GOP Debate—Who Won? CrossRoads, posted by Cindy Cross, a resident of the Parkside neighborhood, on Jun 14, 2011 at 1:15 am Cindy Cross is a member (registered user) of PleasantonWeekly.com
GOP Debate—Who Won? By Cindy Cross
The Republican debate on CNN tonight showcased the seven top contenders for the GOP presidential nomination. There were no big surprises; all the candidates did a good job in introducing themselves to America. One thing though—why do they call this a debate? The candidates are asked a question, and each gives his or her answer. At no time are the candidates lobbing platitudes at one another. Only a few times in the evening were the candidates put on the spot by the CNN commentator.
Of the seven, Mitt Romney was the most presidential. He answered the questions with confidence and foresight. His main focus was on the economy and job creation. Romney, along with the other candidates didn’t hold back when expressing how passionate they were about preventing Obama from winning another term in office.
Newt Gingrich, with all eyes on him after losing sixteen campaign staffers last week, seemed to answer questions that felt real, rather than rehearsed. When asked if he would have a Muslim in his cabinet if elected, he answered, “I just want to go out on a limb here. I am in favor of saying to people if you’re not prepared to be loyal to the U.S. you will not serve in my administration.” Gingrich vowed, if elected to, “End the Obama depression.”
Rick Santorum, who was relatively quiet tonight, voiced his disdain that the Obama administration is stifling domestic jobs by limiting drilling and natural gas exploration in the Unites States. Santorum also expressed his support for the Tea party calling it, “A great back-stop for America.”
Along with Romney, Ron Paul also seemed very presidential. Paul is pro state’s rights and was quick to say he would leave legalizing gay marriage up to each state. Paul, throughout the evening brought up current problems with the Federal Reserve and monetary issues stating, “It’s a fallacy that the federal government can manage the economy.” Paul was the only standout when the candidates were questioned whether they would pull U.S. troops out of Afghanistan. All the other candidates stated that they would take the advice of the commanders. Paul’s answer was, “I’m the Commander in Chief. I wouldn't wait for the generals. I would tell the generals what to do [as president.I would bring the troops home as soon as possible.”
Herman Cain, the only one with no political experience, confidently answered questions. He describes himself as a problem solver who wants to get to the root of problems rather than “kick the same can down the road.” Cain says he will be a president that will "do what's right, not what's politically right." His experiences in the business world, he said, are the same skills that will make him an effective president.
Michele Bachmann made her official announcement that she is one step closer to officially running for president. She made it clear that her number one priority, if she was elected, was to repeal Obama care. A passionate chairman of the Tea Party, Bachmann claims that the Tea Party is comprised of disenfranchised democrats, libertarians, republicans-- a wide swath of America coming together. Bachmann was very impressive tonight.
Tim Pawlenty was the only person who was put on the spot by the commentator when asked what he meant by ‘Obamneycare.’ With Romney looking directly at him, Pawlenty stated that he was referencing Obama’s use of Romney’s Massachusetts plan as a blueprint for Obamacare. The commentator unsuccessfully tried to call Pawlenty out for an attack against Romney in an interview with Fox news over the weekend.
Debates are always a great way to gauge how the candidates feel about the issues, and how they would stand up to pressure and tough questions. As I stated earlier, it is not a true debate, but more of an evening of intelligent political discussion. Since there clearly are no winners or losers tonight--who were the most impressive candidates?
Posted by Early Riser, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Jun 14, 2011 at 3:55 am
Who won? Are you joking? What a sad bunch of pathetic losers. Better question: How were they able to fit all of those clowns into the same circus car?
Both Bachmann and the morman guy guaranteed they'd spend the next four years trying to repeal Obamacare. Aside from the fact that our presidents are supposed to be about executing the law (as in Executive Branch of Government), not repealing it, it does rather present a depressing picture of how someone in office would spend the next four years. Moving backwards. Yeah, that's the ticket!
To hear the spineless Pawlenty talk about his 5% solution and a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage ... well, that was pretty inspiring stuff. All in all, to hear the pizza delivery guy talk at the same level as his opponents, and spout the same platitudes, pretty much sums up the intellectual stature of the clown club that filled up the stage. Not a good night for Republicans. Calling Sarah Palin! Calling Donald Trump! Your party is in need of fresh ideas! Let's reinvigorate everyone by putting forward a new Obama birther claim!
Posted by Scary!, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Jun 14, 2011 at 6:48 am
"Michele Bachmann made her official announcement that she is one step closer to officially running for president. "
If this creates a division within the GOP, having moderates vote for someone like Romney or Pawlenty, and the tea party backing Bachmann, you can be sure we will have an Obama second term, and that is scary!
Why does the GOP insist on supporting Bachmann? She is a congresswoman of a MN district similar to Orange County. She would not be able to get the support of her own socially moderate state! This lady has been on Rush Limbaugh and has appeared to be just like Palin.
Posted by Mike Anderson, a resident of the Castlewood Heights neighborhood, on Jun 14, 2011 at 8:57 am
They all sounded like canned answers except for maybe Ron Paul. He kind of loses me when he talks about the details of monetary policy, but he really seems to understand it. And he was right on marriage and getting the US out of nation-building around the world.
I voted for Obama because I was tired of the status quo, and he turned out to be just a bigger dose of the status quo. Ron Paul may not be as polished as the others in the campaign, but he's the only with actual substance. With Paul, I'm starting to feel like the country can really be saved!
Posted by Scott Wilson, a resident of the Castlewood Heights neighborhood, on Jun 14, 2011 at 10:16 am
I voted for Obama too. I couldn't vote for Ron Paul who named his son Rand after the depraved fiction writer Ayn Rand. I don't think anyone who nonreflexively reaches into a single ideological grab bag, irrespective of an issue, can be called 'having substance'. His son was 'caught' for being consistent with the same ideology. He claimed that 'true' individualism would involve restaurant proprietors not having to serve blacks if they didn't want to, mine and oil rig owners not having to abide by safety regulations if they didn't want to.
And all the pseudo-technical jargon he uses that you say tends to lose you? That is likely by design. Either he's incapable of thinking clearly on his own two feet with clear language, or he's intentionally trying to obfuscate matters that he has no real handle on. Would you want this from your doctor? Your lawyer? Your insurance handler?
You maybe should think about voting for Obama again. His policies kept us out of complete financial ruin, we're pretty much out of Iraq, and the more people are directly affected by the Affordable Health Care Act the more they like it. Unlike Paul, Obama knows how to think on his feet. He probably got good at that when he was a professor of constitutional law at the University of Chicago Law School. Intellectually speaking, of course, he's head and shoulders above what the GOP fielded last night. His instincts are good, people trust him, and I think for good reason.
There are increasingly positive signs that the Democrats will take back the House in 2012. Folks are energized against the GOPers who want to strip them of their medicare. And people saw what the GOP had to offer last night. Candidates' 'strongest' moments were when they spoke about going back and wasting the country's time on a health care battle they already lost decisively and have no hope of winning in the future.
Posted by Stefan, a resident of the Highland Oaks neighborhood, on Jun 14, 2011 at 10:56 am
I was a John McCain supporter but I'm now happy Barack Obama is in office. I intend to vote for him during the next election cycle. He took out Osama Bin Laden. No chest thumping, no fanfare, no mission accomplished speeches. The only thing the GOPers seem to want to take out is Obama and seniors' medicare.
I thought McCain's experience was an advantage over Obama the young whippersnapper. But Obama has grown tall since entering the white house. After having voted straight Republican ticket for nearly three decades, I'm enthusiastic about voting for Obama in 2012. Change IS possible!
Posted by Independent, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Jun 14, 2011 at 12:07 pm
I too voted for Obama but never again - and I am not alone. Obama continues to lose the independent voter - the ones that got him into office.
Just think how left he may possibly go in his final term to set his legacy. He will fake centricity until then and do things like court Wall Street (which is he currently doing). But I don't trust what he will do after the election.
How does that Who song so? ... " I won't get fooled again!"
Posted by Cliff, a resident of the Downtown neighborhood, on Jun 14, 2011 at 1:45 pm
Don't know what Obama has done that's fooled anyone. He has consistently attempted to do what he pledged to do during his campaign. Perhaps everyone underestimated the hole the country has dug itself into beginning with Reagan's deregulation policies. The job picture is bleak, but that isn't Obama's fault. Companies show no loyalty to this country or its citizens. He's a solid president, perhaps not great, but as an Indep who sat out the last election, I'm willing to give the guy another term. I'll vote for him.
Posted by xyz, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Jun 14, 2011 at 1:57 pm
Cliff, I'll tell you what Obama has done for his haters: he was born black.
I am an independent, and so far I haven't seen a candidate from the right that appeals to me.
I will vote, however, to the candidate that swears to change the tariff imbalance that is murdering our economy. WE charge 2% tariff to import goods and places like China and India charge around 20%. That keeps our goods from being bought there and give an incentive to our "wonderful" Corporations to give them our jobs. I am so fed up with this I'd vote for Palin if she promised to put a change on that (well, I guess that would be going a bit too far)
Posted by Jason, a resident of the Pleasanton Meadows neighborhood, on Jun 14, 2011 at 7:45 pm
Thanks for posting such an articulate, objective, fact based summary of the GOP candidates. If someone described any Democrat as you do, then you yourself would rightly see that person as a bigot and a racist. Replace "Mormon" guy with (fill in the blank religion) then ridicule a self made graduate of Morehouse (BA, Mathematics prior to his MS from Purdue) and former CEO as having no intellect and call him a "pizza delivery guy." Your comments, while offensive, do an exceptional job of articulating the polarization and hate mongering prevalent to both the extreme right and extreme left.
Posted by steve, a resident of the Parkside neighborhood, on Jun 15, 2011 at 8:39 am
xyz-thanks for not making s wait for someone to play the race card. This usually happens earlier in the discussion, when a Dem can't articulate their position or discuss the merits of POTUS' vision of how to change America. Besides, I think his half white side is just as bad.
"The job picture is bleak, but that isn't Obama's fault. Companies show no loyalty to this country or its citizens." That's not true for most companies, but there is a pattern developing and it involves comapnies that have uunions--they are sending work overseas just to stay afloat and they are also moving to 'right to work' states, just to get out from under the unrealisitc union demands.
Posted by Leland, a resident of the Happy Valley neighborhood, on Jun 15, 2011 at 9:58 am
I don't know. I liked them all. Bachmann has the most kids. But Romney has the most wives. So, it's a toss-up.
Steve is soooooo right. Fortunately, I've never had to work because my Daddy worked so hard putting food on our table. But my Daddy always said unions would be the ruination of our wealth.
Why should a union-based state like California be able to guarantee a minimum wage? I mean a 56K median household income is simply outrageous. Take out my annual 5-6 million, and it's even higher.
Why can't California be more like Arkansas 41K, Kentuck 41K, West Virginny 40K, or my fave, Mississipp 36K? I mean, these darned unions are preventing us from racing to the bottom. How in the world are we going to compete effectively with turd world child labor when people here in California think they have the right to unionize and make a fair wage for themselves and their family?
Posted by Race?, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Jun 15, 2011 at 10:31 am
Playing the race card is getting very, very old. I don't care what someone's race, nationality, sexual persuasion, or sex is. What I care most about is whether net someone is providing positive value to society or subtracting from it.
My issue with Obama and many candidates is that they are perpetuating this entitlement mentality that has affected our country. It is the same entitlement mentality that is bankrupting many socialist governments these days. And yes the entitlement mentality extends to both individuals and corporations. No one is owed anything. We only have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Do any of you progressive honestly look at the historical data to determine whether/not the entitlement approach actually helps the classes of people you are supposedly fighting for? Here are two examples to chew on. Why is it that after the despicable Japanese internment chapter of our country, Japanese citizens were able to move beyond this crime against them and re-establish their lives.
And yet we have a group of citizens that are decendents of slaves, another despicable chapter in our country. And after decades of special treatment and all sorts social benefits, their average lots are worse that it was prior to the 1960's? Maybe it is time to take away some of the welfare crutch and let people/corporations discover how to stand on their own two feet. Maybe in doing this, we as a country will find our way again.
Posted by Another Take, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Jun 15, 2011 at 10:46 am
Now, I'm not a racist. Really. I hate the white side of Obama as much as his black side. We're so beyond race. I mean why even mention it? So he's half black and so they claim he's half white. I detest either side of him, the black side or the side that's related to the black side. Why, c'mon, we don't even call them racial minorities any more. We call them entitlement groups. See how sophisticated our thinking has become?
Now what really gets me is all the entitlement help we give, WITH MY MONEY, to entitlement groups and their entitlement kids. Its the entitlement kids I most worry about. I mean, instead of using MY MONEY to feed and clothe them and educate them (Ha!), and ensure they have proper child care, why not just let them fend for themselves. They'll prove themselves to be either value-added or value-substracted. Why should I have to pay MY MONEY for some entitlement kid to go to a public school, to use public libraries where they just bother all the other kids? Let them get street smart like me. Let their lazy entitlement parents home school them, assuming most of them can even read. If they have trouble getting money to eat, let them compete in the real world with other beggers on the highway ramps. After all, it's a free enterprise system.
Stop infringing upon my rights by making me pay for entitlement groups. I am not a racist.
Posted by Race?, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Jun 15, 2011 at 11:28 am
Another Take - I guess you will do whatever it takes to create a diversion and not comment on the observations. It is much easier to call the other side a racist. Even better if you can do it in the sneaky underhanded way to did it.
Posted by Ernesto, a resident of the Del Prado neighborhood, on Jun 15, 2011 at 1:30 pm
I was personally struck by diversity within the audience. There were white males and white females, white 50 year olds and white 40 year olds, white 60 year olds and white 70 year olds, whites in shirt sleeves and whites in sports coats, white women in dresses and white women in skirts. I'd say it was a real representative cross section of the populace.
Hi there Race? My guess is that after reading your idiotic remarks that Another Take thought he could out do you. But I think you win, hands down.
Posted by Race?, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Jun 15, 2011 at 4:19 pm
You know the interesting thing is I'm a minority (mixed race) and happily married to a different race so my kids are even more mixed race.
But I'm the "idiot" who points out an obvious dichotomy about how two different groups have dealt with adversity. I kind of feel like Bill Cosby and how he was treated when he called out the obvious. Sorry to upset your victim/entitlement pitty party.
Posted by Pittyful, yes, a resident of the Downtown neighborhood, on Jun 15, 2011 at 4:31 pm
Look who's feeling sorry for himself, having his own pitty party. Maybe some of the comments on this board wouldn't be so downright pittyful if our society could have pitched in more and helped out those who clearly could have used it.
Posted by Morris, a resident of the Happy Valley neighborhood, on Jun 15, 2011 at 9:19 pm
I'm poorly educated, barely literate, I don't read, never have, and every day I get on these posts and vent about our socialist goverment and corrupt unions and greedy teachers and sexual deviants and victimized entitlement groups. Yet people ridicule me and don't take my ideas seriously. I'm sure its them not me. They all must be from the victimhood/entitlement brigade. Once Rick Santorum gets in office you'll all be eating crow.
Posted by Pleasant Gent, a resident of the California Reflections neighborhood, on Jun 15, 2011 at 9:27 pm
E. J. Dionne says it best about the current crop of failures:
"The big winner of the debate was Rep. Michele Bachmann, partly because she went in with a strategy and executed it, partly because she had a stage presence honed by hundreds of television appearances, and partly because she didn't seem crazily extreme, which is what you would conclude from her many outrageous statements in the past.
But she looked almost conventional only because the rest of the Republican Party has veered so far right that it has caught up with her. In the current GOP, she is the mainstream -- and that ought to petrify more reasonable Republicans. Even Bachmann's astonishing call to get rid of the Environmental Protection Agency (created under the Republican administration of Richard M. Nixon) passed without a challenge from her rivals."
Posted by steve, a resident of the Parkside neighborhood, on Jun 16, 2011 at 9:00 am
Ernesto, since you seem to be obsessed with 'diversity', how's that working out for our country so far? You've got your messiah in office now and Dems in control of the Senate. Unemployment is upwards of 9%. And the Dems solution is????? Yes, please...diversity must be the answer to all our problems. Heck, if nothing else, it'll assuage that white guilt you wear around your necklike a hubcap.
Posted by Stacey, a resident of the Amberwood/Wood Meadows neighborhood, on Jun 16, 2011 at 9:18 am Stacey is a member (registered user) of PleasantonWeekly.com
I think you said it best when you ask "And the Dems solution is???". I'd add in "And the GOP's solution is???" To me, neither party has a working solution. For example, the GOP claims to be friendly to business yet all the uncertainty produced by the idea that the GOP candidates want to rescind Obamacare is very damaging to businesses. They won't hire in such a climate.
Posted by steve, a resident of the Parkside neighborhood, on Jun 17, 2011 at 9:06 am
Stacy, I don't believe it's the GOP that's creating uncertainty; it's that most employers don't understand or fear the inevitable damage to their business that the implementation of Obamcare will create. That's not the GOP's fault. They want to rescind this debacle and start over with a plan that's better constructed that doesn't involve throwing away what already works for most people. Besides, the idea that you pay 10 years for a plan that covers you for 6 makes no fiscal sense at all. That's why the GOP didn't sign up for this Dem plan.
Businesses won't hire if they feel onerous new costs and regulations will hamper their bottom line. It's no wonder they are not hiring and hanging on to their cash.
Posted by Blossom , a resident of the Stoneridge Orchards neighborhood, on Jun 17, 2011 at 7:59 pm
Michelle Bachman so obviously won it isn't even funny. Since the debate shes been steemrolling the competition. Check this out:
"I support intelligent design," Bachmann told reporters following her speech at the conference, CNN reports. "What I support is putting all science on the table and then letting students decide."
I mean, who was right? Newton or Einstein? Let the students decide. Who was right? Jonas Salk or Harry Putter? Its more democratic this way. Thats why I support Michelle. Shes for democracy over science. When did the world begin? Lets put it two a vote.
Obamaamaa is so toast. Hes done. Make way for Presedent Bachman.