Debate Politics Forums
Speak your voice
Go Back   Debate Politics Forums > Debate Politics Forum > Archives

Archives CNBC removes poll, Ron Paul wins Michigan debate by landslide; After watching the debates, and analyzing what was said, i cannot believe the way Ron Paul handled the Michigan debate. ...

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-11-07, 01:31 AM   #1 (permalink)
Misesian


 
Goldenboy219's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Last Online: Yesterday 02:37 PM
Location: Evansville Indiana
Posts: 1,576
Thanks: 799
Thanked 185 Times in 146 Posts
Lean: Libertarian
Gender: Male

Current Mood:
Aggressive
CNBC removes poll, Ron Paul wins Michigan debate by landslide

After watching the debates, and analyzing what was said, i cannot believe the way Ron Paul handled the Michigan debate. It was a debate that was supposed to feature the economy, and Dr. Paul kept to it in every sense of the word. Not only that, but he was only given 7 of 120 minutes when their were 9 candidates debating. Giuliani spent most of his time talking smack about the Clintons, and never really said anything original concerning this particular debate...

The results of the MSNBC poll were absolutely astounding... Well, ill let you look for yourselves: Vote on the Michigan Republican debate - The Debates - MSNBC.com

CNBC had a similar poll, but the results were no different so they actually took it down! Nothing like that 4 branch of government is there??? Makes you wonder why they put it up in the first place...

When Ron Paul won New Hampshire debates, (cell phone text), this is what Hannity said:
YouTube - New Hampshire Debate, FOX NEWS LIED


It is becoming increasingly clear that the Ron Paul revolution is coming. I never thought he had a chance in hell, but after watching the debates, the rest of the Republican candidates should be ashamed of themselves in their blasphemous attempt to call themselves conservatives...

My favorite part of the Michigan debate was when Mitt Romney said he had to talk to his lawyers when asked if he would go to war without the consent of congress. Paul then erupted and said, why dont you open the constitution and read it, its illegal to go to war without a declaration of war...
Goldenboy219 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!Spurl this Post!
Inline Ads
Old 10-11-07, 09:15 AM   #2 (permalink)
TOJ
Professor


 
TOJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Last Online: Yesterday 10:30 PM
Location: USA
Posts: 1,872
Thanks: 106
Thanked 257 Times in 212 Posts

Current Mood:
Cynical
Re: CNBC removes poll, Ron Paul wins Michigan debate by landslide

Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldenboy219 View Post
...

It is becoming increasingly clear that the Ron Paul revolution is coming.

...
Oh Goldie, you are so silly and headed for such a disappointment.

TOJ is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!Spurl this Post!
Old 10-11-07, 09:38 AM   #3 (permalink)
I can feel your hatred
Mod team member

 
WI Crippler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Last Online: Yesterday 06:14 PM
Location: Where the sun doesn't shine
Posts: 7,764
Thanks: 977
Thanked 2,245 Times in 1,356 Posts
Lean: Independent
Gender: Male

Awards:
Moderation Team:  Thank you!! US Marines:  Served 5 years active duty in the United States Marine Corps. Veteran of Operation Iraqi Freedom. 

Re: CNBC removes poll, Ron Paul wins Michigan debate by landslide

Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldenboy219 View Post

My favorite part of the Michigan debate was when Mitt Romney said he had to talk to his lawyers when asked if he would go to war without the consent of congress. Paul then erupted and said, why dont you open the constitution and read it, its illegal to go to war without a declaration of war...
I thought the President had 30 or 60 days or some such amount with which he could declare war with Congressional approval.
__________________
"Fatigue makes cowards of us all" - Vincent T. Lombardi.
WI Crippler is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!Spurl this Post!
Old 10-11-07, 10:09 AM   #4 (permalink)
Guru

 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Last Online: Yesterday 10:08 PM
Posts: 3,246
Thanks: 237
Thanked 653 Times in 420 Posts
Lean: Libertarian
Gender: Male

Re: CNBC removes poll, Ron Paul wins Michigan debate by landslide

Quote:
Originally Posted by WI Crippler View Post
I thought the President had 30 or 60 days or some such amount with which he could declare war with Congressional approval.
Let me check with my lawyers.
ARealConservative is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!Spurl this Post!
Old 10-11-07, 03:18 PM   #5 (permalink)
Misesian


 
Goldenboy219's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Last Online: Yesterday 02:37 PM
Location: Evansville Indiana
Posts: 1,576
Thanks: 799
Thanked 185 Times in 146 Posts
Lean: Libertarian
Gender: Male

Current Mood:
Aggressive
Thread Starter Re: CNBC removes poll, Ron Paul wins Michigan debate by landslide

Article 1 section 8, line 11: The Congress shall have Power To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water; raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years; provide and maintain a Navy;

make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces; provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;

And To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

The President does not have the authority to do any of that listed above.

War Powers Resolution of 1973: Section 2. (a) It is the purpose of this joint resolution to fulfill the intent of the framers of the Constitution of the United States and insure that the collective judgement of both the Congress and the President will apply to the introduction of United States Armed Forces into hostilities, or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicate by the circumstances, and to the continued use of such forces in hostilities or in such situations.

(b) Under article I, section 8, of the Constitution, it is specifically provided that the Congress shall have the power to make all laws necessary and proper for carrying into execution, not only its own powers but also all other powers vested by the Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.

(c) The constitutional powers of the President as Commander-in-Chief to introduce United States Armed Forces into hostilities, or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, are exercised only pursuant to (1) a declaration of war, (2) specific statutory authorization, or (3) a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces.

Section 3. The President in every possible instance shall consult with Congress before introducing United States Armed Forces into hostilities or into situation where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, and after every such introduction shall consult regularly with the Congress until United States Armed Forces are no longer engaged in hostilities or have been removed from such situations.

4. (a) In the absence of a declaration of war, in any case in which United States Armed Forces are introduced--
(1) into hostilities or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances;
(2) into the territory, airspace or waters of a foreign nation, while equipped for combat, except for deployments which relate solely to supply, replacement, repair, or training of such forces; or
(3) in numbers which substantially enlarge United States Armed Forces equipped for combat already located in a foreign nation; the president shall submit within 48 hours to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and to the President pro tempore of the Senate a report, in writing, setting forth--
(A) the circumstances necessitating the introduction of United States Armed Forces;
(B) the constitutional and legislative authority under which such introduction took place; and
(C) the estimated scope and duration of the hostilities or involvement.

(b) The President shall provide such other information as the Congress may request in the fulfillment of its constitutional responsibilities with respect to committing the Nation to war and to the use of United States Armed Forces abroad

(c) Whenever United States Armed Forces are introduced into hostilities or into any situation described in subsection (a) of this section, the President shall, so long as such armed forces continue to be engaged in such hostilities or situation, report to the Congress periodically on the status of such hostilities or situation as well as on the scope and duration of such hostilities or situation, but in no event shall he report to the Congress less often than once every six months.

Section 5. (b) Within sixty calendar days after a report is submitted or is required to be submitted pursuant to section 4(a)(1), whichever is earlier, the President shall terminate any use of United States Armed Forces with respect to which such report was submitted (or required to be submitted), unless the Congress (1) has declared war or has enacted a specific authorization for such use of United States Armed Forces, (2) has extended by law such sixty-day period, or (3) is physically unable to meet as a result of an armed attack upon the United States. Such sixty-day period shall be extended for not more than an additional thirty days if the President determines and certifies to the Congress in writing that unavoidable military necessity respecting the safety of United States Armed Forces requires the continued use of such armed forces in the course of bringing about a prompt removal of such forces.

For anything else that i didnt include : http://www.policyalmanac.org/world/archive/war_powers_resolution.shtml

I truly do not believe we were attacked by a sovereign nation since 1941... But it might be wise to ask a lawyer about that one
Goldenboy219 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!Spurl this Post!
Old 10-11-07, 03:59 PM   #6 (permalink)
Right behind you!
 
Edify_Always_In_All_Ways's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Last Online: Yesterday 05:51 PM
Location: Wilmington, DE
Posts: 910
Thanks: 144
Thanked 178 Times in 113 Posts
Lean: Independent
Gender: Male

Current Mood:
Bored
Re: CNBC removes poll, Ron Paul wins Michigan debate by landslide

Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldenboy219 View Post
after watching the debates, the rest of the Republican candidates should be ashamed of themselves in their blasphemous attempt to call themselves conservatives...
So Ron Paul is the most conservative conservative running? He has no chance in hell anyway, in that case. If only there was a liberal candidate like Paul to get excited about- like Ron, but I'd actually agree with them.
__________________
Why?
Edify_Always_In_All_Ways is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!Spurl this Post!
Old 10-11-07, 04:30 PM   #7 (permalink)
ROCK AND ROLL MASTER
Mod team member

 
galenrox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Last Online: 09-10-08 11:21 PM
Location: Chicago, Il
Posts: 11,296
Thanks: 533
Thanked 1,077 Times in 761 Posts
Lean: Conservative
Gender: Male

Awards:
Moderation Team:  Thank you!! 

Current Mood:
Mellow
Re: CNBC removes poll, Ron Paul wins Michigan debate by landslide

Dude, Goldie, I love Ron Paul and nothing would make me happier than having Ron Paul president, save for having John McCain president, but you're in for a massive disappointment. In every poll of any statistical merit Ron Paul's in the 1-2% range, he's not gonna win.
__________________
"Men cannot escape being governed. Either they must govern themselves or they must submit to being governed by others."
- Theodore Roosevelt
galenrox is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!Spurl this Post!
Old 10-11-07, 05:23 PM   #8 (permalink)
Irrelevant Pissant

 
Join Date: May 2007
Last Online: 07-01-08 05:52 PM
Posts: 2,359
Thanks: 99
Thanked 560 Times in 396 Posts
Lean: Libertarian

Current Mood:
Amused
Re: CNBC removes poll, Ron Paul wins Michigan debate by landslide

We shall see. I know there are plenty of people who will be writing Paul's name in even if he doesn't get the nomination.
Panache is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!Spurl this Post!
Old 10-12-07, 02:40 PM   #9 (permalink)
Guru

 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Last Online: Yesterday 10:08 PM
Posts: 3,246
Thanks: 237
Thanked 653 Times in 420 Posts
Lean: Libertarian
Gender: Male

Re: CNBC removes poll, Ron Paul wins Michigan debate by landslide

Quote:
Originally Posted by galenrox View Post
Dude, Goldie, I love Ron Paul and nothing would make me happier than having Ron Paul president, save for having John McCain president, but you're in for a massive disappointment. In every poll of any statistical merit Ron Paul's in the 1-2% range, he's not gonna win.
We already kow he is higher then 1-2% range. I would guess it is in the 5-7% range at the moment.

Polls aren't that accurate this early. They use a plug figure to decide which demographic is going to actually get out and vote and they are most definitely trying to skew the results.

Right now in Iowa on the Rasmussen Poll you have to jump through an extra set of hoops to vote for Dr. Paul. He isn't listed in the first 7 names. you have to hit 8 to get a list of the other candidates - which are Keyes, Tancredo, and Paul.
ARealConservative is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!Spurl this Post!
Old 10-12-07, 02:46 PM   #10 (permalink)
Guru

 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Last Online: Yesterday 10:08 PM
Posts: 3,246
Thanks: 237
Thanked 653 Times in 420 Posts
Lean: Libertarian
Gender: Male

Re: CNBC removes poll, Ron Paul wins Michigan debate by landslide

No, Really by Rick Fisk

Quote:
Originally Posted by link
Polling data is what seems to concern the doubters. Low polling numbers would appear to be an indictment. Last quarter in New Hampshire, Ron Paul was polling at 2% in those polls which included him.

This quarter, a recent poll in New Hampshire shows Ron Paul with 6%, 22% of those being black voters. That represents 66% increase over last quarter’s poll numbers. Where his competitors are just jockeying for position, Ron Paul is gaining significantly. By the way, in 2000, only 10% of Black voters gave Bush the nod.

I’ve previously written about the way these polls are conducted and their usefulness in predicting outcomes (they can’t by definition). However, there is historical data that also tends to support the idea that early polls are not reliable predictors.

In 2003, prior to the New Hampshire and Iowa primaries, Al Sharpton was beating John Kerry in the polls 5% to 4%. Kerry went on to win both primaries and shortly thereafter was polling nationally at 53%. That’s either a very large bump or a very inaccurate result prior to the primary.
ARealConservative is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!Spurl this Post!
 


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Navigation
Home Main
spacer Home
spacer Newsroom
spacer Resources
spacer FAQ
spacer Chatroom

Extras Extras
spacer DP Store
spacer Statistics
spacer Worldmap
spacer Gallery
spacer Link to us

 Advertise Here!

Random Pic
by Sir Loin
· · ·
Member Galleries
990 photos
195 comments



Debate Politics XML Feed

Add to my Yahoo!



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:42 AM.

Partners with: Computer repair || Irrationally Informed

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Debate Politics.com Copyright ©2004-2008
SEO by vBSEO