GOP debate tonight

[ladrones]

Moderates have given the party two Obama terms and just about everything he has wanted along the way. That is the type of compromise that will get you a 3rd Obama term with Hillary.

[J Wales]

All of you suggesting that a true conservative cannot win over the moderates need to go back and listen to Reagan's campaign speeches. He was very passionately conservative in his positions, without compromise (like Cruz), and he won by a landslide. Conservatism makes sense when it is consistently applied, and people will vote for that.

[J Wales]

I dont believe having a different belief means they need to grow a pair.

I'm tired of seeing the GOP losing ground due to their lack of compromise. There are certain issues which require zero tolerance, and other ideals that have to be negotiated for progress and the understanding of the whole as opposed to the part.

The GOP is not losing ground because of a lack of compromise...they are losing ground precisely because they compromise (and the dems don't).

[Joshua Flournoy]

You are obviously of the mindset that the Govt doing something is a good thing. I have the opposite view....unless the govt is undoing something they have previously done.

The Fed Govt does a horrible job at every single thing it does except for the Military. The federal bureaucracy is too large to do the country any good. Waste, fraud, and abuse run rampant in every single federal department.

Yep, all correct.

[Joshua Flournoy]

All of you suggesting that a true conservative cannot win over the moderates need to go back and listen to Reagan's campaign speeches. He was very passionately conservative in his positions, without compromise (like Cruz), and he won by a landslide. Conservatism makes sense when it is consistently applied, and people will vote for that.

Precisely.

[Bazo]

The GOP is not losing ground because of a lack of compromise...they are losing ground precisely because they compromise (and the dems don't).

Yep, there is only compromise GOP side.

[Tommyh]

I dont believe having a different belief means they need to grow a pair.

I'm tired of seeing the GOP losing ground due to their lack of compromise. There are certain issues which require zero tolerance, and other ideals that have to be negotiated for progress and the understanding of the whole as opposed to the part.

i agree. they continually cave in to every Democrat demand without ever offering an alternative. there is no more Rep party of old. its all democrat with a dash of conservatives tossed in for color.

[Joshua Flournoy]

Yep, there is only compromise GOP side.

Yep, the GOP either hasn't figured out yet, or doesn't care, that when the Democrats talk about "compromise", what they mean is "you come over to OUR side". That ain't compromise, that's capitulation.

[Michael]

You are obviously of the mindset that the Govt doing something is a good thing. I have the opposite view....unless the govt is undoing something they have previously done.

The Fed Govt does a horrible job at every single thing it does except for the Military. The federal bureaucracy is too large to do the country any good. Waste, fraud, and abuse run rampant in every single federal department.

Agree. Gridlock keeps issues (like federal budget and spending) from being resolved until last minute, only to have Republicans forced into "compromise" because of fear of government shutting down. The result is increased debt ceiling, more debt, ever increasing deficit and burgeoning government - ie everything the Dems want to see in order to create voter perceived dependence on government.

Gridlock isn't productive. Compromise for the sake of compromise can be counterproductive.

As for the debate, I thought Cruz showed well, especially compared to the previous debate (I didn't watch the first). Kasich, Huckabee and Bush may have a few good ideas, but I don't think either is "electable" and are largely non-factors. I'd probably put Paul in the "unelectable" category, as well. I don't think any of the candidates necessarily had a bad showing last night, except Bush.

Rubio had gained momentum for me in the 2nd debate, while Cruz had lost some. I think both had good showings last night, and Cruz definitely redeemed himself compared to debate 2. Rubio's personal financial mismanagement certainly raised an eyebrow, although he handled his response fairly well.

Christie has impressed me in both debates I've watched. Fiorina doesn't do much for me, but I think she will play an important role in shaping the party nominee. I don't really trust much of what Trump has to say. It was glossed over, but he got caught in a bit of a lie last night. Carson is a brilliant man with an idealistic outlook. I think he's gotten more comfortable with the debate formats and although maybe still a little TOO soft spoken at times, has held his own.

My personal current frontrunners would be Carson & Cruz, followed somewhat distantly by Rubio and then Christie.

[jer_james]

All of you suggesting that a true conservative cannot win over the moderates need to go back and listen to Reagan's campaign speeches. He was very passionately conservative in his positions, without compromise (like Cruz), and he won by a landslide. Conservatism makes sense when it is consistently applied, and people will vote for that.

Obama has been elected TWO times ... Let that sink in. Then tell me how a defiant Conservative can win the election.

[jer_james]

Agree. Gridlock keeps issues (like federal budget and spending) from being resolved until last minute, only to have Republicans forced into "compromise" because of fear of government shutting down. The result is increased debt ceiling, more debt, ever increasing deficit and burgeoning government - ie everything the Dems want to see in order to create voter perceived dependence on government.

Gridlock isn't productive. Compromise for the sake of compromise can be counterproductive.

As for the debate, I thought Cruz showed well, especially compared to the previous debate (I didn't watch the first). Kasich, Huckabee and Bush may have a few good ideas, but I don't think either is "electable" and are largely non-factors. I'd probably put Paul in the "unelectable" category, as well. I don't think any of the candidates necessarily had a bad showing last night, except Bush.

Rubio had gained momentum for me in the 2nd debate, while Cruz had lost some. I think both had good showings last night, and Cruz definitely redeemed himself compared to debate 2. Rubio's personal financial mismanagement certainly raised an eyebrow, although he handled his response fairly well.

Christie has impressed me in both debates I've watched. Fiorina doesn't do much for me, but I think she will play an important role in shaping the party nominee. I don't really trust much of what Trump has to say. It was glossed over, but he got caught in a bit of a lie last night. Carson is a brilliant man with an idealistic outlook. I think he's gotten more comfortable with the debate formats and although maybe still a little TOO soft spoken at times, has held his own.

My personal current frontrunners would be Carson & Cruz, followed somewhat distantly by Rubio and then Christie.

I agree with this

[gingib]

All of you suggesting that a true conservative cannot win over the moderates need to go back and listen to Reagan's campaign speeches. He was very passionately conservative in his positions, without compromise (like Cruz), and he won by a landslide. Conservatism makes sense when it is consistently applied, and people will vote for that.

Moderates have given the party two Obama terms and just about everything he has wanted along the way. That is the type of compromise that will get you a 3rd Obama term with Hillary.

So true guys!!!

Sadly we dont have many hard conservatives anymore...just like with true Christians and MEN!!!!!!! Sad but true

[texansfan]

All of you suggesting that a true conservative cannot win over the moderates need to go back and listen to Reagan's campaign speeches. He was very passionately conservative in his positions, without compromise (like Cruz), and he won by a landslide. Conservatism makes sense when it is consistently applied, and people will vote for that.

What were the demographics 30 years ago?
Reagan didn't have twitter.

[Shane]

Obama has been elected TWO times ... Let that sink in. Then tell me how a defiant Conservative can win the election.

Obama ran against two of the type of moderate Republicans that you say are necessary to nominate so that the GOP can win. It doesn't work that way though. Most people want somebody who has ideas and will take a stand for them. That's what leaders do. Yet another guy who always says things like, "Well, you have a point, but the other side has a point too. Maybe we should just all get along and compromise...." is not the answer. That's weak. People are sick of weakness. Look where it has gotten us. It got us Obama twice, and he has weakened our nation in every way imaginable. It's time for strength, for a change.

The one area where Obama has been strong is in domestic politics. He has never been willing to compromise with Republicans AT ALL on ANYTHING. He has forced his will on Congress and on the nation. He's completely the opposite in foreign policy, as he has been a limp doormat when dealing with other nations. But I'll give him props for being strong and tough domestically. He's completely dead wrong in everything that he has done, of course. But we have probably never had a president that has been more unwilling to compromise than Obama. The media spins it to make it sound like the Republicans are mean and uncompromising, of course, and lots of people lap that up. That doesn't make the false narrative correct though.

It's time for some strong leadership that will take us back in the right direction for a change. The last thing we need at this point in our nation's history is MORE compromise with those that want to destroy our nation. If that hurts some people's precious little feelings in the process, then so be it.

[J Wales]

Obama has been elected TWO times ... Let that sink in. Then tell me how a defiant Conservative can win the election.

Against McCain and Romney...let that sink in. They were the candidates that the media said were the most "electable" out of the Republican group.

In 1980, Reagan won 489 electoral votes to Carter's 49. Landslide.

In 1984, he won 525 electoral votes to Mondale's 13. The only state Mondale won was his own, and only by a hair. Another landslide.

Reagan was every bit as much of a defiant conservative as Cruz is, and he won by two landslides.