McCain looks like a bumbling old Washington insider. He says the right things on SOME issues, but he did so much damage over the last several years that I don't trust him.

Giuliani is the best natural leader - but dammit he's wrong on abortion and I don't trust him on guns.

Romney reminds me of slick willy, sorry - he does. Don't know where he REALLY is on abortion. And he's wrong on guns.

Huckabee seems OK. First time I really considered him. He rose in my estimation.

Ron Paul is a joke. He's running for the wrong party.

None of the rest stood out.

My votes for Ron Paul. At least someone has the b@lls to say what they think. It makes it even better when what they think is spot on!

Too bad the FoxNews moderator changed the subject. The confederate flag issue is waaaaaayyyyyy more important than the whyfores of Iraq.

Cheers!

Who won?

1) Rudy (Rudy took 4th-5th last debate) strong comback, decisive. . .presidential.
2) Mitt. . .people can try to hate Mitt, but he is strong and had another good debate.

Distant 3rd. . .McCain.

Surprise. . .great VP candiate, Hunter.
Step back. . .Huckabee.

Waiting for Newt. . .

When will these guys act like Republicans and secure the border first? Tancredo was right. . .you can't depend on any of them except Hunter (and Tancredo) on that issue.

Who won?

1) Rudy (Rudy took 4th-5th last debate) strong comback, decisive. . .presidential.
2) Mitt. . .people can try to hate Mitt, but he is strong and had another good debate.

Distant 3rd. . .McCain.

Surprise. . .great VP candiate, Hunter.
Step back. . .Huckabee.

Waiting for Newt. . .

When will these guys act like Republicans and secure the border first? Tancredo was right. . .you can't depend on any of them except Hunter (and Tancredo) on that issue.

I didn't watch the debate; the real contenders, Fred and Newt, are more interesting to me this early. Had I been watching, I'd have thrown a brick through my TV when that idiot Ron Paul said what he did. Oh well, at least Erica got a kick out of it. And I'm suuure Erica watched it...yeah, riiiight.

Although my candidate Newt wasn't in the debate, I did watch the debate and thought Huckabee was right on point. I like Duncan Hunter and thought he did quite good in the MSNBC debate also. I really like his stance on border security and the same goes for Tancredo. I am not sure who the heck got drunk and voted for Ron Paul, but I have absolutely no faith or respect for the guy. I wish I could get past Rudy during 911, but I can't--he has my deep admiration and I like his stance on terrorism. I want someone who is tough on the issues and uplifts the Republican party, I don't think Mitt Romney does that nor does Rudy. John McCain is a hero and a wonderful man, I just think he is a lousy politician and he really should retire. All in all, I thought the candidates showed some intestinal fortitude for a change. I am still looking for that pitbull who says what he means and means what he says. A Republican who is tough on the issues, tough on crime, tough on big government, tough on the border issue, tough on the trade deficit, not afraid to tell the world to "kiss off", not afraid to tell the MidEast to knock off the nonsense or become a glass factory, and puts America first.

Other than the fact that Romney is more intellectually honest than Bill Clinton, I agree with Kahn right down the line. I admire Gingrich's intelligence and communication ability, but I think he'd make a lousy President, and I'd be surprised if he gets in the race. I'm intrigued by Fred Thompson, but need to learn a lot more about him (assuming he enters the race) before supporting him. I did watch the debate, and, even though he didn't get to say much, I was more impressed with Duncan Hunter than any of the other 2nd tier candidates. He at least answered the questions posed to him.

Honestly, I think Fred Thompson won the debate with his response to Michael Moore. That was down right hilarious. Also, the timing was perfect.

jbiccum, for those of us who didn't catch Thompson's response to Michael Moore, please enlighten us.

Thompson's video response may be seen at Hot Air, Fred Thompson

That response to Michael "I hope more troops come home in bodybags" Moore is hilarious!! Thompson was right ... Moore belongs in an institution.

I'm still on the fence on a few candidates but one thing is 100% sure, the FOX debate was far more fair and balanced than MSNBC.

Kim,

Exactly how was it more fair and balanced?

Are you guys above me serious? Newt Gingrich is a good Republican candidate? He's an adulterer, a drug user, and a draft dodger. That makes a good candidate? Sounds simliar to who we have in office now and look how well that worked out. Anyone with even an inkling of an idea of what the Conservative and Republican parties were founded on, should look into Ron Paul, the only REAL Republican left. People seem to think to be a Republican you have to agree with Bush, be a war hawk, and cut taxes for the rich, while the exact opposite is what the party was founded on in the 1800s. The so called Republicans of today are so far from what the party originally stood for it's laughable. Ron Paul has been declared the winner of every debate he's participated in by every single poll taken. And how again is Rudy Giuliani strong on terrorism? Last time I checked he was the mayor of the only city to be attacked by terrorists in the last 50 years. People have this image that he's strong on terrorism and will be a good leader simply because he was mayor during 9/11, but the fact of the matter is despite the great job he did cleaning up New York, he hasn't the slightest idea of what's going on in Iraq, and his comments to Ron Paul prove it. Has he ever read a book on Al-Qaeda or Iraq? Read Al-Qaedas 1998 fatwa in which they say quite clearly that the reason they want to attack Americans is because of their occupation of countries in the Middle East. So now Rudy knows more about Al-Qaeda's motives then Al-Qaeda themselves? Please, go back to wearing a dress and cheating on your wife Rudy, you're not wanted.

Clearly Rudy won. He is the tough guy who on 911 was attacked and sees no way in which American foreign policy meddling into middle eastern affairs fo 60 years could have angered islamist so much that they would dare attack his city. Also, he is for torture!! Yeah baby.

RU kidding me, Eric? There were no stupid questions asked like the questions asked during the MSNBC debate. How do you feel about another Clinton in the WH? Gimme a break!

"Also, he is for torture!! Yeah baby."

-Hey me too! If I got to torture someone to get information to save thousands of lives, what the hell is the problem? I'm glad to see that you agree with that view Apoxonu! At least Rudy has the balls to do whats neccessary, unlike his democratic rivals....

My view is this: Man made the laws, not the other way around. If man (In this case, our Pres.) deems it neccesary to bend/break the rules in order to protect the greater good. Then do it.

"If man (In this case, our Pres.) deems it neccesary to bend/break the rules in order to protect the greater good. Then do it."

Wow, this slope is real slippery!

Cheers!

zachster-

The only person with balls to withstand torture on that dais the other night, rejected torture. By allowing the pres. to disregard the laws of this country and the laws of God, if you believe in that sort of thing, destroys what is truly the fabric of this great nation. Besides that ticking time bomb scenario is a bogus scenario that would never happen. Some soldiers with greater expertise in this field than you or me have a dim view of torutre. Read this article.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/16/AR2007051602395.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

Zachster-

You aren't by chance really Alberto Gonzales or Nixon's ghost? The President is above the law, you must like tyranny.

HAHA, no, no, I'm nobody's ghost. And yes that sounds like an awfully slippery slope. What I meant was thats my answer if someone were to ask me the question that the candidates were given about the terrorist attacks. Im sorry, but if i had someone in custody that had information that would save the US from another imminent attack, then yes I would use whatever means neccessary to get that information. If torture needed. Then torture gets used. I have no tolerance who plans attacks on our country. Call me biased.
-Zach

I think Rudy did.

I am not fond of Romney for some reason. He just gives me a bad vibe. Like he is for show, not for real. Almost like a bad TV Evangelist. I just dont like him. Way too smooth IMO.

Fed Thompson. I hope he runs. Id like to see/hear more from him/of him!

Newt? No thanks. Im not a big fan of his either.

So far, im leaning towards Rudy and Fred (if he steps in)

Folks: The Torture: waterboarding, playing loud music, sleep deprivation, IS NOT exactly torture now is it? Torture is cutting off heads, cutting out tongues, chopping off limbs, or ears, hanging
bodies from bridges, dragging bodies through the streets....NOW THAT, is torture, and I am now only
talking about the Middle East. Read history on Japan, or Germany, if you want to KNOW what torture is. Yes, John McCain was tortured, and he
above all should KNOW the difference. The first paragraph can almost be catagorized as "annoyance"
and by the way, I don't care WHAT, our people have
to do to extract information to thwart future attacks on our citizens or our military....DO IT-if it saves lives, DO IT AND STOP WITH THE TORTURE
YOU CLAIM IS TORTURE, WHEN IT AMOUNTS TO TICKLING ONES FEET WITH A FEATHER, IS THAT BETTER?

THIS IS WAR, AND WE DON'T NEED TO KEEP GETTING OUR
PEOPLE KILLED BY THE LIKES OF SAVAGES, BECAUSE OUR
POLITICAL PANDERERS WANT TO 'TAKE THE HIGH ROAD'-
LIKE THE ENEMY IS FOLLOWING THE GENEVA CONVENTION
LAWS RIGHT? GET OVER THE BULLSHIT, AND REALIZE THESE SAVAGES WOULD DO ANYTHING THEY NEEDED TO, TO
KILL YOU, AS THEY LUST FOR TORTURE, TRUE TORTURE.

Oh yeah, I know, the ones who used to post on this with their objections have the sameo sameo theory: "then this makes us just like them"....

Yeah, and THAT is the only thing they understand,
brute force (in retaliation) Stop this whining and worrying about "hurting someone's feelings, that want to kill Americans"...Here, or over there

I like Rudy, but I think he has too much baggage with the marriages, and his flip-flop on issues. I think he handled 9/ll as a true leader should, but that is not going to do it. Mitt Rommney is not only an effective speaker, but he has a certain Presidental air about him. Know he is against the immigration(amnesty) charade, and on other issues, he is conservative, as well as a one
woman, man-God knows, that we need someone with a
moral message. I don't care WHAT his religion is,
as that should NOT be an issue for any candidate.
If the likes of a Robert Byrd can become Senator for all these years with his KKK background, and using the N. word over and over----guess there's hope for many. I think with Newt, who is super intelligent, too much baggage(though I would like to see Mitt appoint him V.P.) but the low percenters need to think about their true chances,
and if they are diluting the votes to a very viable candidate, they need to get off the ego thing. I think there are health issues with Fred Thompson(or the Dems will make it one-especially the "Clinton-Mud-Machine"-and he isn't likely. As for McCain, he is a RhInO, and I didn't like his turning his back on the President, and his health is at issue. As for the debate showing Ron Paul, what a joke..Guess we aren't supposed to KNOW, that the Libs, jammed the lines to vote for him, to be able to say: "See the people don't like this war, and that's why Paul got so many votes"
Jammed lines/text messaging folks, that's all that was. Probably that nut Dean was texting votes to Paul-they aren't beneath trying to make a point about someone like Paul, claiming it's the "way the whole country feels"...yeah right!

You seem to be forgetting there Zachster that torture is the MOST UNRELIABLE form of interrogation known to man. Why? Because when tortured people will tell you whatever you want to hear, whether it's true or not. So odds are if some guy was being tortured because he had information on an "imminent attack" (oh yeah, Bush had the information that an attack was imminent as well, should we have tortured him for it?)he would just lie to us and we'd go off to the place he told us the bombs are and stand there stupidly as the real bombs go off somewhere else.

People keep talking about Rudy like he's some sort of saint. The man is absolutely clueless, I could beat him in a debate. People say "Rudy clearly won the debate", even though every single poll says Ron Paul won and Rudy proved himself to be a jackass when he sounded off on Ron for daring to speak the truth.

Wake up neocons---you are wrong. Mark, you are only spitting out propaganda to people. Those who agree with you are as brainless as they are bloodthirsty.

Ron Paul, hands down. I prefer a pragmatic foreign policy. I'm not going to have my children die for Israel, or Taiwan, or whatever other insanity the neocons have in store.

But he probably doesn't have much of a chance in the face of the Cross-Dressing Penguin.

Ron Paul sweeped the the debate. I thought I was watching a communist/socialist debate until I heard Ron Paul speak. He reminded me of what a conservative is supposed to be like. Thanks Ron.

It was very refreshing to hear from Ron Paul.

I think there are a lot of republicans out there (me included) who are sick of our governments huge spending and waste, weak stance on immigration, expensive foreign policy that is only inciting more Islamic hatred.

I know he won't win, but he will have a large impact in the next 8 months as more people here him speak.