posted on Jan, 7 2012 @ 10:34 PM
Originally posted by PaxVeritas
Ron Paul did NOTHING profound in this debate.
He looked sheepish and played the 'good guy' and didn't adapt to the conversation.
Mitt Romney looked like a "Leader", and I'm not even a fan of Romney.
Ron looked like a philosopher hiding in the corner with a contrarian retort once in a while.
Ron said nothing definitive. Nothing specific. He looked flustered and gave all his time away to the other speakers.
He didn't have concise answers and read from his usual Ron Paul talking points while the others actually gave a substantial debate....even if their
policies are WACKO.
Ron Paul didn't 'crush' anything but some votes that might have gone his way in NH.
I have to say, I agree with most of what you said here. There were a few points I disagree and they made me realize that there was a planned
arrangement tonight. At one point Paul says "I don't like absolutes" and he got interrupted. He turned and told whoever interrupted him (think it
was romney) and said "Don't interrupt me". The other point was during one point of the debate, he got angry.. I mean really angry and it showed.
He was often paying strong attention to the candidates, standing relatively straight and looking at the person talking.
I was a bit peeved when Perry interrupted him and took the balance of his time, though.
I liked his answer about what he would be doing on a Saturday night, but it wasn't a surprise. Unlike everyone else, he does not pander.
edit on 1-7-2012 by rogerstigers because: (no reason given)