PDA

View Full Version : predictions for the debate tomorrow?




amonasro
05-14-2007, 07:41 AM
After watching the first debate and seeing the questions they threw at him, Ron Paul hit them all out of the park with ease. If the media is so scared of him, what questions will they come up with for tomorrow night? Do you think they'll pull out the big guns and ask about medical marijuana, abortion rights, or gay marriage?

I'm fairly new to the whole debate thing as I've only seen a few in my lifetime. I predict they'll ask Ron some tough questions about being a libertarian and he'll nail them, just as he did before, because he knows EXACTLY what he's talking about and what he believes in. That's what makes him so great. Definitely won't be missing this one :)

mlpyeatt
05-14-2007, 09:05 AM
If you would like to know what Ron thinks, I can tell you. While in his office Saturday, my grandfather told me he expects to hear tougher questions this time around. He predicted that he would be asked questions about the support of Israel and questions pertaining to marijuana and hemp.

I asked him what he did to prepare for the debates. He said that he has an advantage over the other candidates because he doesn't have to remember what he said to what group about what previously. He just tells the truth and it is easier. He doesn't really rehearse answers.

He did tell me that he thinks about things like voice, tone, and trying to keep from being caught off-guard for the "tough" questions.

I am excited to see that this forum exists.

wraft
05-14-2007, 10:17 AM
Ron should come out for 9/11 Truth.

Ron should call for end of Iraq War.

Ron should support Kucinich's bill to impeach Cheney. Ron should also call for congressional investigations into war profiteering and cronyism.

Ron should define his campaign and not wait for it to be defined by the media.

giskard
05-14-2007, 01:24 PM
Is it gonna be televised?

Elwar
05-14-2007, 01:30 PM
I bet they ask Dr. Paul his feelings on one of the other candidates.

Something along the lines of. "Dr. Paul, how do you feel about Rudy Guilani's views on abortion?".

They'll just hit him with meaningless questions.

Or, "Would you accept a Vice presidency.."

What they really want to say is..."Would you please give up so we can go back to our own plan for the world?"

JoshLowry
05-14-2007, 01:58 PM
Is it gonna be televised?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,270812,00.html

The 90-minute debate will air from 9:00-10:30 p.m. ET. The event, sponsored is sponsored by the South Carolina Republican Party and will be held at the Koger Center for the Arts at USC's Columbia campus.

The Houston MeetUp.com group will be gathering some of their members together: http://ronpaul.meetup.com/24/calendar/5764664/


If you are going to be at home, make sure you watch it on a television where other family members can see it. Get excited about it, turn it up a little louder than usual, and let your family members see that you are excited. They will want to know what is going on and you will have a great opportunity to introduce Ron Paul.

I hope they give equal coverage to all the candidates.

GreyBlood
05-14-2007, 02:00 PM
I doubt that they will ask him any questions. or:

Brit: "Rudy, should we end the war?"
Rudy: "blah blah blah"
Brit: "Rep. Ron Paul, what is your favorite color?"
Ron: "I think we should discuss the Federal Res-"
Brit: "That is enough out of you"
*Brit pulls a lever and Ron gets catapulted into space*

If Ron really doesn't have a chance at winning, maybe he should just ignore the stupid questions and rant about the Fed. I mean, as long as he is on stage. Make the best of it.

Omega
05-14-2007, 02:21 PM
I really like that Ron is a strait shooter. Keep up the good fight Ron!

PMAC60452
05-14-2007, 02:33 PM
All the other candidates in the last debate looked like a bunch of babbling morons. Only Ron Paul stood out. Truth always shines bright in a room darkened with evil and lies.

NMCB3
05-14-2007, 02:34 PM
I hope they ask him what his plans are as far as terrorism is concerned, and I hope he has a good answer. Pulling out of Iraq is all well and good, but people are curious about what he will do about terrorists that want to attack us anyway. How will he protect mainland USA?

Many Republicans I have talked to believe that he is weak on defense. If we pull out of Iraq they want to know what he will do about terrorism which will still be with us. After all this is a Republican primary and he must win it to proceed further.

Does anyone know what his specific stance on the matter is? I have read everything I could about him including his new book, and have come up with nothing. This is a big question that the Republican base will want answered, the other candidates will hammer him on the issue if he starts to become a threat. Like I said, I hope he has a good answer. If he does, he will get a huge jump. If people think he`s a patsy its all over.

Jimmy
05-14-2007, 02:50 PM
I doubt that they will ask him any questions. or:

Brit: "Rudy, should we end the war?"
Rudy: "blah blah blah"
Brit: "Rep. Ron Paul, what is your favorite color?"
Ron: "I think we should discuss the Federal Res-"
Brit: "That is enough out of you"
*Brit pulls a lever and Ron gets catapulted into space*



LOL...thats about it. Can't let him say alot...everyone would vote for him

Gabecpa
05-14-2007, 03:13 PM
LOL...thats about it. Can't let him say alot...everyone would vote for him

email Brit Hume:

Special@foxnews.com

Korey Kaczynski
05-14-2007, 03:20 PM
Ron should come out for 9/11 Truth.

Ron should call for end of Iraq War.

Ron should support Kucinich's bill to impeach Cheney. Ron should also call for congressional investigations into war profiteering and cronyism.

Ron should define his campaign and not wait for it to be defined by the media.

Please.... 9/11 truth would make him out to be a wacko. Let it rest.

Korey Kaczynski
05-14-2007, 03:23 PM
I think they're going to ask tough questions. See, Fox News figures they'll get higher ratings if the questions make the candidates squirm. Last debate a few people got creamed; Tommy Thompson and Guiliani, especially. People enjoy seeing that.

Korey Kaczynski
05-14-2007, 03:24 PM
I doubt that they will ask him any questions. or:

Brit: "Rudy, should we end the war?"
Rudy: "blah blah blah"
Brit: "Rep. Ron Paul, what is your favorite color?"
Ron: "I think we should discuss the Federal Res-"
Brit: "That is enough out of you"
*Brit pulls a lever and Ron gets catapulted into space*

If Ron really doesn't have a chance at winning, maybe he should just ignore the stupid questions and rant about the Fed. I mean, as long as he is on stage. Make the best of it.

When he was asked that stupid question about whether or not he trusts the MSM, he segued into a better position about not regulating the Internet. So he'll definitely not get caught up in stupid questions.

Erazmus
05-14-2007, 03:47 PM
When he was asked that stupid question about whether or not he trusts the MSM, he segued into a better position about not regulating the Internet. So he'll definitely not get caught up in stupid questions.

Actually, when that question came up it scared the $hit out of me. I really don't trust the mainstream media, so I couldn't think of how I would have maneuvered through that question. The question, even though it wasn't exactly relevant to a presidential candidate, it was hot. By "hot" I mean if he tackled the question directly, he could've made a lot of enemies in the mainstream, and they'd be more reluctant to accept Paul as a tier 1 candidate. So the question itself wasn't without purpose. I think that question was deliberately and strategically crafted with syntax in mind. To the casual observer, the question seems harmless, that is unless you work for the mainstream media where the answer is important. And let us not forget how influential the media is in presidential races. It was craftily stated indeed.

At any rate, I agree with you. Paul deflected it in a positive way and turned the focus to the internet, where information about Paul is readily available. It was a genius move on his part, absolutely genius. He thwarted a dangerous question and made it beneficial to him. Double points for Ron!

I think the last debate made him shine, and they underestimated him. This time, the media won't be so flagrant.

Erazmus
05-14-2007, 03:56 PM
Please.... 9/11 truth would make him out to be a wacko. Let it rest.

While I agree that there needs to be some legitimate independent investigations into 9/11, it's a topic that Ron needs to steer clear of. However, I will say that if Ron Paul does become president, I don't think he would stonewall efforts for instigations into it, which is good.

Bottom line, if there's nothing to hide, then allow the investigations.

But I agree with you, one thing he doesn’t need at this point is negative publicity.

Brandybuck
05-14-2007, 04:10 PM
Ron should come out for 9/11 Truth.
But we already know what the truth is: some terrorists flew some planes into some buildings. It was not a Bush/Cheney/Rove plot. It was not Communist insiders or the Elders of Zion. Nor where the Bilderbergers or Trilateralists involved.

Popular Mechanics has thoroughly debunked the 9/11 conspiracy claims and answered every one of the questions the "Truthers" want answered. How many times do we need to answer these questions for you? How much more objective can you get than Popular Mechanics? Here's a link to start with, then get the book. http://www.popularmechanics.com/blogs/science_news/3886337.html

Back when the John Birch Society started out, it was libertarian, classic liberal, and traditional conservative. But then it got derailed by a stupid conspiracy theory and has been marginalized ever since. They're good people, but every one of their right ideas about liberty is overshadowed by their nuttery on insider conspiracies. Don't do this to Ron Paul! I want him to win, not to be put in a corner with Rosie O'Donnell.

There's more than enough room in this movement for debate an all issues, but you need to accept demonstrable facts as facts. The Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor, Oswald shot Kennedy, and terrorists flew planes into the WTC and Pentagon. People don't need to be part of a conspiracy to commit evil, they only need to be evil.

Brandybuck
05-14-2007, 04:18 PM
Bottom line, if there's nothing to hide, then allow the investigations.
Aaaaargh!!!! How many times do we need to investigate this! How many times do we need to answer those silly questions! If you have a problem with the answers, then address those problems specifically. DO NOT keep asking the same questions over and over, pretending that no one has answered them! Everyone one of the "9/11 truth" questions have been answered. Every one of their claims has been debunked.

Sticking your fingers in your ears and singing "la la la i cant hear you" won't stop facts from being facts.

Erazmus
05-14-2007, 04:28 PM
Aaaaargh!!!! How many times do we need to investigate this! How many times do we need to answer those silly questions! If you have a problem with the answers, then address those problems specifically. DO NOT keep asking the same questions over and over, pretending that no one has answered them! Everyone one of the "9/11 truth" questions have been answered. Every one of their claims has been debunked.

Sticking your fingers in your ears and singing "la la la i cant hear you" won't stop facts from being facts.

Holy chit man! This is not the place for this. Please stop. This is a Ron Paul forum. Since you felt obligated to post your Popular Mechanics rhetoric, I'll respond a debunk to the debunker.

http://www.freedomisforeverybody.org/debunkPopMech.php

Now people can judge for themselves. In a true free society, people aren't attacked on their views, people aren't attacked for questioning their government, and people aren't attacked for asking for an independent investigation. The 9/11 commission wasn't an independent study. Perhaps you're satisfied with their results, I am not, and I have the right to ask for an independent investigation. I never pointed fingers or said who did it. You, sir, are assuming. I merely have questions and want them answered, and honestly PM did a piss poor job.

This is the last I will post on this. I am for Ron Paul and this is what I am here for.

jimmy1954
05-14-2007, 04:44 PM
I must say, Dr. Paul has been around for a long time and this is not his first rodeo... He has debated issues that we never knew existed... Bill Mayer really had to know his position on the Civil War and he left Mayer speechless...

When you have an understanding of the issues as Dr. Paul does, you do not have to speak from a memorized text. You just answer the questions with an explanation that leaves the moderator understanding the root of the problem.
Example,
Question; How can we cut spending?
Answer; If we want to be the world’s policeman then we can not cut spending, we must continue to borrow money and increase our debt.

Lesgov
05-14-2007, 05:03 PM
I agree with Jimmy, this is not Ron's first trip around the block, I think he has been campaigning for this for years.
I think they will ask him some very difficult questions, but I have faith in him. He knows how to answer questions from what I've seen.

Les

billv
05-14-2007, 05:22 PM
I'm expecting:

"Congressman Paul," asks some ridiculously involved question and then, "You have 5 seconds to answer"

"Thank You Congressman Paul. Governor Romney...You have 10 minutes to answer".

wraft
05-14-2007, 05:42 PM
If Ron ducks the question of 9/11 Truth, it will be a one way ticket to Palookaville.

Erazmus
05-14-2007, 05:51 PM
If Ron ducks the question of 9/11 Truth, it will be a one way ticket to Palookaville.

I don't think he'll dodge it, I think he'll tactfully massage the question. Seeing how he masterfully answered the mainstream media question, I think he can tackle the question, if brought up. Somehow, I don't think it will be brought up. Big media doesn't want to bring a spotlight to the 9/11 truth movement. The reason as to why is open to debate, and honestly the reason is irrelevant. The fact of the matter is the media just doesn't want the spotlight to go there.

ModeratorTest
05-14-2007, 05:52 PM
If Ron ducks the question of 9/11 Truth, it will be a one way ticket to Palookaville.

No it won't be a one way ticket to "palookaville"...

The debate won't even bring up any question of the sort.

You mention 9/11 truth in 4 out of your last 5 posts. We got it, lay low with it.

Scribbler de Stebbing
05-14-2007, 06:15 PM
Does anyone know if the debate will be streaming anywhere on the 'net? I watch tv so rarely, I don't have cable.

AlexWallenwein
05-14-2007, 06:25 PM
What's weak on defense is taking our troops halfway around the world to fight an undefinable enemy while leaving the Mexican border wide open to exactly that enemy.

Ron has already pointed this out in the first debate. All he needs to do is to stick to the truth and tell 'em how it is. The rest is common sense, which he has lots of because, funny thing that is, the truth always makes sense. :)

dam4freedom
05-14-2007, 06:34 PM
I believe the mainstream media will try to make him look bad, by asking meaningless questions! Like how he feels about the other canidates views, tring to get him to be more like the others and bad mouth them! This will not work, he is a good HONEST MAN with no CONFLICTS of INTREST! If he does GOOD tonight, I think it will lead to the MAINSTREAM MEDIA to ask him the QUESTION that REALLY needs to be ANSWERD!!!! This Is the time to keep the PRESSURE ON!!!!! THEY will think,so ARROGANTLY, if they ask him his views on 9/11 hoping he will say their needs to be A CITIZEN COMMISION on the events of SEPT 11,2001,Or if he believes in the 911 truth movement! What they don't understand ,I BELIEVE, is that the majority of AMERICANS believe our LEADERS of the EXCUTIVE BRANCH, at the very least had some prior knowledge to what was going on! IF I could ask Sen.PAUL 2 ?'s it would be;
#1 Considering his VOTE to IMPEACH President CLINTON, Would he VOTE toIMPEACH President BUSH?
#2 Does he remember WHERE he was on 9/11?

llamabread
05-14-2007, 06:55 PM
I have full faith that Ron Paul will stick to his guns, and it will only gain him more support, and the media will only hate him that much more. They are used to candidates that send every message possible to any group willing to support them, and end up sending no message at all. At least we will know what Ron Paul is going to do if he is elected president. Honest and integrity just aren't held to the standards that they used to be.

wecandoit
05-14-2007, 07:49 PM
I fully expect a question to Ron Paul on 911 truth. At this point I think they are desperate for RP to have a "Howard Dean" moment that they can replay over and over again on the MSM and say :"see, he's a whacko"

It's either that, or about what would happen to Iraq if we totally pulled out like you advocate, and wouldn't that make everything we've done for naught?

I think both are a dangerous strategy for those who want to silence the RP movement, as Paul's possible answers on both might be very well stated, and cause the largest applause of the night.

The masters of editing at Fox might have their hands full, it'll be interesing.

Brandybuck
05-14-2007, 08:24 PM
Does anyone know what his specific stance on the matter is?
Letters of Marque and Reprisal. See http://www.progress.org/fold232.htm for more info. It's an interesting idea. I'm not sure it would work now, after Bush stirred up the hornet's nest, but it could have been effective back in 2003.

Brandybuck
05-14-2007, 08:35 PM
This is the last I will post on this. I am for Ron Paul and this is what I am here for.
Sorry for my earlier rant. "Truthers" are one of my hot buttons.

NMCB3
05-14-2007, 08:43 PM
Letters of Marque and Reprisal. See http://www.progress.org/fold232.htm for more info. It's an interesting idea. I'm not sure it would work now, after Bush stirred up the hornet's nest, but it could have been effective back in 2003.Thanks for the link. I`ve actually heard him mention this as well. I`m sure there are plenty of ex-special forces types who would take on the challenge. I think that along with law enforcement cooperation between countries would help quite a bit.

chandlerLBT
05-14-2007, 09:20 PM
Many Republicans I have talked to believe that he is weak on defense. If we pull out of Iraq they want to know what he will do about terrorism which will still be with us. After all this is a Republican primary and he must win it to proceed further.

Does anyone know what his specific stance on the matter is?

ron paul believes in a foreign policy of nonintervention. this is the same policy that our first president of the united states, george washington believed in.

right now, there are many troops stationed all over the world, in 130 different countries. how can our troops stand firm and defend america if they're out playing mediator with other countries?! with more troops at home, we have more protection to fight terrorists, and prevent terrorist attacks.

also, the whole reason many people throughout the world have come to despise america is because of our current foreign policy of intervening whenever we please. america has had it's fair share of problems. so do other countries. we don't need any help from other countries to fix our problems. so why do we feel the need to 'help' other countries with theirs? this only causes hostility from the opposing side on an issue that has nothing to do with american citizens.

we need this foreign policy of nonintervention for two reasons: to keep our troops in our OWN country so they can effectively defend our country, and to reverse the world's ever-growing hatred for intervening in their respective countries.

jimmyjamsslo
05-14-2007, 09:48 PM
.. to the poster who mentioned the terrorism and defense issue: it is the policy of foreign meddling, military aggression, and aiding the Zionist agenda in the Mideast that foments terrorism. The concept of a 'war on terror' is a misleading one. It is waging a war against an abstraction. The prosecution of this so-called 'war' has been instrumental in spawning a new generation of terrorists, like the debacle in Iraq has shown us. All the other GOP shills, as well as the Democratic ones (Hillary, Obama, J. Edwards) are apparently loathe to address the root causes of terrorism like this overseas. It is much like the 'war on drugs' which is responsible for the rampant gang problem, burglary and police corruption in the cities. This why Dr. Paul's clarion call for non-interventionism is so crucial at this juncture in history.

Jimmy

AlexWallenwein
05-14-2007, 09:57 PM
Ron should come out for 9/11 Truth.

Ron should call for end of Iraq War.

Ron should support Kucinich's bill to impeach Cheney. Ron should also call for congressional investigations into war profiteering and cronyism.

Ron should define his campaign and not wait for it to be defined by the media.

I really don't like the fact that people are using Ron Paul message boards to push the 911 issue. There's a little bit too much of that going on in my view.

If and when Ron becomes president, the issue will be dealt with. Cover ups are not his nature. He is one to uncover them. But pushing this issue on us now, at this time, when it can do nothing to help him win the nomination first and later the election, does both camps a huge disservice.

AlexWallenwein
05-14-2007, 10:02 PM
I think Ron knows what he should do. he paid his dues in over twenty years in Congress, reminding more than unwilling fellow representatives that the COnstitution IS the law of the land and needs to be adhered to, or else.

Ron know what to say when, where, and to whom. That's what he has practiced, and how he blew away Bill Maher is the best proof of that. I don't think he needs advice from any of us. What he needs is our support (financially and time-wise) and our help in getting the word out, not what he "should" do to further somebody else's primary agenda.

This doesn't help.

ronpaulitician
05-14-2007, 10:05 PM
Here are the questions I would ask (both to learn what his answers are and to give him a chance to beat his critics to the punch, by allowing him to further explain his votes):

1. What is your position on the "taxation without representation" issue in regard to the District of Columbia?

(The House recently passed a bill to allow DC to have a permanent vote in Congress, but since DC is not a state, that bill seems to be unconstitutional. I believe Ron Paul voted against it. Some possible solutions that I see: (a) Make DC a state, (b) Amend the Constitution, (c) Eliminate all federal taxes to DC residents, (d) Cede all of DC back to Maryland, except for federal buildings and parks.)

2. You voted to ban adoptions to gay couples. Why?

(Ron Paul voted to ban the use of federal funds for abortions to unmarried couples in DC. Some critics seem to have turned that into "Paul's against gay adoptions". Does anyone know if Dr. Paul provided any comments with that vote? Would he have voted to ban the use of federal funds for abortion regardless of the status of the prospective parent(s)?)

3. Do you hold the Constitution above God?

(I respect Ron Paul's religious beliefs, but, as an atheist, I'd like to know if, when push comes to shove, Dr. Ron Paul would put the Constitution about God.)

DrStrabismus
05-14-2007, 10:08 PM
Does anyone know if the debate will be streaming anywhere on the 'net? I watch tv so rarely, I don't have cable.

www.foxnews.com says they will be streaming the debate live.

dwdollar
05-14-2007, 10:31 PM
I just hope they give equal time to all candidates. But we all know how unfair and unbalanced FOX news is...

aknappjr
05-14-2007, 11:52 PM
Anyone know? I attempted to contact Fox, to no avail. My guess no online poll will be offered, but I have no idea.

Join a Ron Paul meetup in your area! http://ronpaul.meetup.com

aravoth
05-15-2007, 12:25 AM
If you would like to know what Ron thinks, I can tell you. While in his office Saturday, my grandfather told me he expects to hear tougher questions this time around. He predicted that he would be asked questions about the support of Israel and questions pertaining to marijuana and hemp.

I asked him what he did to prepare for the debates. He said that he has an advantage over the other candidates because he doesn't have to remember what he said to what group about what previously. He just tells the truth and it is easier. He doesn't really rehearse answers.

He did tell me that he thinks about things like voice, tone, and trying to keep from being caught off-guard for the "tough" questions.

I am excited to see that this forum exists.

Hi Matt. Yes your Grandfather is amazing. The only political leader on earth that doesn't bullshit. I've made a few videos of him to drum up support on youtube. and ya know, it's easy. You can look back to any speech he has ever made, any bill he has introduced, or any utterance he made to a camera, and you will never find a discrepency between what is in the debate or interview, and what is on paper. Even if it was 20 years ago.

I sincerly hope he gets the nomination. But if he doesn't I sure hope he drops the republican ticket and goes it alone. There are far more unregisterd independants in this nation than people realize.

jimmy1954
05-15-2007, 02:46 AM
I think Dr. Paul will, again, separate himself from the field... I think he will do it a little at a time... If you notice, he always answers with what will happen if a particular policy is changed or left unchanged... He is a great debater...

Jimmy1954

Elwar
05-15-2007, 08:14 AM
Ron Paul has already stated his stance on this issue. He's not ruling anything out, but he would not waste taxpayer money on an investigation.

If the question is asked, that is how he'll respond...again.

MsDoodahs
05-15-2007, 08:55 AM
You know...it strikes me that a question on 9/11 investigations might be a PERFECT opportunity for Dr. Paul to bring up the mainsleazemedia's mea culpa on their FAILURE to investigate the current admin's claims prior to invading Iraq (ala that Bill Moyers special), and he could even tie that into the mainsleazemedia's blackout of his own meteoric rise in online popularity...and suggest that perhaps the mainsleazemedia is failing the nation in a VERY serious way....

:D