It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

GOP Debate Tonight 1/26/12

page: 21
15
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 09:00 PM
link   
From a liberals standpoint whom views everyone up there as a bunch of nonsense talking disasters:

I would venture to say Romney has this.

Santorum is acting like the mad hatter..clearly feeling the pressure of scraping the bottom. He is trying to take a newt and become aggressive in his speech, but its coming off as someone whom just got punched and is shakingly trying to tell his side right before he bursts into tears. This is now showing cool strength, its showing hysterical craziness.

Paul sounds good, but there is very little pandering. He isn't fluffing his answers enough. People love fluff

Gingrich sounds like a grumpy and apathetic person whom is simply topping up on other answers, flouted who endorsed him (like that matters).

Romney spoke a bit stiff. He made also a few awkward moments, but ultimately he sounded most "presidential".

Last comment however, clearly Ron Paul won that. The rest towed party lines, and know they aren't going to win against Obama..therefore Ron Paul was the only genuine answer.

But ya...point, Romney..however, due to my liberal mindset, logic and reason doesn't apply here...I don't understand the mindset of the audience...who knows. they might like the shakingly angry b--ch tone santorum took on.




posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 09:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrWendal

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by MrWendal
 


Tell me who won after the polls come out or after the Florida primary.

You are commenting on this from a personal and emotional position.

I'm commenting on what will translate into the real world.


No your not. Your commenting from the point of view of someone who has no horse in this race and your not saying anything that people do not know or are not expecting. Even Ron Paul expects to come in last in Florida and HAS NOT spent money campaigning in this area. It is a winner take all State. Whoever wins Florida, gets ALL the delegates. Paul's strategy is to collect delegates. He is spending his money campaigning in Caucus States and states that divide delegates based on the primary results.

Your not basing anything on "the real world" your simply saying the same thing everyone has said since the S.C. Primary.


I am basing everything on "the real world".

IF Ron Paul did so great as all of you are saying...he should win Florida.



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 09:01 PM
link   
didnt anyone notice santorum sluff off the constitution? with a wave of his hand he says it is the declaration of independence which counts... MAN!!! THAT needs to be quoted and gone viral!



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 09:01 PM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 




LOL...you are right...working conditions were just peachy in the last 1800s/early 1900s.


Quotes like this are extremely ignorant IMO. I always picture some valley girl saying "OMG Ron Paul is lame, because like, he wants to like take us back to the 1800s OMG!"

So you think banks should keep loaning $ to those who need it, by borrowing money that doesn't exist and then turn around and slap 25% or so interest on it while they keep borrowing this non-existent money from the Federal Reserve? Then people can't afford it so they end up foreclosing so the banks turn around and sell it and make even more. This $$ the Federal Reserve conjurers out of thin air gets added to the deficit and we're all penalized because the banks are corrupt and absolutely nothing is being done about it. I'm really sick of people like you being cool with this.


edit on 26-1-2012 by Wookiep because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 09:02 PM
link   
not a clear winner my butt,
I don't understand what my glowing picture box speaks at times
edit on 26-1-2012 by GaboVarfang because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 09:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Zanti Misfit
 



WHAT IF ............Health Insurance and Car Insurance Played by the Same Rules ?


Because a car and a person are so alike.

And because auto insurance and health insurance are exactly the same.




posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 09:03 PM
link   
reply to post by antar
 


The Constitution takes a back seat to the Bible in Santorums delusional mind, which isn't a healthy attitude for somebody who will swear an oath to protect and defend the Constitution
edit on 26-1-2012 by TupacShakur because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 09:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sek82
Just wait til the post debate analysis/show, if they hold it outside where they were before the debate started you're going to see and hear a lot of Ron Paul support out there. Good debate overall, enjoyed watching it and reading your commentary and seeing some score keeping going on... Especially when it pisses off OutKast, no debate thread would be complete without his presence.


LOL.

I think you are mistaking me laughing for being pissed off.



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 09:03 PM
link   
If you guys elect someone other than Ron Paul and WW3 happens your gonna stumble upon a rusted computer terminal and log on to ATS from your concrete bunker and this will be your message you are going to type :"we should have elected Ron Paul, I now only have 5 grapefruits and 3 peanuts left to eat".



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 09:04 PM
link   
Ari Fleishcer just called Ron paul funny? I just want to punch that guy. Note to people, that he is jewish that is why he hates Ron Paul, he is an anti-libertarian warmonger.
edit on 26-1-2012 by THE_PROFESSIONAL because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 09:05 PM
link   
Did Santorum admit that Paul was better? Paul, Romney, and then Gingrich spoke at the end when asked why they had the best chance to beat Obama. Santorum said he was better than the previous two speakers which were Romney & Gingrich. That's Santorum admitting that Paul is better than he is.



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 09:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wookiep
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 




LOL...you are right...working conditions were just peachy in the last 1800s/early 1900s.


Quotes like this are extremely ignorant IMO. I always picture some valley girl saying "OMG Ron Paul is lame, because like, he wants to like take us back to the 1800s OMG!"

So you think banks should keep loaning $ to those who need it, by borrowing money that doesn't exist and then turn around and slap 25% or so interest on it while they keep borrowing this non-existent money from the Federal Reserve? Then people can't afford it so they end up foreclosing so the banks turn around and sell it and make even more. This $$ the Federal Reserve conjurers out of thin air gets added to the deficit and we're all penalized because the banks are corrupt and absolutely nothing is being done about it. I'm really sick of people like you being cool with this.


edit on 26-1-2012 by Wookiep because: (no reason given)



I see that you completely ignored working conditions under a 100% free market.


Yes...I fully understand you don't like a comment like that...because it destroys the concept of a utopian "free market".



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 09:05 PM
link   
A social welfare state? Really? That is what Mitt just said of Europe! Weigh in? Is he going to alienate the US from the European countries? That statement was very telling imo.



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 09:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blueracer
Did Santorum admit that Paul was better? Paul, Romney, and then Gingrich spoke at the end when asked why they had the best chance to beat Obama. Santorum said he was better than the previous two speakers which were Romney & Gingrich. That's Santorum admitting that Paul is better than he is.


No...it is Santorum admitting that Ron Paul isn't a serious contender and isn't worth comparing to.



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 09:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher

Originally posted by MrWendal

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by MrWendal
 


Tell me who won after the polls come out or after the Florida primary.

You are commenting on this from a personal and emotional position.

I'm commenting on what will translate into the real world.


No your not. Your commenting from the point of view of someone who has no horse in this race and your not saying anything that people do not know or are not expecting. Even Ron Paul expects to come in last in Florida and HAS NOT spent money campaigning in this area. It is a winner take all State. Whoever wins Florida, gets ALL the delegates. Paul's strategy is to collect delegates. He is spending his money campaigning in Caucus States and states that divide delegates based on the primary results.

Your not basing anything on "the real world" your simply saying the same thing everyone has said since the S.C. Primary.


I am basing everything on "the real world".

IF Ron Paul did so great as all of you are saying...he should win Florida.


WRONG again.

Even CNN right now is saying the EXACT same thing I said. Strong showing by Mitt, Gingrich losing ground, VERY strong showing from Santorum.. and the best lines of the night goes to Ron Paul.

So is CNN commenting from an emotional and personal view too?

How will we know if Ron Paul did so well? You can compare his vote totals to what they were in 2008 and what the polls show today. Doing well does not always = win. How many debates did Obama do well in and Hillary won the primary?



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 09:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Blueracer
 


he COMPLETLY ignores Ron Paul, I have yelled this out in each debate.



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 09:07 PM
link   
Well this was a pretty good debate in my opinion. One of the best overall.

I think Paul, Santorum, and Romney did pretty well. Gingrich got hammered pretty hard in the first half, and I think that cost him a good amount in this debate.

I think Paul was amazing. He came out the winner in my opinion, plus he had the best humor of the night to.

I also think Santorum wasnt too far behind. He was pretty strong tonight to, especially with his jabs at Romney and Gingrich during the healthcare part.

Romney did pretty good, with the best part when he kept nailing Gingrich in the first half of the debate. When he took some flak from Santorum, I think that took him down just a little bit.

Gingrich is last in the debate tonight. He was attacked way too much in the first half to make any comeback later on in the debate. I wouldnt be suprised if he takes a pretty big hit in the polls.

ETA - I think Wolf finished higher than Gingrich. Wolf fought back against Newt when he tried to stick it to the moderater again.
edit on 26-1-2012 by buni11687 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 09:07 PM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


Why would a free-market be different from back in the day? One reason is because people could sue their employers if they had conditions even remotely comparable to some things seen back then.



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 09:07 PM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


I think that is more than likely the case, which based on Pauls performance tonight, I think is uncalled for



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 09:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher

Originally posted by eLPresidente
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


whatever you just said isn't even debatable.

ATS is an entire archive of the failure of the American centralized and 'progressive' aka welfare system.


It's not debateable because it's true...and you have nothing.

You could answer one simple question...were working conditions just fine in the late 1800s/early 1900s????

Let me remind you...those were 100% FREE MARKETS.

I know you won't answer...because it destroys your way of thinking.
edit on 26-1-2012 by OutKast Searcher because: (no reason given)


What do you mean I have nothing? You're the one that is trying to prove a point with a FICTIONAL NOVEL. And you're always talking about how you're the only one living in reality. LOL

Calm down & stop being emotional, it is, after all what you like to tell everybody to do.

Sure I'll answer your question, working conditions were not FINE in the late 1800s and early 1900s. You want to use the era right after the industrial revolution as a time that should've had perfect working conditions?? LOL you must be insane.


I answered and it didn't destroy my thinking, the FREE MARKET doesn't give you progress at an instant but it also doesn't give you intentionally guaranteed crap through time like the centralized fascist government does. NOBODY knows how we would've benefitted from the free market in current times because we're working with a government that more or less controls everything.



Keep it up, reference The Jungle, A FICTIONAL NOVEL, again.








edit on 26-1-2012 by eLPresidente because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join