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 7 of 9)
91. Ron Paul is the BEST choice. Rudy Guliani is a liberal hack - anti-American Globalist. Anti-Gun, Pro-Gay Marriage, Pro-abortion - Pro immigration -
By the way, Ron Paul is not anti-military - he is anti doing stupid things with the military.
Greg at 2:03PM on Jun 6th 2007
92. Ron Paul for president!! He is the best choice.
ncangie9399 at 2:56PM on Jun 6th 2007
93. I am a conservative and I totally reject the comments related to Ron Paul. It's true that he is a long shot due to the unfortunate media machine that chooses candidates as well as the entrenched 2 party system. Nontheless, I think it is foolish to disparage his thoughful, informed stance on issues and unwaivering ethics. Those are attributes to be celebrated and anyone who chooses to smear him has significantly reduced credibility with me.
Sarah at 3:56PM on Jun 6th 2007
94. You AOL dolt. Ron Paul is certainly not anti-defense. In fact, I suspect our defenses would be stronger under his command than any other candidate because he wouldn't send our soldiers off to nation-build in countries that resent it.
Angela Thornton at 4:08PM on Jun 6th 2007
95. The only reason Rudy is for abortion is the Reps know they don't have a chance in hell if they are against it. So he has jumped on the Democrat band- wagon as the Reps have done in the past. And oh yes there is no one who can cook the books like the Republican Party can. Inflation at 3.???% what ever lets say closer to maybe 10 or 12%, give me a break.
Ray
Ray S Woods at 2:28PM on Jun 12th 2007
96. What a crock of shit, Ron Paul anti-national defense??! Read up on your candidates a little more before you go writing political blogs bozo.
He wants a strong national defense, and a nonintervention foreign policy.
Vito at 4:39PM on Jun 6th 2007
97. Anyone who is against Ron Paul simply needs to read about him and that person will understand. Read George Washington's speech when he decided not to accept a third term as president as well. George Washington felt the same way Ron Paul does now, oh and the constitution. It would seem a lot of people as well but of course we are all one crazy, Islamic terrorist blogger.
Sean Tirkot at 5:09PM on Jun 6th 2007
98. This is a disgusting attack on the American peoples thinking. Ron Paul would be a better president than any other in decades. He's a better man than any candidate; man, women or mixed. He stands for all things CONSTITUTIONAL!!! When did that become a BAD THING? Throw values out the door for all I; RON PAUL stands for Equality & Prosperity and the moral compass should be what this GREAT NATION was founded on. THE CONSTITUTION of AMERICA; not THE CONSTITUTION of GERMANY.
MadAmerican2 at 5:38PM on Jun 6th 2007
99. Rudy will put more of our citizens infront of flying BOMBS,rememeber? think again.
KaM at 5:34PM on Jun 6th 2007
100. Very irresponsible of you to claim Ron Paul is against national defense. When this government has fought alcohol consumption, it resulted in more alcohol consumption. The War on Poverty resulted in more poverty. The War on Drugs has vastly increased our drug use and related problems. Bush's War on Terror has likewise produced historically consistent results.
Rachel at 6:19PM on Jun 6th 2007
101. The idiot who wrote the article that said that he would take Hillary over Ron Paul is not only an idiot, but he's obviously been brainwashed and knows nothing about the Constitution or the intent of the founding fathers and even less an objective view of American history.
The sharpest contrast in this election is that which exists between Hillary/Karl Marx and Ron Paul/Thomas Jefferson. The choice you make is really between the idealogies of Marx as opposed to Jefferson. We really don't need people like you in this country right now. I choose, any day of the week, my individual liberty over Hilary Marx's collective responsibility. Just wondering. Where did you attend school? Moscow?
What might be even worse is to choose Guiliani over Ron Paul. Guiliani's "stop and frisk" that he touts as being so responsible for lowering crime in NYC, coupled with his strong advocacy for the national ID card is literally the makings of an authoritarian police state. This is not a state in which I would want to live, nor want my children to live in either. I again, would choose freedom over fascism.
Last. Policing the world, is not protecting America. It only requires more policing which by definition is empire building. The long view of history reveals that not a single empire lasted. They all fell. Oh no. But not this one. You're sure this one will last forever right Rude Rudy fans?
You want sound money? You want freedom? You want peace? You wanty security for this nation? You want government out of your life to live it the way you see fit?
You want the money that you earned to stay in your pocket instead of being ripped out fo your pockets and sent all over in the form of nation welfare, corporate welfare, and socialist programs?
You only have ONE choice in this election.
RON PAUL.
Ron Paul not, and you and the rest of us lose big time.
Captainshays at 2:20PM on Jul 24th 2007
102. Ron Paul is anti-national defense? Since when is wanting to catch Osama Bin Laden and wanting to prevent more young Americans from dying anti-national defense? Methinks that you have confused nation building with defense.
Phil at 12:30AM on Jun 7th 2007
103. Another thing. Americans are not stupid. Well not as stupid as many of you think we are. After 911, there were old ladies and little boys, Democrats, Republicans, Libertarian and even Greens who were ready to fight to defend this nation. We wanted justice in a big way.
No one needed to convince the majority of us to fight because we were attacked and there was no shortage of volunteers to serve in the executing of that justice.
But, now, every day we have to endure talking heads and corrupt politicians attempting to convince the American people that we needed to attack a country that had never attacked us or threatened us.
Hint. We don't need to be convinced to fight in just wars for our national defense. But I assure you that unless we stop electing these globalists, and militiarists and corporatist bastards the leadership will have no other choice but to re-enact the draft, which is a form of slavery. That means the government owns you and your children and can make them fight in wars that have no legitimate value, relative to our national security. But instead can send tham off to fight in whatever UN conflict or securing of commodities, and as Thomas Paine used to indict the empire of Great Briton in Common Sense, "for the sake of trade and dominion".
Oh and BTW. Ron Paul is correct. That empire crap costs a lot of money and doesn't make us any safer.
David at 7:41PM on Jun 6th 2007
104. RON PAUL is the only one who stands by our Constitution!! RON PAUL for President!!
Connie at 8:28PM on Jun 6th 2007
105. Paul Ron for Pres. and HILLARY ! for VP, (Bubba for Humidor Manager)
Max Linder at 9:15PM on Jun 6th 2007