Ten Republican White House hopefuls are set to square off in Manchester, New Hampshire, Tuesday night in a debate sponsored by CNN, WMUR-TV, and the New Hampshire Union Leader. This will be the third such outing for the GOP candidates over the last month. Is three times the charm? Which candidates do you think have the most to lose - or gain - headed into Tuesday's big event? Weigh in.
I don't think the next president of the United States has entered the race yet!
Mike Huckabee is the only hope the republicans have to a victory over the democrats. The Bush leaguers have done more harm not only to the U.S. but to the world as a whole. He has infinitely multiplied and utilized fear and hate to such a degree with his and herr cheney's nazi tactics that we and the rest of the world may never recover. I used to look forward to going to Canada, now no matter whether we're going to or returning from I feel like I'm in a old WW II movie and minus the Otto Preminger like accent I hear "show me your papers". Mike Huckabee represents a combination that no other candidate in either party posses and they are intelligence, common sense, the ethics that made America what it once was.
Apparently not Newt Gingrich.
The more debates, the more Giuliani loses ground.
"Smile as you charge through the cannon smoke!" Fred Thompson will earn my vote.
Based upon the venue (a school in a state where most voters take their time before blindly supporting one candidate), Rudy Giuliani will probably not receive the resounding applause, accorded him in the last debate, should he attack Ron Paul. That gives Rep. Paul more breathing room to make his own points, should Mr. Blitzer give him enough time. Ergo, Ron Paul has something to gain and Giuliani has to worry about the rep. from Texas trotting out a summary of his reading assignment for the former mayor of New York.
That said, a truly machiavellian move, by any of the other candidates, would be to ignite the debate between Ron Paul and Giuliani if they are asked to defend their own positions vis-a-vis Iraq. Romney and McCain can afford the probable resultant bump in support for Ron Paul, while at the same time deflecting substantive investigation of their own positions. With the campaign starting so early, the major candidates can only remain viable by staying off the radar for as long as possible. No one wants to repeat Howard Dean's meteoric rise and commensurate fall.
Definition of a cult from dictionary.com:
Cult: a particular system of religious worship, especially with reference to its rites and ceremonies.
Yes, Mormonism is a cult. So is every other religion in the world. Next.
Romney has the most to lose.
Come on, last year we hammered the Dems for nominating an aristocratic MA flip-flopper…now we’re going to nominate one ourselves?
We should know better.
Guiliani. The guy will lead us to a guaranteed war with Iran and North Korea. I hope all of his supporters back it up by enlisting in the military.
Please, can we dispense with the "true conservative" crap? Here's a fact: A strong majority of the American electorate are "moderates", neither "true liberals" or "true conservatives". I'm one of them. On a scale of 1 = Sean Hannity and 10 = Michael Moore, I'm about a 4.
On the one hand, I'm in favor of "amnesty" as long as it's accompanied by serious border enforcement. I don't care in the slightest if two people of the same sex want to get married, nor do I feel threatened by it. I strongly support stem cell research, even if the cell lines are obtained from embryos at fertility clinics that are about to be destroyed. I support keeping prayer out of the public schools. I think global warming is not fiction but is rather a serious problem that needs to be addressed. I don't see anything wrong with abortion in the first trimester of a pregnancy or to protect the life of the mother.
But I also strongly support the effort in Iraq, aggressively going after terrorists worldwide, the Patriot Act, and reducing taxes and government spending (something at which our supposedly "true conservative" president has been a "true disappointment.").
Finally, I believe that it's far, far better to compromise with the other party in order to get things done that it is to "stand on principle!" And you know what? The great majority of the American electorate agrees with me.
As for tonight's debate, I think that of the serious Republican candidates, I think that both Rudy and McCain need to be careful, and they need to be careful that they don't come across as pandering to the fringe right wing of the Republican Party. The "Looney Left" has taken over the Democratic Party, and we saw last night just how ridiculous they all looked falling all over each other to try and prove who was more "progressive." We Republicans need to make damn sure that we don't do the same thing with the low-brow, knuckle-draggers on the fringes of our own party.
As for Mitt Romney, he has a lot to lose in that if he doesn't make a move up in the polls soon, he's done. So, I'd expect him to be on the attack tonight.
Finally, Fred Thompson needs to quit screwing around and get in the race.
Whatever party captures the middle of the political spectrum in this country will be the party that wins the White House in 2008. McCain is my favorite and has been for some time. But I would enthusiastically support either Rudy Guiluani or Fred Thompson, even though Fred may be more to the right on some issues than I'd prefer. But if we nominate someone like Romney or Huckabee, Hillary could beat us.
I've voted Democratic the past two elections but if Ron Paul gets the nomination, I would jump ship to the GOP simply b/c I want somebody in the White House that truly understands global politics and the economic/social/political developments that have led us to the world situation today. He understands that we cannot fight a "War on Terror" and we should be hunting down and killing Osama bin Laden and Al Qaida, those who really attacked us on 9/11. Terrorism is a tactic, not a country. We need change and I sincerely hope Paul gets the GOP nomination, good luck to him.
It seems to me that the Republicans have a true presidential candidate in Mitt Romney, and I would be surprised if they did not realize it.
tom tancredo has has a lot to gain because poll after poll has shown that knowledgeable americans are against any type of amnesty, and he is the only candidate who has stood his ground on this volitale issue. american citizens want our current laws enforced and tom tancredo is the only candidate willing to do this. if his name gets out there, the people of this nation will support him.
There is no way that Rudy Giuliani can get the GOP nomination until his team educates Southern Republican conservatives that while he is a Roman Catholic, Roman Catholics are the original Christians. I do not know how many times I have had to explain this to people when I travel south of the Mason-Dixon.
RON PAUL is shining the light of truth and the other candidates are scurrying like roaches. The other candidates have the most to loose when Congressman Paul ignites the beacon of truth! Watch them run! Watch them hide!
That's good enough reason not to support Mr. Thompson.
It's so refreshing to read comments like those of Mr. Castleton posted above. The more people understand how irrelevant questions of gay marriage and abortion are when it comes to electing a president, the more hope we have of things improving at least a little in this country after the next election.
The current president has done so much damage over the last six years that the only prayer we have of recovering is to elect a leader who is not afraid to speak strongly and as honestly as possible about all the mistakes that have been made.
Unless we want more of the same we CAN NOT afford a Giuliani or Romney administration, and if people would stop thinking of elections as a game-show (for which all the major media outlets are to blame) and started understanding just how IMPORTANT the job of President of the United States is–especially in such a crucial historical moment–my faith in our democracry might just be restored...a little.
Ron Paul seems to be the only one on the Republican side, and in fact one of the only candidates in the entire field who wants to elevate the dialog and bring about some genuine change. But thanks to the deplorable way the media covers campaigns, and the money-driven way the whole electoral system operates, candidates like him have no chance.
As for who has the most to lose, it's Rudy. When is someone finally going to expose him for the fraud he is? It's so plain to see that it boggles my mind he's the front-runner!
I think Guiliani is at the very bottom. He's losing support from conservative christians all over the place. The only thing that might save him is the guys who planned an attack on the JFK airport. (Terrorism is his biggest issue.)
Romney is flying high, but he's so likely to flip, that he will probably fall hard if pressed on those issues that he doesn't stand firm on. So, he's most likely to fall.
McCain's amnesty bill will knock him down during this next debate. He even dropped the F-Bomb recently, it's just not something I see as presidential. I think it will come up a few times during the next debate.
I think if they play their cards right, Tancredo, Huckabee and Paul will gain a whole lot of traction from this debate.
I'm pretty sure Guliani will have the most to lose because of his absolute pathetic rational, the same goes for McCain, he can't win NH again. Though, Ron Paul and Mitt Romney have the most to gain, Paul will probably appeal to more people in NH than Romney, but Romney will undoubtedly come out on top.
They all have something to lose! This is why Ron Paul stands out among the rest!
He is laying it all on the line as he goes against the party line! It is a gamble but i believe that the truth he speaks is and will resonate with the American people... this is why all of the rest may lose big time!
I think they all have a lot to lose thanks to the Bush Administration shananigans of the past 6 1/2 years.
The GOP slate is a bunch of tired grumpy old rich white men.
Giuliani acts like a hot tempered fascist pig while Romney wants to at least double the size of Gitmo. And we absolutely do not need another Reagan wannabe.
We need someone who will fix our issues at home and abroad. and not spend their time imposing their religion on us and the world. Hiding behind the cross is not an enabler to engage in arbitrary violence and torture.
The Media has the most to gain and to lose in this debate. If Ron Paul was given a chance and not marginalized he would be a true contender for the Presidency. Hopefully, the public outcry for more knowledge on him will cause a reaction. Giuliani has the most to lose tonight, he is having his core accomplishment being eroded away when fully analyzed.
I think that if we do not get a president, either republican or democratic or other, that can not see past all the less important issues. Then the country has the most to lose. Why has no leader dealt with the gay marriage issue by just putting in legislation for civil unions, all the rights without using the name marriage. Of course you can never make everyone happy. Abortion is not going to completely go away. Even if Roe v. Wade is overturned it them becomes a state issue.
This country was founded on freedom of religion and not having Christianity shoved down everyones throat. And that is what seems to be happening now. We are much in danger of becoming a theocracy.
They all stand to lose a lot to Ron Paul...Ron's the only conservative in the entire group, and once America sees that, the rest of the field will be in big trouble. Go Ron!!
I have just two words for hope of the best of both worlds on the Republican ticket:
"Thompson – Rudy"