Wednesday night, live from Oakland University in Rochester, Michigan, eight GOP candidates participated in a debate sponsored by CNBC focused solely on the economy. The questions were mostly substantive to the topic despite some sneering and snipping from moderators at times. The candidates largely avoided attacking each other in favor of sticking to the issues.

Original Air Time: Wednesday, November 9, 2011 on CNBC

Here is the entire debate in 3 parts from CNBC.

Part 1:

Continue reading for parts 2 and 3.

Part 2:

Part 3:

All candidates seemed to escape unscathed, except Texas Governor Rick Perry, who failed in answering the question of what government agencies he would cut should he assume the Presidency. Report from The Daily Caller:

Texas Gov. Rick Perry, the one-time Republican front-runner who saw his star fade after a series of shabby debate performances, made yet another unforced error during Wednesday’s Republican presidential debate.

While selling his tax plan and his record in Texas, Perry said three government agencies would be eliminated in a Perry presidency. “I will tell you, it’s three agencies of government, when I get there, that are gone,” he said. “Commerce, education, and the, um, what’s the third one there …”

Perry then trailed off, unable to remember the third agency he would eliminate. Amid audience laughter, another candidate volunteered the idea of axing the Environmental Protection Agency.

“Is the EPA the one you were talking about?” moderator John Harwood asked Perry. “No sir,” Perry replied. “We were talking about the agencies of government — the EPA needs to be rebuilt, there’s no doubt about that.”

“But you can’t name a third one?” Harwood asked again. Perry then stalled for a few moments before admitting that he could not, in fact, recall the name of the third agency he would eliminate as president.

“The third one I can’t,” Perry said, smiling. “Oops.”

The remaining candidates all came off fairly well, no glaring flubs or undesirable exchanges.

111 COMMENTS

  1. I believe Newt Gingrich will continue his steady rise in the polls. He consistently displays a thoughtful understanding of all of the issues facing America. He is smart in how he supports his fellow candidates on stage while contrasting the Republican ideas of pro-business growth and sincere, love of Country with the tax and spend ideology of the Obama and the Democrats in Congress, as well as, Obama’s negative attitude toward the USA.
    While I like Herman Cain and appreciate his straight-forward manner, it is obvious that Newt is clearly more prepared to be President. I would like to to see a Gingrich/Cain ticket.
    I would love to see Newt in a debate with Obama. It wouldn’t even be close.
    I would also like to compliment CNBC on this debate. While much of the answers contained nothing new, I thought the questions and pacing of the debate were good.

    • Totally agree with you, I would like to see where Gingrich is going with his challenge of Obama to a debate. If that took place, there is no way Obama would stand a chance. I just hope voters have the sense to keep informed as we all are and understand who they should choose and why. If that happened, I believe Gingrich would have a good shot. As it is, Cain as president (since he is currently ahead in the polls) would not be a terrible choice. Certainly better than anything Obama has offered.

    • Thanks for the Replay – I missed it last night.
      I think all performed well – including Perry who was overly critisized by all media sources.
      Ron Paul continues to be my favorite with practical and consistent Constitutional beliefs. I believe that RP will continue the fight for our individual Liberty and Freedom and is the most likely not to be bought off or threaten off.
      We must reign in the federal gov and minimize it to the extent outlined by our founding fathers.
      Regardless of who ends up facing the Destroyer (BO), I hope they continue to support the Ron Paul ideas they are echoing.

      • I do agree with you about Perry. I found it ridiculous that, until I actually watched the debate myself, there was no way I could find out anything about how it went. The media did not summarize the high/low points, nor each candidates performance. Literally the only thing I heard was that Perry “flubbed”. I don’t have a problem at all with the fact that he forgot. He came back and addressed it later, didn’t try to cover it up, just was trying to stay real and accept that everyone makes mistakes. It’s how we recover from those mistakes that shows our true character, any person could tell you that.

    • 999 is all Cain talks about. He seems more interested in how he will generate revenue then about how the money will be spent. Like Paul said, spending is taxation. Besides, Cain sat on the Board of the Federal Reserve. The agency responsible for devaluing our dollar by increasing inflation… Why should we trust anything he says?

      • I agree. I like Cain and both he and Romney probably have the best business experience. They may even be the best prepared to lead in the area of job creation. (Although I think the other candidates are smart enough to bring in the best business minds to work on this project.) The problem I have with both Cain and Romeny is that they are one-cylinder engines–focusing pretty much exclusively on job creation. I AGREE that job creation is the number one challenge facing our country and it does make sense to have a nominee who can be effective in that area. HOWEVER, a president is responsible for a whole lot more than exercising leadership in this one area. We need a president who is well versed in international issues and can handle foreign affairs. We need a nominee who is well versed in judicial issues and will appoint good judges [i.e., judges who will interpret the constitution not legislate from the bench]. We need a nominee who can work with congress–on both sides of the isle–sonmething our current President seems unwilling to do. We need a nominee who can manage the federal buraeucracy. I don’t think Cain has the depth for this. And neither Romney nor Perry nor Bachman have the depth Gingrich has in foreign affairs. Gingrich makes the best candidate because he is the most well-rounded in ALL the areas we need presidential leadership in.

  2. Thanks for posting! This website is an absolute delight! One stop for all the debates! I have been waiting for this debate!

    • I agree whole heartedly! I missed this debate due to having to work. I didn’t even know it was on till I heard it announced on the radio while driving to work. I found this website by pure accident while searching for any replays of the debate. I will definitely bookmark this site! I wish the dates for these debates would be advertised more often so that people are aware of them and can watch them. They ought to be advertised as much if not more than the EAS test!

  3. The candidates are taking up Ron Pauls ideas, because, even though being slighted by the media/corp. controllers, he OWNS the ideas and they have become immensely popular, and Congressman Paul is the only one credible in implementing them. Let’s get America back on track…. Peace, free markets, sound money, and reimplementing the Constitution. He is the only candidate, including Obama, for peace.

    • I noticed that too–that the other candidates are starting to point out that Paul’s ideas are correct. I was glad to see that Paul got the respect and attention he deserves.

    • Ron Paul is absolutely correct, you can’t even talk about cutting government spending and government regulations until you actually begin the process of cutting entirely unnecessary Government Agencies and or Departments thus reducing the size and scope of Big Government bureaucracies. The bigger government is the more taxpayer money is needed to pay for the high salaries and big benefit packages that exists today. We need to actually cut the size and scope of the Federal Government and that is the one thing that sets Congressman Ron Paul apart from all of the other candidates on the republican side as well as Obama himself on the Democratic side. the bigger the government is the more expensive it is to pay for. That is why I whole heartedly support Ron paul’s plan for our economic growth. Reducing our nations expenditure of the Federal Government will restrengthen our economy and get people back to work.

  4. Thanks for posting. Your site is an excellent resource/archive for accessing everything related to the GOP discussions. Please keep up the good work.

  5. GAO Finds Serious Conflicts at the Fed
    October 19, 2011

    “The 108-page report found that at least 18 specific current and former Fed board members were affiliated with banks and companies that received emergency loans from the Federal Reserve during the financial crisis. In the dry and understated language of auditors, the report noted that there are no restrictions in Fed rules on directors communicating concerns about their respective banks to the staff of the Federal Reserve. It also said many directors own stock or work directly for banks that are supervised and regulated by the Federal Reserve. The rules, which the Fed has kept secret, let directors tied to banks participate in decisions involving how much interest to charge financial institutions and how much credit to provide healthy banks and institutions in “hazardous” condition. Even when situations arise that run afoul of Fed’s conflict rules and waivers are granted, the GAO said the waivers are kept hidden from the public.”

  6. Rick Perry ONLY candidate with substance, Newt is a close 2nd. Romney stutters trying to answer questions (can’t even remember how long he has been married at first), Ron Paul has no clue how to run a country. Media knows they cannot attack Perrys’s Policies so they have to make a big deal on the 3rd agency Perry would get rid of (yet he did respond to it later) yet they don’t talk about Romneys gaffe’s. It’s obvious who America needs in the Whitehouse…Perry…

    • I tell you one thing Ron Paul understands why we created the United Nations. He understands all our troops stationed in Iraq, Japan, etc is costing our country billions. He understands our situation on illegal immigrants. It all starts by eliminating some of our BS programs and shrinking down the government. He understands not to rush into to war unless absolutely necessary. He is very bright. I feel Paul is the brightest candidate that will not screw us, it seems that he is the most trustworthy. Don’t forget we have to figure out which candidate will not try to screw us by double dipping, lying, laundering, etc. I just feel Ron Paul is that man.
      Ron Paul is what the Republican party use to be a small simple government For the People. I so feel we need to get our country back to that point before it get’s so Big and Corrupt that we won’t be able to do a damn thing.

    • Romney stuttered? I’m not a Romney supporter by any means but lets look at the facts. Perry couldn’t even think of three government agencies he would eliminate. He turned to Paul for help and still he stumbled and fell on his face. And its really no surprise to me. I’m a former Texan and know all too well what a failure Perry is. And most Texans I know and talk to feel the same way. I was glad to see that the moderator brought up Perry and Crony Capitalism in the same sentence. Hit the nail on the head.

    • Perhaps you know Perry better than I do. Perhaps you are right about Perry having substance. However, I have to take exception with your comment that Perry is the “ONLY candidate with substance.” Have you checked out Newt Gingrich’s web site? A while back I ***studied*** the web sites of ALL the candidates–except Huntsman, who I think had just entered the race, so I cannot speak about his website. The web site I was most impressed with was Gingrich. ALL the candidates had a page on their web site labeled “Issues.” (Santorum’s web site was a little better. He labeled that section of his web site as “Where I Stand.” But Gingrich, alone, labeled this section of his web site “Solutions.” His whole web site and his whole campaign is driven by finding solutions to the problems we are facing. And his web site is filled with numbered lists of steps he thinks we need to take on a whole range of issues. In contradistinction to the other candidates–at least back when I had checked, Gingrich’s web site has videos of him giving speeches on various topics. There were practically no videos that looked like commercials. The other candidate’s videos were mostly commercials. As an example, Gingrich’s web site has a 13 minute video clip from a middle east foreign policy address he gave somewhere. At the conclusion he gave 9 specific things we ought to be doing regarding our middle east policy. The guy drips with specificty. He is the most substantive candidate running for president, including the incumbent.

      • You should look at Ron Paul’s website which was the first one publishing “Plan To Restore America”, the banner he’s carried for a number of years. In fact, it probably wouldn’t hurt everyone to visit his website: the history of his life in private and politics would ensure anyone who is best suited to resolve this extreme time in our country’s history.
        http://www.ronpaul2012.com/who-is-ron-paul/

        • No doubt, I agree. Paul knew what America’s financial state and other problems would be several years before it happened. We have to give this intelligent candidate some kind of acknowledgement and credit. I feel Newt and Paul are the smartest 2 candidates. I feel Paul is what America stands for and what the Republican party use to be. He stands behind the constitution, what our Country is based on. We so need to bring that back and follow the constitution. Paul tells the truth, I feel he is the most trustworthy. America really needs a change, I’m a little bit tired of the ego maniacs, bullies, fight picking, liars and smooth talking wishy washy candidates! We just need an Honesty president that will bring our country back to where it use to be.

  7. These candidates smacked these moderators around. There were some ridiculous questions, and they got called out on them. Even the crowd sent some boos to the horrible, pointless questions. It was nice to get some personality from everyone in this one.

    • The boos you heard were Cain’s supporters. I’m sure he packed em in to make sure that the focus was taken off of him and onto the moderators. His character is a very important aspect and I respect the fact that the moderators brought it up. Why do we want someone in office who treats people badly? Or cant even keep a marriage oath? And what a cop out answer Cain gave us. Allegations they may be, but the fact is, Cain has been accused on 4 separate occasions for the same offense. Where there is smoke there is fire.

      • Teri… So, in your world, how many unsubstantiated decade-old accusations equate to your guilty verdict and sentencing? Will just one work for you? How about two disgruntled bimbos and their celebrity mouthpiece lah-yers? Is three the threshold? Or does it have to be four bankrupt blondes with records of filing serial greivances for cash settlements? ===== I sure hope you’re not in the jury pool if I’m ever unjustly accused of ANYTHING. Please recuse yourself from any jury duty in America. And have someone read and explain the 6th Amendment to you… today.

      • terilynn, that’s baloney and you know it is. I doubt if any of the candidates packed the audience. The fact is these were the WORST moderators to ever conduct a debate. I’m not necessarily leaning toward any one GOP candidate yet. But it is so obvious that these character assassinations on Herman Cain are nothing but fabricated lies to discredit Herman as a viable candidate. One can dislike Herman Cain because of the policies he stands for as a candidate, I have no problem with that. But to discredit him because of hearsay rooted from people who would like nothing better than to take Herman Cain down, is ignorance and foolishness at best.

  8. WHERE IS RON PAUL…..NOT ENOUGH TIME GIVEN TO THIS MAN THAT CARRIES A PhD???? RON PAUL IS THE SMARTEST AND MOST COMMITTED TO AMERICA AND THE REBUILDING OF IT.

    • Hermain Cain’s 999 will only benefit indidividuals who save a good portion. Those individuals with low incomes, who have large families and no saving will suffer. Hermain Cain has had to modify his plan already for those making lower income. Every job, every individual is different in this world, everyone can’t make large amounts of money. I agree in a perfect world 999 would be idea.

  9. I cannot believe the extent to which the media tries to ignore Ron Paul. What are you so scared of? Your summary includes, “another candidate volunteered the idea of axing the Environmental Protection Agency” – you could have named that candidate, as you even then named the moderator (“moderator John Harwood asked Perry”) but you’re afraid to even mention Ron Paul? It’s bad enough that he wasn’t given adequate time during the debate. I think that people who haven’t heard about Ron Paul and the constitutional principles he stands for are smart enough to notice glaring discrepancies like this and do their own research.

    • I agree, Ron Paul is the smartest candidate up there. I understand he’s not the smoothest talker, but he is what the Republican party use to be. We need to bring that back “For the People, By the People”. Newt appears smart, but just seems like he has taken a lot of money from the people for nonsense. I’m not sure if we can trust him.

      • What turned me off about Newt was treatment of the moderators. He seemed arrogant and snotty. He may be smart but its not just about what you say but how you say it. Newt failed in that department. Who wants someone in office who thinks he is above reproach?

        • Newt is known for this attitude, which is actually similar to many of the truly brilliant minds of the world. Even though it is not endearing to be talked down to, it can be maddening to be constantly surrounded by ignorance, incompetence, and yes, evil. When you do not mentally live in the same paradigm as the liberal media, and have become hyper-sensitive to its insidious affronts on intelligence, the result is disdain and impatience. Make no mistake- Newt is not in this to make friends, but to make a point, and hopefully make a difference.

          However, this brings up a good debate question regarding leadership styles- Newt has evolved past the diplomatic, bridge-building phase and is now on to the abrasive, brutal-honesty, get-what-you-want-through-strategem phase. Romney is still in the benevolent leader, CEO, father-figure style of leadership, which is extremely appealing and effective for certain areas.

          While I believe that ultimately, both will shake things up in a similar way in DC, their approach would be totally different. Newt would make enemies, and not care, because they would still respect him. Romney would most likely try to be fair but firm with mixed results. I know that both are planning on really taking the issues straight to the people and getting the American people to put the pressure on their representatives, and both would handle foreign situation great.

          Seriously, I know both of these candidates really well, and they would both be extremely effective, just with different styles. Anyone else come up with pros and cons related to their leadership styles?

        • I didn’t get that impression at all. The impression I got was that he was annoyed with the request to limit an answer to the complicated question he was asked in just 30 seconds. I saw an interview with Michael Moore–who is hardly a Ginrich supporter!–where he congratulated Ginrich for his reluctance to give a sound-bite sized answer to a question as large and as complicated as what he was asked. Ginrich has spent years studying these issues and can give very specific recommendations, but sometimes the right answer just cannot be given in a small sound bite. This is why we need to see the presidential debates move to the Lincoln-Douglas style debates, where candidates have the opportunity to give comprehensive answers to these big issues we are facing. For and example of what this style of debate might look like check out this debate: http://www.c-span.org/Events/Cain-Gingrich-Debate-Lincoln-Douglas-Style/10737425199/

          • I agree that this debate style is for the intellectually shallow. Although I do not mind straight-forward questions, the questions in this debate were loaded, and combative. It was clear that they wanted the candidates to rip each other apart, which I think was a failed effort. The most indicative scene of the night was Maria Bartiromo getting impatient with the audience’s cheering for the candidate’s response to ridiculous questions. Also, did anyone pick up on the moderator smirks when Ron Paul finally was able to rant about the Fed? They think he’s hanging himself, and they seem so pleased with themselves. I found myself saying “eeww” to a lot of their ignorant questions.

      • Yes, most Americans can see the obvious that Ron Paul has, for years, known what the problem areas were in government, which needed deleted and which needed amended. He clearly defines this and recent weeks reveal all the other candidates copying his answers and style. Copying is a form of complimenting and confirming. They all agree he is right on, all the other candidates honor him and know he’s right, the majority of Americans know he’s right according to this year’s polls, but somehow these stupid moderators and the ever ignorant press fear him. I think it’s because he doesn’t pander to them and simply tells it like it is, it doesn’t feed into their media frenzy. Also he can’t be bought, read his website for his political history: http://www.ronpaul2012.com/who-is-ron-paul/

    • @Currency–you are exactly right. I noticed it too. Most of the attention Paul got came from the other candidates who agreed with his ideas. The moderators pretty much ignored him which really says something about them and their agenda. But this is has been pretty much the status quo with all media. Paul is not given enough attention and when they do give him attention, its negative and meant to disparage him. Its really sickening to watch.

    • Ron Paul has intentionally been left out by the Media and just about ignored by the GOP Party itself. I believe that there are many influential people in our society that know he is a man of no compromise. If you look up videos of him, he is aware of these powers that be. Call them Illuminati, the Elite, or whatever. They are out to blot his voice and are against the ideals of the Founding Fathers of the U.S. The powers that be know they can influence and infiltrate the agendas of the other candidates because those candidates are unclear of the Constitution. And it is not just the Republican candidates I’m talking about. The secret powers in our society care not what party you are from. They strategize a game of give-and-take as long as they get what they really want, control of the big picture. Control through our finances and control of the regulations dictating our finances. Investigate the Federal Reserve and it’s ties and you will see more than a centuries worth of intrigue. The Federal Reserve’s inception was the beginning of the demise of our country. Two prior attempts were made and were squashed by smarter presidents.

      Ron Paul is a doctor, and thus has knowledge of business. He is also a humanitarian. (In his business as a doctor, he has compassionately dealt with patients who have no money or no insurance. He is popular with the college kids because he is idealistic like them and the Founding Fathers of this nation. He is the only one who has brought up the Constitution consistently, and that’s because he is well-versed in it. He has a consistent and impeccable voting record for the last 3 decades that vouches for his integrity as someone who won’t pass agendas that are unconstitutional. This is key! Our country is great because of the Constitution, but it has declined because the majority of government has been run contrary to the Constitution. As another poster mentioned, all the other candidates just leach off of his lead to uphold the Constitution. If you believe in the Constitution, vote for Ron Paul. To those that say he doesn’t know how to run a government because he doesn’t use “kiss your arse” language and doesn’t know how to run a business, remember he has been a doctor for decades. A doctor is sworn to look out for those who cannot help themselves at the same time he is trying to manage his practice. He has delivered over 4,000 babies. No insignificant feat! He was also a doctor in the military prior to having his own practice and being in Congress. So he’s been in the military, is a doctor, is in Congress, has been married for 54 years, and opted not to take you money by refusing the government pension program. Look him up. I’d say he’s the right candidate for these times. Any other candidate, whether a democrat or republican, is just more of the same as we’ve been getting for a long, long time now.

      • AMEN! Thank you for speaking the truth and Ron Paul is our only option in this Presidential race. If we truly want to improve our country, we need to support Ron Paul. The others are all just distractions and politics as usual.

      • That’s because he’s insane, and has no idea what he’s talking about. He’s far to radical. Oh and removing the Federal board of ED, will not cut college costs! News Flash, many if not most colleges are private. Certainly the top ones are, and they’re the ones producing the new leaders of the country, and the new innovators. Heck half the people who drop out of Harvard become successful. And the board of ed, had nothing to do with it. What the board does impact is High schools, which we rank in the 30’s around the world. We are behind developing countries in our quality of high school. Now that’s sad. And the countries that have the best, use a very powerful Board of Ed to regulate education. It shouldn’t be abolished, it should be amended and made to function more efficiently.

      • Bryan

        I like your ideas and I think this paragraph is important.

        You wrote:

        “The powers that be know they can influence and infiltrate the agendas of the other candidates because those candidates are unclear of the Constitution. And it is not just the Republican candidates I’m talking about. The secret powers in our society care not what party you are from. They strategize a game of give-and-take as long as they get what they really want, control of the big picture. Control through our finances and control of the regulations dictating our finances”.

        Those powerful people can infiltrate and are also granted access with the help of unprincipled representatives who take the money from special interest groups. I want to emphasize that when we listen to the content of a candidate’s response, how important it is to ask this question; is the candidate’s statement true to the principle’s of the Constitution, ie., the rules that protect the people or is a fundamental principle being managed, redefined or compromised in a way to benefit something else, ie. a select group, which is a detriment of the people.

        The Constitution ensures that that government would be just, and would protect its citizens from internal strife and from attack from the outside. It would be of benefit to the people, rather than to its detriment.

        When we allow the constitutional principle’s to be tinkered with for a particular cause or personal ideology, we have effectively granted an open door for the likes of big business interests. They use the human flaw, self-gratification, to drive a wedge and further erode our protections in the relentless pursuit to gain more power and ease access for profit making.

        This fundamental principle has to be corrected, upheld and adhered to or there can’t be any real change, and as a nation we will only stay on the same course we find ourselves on now, a road rapidly leading to the end of America as we know it. The upcoming election may very well be the last opportunity to make the correction before it’s too late.

        We have to be on guard, big business is comprised of powerfully-connected intelligent people who in the quest of profit have influence through unprincipled representatives. Big business plot’s it’s growth and seeks out the way to best manipulate, coerce, and ultimately shred our protection’s in their pursuit of profit. We are the expendable resource, our dollars and our country are the goal.

        They go to the best schools, join exclusive private clubs, are invited to the best private think tanks, hire the smartest people and successfully lobby and enact legislation that enables and protects the kind of profiteering which destroys our personal freedom, prosperity and undermines America’s foundation as a sovereign nation.
        Business isn’t in the business of people, it’s about the business of making money, “for Pete’s sake!”

        Ron Paul, first an Air Force flight surgeon, later gynecologist and obstetrician who routinely lowered fees or worked for free and refused to accept Medicaid or Medicare payments went to work as a Representative serving 12 two-year terms and continued to deliver babies on Mondays and Saturdays during his entire 22nd district career.

        He understands the the importance of the Constitution, he fought for it in Congress, never compromised the principle’s to benefit his home state of Texas, he taught the importance of protecting the Constitution to us, he ran a Presidential campaign three times, and he stood steadfastly even as he was mocked, never wavering never minding poll numbers, never changing the message for popular vote. He serves on the House Committees on Foreign Affairs and Financial Services, and on the Joint Economic Committee. He is the chairman of the Financial Services Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary Policy and Technology, where he has been an outspoken critic of American foreign and monetary policy. He leads the fight for an audit of the Federal Reserve. Conducts debates and interviews without mud-slinging or derision, and courageously, unabashedly defends his message in the debates. As a Congressman, He declined to attend junkets or register for a Congressional pension plan, as President he will not take more in pay that the average citizen earns in this country.

        In 1984 after losing a bid for the Senate, in his House farewell address on September 19, 1984, Ron Paul said, “Special interests have replaced the concern that the Founders had for general welfare. Vote trading is seen as good politics. The errand-boy mentality is ordinary, the defender of liberty is seen as bizarre. It’s difficult for one who loves true liberty and utterly detests the power of the state, to come to Washington for a period of time and not leave a true cynic.

        Today the current crop of candidates are parroting the very message that originated with Ron Paul. They acknowledge that Ron Paul is right and now attempt to get on board and lay claim to the ideas that Ron Paul fought so long for, but they tinker and tweak the principle’s to satisfy their big money contributors with special interests.

        Ron Paul is a dangerous man. Ron Paul has no special interests. No one can influence him to go against his personal principals nor jeopardize the principles of the Constitution and this makes him a danger to the status quo.
        He only has millions and millions of individual, unorganized, grass-root level supporters who heard his message and recognized the truth and the validity of it. Individuals who looked into his record and verified for themselves that Paul is a qualified leader who not only legislates honestly and according to the Constitution, but also lives his life by the standards he upholds. Ron Paul’s’ popularity and support as the only candidate qualified to be called a “defender of liberty” continues to soar. With these credentials Ron Paul is the only candidate that I can vote for and I hope his message along with his supporters loyalty resonates with those still undecided so that they look beyond the surface to see what so many already do.

        Regards,
        From another individual in support of Ron Paul 2012

        • And where did Paul go to college? if you can opine as much get your facts straight. It is simply stunning how gullible and ignorant you people are… because someone strings words together that YOU do not understand, does not make that individual intelligent. How many wives has Newt had, he represents family? Give us a break. So many responses just have no logic here you all sound like hysterical adolescents. Many here need tertiary education

          • He received a B.S. degree in biology at Gettysburg College(Gettysburg, Pennsylvania) during 1957 and Duke University School of Medicine during 1961, he also stated that he worked to pay trough his schooling. I really don’t understand what point you are trying to make. We are not all stupid and do understand what these GOP representatives are saying. I am sorry that you do not.

      • Well said!!! Ron Paul in 2012!! At this point, I’d love a Paul/Gingrich ticket:) But if not, I’d settle for a Gingrich/Romney one.

    • This is written only as recent as August by Wikipedia on Ron Paul: “An August scientific poll of likely voters across the political spectrum by Rasmussen Reports held a contest between Paul and Barack Obama, in which the two were “almost dead even.” Obama led Paul by one percentage point at 39% to 38% – a significantly smaller margin than July (41% – 37%). Paul moved up to 3rd in a late-August poll of likely Republican primary voters, trailing Rick Perry and Mitt Romney and passing Michele Bachmann, climbing from fourth to third position.” I believe he’s been first since September. So yes, the question remains, why does the media fear? do they fear an honest politician for once, the first one that can’t be bought by them and their cronies? http://www.ronpaul2012.com/

      • Those poll numbers make sense. It seems obvious that Ron Paul would do best in the general election against Barack Obama, because Ron Paul is the only one of the Republican candidates on that stage who has significant transpartisan appeal to independents and Democrats.

        Although he hasn’t always gotten the debate time or the respect or media attention that some of his rivals have gotten, Ron Paul has been the one shaping the debate and bringing the Republican Party establishment around to more of a pro-freedom, limited Constitutional government perspective. This is in no small part because of the strong grassroots following that has coalesced behind Ron Paul.

        The people who are paying attention to the political process and are more engaged than simply voting once every election cycle or two and maybe writing the occasional check, are disproportionately supporting him. Just as members of the armed forces are disproportionately supporting him with their donations, as he has raised more money from active duty military personnel than any other candidate. I think that’s because there’s a growing realization that he is a different type of political figure, one who really is running for president because of his beliefs and understanding about how to fix the economy and restore America, and not because of personal ambition or desire for power or wealth.

        If you want to be part of the grassroots movement supporting Ron Paul, a good place to start is http://www.RP2012.org (This is not Ron Paul’s official campaign site, which is http://www.RonPaul2012.org, but an independent volunteer-driven effort to send this humble, honest man who believes in freedom to the White House, for the *real* change America needs.)

  10. RON PAUL 2012! Yes the other candidates are mimicking him and the concepts but don’t be fooled by their babble. Ron Paul means what he says and is for the CONSTITUTION!

  11. It seems that the Neo-Conservatives are following Ron Paul down the Paleo-Conservative path. Ron Paul is a mix between a Paleo-Conservative and Libertarian.

    I have come with the theory that Ron Paul is the secret love-child of Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher when they met up during the 80’s.

    Of course the age isn’t right, so possible a brother of Ronny Reagan and Maggie Thatcher.

  12. “audience laughter, another candidate volunteered the idea of axing the Environmental Protection Agency.” That other candidate was Ron Paul. Why not give him a name?

  13. One of best ways to verify whether the immense support that knowledgeable individuals have for Ron Paul on this site is valid is to go to YouTube and watch the debates leading up to the 2008 Presidential election.

  14. Newt Gingrich, Ph.D., should be the republican nominee. He would do the very best in debating President Obama. In the end the republican nominee will have to sell his vision to the American people (beyond the republican party). Newt is (and has been for years) the most visionary of all the candidates. The nominee needs to be articulate and able to sell the merits of his vision. None of the candidates top Gingrich in the ability to articulate ideas. Finally, the nominee will need to be able to debate the President and show the American people why his ideas are better than the President’s. A very great many people will make their election choice based on national debate performance. Republicans need their best debater to win the hearts and minds of the nation. Newt Gingrich is, IMO, hands down the best debater in the race. Therefore, it is logical that he be the nominee to face President Obama. If anyone doubts Ginrich’s ability to defeat Obama in a debate, listen to this 90 minute “Lincoln-Douglas style debate” between Cain and Gingrich: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gMuYRBwsq-g&feature=related Understand, of course, that there isn’t substantive policy difference between the two so it is more conversation than (adversarial) debate. Still, this “debate” has gotten rave reviews and showcases Gingrich’s strengths as a debater.

    • Newt Gingrich is a terrific debater, no question. He’s also quite possibly the smartest of the Republican candidates just in terms of sheer raw intelligence. Where he falls down is in matters of character and personal integrity, as well as in his being too much a part of the Washington establishment. Take for instance the question he was asked about his company being paid $300,000 by Fannie Mae for “advice”. Does this sound to you like a responsible use of taxpayer money? In his personal life, there is his shabby treatment of his wife when she was dying of cancer, his lavish spending at Tiffany’s, etc.

      Ron Paul, by contrast, has not trumpeted his personal moral virtues, but has been quietly practicing “conservative family values” while others have preached them. Married to the same woman for over 50 years, a family doctor, served in the Air Force, never worked as a Washington lobbyist, etc. What he has done is he has been the “taxpayers’ best friend” in Congress, and been unafraid to stand and vote on principle, even when in many cases it was 434-1 and he was given the nickname “Dr. No”. Well it just so happens that “no” was the correct answer in those situations, and if more people in Congress had joined Dr. Paul in saying “no” to spending a bit more often, the country wouldn’t be in the mess it is today.

      Gingrich looks great in debate, and often provides some much-needed context and perspective on the questions being asked by the media moderators. But Ron Paul is the one with the track record we can trust.

  15. So Gov. Mitt Romney want to push UN-funded mandates on to the states…. Great just another shell game …Fail!

  16. Newt Gingrich, PhD, should be the republican nominee. He is, IMO, hands down the best debater running for President. In the end, the republican nominee needs to show the American people (beyond the republican party) a clear and appealing vision for a great America. Newt is (and has been for many years) the most visionary of all the candidates. The nominee will need to be able to articluate why his vision is better than the President’s. None of the candidates is better at articulating ideas. Gingrich uses common sense, rational argument, and even humor to make his points. He has encyclopedic grasp of all the issues our next President will face. (Note: he isn’t running on just the one-cylinder engine of being a jobs creator. He can easily handle ALL the issues we want our president to be competent in.) Finally, the republican nominee will need to be someone who can outperform President Obama in nationally televised debates. A great many people will make the decision of who to vote for based on the debate performances. If anyone doubts that Gingrich would soundly defeat Obama in debate check out the highly-rated Cain-Gingrich “Lincoln-Douglas style debate.” (You can find it on C-Span: http://www.c-span.org/Events/Cain-Gingrich-Debate-Lincoln-Douglas-Style/10737425199/) Note: Since there isn’t substantive difference between the two it is more of a conversation than an adversarial debate (as would be the case with Obama, who is about polar opposit of Gingrich). Nevertheless, this Cain-Gingrich debate showcases Gingrich’s comprehensive grasp of subjects and the ability to carry on an extended, intelligent, mature conversation about important issues facing our country. He even demonstrates true statesmanship–the ability to articulate solutions without running down the other candidates. He brings the maturity and wisdom we need. …By the way, if you haven’t seen this “debate” you owe it to yourself to see how intelligent and informative debates really could be if loosed from the moderator-driven format we have been given so far. No 30-second sound-bite answers to moderator-posed questions here. Instead, we get thoughtful answers to serious issues. And, in contrast to the network debates, where there are so many candidates on the stage with the moderators not even asking all the candidates to answer the same question, this debate style really gives us the opportunity to judge a candidate’s preparation for the Oval Office. In that light, Gingrich is the best candidate for President.

  17. Why does everyone overlook Rick Santorum? He said and has proven that he has lead in many of the answers, to todays problems. He even said stated that 5 out of 8 people on stage was in favor and voted for the bail out… And yet, no one seems to be able to challenge him on anything. This is a debate, and still no one can combat him on his argument. doesnt that make him the winner?

    Doing this with very minimal questions mind you.

  18. Rick Perry sounds so stupid! He’s been trying to just take parts of other candidates platforms, and call them his own. How stupid does he think the American people are???

  19. Who are these moderators? Where did they come up with these ridiculous questions? How about the issues, stupid, quit discriminating against conservatives and Herman Cain. Fire CNBC and take your advertising dollar elsewhere.

  20. Ok, The debates are a nice way to see where the each person stands. But if your honest about it everyone of them can say what ever they want because no matter what they say they will do, they can only suggest it to congress and if congess votes againts them their hands are tied just like the currant POTUS. I would have more respect for them if they got up there and said this is what I would like to do and not this is what I will do, because honestly the “Will DOs” are not completely in their control.

    • This is true. Gingrich, however, regularly acknowledges that unless Republicans can recapture the Senate and hold on to the House as well as capture the White House we will not see the comprehensive change that is needed. He understands the big picture–the importance of having a Republican victory across the board in 2012. I’m with him. We need to understand the importance of having Congress and the White House on the same page. I also believe that if it all Democratic we will be in serious trouible.

  21. What really annoys me is the narrator for this at the beginning, very fake, very ‘like its a movie’ takes away the realism of everything, i know its an American thing and its on just about all of the news channels but really, its a hypnotic way to disconnect people from the seriousness of everything, life is not a movie, i know that so much of your government is a stage (please ron paul get president) but anyway…

  22. I just want to say that your website is perfect; thank you for being a dependable source of information. I don’t catch everything when it airs, and I know I can depend on this site to show me the next debate.

  23. I really think Herman Cain is our best option. He seems to be the one with the best solutions and has an answer for everything. Perry doesn’t know what he’s doing up there and I don’t want him up there debating against Obama. Romney flip-flops on too many issues and I don’t know what he believes and don’t trust anything that comes out of his mouth. I hate Ron Pauls foreign policy.

    There are a few good candidates up there, but I think my vote is going for Mr. Cain.

    • would you mind explaining why you hate ron pauls foreign policy? and then please explain why you like cains foreign policy. im assuming you do since you think cain is the best option.

    • Herman Cain’s plan sounds like a marketing gimmick that most everyday people buy into. It’s like saying buy this pizza for only $9.99. So people are sucked in and buy into it. It’s like getting swept into the current of a poem that rhymes. If you look tho, he is more of the same. His plans are more of the same unconstitutional gibberish that everyone but Ron Paul spouts. As Windisea above stated:

      I want to emphasize that when we listen to the content of a candidate’s response, how important it is to ask this question; is the candidate’s statement true to the principle’s of the Constitution, ie., the rules that protect the people or is a fundamental principle being managed, redefined or compromised in a way to benefit something else, ie. a select group, which is a detriment of the people.

      The Constitution ensures that that government would be just, and would protect its citizens from internal strife and from attack from the outside. It would be of benefit to the people, rather than to its detriment.

      When we allow the constitutional principle’s to be tinkered with for a particular cause or personal ideology, we have effectively granted an open door for the likes of big business interests. They use the human flaw, self-gratification, to drive a wedge and further erode our protections in the relentless pursuit to gain more power and ease access for profit making.

      This fundamental principle has to be corrected, upheld and adhered to or there can’t be any real change, and as a nation we will only stay on the same course we find ourselves on now, a road rapidly leading to the end of America as we know it. The upcoming election may very well be the last opportunity to make the correction before it’s too late.

      We have to be on guard, big business is comprised of powerfully-connected intelligent people who in the quest of profit have influence through unprincipled representatives. Big business plot’s it’s growth and seeks out the way to best manipulate, coerce, and ultimately shred our protection’s in their pursuit of profit. We are the expendable resource, our dollars and our country are the goal.

      Cain and the others (beside Paul) leave holes for special interest groups to take hold on the Federal level. This is what our Constitution protects us from! As long as special interest groups get a foot-hold, niche, or any type of compromise in regulation, it’s all over. Special interest groups or big business just needs to have a little foothold here and a little foothold there, and they’ve won.

      Realize that Cain supports a compromise of the Constitution.

  24. I find it confusing that the candidates understand the Fed debasing the Dollar is bad and inflationary, yet somehow see China similarly debasing the RMB as an advantage for the Chinese.

  25. I just want to say that, on the topic of student loans, Newt Gingrich SOUNDED like he had the best plan, but, in reality, it may not live up to its intended standards.

    Gingrich’s plan works on the basis that students do not have jobs and are simply being lazy. From my experience at community college, and even now as I attend Oakland University, I can attest that this is not true. Many students at community college are those who have fallen on hard times and need a two year education to get them on the right track. When I graduated from Oakland Community College in June, there was a certain pride which went along with receiving the degree, because, like so many others, I had to balance working part-time, living, and commuting with my schoolwork. I was GRATEFUL that I got to take less credits, because it made things more manageable for me.

    Now, I wasn’t involved in many student orgs on campus, but our commencement speaker was. When she got her degree, she also was in the middle of raising a family and working 40 hours per week. I don’t know if she had any student loans, but I could clearly see she was a hard worker, and grateful for her education.

    Similarly, I’m working about 18 hours per week and going to school, but with prices what they are and my income what it is (about $8 per hour), there’s still no way in the world I would be able to pay for my education by myself. As things are, I’m stuck living at home with my parents and commuting to school to save money. They pay the tuition and I pay for my gas and amenities. The system works until my payroll doesn’t come through one week or say, my youngest brother graduates from high school. My dad, who has a white collar job at GM and took a pay cut and a “re-leveling” in 2008, is now applying for a second job to pay the bills. He is already working full time. This is all so we don’t HAVE to take out student loans. But, imagine if my parents and I did? It would be in an act of financial desperation, not laziness.

    Gingrich would have me taking 17 credits a semester when I can only handle 12 and doubling my hours at work just to pay tuition. I vote NO. I mean, I disagree with taking out student loans, but, if I had to, I think there ought to be a better plan to pay them.

    • Your experience at a community college is different from my experience with state universities. Three of my children attended state universities. Neither they nor their friends held significant jobs during the school year. Like Newt said, they just took out student loans, not paying too much attention to how much it would be costing them. Now they and their friends have LARGE student loans and dismal job prospects–and therefore dismal prospects of coming up with the money to repay the student loans. It is time to rethink this whole process than many just take for granted with little thought about a better way of funding higher education. It really isn’t the federal government’s job to secure education for its citizens. (All the Ron Paul supporters on this forum can tell you it isn’t a constitutional duty of the federal government to provide student loans–and deal with the defaults on those loans when the graduates cannot find jobs to pay for the loans. Newt hit the nail on the head.

      • When did “higher education” become less important than grades K-12? That’s what I want to know.

        Why is it that tax payers don’t have a problem with funding the public school system, but then that stops once the child is old enough for college? I would think this would be one of the most important steps to an individual becoming a productive member of society. Why don’t we, as a society, agree with this? What’s the point in educating a child and giving them the means or the foundation to make it to college and to being on their own with a good job, if we’re just going to rip the rug right out from under them upon graduating from high school??

        Am I missing something here?

        • Well that’s another department the feds need to get out of, the primary education system is another one of their messes. It, too, needs to become private sectored.

  26. I’m so appreciative of this website. It is excellent!

    Gingrich has no idea why students take student loans, fails to address the skyrocketing cost of education and fails to address why corporations aren’t hiring despite their wealth. Perry also does not understand that educational costs are linked to STATE and federal funding, not necessarily efficiency. University of Texas is relatively very well funded – he doesn’t seem to grasp that not all states have thriving oil/defense corporations.

  27. i love how a lot of the candidates are just now starting to say the things that Ron Paul has been saying for decades… yet ANOTHER flip flop to try to steal Pauls thunder.

  28. It is amazing that in such a short span of time Congressman Paul’s idea’s and policies have removed the frivilous party line points and become the center of discussion. When he speaks everyone stops and listens, as when a knowledgeable proffessor has his students undivided attention. His knowledge is not from party rhetoric, polls and say what you think the public wants to hear as several of his fellow campaigners do. It is from practical application, and study of cause and effect delivered from a caring man trying to do his best for the country and people he believes in. You can see his comments and thoughts are taking hold right there on stage, with everyone except the moderator’s. Off stage Congressman Paul is gaining by leaps and bounds, we listen to him and we learn, then we think about what he said, which is always thought provoking. One can only hope the leftstream media will eventually stop doing him and We the People the great disservice they are currently engaged in and begin conducting themselves professionally while performing their public duty properly. Their need to hide from us this man’s message and idea’s is unexplainable from a news medium tasked with fair, unbiased, factual reporting. What were the results of CNBC’s poll?

    • Yes I truly agree with you David and what’s really scary is that he’s saying the same things this time as he said in 2008 when he ran, so he was aware and talking about these problems 4 years before the rest of them, he had the resolutions to the problems 4 years ago and more. This fact and his bio and political history is enough reason he would be the best one to take our country out of these dire times.

  29. This is why liberals resort to jokes and bashing, because when they give Conservatives a fair word, they get schooled.

  30. America and the world is on the precipice of a crash that has never been seen in recorded history. The upcoming election’s importance is like none other. A defined plan to correct the course America is on is the only way to mitigate the crushing effects and suffering America will experience in a world-wide crash. In times like these a leader with a sound plan who will not compromise is the only option and we all recognize who that candidate is. Why?
    Ron Paul’s plan is sound, demonstrated by the current candidates themselves, without exception every republican candidate has co-opted Ron Paul’s plan and offer it as their solution, yet without exception they tweak Paul’s plan according to their base, personal religious views and the voters they want to sway to their camp.
    It is far too late for that.

  31. That’s not fair to say that Perry couldn’t answer what the 3 agencies he would cut were because he did say what the 3rd one was next time he had a chance to speak.

  32. As you can see from this debate and all the debates that have been held in the past. The two most educated candidates and the ones that have been there done that and kept up with their homework are Ron Paul and Newt Gingrich. And they aren’t afraid to be bold in the real way. I say Ron Paul for president and Gingrich for Vice President.

  33. Thank you for this website and listing the debating videos all in one place. I am in England and cannot see any of this live so it is nice to be able to see a schedule (there are so many debates!) and watch them all.

  34. Ron Paul said exactly the same things as he is now in 2008 and everyone called him Crazy.

    Now everyone is saying pretty much the same thing as Ron Paul and people are still calling him crazy.

    True serious cuts are required and its gonna be painful…… and necessary

  35. Let me quickly add to these well meaning comments I have read. First, I’m a democrat, so you know who I will vote next election President Obama. I did want to give you a chance and see if any of these candidates offers Americans any hope for the future; I did this fairly by looking at the debate in its entirety. I must say that after looking at this dreadful debate that if that is all they have to offer, well may god help the USA. I’m also saddened by the comments, showing lack of integrity and not so intelligent ones. I can also see that some of you have agendas that are not worthy, but rather talking points from the very candidates you are supporting; I can also see some of you may work for candidates and have been asked to do these posting. Any way, yes I’m to your left and very liberal, but also honest and laden with integrity something is lacking in all of your comments.

  36. These candidates are a joke. It was like watching a circus act. The only candidate with practical ideas is John Huntsman. Otherwise, the rest are living in lala land.

  37. I thought Ron Paul won the debate hands down. He is the only one who seems to ever know what is actually going on in the room. He knows his history, he knows his legislation, and he is consistent. He answers the questions head on and does not waste time either criticizing another candidate or throwing mud.He answers with knowledge and solutions.

  38. They should let Cain go over his “999” plan. They laugh about it when he starts to talk about it but he doesn’t get to elaborate on it. Ron Paul seems to understand more about what it takes to be President. Also Perry should have more of a chance. Sure its not good he forgot the third agency but he does make some very specific points and he is still my vote.

  39. Did Herman Cain just make the declaration that he was the only candidate with a BOLD plan?
    Does he or anybody else understand what Ron Paul is actually proposing (let alone, talking about)?

    I ask this rhetorically because it seems to me that: Ron Paul has CLEARLY AND BY FAR, THE MOST AMBITIOUS AND YES — BOLD PLAN ON THE TABLE TODAY!!!

    I might even venture to speculate that his (Ron Paul’s) ideas; his convictions are no less BOLD than the visions and plans of our founding fathers.

Comments are closed.