Official CNN Tea Party Express Debate Thread

[Standing Liberty]

I am not sure why I watch these debates because it just raises my blood pressure. Ron did great when allowed to speak. But it never fails, every single F'n time, they bring up a subject like the Fed or Health care and obviously ignore him. Then ask him a stupid question about school lunch or hot pockets.
As far as the audience booing, did you get a good look at these people. It looked like an audition for the Stepford Wives. Screw these Chicken Hawk Neocons are brainwashed beyond repair. These things is so rigged.

 

[Feelgood]

I have 5,000 posts. Is it somehow sacrilegious to point out when Ron blunders?

Being a forum whore does not make you all knowing. Having every post be about how you think Ron is a screw up, is not something I really wish to see either. One or two posts is more then adequate, for us to understand your seeming disdain for Ron. If you wish to add something constructive to the conversation, great. Would be nice if you could tone down the hate rhetoric you have for Ron. I'm not the slathering fanboy most here are, but damn I'm not going to sit here and just slam the guy all night. By your posts, he lost all his toes long ago, time to let it go now.

 

[FSP-Rebel]

Not that I saw the rest of the debate, but what was the circumstances of which ron got booed?

 

[turbobrain9]

Here's the thing. On the one hand you want Ron Paul to be perfect - he isn't. On the on the other hand I think we all understand for him to get over the top poll wise, his public presentations are going to have to be perfect and on point to overcome the media blackout. A very tough problem. But hey, what are you going to do - look at what 4 years of imperfect messaging has brought us - the other candidates parrot all his points, and Ron is in double digits. I am not jumping ship, and I love Ron, warts and all.

Sk

Ron is running for the President of the US...he should be held to a higher standard and he should strive for excellence in his candidacy. He must do better if he wants to win and he has to contend with the media blackout by adopting a new strategy...he has to buck the moderators and answer the questions he wish he was asked just like everyone else does...he doesn't show strenght when he doesn't...

 

[Badger Paul]

"Is it somehow sacrilegious to point out when Ron blunders? "

No it isn't nor should it be. But if you referring to the 9-11 answer, the answer he gave is no different than what he told Rudy Guliani four years ago. Not one iota of difference. So where's the blunder? Because he said it? Because some neocons in the audience booed who weren't going to vote for him anyway? Hell, half the people on these forums are here because he did say it back in 2007.

He's at 13 percent in the latest poll despite every so-called "blunder" in every debate whether it was "heroin" or "Iran" or "border fences".

Maybe it's two-percenters out there like Rick Santorum who should wise up and learn what many in the foreign policy community have said instead of acting like junior-league Rudy. Yeah, tell us what happened to that fellow!

 

[GunnyFreedom]

Ron's not perfect. He does have faults. It's obvious that he doesn't use buzz-words or follow the recommendations of people like Frank Luntz. I wish he would tie his wonderful message with a slick delivery that plays on the subconscious of the listern.... but he won't. He will just deliver an honest message, supported by logic and built on a foundation off consistency.

He DOES win over undecideds, moderate conservatives, independents, and democrats when he speaks as he did tonight. Nights like tonight... they're what started this whole Revolution!

I for one am happy to be slickified so long as it does not damage the message. Simply because I want to make an impact. Slickification takes money though. I do well enough by being fast on my feet with a sharp response at least. I can take these complex policy issues and return one-liners pretty easily. Probably because I Twitter.

 

[anaconda]

Meh. Not many voters watch the debates, and of those, how many do you think actually care about the response of the crowd?

Independents cheering Ron at home far outnumber the 2 or 3 frat boy yahoos booing for peace.

 

[KingNothing]

I just don't want to be banned for completely losing my shit...besides, more flies with honey than vinegar, or something like that?

I just can't believe that I can no longer align myself with the Tea Party! Some of them are my best customers...I'm going to have to step up and educate those who will listen, and continue to wake those who are ready to be unplugged.

As much as I want to give in and give up, I'm just going to have to redouble my collection of Red Pills.

BTW

Ari Fleicher is on CNN right now. Go to hell, Ari, you Clinton administration retread retard has been hack COCK SUCKER

To be fair, the "tea party" you saw tonight is only a small piece of the Tea Party. All it takes is a group of four or five people to boo or applaud to generate the sort of response we heard tonight to a few of the comments.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

"Is it somehow sacrilegious to point out when Ron blunders? "

If you referring to the 9-11 answer, the answer he gave is no different than what he told Rudy Guliani four years ago. Not one iota of difference. So where's the blunder? Because he said it? Because some neocons in the audience booed who weren't going to vote for him anyway? Hell, half the people on these forums are here because he did say it back in 2007. He's at 13 percent in the latest poll despite every so-called "blunder" whether it was "heroin" or "Iran" or "border fences".

Maybe it's two-percenters out there like Rick Santorum who should wise up and learn what many in the foreign policy community have said instead of acting like junior-league Rudy. Yeah, tell us what happened to that fellow!

No, it more that he needs to focus less on UBL's rationale, and use the same data from the 9/11 commission report, and Michael Scheurer. It's the perception issue. If he drops UBL and talks up the "sanctioned" sources, those boos either stay silent or convert to cheers.

 

[KramerDSP]

Twitter as of right now:

JesseRoyce007 Jesse Johnson
So Ron Paul should just go ahead and say he's a democrat. #switchpartiesdude

kevibo75 Kevin Pritchard
@ @rolandsmartin @andersoncooper didn't ron paul say letting that uninsured person should die just send a chill down ur spine ? I am mad

cliffordmerin11 Clifford A. Merin
during the portion on the fed reserve during the GOP debate, wolf blitzer doesnt ask a SINGLE QUESTION TO RON PAUL WHO WROTE A BOOK ON IT

Love Ron Paul or Hate Ron Paul, he riles people up and everyone has an opinion on him. I'm guessing 85% name recognition now despite a near media blackout. If only he were talked about 24/7 like Perry, he'd easily be the national frontrunner.

 

[DrN0]

He's got a point. Ron is not a perfect candidate. But he shouldn't say that Paul can't make hay. This time in 2007, he was polling at 1%. Now he's polling 14% with a serious shot at winning iowa, and possibly NH if he can get enough independents and democrats out to vote.

To win NH, he just needs enough money and well tailored ads...

 

[PaulConventionWV]

Ron's not perfect. He does have faults. It's obvious that he doesn't use buzz-words or follow the recommendations of people like Frank Luntz. I wish he would tie his wonderful message with a slick delivery that plays on the subconscious of the listern.... but he won't. He will just deliver an honest message, supported by logic and built on a foundation off consistency.

He DOES win over undecideds, moderate conservatives, independents, and democrats when he speaks as he did tonight. Nights like tonight... they're what started this whole Revolution!

Again, how is that even a response to what I said? I never said Ron was perfect. Iw as talking about people who claim to know what words are best and how much it will increase his support. It's an exercise in futility to argue over stuff like that. Ron's not perfect, but neither are we.

 

[AuH20]

If you truly hate reading "crap" such as that Ron Paul's most ardent supporters oppose being forced to pay for mass murder in the Middle East, then there's really no hope for you.

Mass murder? Saddam, being a brutal dictator was the only glue holding that state together. When the U.S. unwisely decided to remove him, civil war was inevitable when all the hostile factions were unleashed. I don't think they went in there with the purpose of mass murdering Iraqi citizens. That's insane. Of course, they wanted the resources, but the mass murder thing is WAYYYYYYYYYYYYY OVER THE TOP. It's almost as ridiculous as when Hot Air commenters refer to Ron Paul as fervently anti-Semitic.

 

[wstrucke]

Oh, but I think you underestimate how seriously some people take this. They're all about "Paul should do it this way and his numbers will increase by X amount!" It's not about that. Nobody can claim to know that, and I know not everyone's saying that, but to think you know what will be viewed either overwhelmingly favorably or unfavorably in the eyes of the public is pure hogwash. I don't need to chill out. People need to chill out about Ron Paul's "numbers." Stop thinking it's my way or the highway and realize Ron is doing what he thinks is best. None of us can claim to know whether or not or how much support any individual statement will bring him. Again, some people really seem to think that it's their responsibility to tell Paul that their way is the best way, when they should just realize that they can't claim to know these things. To state otherwise is to be full of oneself.

I will try to speak slowly for you to you can understand. Some of us have been through all of this before during the last election cycle -- I suspect we all understand the reality of the situation.

I can not understand your reaction to this -- it appears to be completely out of proportion. Did someone say "it's my way or the highway" and I missed that? A fairly simple, and mild if I may say so, point was made. There are a huge number of ridiculous, inflammatory things being said around here that are much more worthy of your criticism and scorn than the simple suggestion that speaking more clearly is more understandable.

As an aside, to your suggestion that "Nobody can claim to know that" -- you know what? Normally I would err on the side of caution, but in this instance, yes, I will definitely claim that if RP spoke in simpler more understandable terms, he would have more supporters. There are a lot of people that have no idea they agree with him because they just hear an old man rambling, see him dismissed by the media, and don't bother to do any research on their own. That's also why I agree with the idea of us raising as much money as we can -- because the only way besides getting Ron Paul in a one on one to truly understand how incredibly intelligent he is, is to present the message well in a paid advertisement (or individual word of mouth).

 

[KingNothing]

Independents cheering Ron at home far outnumber the 2 or 3 frat boy yahoos booing for peace.

I completely agree. I can personally attest that every friend I have who watched the debate -and republicans, democrats, teapartiers included (though, all under the age off 40)- was appalled by the crowd's behavior, and receptive to everything Paul said tonight, ESPECIALLY his take on the wars.

 

[NorfolkPCSolutions]

The greatest strength of the RP army is in some respects it's greatest weakness. This strength derived from being the extreme minority sometimes conjures this paranoia in that every dissenting opinion is somehow tied to a more nefarious motive. You can't just disagree with Ron in a civil fashion, but you must be forced to wear the clothes of a bloodthirsty adversary.

The strongest trees grow in the strongest wind. Regardless of 2012's outcome, if America can hold tight long enough, these last two or three generations of sheeple that represent the majority of the American electorate (retired SSI recipients, greedy baby boomers, 60's retreads) will die off. Literally, not figuratively - my argument is that someday, the stupid people will simply assume room temperature, leaving nothing but liberty loving, highly motivated, intelligent men and women that supported the latter-day George Washington, Ron Paul, waaay back in 2012.

The battle to wrench American Liberty back from the jaws of the globalist NWO - as well as the ignorant sheeple representing the (seemingly) overwhelming section of the electorate - will go on for decades.

It will go on for decades, if America survives that long, God willing. I and those I know are ready to go to war to restore Liberty in this country. For now, we are content to do battle at the ballot box. This is the path our founders laid out for us in our Constitution.

All I know is, that long train of usurpations and abridgments of liberty is getting awful goddamn long.

 

[KingNothing]

Again, how is that even a response to what I said? I never said Ron was perfect. Iw as talking about people who claim to know what words are best and how much it will increase his support. It's an exercise in futility to argue over stuff like that. Ron's not perfect, but neither are we.

lol hey Mr. Combative, I'm on your side here.

 

[runamuck]

So, according to Santorum and the rest of the brainwashed rats; terrorists attack us because we stand for "freedom and opportunity for everyone around the world". Yet, just moments earlier he was saying how badly we need to erect an enormous fence to keep all those pesky foreigners out.

Hmm ok...

 

[Feelgood]

Well I think we would all have to agree, the Tea Party as it is, has pretty much been completely co-opted by the Bachmann's, Palin's, Cain's and others that wish to preach under the banner of the Tea Party. We all know who wears the only real shroud of the Tea Party.

 

[specsaregood]

Not that I saw the rest of the debate, but what was the circumstances of which ron got booed?

motivations behind 9/11.