On Saturday evening ABC presented a GOP debate live from Drake University in Des Moines, Iowa. The debate was sponsored by ABC News, Yahoo! News, WOI-TV, the Des Moines Register and the Republican Party of Iowa. This was the first debate held since Herman Cain ended his 2012 run leaving just 6 candidates on stage to field questions. Jon Huntsman did not meet the polling requirements set forth by ABC to participate in this debate.
Here is the entire 1 hour and 30 minute debate video via YouTube:
(Video fixed)
You can also view the full video directly from ABC News available here.
Original Air Time: Saturday, December 10 at 9pm ET / 8pm CT / 6pm PT on ABC
Participants: Romney, Perry, Bachmann, Gingrich, Santorum, Paul
Report from ABC News:
With the Iowa caucuses looming, six Republican presidential candidates clashed tonight over their conservative credentials and personal histories in a Des Moines debate that saw resurgent frontrunner Newt Gingrich battling attacks by his rivals from all sides.
But it was Mitt Romney who stole the spotlight for a $10,000 bet with Texas Gov. Rick Perry over what he wrote about the individual health insurance mandate — then removed — in subsequent editions of his book, "No Apologies."
"I read your first book and it said in there that your mandate in Massachusetts should be the model for the country. And I know it came out of the reprint of the book," Perry said. "But, you know, I'm just sayin', you were for individual mandates, my friend."
Romney disputed the claim, challenging Perry to a $10,000 bet over who was right.
"I have not said, in that book, first edition or the latest edition, anything about our plan being a national model imposed on the nation," Romney said.
"I'm not in the betting business, but I'll show you the book," Perry replied.
In the first version of Romney's book, a line referring to a universal health care mandate reads: "We can accomplish the same thing for everyone in the country, and it can be done without letting government take over health care."
In the later paperback version, the line was changed to: "And it was done without the government taking over health care."
I think each candidate performed well with, perhaps, the exception of Mitt Romney who was knocked a little off his game. Santorum, Paul, Bachmann and Perry all came off quite strong in this make-or-break debate. Newt Gingrich seemed to get by fairly unscathed as he was mostly able to explain away or dispute any lines of attack. I say "mostly" because I think some may have brought him down a peg.
This could open the Iowa field and give Santorum, Paul, Bachmann or Perry a chance to improve in the caucus polls and maybe pull out a win. Iowa can be unpredictable and the ground game efforts of Santorum, Paul and Bachmann, most notably, can't be underestimated despite the "front runner" status of Ginrich and/or Romney.
Overall a good debate, quite informative, substantive and entertaining.
Auto-Generated Tags:
- abc debate video
- watch abc debate
- abc gop debate video
- abc presidential debate video
- iowa presidential debate video
- iowa gop debate video
- abc iowa debate video
- abc republican debate 2012
- abc iowa gop debate
- abc presidential debate 2012
- watch republican debate december 10
- abc news debate video
FINALLY!
Thanks for posting these videos
Awesome thanks
I was looking everywhere for this. Thanks.
Go Ron Paul!
abc sucks for not allowing to downoad this debate and all their online content
Yeah, gatekeepers really hate it when you burn down the fences.
Seriously! If it weren't for 2012PresidentialElectionNews, I wouldn't be able to find a decent file to watch when I miss the debates.
All the cable networks should have it available on their websites if they really want to attract more visitors.
If you download RealPlayer then open this site in Internet Explorer 8 (whatever newest one is). Then, play the clip and a little Realplayer download option appears in the upper right of the "small" version. Click it…wait…and don't close Internet Explorer until download completes. So, YES – you can download this debate
I love that the audience started clapping when Ron Paul was introduced and no applaud to others haha!
Ditto.. then they said bachmann and even the crickets stopped chirping.
[...] can watch yesterday's (december 19) republican debate here that took place at drake university. Share this:ShareTwitterDiggFacebookEmailLike this:LikeBe the [...]
Thanks
Lame that all the rest of the comments are gone now.
What comments are gone? Nothing has been removed. Are you mistaken on which thread you're looking at?
Ron Paul owned this debate!!
I don't think it's just me that realizes that every single debate the candidates adopt more and more and Ron Paul's principles and ideas. He's the innovator here. They're copying his words, but the exception is that they don't mean a word of it.
wow. What Newt said about Palestinians are simply not true!
What about Israels inhumane treatment of Palestinians on the Gaza Strip, such a treatment creates terrorism and doesn't lend itself to peaceful negotiation
Give me a break….Israel is inhumane ? How about the thousands of rockets that rain down on Israel every year from hamas and NON peace loving Palestianians. How about the hundreds of Isralis killed from these rockets ? Get your facts straight.
The US funds the Israeli imprisonment of Palestinians in such hopeless conditions that terrorist groups have to emerge… the Gaza strip has 1.5 million inhabitants, they do not get enough aid, and cannot rebuild the thousands of houses that the Israelis have bombed. Over half the population there are children or teenagers with bleak futures; not hateful terrorist-prodigies.
During the war in 08/09 Israel killed 1500 Palestinians, a 1000 of which were civilians. (13 Israelis were killed, 3 of which civilians). 4000 homes were destroyed. 4000! With only a fraction of them being rebuilt. And all of this with American tax money and US drones used without a care in the world for human life.
If you actually get out to the world and get an ounce of perspective you'll see that the one western country in world blind enough to support Israel is the US… Personally I NEVER support terrorism; whether that comes from Al Qaida, Hamas or the Israeli government.
Both sides are at fault and we should stay out of it, let them work things out. They are not kids and until they stop acting like kids we really have no business helping out either side financially or with military. The only thing we should be doing is helping the innocent civilians escape the madness over their.
Shawn Hyde
I agree with you Shawn. I'm old enough to remember when American's were the good guy!
Shawn H, I think you better check your sources.
thanks for posting. great debate. i wonder who gringrich was winking at, seen him do it twice.
His wife!
Ron Paul was the clear winner of this debate. No one on that stage comes close to his level of principled consistency on the issues. Other candidates even admitted in their closing statements that he has the most campaign energy and that he has been right for the past 30 years about the economy and the abuses of the Fed. There is a reason that Ron Paul has the most energetic support. It is because he is the only candidate that abides by the constitution, and this country hasn't seen that sort of statesmanship in a very long time. If you want real change in this country, Ron Paul is the only candidate that will bring it. All the other candidates represent only a slight variation of the current administration… corrupt politicians, crony capitalism, unconstitutional government actions, restriction of liberty, and government authorized theft from the people. The sad part is that some people have gotten so accustomed to these injustices that they find liberty and constitutionality to be "extreme". It is going to be a very tough fight to fix America because many powerful people benefit from the current system, including those who control the media. If you are reading this, I will only ask one thing of you… do your own research and don't let the media forcefeed you their bias. Evaluate each of your thoughts to determine if it is something you came up with on your own or something a reporter planted in your head. After watching every debate, studying every issue, and researching every candidate, tonight I concluded that Ron Paul is the only candidate that can fix this nation. He's the only one that isn't puppetting for some big corporate interest in maintaining the status quo.
AMEN!
SPOT ON!
Totally Agree with that,
Make sure you get your friends family and coworkers to the primaries and vote Ron Paul. If he is not elected and we get stuck with Obama or one of these other clowns for four more years we're going to be screwed.
Paul 2012, Get out and vote!
Dag, if I can get it through my family's thick skulls. Keeps talking about getting Bin La din, I say that was the military, could have happened on anybody's watch. Very interesting that Bin La din was found on Obama watch. There is a cycle going on here Bush is now bad and Obama is the savior, then Obama will be bad and another puppet will enter. Then family says minimum wage nobody can live off that. I have to argue simple Economics and how that is a starting point and by raising with inflation many companies only hire individuals with more qualification. I argued all the companies that closed because of this and the Walmart's stay open killing jobs and the economy. I argue you rather have several people losing jobs, several people not being hired so a few people can get a raise. I say the economy has to work on supply and demand and the government should not interfere. I said I start several jobs in a good economy a minimum wage and got raises regularly. You hire the right president we will be on the way to a good economy. Some people are stubborn for puppets, I argue the last real solid president would have been JFK and Ron Paul is who I'm voting. I bring up Bush's policies still enforce and the newly NADD stripping our liberty. Is it me or is people this blind? I linked them to Obama deception video, I told them to watch but don't take it for face value do the research. Most Obama supports don't have open minds and need to be led by Media/Political propaganda.
Bret
Amen!
I continue to support Ron Paul 2012 Freedom and National Sovereignty!
Finally!!! Newt, you bring what you've said, after 20 years, but no results. Nothing can change what will happen.
I was raised Republican but now I see what is true about our nation.
Vote Ron Paul!
ron paul is a republican too
I would like to see a debate format that asks a question, then every single canidate answers it in a specified time without taking aim at other canidates, so there would be no rebuttals. This should eliminate seeing and hearing from the frontrunners for the majority of the debate. That said, I believe that Newt is the strongest "speaker" of the group with a very casual, confident style that does not sound like he is either trying to remember his lines or stuttering to get words and ideas out of his mouth. I also believe that he may be the only canidate able to beat Obama, do to his vast experience/knowledge in and around Washington coupled with his speaking skills. My choice, however, would be Ron Paul, for his outright honesty and his strong belief in the constitution of these United States and the people it is meant to protect. There is also Mr. Paul's intentions to dismantel government as we know it today, and do away with it's waste, corruption and assault on American's Freedoms.
Now Newt has set up another Lincoln/Douglas Style Debate with Jon Huntsman for Dec. 12th. (another Candidate who soon will be dropping out of the race) Why doesn't he Debate someone with some REAL Conservative Values and a Superior Intellect than himself? I don't know….maybe someone like Ron Paul?
Because Paul would show everyone how much of a blathering flip-flopping fool newt really is.
Darrel, to answer your question: Because Newt is the one with Superior Intellect.
B Anderson So… then why is Newt Debating Jon Huntsman, of all people? Could it be just to show people how much "trivia" he knows? I have to agree with Shawn. If Gingrich faced off against Ron Paul, Gingrich would be spun in circles, especially on the Topics of the Monetary System, the Federal Reserve and Foreign Policy. He'd be on the defensive all through the Debate.
Newt is great at "talking" and maybe, writing books, but when he's confronted about his ANTI-Conservative Record, his BIG Government Philosophies and of course, his "Flip-Flopping Hypocrisies", he shrinks behind his "Historian" Cloak and "switches" the Topic to either blaming Obama or the Media Bias. He's hardly the Leader the media is making him out to be.
The Democrats would absolutely LOVE IT if Gingrich was nominated. Obuma wouldn't have to do much at all. Just let Newt "talk and talk". Newt's haughtiness and arrogance would shine through. The Democrats would have a Field Day with all of Newt's Baggage and his ANTI-Conservative Record. It would be John McCain all over again.
Ron Paul is the ONLY one that can beat Obuma.
Ron Paul is not gonna be the GOP pick. If they put that guy forward it will be another McCain scenario. He appears frail. I know very many people that will not vote for anyone who does not support Israel. I won't.
Darryl
I like your comment. I want to add that IF Gingrich were to win the Presidency, Obama would retire to Hawaii well-rewarded and content that he served the globalists well and is only passing the scepter to the next heir apparent and chosen world order tyrant.
I support Ron Paul
I'm not just voting for Ron Paul because he would shut Obama down, I like what he stands for.
Obama is one of the smoothest talkers and quick on his feet, I know he didn't get a degree in Speech Communications, it would be great to see the most knowledgeable and honest candidate go up against him. It was just be nice to shut Obama up along with all his supporters who refuse to have open minds and do a little research.
Why do some people call him one the greatest president of all times? He is one of the worst!
You are right besides Paul, Obama would shut the rest of the candidates down, he is just too cool,quick calm and collect, unless there's another discrepancy in Florida of course
These republican debates have brought to our attention the reasons we must change the course of our American government and leadership therein. I believe that anyone of these men and women who are running for the presidency of the United States of America are many times better than the present leadership – if you can call it that of Mr. Obama.
Why aren't they talking housing market solutions like…http://gilkerk.realestateloans.com/realestateloans.com/2011/12/07/housing-immobility-president-obama-s-sword-of-damocles.html
[...] debate from Drake University in Des Moines, Iowa. However, I am watching the debate on the 2012 Election Central web site this [...]
@Bret, your remarks are spot on – no matter how much we all hate to admit it. Everyone, please take a moment to review his very thoughtful comments. I'm independent and have not made up my mind, but am considering registering as a Republican so I can vote in this crucial primary. Our lives will be so difficult if we don't make a major change.
Although I think Ron Paul is great on domestic issues, some of his isolationist positions could be detrimental to America. When Irag took over Quwait in 1990, would he have done anything to protect America's strategic interests? If he had been president at that time he would have previously pulled all of our military out of Germany and other places close to the middle east to the extent that it would have been hard to defend our interests. I think that it is great that Ron Paul is in the race because he very effectively articulates many issues that the other candidates have not paid attention to, particulaly how the federal reserve and the people behind them will lead to our economic destruction. The US is on the financial precipice. We are on the verge of rampant inflation that will destroy the purchasing power of the dollar.
My big concern is that if he became the republican nominee for the 2012 presidential election, Obama and the Democrats would be able to effectively paint Ron Paul as out of touch with mainstream America. This would result in Obama's re-election. I also like Rick Santorum and Michele Bachman but Obama and the Democrats would also be able to paint them as too "extreme", whether or not it is true.
I am more interested in seeing a Republican nominee who would appeal to mainstream America. Rick Perry, Newt Gingrich, and Mitt Romney all would appeal to mainstream America. I have to add that I was absolutely disgusted with Mitt Romney's attitude which was displayed when he was recently interviewed by Brett Baier of Fox News. When asked about Romney care in Massachusetts, Romney displayed this seething attitude of "How dare you ask me this question?". This naked display of arrogance explains to me why the three main candidates in the election are Ron Paul, Mitt Romney, and "anybody but Romney". I don't trust that Romney is genuine in his positions. He says many of the right things, but can you believe him???
Hmmm… The most recent poll I saw indicating matchups between Obama and each of the GOP contenders in turn showed Ron Paul as the only one beating Obama. That's the second time the same poll has showed the same result (the first was a couple of months ago, but I don't have the reference here).
There is also the reality that, in polls from Iowa that include independents and Democrats who are leaning toward voting Republican, the majority of the crossover vote goes to Ron Paul. It was Reagan Democrats that helped swing the 1980 election and turn Carter out of office, and I could easily see the same thing happening again next year.
Neville, Real Clear Politics: for poll results:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/?state=nwa
Look at who has the most donation from military.. yes that would be Ron Paul, and not just a little more he has more donations from our military than all of the other candidates combined.
The people protecting our country with their lives are voting loud and clear with their pocketbooks for Ron Paul, your takinmisconstrueded words from thcorporatete controlled media. Pay attention, wake up and look at his views, none of them are isolationist. And if you look instead of listen to what the media fabricating you will learn the truth that Ron Paul is not afraid to protect our country, but he's going to do it the way its suppose to be done, with permission from the congress with declarationon of war.
Shawn H. Please check your sources. How would anyone know if a donation came from a person in service??? I sure did not give him any money.
B Anderson
All campaign donations are tracked and reported quarterly. The 2012 presidential candidates must file their fund-raising reports with the Federal Election Commission The numbers will reveal not merely how much they are raising, but how much they are spending and where they are spending it and all contributions.
Report Type: October Quarterly
Filed 10/15/2011
SUMMARY
DETAILED SUMMARY PAGE
ALLOCATIONS BY STATE
CONTRIBUTIONS BY EMPLOYER
CONTRIBUTIONS BY STATE
CONTRIBUTIONS BY ZIP
CONTRIBUTIONS BY DATE
CONTRIBUTIONS BY ELECTION
DISBURSEMENTS BY PURPOSE
DISBURSEMENTS BY PAYEE
DISBURSEMENTS BY DATE
Windisea, I see a flaw in your thinking. How would the canidate reporting know the employer of the person's who donated? I know I was not asked when I donate. Your source of "facts" is baseless. I see no way to determine if a donation came from a person in the military.
B Anderson
I didn't "think" it up, it's is a copy taken directly from the
Federal Election Commission Website.
I was trying to be helpful.
FYI I am always asked who my employer is when I donate.
That's funny what you said about Romney's Attitude while being interviewed by Bret Baier. Newt Gingrich was also interviewed by Sean Hannity. The only difference between the interviews is that Romney was asked the "tough" questions about his Flip-Flopping Record. However, the "haughty" Gingrich was NEVER asked the "tough" questions about his Flip-Flopping Record or even his ANTI-Conservative Record. Hannity just flipped him Soft-Balls.
Apparently, FOX News has already made their Choice for President. Newt is their man.
I once was a big FOX News fan until I watched them, with my own eyes and ears, LIE concerning the Economic Collapse of 08 and recently, the Wall Street 1% vs OWS. Now, I only watch them in passing and take what they say with a Grain of Salt. They are just a Propaganda Machine for the Republican "Establishment" Elitists, and not the Republican Party Faithful. Fair and Balanced they are NOT! They're CONTROLLED by the Corporate Interests of the 1%. They are TOLD what to say and they sure don't speak for you or me (average folks).
Great website for watching the entire debate if you miss it on live tv. Ron Paul never ceases to amaze me. Smart as a whip, honest, and consistent basing his platform entirely on past history and our Constitution. I'm proud to be part of the Ron Paul Revolution!
I didn't fully understand Ron Paul's answer regarding Newt's comment about the Palestinians. First he indicated that Newt was not correct, but then two sentences later said that he was "technically correct". Not sure what to make of that. I'm personally not familiar with that part of history, but I get the impression it might be one of the many areas in which historians take different points of view. Any historians here want to chime in?
I don't know about the history of the area either but new peoples and countries are made all the time. If you go back 400 years there was no such thing as americans either.
Look it up about Palestine…Newt is correct…It is not a biblical place or nation….He is right about everything he says and can prove it too…If you are in doubt do some searching on the internet yourself before you doubt him….He is very intelligent and is the only one who can out debate Obuma….He is a winner….Ron Paul is trying to go back into the womb so to speak and it is too late…He should have lived along with George Washington or Abe Lincoln … he is way outdated and lives in a dream world…He needs to go back to being a Doctor or just retire ….
So you consider working and striving for peace and prosperity is being outdated and living in a dream world? Then you sir are living in the wrong country, people like you who give up on freedom and prosperity is the reason our country is in the dumps right now.
If you don't want to live in a society that is controlleded by the people instead of the government than please leave.
Newt is a "Loose Cannon" who Fuels-the-Fires of Hatred and War throughout the Middle East. He hides behind his cloak of being an "Historian", but people can see right through it by his TOTAL LACK of Diplomacy.
I don't know anyone could support this guy, unless you're a Hate-Monger and a War-Monger like Newt Gingrich. People are being "hood-winked" into supporting this guy because he speaks articulately, but in reality, he WANTS Destabilization and War in the Middle East.
Aren't you Sick of it yet? How many more people must DIE or be Maimed? How many more Wars does Newt Gingrich want to involve our children in? Isn't it enough for you yet? Or do you want MORE War? Plutocrats, like Gingrich, NEVER FIGHT!: They "pick-the fights" and then send others to do it. And if you notice, Newt Gingrich NEVER talks about PEACE! This is something foreign to a Warmongering Plutocrat!
The REAL Newt Gingrich was "On Display" last night. He is Completely Psychopathic and he'll use Ole' Glory and Patriotism to "stir up" the masses. People need to WAKE UP! Warmongers, like Newt, MUST BE Marginalized and Disavowed or we'll see Millions DIE from Nuclear Weaponry. Future "Historians" should write that "Historian" Newt Gingrich was the "Political victim" of a People desiring PEACE instead of War!
Ron Paul is the ONLY way to go! He's the only one Qualified to be President of the United States!
It occurred to me that if you truly value a Republican Party win more than you care to have the best leadership for our country, you would do better to vote for Ron Paul.
Yes it makes sense.
Ron Paul supporters are solidly convicted, so much so that they will write him in or follow him to a third party before choosing a lesser second candidate. It's a fact that his supporters support the candidate above the party and are uncompromising in their support for him and as such should be better used to benefit the party. A quick search on the internet and social media sites will confirm the level of conviction and loyalty his supporters have for him to be fact.
As many have justifiably pointed out, Ron Paul's supporters are a force that could potentially sink the GOP's chances if he were to break away, just as it surely will if his supporters write him in, and they will.
It makes sense to me to vote for Ron Paul rather than permit that to happen. After all, Ron Paul is a GOP candidate, a conservative Republican, with Libertarian ideals and the candidate who originated the discussion the candidates are debating now.
He is not a socialist, fascist, communist, corporatist, globalist, progressive, liberal, tyrant or a Democrat.
“look it up about Palestine…Newt is correct…It is not a biblical place or nation…”
Even in Roman times, it was known as Palestine. If a place is known as America, wouldn’t its inhabitants be called Americans?
If you are in doubt do some searching on the internet yourself. Newt may be intelligent but that says nothing about him otherwise.
“He is the only one who can out debate Obuma.“ That is doubtful, but it could work against slick Newtie. You can’t fool most of the most of the time.
“Ron Paul is trying to go back into the womb so to speak and it is too late…He should have lived along with George Washington or Abe Lincoln … he is way outdated and lives in a dream world…”
Your “dream world is where the county is headed if the people fail to start seeing the wisdom of George Washington or Abe Lincoln.”
“He needs to go back to being a Doctor or just retire ….”
The country is very sick and needs a doctor like Ron Paul.
An excellent debate all around! Thank you 2012 website for publishing these videos. I always come here now to watch them. Tried to find it last night to no avail. I am so proud of these Republican candidates each bringing something good to the table. And the last question brought out the benefits of the primary season where candidates learn from each other.
I wish to also appreciate the moderators from abc.. this was the least "gotcha" journalism of any of the "moderators." You did not see the big egos of journalists trying to play god on stage and I appreciate abc for that. As a result we got a much better debate.
As a new republican this year i am starting to solidify my views. I think Ron Paul would make an EXCELLENT secretary of the Treasury and would be the person to oversee a dramatic overhaul of that department and perhaps some prosecutions as well and bringing to light who got all of our money. He has the knowledge and depth of understanding to do it. He is not going to be president but has brought an important voice to the debate.
After leaning to Newt i am gravitating to Romney. Newt's latest gaffe about Palestinians (as Santorum said "speak the truth with prudence") has offput me about him. He is a loose cannon given to gaffes he then has to explain and we don't need a candidate who is going to hand the ball to the other team. Romney has been steady and would guide the nation with a steady hand. He understands leadership and how to create jobs. He has given as good as he got and I think stood up well to the attacks coming from Newt. He stood even with him in the wrestling match thus showing that Newt is not all knowing and all great when it comes to debates. Romney has consistently given great answers to attacks with aplomb. He keeps cool where Newt heats up. And no, i don't want calista as first lady.
I would like to see Rick Santorum as his VP pick. He has excellent in these debates and would be an attack dog against the Obama machine. He is has the true conservative credentials Romney lacks with great foreign policy experience as well as domestic credentials. As he pointed out to Bachmann he was in the minority and won.
I would like to see Bachman in charge of Health & uman HServices and overhaul and root out Obamacare.
Perry can go back home to Texas where he belongs and Newt… not sure what role for him or if his ego would allow it. Something on the domestic policy side for sure.
All in all a great debate experience!
Wow Colleen. I couldn't agree more with any of that! Very well put. Perfect analysis of each candidates strengths where their strengths are most needed and would best be used.
I am not yet set on a candidate but I agree at the moment I am leaning for Romney in 2012.
I agree with many of those here. Obama is a very smooth debater and if we put him up against a weak debater like Bachman or Perry he will chew them up and spit them out. I think Paul, Romney, and Gingrich would all stand a decent chance against him in debates. As for Santorum, I can see obama getting santorm frustrated. But I'm going with the crowd on this one…RON PAUL is our guy. Ron Paul is the most consistent and the most right on every issue. That being said, I think Newt is probably the best debater and may stand the best chance against obama in debates, but I think Ron paul ultimately will be able to get more of the independant and democratic vote. For the record, I voted for Obama in 2008 in both the general and the primary election and I really liked what he stood for. I am dissappointed in how that translated to actual presidency though and if he was up against Ron Paul for 2012, I would vote for Ron Paul hands down. I can't say the same about some of the other candidates.
I do not believe that Obama is either a skilled debater or skilled speaker. The times he has gotten off his teleprompter he is VERY BORING. Why do people give him more credit than he deserves? Hillary crushed him in the primaries in the debates and one comment of hers towards him was "You're never responsible for anything!" Sound familiar? The press coddled him in both the debates and in person. The guy is boring. People just projected what they wanted to on him.
Again, and the media agrees with me, Gingrich won the debate. This week it was the media that made a big deal about the Palestine remark, not Newt. As another poster above said, check the facts for yourself. You will find Newt is correct. Then there is another fact to it. SO WHAT??? Why would stating fact make some one mad??? We could say the United States came from Europe. Why would that be considered to be a nasty statement??? Don't be lead by the left media spin.
Newt is the only person in this debate that showed leadership. When he answered, people listened. He answered with knowledge backed answers. All the rest except Ryan were answering as someone begging for support of their answers. They show shame of the truth. They would rather make statements according to who is listening. Ron Paul answered as a Bible thumping preacher. Pointing to the Constitution as if it were the Bible in the midst of a heathen crowd. He may have a few believers, but He got nowhere with the crowd. Ron Paul is not a leader, and will never be president.
If a Loose Cannon is a sign of leadership, then the World and Humanity is in BIG BIG Trouble.
Darryl. Yes we need to get Obama out of office. Any of the REPUBLICAN canidates will be better than him.
Yes. Obuma definitely needs to go. That's for sure. But ANY? I totally disagree. What people fail to realize is that the FED is the MOST IMPORTANT Issue NOT talked about. Ron Paul is the ONLY Candidate that understands this.
All eyes should be on Europe next week. The FED is planning to Bail-Out European Banks on the "backs" of the US Taxpayer. What will happen? People are going to RISE UP all over the World like never before, including the people in the United States.
If this happens, Newt Gingrich would be a VERY DANGEROUS President to have in Office. He HATES when people protest. He's a Plutocrat with an "Attitude" and he wouldn't think twice about using the Military against Protesters.
I would have to agree strongly with Darryl on this one. The Fed is a very big problem and several candidates appear to be over looking this very important issue. I also would like to add that agreeing with the bias media is not necessarily a good thing. The media has shown so much favortism over the last decade it's pathetic. And the majority of Americans have been persuaded by the media over the last several years, I hope this time is different. The most important election I can recall in my life, I just hope the people of this country take the time to remember and research each one of the candidates; bad, lobbying ways and the good they have done for us to try to keep our liberty. The bottom line is we need a consistent president we can trust.
I enjoyed this debate a LOT. One thing that stands out – ANY of these six would be much better Presidents than Obama. I probably agree the most on positions with Ron Paul. But, I also really liked each of the other 5 quite a bit, with Romney perhaps being my least favorite of the group, but if it were Romney against Obama – of course I will vote Romney.
I thought Perry actually finally seemed comfortable in a debate, and I think he did quite well. His comments on foreign policy and Obama doing nothing re. our predator drone hit home. He was 100% right that the real threat to our country is Obama. Again, ANY of these candidates would be better than Obama. Each has strengths and weaknesses, but each will lower taxes and cut the size of federal government. I think Ron Paul's positions are the best, but even Romney would be substantially better than Obama.
I loved Perry's idea for a part time Congress and think he is showing a real fire that he would direct against Obama, I think Gingrich is the most brilliant intellectually, Bachmann is sharp and crisp and could generate excitement as a woman Presidential candidate and Santorum has been consistently conservative and courageous. While Romney is my least favorite, I do think he has shown competence in a variety of areas – at Bain, with the Utah Olympics, etc.
Re. the Massachusetts healthcare plan, one thing Romney did that Obama did not – Romney balanced the state budget BEFORE passing Romneycare, Romneycare uses private insurance companies, and it's only 84 pages long vs. over 2000 pages for Obamacare. It also was set up for a state with only 8% uninsured, and where the voters really wanted it. So, while I don't think Romneycare is a good thing, at the same time, I don't think it should be an anvil around Romney's neck.
I think each candidate (except maybe Ron Paul) has had a few positions that are objectionable; however, while I will vote for my favorite in the primary, I will vote for whoever wins the GOP nomination in the general, because ANY of these guys would be better than Obama.
The other candidates must view Gingrich as a real threat in Iowa to be attacking him so much. Maybe he's the anti-Romney who won't wither away. Click my name for our free fantasy politics game where you can predict the primaries.
What??? You've got to be kidding… We already have the fantasy politics game. The Mainstream Media…
I agree!!!
It feels like everyone's just one big happy family at the end.
Good Luck Doctor Paul.
Thank you for the link.
"Resistance to tyranny becomes the Christian and social duty of each individual. … Continue steadfast and, with a proper sense of your dependence on God, nobly defend those rights which heaven gave, and no man ought to take from us." -John Hancock
My Fellow Americans;
Before us now lies the prospect of a Christmas season spent pondering the future of our nation. From east to west, north to south, millions of Republicans, Independent Candidates, and Democrats disenchanted by the false promises of socialism, must nominate a candidate to fight for the restoration of American eminence.
I think you will join me in appreciating the gravity of our situation. Melodrama aside, this is a very important election.
As many of you know, our party is faced with a predicament: to nominate a candidate who will satisfy our mainstream but risk losing the election, or to nominate a candidate who might disappoint our base but prove most likely to garner votes from disenfranchised democrats and independents, and thus win the election. The solution is not simple, and we have erred before: McCain-Palin was an unrealistic choice, one the party must not repeat again. We must balance the importance of staying true to our values whilst choosing a realistic candidate who can make a successful run against what Americans have come to revere as the prototypical image of an underdog.
At this point, I would like to make my own endorsement. I think our choice this time around is simple: Ron Paul. In saying I am for Ron Paul, however, I also acknowledge the uncertainty facing many Americans. Some may not care too much for Republican selection. Some may wish Donald Trump, Christopher Christie, Mark Rubio, or Sarah Palin were running. Some may not have had time to watch too many debates.
If you are looking at our candidates and asking yourself 'who should I endorse for the nomination with my vote?', here's a breakdown of some issues you should consider. These are issues that will figure greatly into the dynamic of the decision-making process in a presidential debate:
- Rick Santorum: If I may be direct, this candidate does not have what it takes on a number of levels. Presidential elections attract a host of unsuitable candidates. Santorum's parochialism, both in terms of moral issues and otherwise, proves how potential nominees can be out-of-touch on a national level while still managing to garner limited support from the more extreme members and subgroups of the party. Rick Santorum is unelectable. He cannot beat the incumbent – there are even large groups of republicans who dislike him immensely. I am thankful he will not be our nominee.
- Rick Perry: This is the only remaining candidate with regional appeal (the other was Herman Cain): Southern/south-western republicans consider Perry the candidate who most accurately espouses their views on religion, states’ rights, the economy, taxes, and Washington politics. Despite being weak on illegal immigration and a couple of other conservative issues, Perry has been a good governor for the state of Texas. He is affable and good looking, but voters in the northwest and California are put off by what they see as his tendency for ‘Bush 2.0’ situations, and he is notoriously unpopular in New England, particularly in Vermont and Maine. He lacks originality, is poor at debates, and many commentators think he is not sharp enough to win presidential battles against the current incumbent, who, as we all know, is gifted in the art of sophistry and oration. In the post-Bush era, Perry’s style and demeanour do him favours and disfavours, but the buck stops at the fact that, this is a candidate who cannot beat the current president.
- Michele Bachmann: A lot of republicans who espouse Bachmann don't realize she has a record on social issues that, to my mind, will prove a deal-breaker on the national scale of a presidential contest. Besides holding views similar in their draconian tradition to those of Rick Santorum, democrats, in pushing for the president’s second term, will point out that while Bachmann is slightly more experienced than Sarah Palin, this experience does not extend to foreign policy. Furthermore, they will also argue that she has had a far less successful political life. Where the issue of her her bad record comes in, we have not believing in Darwinism, advocating that our planet is 10,000 years old, other comments that suggest she is scientifically illiterate, and promoting prayer as a 'cure' for homosexuality. Again, we have here a candidate who appeals to a narrow cross-section of the republican demographic. Bachmann’s record will fail her in her goal to reach The White House when it is subjected to the intense scrutiny that is part and parcel of the presidential debate process.
- Jon Huntsman is an intelligent, cultured, and well-spoken moderate Republican who comes from a good family of billionaire industrialist job-creators. Although he ranks second on personal wealth amongst the candidates, behind Willard Mitt Romney, his family as a whole is about five times richer than the Romneys are. Huntsman’s other wealth includes international diplomatic experience, and a sound educative background that has informed his positions on issues such as the environment and the economy: Forbes magazine, which employs some of the best economists in the world, has endorsed his candidacy in this republican primary based on his economic stimulus program as well as proposed tax cuts. Huntsman is very popular in his home state of Utah, and the states of California and Oregon, but he has remained a low-status republican in the eastern hemisphere. He is not a very interesting speaker, and loses points on debate performance. Republicans true to the base have questioned his Mormonism. Like former contender Pawlenty, and current contender Gary Johnson, I believe Huntsman is a modern sort of republican who, in another, perhaps future scenario, could win a presidential election against the current president – the problem is winning the republican nomination in 2012. Like Pawlenty and Johnson, Huntsman is a young, attractive, active candidate whose departure from the traditional view of a republican nominee will mean he will have his day in the sun when the republican party evolves to personify the views of a younger, more dynamic demographic; eras of uncertainty as the current one make for weary voters, however, and the truth is that this candidate has failed to have an impact.
- Newton Gingrich: Well, first of all… Joking aside, this candidate is an intelligent, well-educated, all-American character who excels at debates. He respects fellow republicans during debates and has won a staggering amount of respect and noteworthiness because of it. Gingrich is appealing to a number of independent and traditional republican voters, in a removed sort of way, but young women report finding him unappealing, untrustworthy, and he makes considerable losses on record and ideology where the base of the party is concerned. While many appreciate the depth of his knowledge in the fields of law, American political history, and foreign policy, he is known to lack charisma and what contemporary society considers 'good looks', and he seen as too professorial, too authoritative, and too theoretical. Furthermore, he has the worst record, both personal and political, of the candidates vying for the nomination. While Gingrich’s past behaviour and reputation as a flip-flopper means he will pick up a few democrat votes, his current position on issues means he is unlikely to capture the hearts and minds of enough democrat party-deserters to prove effective in the race to the White House. If Gingrich is the party's choice, I suspect the current president need not pack his bags anytime soon.
- Willard Mitt Romney: This moderate republican candidate has a lot going for him, and a lot going against him. His positive points include an exceptional, consistent performance throughout the debates; a moderately successful governorship of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts; a self-made personal fortune of two-hundred million dollars, which renders him 11 times richer than the second-richest nominee for the republican candidacy, Jon Huntsman; his long-lasting, successful marriage and beautiful family; and his origins in a family of political pedigree. His local eminence as a co-founder of Bain Capital and youngest son of George Romney helped get him elected in as governor in a 2:1 democrat state, but so did his support of a number of positions he no longer has: Romney has flip-flopped on abortion, the environment, the death penalty, TARP, states’ rights, global warming, and socialised medicine, which he signed into law in his state. Other negative issues include his poor performance during televised interviews, his bad temper, his tendency to ‘lawyer up’ and avoid answering direct questions, his on-stage his rivalry with other candidates in the republican primary debates. He has also been criticized for his slick physical appearance and some of his more animated mannerisms. Romney stands a good chance of being the party’s candidate, but I don’t see this as a good thing. First, many republicans and don’t trust him. Second, separate from the republicans who distrust him are another mixed group of republicans and independents who dislike the way he argues, his demeanour, his ‘used-car salesman’ hairstyle, to quote Joy Behar, and his grin. Third, there is another mixed group of republicans and independents who trust Romney and have no trouble with his appearance or attitude, but who refuse to vote for him: they see him as power-hungry, obsessed with his family and legacy, and willing to say anything to get ahead, and they won’t endorse it. If Romney is the party’s choice, he will likely pick up a more sizeable portion of the democrat vote than other republican candidates traditionally do, but in the long run, I think his record is too flimsy to stand scrutiny, I think he has the wrong temperament for the White House, and I think there is a lot about him that will alienate the undecided voter. A recent poll suggested he would fall 4% short of required votes to defeat the incumbent.
I will not be providing a column on the policies of Ron Paul, particularly because I would like to encourage all readers to learn more about this very interesting veteran congressman who has been preaching the solutions to our problems in a consistent manner for three decades. Paul was identifying calamities before they were issues, and his foresight demands we elevate him to the presidency. Please inform yourselves. Learn more about conservative libertarian candidate Ron Paul and his aspirations for a better America.
Thank you for your readership.
Dr H Willamsburg
New Hampshire
12/12/2011
I would like to take the time to thank the host of this site for supplying all the debates for us. I do not own cable, I made sacrifices several years back in the Bush era when I was not certain what was going to happen to the economy. I'm so glad I made the sacrifices, cause we went from bad to worst. I feel the smartest 2 candidates are Paul and Gingrich, but Gingrich will continue to dig into our pockets deep and can't be trusted. Paul seems down to earth and strong, he does not back down. I don't know about any of you but I can't just look for a candidate to beat Obama, that's irrational thinking. I want a candidate when president that's going to look out for the American people restoring liberty, giving us tax payers mor money to spend so in term adding to boosting the economy, breaking down the Fed, smaller government, ridding of the crooks in Congress that Obama promised, ridding of bogus programs, eliminating unnecessary troops overseas which is costing so much.
ABCNEWS Should be ABSOLUTELY ASHAMED OF THEMSELVES!!! For now providing a link on their own WEB site for this debate. I've been looking for this debate all day. CBS, and ABC's IT Department clearly Suc.k! NBC news websites are clearly more on top of the online news game.
As for the debate.. too much GOP rhetoric! The economies engine is based on the middle class and if you squeeze them anymore.. you will stall the economy. The issue is NOT about the richest getting squeezed…. If the bottom 50% aren't paying taxes Bachman? What do you expect to do? Tax them more? How about increase their wages and STOP the extreme profits corporations are getting.
Listen, I think Ron Paul is a good man with great character as well but lets be realistic here, his views are a little narrow minded, a bit extreme, too risky, and he does not exhibit a very strong presence. Experience is what we need and Newt is our man.. The country gambled on something new and fresh the last go around with the "hope and change" idea and it bit us in the rear! Lets be smart and vote for someone/something that makes sense, has the experience, and that can actually beat Obama. I know Obama has royally screwed up but I can seriously see him humiliating candidates like Ron Paul and Rick Perry. Newt is smooth, direct, and precise with his responses and like I keep saying has the EXPERIENCE to actually make sensible change!!
[...] VIDEO: The Debate in Full CNN: 5 Things We Learned from the Debate [...]
Ron Paul is the only hope
Americans have been "conditioned" to think that Ron Paul's views are "extreme", while what the Government and past/present Administrations does, is NOT extreme. Dr. Paul tries to point this out as he Campaigns around the country.
Is it "extreme" to follow the Constitution when it comes to Declaring War? Or is "extreme" to bypass Congress and the Constitution to invade sovereign nations around the world without Declaring War?
Is it "extreme" for Congress to dutifully debate legislation and come to an agreement on whether or not the law would benefit the American people? Or is it "extreme" to pass legislation in the middle of the night without even reading the bill?
Is it "extreme" for the United States Military to be protecting our OWN Borders? Or is it "extreme" for the United States Military to be in over 130 countries, subsidizing the security and protecting the borders of other nations (friendly and non-friendly)?
Is it "extreme" for Our Elected Statesmen (and women) to take seriously their Oath-of-Office and to protect the Rights and Civil Liberties of the American people to preserve a Free Society? Or is it "extreme" for Our Elected Statesmen (and women) to pass legislation that will allow the assassinations and imprisonment of American Citizens "without cause" and "without Due Process?
Is it "extreme" to follow Free Market Principles and allow Private Corporations (Banks and Auto Industry) to go through a controlled Bankruptcy to preserve Capitalism, especially when the American people are in favor of it? Or is it "extreme" to "Bail-Out" these Private Corporations (Banks and Auto Industry) only to have them "pile" their Debts upon the "backs" of the American people when they weren't in favor of it?
Is it "extreme" for America to have a "sound" Monetary System backed by something tangible, like Gold or Silver? Or is it "extreme" to have a "Fiat" Monetary System backed by DEBT, which, when the Printing Presses are allowed to run non-stop, the prices of everything we need to live goes through the roof?
I think you've been "conditioned" to what the Media "says" is "extreme". Ron Paul wants to return America to "sanity" and to the "Rule of Law" in accordance to Free Market Principles in a Capitalist Society. Capitalism was "usurped" when the Bail-Outs occurred. It's almost DEAD! It will DIE for sure, if anyone but Ron Paul is Elected to the Presidency. It may be even too late, but Ron Paul is our ONLY "Last Chance".
You'd rather risk everything on a man that has fail to address the collapsing housing market??! For peeps sake, Newt has taken over 1.5 million from Fannie and Freddie to turn the other cheek, lying to us about those payouts being advisory fees. If you believe that he'll tell you another. Don't forget about all the bum checks he wrote while he was in Congress, saying he made mistakes. Kind of a big mistake at our expense, don't you think? He is not in our best interest. Paul said we should do something about this market before it even happened. Do your research, Paul has been fighting for us since the 80's. I do not understand how anybody can say Paul has no experience. He called shots about the destruction of the housing market, the Fed corruption and our troop situation before they even happened. You know what? He was right on the money with all of it. Where were the others…? Yet everyone just ignored him calling him names, that just tells me all Political parties fear him because he will squash their easy ride to riches at our expense. I come to the conclusion that Newt is not in our best interest, but Paul… Anybody in their right mine can clearly understand that Paul makes a lot of since, if they take time to do the research and STOP listening to the bias media. Since this election is so important I decided to give each candidate a fair shake and after much research, I came to the conclusion that Paul has remain consistent and he will not back down to anybody. He has schooled Congress and the Fed often, please research this. He has educated many of his current opposition on what is actually going on with the Fed. The truth of the matter is everyone is a gamble, our job is to pick which president will be confident enough, strong enough and honest enough to stand behind his or her policies and issues go before Congress and defend our American liberty. One day I would love to see companies invest in the market and keep all of their investments. Can you imagine how confident companies and individuals would fill in turn boosting the economy. Companies would flourish if Big Brother would stop taking our money. The market is too risky as we speak now with the big government digging in hard working Americans pockets. It's our money, we loan money to the Corporations and how are we rewarded by legalized thieves taking half of our profits, do they share in our loses? What if I were to rob some of these politicians houses off to prison. Ron Paul 2012 to try his hardest to abolish all this NONSENSE!! Wake up people, this government wants to regulate everything they can get their grubby paws on. Government is suppose to be there to create laws to protect us while still keeping our liberty intake.
George Stickney, You have been reading and listening to too many extreme left and right wing news articles. You need to check them out before repeating them. Newt has been accused of many things FALSELY, by the Democrats and people like you. If you would have kept up, you would know that all but one of the charges against Newt were unfounded. There was onlya minor one that may have substance, but it was dropped after the political damage was done. That shows that the charges were TOTALLY politically based. Newt has balance the US budget, even with a Democratic President. That is quite a feat. We need that today. Several times I have read about the FredieMac story. You seem to not know the difference between lobbying and advising. Both are legal. But who cares??? That does not mean he can not have a job of President. It's kind of like this; If we have a gushing water leak in our house, and there is an expert in plumbing repairs that has had another customer that we hate, and who is married and divorced… would that keep us from having him fix the plumbing? I would get him to fix the pipe.
Newt has experience getting bills passed in Congress. Ron Paul is abrasive, and would have little congressional support. He would not be able to get his ideas into law. I would like problems be addressed, rather than pushed down the road another four years.