GOP Debate Tonight 1/26/12

Originally posted by antar
reply to post by OutKast Searcher

 

And where will he stand when RP makes it to the Oval Office? LOL, santorum is such a brown noser to both the other candidates.

Come on now...not even Ron Paul believes this. He has all but admitted that he is now just trying to spread his message.

Originally posted by Wookiep
reply to post by OutKast Searcher

 

LOL you act as though you know what the working conditions were like 100+ years ago. I dunno OKS how terrible were they compared to your "Utopian" society you seem to think Obama is giving us?

He and Titor are bosom buddies ya know.....

I am a little behind, just now listening to the talk afterwards and have not heard RP name mentioned yet.

Originally posted by MrWendal

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
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.

Actually they are the same thing. You PAY money for coverage today in case you need it later. The only difference is what you are covering. At the end of the year if you do not need the coverage, they both KEEP the money. Is that not correct?

Insurance is insurance no matter what your covering.

Comparing auto insurance and health insurance is way off.

Comparing auto insurance and life insurance is a closer example. It pays out when something goes wrong...not to do maintnance or prevantitive care.

And of course...auto insurance loves to just "total" out the car because it is too expensive to fix. GREAT...I want my health insurance to be able to "total" me out...because I'm too expensive to fix.

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher

Sue their employers on what grounds???

If you completely de-regulate the markets...there are no laws for the company to break in order for the employee to sue over.

You clearly have not thought this through very well.

More senseless drivel. The point is to not completely deregulate; there will always be laws/regulations in place to counter fraud + supply and demand dictates who survives in a free market. When a corporation doesn't thrive in a welfare state they actually have to accommodate the consumer, not vice versa.

Again, LESS regulations --- not zero.

reply to post by OutKast Searcher


What i appreciate about RP is that he has stayed the course on WHY he is running, the others have been all over the place which is what I expect from the "other" parties candidates when those debates begin, well if you don't count the state of the Union address which was a one man debate.

reply to post by eLPresidente

He literally won the debate

Yes...Newt won that debate.

Ron Paul did not win the debate...but he may have had the best line.

What don't you understand???

Originally posted by Wookiep
reply to post by OutKast Searcher

 

LOL you act as though you know what the working conditions were like 100+ years ago. I dunno OKS how terrible were they compared to your "Utopian" society you seem to think Obama is giving us?

So, you are just going to ignore it again...huh.

Maybe you should look into what type of working conditions a 100%, regulation free, market gives you.

reply to post by OutKast Searcher


You can keep debating the past over a hundreds years ago or we can talk about TODAY.

Like I have been mentioning earlier in this thread, the PROOF of the failure of the American centralized, fascist government system is extremely apparent today. ATS alone is an archive FULL of proof and if you don't want to look here, LOOK OUTSIDE. A WORLD of PROOF.

But you don't want to live in the real world, despite how much you say you live in the real world.


CENTRALIZATION is a failure and that is something you cannot disprove.


CENTRALIZATION is the most susceptible to corruption and the proof is all around us.


Have you not seen the Monstanto/Government and Goldman Sachs/Government venn diagrams? if not, you're spending too much time antagonizing Ron Paul that you don't have time to learn about your precious 'real world'

reply to post by Raelsatu

More senseless drivel. The point is to not completely deregulate; there will always be laws/regulations in place to counter fraud + supply and demand dictates who survives in a free market. When a corporation doesn't exist in a welfare state they actually have to do what's best for the consumer.

Again, LESS regulations --- not zero.

Oh...ok...so you don't want a "FREE MARKET"...you want a regulated market as well. Awesome...now we just disagree on the level of regulation.

Words mean things...saying "100% free market" literaly means zero regulations.

Upon watching the debate:

Romney came out as the winner,
Gingrich was just looking for loud applause to score points with the viewers,
Santorum came second in this debate in my opinion, he held himself well, I think he'll score with hispanic voters come Florida,
Ron Paul was unnoticable not because the media wasn't giving him enough attention, but because the way he addressed the questions and the way he held himself didn't particularly connect with the audience.

To those here claiming that Paul is 'skipping Florida' then this once again demonstrates just how serious the Paul campaign is about winning the nomination. You cannot simply 'skip' states because they're too big, too expensive, especially with a State like Florida which is a key battle ground in the general elections. If Paul comes 4th or 3rd in Florida, you can forget about his chances for the nomination, and you forget about any further media attention. I don't see why the media must be forced to pay attention to Paul when he is clearly making campaign decisions that are serious and realistic towards getting the nomination.

People are beginning to see that Paul is gathering delegates to make a deal come the convention. The media will rightfully not take him as a serious presidential candidate.

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by eLPresidente

 

He literally won the debate

Yes...Newt won that debate.

Ron Paul did not win the debate...but he may have had the best line.

What don't you understand???

Ron Paul won tonight's debate, and he had the best line as well.



Yes, that is literally your logic and I'm using it against you.

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
Upon watching the debate:

Ron Paul was unnoticable not because the media wasn't giving him enough attention, but because the way he addressed the questions and the way he held himself didn't particularly connect with the audience.

I guess getting the most applause of the night didn't particularly connect him with the audience.

And now for the post debate ya ya: Ron Paul no longer exists. Ron Paul who???

reply to post by eLPresidente


We were talking about "free markets"....not centralized government...please try to focus.

I understand...you are trying to deflect because in reality free markets really suck and you don't want to admit it.

This is why Ron Paul is a crazy fool...because he honestly wants zero regulations and a 100% free market. It sounds all cool to say you support "free markets"...but in reality you wouldn't...but you could never say anything against your god Ron Paul.

Newt and Mitt spent so much time shooting each other. Santorum was so focused on going against Romney (and to a lesser degree Gingrich), shining light on Romney's government mandate which contradicts appealing Obamacare did not help Romney at all. I'd say Romney did not come close to winning this tonight so would have to agree with the CNN commentary so far that Paul and Santorum did well, while Gingrich and Romney walked out of it limping.

Does anybody have a time count for each candidate? It's obvious that Paul was 4th and Romney was 1st time-wise, but I'm curious to see who got more time between Santorum or Newt.

reply to post by eLPresidente

Ron Paul won tonight's debate, and he had the best line as well.



Yes, that is literally your logic and I'm using it against you.

Ron Paul did have the best line of the night...but no, he didn't win the debate.

The two do not have to be mutually inclusive.

Only Ron Paul fanboys are claiming he won the debate...as usual. It's not going to help him in Florida...he most likely finishes dead last.

Originally posted by eLPresidente
I guess getting the most applause of the night didn't particularly connect him with the audience.

On the contrary, had you read my post, you have seen what I said about Gingrich. I don't think these debates should allow applause from the audience, it only serves to distract. The way Paul answered questions, there was no connection to the voters, there wasn't a feeling of seriousness when you looked at him on stage. You personally disagree with this, you are a Ron Paul supported, I wouldn't expect you to.

reply to post by Southern Guardian


Late to this one sure it's been lively

I agree with your assessment on the outcome though I would give Paul a bit more credit in his performance..

We have to keep in mind that Florida forfeits half of their delegates this year as a penalty for them moving their primary up, so that could be one of the considerations by some to hold onto some funds in that state..