Coming up this Saturday will be the first post-Iowa GOP debate heading into New Hampshire. The debate will be held at Saint Anselm College in Manchester and sponsored by ABC News, Yahoo! and WMUR.

Air Time: Saturday, January 7th at 9pm ET / 6pm PT on ABC

Participants: Santorum, Romney, Paul, Perry, Gingrich, Huntsman

video platform
video management
video solutions
video player

Report from WMUR:

In an effort to provide viewers the best opportunity to hear from the candidates, the co-sponsors of the ABC News, Yahoo!, WMUR debate at Saint Anselm College on Jan. 7, 2012 have agreed on a set of criteria for a candidate’s participation. The candidates have been informed of these criteria, which are the same criteria ABC News applied during the 2008 election cycle.

In order for a candidate to meet the standard of eligibility to participate in the debate, they must either:
1) Achieve 5 percent or higher in a poll of likely NH Republican primary voters conducted by UNH Survey Center, Harvard/Saint Anselm NHIOP, or any polling organization on the list below, conducted between Nov. 1, 2011 and Jan. 6, 2012;

– OR –

2) Achieve 5 percent or higher in a primary trial heat of registered Republican voters in any of the national polls designated on the list below, conducted between Nov. 1, 2011 and Jan. 6, 2012;

– OR –

3) Place first, second or third in the Iowa Republican caucuses.

Polling organizations include: ABC News, AP, Bloomberg, CBS, CNN, FOX, Gallup, NBC News, New York Times, Wall Street Journal, and the Washington Post

This should be a very entertaining match up considering how sharply Gingrich has begun going after Romney. The candidates with the most to gain could be Gingrich, Santorum and Paul who would all love to bring Romney down a few pegs and prevent a landslide victory next Tuesday in New Hampshire.


  1. So, to provide viewers the best opportunity to hear from the candidates, the co-sponsors of the ABC News, Yahoo!, WMUR debate, restricts the number of eligible candidates who may participate in the debate.

    Yet the important concern of the people is, will ABC allow fair and equal time for all the candidates to participate in the debate, is not addressed. Does ABC take public money?

  2. It is such a gift to have your website available to us. Because of it we are able to know exactly when, what time, and what station the debates will be televised on. Thanks a million!

  3. Well, while Gingrich, Paul and Santorum deliberately aim at Romney, Huntsman will respond to questions from the moderators and whatever pokes come from his opponents.

    He is the true statesman in that group, IMO.

    • He was, hands down, the most intelligent on the platform, but after that first debate, I wonder what happened to him.

    • Are you joking?? Huntsman is a con artist like the rest of them, with the exception of Dr. Paul. The difference can be summarized thus: The liars, cheats,and thieves want to be President so that…..well, so that they can be President. Ron Paul wants to be President so that he can fix the damn mess……

  4. Should be interesting to see Huntsman in this debate and the one on the 8th.

    I disagree with Huntsman on basically everything – but, a strong finish by Huntsman is a win for Ron Paul in many respects.

    Paul won’t lose any votes to Huntsman, and Huntsman’s main grab of support is from Romney and Gingrich.

    • You disagree with Huntsman of everything? You disagree with the feds not interfering with med. marijuana? You disagree with scaling down the middle east wars and rebuilding our core? Hes also pro civil union, do you think that’s wrong? He says “audit the fed” hard to say if he can follow through with that though. I think Huntsman is the next best thing to Ron Paul and way more electable than anyone else. I guess this is just my opinion but take a look at all the candidate’s issues/baggage and tell me that Huntsman isn’t the only one that can beat Obama. I count Ron Paul out because I believe the establishment will resort to voter fraud to keep him out.

      • AJ,

        I believe all drugs should be legal, not merely medical marijuana. Huntsman does not agree.

        I do not believe in scaling down the ME Wars, I’m for ending every single military base we have overseas, and never sending soldiers outside our borders unless we are attacked. (the last nation to attack us was the Empire of Japan)

        I do not support civil unions, as the very notion makes gays and lesbians second-class citizens who are not worthy of marriage.

        Huntsman may do an audit, but it won’t be complete – and he certainly doesn’t want to end the fed – which I definitely do.

        Huntsman will drop after his poor performance in New Hampshire.

        • For the most part I agree with you. I would vote Ron Paul over him. I just don’t think the establishment will allow Ron Paul to win, they will resort to anything including voter fraud. I’m just throwing in for him as the only alternative. Otherwise I will write in Ron Paul. You know one thing that scares me, the thought of Gingrich or Romney setting the DEA attack dogs on the medical marijuana states. That is why I like Huntsman.

          • I agree to most everything you say, and the alternatives are so out of it. Have you ever listened to Buddy Roemer, and why isn’t he in the debates? The man has some really fresh ideas, is articulate, open to new approaches, has economic and government experience, and yet is not being heard. He refuses superpac money, and has an open social agenda.

        • You don’t consider bringing down the twin towers and killing over 3000 Americans in the process an attack???

      • After the stunt Huntsman’s campaign pulled with that bogus Ron Paul video I wouldn’t vote for him as dog-catcher.

  5. Please consider this question for your upcoming debate:

    What do you think the ‘mission of education’ should be in order to prepare today’s children for tomorrow’s America?

    What is the MISSION of education?

    The future of our nation (economically, socially, politically, geo-competitively…) depends on how well we educate today’s children to become tomorrow’s successful adults. Our ascendancy as a nation is evidence of how well we were able to do that in our first centuries. Our current economic chaos reflects how poorly we’ve been able to do it in the past few decades.

    In 2012 the accelerating rate and complexity of change introduces unprecedented uncertainty into any attempt to predict what it means to be prepared for tomorrow’s jobs and careers. Clearly, more than at any time in human history, today’s children must be educated so as to be able to learn in ways and about things that we can’t even imagine when we are educating them.

    What is the mission of education when we can no longer assume that what we think children should learn today is more important than how well they can learn in their futures?

    What do you think the mission of education should be in order to prepare today’s children for tomorrow’s America?

    David Boulton, Learning-Activist

    • The mission for educating any child should first and foremost AND ONLY reside with the parent(s)! There never should have been any mandate by any governing body – be it town/city or county or state or federal – to educate any child. It is not in the constitution of the USA. Unfortunately it is in the constitution of many states, if not all of them. (How we let that happen must have been by being bamboozled by “good” intentions.) If a parent chooses not to educate a child – so be it. Neither I nor any other citizen should be required to pay taxes to educate any child. Educating my children is my responsibility and I paid enough for that, thank you, and no they are not idiots, miscreants or burdens on society.

      • The sheer fact that you do not realize how the education of others affects your everyday life and the quality of our society overall astonishes me.

  6. Please insist candidates answer question, ie: be specific, cut them off if they refuse or change the subject then proceed to next candidate. Previous debates have allowed candidates to use valuable time to bash our president without being honest about what he or she can really do unless there is cooperation of congress. Ex: “on my first day in office, I will repeal Obama Care” Very little can be accomplished without congressional approval.

    • This president has done more harm to country than good. The whole purpose for these debates are to inform America on where the candidates stand and their plans to improve an unfavorable situation like that which plagues our economy right now… “OBAMA CARE”! The candidates understand that America needs hear just how damaging Obama’s polices have hurt us all. So the so called bashing you think the candidates are doing is nothing more than the TRUTH being told.

    • Sue,

      I agree with you 100% and can only hope these moderators will become more strict and not allow these “debators” to digress, dodge the questionl, or just say they’ll “change whatever Obama did, blah, blah, blah” without being VERY specific. And if they cannot, then move on to the next person or next question. Huge amounts of time are wasted in these debates by allowing these people to blabber and not answer the question succinctly and to the point.

  7. Re: Education’s Mission
    The “Mission of Education” is to employee as many people as possible, pay them them highest level wage with the most benefits as possible and have all retire early. If in that process a few children happen to learn something, well that is okay too.

  8. The “Mission of (Public) Education” is to employ as many people as possible, pay them the highest wages and benefits possible and have them retire as early as possible. If during that process a few kids learn a little, that is okay too.

  9. As far as I can see, Buddy Roemer is polling at 13% in New Hampshire. Why isn’t he invited. We want all comers!!

  10. Can we clarify Ron Paul’s position on how we would be stronger and safer if our military was cut and we shutdown bases around the world? And at what point would he ask the congress for a declaration of war or use military forces?

    • Ron Paul’s position on how we would be stronger and safer if our military was cut and we shutdown bases around the world is that our military bases around the world provoke people/governments to rise up and defend/attack (depending on how you view it) our country in a term known as “blowback.” If we did not provoke other countries to attack us by occupying their land, killing their people, or telling them how to live then we would be much safer because they would have no reason to attack us. The argument that there are radical Muslims out there that will/have attacked us because they hate us and our freedoms is simply untrue. Before we invaded and occupied Islamic land, there was no serious uprising or organization that sought to attack the United States. Sure there were a few radicals out there that did want to kill us because of their hatred for our freedoms and there was even an attempted uprising to support this but it failed because it couldn’t convince the majority of people to join it for a rather petty cause. Also note that every religion or group of people have their radicals such as the Christian ones that blow up abortion clinics.

      To answer the other part of your question, we would be stronger and safer if our military was cut because well if it was cut then we wouldn’t be able to occupy other countries. Furthermore, we would save billions and billions of dollars which would lower the debt and thus help the economy, our nation’s greatest threat at this point in time.

      Sorry for this rant-like post but I hoped I helped to clarify things for you. Let me know if you have any other questions regarding Ron Paul and if I’ve missed anything. Lastly, a great book that you should read is “Imperial Hubris” by Michael Scheuer (who just recently endorsed Ron Paul for president).

      • Michael,

        I agree with everything you said. The issue is that Paul is doing a lousy job clarifying his position and the other candidates are making him look like some kooky mad scientist. I think everyone likes his view of the governments role with less taxes, less intrusion. But he is getting murdered by the way he is made to appear on foreign policy. There has to be some message from him about how his position makes us safer and stronger. We all get it that he wouldn’t wage war and would make the military smaller, but as soon as he says stuff like that, he get’s pounded for making the country less safe.
        His first message needs to be we’ll be safer by not exposing this country to situations in other countries that have nothing to do with us, thus, as you said, taking away the reason to attack us.
        The Iranian thing is really bad timing because of their threatening posture. Although I feel if we were not in the middle east business, they wouldn’t be threatening us, but we are. So he needs to address that issue specifically in a much stronger and harsher manner if he wants to combat the other candidates and warm up the public!

        Thanks for your response!

        • You’re absolutely right. There are times when I watch his interviews and just cringe at his responses. Hopefully in the debates on Saturday and Sunday, Paul will do a better job in clarifying his position on a national stage but if not, it’s up to people like us to spread his message and erase any of the myths and misconceptions people may have of him.

          Ron Paul 2012!

          • Michael J, I’m sorry, but if Ron Paul has to have his supporters go around the internet correcting misconceptions about his policies, then he’s not the man for the job of President of the United States. He needs to be able to clarify his own positions, with words out of his own mouth. He is the main reason for the alleged misconceptions. He just is not at all good at articulating his positions. All he can do for justification of his foreign policy is go back to the ill-conceived notion that it’s all our fault, anyway. Yes, there are indeed many problems with our foreign policy and foreign aid, but the notion that it’s all our fault just doesn’t wash.

  11. Yeah, darn all those kindergarten teachers driving to work in their ferrari’s! It burns me up how those middle school teachers are going through all that taxpayer money lighting cuban cigars with 100 dollar bills!

  12. Ron Paul says that we should not engage our troops in military combat without a declaration of war. And I agree. But doesn’t a Resolution authorizing the President to engage our troops in military combat to remove Saddam Hussein from Kuwait amount to a declaration of war? That’s just one example. Bush the younger also got a resolution from Congress to fight the war on terror, wherever it took us. Is that not a declaration of war? Bush the younger also got a resolution from Congress authorizing the removal of Saddam Hussein. Is that not a declaration of war? And if Congress funds these military endeavors year after year after year, does not that constitute a declaration of war? Someone please explain to me why such resolutions and such funding aren’t de facto declarations of war.

    • Marlene..some are defacto and some aren’t The War Powers Resolution requires the President to notify Congress within 48 hours of committing armed forces to military action and forbids armed forces from remaining for more than 60 days, with a further 30 day withdrawal period, without an authorization of the use of military force or a declaration of war…libya, yugoslavia, nicaragua, panama, somalia, vietnam, korea weren’t. (many were classified as police do an end run around the law) Afghanistan, Iraq (questionable) were. This should clarify your question: The point of it all is it isnt the president’s place to be making these decisions that risk our men and other coutries people. That is supposed to be left to the Congress to decide. We (the US) are not supposed to be aggressors, nor the world’s police force. It all looks so tame on the surface, but the the real decison makers are those in the military industrial complex. Youtube eisenhower’s speech on the military industrial complex..and Kennedy’s secret society speech. If you haven’t heard/seen them. Kennedy died within a year of making that speech. It is chilling.

      • In both wars with Iraq, under each of the Bush Presidents, the Congress specifically passed a resolution authorizing the use of force with specific goals, and my understanding is, neither Bush exceeded the limits of those resolutions. Congress also specifically funded those wars. I don’t know how that is not considered a de facto declaration of war. As for some of the other wars, which were called peace-keeping efforts, we got into some of them because of our treaties — which the Constitution says are just as binding as itself — NATO and the UN. It seems to me that the Congress has signed away a lot of its war authority by signing those treaties. My point is, Paul repeatedly says we can’t go to war without a Congressional declaration of war, but Congress’s actions repeatedly authorize other entities to determine when to engage our troops. So what does he plan to do about NATO, SEATO, the UN, and other treaties we have that could some day require an engagement of our troops? He can’t just disregard treaties. That’s not constitutional.

  13. Please Ask: “” Why Some Candidate repeadly Name REGAN and try to sy Iam Photo copy Of him. We the Voters know well REGAN, these candidate are Regan. Regan, REGA …. just look they empty pbucket and by naming REGAN try to make credit for themself.
    REGAN was Regan, this body who are they ????????????????????????
    Big big problem and waste of time…..again and again ?????????

  14. Dear Debate organizer… BIG question / SUBJECT:

  15. The only Republican candidates that I can possibly see myself vote for (many, many independents agree) are Huntsman and Paul, preferably Huntsman. If the Republican party had any intelligence at all they would rally behind one of these two. The independent vote will be the deciding vote for the President in November. The candidate that scares me the most is Santorum. He is continually citing his religion as the reason for his views. (The bible says this, the bible says that) He wants to turn our Democracy into a Theocracy. Theocracies can be found in the Middle East and see where that got them. I don’t believe a Catholic Theocracy would be as bad but how can you force the entire country to live under your religious beliefs which is what Santorum wants. It is downright scary to me. At least Romney doesn’t go around preaching his religion and people say they won’t vote for him because he is Mormon. Come on which is more dangerous? The one who wants to force his religion on all Americans or the one that keeps his to himself?

  16. Here’s the “mission of education” from Brown v. Board:

    “Today, education is perhaps the most important function of state and local governments. Compulsory school attendance laws and the great expenditures for education both demonstrate our recognition of the importance of education to our democratic society. It is required in the performance of our most basic public responsibilities, even service in the armed forces. It is the very foundation of good citizenship. Today it is a principal instrument in awakening the child to cultural values, in preparing him for later professional training, and in helping him to adjust normally to his environment. In these days, it is doubtful that any child may reasonably be expected to succeed in life if he is denied the opportunity of an education. Such an opportunity, where the state has undertaken to provide it, is a right which must be made available to all on equal terms.”

  17. Huntsman needs to go away. That guy makes me want to vomit, no different then McAmnesty. I’ll vote to keep Obumble in the WH before voting for him. Hopefully Santorum, Gingrich and Paul can take Romney and his fake Liberal attitude out. Santorum or Perry all the way, Gingrich or Perry if I have to.

  18. Patience and diplomacy must be utilized in world and state affairs while we ramp up production and strengthen America’s energy resources, food supply, defense and economy. Healthy, productive, prosperous people equals strength, generosity, freedom and security.
    Which of our Presidential candidates will take this course?

  19. Our current predicament, how we arrived here and how we will be “driven off a cliff” unless We The People do something about it during these primaries can be summed up in its entirety with these two quotes:
    Goebbels often said: “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.” Hitler said: “What good fortune for governments that the people do not think.”

    Forget about the names of the messengers but focus on the message. Adhering to this philosophy and belief they were able to “lead” and convince a nation of human beings to commit atrocities during a modern era of civilization. Don’t think for a moment that governments do not study these quotes because they’re whole intent is studying effective ways of controlling millions of people they must keep in check. Yes, in my opinion – and I’m not alone – there’s only one candidate who boldly speaks volumes of truth and as such, attempts are being made to silence his voice, suppress his message and discredit his character: Dr. Ron Paul. In the end, it’s all about commonsense. Research his stance on the issues and in the very end, it’s all about Economics and the improper belief that the Constitution is a “living document.” That’s why we’re in trouble today and the above-referenced quotes are the “vehicles” that allowed the government to bring us to this point.

  20. WHY does this NH debate include Perry and not Buddy Rhoemer when Buddy out-polls Perry in NH? Shame on the networks to basically give the message that ‘money’ gets you a debate position.

    • You said it!!! Buddy has really good ideas, and is speaking out. Is this too much for you, networks? Give him a chance on the platform!

  21. No thanks, I’ll be watching the playoffs. I’ve seen plenty of debates to know that the media pushes the debate whatever way they wish. If you haven’t chosen a candidate yet, then you are equal to that of a 13 year old girl.

    • Until your candidate goes bye bye and then what? Do you become a 13 year old girl when you have to choose a new candidate?

    • ABC allows commercials here for candidates???? This video being allowed to air, no matter who they are backing, is very poor judgement on ABC’s part. I’ll go to other sites from now on. If I want to see this kind of junk I’ll turn on the TV and watch CNN when they show stump speeches of these guys on TV during the day and evening!!

  22. Allot of you are writing a book in your comments. Folks don’t want to read a book. I think the Debates are good for all. Go Ducks and Blazers!!!

  23. Here are the numbers from a Reuters story on Dec 12th of those likely to vote in the Iowa caucuses:

    Gingrich 29.8% Mitt Romney, 20.3%, Ron Paul 10.7%. U.S. Rep. Michele Bachman 8.5%, Rick Perry 8.2%.

    Since he didn’t buy enough ads or hire enough ex/future media people from PR firms, and is a conservative that can win with conservative volunteers, Rick Santorum wasn’t worth mentioning. Pat Caddell said that Santorum was in single digits a week before 01/03/12! Keep that in mind as you see the election results:

    Santorum & Romney 25%, Paul 21%, Gingrich 13% Perry 10% Bachmann 5% Huntsman 1%.

    The pollsters are rigging this election to whoever they think will buy the most ads/can be beat by Obama, Romney and Gingrich. The massive 40% undecided vote wasn’t even mentioned until Sunday and has yet to be mentioned for New Hampshire, S. Carolina, Super Tuesday States, or any other state. Is there is a reason to trust a pundit claiming a candidate is “finished” after this “surprise”?

    • Asking for a clarification on your last paragraph, first sentence: “The pollsters are rigging this election to whoever they think will buy the most ads/can be beat by Obama, Romney and Gingrich.” Are you saying the pollsters want someone who will lose to Obama, Romney and Gingrich?

      • Well I do not know how to commit voter fraud without arousing suspicion. I just feel they will interfere so the people they want make it.

  24. Ron Paul has a lot of something we all need to search for… “Common Sense” Please research him, and listen to what he is saying. He wants to solve our problems at the source, instead of just putting band aids on them. His proposed solutions do just that… go straight to the source of the problem. Don’t let the main stream media who have their own agendas influence you to follow the status quo and ignore Ron Paul. He has a lot of support, and there is a reason for that, we are sick of lies, deceit, and being treated like sheep. He’s our only hope of not following the historical trend of past nations. Do some history, and look at the REAL reason for how nations crumble, and why certain ones stay stable longer than others.

  25. The reason that they won’t let BUDDY ROEMER debate is that what Roemer is saying is PROOF that they are corrupt !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    The system stinks !!!!!

    • I went to Roemer’s website and do not like his tax plan. He will exempt the first $50,000, and then levy an income tax on 17% over that. That means the people making just above $50,000 will be paying the highest rate of all. I don’t understand the justification for that. I also don’t think that many Americans should be totally exempt from paying income taxes. Do they not benefit from this great land? He needs to rethink his tax policy.

      • What??? You obviously don’t understand basic math…

        I agree, no one should be totally exempt. That’s why most don’t give a damn what happens. They don’t pay, so they don’t care. EVERYONE must pay, or the system stays like it is.

  26. Gingrich is the only canidate that can beat obama.

    the baggage has been out there so long it is having less and less effect

    when will you guys stop trying to elect a saint and put someone in office who has the smarts in all areas and can do the job?

    i would love to be selling tickets to a newt / obama debate

    newt would crucify him

    • In my opinion, Huntsman can outdebate Gingrich, and therefore, outdebate Obama. If you saw the debate one-on-one with Gringrich and Huntsman, you saw that Huntsman’s foreign knowledge is far superior to Gingrich’s and he’s much better able to articulate the foreign policy complexities. Huntsman’s knowledge comes from experience; Gingrich’s from a think-tank. Gingrich is brilliant; but Huntsman even more brilliant. And Huntsman DOESN’T have the baggage.

      • Huntsman is great 2nd choice for me. I privately call him a diet libertarian lol. I did watch their debate and yeah it was more like Huntsman giving a lecture on foreign affairs and Gingrich was just a guest speaker. Huntsman has charisma, too that counts for alot while Romney is just a NeoCon we didn’t want last time.

    • Gingrich is potentially more dangerous than Santorum or Obama. I envision a police state in the medical marijuana states if Newt is president not to mention overseas.

  27. Mike W, it’s a little annoying to read comments that suggest that if you are not for Ron Paul, then you are being led by the nose by the media. It may strike you as impossible, but some of us do our research and come to different conclusions. While I agree with a lot of Paul’s stand on the issue, I do not believe he is a capable leader. Right message; wrong messenger. If he doesn’t get the nomination, I certainly hope his supporters will realize that drastic change takes time, and throw their support behind the nominee, and then work with their individual Congress people to be sure they work with (and against, if necessary) the Republican President to restore America. It won’t be the end of the world if Paul doesn’t get the nomination, as many of his supporters suggest; but it may hasten the final demise of the United States of America as we know it if Obama is elected again, as he and the left-wing democrats will see this as mandate to fully implement their socialist agenda.

  28. Mike W

    Yes I totally agree RP is the man we need as a new leader! He’s trying to tell Americans to take our country back, and he needs to be our leader. The media is half the problem of these debates…we can think for ourselves without the media’s input..Let the candidates give us answers on how they would deal with today’s problems in America, and don’t keep harrassing each candidate for their answers. We can figure out what they mean ourselves. Yes, the media is crushing RP for his foreign policies, and all the time Ron Paul is right on the money. Wasteful time, money and lives given which we need to rebuild our infrastructures here at home, wars never solve anything esp in the mideast..We’re paying the price for wars the rest of our children’s lives, and hatred keeps esculating against America. We need control and we need it fast. A man with common sense not an ego!

    • Who &how can Congress Integrity,Morality &Unity be ensured to Zero Debt &Poverty?
      Did RP or Congress make Life better of US Citizen in last ten years?Deeds speak louder than hollow Talk-Where was Common sense in last decade we witnessed peak debt/poverty?

  29. Is there a scheduled rebroadcast of the January 7, 2012 debate? What time? What channel? What website? Thank you.

  30. Questions I’d like to see them answer tonight:
    1. Who has the greatest ability to rally, unify and mobilize citizens across political and societal spectrums?
    I believe our country was duped to interpret our current president’s charisma as leadership ability. Pitting political parties and polarizing social classes against one another isn’t leadership. America’s woes have been exacerbated by Obama’s inexperience and lack of executive leadership, and our world also is suffering from it.

    2. Who is most committed to follow and lead by the U.S. Constitution?

    Strictly following the Constitution includes restoring the 10th Amendment balance of power to our states and shifting solutions away from an “only government” savior (to which Obama committed early in his presidency) to encouraging local communities, agencies and neighborhoods across our nation to rally together, strategize and resurrect the golden rule in caring for their own, just as it was done in America’s heyday.

  31. As to RP’s message, I was in a bad car accident recently — through no fault of my own. If I hadn’t been wearing a seatbelt, I would’ve been killed. I am thankful that the government forced the free market to install these safety devices. We cannot just leave it up to businessmen to do the right thing. Of course, there are way too many regulations. But everything needs to be in balance. It’s not just one way or the other.

    My problem with many of the Ron Paul supporters is that their fanaticism for the Man is so much greater than their support for the libertarian policies he espouses. If someone less charismatic was preaching to do away with government programs that we all depend on more than we know (not all of them), it would be easier to point out his/her short vision. It’s the obsession with this Texas congressman that I find troubling.

  32. It’s unfortunate that Romney is in the lead because it has been said that he looks presidential. It made me sick to hear this when the debates first started up. If how a person carries themself is what influences people, hey, Santorum has nice teeth. Hunstsman started out very intelligent, yet even then he was at the bottom. I hope Paul survives it all, but I beleive what others have said here – that voter fraud would take place if he won.

  33. Romney is quick on his feet, for example, his answer in reference to the number of jobs created when asked if that included jobs added minus jobs lost/


    • Buddy Roemer is the only canadate who understands why the USA is going downhill and knows how to fix it. Please contribute to his campaign- I HAVE

    • Absolutely!! The only candidate that seems to understand what ails us, the people. Let a populist candidate speak! Or are the major media types afraid of the challenge?

Comments are closed.