Last Updated:October 1 @ 07:56 am

GOP Contenders Mix it up in Iowa

By Bobby Eberle

The final debate before the Iowa caucuses was held Thursday night, and it gave Iowans and people around the country a chance to see the candidates in action. Newt Gingrich, now the frontrunner in many polls, did nothing to diminish his status, although his lead this week is down significantly from just a week ago. Mitt Romney was strong once again and seems to be playing the strategy of "I'll let every other candidate lead for a while so he or she can self destruct" to perfection.

First, let's take a look at the polling in Iowa. As pollster Scott Rasmussen indicates, the GOP candidates have been on a roller coaster. As soon as someone achieves frontrunner status, the candidate starts to drop like a lead balloon:

Nationally, Gingrich holds the lead. According to a new Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll, among Republicans, Gingrich garners 40% support. Romney is in second with 23%, with each of the remaining candidates below the 10% mark.

The poll also points out one of the biggest problems for Gingrich to overcome: the perceived lack of electability.

Still, the poll found that Mr. Gingrich would confront a steep challenge in trying to win voters beyond his core constituency of conservatives.

Half of all voters say they wouldn't vote for Mr. Gingrich if he were the Republican nominee, compared with 44% who say they wouldn't vote for Mr. Romney—a slight improvement of three percentage points for him since November. Some 45% said they wouldn't vote for President Barack Obama.

In the Fox News Debate, Gingrich was asked right away about the electability issue. Here was his response:

It was an excellent response, and it shows why Gingrich has vaulted to the top of the polls. Republicans have been watching the debates. Gingrich is a great debater. Gingrich is not Mitt Romney. You do the math.

But, as Bachmann and Perry and Cain before him, Gingrich is now facing increased scrutiny, and the next few weeks and months will tell if voters feel comfortable enough with him to actually choose him as the GOP nominee.

All in all, Gingrich did very well in the debate, with a couple of exceptions. When Michele Bachmann hammered him on his $1.6 million fee to speak in favor of Freddie Mac, Gingrich was on the defensive. It's hard to defend being paid such a large sum to essentially lobby for the entity at the heart of the housing bust. Gingrich also played defense when Bachmann asailed him on partial birth abortion.

Mitt Romney, the continual second-runner, was not just steady. To say he was and leave it at that would be a discredit to the vision he has for America. More than any other candidate on the stage Thursday night, Romney showed his love for our country and his intent to keep America number one. In an age when Barack Obama is apologizing to other countries and painting America as a country past her prime, Romney is a breath of fresh air when he talks about how good America is and how good it can be.

Here's a clip of him talking jobs and responding to a Gingrich attack:

Ron Paul is like two candidates in one. Both have a tone and mannerisms which grate on the nerves. But Candidate #1 is one who will talk about the Constitution, the debt, and the limited role of government. The points are excellent, even though the delivery is lacking. Candidate #2, however, is the one, as in Thursday night's debate, who can't see the obvious danger lurking in Iran. This is the candidate who basically comes unhinged when foreign policy comes up, and shows the voters that he has no grasp of the threats facing America and the world.

In scoring the debate, I would call it a tie between Gingrich and Romney. Gingrich was very strong on the issue of judges, but weaker when attacked. Romney was steady throughout, and captured the idea of America as a great country in search of a real leader.

Next would be Michele Bachmann. Although dismissed in recent debates, Bachmann was strong throughout. She showed knowledge on every single issue, was steady, and took the fight to Gingrich. Rick Perry had a good showing as well. He has certainly improved during the debates, but his delivery still needs work. It's easy to see his face light up when he recognizes an issue or a sound bite that falls into one of his canned responses. You can see him waiting to launch it. Then... the words stumble out. He was much better, but he needs to keep building.

Who do you think won?

VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
Rate this post:
Rating: 7.4/10 (32 votes cast)
GOP Contenders Mix it up in Iowa, 7.4 out of 10 based on 32 ratings





Don't leave yet! Add a comment below or check out these other great stories:

37 Comments

  1. ranceComment by rance
    December 16, 2011 @ 9:44 am

    Bachman did well in last night’s debate. Gingrich either lied or obfuscated when she confronted him. We do not need another Obfuscater in Chief. We already have one!

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 3.4/5 (31 votes cast)
    • inluminatuoComment by inluminatuo
      December 16, 2011 @ 10:00 am

      The pain in his face was self evident and very revealing of a kid caught with hand in cookie jar by a strong disciplining mother figure.. The question is, has the kid learned his lessson? All the candidates feet should be held to the fire to cauterize, cleanse and prepare them for the coming battle. Let’s hope these debates served to burn out the corruption, and not shoot down in falmes any of the very good Conservative warriors needed to face the enemy before us. Soon it will be time to close ranks.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 3.4/5 (23 votes cast)
    • davnkatzComment by davnkatz
      December 16, 2011 @ 3:56 pm

      In my mind, it was a toss-up between Mitt & Michelle. The major defense by both Ron & Newt was “That’s not true.”  Ron just appeared stupid with his responses about Iran’s nuclear designs.  Newt tried to paint a picture he was a “paid consultant”, NOT a lobbyist for Freddie & Fannie.  Consultant – at $1.6 mil or $30,000 an hr???  I kept wondering if he thought ALL us voters are totally ignorant.  After all, entities like Freddie & Fannie do NOT pay out (or continue to pay) that kind of “consultant fee”  unless they are reaping many times the money in rewards.

      Remember back when Perry & his wife said they were entering the race because God wanted them to?  He was the GOP Messiah back then. Declaring himself last night to be America’s new sports hero was just disgusting.  By the way, did you see his expression (the one time the camera showed him) when Michelle was challenging Newt and Ron?  I could almost hear him saying, “OMG!  I hope she doesn’t jump on me.” FUNNY

      Something else I noticed.  ALL of them (except one) were challenged by moderator or other candidates concerning various points.  The exception was Michelle Bachman.  They could NOT attack her record or Constitutionality.  The ONLY thing the MSM has been able to attack is she once stumbled concerning the date of the election and a really bad picture. Of course, Newt subtlely used the establishment GOP attack on Michelle concerning “electability”. I DON’T BUY THAT ARGUMENT.  At least Newt refrained from calling her “too conserative”.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.2/5 (13 votes cast)
    • CharlieComment by vietnamvet
      December 16, 2011 @ 5:39 pm

      You misread his reluctance to confront Bachmann.

      Michelle Bachmann and my wife share some qualities. One of those is when she makes up her mind about a particular subject she is no longer open to input on that subject … unless or until something drastic happens which changes her attitude.

      Michelle Bachmann has decided that the simple fact that Gingrich accepted money from Fannie/Freddy is evidence that he was peddling influence.

      If Gingrich had been in the painting business after serving in Congress, and had redecorated some Fannie/Freddie offices … Michelle Bachmann would still see Gingrich cashing checks signed by Fannie/Freddy … therefore he would be peddling influence.

      Gingrich seemes ‘weak’ in his answers to her for the same reason my wife gets to continue to believe some things that are not true.

      It’s because (we) are too gentlemanly to dress any woman down, in public, in the drastic manner she so richly deserves.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 2.8/5 (11 votes cast)
  2. inluminatuoComment by inluminatuo
    December 16, 2011 @ 9:46 am

     
    Newt’s ability to defend his past mistakes is only exceeded by his prowess in attacking Obama’s current ones. This is a good and much needed thing. There is a large part of me which wants him to succeed.
     
     I guess it is up to the electorate to decide if he is the weapon we need to slay the government beast, or just another faulty government programmed smart bomb, launched at the enemy with just enough corrupted programming to miss the mark and get captured by the enemy to our peril. Like the Iranians and our captured Drone, Obama already would steal our good smart bomb information and our good Conservative programming, to liberally and progressively corrupt, re-program and turn it against us to our peril in the coming election. In the close up debates this attack Newtonian missile is a destructive weapon on our behalf. It is up to the voters to clearly send the message that a permanent reprogramming of Newt’s brain for the good in many areas is needed to assure he in the long term aim does not go astray and miss the long range mark.  
     
    The well earned Conservative pummeling of Newt in the debates is not so much to tear down the candidate warrior drone for future scrapping so much as it should serve as an anti-virus program to solidly prevent this missile from going astray in our long term aims to destroy the enemy in the long term and at a long distance..
     
    I think the debates have accomplished this to a great degree. Let’s just hope the inner core wiring of this weapon we would use has been cleaned up and rewired to withstand the heat of the coming political exchanges, and in the most important areas of personal integrity his does not default to past performance and corrupt information programs.
     

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 3.8/5 (18 votes cast)
    • davnkatzComment by davnkatz
      December 16, 2011 @ 4:03 pm

      Was it Newt who said, “Any candidate on this stage will be a better president than Obama.”?

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 5.0/5 (3 votes cast)
    • inluminatuoComment by inluminatuo
      December 16, 2011 @ 9:21 pm

      Even Donald Trump figured this out,,,then for some reason proceeded to bow out?? What does that tell you about the Donald??

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.0/5 (4 votes cast)
  3. newsjunkyComment by newsjunky
    December 16, 2011 @ 10:38 am

    I doubt if anyone need worry about Newt getting the nomination, as the wolves have devoured him in more ways than just one.  Those who call others mean, and nasty prove to be just or even more so than their victims.  Mitt Romney displayed his usual self, making sure he didn’t upset his apple cart since he has an army of surrogates to do that job for him. 

    Insofar as Bachman is concerned, she’s an intelligent woman that deserves respect for mothering so many children including five of her own, but she is prone to tactics that have not served her well in regards to public opinion.  According to what I’ve read she’s compared to a “pit bull” and disregards substance in order to degrade and depose her opponents.  Looks as though she’s turned many conservatives against her because of her strategy. 

    Ron Paul who has a tremendous amount of support is without a doubt mentally unbalanced.  He is so far out with his policies and opinions that we’d be in more danger with him being president than any one else on the planet.  That argument with him and Bachman got really out of hand, as it looked as though he was going to totally flip out. 

    As it stands now, I’m sure Romney will win the nomination, as he’s the likely choice with a lot of backing from politicians who know they can control him, if per chance he does win.  I just hope he has what it takes to beat Obama in the debates as he’s going to have to do it on his own, without help from surrogates, staff members or a big bank account.  Time will tell if he has what it takes, as I believe he’ll be the last man standing.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 2.9/5 (20 votes cast)
    • spkup4americaComment by spkup4america
      December 16, 2011 @ 10:54 am

      You are listening to the pundits re Bachmann. In fact, Rick Santorum had a great, pithy and true comment re Pres Reagan’s so-called 11th Commandment not to criticize other Republicans (as did Perry who said he didn’t think that rule came from Reagan, rather from the Chair of the GOP!). As Santorum responded so well, saying, “we better be able to handle the criticism. I know I have,” he said. “It’s called vetting. And if we can’t take it from each other, how will we stand up to Obama?” (loose translation of Santorum’s words.)  I have gotten upset watching the pundits criticize Bachmann for simply “telling it like it is”! My opinion is that if we can’t speak truth to one another as Republican contenders, than why even have a “Debate”. Debate means to DEBATE! I also question those, including Gingrich who refuses to criticize the other candidates..makes me ask, WHY? What would he be trying to hide?! I say, speak truth now, or forever hold your peace! People are FORGETTING that this is how we ended up with Obama, who everyone refused to criticize. I did speak truth re him, in fact, I wrote all media, conservative and mainstream, begging them to get the word out about the facts of Obama’s past, his left-wing views and history. Even when some media reported it, people refused to believe it. Are we a nation of ostriches who put our hands over our ears and repeat the mantra of, “I can’t/won’t hear you!” Or will we want to hear the truth about each candidate and let the chips fall where they may. Will we run about with our tail tucked between our legs in fear of what the other side will do with the information conservatives bring up about each other, when in actual fact, the Left has the info anyhow??  Wake up America and speak truth or forever hold your peace and regret it when it is too late!

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.5/5 (26 votes cast)
    • newsjunkyComment by newsjunky
      December 16, 2011 @ 11:18 am

      Debates are good, I agree, as long as people can act civilized and don’t disregard their comportment in the process.  Truth is relevant to everything in life as long as it’s not intermixed with hyperbole and the motivation to increase your own standing.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.5/5 (11 votes cast)
    • inluminatuoComment by inluminatuo
      December 16, 2011 @ 12:19 pm

       
      Pit-bulls Like Bachman can be an effective tool to protect the American family and prevent home attack from the enemy without. Pit-bulls just need to be kept on a tight leash and taught not to attack family members in confusion. Loose cannons and smart bombs that have slightly faulty programming should not be thrown overboard but tied down and reprogrammed with clean uncorrupted data.
       
      We all must understand that when you go to Washington on the Potomac, you do not get a TON of moral WASHING, but are subject to dirty laundry and the infestation of the Big Fleas when you lay down with the Big Washington Dogs. It is hard to breathe the tainted powerful air of Washington D.C. without becoming contaminated with a Liberal Virus. This does not make them evil. It is the corrupting virus that is evil.
       
      It is “WE THE PEOPLE” who own the palliative cure, which is holding our representatives feet to the fire to burn out the infection, and re-write the message, not kill the messenger. We just need to discipline our attack dogs so they know who the real masters are.
       

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.8/5 (13 votes cast)
    • newsjunkyComment by newsjunky
      December 16, 2011 @ 12:31 pm

      You’ll have to take up that argument with several journalists, as I stated it was something I read which was clearly defined in my commentary. 

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 2.4/5 (5 votes cast)
    • lovemycountry2Comment by lovemycountry2
      December 16, 2011 @ 1:08 pm

      illumin-nut

      You just like to argue with people as most of your comments are nothing but poetic jumble.  Always butting into everything with all your nonsensical arguments and quotes from other people. If anyone gets by you and your crazy responses they’re lucky. 

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 2.4/5 (16 votes cast)
    • inluminatuoComment by inluminatuo
      December 16, 2011 @ 1:33 pm

      Lovemycounrty2
       
      My comments, unlike yours,,, challenge the conventional wisdom and parsed political paradigms of the unquestioning, unformed minds that shroud themselves and their liberal mind bends in faux patriotic internet names like Lovemycountry2 and just add to the problems instead of challenging the problems.  Every time you open your mouth you just add credence the saying that faux “Patriotism is the last refuge of a Liberal scoundrel” Like our Faux President, when absent the ammunition of working ideas that challenge the mind he attacks and challenges the person and the party of real ideas.
       
      Great minds DO discuss ideas, average minds discuss events and small minds discuss and attack people. Every time you open your trap you betray the size of your mind and the real political which camp you dwell in. At least Newt is learning his lesson. How about you?

      If you spent more time challenging truth and less time trying to score stars you might just add something to the political discussion. It is the falling stars in Washington, and the falling stars of your rating, not the rising stars of the Republican debate that we need to concern ourselves with.
       

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 3.5/5 (12 votes cast)
    • lovemycountry2Comment by lovemycountry2
      December 16, 2011 @ 1:51 pm

      Great Minds!  Oh, brother!  That’s your problem, you think you’re one of them that’s why you always butt in and criticize others.  You might be everyone else’s light, but you sure as hell are not mine.  See you in the comics!

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 2.7/5 (13 votes cast)
    • inluminatuoComment by inluminatuo
      December 16, 2011 @ 2:03 pm

      Once again you open your trap and fall into your own snare. Just keep attacking and offering no solutions and those Liberal Stripes will become more visible. It is you who distain the light and the glow worms to hang out with the ones that the real Eagles just feed upon.

      No wonder the real American Eagles are becoming extinct, they have to survive the Progressive personal poison of delusional invective that just pollutes the land of rational discussion.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 3.0/5 (10 votes cast)
    • davnkatzComment by davnkatz
      December 16, 2011 @ 4:11 pm

      spkup4america – Rick Santorum still has issues (Constitution, 2nd Amendment, illegal immigration, etc) but he WAS good last night.  Did you catch Rick Perry’s attempt to cash ion on the audience reaction (“I love these debates.  They have made me an even stronger candidate. etc etc”  Disgusting!

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.4/5 (7 votes cast)
    • linfComment by lin
      December 16, 2011 @ 4:25 pm

      lovemycountry2, perhaps you should read your posts and apply your advice to yourself.  In my opinion, telling others not to post or harshly criticizing the writing style of others commenting adds nothing positive or even real, to the discussion.  Perhaps these comment sections just aren’t your cup of tea.  If I found myself so incensed so regularly, I think I’d find something else to do.  But then again, when I don’t have anything to add, I don’t. 

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.1/5 (10 votes cast)
  4. spkup4americaComment by spkup4america
    December 16, 2011 @ 10:42 am

    Yes, Bachmann did good and was on fire. What took me watching the Debate twice to recall is how very well Santorum did. His keeping Romney honest re the Gay Marriage question and Romney’s past statement re discrimination in that regard, was very well spoken, as was his obvious knowledge on the issue of our Border problems, including his mention re Venezuela, that he followed up on in response to Perry’s answer that was also good. I think Santorum got the short end of the stick on the questions/response opportunities, but if one reviews his comments in the debate, I find him to be a sound, rational candidate who makes a lot of sense. I think perhaps the powers that be hope people will forget about Santorum, but if I compare his comments and experience and background, I find that he is a good candidate to consider.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.1/5 (19 votes cast)
  5. lovemycountry2Comment by lovemycountry2
    December 16, 2011 @ 11:44 am

    Ron Paul is crazy!  How he ever got to be where he is, is a mystery.  Just goes to show you how nuts people are in this country, and how we do get the government we deserve. 

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 3.3/5 (19 votes cast)
    • inluminatuoComment by inluminatuo
      December 16, 2011 @ 1:50 pm

       
      Ron Paul for all his faults is a believer in personal freedom and the pre-eminence and rights of the individual over the rights of the oppressive collective. His only fault that I can see, is that his great heart and sadness over the sacrifice of the flower of American manhood in war which empties our treasury that could be otherwise put to a greater good, distorts and overcomes the reasoning side of a powerful brain to recognize the sad reality and necessity of the real world need to confront the very evil that would consume all of us. The sacrifice of the few becomes necessary to save the rights and freedoms of the many, so it has been since the dawn of time when people came together to collectively do that which as individuals they could not do for themselves,,,,like fight wars and defend themselves. I Praise him for the areas of his rational clear thinking, but find it hard but necessary to confront him when his heart and emotions interfere with the safety of the nation… We already have an irrational panderer of the emotions leading this country to our own destruction.

      I can forgive Ron Paul his minor misteps of the heart, but Obama is another more dangerous matter and HIS faults and emotional delusions are legion, and the source of his problems come from the head and not the heart. 
       

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 3.7/5 (11 votes cast)
    • SAnnComment by SAnn
      December 16, 2011 @ 2:29 pm

      inluminatuo: I can understand what you are saying and I agree with you on the reasoning. I believe Ron Paul really loves this country and has a huge following that believe in him, but I could never vote for him because there are laws that we need, not all that we have and have been given over the years that take away our freedom but some to protect the freedom. We do need to be strong militarily but I agree that we do not need to send our men and women into every confrontation that results in the deaths of so many and for what purpose.  Vietnam never should have happened as other confrontations which cost so many lives because it was based on politics and not winning. Our military has had their hands tied in the way that has cost more lives thanks to the fools (politicians) that have never served in a war zone. 

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.2/5 (10 votes cast)
    • lovemycountry2Comment by lovemycountry2
      December 16, 2011 @ 2:39 pm

      Hello inlumin-nut!
       

      You like Ron Paul because you can see what’s in his heart!  Good, we need men like you to see into everyone’s heart and offer their forgiveness.  Everyone else including those who are much smarter than yourself, say he’s flakey and unbalanced, but the great one’s opinion is gospel.   Everyone that disagrees is either a liberal, scoundrel, just not worthy to exist.  I’m not surprised you are defending Ron Paul as in other comments you have ripped him to pieces along with others you didn’t like.  Hmmmm … sounds just like the democrats they do the same thing, and they too want to legalize pot.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 1.8/5 (12 votes cast)
    • inluminatuoComment by inluminatuo
      December 16, 2011 @ 2:44 pm

       
      I like you do not think Ron Paul will get my vote in the primary. I repeat the primary. But he is a book well worth reading and many Domestic truths reside within in the mispelled foreign words of his miss-thought foreign policy pages. Each election though, you can see his spell-checker is getting more accurate, with the exception of International Political reality.
       

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 3.3/5 (8 votes cast)
    • wildfireComment by wildfire
      December 16, 2011 @ 7:10 pm

      @inluminatuo  Ron Paul has way more than one fault.  As a victim, I mean constituent of his district for the last 9 years I could go on at GREAT length.  Suffice it to say, besides his idiot ****-eating grin I always feel like slapping and the fact that even though his profession is OB/GYN he has no problem with abortion whenever, he has an intense dislike of the military.  And I don’t mean his bizarre obsession with the so called “military-industrial complex,” he really doesn’t like the military.  If you don’t believe me ask any member of the VFW.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 3.3/5 (7 votes cast)
    • inluminatuoComment by inluminatuo
      December 16, 2011 @ 9:44 pm

      Wildfire, you think you had it bad, Dick Armey used to be my rep and he used to cringe when he saw me show up at his town meetings at approach the mike for reproachment. But that was before his Tea party enlightenment, so there is hope for redemption.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.0/5 (4 votes cast)
  6. oldcuzComment by oldcuz
    December 16, 2011 @ 1:53 pm

    I don’t know about anybody else but Ron Paul’s over simplification of world dangers scares me to death. If you don’t beleive that mad man Ahbaanutjob’s ranting about wiping Israel of the face of the earth should be taken seriously I don’t know what in the Sam Hill you would take seriously. One thing he mentioned in this video was that JFK was able to back the USSR down over the missles in Cuba,, but it wasn’t diplomacy, it was the threat of Mutually Assured Destruction because we were powerful enough to back it up. 

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.2/5 (10 votes cast)
    • inluminatuoComment by inluminatuo
      December 16, 2011 @ 2:30 pm

       
      Ron Paul’s ideas to denude the Military industrial complex in the short term would like Obama, make the economy perk up for a feel good infusion of the drug of immediate financial gratification. It might even get Obama re-elected.

      In the long term it would put us in jeopardy of the necessity of going to the nuclear option, having defunded our ability to go the conventional way of war solution. I prefer to invest in the long term. Let Obama and the deluded Liberals live off the financial drug of the immediate gratification, then find themselves bankrupt morally and financially when the real challenge comes,,,,,Like they will they will in November 2012. This is one option we cannot afford when it comes to the long term security of our nation and the ability of America to protect its interests abroad.
       

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.2/5 (5 votes cast)
  7. SAnnComment by SAnn
    December 16, 2011 @ 2:04 pm

    I listened to most of the debate last night but missed the first 30 minutes. I hate listening to the attacks coming from Michele Bachmann. I have researched all of the candidates and know what their past is but  do not need to have her attack so viciously when she could be talking about what she would do on the issues facing this country. I would have loved having Sarah Palin instead of Bachmann on stage for this run for the presidency!

    Polls! I do not trust polls and will not make a decision by the polls. A poll is not a true poll unless every American in this country is being polled otherwise it is false! My opinion! **Yes, I used the word POLL 6 (7) times to make a point**

    I will not listen to Chris Wallace questioning on another FOX News debate! It is so obvious who he does not favor in the least with his attacks.  If and when FOX has another one and Wallace comes on I will change the channel.

    I like Santorum and would like to see him given more credibility from the Republican Party. He is intelligent and a conservative. Sure there are a couple of things I have not agreed with him on but that can be said for the rest especially Ron Paul who I will never vote for.  His reply on whether he would run on a 3rd party ticket when speaking with Hannity after the debate made me know that he will probably do just that! Between Paul and Trump we will suffer as a country if either one make that decision.

    The other important thing in the 2012 elections are voting in conservatives in the House and Senate. We need to look at the field in those areas and find the candidates who will help to save this country.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 3.4/5 (9 votes cast)
    • inluminatuoComment by inluminatuo
      December 16, 2011 @ 2:15 pm

       
      You are correct about the polls,,,,behind many poles resides many a Polecat with an agenda. Come January and the actual voting we will see which pollster is the most reliable and who can be relied upon in the future.
       

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 5.0/5 (6 votes cast)
    • davnkatzComment by davnkatz
      December 16, 2011 @ 4:32 pm

      Obviously YOU missed more than 30 minutes.  Everytime Michelle “attacked”, she explained WHY, illustrated her own record, and proposed a solution.

      I don’t “fault” you for not liking Michelle.  Most people who have been teachers, or most leaders, and ALL former military Drill Instructors know the way to “correct a problem” is to:
      1.  Identify the problem;    2. Explain the mistake made;  3.  Provide explanation for correcting the problem;  4. Provide opportunity for resolving the problem;  5.  Repeat procedure (1-4) and provide guidance until the desired resolution is achieved.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 5.0/5 (8 votes cast)
  8. billwvComment by billwv
    December 16, 2011 @ 2:35 pm

    I believe the debates to be ‘verrlly interesting’ and a good source of knowing who is who and where they stand.  A lot of us did not come pre-knowledgeable of all these candidates.  I’ve seen them in their ‘news reports’ and heard about them, but to actually see and hear their ‘talking the talk’ and ‘walking the walk’ is what the debates are and should be about.  I don’t agree with ‘some’ of what they all say, but I agree with most of all that they say.  [The one exception is Ron Paul] I can’t get my mind around what this man advocates.  I like Gingrich best, then in order: Perry, Santorium, Romney.  Michelle Bachman is a flame thrower.  Huntsman has been around the State Department for too long.  In the end one of these will represent us against one of the biggest ‘socialist communist’ wantabe nation destroyers. 

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 2.0/5 (8 votes cast)
  9. wdjincComment by wdjinc
    December 16, 2011 @ 5:57 pm

    I thought that Gingrich stood up well on the attacks. During his time as Speaker he wisely was able to negotiate with the Dems in order to get other things passed. Sometimes he had to give in to the moderates on issues that were less important in order to achieve Republican platform issues. Now he is being attacked by Bachmann for not purging other Republicans for lack of anti-abortion support, but tried to unite all Republicans to work together. 

    During these debates Newt has concentrated on one target to attack and that’s Obama. He has wisely not resorted to negative attacks on his fellow Republican candidates. This does not mean that he will refrain from going after Obama hard if he wins nomination. I believe that he would drill Obama during presidential debates much more effectively than any of the other candidates.

    Paul came across unhinged when discussing foreign affair, Bachmann sounded shrill when she went on attack-mode, Santorium has good ideas but simply is not a good speaker. Both Perry and Romney did well and I believe Perry gained a few points with his performance and lack of gaffes. Romney looks presidential and speaks very well, but he is too moderate for my liking.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 3.3/5 (6 votes cast)
  10. MinoComment by Mino
    December 16, 2011 @ 6:38 pm

    “if My people, who are called by My Name, will humble themselves and pray, and seek My Face, and turn from their wicked ways, THEN will I hear from Heaven, and will forgive their sins, and HEAL THEIR LAND.”  The Holy Bible

    The Holy Bible has never been wrong, and it will continue to be right forever!  We just need to obey it.  We need to pray for God’s guidance as to who He is most pleased with, or who He thinks we are deserving of as president……..perhaps it just might be another 4 years of Mr. “O”.  If we continue to live like we are right now, I think it just might be the latter. But the tide seems to be shifting towards truth, common sense, responsibility, and righteousness.  I just hope it continues so that God will not completely remove His Hand of blessings, provisions, protections, and healings from this nation.  GOD SAVE AMERICA!

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.1/5 (9 votes cast)
    • newsjunkyComment by newsjunky
      December 16, 2011 @ 7:36 pm

      Amen!

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 3.3/5 (3 votes cast)
  11. mcoryComment by mcory
    December 16, 2011 @ 8:16 pm

    Those people who won’t vote for Gingrich or Romney or whoever the final nominee is had better grow up. Stay out of the election because of this guy or that guy and guess who is back for four more destructive years. This coming year is about national survivial; any of the Republicans, except Paul, would be a better President than that Commie Jerk in the White House. So, Grow UP!

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 3.3/5 (7 votes cast)
    • billwvComment by billwv
      December 17, 2011 @ 5:07 am

      Gottcha, my friend.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 3.0/5 (2 votes cast)

Leave a Comment





The Loft Archives

  • September 2014
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • Reference Pages

  • About
  • Network-wide options by YD - Freelance Wordpress Developer