Thread: IOWA GOP DEBATE TODAY at 2 PM ET

Originally Posted by usanevada

Alan Keyes , while having some good ideas basicly came off
as not in a very flattering way in this debate

Keyes was being passed over and given little time. I would have been
disappointed in him if he had not stood up for himself. I liked his
fearless outrage.

Thompson did welll I thought! And I liked his sense of humor.

Hunter was brilliant and Tancredo spoke well and with determination.

Ive liked Keyes for years and have always admired his fearless
stands.


Thats just my opinion from his actions on the stage

Clearly after it was over it appears Romney won

Huck was lackluster and didn't impress the studio crowd

Also Romney beat Huck on every question on the second by second
on screen polling

This debate was stated from the start it would not include immigration or Iraq , even though a bit of it did come up

This was an incredibly dull and boring debate and the moderator was a joke

I just don't understand why an unknown like Alan Keyes would try to jump in now-----when even Thompson-----who is more known and had a big lead up-----is failing because he waited so long to jump into the race.

The question that begs to be ask is why did they include Keyes and yet tomorrow during the dems debate they have excluded Kacinich and Gravel

The dems will have 2 less bodies on the stage

methinks there is a bit of bias on behalf of whos throwing the debate

Plus I bet the questioning will be total softball tomorrow

Originally Posted by MW

BrightNail wrote:

No, the onscreen poll - by the 'undecided' voters is not legitimate.

IT WAS INFACT, STAGED.

Undisputable evidence, please.

hahah. I gave it to you. I supplied the "link". When the "undecided" voters are infact decided, that is staged. Also, this exact same thing happened in a previuos Frank Luntz 'forum'.

Originally Posted by MW

usanevada wrote:

I base that on the answers , the questions and how
the lines moved

Some answers by Tancredo and Hunter went off the charts
up

A planted audience would never have done that

Good answer.

Why is that a good answer? You are missing the whole point.

Who won? Who keeps winning these debates?

THE SAME CANDIDATES.

Its not about throwing some bones one way or the other. It is about WHO is always winning, who is ALWAYS in the MSM ? And ONCE you compromise the voters, then the WHOLE process is compromised.

I mean, do any of you think Frank Luntz has ANY validity in what he is pushing?

Originally Posted by usanevada

The question that begs to be ask is why did they include Keyes and yet tomorrow during the dems debate they have excluded Kacinich and Gravel

The dems will have 2 less bodies on the stage

methinks there is a bit of bias on behalf of whos throwing the debate

Plus I bet the questioning will be total softball tomorrow

Right. They don't want Kucinich or Gravel because they call out the front runners. They are not playing politics and tell it like it is. Watch some youtbues of these guys - they really take it to the other dems.

In relation to the Repubs. They dilute the time so that the SAME top tier can covet all the time. I mean, is this shocking in question?

In Iowa, where Ron Paul has been reported to be able to steal 3rd, and how Tancredo performed rather well there in the Straw Poll - they are diluted further by including Keyes.

on a side note: did you all see this:
http://www.drudgereportarchives.com/dat ... lashhu.htm

What I find most interesting, is that the very same MSM that misinforms, misguides, mininterprets an agenda - you all want to think that the debates - WHICH ARE PUT ON BY the very same media, is gonna be honest.

These debates are laughable. The same candidates get the same amount of time. While those with a different voice get MUCH less time.

You all know I am RON PAUL all the way.. okay. But lets take Tancredo as an example.

Immigration: Tancredo > Ghouliani > Huckabee
Taxes: Tancredo > Romeny > Huckabee
Kill the terrorists: Tancredo = Ghouliani = Huckabee
Gun Rights: Tancredo > Ghouliani > Thompson
US Jobs: Tancredo > Huckabee > Ghouliani

As a snapshot. There are 'other' items. BUT, do you see what we have?

We have a candidate who is by far, better than ANY of the top tier candidate at their OWN GAME. YET, Tancredo is almost dead last in polling AND fundraising. Why? It is certainly not his message. Then what is it?

THE MSM (when I say MSM, I mean special interests who manipulate media for policy and who actually control media - ie. mockingbird), have shoveled their choices to us. The same corrupt politicians who bend kneel to other masters, and not the constitution.

I mean, c'mon, lets be real. THE ONLY ANTI-CFR candidates, and they are all ignored and ridiculed by the MSM. And nobody sees an "issue" with the debates, its format and the "possibility" that their "jury rigged forums" are infact, planted and fake.

really?

Originally Posted by ryan182

Originally Posted by usanevada

Alan Keyes , while having some good ideas basicly came off
as not in a very flattering way in this debate


Thats just my opinion from his actions on the stage

Clearly after it was over it appears Romney won

Huck was lackluster and didn't impress the studio crowd

Also Romney beat Huck on every question on the second by second
on screen polling

This debate was stated from the start it would not include immigration or Iraq , even though a bit of it did come up

This was an incredibly dull and boring debate and the moderator was a joke

I have to agree compeletly. Keyes sounded like he forgot his meds this morning, really didn't do himself any favors.

Romney did quite well, but it was BOOOOORING! That moderator was horrible.

I liked his spunk! (Keyes) And Im sure he is as fed up as most of us are.
Hmmmm....would meds help?

Other venues have declared Rudi to be todays winner

There really is no way to call these things to begin with ,

They are scripted , the moderation and hosts all have agendas

None of them have been free and open debates

Not one

Most of us are well versed on the issues ,the candidates and the spin

I don't think many people on this site or others are being fooled by
canned answers , made up dialog or diatribe

We know Rudi , McCain and Huck are for amnesty in a second
Tancredo , Hunter and Paul are the true conservatives
Romeny has globalist tendencies but he also has a good
record on illegal immigration

Thompson is a goof with about 0 chance , he talks a good game but pulls goofy stuff

Very little gets past some of us

Originally Posted by Saki

Huckabee is trying to spin his Jesus/Devil comment on Situation Room. He's doing a poor job, but Wolf Blitzer is being his usual conciliatory self. I think I'd drop dead if I ever heard Huckabee admit a mistake.

Hugh Hewitt thought Hucakbee's so-called apology on Blitzer's show was insincere. Apparently, Huckabee did apologize to Romney after the debate and Romney accepted it. Blitzer is such a wimpy interviewer

This just makes my opinion of Huckabee drop even further.

BTW, Frank Luntz (pollster) said his focus group clearly had Romney the winner.

Huck stated twice today that he has the endorsement of the "minutemen"

That is a flat outright lie

Well , actually he implied that saying he had the endorsment of
Jim Gilchrest , founder of the minutemen

Same thing in my book

I know a great number of real minutemen and none of them
support Huck