The problem with a debate of this size is that you just don't get to hear as many answers as you'd like from the candidates you want to hear from. That said, here are tonight's winners and losers, in my most humble of opinions:
Winners:
Rudy Giuliani: Giuliani was forceful with his points and seems to be getting more comfortable. He walked the stage and looked like an attorney in a courtroom; confident, sure of his answers and convincing. He didn't get tripped up on the social issues and was on his game. He solidified his place as a front-runner by sounding conservative on national defense and taxation.
Duncan Hunter: Duncan Hunter suffers from the incurable disease of having zero charisma. He's a great candidate and knows policy better than anyone. He would make an excellent president. He was on in his answers and knows the immigration issue well because his district (my former home) in San Diego County is literally miles from the border. He also has a son serving in Afghanistan and who also served in Iraq, the war is real to him and he speaks with authority. That said, he still is a third-tier candidate because he is just not making a splash with the American people. He'd be an excellent Vice President. The international press and the New York Times will most-likely go ballistic that Hunter said he'd nuke Iran to prevent their having nukes themselves.
Losers:
John McCain: McCain had to be stellar today when discussing the immigration bill. He had to convince conservatives that this was a good bill. He failed miserably. As the old saying goes; you can put a dress and lipstick on a pig and it's still a pig. That's how it is with the immigration bill. McCain had but one issue to hammer home and he just couldn't do it. Besides that, the whole "my friends" thing is a bit irksome after the fiftieth time.
Ron Paul: Although the congressman from Texas has no shot at the nomination, he is a candidate and thus gets to talk at the debate. He's anti-war, anti-national defense and would be the single worst choice to lead our nation at this time. I would take Hillary Clinton over Paul at this time -- and anyone who reads my writing knows what I think of Hillary.
Mitt Romney: Romney, like McCain, had to have a strong performance and failed to. He's sinking in the polls and sits behind Fred Thompson -- a candidate not even in the race. He made good points but failed to nail them as much as he needed to. Romney is the anti-Duncan Hunter -- he looks presidential and has charisma but just doesn't convey his message well and sound too much like a politician.
Reader Comments ( Page 6 of 9)
76. Way to go Ron Paul! The only thinking man there. He tells the truth about his views. Guiliani skirts the truth when it can help him politically.
Marilyn Atkins at 10:56AM on Jun 6th 2007
77. Ron Paul's comments were a breath of fresh air! He has courage. He thinks comprehensively and puts every issue into a correct perspective considering the needs of the people and the nation, while the other Republican , claim direct access to God, and B.S. their way to the nomination. Why is it that people will believe the phony rhetoric and not understand the logic and true story when they hear it? A voter should read, read, read, everything available (books, magazines, newpapers, reports,etc.) pro and con from all perspectives, then really be informed. We are in the tragic circumstance we are in now, because people listened emotionally (politicians play on the faith and fear angle) and voted accordingly, basically uninformed about who manipulates and causes the problems they then later purport to solve. Not read important documents before voting on such critical issues such as going to war! Excuses like that are not acceptable and don't deserve the trust and vote from the public.
jw at 10:57AM on Jun 6th 2007
78. None of the Democratic candidate's have any real expierence to prepare them for President. A few of the Republicans actually do! Thompdon if he runs, He was a Senator before he was an actor by the way. He actully did pass some bills and for more than only two years doing nothing but run for president like the two Dem's running! Mitt Romney has the most impresive cridentials in his career. And is honest, and a man of integrity to boot. He's even good looking on top of it! Duncan Hunter and Tancredo have impresive record's in thier political careers. They actually try to acomplish thing's unlike the Democratic contender's. And Juliane is a national Hero that guided New York through a terrible time all though I don't know if it qualifies him for President it doe's show leadership under presure in action. Something the democratic contenders just don't have. Expierince.
C. Lungren at 11:07AM on Jun 6th 2007
79. One of the weakest debates I have ever seen and heard in my lifetime. Do we really want another weak President who cannot assure us of securing our own borders. Rep Tom Tancredo who was the only one who made a strong stance on anything the whole night. I'm all for a free America, but if we have a President who can't control illegal Immigration how will they be able to control and stop Terrorism?
Art at 11:13AM on Jun 6th 2007
80. Does anyone else think that the corporate Media is sidelining Ron Paul besides me? I cant believe people bash this guy for wanting everyone to live in a free america just like our nation builders wanted. these people must be retarded if they dont care that our constitution is about gone down the drain along with our rights, freedom, and liberty.
Vote RON PAUL!
lin2903 at 11:19AM on Jun 6th 2007
81. What a joke all these Ron Paul supporters! You guys are whacked out! obviously Ron Paul doesn't have enough money so you guys are swamping the board to mis lead people as to his support but you guy's are whacked!
C. Lungren at 11:17AM on Jun 6th 2007
82. I believe this writer was not listening at the debate and got Rudy and Paul confused. Ron Paul wants us to get back to the America that our Constitution intended us to be. We have got to focus on our nation first and protect it. We find it being taken over more and more everyday by illegal immigrants. The rich are getting richer and the poor are getting everything nearly free while the middle class American is suffering more everyday....Ron Paul, I believe, is by far the best candidate and if more people would read and become more familar with the candidates platforms instead of sitting and watching TV which tends to air what they want us to hear, then they would wake up and take different look at things.
Debbie at 11:27AM on Jun 6th 2007
83. To say that Ron Paul is against national defense is a bold faced lie! He's against national "OFFENSE." He is in favor of protecting the United States citizens' rights, not for sending troops to foreign countries, bombing them in order to start wars undeclared by Congress and for corporate interests. He's the only principled person running for either of the "major" parties.
Craig at 11:39AM on Jun 6th 2007
84. Ron Paul is not against national defense ... he is against national OFFENSE.
Go Paul 2008
indio007 at 12:26PM on Jun 6th 2007
85. Ron Paul is the only candidate willing to stop the slide into fascism lead by the NeoCons. If the Republican rank and file fail to nominate Ron Paul then the write-in campaign shall begin.
Ron Paul ... and it's easy to spell!
tnmoultrie at 12:25PM on Jun 6th 2007
86. The writer is so out of touch with the sentiment of American voters, and with common sense that I'm kind of left speechless.
On Ron Paul, are you wholly unable to muster a single reason why you feel so much vehemence toward Dr. Paul's positions and ideas? You offer nothing but blanket rude criticism with zero reasoning. you should be embarrasses. hell, I'm embarrasses for you.
Charles Wesley Fowler at 12:31PM on Jun 6th 2007
87. Ron Paul is the only Republican that can string a logical argument based on observable facts. All the other candidates use strings of buzzwords and slick PR spin. Ron Paul speaks frankly, and quite frankly that is something we haven't had in a leader for a long time.
Time to prove that if we can't get rid of the two party system, we can vote for who controls it and change the system from within.
spencer schluter at 1:00PM on Jun 6th 2007
88. Ron Paul is pro-national defense. What are you talking about? Further, he has tremendous support which is growing exponentially. He has a very good chance of winning both the nomination and the presidency. Everything you say you want in a president can only come with a Ron Paul presidency.
Grow a brain, my friend! Learn about the issues. And, certainly, learn what Ron Paul is about before you make baseless accusations about him.
Joe Naab at 12:47PM on Jun 6th 2007
89. I have been an ardent supporter of Rep. Ron Paul for many, many years and believe him to be by far the best Presidential candidate ever in our national history. He is a man of sterling character and profound understanding of what is best for the people of this nation. He really, sincerely cares about us rather than himself in public office. We may only have one opportunity to vote for a truly great man for President, so, if you are wise, you will take advantage of this marvelous, fleeting opportunity to vote for him now while you can.
Any man who would vote for Hillary over Ron Paul for any reason whatsoever is profoundly ignorant of Hillary, Ron or both--probably both. They are at opposite poles of the sanity spectrum and unlikely to change this side of Jordan. Any woman who hangs condoms and Satanic symbols from her Christmas tree in the White House does not deserve to even be a sanitation worker, and becoming President of the United States of America is absolutely unthinkable in a sane universe.
F M Richbourg III at 12:48PM on Jun 6th 2007
90. Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate to lead our nation at this time, because he's the only candidte that understands middle east history. The writer of this article stupidly assumes that the way to make America safe is to step up our invasions of foreign coutries. Ron Paul correctly understands that, in fact, this makes America less safe. He is not anti-defense. He is actually to strongest on defense of any candidate. What kind of newspeak is this writer using when he labels someone who's anti-pre-emptive offense as being anti-defense or anti-war (and Dr. Paul is a veteran)? I'm writing this as a conservative Republican, and it's scary how the right has been brainwashed into warmongering. Oh, and Rudy is an idiot. Hey, I was living in NYC on 9/11, too. Maybe that qualifies me for vice president.
jeremiah black at 12:48PM on Jun 6th 2007