PDA

View Full Version : Republican Debate Scorecard: CNBC / Michigan Republican Party




sailingaway
11-10-2011, 10:10 AM
http://www.ology.com/politics/republican-debate-scorecard-cnbc-michigan-republican-party

InTradePro
11-10-2011, 10:14 AM
Dr Paul gets an A-, right on.
Paul: "...his line about spending being the disease and the tax code being merely a symptom was right on."

HeyArchie
11-10-2011, 10:18 AM
I think it was pretty accurate, regarding Paul. I don't think what he did to Perry was distasteful though.

His best debate was the last and this one is up there too, so A -> A- makes sense.

But, it does appear it's time for the media to start pushing for Gingrich again. They know deep down that Cain's run is unsustainable and he will fall. Sexual allegations aside, the guy knows nothing about the major events going on in the world right now.

SilentBull
11-10-2011, 10:28 AM
he sneered a bit during the Perry gaffe ("ffffiiiivvvveeee") which I found a bit distasteful Was it distasteful when everyone was laughing at him back in 2008, when he was trying to explain inflation to that idiot Thompson?

sailingaway
11-10-2011, 10:33 AM
Was it distasteful when everyone was laughing at him back in 2008, when he was trying to explain inflation to that idiot Thompson?

The point is Ron didn't sneer. I don't think Ron KNOWS how to sneer. In fact when they tried to get Ron to go after Perry on 'crony capitalism' Ron specifically turned it into a depersonalized discussion of how crony capitalism permeates government overall, and how it needs to be stopped, but how it also is not TRUE capitalism and shouldn't be confused with that.

ShaneEnochs
11-10-2011, 10:36 AM
Ron Paul just isn't as vicious as he used to be. Remember that clip of him from the 80's going after the fat kid? He's much more mature now, and is more like a wise old Jedi than a emotional padawan.

The Free Hornet
11-10-2011, 10:42 AM
Paul's actions were not distasteful. He tried to feed Perry "HUD" and was clearly not the one who fed "EPA".

In general, you will see Ron Paul watch the other debaters intently and he is mentally engaged with them even when not answering a question. The guy may not have "good hair" skills like Romney but I don't doubt he can work a room of politicians and knows the how and the who to get things done.

Miss Annie
11-10-2011, 11:06 AM
Does anyone know when the debate on foreign policy is that the end of the article is referring to? I think the guy is right, that will be his crucible. But I think that his message is great, the only reasonable message to be delivered. But it's going to be the delivery that determines how it is received.

bluesc
11-10-2011, 11:07 AM
Does anyone know when the debate on foreign policy is that the end of the article is referring to? I think the guy is right, that will be his crucible. But I think that his message is great, the only reasonable message to be delivered. But it's going to be the delivery that determines how it is received.

12th. There is another foreign policy debate coming up, too. Ron just needs to use his line on the Suez Canal. People will be surprised (I was).

sailingaway
11-10-2011, 11:13 AM
Ron Paul just isn't as vicious as he used to be. Remember that clip of him from the 80's going after the fat kid? He's much more mature now, and is more like a wise old Jedi than a emotional padawan.

the 'fat kid' was insulting the guys he was with and all libertarians in general. Ron merely pointed out the logical conclusion of nannystatism of the sort the fat kid wanted. And do we or do we not actually have government moving in that direction? If anything, it should be added to the 'Ron Paul's awesome predictions' thread :p

sailingaway
11-10-2011, 11:13 AM
Does anyone know when the debate on foreign policy is that the end of the article is referring to? I think the guy is right, that will be his crucible. But I think that his message is great, the only reasonable message to be delivered. But it's going to be the delivery that determines how it is received.

I hope Ron ties the direct line between social security and medicare and unnecessary militarism. We can't fund both, and at the rate we are going will not be able to fund EITHER when the house of cards collapses.