Posted on 10/09/2007 4:17:00 PM PDT by Westlander
This debate will be known for two things: 1) an uneven debut for Thompson; the opening answer he gave was that of a VERY nervous first-time candidate and there was a noticeable pause that was striking in a bad way; every evening newscast grabbed that moment and because of that some may believe Thompson's performance was worse than it actually was. 2) these candidates were ALL uncomfortable having to answer some detailed, non-soundbite applicable questions. The candidates better be glad most of the rest of the debates will be on general topics rather than focused on the economy where clearly these guys didn't do their homework.
(Excerpt) Read more at firstread.msnbc.msn.com ...
Ha ha ha.
I saw his first answer on “impending recession”
it was fine....very deliberate and no hyperbole
folks are looking for anything to be less than 110%
nuts
lest we forget.....Magnus stumbled too......many great folks don’t talk slick
Romney's comments that he'd consult "attorneys" on whether he'd attack Iran is going to be mocked by his opponents for a few days (if our email inbox is any judge). It, POTENTIALLY, opened up an inexperienced argument against Romney.
No, it won't open up the "inexperienced" argument as much as a "Clintonian" one. Too lawyerly and too slick, which feeds into Romney's negatives.
Thompson has helped Republicans step back and slow down a little and stop rushing to the first candidate that comes along. I hope he doesn’t win but he might serve a good purpose. People forget to take their time and let this be a real contest, a winner emerging only after he has been well tested by the people, not the party powerful.
For someone who makes his living as performing before an audience on television, Thompson was not impressive at all.
The best Thompson speech I ever saw was when he gave a rebuttal to a Clinton speech in 1994. He was presidential, likable, engaging and his voice was strong. I rememebr thinking this guy should run for president.
We saw none of that tonight.
Yes. RR was not RR until he was President. He didn’t do so well the first few outings and the media guffawed him as an actor who wouldn’t make the cut. RR caught fire in the last month of the primary.
Taken in that context, Fred did just fine, but is going to have to make his case next. As I see it — Rudy and Fred, now in a sprint for the gold.
Mitt just doesn’t do it, and the rest of the field didn’t break through.
Does NBC have any non-left wingers?
Lets be clear folks: THESE ARE NOT DEBATES!
THESE ARE POLITICAL QUIZ SHOWS. DEBATES REQUIRE THAT PEOPLE DEBATE SOMEBODY OR SOMETHING AND SINCE THEY CANNOT DEBATE THE OTHER CANDIDATES THIS DOES NOT QUALIFY.
Sorry for the shouting but this is exasperatingly insane. 25% of the speaking is done by the ‘moderators’ and a ‘lightening round’???? WTF??!!!?
You cannot have an actual debate between 9 people. If you can’t get the approval of more than 5% of the GOP, Get The F Out!
Ron Paul - please defect.
Sam Brownback - Retire with your remaining dignity
Tom Tancredo - Keep your seat in Congress and keep fighting
Duncan Hunter - Join AmericanSolutions and wait for a Cabinet appointment
The rest can debate. But after one more debate, one more has to go. And so on, until we have two/three left. And by then we are ready to start having primaries and actually voting.
If the DNC wants to commit suicide each 4 years by having special interest debates for every fringe nutbag group out there, LET THEM! We don’t need to join in that suicide cult. We should be adults whether the media likes it or not. No debates for/about blacks, hispanics, union bosses, queers, gun owners, the left handed or any other interest group.
Maybe some CQ-10.
Romney’s comment was pretty nutty, wasn’t it? Of course, you’ve gotta abide by the law, but I think the question of what the lawyers say is the last thing you think about, not the first.
No. Lets vote for Romney’s lawyer. He seems to have all the answers.
“Great. Let’s vote for Fred because he was comfortably mediocre.”
“It wasn’t disastrous.” Not exactly inspiring, is it?
Been here for 10 days and your telling us he’s mediocre??? Maybe you should let us all know which candidate is yours?? Wouldn’t rhyme with Pillary would it??
Pray for W and Our Troops
That single remark is enough to sink him, in my opinion. There is a visceral reaction to “running it by the lawyers” in this country. People are sick of the rising costs and nanny statism wrought by lawyers and insurance companies. I am bordering on incoherent babbling myself, just thinking of it’s ramifications.
I want a leader to decide and act on the right course for our security and our freedom. Lawyers be damned.
Being a lawyer, I can tell you that he’d be a complete idiot if he invaded Iran without asking a lawyer whether it was legal first.
On the other hand, he gave the lawyers more than their due. He made it sound like he’d delegate the decision to his lawyers.
Of course, Giuliani is a lawyer, so I don’t think his conversations with the lawyers would have much to do with what he does. So is Thompson.
First why do they allow chrissy to moderate? That being said, this bunch of candidates have us looking at 2006 all over again.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.