If you took a drink every time Ronald Reagan's name was mentioned, you'd have a bad hangover this morning. If you took a drink every time George "30 percent approval rating" Bush's name was mentioned, you'd be as sober as my grandma. Was this a debate for the 2008 election or the 1988 election?
I was working last night, so I only caught whatever CNN was willing to show me.
McCain's done, I think, and should be - too old.
I like Duncan Hunter, from what I saw. But I can accept any of them - even Rudy, who I disagree with on many "social/Moral" issues. I doubt that more than 6 of them will make it to Iowa. Crazy that the first primary is more than 8 months away.
30% of the candidates don't believe in evolution. Plase let one of the other 70% win the nomination.
To those who say people wouldn't look; they wouldn't be interested; they're too complacent, indifferent and insulated, I can only reply: There is, in one reporter's opinion, considerable evidence against that contention. But even if they are right, what have they got to lose? Because if they are right, and this instrument is good for nothing but to entertain, amuse and insulate, then the tube is flickering now and we will soon see that the whole struggle is lost. This instrument can teach, it can illuminate; yes, and it can even inspire. But it can do so only to the extent that humans are determined to use it to those ends. Otherwise it is merely wires, and lights, in a box.-Edward R. Murrow
I honestly think the nomination's Huckabee's. McCain, like everyone said, has long since blown his wad. Guilliani would probably win the general election, but there's no way the GOP's base is going to support someone who agrees with someone like me on so very many social issues, even if he's pretending not to for the next few months. And Mitt Romney is their ideal candidate except he's a Mormon so he's out. That leaves just the "also ran"s and Mike Huckabee's the best of the bunch.
I agree that they're not debates. They're more showcases, getting to know you, first look sorts of things. For that purpose, at least, I thought both "debates" were okay.
I thought Giuliani probably did the best at seeming "Presidential", and I liked him best. But, then, I'm a liberal, so that's not necessarily a good thing for him in primary season.
I thought Romney came off pretty well, despite the rather weak defense of his change of heart regarding abortion. For the hardcore conservative crowd, I thought Brownback made a better showing than Huckabee, although my friends and I were desperate for him to give "the number of the Beast" as a reason to oppose a national ID card.
McCain was definitely the big loser, I thought, seeming blustery and not entirely cogent.
The worst part of the whole thing I thought was Chris Matthews. He didn't enforce the rules and kept asking follow up questions. They're not on Hardball, Chris! Give everybody a chance to talk! He got better as it went along, but Brian Williams did a much better job last week (even though the candidates still freely ignored the rules).
"Never piss off a hawk with a blowgun" - Conan O'Brien
It's interesting to me how, while the Dem field is basically set, and for all the folks trying to run it really is a 3 horse race (Obama, Edwards, Clinton), the GOP field seems very fluid. And two major names are still lurking out there. I saw an Iowa opinion poll showing Fred Thompson running 4th despite not even beginning to campaign yet, and Gingrich has done well in national polls recently. At this point it seems like any of 5 to 6 people could reach out and grab the nomination. The key is going to be if any one candidate can break through as the "conservative candidate" and get beyond the perception that the only electable candidates are Giuliani and McCain (and maybe, maybe, MAYBE, Romney).
I've always been surprised Tommy Thompson doesn't do better. Even though he's a GOP'er he always struck me as a sharp guy, and he has solid conservative credentials.
For a state with two Democratic senators, a two-term Democratic governor, and that since 1972 has only voted for Democrats (or Ronald Reagan), we love Thompson in Wisconsin. But he really seems like a long-shot now. If he had been able to run right when he retired as governor, he probably would have done better. But after some uneventful years as the Sec. of Health and Human Services, Thompson's just been out of the limelight too long, I think.
Obviously, we need to beef up homeland security. But do you think leaving terrorists alone makes us bigger people, or bigger targets? We took the Taliban out of power because the Taliban was making Afghanistan a comfy little place for terrorists.