DVD Talk Forum

DVD Talk Forum (https://forum.dvdtalk.com/)
-   Religion, Politics and World Events (https://forum.dvdtalk.com/religion-politics-world-events-47/)
-   -   GOP Presidential Candidate Debate (https://forum.dvdtalk.com/religion-politics-world-events/499650-gop-presidential-candidate-debate.html)

NotThatGuy 05-03-07 09:17 PM

GOP Presidential Candidate Debate
 
How is there no thread on this?!!

Rudy got a few curve balls, but he handled them well.

I'm not really digging anyone that much....blah.

McCain has given some fo the best answers, but I can't see myself voting for him. Guiliani has been good also. I suck at names, so I can't remember the other guys.

Doc....out.
Utah guy....out. Romney I think. He's pretty slick though, bad politics though.
Guiliani......in the mix.
Brownback.....Fuck you and your fence. There are some others who want the stupid fence.
McCain.....eh, I loved his comments about the National ID card.
Tancredo......not sure yet, he didn't speak nearly as much, or it wasn't forgettable.

chrisih8u 05-03-07 09:23 PM

Mitt Romney is "Utah guy"? :confused:

Red Dog 05-03-07 09:23 PM

http://forum.dvdtalk.com/showthread....8&page=1&pp=25

NotThatGuy 05-03-07 09:24 PM

My bad.

-p

NotThatGuy 05-03-07 09:25 PM

The "reagan library" logo looks like the Mike's Hard Lemonade logo.

:lol:

-p

NotThatGuy 05-03-07 09:25 PM

Brownback.....good answer @ hillary...she blows.

-p

NotThatGuy 05-03-07 09:28 PM

I gotta give it to McCain....he hit the nail on the head with the supreme court stuff.

Guiliani went right back to the terror card. Expected, but somewhat effective.

-p

lordwow 05-03-07 09:51 PM

:thumbsup: to McCain, he's got my vote if he keeps this up.

CRM114 05-03-07 09:56 PM

Chris Matthews asked the candidates to raise their hand if they did not believe in evolution. I was shocked that nearly half of them raised their hands.

Giuliani kills himself on the pro-life issues. Huckabee is frightening how he says that his religion would guide his decisions. Romney is the robo-candidate. Too bad about the Mormon thing.

JasonF 05-03-07 10:18 PM


Originally Posted by Vandelay_Inds
What channel is this on again? Is it being broadcast over the Internet?

MSNBC -- See here:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18466314/
They don't seem to have video up yet, but I'm sure they will soon. Edit: It's starting to become available. Right now, they have the first three segments.

CaptainMarvel 05-03-07 10:24 PM


Originally Posted by CRM114
Chris Matthews asked the candidates to raise their hand if they did not believe in evolution. I was shocked that nearly half of them raised their hands.

3 out of 10, right?

CaptainMarvel 05-03-07 10:32 PM


Originally Posted by Vandelay_Inds
I'd be curious to see which ones do not believe in evolution.

CNN: "No evolution?
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- When asked to raise their hands if they don't believe in evolution, Sen. Sam Brownback, Gov. Mike Huckabee and Rep. Tom Tancredo all said they do not."

Jason 05-03-07 11:08 PM


Originally Posted by CaptainMarvel
CNN: "No evolution?
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- When asked to raise their hands if they don't believe in evolution, Sen. Sam Brownback, Gov. Mike Huckabee and Rep. Tom Tancredo all said they do not."

They're going all out for the evangelical vote, like they have a hope in Hell.

If they thought it would get votes, they would raise their hands in answer to the question, "How many of you think Ronald Reagan was gay?"

X 05-03-07 11:28 PM

So the Democrat candidates pull out of their first debate which was going to be on FOX and decide to have it on MSNBC. And the Republican candidates have their first debate on MSNBC, hosted by Chris Matthews.

What does this say (other than both parties wanting their first debates not to be seen by anyone)?

JasonF 05-04-07 12:06 AM


Originally Posted by X
So the Democrat candidates pull out of their first debate which was going to be on FOX and decide to have it on MSNBC. And the Republican candidates have their first debate on MSNBC, hosted by Chris Matthews.

What does this say (other than both parties wanting their first debates not to be seen by anyone)?

People may not watch MSNBC on a day-to-day basis, but they'll seek it out if it's something they want to see. How many people want to see a presidential debate 8 months before the first primary is another question.

And I would argue that Fox is far more hostile to Democrats and liberals than MSNBC is to Republicans and conservatives.

Interesting MSNBC debate fact -- according to the way MSNBC entitled the video clips, this debate had a "lightening round." As if the candidates weren't white enough. ;)

IMRICKJAMES 05-04-07 12:08 AM

Mitt Romney, or 'Utah Guy' clearly won the debate

I hope for a Romney Clinton matchup, just so from now on I can talk about Utah Guy vs Hill Dawg

JasonF 05-04-07 12:33 AM

I'm obviously not the target audience for this thing, but I was unimpressed with all of these people. We get it, guys -- you like President Reagan. You don't have to drop his name every other answer.

And the candidates who sais they oppose a Constitutional Amendment to allow foreign-born citizens to run for president because they are originalists ought to be taken out back and shot. These people are clearly using buzzwords to pander to the Republican base -- I'm not sure if they understand what they are saying. There are plenty of legitimate reasons to oppose a Constitutional Amendment in general and this one in particular. But the whole point of the amendment process is to provide a mechanism to change the Constitution. Originalism doesn't enter into it.

kvrdave 05-04-07 12:51 AM


Originally Posted by CRM114
Chris Matthews asked the candidates to raise their hand if they did not believe in evolution. I was shocked that nearly half of them raised their hands.

It's a loaded question, imo. The term means so many different things to different people, that I wouldn't really know how to answer it. It would have been nice to see how many people believed in UFOs, Big Foot, etc.

IMRICKJAMES 05-04-07 01:41 AM

I have a problem with some of the questions like the evolution one, but especially the questions from readers of the politico.com. It was pretty easy to see a lot of those questions were from liberal loons.

First about the evolution one. I definitely agree with the poster above. It was loaded. Just having people have to raise their hand about evolution isn't right. It doesn't leave anything for interpretations such as the belief I personally have which is God created the universe but then left it alone. There was evolution but everything was created by God and evolution is partly God's Will.

Now on to the politico.com stuff.

Come on, "what do you dislike about America most?" Really? Definitely asked to try to catch someone

"What's the difference between Shia and Sunni?" or "How many have been killed or injured in Iraq?" Only asked to embarass.

“Thousands of reputable scientists have concluded, with almost certainty, that human activity is responsible for the warming of the Earth. Do you believe global warming exists?” Another stupid question because there is no 'almost certainty' and for a thousand reputable scientists theres another thousand reputable scientists who concluded differently.

My favorite question of all though has to be the Chris Matthews asked, “Would it be good for America to have Bill Clinton back living in the White House?” I'm sure him and Olbermann and all the Dems out there watching in TV land were just hoping for a joke they could pounce on as offensive, so someone could get Imused

wmansir 05-04-07 02:02 AM


Originally Posted by JasonF
And I would argue that Fox is far more hostile to Democrats and liberals than MSNBC is to Republicans and conservatives.

On the whole I would agree, but Chris Matthews in particular is more of a pundit than a journalist. I would certainly consider him more partisan than Brit Hume.

Xytraguptorh 05-04-07 02:07 AM

I thought the whole debate was pretty worthless, though I'm not sure how to really improve the format. But thirty seconds isn't enough time to give real answers. Too much time was spent talking about abortion, and not enough time on immigration. This debate really just tested candidates' ability with thirty second sound bytes. It didn't really tell us that much about where they stand. I hope most people have enough sense to dig deeper than these debates.

As for who won, not that it matters, but I thought Ron Paul did good in this format and sort of stood out, though he still has no chance of winning. Giuliana didn't seem terribly confident, but again they discussed abortion way too much (although he probably would have been shaken too if they'd focused on immigration given his past record). I don't trust McCain anymore than before after seeing him in this debate. Romney is a good speaker, but seems awfully plastic and not someone I trust (his picture could be in the dictionary next to the word politician). Hunter was okay. Tancredo didn't stand out at all, but again, immigration was barely touched on, even though it's probably the hottest domestic issue right now, especially for conservatives. Who were the other candidates??

I hope the Fox and CNN presidential debates are better than this one. I actually thought the Democratic debate was slightly more interesting.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:59 AM.


Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.