Presidential debate on September 7, 2011
Perry and Romney are the front runners with a wild card Huntsman, together they got the most time in this debate. If they keep up, they can march forward. Bachman came in to the light now and then as a surprise, as if she did not exist, same was with Gingrich. Why don’t these guys drop out and let the three debate more intensively and receive some serious grilling and fine tuning. These are my random, unedited, random notes I sent on Twitter, I just don’t have the time to fix to put in flowing manner.
I like Obama, voted for him, held two rallies, wrote over a dozen articles in his favor.. He operates from the idea that all are mature people and will do their job without breathing on their necks. The Tea party people listen to shut up kind of language and Obama is not adept in it as a result they are creating a mess. Debt ceiling should have been increased for the job growth and Obama should have threatened to veto or go 14. He did not do that, he wants consensus from radicals and it ain’t going to happen. A sign of weak leadership.
PERRY – Good suit – came across confidentPerry has strong appeal to the conservatives when he talks about punishing those boys and sticking to the guns of ponzi schemes on social security. He has got that Red-neck appeal. The state killing the criminal? Nope’s we need to have compassion – What’s difference between Iran and Saudi Arabia where they hang and stone to death. He will lose out on sticking to his gun on the Ponzi scheme story on social security. He has negative on issuing an executive order to inoculate the girls against aids, state intervention? No way. Good exchange and come back with Romney
ROMNEY – Bad Suit – came across confident
Romney does not have a strong appeal, viewed as intelligent but will not cut it, if he does no improve. Hits Perry in the guise of Obama – what does a guy know who has never worked in private sector Fully prepared to debate, had everything on his finger tips. He keeps scoring negatives on his health care
HUNTSMAN – Best Dressed, loved his Tie, looked presidential-
He was eloquent in his response and seems to have vast experience. Makes most sense in his answers, just as Obama does, how much of it is really implementable?
BACHMAN – Could have dressed better.
Good on immigration policy though shared a bad example of visiting Florida- just because the Cuban folks in the Restaurants don’t like the policies… what is her take? Moral? Will lose out on thoughtless rhetoric of $ 2/Gallon Gas – Market determines that, not her. Good to see her praise Obama on something…
PAUL – No Presidential looks, sorry Ron
If they (state) feels the obligation to help the poor….. his belief stems from the idea that every individual is independent, healthy and not sick. That is a wrong policy Paul – talk with people who have children born withdiseases, aids from blood transfusion… if it was left to the pre- civil rights act, the locals would let the down trodden die. ]
CAIN – Good suit, clarity in speech
He was on bent on cleaning everything and fixing everything. Life and politics are not logical and he cannot fire people at will, or shut down a business if it is not profitable… can’t do that with life and politics where other lives are dependent.
GINGRICH – he knows the stuff, but the
wrong stuff. No idea why he is there
BRIAN, the Anchorman – Had difficulty in asking
questions, too much talk for short questions
OBAMA-CON-ME? OR Obama economy? I just invented this term
Mike Ghouse is committed to building a cohesive America and offers pluralistic solutions on issues of the day to the media and the public. He is a speaker thinker and a writer on the topics of pluralism, cohesive societies, Politics, Islam, interfaith, India and Peace. Over a thousand articles have been published on the topics and two of his books are poised to be released on Pluralism and Islam. Mike’s work is reflected in 4 website’s and 27 Blogs indexed at http://www.mikeghouse.net/ and you can find all of his current articles at www.TheGhousediary.com