• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

ABC GOP Debate 9pm EST

[TABLE="width: 159"]
[TR]
[TD="width: 53"][/TD]
[TD="width: 53"]Total Talk[/TD]
[TD="class: xl64, width: 53"]%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Romney[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63"]18:19[/TD]
[TD="class: xl64"]25.36%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Gingrich[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63"]13:41[/TD]
[TD="class: xl64"]18.95%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Bachmann[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63"]11:39[/TD]
[TD="class: xl64"]16.13%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Perry[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63"]10:19[/TD]
[TD="class: xl64"]14.29%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Santorum[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63"]9:35[/TD]
[TD="class: xl64"]13.27%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Ron Paul[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63"]8:40[/TD]
[TD="class: xl64"]12.00%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Total[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63"]1:12:13[/TD]
[TD="class: xl64"]100.00%[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]


[TABLE="width: 159"]
[TR]
[TD="width: 53"][/TD]
[TD="width: 53"]Turns Talking[/TD]
[TD="width: 53"]%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Gingrich[/TD]
[TD]17[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63"]23.29%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Romney[/TD]
[TD]16[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63"]21.92%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Perry[/TD]
[TD]11[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63"]15.07%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Bachmann[/TD]
[TD]10[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63"]13.70%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Santorum[/TD]
[TD]10[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63"]13.70%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Ron Paul[/TD]
[TD]9[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63"]12.33%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Total[/TD]
[TD]73[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63"]100.00%[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]


[TABLE="width: 159"]
[TR]
[TD="width: 53"][/TD]
[TD="width: 53"]Avg b/w Talks[/TD]
[TD="width: 53"]Longest Wait[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Santorum[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63"]7:13[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63"]18:03[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Ron Paul[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63"]6:57[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63"]15:12[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Bachmann[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63"]6:03[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63"]11:07[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Perry[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63"]5:48[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63"]19:47[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Gingrich[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63"]4:03[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63"]13:45[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Romney[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63"]3:12[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63"]7:20[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]


[TABLE="width: 256"]
[TR]
[TD="width: 53"][/TD]
[TD="width: 53"]Qs[/TD]
[TD="width: 53"]Responses[/TD]
[TD="width: 53"]Follow-ups[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Romney[/TD]
[TD]9[/TD]
[TD]7[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Perry[/TD]
[TD]8[/TD]
[TD]2[/TD]
[TD]1[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Ron Paul[/TD]
[TD]8[/TD]
[TD]1[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Gingrich[/TD]
[TD]8[/TD]
[TD]7[/TD]
[TD]2[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Santorum[/TD]
[TD]8[/TD]
[TD]1[/TD]
[TD]1[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Bachmann[/TD]
[TD]7[/TD]
[TD]3[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Total[/TD]
[TD]48[/TD]
[TD]21[/TD]
[TD]4[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

ABC News Debate Statistics 12/10/11

also fact check

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2011/dec/11/fact-checking-iowa-republican-debate/
 
Last edited:
Just looking at the time I would've said it was a bit unfair to have a high polling person in Iowa like Paul not get more time. However, the questions portion shows the real story. Paul got a good amount of questions, it just seems he didn't have a lot of people making claims about him taking up "response" time.
 
The reason Paul's answers are so short is because all of them are "just get rid of government", "abolish the Federal Reserve", or "we shouldn't be world policemen". Gotta love how simple the guy is lol. Gingrich is well spoken. He gets the point across fast and makes sure he answers the questions head on. I like that. Unlike Romney who bets money (wow) and spins everything back to how he's an accomplished business man. Santorum is going to be a contender in future Presidential races, he just needs to get his name out more. I actually like the guy. He just has that Jethro Clampett feel about him. Overall, a weak field headed by a retread (Newt), a robot (Romney), and George Constanza's dad (Paul).
 
More factchecking:

FactCheck.org : More Baloney at ABC/Yahoo! Debate

  • Romney falsely claimed that no president before Obama had cut Medicare, and that Obama favored pre-1967 borders for Israel.
  • Gingrich said he opposed cap-and-trade, even though he once spoke favorably of it, if combined with other measures to curtail carbon emissions.
  • Perry again falsely accused Romney of writing that the Massachusetts health care law should be a model for the nation, and once again made an apples-to-oranges comparison to make his Texas job-creation record look more impressive.
  • And Bachmann recycled a bogus claim about projected job losses under the new federal health care law.
Click to expand...
 
I don't know why anyone is making a fuss over the $10,000 bet. Romney picked a high number to demonstrate how confident he was that Perry was misrepresenting the facts.
 
Krhazy said:
I don't know why anyone is making a fuss over the $10,000 bet. Romney picked a high number to demonstrate how confident he was that Perry was misrepresenting the facts.
Click to expand...

mostly because it comes off as something you would have heard on the playground at age 9, not at a presidential debate.
 
Helix said:
mostly because it comes off as something you would have heard on the playground at age 9, not at a presidential debate.
Click to expand...
I thought it was pretty effective. Perry looked like a complete idiot, although I guess that is nothing new.
 
MarineTpartier said:
The reason Paul's answers are so short is because all of them are "just get rid of government", "abolish the Federal Reserve", or "we shouldn't be world policemen". Gotta love how simple the guy is lol. Gingrich is well spoken. He gets the point across fast and makes sure he answers the questions head on. I like that. Unlike Romney who bets money (wow) and spins everything back to how he's an accomplished business man. Santorum is going to be a contender in future Presidential races, he just needs to get his name out more. I actually like the guy. He just has that Jethro Clampett feel about him. Overall, a weak field headed by a retread (Newt), a robot (Romney), and George Constanza's dad (Paul).
Click to expand...
Interesting, who do you think should run?
 
Krhazy said:
I don't know why anyone is making a fuss over the $10,000 bet. Romney picked a high number to demonstrate how confident he was that Perry was misrepresenting the facts.
Click to expand...

Ask Marie Antoinette why it matters so much. When people are suffering through desperate economic times things like a 10K bet throw it your face. If economic times were good or even moderate this would have not been a story. It is not the fact that he bets or even that he challenged another person with a wager. The problem is that betting someone 10K while a lot of the people int he audience are having trouble putting food ont he table and staying in their homes shows a complete lack of thoughtfulness and empathy. You cannot run a campaign on pretending to be like everyone else and then show them why you are not like everyone else and not expect fallout.
 
American said:
Interesting, who do you think should run?
Click to expand...
I wish that Marco Rubio would have ran. The guy is exactly the kind of guy we would have needed to beat Obama. He doesn't look or sound like your typical Republican. I know that is playing on his youth and ethnicity, but that is what the left does and they wouldn't be able to pull that card if Rubio were running. I think he would bring a young energy to the table. Herman Cain brought good energy to the table, however, he didn't have any substance behind it. He only knew economics. Rubio also has a more realistic view on foreign relations that most of my Tea Party brethren. I know we should stick to the founders philosophy of limited alliances that are only used during times of war. However, I'm sure never in the founders wildest dreams did they think something such as the nuclear bomb would be made. Thats the game changer in terms of foreign policy, in my opinion. I don't like Chris Christie but he would have been stronger than Huntsman and seems willing to breath some fire sometimes. However, if I could have it my way, he wouldn't be included in my ideal GOP debate because he's basically the same as Romney. I think Palin should have ran as well. The problem with her is that she has become such a caricature in the media that no one would ever take her seriously. My ideal debate stage would be Gingrich, Paul, Romney, Palin, Rubio, and Cain with Rubio winning. Those would be great debates because all of those guys can command a room. Huntsman, Bachmann (who I like, just not as President) and Santorum (not yet) are not capable of that. How about you?
 
AdamT said:
Romney came off looking like a richie-rich asshole. Perry did okay but he could have done better. He should have said, "thanks for the offer, Mitt, but like most Americans I can't afford to throw money around like that."
Click to expand...
The problem is, Perry can afford to throw money like that around. He should have said something about his faith not allowing him to gamble or something to that effect. That would have gone over well. Romney should have said 1 million honestly. Think about it. 1 million is a totally unrealistic figure that would have gotten the point across that he was trying to make. How many times have you said that to someone? Thats almost a common phrase in America. Its used to show someone how much confidence you have in your statement. 10 thousand is still in that gray area of "did he really mean that.......was he joking....." Whatever, it's over. Dumb statement. I just hope none of the other candidates try to seize that as a commercial line or zinger during a debate. They'll sound as dumb as he did and it will give him a chance to say it was an attempt at satire. But, you know Bachmann will jump all over it
 
MarineTpartier said:
The problem is, Perry can afford to throw money like that around.
Click to expand...

Perry is well off, but not super rich like Romney. But he probably doesn't want people thinking too much about how a guy who's been in politics his whole life, and didn't have family money, winds up with a net worth of close to $3 million. Because it looks suspicious as hell when you see how it happened....
 
MarineTpartier said:
I wish that Marco Rubio would have ran. The guy is exactly the kind of guy we would have needed to beat Obama. He doesn't look or sound like your typical Republican. I know that is playing on his youth and ethnicity, but that is what the left does and they wouldn't be able to pull that card if Rubio were running. I think he would bring a young energy to the table. Herman Cain brought good energy to the table, however, he didn't have any substance behind it. He only knew economics. Rubio also has a more realistic view on foreign relations that most of my Tea Party brethren. I know we should stick to the founders philosophy of limited alliances that are only used during times of war. However, I'm sure never in the founders wildest dreams did they think something such as the nuclear bomb would be made. Thats the game changer in terms of foreign policy, in my opinion. I don't like Chris Christie but he would have been stronger than Huntsman and seems willing to breath some fire sometimes. However, if I could have it my way, he wouldn't be included in my ideal GOP debate because he's basically the same as Romney. I think Palin should have ran as well. The problem with her is that she has become such a caricature in the media that no one would ever take her seriously. My ideal debate stage would be Gingrich, Paul, Romney, Palin, Rubio, and Cain with Rubio winning. Those would be great debates because all of those guys can command a room. Huntsman, Bachmann (who I like, just not as President) and Santorum (not yet) are not capable of that. How about you?
Click to expand...
What happened to Palin? SHe sure has gotten quiet since quitting her bus tour of the nation.
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
What happened to Palin? SHe sure has gotten quiet since quitting her bus tour of the nation.
Click to expand...
She's on Foxnews every once in a while. Usually on Hannity. You guys favorite commentator lol. Or was that Limbaugh.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom