[Randy Larsen]

Who would YOU chose as a wnner?

[jbp1]

nobama, because the candidates did not take it to that socialist/muslim piece of crap

[Fledermaus]

Romney was too rigid for me. The “I have a plan” crap sucks.

Newt was the best with the answers, but we all know it’s too late for him. He should have ran in 2000 or something.

Yes, Ron Paul was good. But his kook factor is annoying.

Hunstman is a lib. A total sound bite candidate. He said “98 of 100 climate scientist agree...” and no one called him on that LIE.

Cain was okay but won’t get the nomination.

Perry was a little too statist sometimes.

If I have to choose a “winner”, I pick Perry, then Newt.

[MestaMachine]

Nancy Reagan. And THAT is the G-d’s Own Truth.

[2nd Bn, 11th Mar]

Didn’t see the debate. Shopped around the net for a new holster instead.

[leprechaun9]

The Show ‘n Tell for the media was not on the Food Network!

[NavyCanDo]

Newt was the smartest person in the room, and did very well considering he only had a handful of opportunities to talk. I think Romney may have closed the gap some between him and Perry, mainly because Perry did not live up to his front runner status. Bachmann is done, I hate to say because I was an early supporter of hers. Cain will hang in for awhile and may move up a few notches.

[Will88]

Well, MSNBC is rerunning the debate for anyone who didn’t get enough the first time.

[PhatHead]

It was a tie between Charles Ponzi and Galileo Galilei.

[katiedidit1]

Newt and Cain.