Following Saturday's GOP debate on ABC, NBC will be airing a GOP debate Sunday morning beginning at 9am ET as a special presentation of their Meet the Press broadcast for 90 minutes. This debate is sponsored by NBC News and facebook. This will be airing live in the morning but you'll be able to watch replays shortly following the broadcast if you miss it.
Full Video: (80 minutes)
Original Air Time: Sunday, January 8 at 9am ET/PT on NBC and 9am ET / 6am PT on MSNBC
Participants: Santorum, Romney, Paul, Perry, Gingrich, Huntsman
Report from WCSH:
Politicians wouldn't get very far without being social. So it makes a lot of sense that the most social medium of 2012 is also where the candidates will be debating this weekend. Facebook, in a partnership with NBC News and Meet The Press, will host the first social media presidential debate this Sunday. We spoke with host of "Meet The Press", David Gregory, about why it was important to team up with Facebook, the biggest name in social media.
"Look, it's a great opportunity for us to do something that we try to do on the program a lot which is recognize that while we're having a conversation, on Meet The Press, there is often a conversation going on digitally, where people are watching the program and connecting in real time and making judgments about the answers and the guests. So this is an opportunity, in the course of a debate to say — hey, we're out here connecting to each other via Facebook. We have questions for the candidates. And by the way we can react real time to how the debate is going and get our voices heard in the middle of the debate by connecting directly with us. So the partnership from that point of view makes great sense."
Leading into this debate, Facebook has been carefully gauging the mood of voters in both Iowa and New Hampshire, but also across the country. By using Facebook, users have been commenting on the Meet The Press page and asking exactly what they want to see in the debate. Also they've been talking with each other too as they post comments.
Following Saturday night's debate, it will be interesting to see what themes spill into Sunday morning and the argument shapes up. If you miss this broadcast in the morning, NBC usually makes the replays available almost immediately following the broadcast so you should be able to watch it Sunday afternoon.
Auto-Generated Tags:
- meet the press debate
- watch the 2012 republican debate new hampshire
- meet the press gop debate
- nbc debate
- watch meet the press debate
- video of full jan 8 2012 gop debate
- meet the press presidential debate
- january 8 GOP debate video
- republican debate 2012 january video
- watch republican new hampshire debate
- meet the press debate new hampshire
- nbc meet the press debate
To those of you who would that have doubts about Ron Paul's beliefs and policies, I would offer two additional quotes from Carl Schurz calling for the need of such a patriot and the need for policies as Ron Paul supports. I offer these to you in hopes of broadening your perspectives.
The first quote I would like to dedicate to Ron Paul"
Carl Schurz on Patriotism:
The man who in times of popular excitement boldly and unflinchingly resists hot-tempered clamor for an unnecessary war, and thus exposes himself to the opprobrious imputation of a lack of patriotism or of courage, to the end of saving his country from a great calamity, is, as to "loving and faithfully serving his country," at least as good a patriot as the hero of the most daring feat of arms, and a far better one than those who, with an ostentatious pretense of superior patriotism, cry for war before it is needed, especially if then they let others do the fighting.
— Carl Schurz
The second I would dedicate to Dr. Paul's Foreign Policy.
Carl Schurz's "The True Americanism":
What is the rule of honor to be observed by a power so strongly and so advantageously situated as this Republic is? Of course I do not expect it meekly to pocket real insults if they should be offered to it. But, surely, it should not, as our boyish jingoes wish it to do, swagger about among the nations of the world, with a chip on its shoulder, shaking its fist in everybody's face. Of course, it should not tamely submit to real encroachments upon its rights. But, surely, it should not, whenever its own notions of right or interest collide with the notions of others, fall into hysterics and act as if it really feared for its own security and its very independence. As a true gentleman, conscious of his strength and his dignity, it should be slow to take offense. In its dealings with other nations it should have scrupulous regard, not only for their rights, but also for their self-respect. With all its latent resources for war, it should be the great peace power of the world. It should never forget what a proud privilege and what an inestimable blessing it is not to need and not to have big armies or navies to support. It should seek to influence mankind, not by heavy artillery, but by good example and wise counsel. It should see its highest glory, not in battles won, but in wars prevented. It should be so invariably just and fair, so trustworthy, so good tempered, so conciliatory, that other nations would instinctively turn to it as their mutual friend and the natural adjuster of their differences, thus making it the greatest preserver of the world's peace. This is not a mere idealistic fancy. It is the natural position of this great republic among the nations of the earth. It is its noblest vocation, and it will be a glorious day for the United States when the good sense and the self-respect of the American people see in this their "manifest destiny." It all rests upon peace. Is not this peace with honor? There has, of late, been much loose speech about "Americanism." Is not this good Americanism? It is surely today the Americanism of those who love their country most. And I fervently hope that it will be and ever remain the Americanism of our children and our children's children.
— Carl Schurz
These words were written more than 100 years ago and if carefully read still shed the light of relevance on America today.
@ Dee….You are a complete fool. You just spouted so much BS! You need to spend more time reasearching these important matters before you share your stupidity with everyone.
@DP - Ron Paul is 76 years old and seen a lot - I think a lot of what is coming out oft his mouth makes a lot of sense — nothing he is proposing to change would hurt you
I have an idea. ASK EACH CANDIDATE THE SAME QUESTION AND GIVE THEM ALL EQUAL TIME….I don't care if there is a front runner or prediction made by such and such polls or moderators or networks. That is no excuse to massage your predetermined puppet of choice and extend their debate time. This is for our best interest for president, not your time to prop up a single candidate via biased network. I am for Ron Paul who you are afraid of and you have instilled that choice time and time again. For you don't want him to speak even though he is gracious towards you. These are not debates….they are public insults to our intelligence.
That would almost be to much to hope for wouldn't it.
Below is posted a news letter from the National Association for Gun Rights.
Things you might or might not know about the Candidates.
——————————————————————————-
With the Iowa caucuses just a few days behind us, and with New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada choosing their Republican candidates soon, I wanted to write to you and give you a quick update on the NAGR Presidential Survey program.
As you know, NAGR has mailed every candidate for President an official NAGR Gun Rights Survey.
Ron Paul is the only remaining Republican candidate who has returned his survey 100% in favor of gun rights.
Over the last few weeks and months, I've asked you to call the campaigns of Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry to demand that each candidate return their gun rights survey 100% in favor of the Second Amendment.
Believe me, your calls worked. Repesentatives from each of those campaigns called NAGR offices, demanded we instruct our members and supporters to stop calling and to send them a survey.
Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry were hurt severely in Iowa because they stonewalled gun owners by refusing to return their surveys, and I think the longer that Rick Santorum and Mitt Romney ignore gun owners, the more it will hurt them as well.
Each candidate has the NAGR Presidential Survey in hand. However, we didn't stop the calls, and we won't. Each of the remaining candidates needs to know that gun owners have a powerful voice and we will assume that silence is a sign that they are hiding an anti-gun position.
I have serious concerns about Romney, Santorum, Gingrich and Perry. It's their records that worry me.
Let me take a minute or two right now to remind you about the positions of the four Presidential candidates who have so far refused to return their National Association for Gun Rights Presidential Survey.
Mitt Romney:
So far Mitt Romney has refused to respond to his NAGR gun rights survey, perhaps because when Mitt Romney was Governor of ultra-liberal Massachusetts he signed a bill to ban an entire class of firearms.
Would he do the same thing — or even worse — as President of the United States? His record indicates that he would.
Mitt Romney supports the Brady Registration Act, mandatory 5-day waiting periods, mandatory firearms ID cards, the Federal Feinstein Gun Ban (so-called "assault weapons ban") and he signed the Massachusetts Semi-Auto Ban in 2004.
He even went as far as to say that he supported Massachusetts' tough anti-gun laws: "We do have tough gun laws in Massachusetts; I support them… I won't chip away at them; I believe they protect us and provide for our safety."
And to throw fuel on top of Mitt Romney's anti-gun fire, he received the endorsement of John McCain this week, who himself has recorded promotional commercials for anti-gun groups hell-bent on restricting our Second Amendment rights.
Rick Santorum:
If you’ve watched any of the Presidential debates, you’ve noticed that Rick Santorum claims time and again to be a “fighter” who has “led on conservative issues.”
Rick Santorum’s record on the Second Amendment, however, tells a different story.
In the 90s, he voted to support the Lautenberg Gun Ban, which stripped law-abiding gun owners of their Second Amendment rights for life, simply because they spanked their children or did nothing more than grab a spouses wrist.
He voted for a bill in 1999 disguised as an attempt to increase penalties on drug traffickers with guns… but it also included a provision to require federal background checks at gun shows.
In 2000, Santorum voted to force pawn shops to require a background check on anyone coming into the store to sell a firearm.
And then he voted with gun-controlling Democrats Dianne Fienstein and Frank Lautenberg to mandate locks on handguns in 2005.
But worst of all, Rick Santorum has a storied history of bailing out anti-gun Republicans facing reelection.
Rick Santorum came to anti-gun Arlen Specter’s defense in 2004 when he was down in the polls against pro-gun Republican Pat Toomey. Specter won and continued to push for gun control during his years in the Senate.
He also supported and openly campaigned for anti-gun New Jersey governor, Christine Todd Whitman.
It certainly appears that Rick Santorum has no regrets about his past anti-gun record. Worse, it appears he’d be happy to continue along this path as President.
Newt Gingrich:
For those who have followed Newt Gingrich’s career, the revelation that he talks out of both sides of his mouth won’t be a surprise.
Despite claiming to be pro-gun, Newt Gingrich’s reign as Speaker was downright hostile to our Second Amendment rights.
Newt supports the Brady National Gun Registry, a national biometric thumbprint database for gun purchasers, the Lautenberg Gun Ban and the “Criminal Safezones Act."
Newt doesn't think the Brady Instant Gun Registry goes far enough — he wants thumbprints:
"I think we prefer to go to instant check on an immediate basis and try to accelerate implementing instant checks so that you could literally check by thumbprint… Instant check is a much better system than the Brady process." — June 27, 1997
Gingrich may claim to be pro-gun . . .
But his record indicates otherwise, and his refusal to answer his NAGR survey should give any Second Amendment supporter cause for concern.
Rick Perry:
Texas Governor Rick Perry has received an earful from NAGR members over the past several months for refusing to return his Candidate Survey.
His strategy seems to be to tell gun owners “trust me” while keeping completely silent on what he would do about our gun rights if elected President.
Over the years, gun owners have learned that this is a failed strategy.
George H.W. Bush ran as a pro-gun candidate for President in 1988, but when elected, things changed.
First, he signed an Executive Order banning the importation of so-called “assault weapons.”
Not only that, but it was under President Bush that “Operation Triggerlock,” which dramatically increased funding and power for the BATFE, was implemented.
Of course, as Governor of Texas, Rick Perry did make some minor improvements in state law for gun owners.
It is, however, one thing to act pro-gun as Governor of a state like Texas and quite another to be a pro-gun President of the United States.
Please keep up the pressure on these four Presidential candidates who continue to stonewall gun owners.
Give each campaign a call and demand the candidates return their National Association for Gun Rights Presidential Survey — at once:
Mitt Romney: 857-288-3500
Rick Santorum: 603-518-5199
Newt Gingrich: 678-973-2306
Rick Perry: 855-887-5627
You and I know that we have the most anti-gun President in the history of our country right now in the Oval Office . . .
. . . but perhaps even more dangerous would be a Republican with a proven anti-gun history cutting backroom, anti-gun deals.
For Freedom,
signature
Dudley Brown
Executive Director
Dudley - You are out of touch with reality. Romney is NOT anti-gun! He believes in the right to own our guns.
Please take the time time to investigate Romney's real record. When he was governor he did sign into law a ban here is part of an article posted in Berkshire News on July 08, 2004.
Romney Signs off on Permanent Assault Weapons Ban.
Governor Mitt Romney has signed into law a permanent assault weapons ban that he says will make it harder for criminals to get their hands on these guns.
Deadly assault weapons have no place in Massachusetts, Romney said, at a bill signing ceremony on July 1 with legislators, sportsmen's groups and gun safety advocates. These guns are not made for recreation or self-defense. They are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people.
Like the federal assault weapons ban, the state ban, put in place in 1998, was scheduled to expire in September. The new law ensures these deadly weapons, including AK-47s, UZIs and Mac-10 rifles, are permanently prohibited in Massachusetts no matter what happens on the federal level.
We are pleased to mark an important victory in the fight against crime, said Lieutenant Governor Kerry Healey. The most important job of state government is ensuring public safety. Governor Romney and I are determined to do whatever it takes to stop the flood of dangerous weapons into our cities and towns and to make Massachusetts safer for law-abiding citizens.
Internet search Top Five Romney Gun Facts.
YouTube Romney, there is a lovely video of Romney quoting G.W. Bush when Bush stated " that if a bill to extend the Clinton Crime Bill came to his desk that he would sign it". Romney goes on to say that if he had been President he would have signed it to.
All is not what it seems. The truth is out there.
Yawn feast..did anyone see the woman with eyes closed behind Gregory.
ron paul is clearly crazy, please just drop out buddy!
During the debate this Sunday, I am very pleased to have witnessed Dr. Paul address a major concern of and critique by a number of American people looking at his potential for the presidency.
It is encouraging to know that like a champion race horse, he holds true-to-form, continually listening to what WE are speaking about and is NOT focused on HIMSELF.
Here, take a look and see that of which I speak…
"Dr. Paul may be a catalyst of great benefit to a number of issues which ail America, however, … PLEASE LISTEN TO THE INTERVIEW AT THE FOLLOWING":
http://tarpley.net/2011/12/28/critique-of-ron-pauls-austerity-plan/
These debates are only one info-limited method for people of all political stripes to have an opportunity for listening to, hearing and learning of THE ONE giving voice to what really matters!
I don't understand how Paul is running a solid second place in New Hampshire yet only gets 2 questions directed at him. The bias continues… Paul 2012.
It seems to me that these debates don't really put these candidates on the hot seat for the Wall Street bailouts (Republican-originated) and the relative inability of our judicial branch to prosecute white-collar (financial) crimes when at the same time we are one of the world's leading executioners w/r/t so-called "blue collar crimes" (probably only China executes more blue-collar criminals than the US, but at least they also execute white-collar criminals!)
The moderator should have grilled those candidates who voted for the bailout - "Why did you vote for the Wall St bailout? If one of these banks were to collapse in the future, would you bail them out again and protect the executives' bonuses -or- allow bankruptcy/takeover proceedings with much-deserved imposed "austerity" measures?"
If certain segments of society are blatantly above the law and the rest of the people openly know this and defeatedly accept this … then we shouldn't expect a healthy, growing economy with such a broken foundation. We should just expect 0% unemployment with everyone working as peasant-serfs like in the Dark Ages.
Yes! Finally, one of the Republican candidates (besides Ron Paul) has the b*lls to call out these Wall Street banksters for what they truly are AND has provided specifics about how he would fix this disgusting problem, while at the same time supporting smaller/community banks. Good for you, Huntsman - nice editorial piece:
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/01/07/wall-streets-big-banks-are-real-threat-to-our-economy/
(looks like the other candidates - except Ron Paul - have been bought out by the banksters)
Don't quite get the Huntsman applause at the end of the debate. I can't stand Romney, but there was nothing wrong with what he said about Huntsman's working under Obama. You seriously have to question the judgement of someone who gives Obama high praise they way Huntsman did. Huntsman is nothing but a phony, just like Romney. I think maybe people applaud those things because they hear the media say over and over that the parties should all get along like one big happy family. That's what the Dems. brainwash everyone to. believe when they want things to go their way. - They use our virtue against us. They're like a bunch of spoiled children who cry and whine and call others mean to get what they want. We fall right into their trap.
This site has a list of the candidates' speaking times for this debate. Why Ron Paul has less than HALF the speaking time of Romney and Santorum is beyond me, especially after doing so well in Iowa and polling so well in N.H.
http://www.dawnoftheweak.com/2012/01/debate-stats-nbc-meet-press-1-8-2012_08.html
In answer to Huntsmans entitlement programs. Social Security is NOT and entitlement, We paid into it whether we wanted too or not as an investment for our retirement. Entitlements are getting something for nothing. We need RON PAUL in the Whitehouse!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I'm tired of debates that miss the point about our environment. Republicans are completely clueless; bamboozled by Rush L. and others.
Many people on here are primarily concerned with specific topics. Like the environment, medicare etc… The truth is we can't break down every single issue. Based on leadership abilities, morality and presidential swagger. I think the choice is clear, and as long as it is someone that wants to cut spending and shrink the inefficient garbage government programs we have in place I will be happy. Anyone on the right is better than the communist/political terrorist that we have in office today.
Did anyone catch the question for Perry "What will you do to make Republicans uncomfortable?" That is the best example of a true "gotcha question" if I have ever heard one, ask a question to shoot yourself in the foot with your own party? I think if I was asked something like that I would defer it, just outright refuse to answer it.
Strangely I noticed that when Gov. Jon Huntsman speaks during these debates, even the other candidates listen with attention and respect to what he has to say. Then why has he not found more traction with the public.
Huntsman ideas, vision, and solution are sound. I don't know what the bias against him is. I am certain he will be a worthy match for Pres Obama 2012. That will be a thrilling contest. I won't be disappointed if that turns out to be the case.
I hope Obama wins, we need him to pull our country out of the mess that bush put us in.
First of all, Bush did not cause the mess that America is in. It was Greenspan not monitoring the new "derivatives" in the stock market. Second, If Obama really cared about the US economy, he would have allowed the Keystone XL Pipeline.
A point that Ron Paul supporters miss is that he is 78 years old. He just wants to go back to his childhood standards (pre WWII) at that time the US was not actively involved in world events. The World was falling appart with the Nazi's taking over Europe. The US kept out of it as long as it could. Ron Paul still has not realized that The US finally had to enter the war. It cost us MORE than if we had entered years earlier.
If Ron Paul becomes President, the person he chooses to be Vice President will be President.
B anderson so what he's 78 he is way more sincere and honest than any of the other candidates. He is a man of courage and principle. You better get your facts right, when was the US not invovled in world events. To be a nation this powerful you definately have had to be involved in World events. What was World war 1. Just to name an event.
@MadPatriot, Thank you so much for the explanation about legal tender. It was so clear. I know Ron Paul is the right choice. I hope he's given a chance to straighten this mess out. If he won in Iowa along with the other two (he had a couple of percentage points lower) why doesn't he get time to speak? The media is so corrupt. I can't believe they get away with it. Is this Amerika?
Wow, 120 min without one real question. They try to make them look like real questions, but in essence there all screened, and than screened again.
The Only guy answering truthfully, and telling it like it is is Ron Paul. Lets wake up America and vote a real man into office this year, Ron Paul is the only real person standing on that stage. Why didnt they ask the candidates about Obama's recent bill, the NDAA? Why did Obama just wage war on Americans? Historically the most important bill in this nations history gets signed on New Years Eve and no one is asking why?
Why not ask the candidates if they would support a real 911 investigation into what transpired on 9/11/01. Any structural Engineer in the world will tell you a steel structured building could never come down inside its own foot print at almost the speed of gravity. Lets ask these candidates some real questions…
Are there any real people out there, like that old pink floyd songs says "Is there anybody out there"?????
WOW. this Dinosaur Media is reall y Scared of Ron Paul When he brings up real topics they try to shut him off. Prime example is when he talked about The Military Security Complex he got interrupeted like if he was talking about a conspricacy or something. these False Media are Pathetic. RonPaul 2012
While there are many great posts regarding this topic so far…the unfortunate reality is our governmental structure and process will never change. Neither will the politicians. Why? Because there is too much POWER and too much MONEY up for grabs. We can debate among ourselves (Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians, Tea Partiers, or independents) about party line beliefs until we are blue in the face yet at the end of the day it will be business as usual. Our current government is structured in such a way that allows for loop holes to be exploited to the benefit of large corporations. The large corporations have the millions of dollars necessary to hire the most influential and charismatic lawyers as lobbyist representing their interests. Regardless if we truly know a corporation's true agenda it does not matter. Because the sum of their agenda is POWER and MONEY. The more power they can wield the more money they can make. The more money they make the more they can continue to buy representation on the inside circles. Be open and honest with yourself for a moment. If you had expertise in a certain field and there was another company who wanted to pay you a huge and substantial fee for your representation are you honestly going to turn that offer down? Most people (not all) but the vast majority would not. So I then ask why is a lobbyist expected to act any differently when he/she is governed by the same human emotion of desire as we all are? I'm not advocating what I am talking about here. I am simply pointing out that based on our current structure of government and the innate aspect of desire in humans the issues we can all debate for hours on end will never go away nor will they ever be fixed. I do not have a solution either. All I can offer is candid commentary on why things will continue to be the way they are.
the answer is simple be teach integrity to your children and be integritous your self that is the solution.
Oh snap, B-Anderson again. What this time? Ron Paul's age?
Instead of voting record or anything relevant, opponents of Ron Paul must attack his age. They said the same thing in 2008. Meanwhile, in the past 3 years… Ron Paul went on to kick-butt for his district, while the rest of the nation suffered.
Apparently they give up on the "age" card like they give up their flawed Keynesian Economic Policy - not at all.
Want to help fight against Vote Fraud?
IF you live in a PRIMARY state (which uses corruptible voting machines) watch the video on the 4th Branch of Government (or the GRAND JURY)….. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8JL8R4eH3qE
Now take action:
Print out the complaint letter, fill it out, and take it to your local County District Attorney's Office to be filed. There is NO cost involved. They put in in an envelope to pass it to the District Attorney and provide you a phone number and a contact name to call back in about 1 week to follow up with whoever the D.A. assigns to the investigation.. http://hidden4thbranch.com/?page_id=305
(IF you do not know whether your state is a Primary or Caucus state look here: http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P12/events.phtml?s=c)
IF you live in a CAUCUS states (which counts votes by hand)
We at WatchTheVote2012 primary mission right now is to monitor the CAUCUS states (the ones with hand counted paper ballots) to ensure the votes are honest, open and transparent. We need 1 person in EACH precinct (1000 - 2000 depending on the state) in the upcoming CAUCUS states below that we have STATE MONITOR pages created for at this time.
(new state monitor pages will be created shortly for the next upcoming caucus states)
Our MAIN FB page:
http://www.facebook.com/groups/watchthevote2012/
Below is a good example of what needs to be done in EVERY Caucus State Precinct on CAUCUS day at the end of each caucus in the precinct:
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=315116938528444&set=o.242720279134884&type=3&theater
Take a photo of the official tally sheet, in addition to writing down the #s on your own sheet. PHOTO is important! SEND it to US and post it on your wall!
=====================================
Can you do the above & help ensure vote count integrity in the Caucus State you are monitoring? If so, please choose the STATE below in which you can help, and register there (or if you can drive to one of these states and help that way):
Feb 4th - NEVADA: http://www.facebook.com/groups/WatchTheVote2012Nevada/
Feb 7th - COLORADO: http://www.facebook.com/groups/WatchTheVote2012COLORADO/
Feb 7th - MINNESOTA: http://www.facebook.com/groups/WatchTheVote2012Minnesota/
1/29-2/11 - MAINE: http://www.facebook.com/groups/WatchTheVote2012Maine/
=====================================
Below is the link to the WatchTheVote2012 Facebook page so you can join the effort. We are not affiliated with any candidate & our purpose is to help ensure an accurate vote count & report from the precinct level everywhere.
http://www.facebook.com/groups/watchthevote2012/
(NOTE: WatchTheVote2012 with Edward True were the ones who actually blew open the news that the Iowa Caucus results were reported falsely & that Romney did NOT win. No one, (not even the Ron Paul campaign) discovered the discrepancies in the information until we & our team of reporters began reporting what we found.)
Watch the CNN report below with Edward True that forced the GOP to admit their 'error': http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31qgr90-sOQ&feature=share
WatchtheVote2012
Next states up for monitoring: If you live IN or NEAR COLORADO, MINNESOTA, NEVADA or MAINE please ask to join the that state's Monitor page (TOP PRIORITY are these 3 NV 2/4, CO & MN 2/7