Who won the debate?

[Politico]

An honorable mention for Prime Minister Erdogan, who is apparently an Islamic terrorist.

Gingrich got a STANDING OVATION on his child labor comments. They loved that. I loved that, and I disagree with it. It was great political stuff. Definitely not a loser with Republicans and probably not even a loser in the general election.

The nation really is lost if it fully endorses taking children out of the classroom so they can be janitors. There are better ways to improve work efforts among the inexperienced and young (i.e., 15 and older, not 10 year old kids), specifically by lowering the minimum wage rate.

When did Gingrich ever say to take them out of the classroom?

Obviously they cannot learn in the classroom and clean up as janitors at the same time. They only have so much time in school. There is a trade-off there at some point.

[Penelope]

Oh look, Romney supports justifying a mediocre performance.

It was mediocre, but what can you do with an audience like that? South Carolina has always been a reach, so we'll see. Even if he loses in South Carolina, he'll still wrap things up in Florida and Nevada. Gingrich is nothing more than a whiny troll at this point. I know Nevada is locked up for Romney, and my southern sources tell me he's in good position in Florida too.

Guys, he's got sources!

[RI]

An honorable mention for Prime Minister Erdogan, who is apparently an Islamic terrorist.

Gingrich got a STANDING OVATION on his child labor comments. They loved that. I loved that, and I disagree with it. It was great political stuff. Definitely not a loser with Republicans and probably not even a loser in the general election.

The nation really is lost if it fully endorses taking children out of the classroom so they can be janitors. There are better ways to improve work efforts among the inexperienced and young (i.e., 15 and older, not 10 year old kids), specifically by lowering the minimum wage rate.

When did Gingrich ever say to take them out of the classroom?

Obviously they cannot learn in the classroom and clean up as janitors at the same time. They only have so much time in school. There is a trade-off there at some point.

k. I'm sure children/teens have no free time whatsoever.

[Sam Spade]

An honorable mention for Prime Minister Erdogan, who is apparently an Islamic terrorist.

Gingrich got a STANDING OVATION on his child labor comments. They loved that. I loved that, and I disagree with it. It was great political stuff. Definitely not a loser with Republicans and probably not even a loser in the general election.

The nation really is lost if it fully endorses taking children out of the classroom so they can be janitors. There are better ways to improve work efforts among the inexperienced and young (i.e., 15 and older, not 10 year old kids), specifically by lowering the minimum wage rate.

When did Gingrich ever say to take them out of the classroom?

Obviously they cannot learn in the classroom and clean up as janitors at the same time. They only have so much time in school. There is a trade-off there at some point.

k. I'm sure children/teens have no free time whatsoever.

This site is proof of that point.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

didn't watch, but not surprised Newt won....though, within a couple of hours he'll probably cut a new ad claiming a national defense issue over Romney's choice of shoes, and be forced to issue an apology right before the polls open.

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

I don't have a problem with teenagers taking jobs or helping out their community, but telling them to compete with adults in the job market for janitorial positions (which pay very little to uneducated adults, as it is) isn't a good idea for society or the economy.

[TheGlobalizer]

Gingrich killed it.  Hated almost everything he said, but he was all red meat for the deeply conservative SC primary voters.  Paul would have been close but he stubbed his toe a bit on OBL.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Romney's platitudes were weaker to me than usual tonight

doesn't it make you want to gag?!  seriously, has there ever been a candidate who spoke so much while saying so little?

[TheGlobalizer]

Romney's platitudes were weaker to me than usual tonight

doesn't it make you want to gag?!  seriously, has there ever been a candidate who spoke so much while saying so little?

Obama?

[Oswald Acted Alone, You Kook]

My SC Predictions:

1. Mittens/Newtie
2. Mittens/Newtie
3. Saintly Rick
4. Conspircist
5. Bush 44

[Stranger in a strange land]

Romney's platitudes were weaker to me than usual tonight

doesn't it make you want to gag?!  seriously, has there ever been a candidate who spoke so much while saying so little?

Obama?

With Obama, at least you know where he stands.

[Lief 🗽]

The thing with hearing Obama or Gingrich or even Santorum speak, is that when they talk about issues they're truly passionate about, you can hear in their voice and in the language that they use that they've thought through these problems, they have approached them using their ideologies, values and belief systems, and they have come to a conclusion that they truly believe in. Now I obviously don't agree with the conclusions that Gingrich and Santorum come up with, but you can tell that they have looked at problems and deeply thought about them. Whether it was Santorum's family speech last night or Gingrich's on the working poor, there is substance there.

Romney, in stark contrast, is just a robot who parrots right-wing pablum. It's clear that he doesn't care about issues or ideas or solving problems. He just wants to win an election, so he's saying the words that he's programmed himself to say, through constant practice, that he is told will most aid him in winning the election. He's really not much better than Perry in that regard, just a lot more articulate.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Romney, in stark contrast, is just a robot who parrots right-wing pablum. It's clear that he doesn't care about issues or ideas or solving problems. He just wants to win an election, so he's saying the words that he's programmed himself to say, through constant practice, that he is told will most aid him in winning the election.

Agreed, and I find it extremely sickening.

And the GOP establishment’s pushing of Romney reminds me a lot of 1978 remake of Invasion of the Body Snatchers:

“Nothing changes.  You can have the same life.  You'll be born again into an untroubled world, free of anxiety, fear,...hate.  Your minds and memories'll be totally absorbed. Everything remains intact.  There's no need for hate now...or love.  Don't be trapped by old concepts.  There's nothing to be afraid of. They were right. It's painless. It's good. Come. Sleep…”

[Torie]

The thing with hearing Obama or Gingrich or even Santorum speak, is that when they talk about issues they're truly passionate about, you can hear in their voice and in the language that they use that they've thought through these problems, they have approached them using their ideologies, values and belief systems, and they have come to a conclusion that they truly believe in. Now I obviously don't agree with the conclusions that Gingrich and Santorum come up with, but you can tell that they have looked at problems and deeply thought about them. Whether it was Santorum's family speech last night or Gingrich's on the working poor, there is substance there.

Romney, in stark contrast, is just a robot who parrots right-wing pablum. It's clear that he doesn't care about issues or ideas or solving problems. He just wants to win an election, so he's saying the words that he's programmed himself to say, through constant practice, that he is told will most aid him in winning the election. He's really not much better than Perry in that regard, just a lot more articulate.

Sorry, but Mittens has thought more deeply, and has forgotten more, about all of these issues, than Newt and Rick will ever collectively know. You are conflating style (Mittens tends to stay self contained - he does not wear his heart on his sleeve, that is just not his temperament), with knowledge and substance. Mittens isn't feeding you the red meat that you want, to keep yourself entertained, while trapping himself into rendering himself unelectable (the list of positions Newt took last night alone that would render himself unelectable, is probably more than the numbers of fingers on both of my hands). You know what you really ought to do, Lief? You should listen to Mitt in a hourly interview, like the one he had with the Manchester Union reporters.

[Politico]

Anybody who has seen Mitt appear before an editorial board can attest to the fact he has substance that matches Obama. They're both "no drama"-type personalities hence the low-key style. Mitt always listens to his advisers, of course, especially with regards to messages/key words that will have the greatest impact upon voters. That is only rational.

[Sam Spade]

Romney's platitudes were weaker to me than usual tonight

doesn't it make you want to gag?!  seriously, has there ever been a candidate who spoke so much while saying so little?

I'm not a Republican, but if I were, I'd find most of what Mitt Romney says "insulting to my intelligence."  Which makes you wonder about those who support him.

Of course, since the GOP establishment and the fundies are devoid of intelligence right now, maybe it doesn't really matter.