisfies me, except that of Mitt Romney. Every one of them is sincerely pro-life, pro- family, except Mitt. Yeah, I understand that his current positions are. But, the keyword is CURRENT positions. When you look at Bachman, Paul they have been ideological purists in their consistent support of these issues. And… to my knowledge, so has Newt Gingrich. Rick Perry had a prayer rally, tonight you had Santorum and Gingrich talking about their faith. Gingrich referenced that he has a solid prayer life.

Mitt Romney has distanced himself from his Mormon faith. Saying, that it wouldn’t influence how he led. Isn’t that the same argument that liberal Catholics use when they vote for abortion and gay marriage? That their personal faith doesn’t affect their public actions.

Those are my 98 cents :twocents::twocents::twocents:I feel like LOL 😃
 
Like a lot of the Republican base that has been avidly watching the field, I have shifted my support a lot. And, it’s for the same reason: I simply cannot accept Mitt Romney as the nominee without feeling like I’m settling for the guy that can beat Obama.

I don’t want to settle for someone to be the President of the United States, I want someone who’s conservative values are economic and social in nature. And have been so consistently.

That being said, I’ve looked at Newt Gingrich before, and I’m looking at him again tonight.

I want to interject and say, I was nearly won over by Romney last week. But again, it’s because he looks Presidential, he looks like the most legitimate contender. It wasn’t because “wow, Mitt Romney looks to be the most principled conservative with the best ideas”.

To some extent, Mitt Romney, even with all his polish, still shows that his positions are created by handlers. So yeah, they sound good… but they are crafted for the campaign, how do I know he believes them?

I say all this because I don’t think Bachman, Cain, Perry, or Santorum could have a Lincoln Douglass debate with Obama. However, Gingrich could, and in fairness so could Mitt Romney. However, I now support Gingrich because he is a true ideas man and a true conservative. With him I get the sense of authenticity that I got from Mike Huckabee last go round. In that: he writes his own speeches and decides his own positions. And not handlers like a lot of the candidates.

p.s. I would say Bachman and Paul are both authentic as well. But, if I take the ideas and philosophy of these 3 authentic candidates: Bachman, Paul, and Gingrich I personally agree with Gingrich’s the most.
 
I’m confused as to how such a debate can occur. In the Lincoln-Douglas debate, Lincoln knew both sides of the issue, whereas Douglas knew only one side.

In a Newt-Obama debate, Newt can be like Lincoln since he knows both sides of the issue. However, Obama can’t be Douglas since Douglas at least knew one side of the issue.

So where does Obama fit in?🙂
 
Semper_Zelare said:
Like a lot of the Republican base that has been avidly watching the field, I have shifted my support a lot. And, it’s for the same reason: I simply cannot accept Mitt Romney as the nominee without feeling like I’m settling for the guy that can beat Obama.

I don’t want to settle for someone to be the President of the United States, I want someone who’s conservative values are economic and social in nature. And have been so consistently.

That being said, I’ve looked at Newt Gingrich before, and I’m looking at him again tonight.

I want to interject and say, I was nearly won over by Romney last week. But again, it’s because he looks Presidential, he looks like the most legitimate contender. It wasn’t because “wow, Mitt Romney looks to be the most principled conservative with the best ideas”.

To some extent, Mitt Romney, even with all his polish, still shows that his positions are created by handlers. So yeah, they sound good… but they are crafted for the campaign, how do I know he believes them?

I say all this because I don’t think Bachman, Cain, Perry, or Santorum could have a Lincoln Douglass debate with Obama. However, Gingrich could, and in fairness so could Mitt Romney. However, I now support Gingrich because he is a true ideas man and a true conservative. With him I get the sense of authenticity that I got from Mike Huckabee last go round. In that: he writes his own speeches and decides his own positions. And not handlers like a lot of the candidates.

p.s. I would say Bachman and Paul are both authentic as well. But, if I take the ideas and philosophy of these 3 authentic candidates: Bachman, Paul, and Gingrich I personally agree with Gingrich’s the most.
Click to expand...
Good points, all. However, I would make the additional point that Bachman and Paul (and any of the others) don’t rise to Gingrich’s level of intellectual rigor. Newt would expose Obama for the phony he is. If you think he stammers and hesitates now, imagine him debating Gingrich. And that is why he would never agree to such a debate. Also, its usually not to the advantage of the incumbent to debate the challenger.

Ishii
 
Gingrich would shred Obama. I think Newt would be the perfect VP candidate.
 
Baer said:
Eh, Newt is what, 5th place in polling right now? Maybe even lower. If Herman Cain, Romney, or Perry made this challenge that would be one thing, this just seems like New is trying to find cheap ways to get noticed.
Click to expand...
Newt and the rest of them should probably first worry about performing in and winning the Republican debates and winning the Iowa caucus to obtain a ticket out of Iowa for a chance to meet Romney in NH.
 
Alas, I cannot vote in your poll, since I was doing more important things during the debate time. 🤷
 
Baer said:
Eh, Newt is what, 5th place in polling right now? Maybe even lower. If Herman Cain, Romney, or Perry made this challenge that would be one thing, this just seems like New is trying to find cheap ways to get noticed.
Click to expand...
How could displaying his thorough knowledge of politics at a pivotal time in American history be considered cheap?
 
BVM_1221 said:
Alas, I cannot vote in your poll, since I was doing more important things during the debate time. 🤷
Click to expand...
Why post then? :rolleyes: I doubt that anyone cares what your thoughts are on a debate you didn’t watch. 😛
 
BVM_1221 said:
Alas, I cannot vote in your poll, since I was doing more important things during the debate time. 🤷
Click to expand...
Me neither and me too. But I guess CNN was replaying it @ 11 pm ET. I was channel surfing just a bit ago at 11 and just watched the opening. Enjoyed the attacks on 999. Cain was saying a state sales tax is an apple or an orange and his national sales tax the other fruit. I got a big laugh when Romney said then I’m getting a bushel basket of both apples and oranges! Good one Mitt.

I do see though at this early moment Tea Party non-favorite Romney once agian leads another CAF post-GOP debate poll. Only 7 have voted though so far.
 
CMatt25 said:
Me too but I guess CNN was replaying it @ 11 pm ET. I was channel surfing just a bit ago at 11 and just watched the opening. Enjoyed the attacks on 999. Cain was saying a state sales tax is an apple or an orange and his national sales tax the other fruit. I got a big laugh when Romney said then I’m getting a bushel basket of both apples and oranges! Good one Mitt.
Click to expand...
You can always watch these on YouTube, as well. That’s what I plan to do in a few hours, since I don’t have TV.
 
rlg94086 said:
You can always watch these on YouTube, as well. That’s what I plan to do in a few hours, since I don’t have TV.
Click to expand...
Except for those poorer folk who although having warfare declared against them, are still trying to save money with dialup where YouTube runs as slow as molasses or those of us who don’t have smartphones.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top