The 2012 New Hampshire Republican Presidential Debate

[SV Fan]

A divided Republican Party will only help Obama and so far no Republican candidate has been able to unify the Tea Party, religious right, neo cons and Libertarians.

The neocons are easy. They can give a rat's ass about anything as long as they get their military spending.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

The neocons are easy. They can give a rat's ass about anything as long as they get their military spending.

They want their crony capitalism, drug war and police state too.

Libertarians are directly opposed to all of those.

 

[SV Fan]

They want their crony capitalism, drug war and police state too.

Libertarians are directly opposed to all of those.

The libertarians are a small fragment of the Republican party though. I am guessing a large portion of Ron Paul backers would consider themselves Independent, with a few disenfranchised Democrats.

The Neocons objective is basically to get the evangelical right and fiscal conservatives on there side by offering them breadcrumbs. If Social issues ever became a losing platform, the neocons would drop the evangelicals in a second(although evangelicals also easy to sway on the pro war side as long as it's done in the name of Jesus). I wouldn't be surprised if in the next 5-15 years the neocons try to adopt the Latino vote and start campaigning for there side

 

[Kelly]

I think social policy is what really divides the tea party from the libertarians and libertarians take social policy very seriously because it includes civil liberties.

What's the point of having tax breaks if you lose your personal rights and freedoms based on the War on Terror or "family values".

Libertarians have a choice to make because the neo-con establishment have an iron grip on the Republican Party.

Libertarians for the most part believe the social issues will be dealt with by the states, most of your religious right neo cons are fine with that....BOTH do not want a European style Socialism, which they both see as the direction that this President is taking us. I believe that the later will win out, and whomever the GOP candidate is......IF they rail against THAT, the social issues will take a back seat, as they usually do, and history has shown us.

What won it for Obama was not a lack of religious right for McCain.....A WEAK GOP CANDIDATE, and a HUGE group of Independents that were not happy all the way around, they knew very little if anything about Obama, but they knew that Progressive McCain sounded a hell of a lot like a Progressive Bush. BIG SPENDER.......The ignorance about who and what Obama was IS what got him elected. He does not have that luxury this time around. That is why he is losing Independent voters this time around. What will win it for Obama is Independents staying home.....

 

[SV Fan]

Libertarians for the most part believe the social issues will be dealt with by the states, most of your religious right neo cons are fine with that....BOTH do not want a European style Socialism, which they both see as the direction that this President is taking us. I believe that the later will win out, and whomever the GOP candidate is......IF they rail against THAT, the social issues will take a back seat, as they usually do, and history has shown us.

2004 was an election built heavily on social issues from the republican side. Social issues will always be used as a way to divert the conversation

 

[Kelly]

The 2004 election was a bad GOP candidate against a horrible Democrat.....nothing more, nothing less.

Social issues are used by liberal media to grab a "gotcha" moment in GOP debates.....as Clinton so profoundly stated....."It's the economy stupid...." and that has never been more real than it is today.

The liberal media will push the social issues so that THEY can divert the fact that Obama doesn't know a thing about the economy.

 

[redfirebird2008]

Long story short, Paul has his 10% to 15% of "loud voters" just like he is a "loud representative" that doesn't really have that much power, but is loud. He doesn't need money because that 10% to 15% follows him from state to state on the ground because they have nothing else to do. They vote in straw polls, they are like that demographic of 13 to 15 year olds that vote and put Taylor Swift at the top of every damn poll out there....they have time to walk the streets, go door to door, and volunteer......so he doesn't really need the money. The problem for Paul is that HE has to be the "barking dog" against the other candidates. He doesn't have SuperPACS to do it for him. So he ends up looking like a jerk. Now, back to Paul being an insider? He is an insider (simply because of time inside the beltway) that is loud but only has a 6 inch knife instead of a 3 foot sword. He can still do some damage to whomever the GOP candidate is, but in the end will go off into the sunset "an angry sounding old man". Much like Perot. If he runs as a 3rd party, if his followers that WANT OBAMA OUT do not get smart in time and either "don't vote" or "give an angry vote to Obama" they will also go into the sunset as a group of "angry young people, who didn't get their way" and they will have 4 more years of a Chicago style politician that goes against EVERYTHING they believe in.....and they will have less influence than they do now.

That 10% to 15% of voters will drop to around 7% when it comes to their vote for President, BUT.....that will be enough to give Obama 4 more years.

So, the GOP has to give this 10% to 15% their due time, their due voice, and realize that they are not going away, so they had better show some respect. Romney needs to begin talking to Paul asking him advice on fiscal issues, showing him respect in the debates on fiscal issues (which he did last night)....and even promise him a large role in his adminsistration in the area of fiscal policy. MUCH the same way that Obama did with Clinton in the area of "foreign policy"......REMEMBER THE PHONE CALL AT 3 a.m. commercial? THAT is how Obama brought votes over from Clinton to his house. Romney needs to begin to do the same.

Sorry if what I've said makes Paulites mad, but that is how I see them. I will back Paul all the way as far as his fiscal policy, but his foreign policy is scary as hell.....and since as President that is where he has the bigger sword as President.....no way in hell will he get my vote, and anyone that thinks that foreign policy is ok? Is not even drinking kool aid, they are drinking 99 proof.

I'm more afraid of the neo-con foreign policy, which is supported by GWB, Obama, Romney, and everyone else being bankrolled by the military industrial complex.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

Libertarians for the most part believe the social issues will be dealt with by the states, most of your religious right neo cons are fine with that....BOTH do not want a European style Socialism, which they both see as the direction that this President is taking us. I believe that the later will win out, and whomever the GOP candidate is......IF they rail against THAT, the social issues will take a back seat, as they usually do, and history has shown us.

What won it for Obama was not a lack of religious right for McCain.....A WEAK GOP CANDIDATE, and a HUGE group of Independents that were not happy all the way around, they knew very little if anything about Obama, but they knew that Progressive McCain sounded a hell of a lot like a Progressive Bush. BIG SPENDER.......The ignorance about who and what Obama was IS what got him elected. He does not have that luxury this time around. That is why he is losing Independent voters this time around. What will win it for Obama is Independents staying home.....

McCain was a weak candidate but the economy was starting to turn bad under Bush so people were ready for something different. Ignorance cannot be blamed on Obama's support because he decieved the public about his agenda. He was really more of a neocon than he was a radical progressive. I wouldn't call McCain a progressive either since he suggested a spending freeze on everything outside of military spending and he wanted to stay indefinitely in Iraq.

If the economy continues to improve, the republicans will have no chance at beating Obama.

and they might lose the house too with congress' low approval rating.

 

[SV Fan]

and they might lose the house too with congress' low approval rating.

I think it will be a bad year for all incumbents in both the senate and house(which is good news for the Democrats in the house, bad news in the senate)

 

[hippie_hunter]

I think it will be a bad year for all incumbents in both the senate and house(which is good news for the Democrats in the house, bad news in the senate)

Don't expect most incumbents to get voted out. You see despite the fact that Congress' ratings are low and most think that we should vote all the bums out, most people think that their bum should stay in place and that all the other bums should be like their bum.

With all the gerrymandering protecting Republican gains in Ohio and Pennsylvania, Democrats making huge gains in Illinois, Republicans making huge gains in North Carolina and other potential GOP and Democratic gains, I doubt we will see much movement within the House.

And most incumbents in the Senate will be safe as well. Most gains will come from open seats in like Wisconsin, Nebraska, North Dakota, Hawaii, and Virginia. The only incumbents that need to worry are Bill Nelson of Florida, Claire McCaskill of Missouri, Scott Brown of Massachusetts, Dean Heller of Nevada, and Jon Tester of Montana. 5 incumbents out of 33 races.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

Wasn't Bill Nelson retiring?

 

[hippie_hunter]

Ben Nelson of Nebraska is retiring.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

Ben Nelson of Nebraska is retiring.

I could have sworn the Florida Nelson was talking about it too. I guess I was wrong.

 

[Kelly]

McCain was a weak candidate but the economy was starting to turn bad under Bush so people were ready for something different. Ignorance cannot be blamed on Obama's support because he decieved the public about his agenda. He was really more of a neocon than he was a radical progressive. I wouldn't call McCain a progressive either since he suggested a spending freeze on everything outside of military spending and he wanted to stay indefinitely in Iraq.

If the economy continues to improve, the republicans will have no chance at beating Obama.

and they might lose the house too with congress' low approval rating.

McCain a neocon? lol....that's funny. He is just like his Progressive hero Theodore Roosevelt, the father of Progressives.

The economy isn't improving. Just because we have had slow, very slow job growth doesn't mean the economy is improving. Those #'s do not show the under employed, and those that just gave up. Unemployment has to fall below 7% for Obama to have a semi-free ride.....that is not going to happen at this rate.

He did not dominate one of the weakest opponents I've seen in my 3+ decades of watching this stuff. Independents in large numbers are pissed off at him now that they know more about him.

He doesn't have the luxury of being the first biracial President, the new guy, the guy no one knew anything about, the guy that for some reason things just didn't stick, the hope and change guy anymore, and it was all of those things that got him elected in the first place. We now know him well....

If he has an even semi-strong opponent that chooses a strong VP, campaigns from the first to last day (something McCain could not do because of his age) then Obama may see a large problem of winning. It is again the vote of the Independents like me that will get him into office, just like we did the first time. Unfortunately for him, many like myself want him out NOW, and give us any reason....and we will put our money where our mouth is...

Also, spending freezes don't mean you are a neo-con....a good portion of independents are fine with that because we know that AT THE LEAST, while these idiots figure out what to cut, we wouldn't be increasing the deficit at an alarming rate like we are now.

There are many Independents just like me out there that would be happy with "at the least" a 10% cut across the board, including defense. If the leaders of these agencies can't figure out a way to make up that 10%, then what the hell are they in their positions for, and they need to be fired. My budget for my department was cut by 18%. I found a way to make that up, and we have not wanted for anything. There is no reason why that can't happen at 10% across government.

 

[Kelly]

Don't expect most incumbents to get voted out. You see despite the fact that Congress' ratings are low and most think that we should vote all the bums out, most people think that their bum should stay in place and that all the other bums should be like their bum.

With all the gerrymandering protecting Republican gains in Ohio and Pennsylvania, Democrats making huge gains in Illinois, Republicans making huge gains in North Carolina and other potential GOP and Democratic gains, I doubt we will see much movement within the House.

And most incumbents in the Senate will be safe as well. Most gains will come from open seats in like Wisconsin, Nebraska, North Dakota, Hawaii, and Virginia. The only incumbents that need to worry are Bill Nelson of Florida, Claire McCaskill of Missouri, Scott Brown of Massachusetts, Dean Heller of Nevada, and Jon Tester of Montana. 5 incumbents out of 33 races.

Also the loss of districts in the Northeast, and the gain of districts in states like Texas will also make a difference. But yes, it is always the other guys representative/senator that is the problem, not mine.....

 

[redfirebird2008]

McCain a neocon? lol....that's funny. He is just like his Progressive hero Theodore Roosevelt, the father of Progressives.

The economy isn't improving. Just because we have had slow, very slow job growth doesn't mean the economy is improving. Those #'s do not show the under employed, and those that just gave up. Unemployment has to fall below 7% for Obama to have a semi-free ride.....that is not going to happen at this rate.

He did not dominate one of the weakest opponents I've seen in my 3+ decades of watching this stuff. Independents in large numbers are pissed off at him now that they know more about him.

He doesn't have the luxury of being the first biracial President, the new guy, the guy no one knew anything about, the guy that for some reason things just didn't stick, the hope and change guy anymore, and it was all of those things that got him elected in the first place. We now know him well....

If he has an even semi-strong opponent that chooses a strong VP, campaigns from the first to last day (something McCain could not do because of his age) then Obama may see a large problem of winning. It is again the vote of the Independents like me that will get him into office, just like we did the first time. Unfortunately for him, many like myself want him out NOW, and give us any reason....and we will put our money where our mouth is...

Also, spending freezes don't mean you are a neo-con....a good portion of independents are fine with that because we know that AT THE LEAST, while these idiots figure out what to cut, we wouldn't be increasing the deficit at an alarming rate like we are now.

There are many Independents just like me out there that would be happy with "at the least" a 10% cut across the board, including defense. If the leaders of these agencies can't figure out a way to make up that 10%, then what the hell are they in their positions for, and they need to be fired. My budget for my department was cut by 18%. I found a way to make that up, and we have not wanted for anything. There is no reason why that can't happen at 10% across government.

McCain is absolutely a neocon. Neocons have a strong belief in overseas military intervention. McCain is a supporter of this. Obama is as well. The American political Establishment in BOTH parties have been pushing this agenda for decades.

As far as spending is concerned, the neocons don't give a hoot about this issue. If they did, they wouldn't have run up trillions of dollars in debt fighting wars that will never end. But this isn't about their principles, it's about our taxpayers funding the weapons contractors who donate campaign money to these politicians. A spending freeze isn't a neocon idea, it's a fiscally responsible idea as you pointed out. Something needs to be done. 10% across the board would be a decent start.

 

[Paradoxium]

The spread democracy horse**** came from the progressives, for whatever reason and whenever it was, the Republican decided to hop on the stupid idea post Woody Wilson.

 

[redfirebird2008]

The spread democracy horse**** came from the progressives, for whatever reason and whenever it was, the Republican decided to hop on the stupid idea post Woody Wilson.

Yep. Wilson also gave us the Federal Reserve. Thanks Woody.

 

[Paradoxium]

It's telling that he even regretted some of his actions. Especially the Federal Reserve.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

The spread democracy horse**** came from the progressives, for whatever reason and whenever it was, the Republican decided to hop on the stupid idea post Woody Wilson.

It's not a stupid idea if you want an excuse to overthrow rogue countries and set up puppet governments in oil rich places.

 

[Fenrir]

It's not a stupid idea if you want an excuse to overthrow rogue countries and set up puppet governments in oil rich places.

Only to find said puppet governments overthrown by military coups and/or revolutions which end up with a populace and a regime that, as per popular demand, are openly hostile to U.S interests. Republican candidates criticizing Ron Paul over his foreign policy are the biggest bunch of myopic, self-serving zealots who can't smell what's around the corner. All this warmongering over Iran yet no one has the common sense to foresee that Russia and China are basically waiting for the U.S to continue to bleed itself dry economically and militarily before jumping in for the kill.

 

[8wid]

Ron Paul: Terrorism Is a Crime, Not a War

 

[Kelly]

The spread democracy horse**** came from the progressives, for whatever reason and whenever it was, the Republican decided to hop on the stupid idea post Woody Wilson.

Yep, the great legacies of Teddy, Woody, and Hoovie....

 

[Quetzal]

I feel like those three should not be in the same sentence at all. Those three presidents represented such stark contrasts with one another and though one may try to post-dict their legacies, the three can not be mentioned as one and the same.