Anyone else watching the GOP debate
- Thread starter High Planes Drifter
- Start date
- Status
cbsbyte
Member
None of the above. They are all out of touch with American values. Well Ron Paul is the closets but he really is not a very good candidate and some of his stance are way to radical for this time period.All of them besides Ron Paul would expand the government, military, police powers and further restricts our rights. Forget their foreign policy which is more of the same. More American lives lost for nothing. I really don't trust any of them with the presidency. It looks like I won't be voting in 2008.
indyogb
Member
I wouldn't lose heart just yet. Fred Thompson hasn't even officially entered the race, and he is in third in some of the polls. While that may not mean much, my gut tells me if he runs (and I think he will), he will get the nomination.
xd9fan
Member
I agree
Titan6
member
Fascinatng. I just checked the MSNBC web site and the article on the debate mischarcterized the candidate's positions. Since they hosted the debate this is really sickening.
Here:
Republicans walk tightrope over war
In first debate, 2008 hopefuls say conflict mismanaged, but worthwhile
Kevork Djansezian / AP
Presidential contenders Mitt Romney, Sam Brownback and Ron Paul line up Thursday on stage before the first Republican presidential debate at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library.
By Alex Johnson
Reporter
MSNBC
Republican presidential candidates gave a qualified endorsement Thursday night to President Bush’s strategy in the war in Iraq, criticizing the administration for mismanaging the war but insisting that U.S. troops should not be withdrawn.
In the first Republican debate of the 2008 campaign, the 10 most prominent contenders walked a fine line on the war. On one hand, they were reluctant to wholeheartedly back Bush’s strategy, which polls show is unpopular with the public at large; on the other, they could not afford to abandon the president and antagonize conservative Republicans who vote in the party’s presidential primary.
The candidate in the most difficult position, Sen. John McCain of Arizona, stuck by his guns in being the president’s strongest backer, a position his advisers said showed his willingness to remain true to his principles regardless of popularity.
Asked how he would handle Iraq if elected, McCain allowed that the war had been “terribly mismanaged,” but he added: “We have a new general, [and] we have a new strategy. That strategy can succeed.”
By contrast, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee criticized Bush for firing Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld after the 2004 presidential election. He said he would have fired Rumsfeld before the election.
“Clearly, there was a real error in judgment,” Huckabee said, saying the administration did not listen closely enough to veteran military commanders who warned that the war would be long and difficult.
The sharpest disagreements of the night came on abortion. All but one candidate, former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, called for repeal of the 1973 Roe v. Wade Supreme Court ruling legalizing abortion nationwide, putting Giuliani, the party’s front-runner in the early going, sharply at odds with its base.
The U.S. campaign to track down al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden did give the candidates a chance to take a clear-cut position. All who were asked said the mission was imperative, including former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who tried to clarify his previous statement that the war on terrorism “is more than about just one man.”
Romney repeated that “this is about more than Osama bin Laden,” but he said firmly, “He will have to pay, and he is going to die.”
McCain was equally blunt, promising, “We will bring him to justice, and I will follow him to the gates of hell.”
Giuliani looks to consolidate lead
The debate was held at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley, Calif., north of Los Angeles. The debate, co-sponsored by MSNBC and the political Web site politico.com, aired on MSNBC-TV and C-SPAN radio and was streamed live on MSNBC.com.
Reagan’s legacy was acknowledged almost immediately, when Giuliani said he would “lead with optimism.”
“What we can borrow from Ronald Reagan, since we are in his library, is that great sense of optimism,” he said.
Giuliani was hoping to build momentum on recent polls that show him leading the field. A poll released Thursday by Quinnipiac University showed Giuliani leading McCain by 27 percent to 19 percent. Romney trailed with 8 percent.
Sen. Mel Martinez of Florida, chairman of the Republican National Committee, acknowledged polls that indicate that many Republicans are unhappy with the candidates on offer, but he said, “I think tonight as they get better known, as they deal with the issues and people get to compare and contrast, I expect those numbers will increase.”
The other candidates on the stage Thursday night were Sen. Sam Brownback of Kansas, former Virginia Gov. Jim Gilmore, Rep. Duncan Hunter of California, Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, Rep. Tom Tancredo of Colorado and Tommy Thompson, a former governor of Wisconsin and Bush’s first secretary of health and human services.
Romney aims to firm up his image
Romney had the opposite challenge from McCain: proving that he can stick to his principles.
In the past year, Romney has switched his stances on same-sex marriage and abortion rights, which he advocated during his single term as governor of liberal Massachusetts during the 1990s.
He explained Thursday night that his positions had evolved sincerely over time and that he now firmly opposed abortion rights, a change that set even further apart Giuliani’s support for a woman’s right to an abortion.
Romney, meanwhile, got a chance to address concerns among some voters over his Mormon faith. Huckabee, a former Baptist minister, suggested that Romney had revealed himself as not being particularly religious because he has said his faith would not determine his decisions on important issues.
Romney said the question was not what faith a president observed, but whether that faith informed his belief in “American values.”
“The great values we share are American values,” he added.
Romney drew support from Brownback, a leading figure in the conservative evangelical Christian movement, who said: “We’ve had 40 or 50 years of trying to run faith out of the public square. ... This isn’t something that divides us.”
Actor, ex-speaker loom large
Beyond the challenge of being heard above their declared rivals, the candidates are also laboring to emerge from the shadows cast by two men who were not there, former Sen. Fred Thompson of Tennessee and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich of Georgia.
Neither man has said whether he will run, but Thompson has been speaking widely before conservatives and Republican groups in recent weeks. Friday night, he is scheduled to speak to a gathering of Republicans in nearby Orange County, one of the most conservative counties in the nation.
Rep. Zach Wamp, R-Tenn., an adviser to Thompson, said Thompson would almost certainly announce “in early summer” that he was running.
Gingrich, meanwhile, has kept a lower profile, but he has said he will decide whether to run by September.
The Quinnipiac poll illustrated the depth of Republicans’ desire for different candidates. Even though they are not yet running, Thompson polled third, at 14 percent, while Gingrich was tied with Romney, at 8 percent.
Against that background, the lesser-known candidates worked to get a hearing for their signature issues.
For Hunter and Tancredo, that was a crackdown on illegal immigration. Time and again, Hunter reminded voters of his role in the building of a wall on the Mexican border in Southern California, while Tancredo repeatedly urged the adoption of “secure* borders.”
For Huckabee and Thompson, the main argument was their readiness to take office as governors with long records of accomplishment.
For Gilmore, the goal was to reinforce his main campaign appeal as the only “true conservative” in the race. He said that, unlike some of his rivals, he had “remained consistent” to his conservative ideals and had never “flipflopped from one year to the next.”
Brownback sought to challenge Gilmore for that mantle, returning to core issues important to conservative religious voters, especially his opposition to same-sex marriage and all abortion.
Paul, meanwhile, used the opportunity to give a second airing to the traditional Libertarian principles he espoused as a candidate in 1988 on the Libertarian ticket. Alone among the candidates, he opposed issuance of identity cards to immigrants and called for abolition of the Internal Revenue Service.
Here:
Republicans walk tightrope over war
In first debate, 2008 hopefuls say conflict mismanaged, but worthwhile
Kevork Djansezian / AP
Presidential contenders Mitt Romney, Sam Brownback and Ron Paul line up Thursday on stage before the first Republican presidential debate at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library.
By Alex Johnson
Reporter
MSNBC
Republican presidential candidates gave a qualified endorsement Thursday night to President Bush’s strategy in the war in Iraq, criticizing the administration for mismanaging the war but insisting that U.S. troops should not be withdrawn.
In the first Republican debate of the 2008 campaign, the 10 most prominent contenders walked a fine line on the war. On one hand, they were reluctant to wholeheartedly back Bush’s strategy, which polls show is unpopular with the public at large; on the other, they could not afford to abandon the president and antagonize conservative Republicans who vote in the party’s presidential primary.
The candidate in the most difficult position, Sen. John McCain of Arizona, stuck by his guns in being the president’s strongest backer, a position his advisers said showed his willingness to remain true to his principles regardless of popularity.
Asked how he would handle Iraq if elected, McCain allowed that the war had been “terribly mismanaged,” but he added: “We have a new general, [and] we have a new strategy. That strategy can succeed.”
By contrast, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee criticized Bush for firing Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld after the 2004 presidential election. He said he would have fired Rumsfeld before the election.
“Clearly, there was a real error in judgment,” Huckabee said, saying the administration did not listen closely enough to veteran military commanders who warned that the war would be long and difficult.
The sharpest disagreements of the night came on abortion. All but one candidate, former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, called for repeal of the 1973 Roe v. Wade Supreme Court ruling legalizing abortion nationwide, putting Giuliani, the party’s front-runner in the early going, sharply at odds with its base.
The U.S. campaign to track down al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden did give the candidates a chance to take a clear-cut position. All who were asked said the mission was imperative, including former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who tried to clarify his previous statement that the war on terrorism “is more than about just one man.”
Romney repeated that “this is about more than Osama bin Laden,” but he said firmly, “He will have to pay, and he is going to die.”
McCain was equally blunt, promising, “We will bring him to justice, and I will follow him to the gates of hell.”
Giuliani looks to consolidate lead
The debate was held at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley, Calif., north of Los Angeles. The debate, co-sponsored by MSNBC and the political Web site politico.com, aired on MSNBC-TV and C-SPAN radio and was streamed live on MSNBC.com.
Reagan’s legacy was acknowledged almost immediately, when Giuliani said he would “lead with optimism.”
“What we can borrow from Ronald Reagan, since we are in his library, is that great sense of optimism,” he said.
Giuliani was hoping to build momentum on recent polls that show him leading the field. A poll released Thursday by Quinnipiac University showed Giuliani leading McCain by 27 percent to 19 percent. Romney trailed with 8 percent.
Sen. Mel Martinez of Florida, chairman of the Republican National Committee, acknowledged polls that indicate that many Republicans are unhappy with the candidates on offer, but he said, “I think tonight as they get better known, as they deal with the issues and people get to compare and contrast, I expect those numbers will increase.”
The other candidates on the stage Thursday night were Sen. Sam Brownback of Kansas, former Virginia Gov. Jim Gilmore, Rep. Duncan Hunter of California, Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, Rep. Tom Tancredo of Colorado and Tommy Thompson, a former governor of Wisconsin and Bush’s first secretary of health and human services.
Romney aims to firm up his image
Romney had the opposite challenge from McCain: proving that he can stick to his principles.
In the past year, Romney has switched his stances on same-sex marriage and abortion rights, which he advocated during his single term as governor of liberal Massachusetts during the 1990s.
He explained Thursday night that his positions had evolved sincerely over time and that he now firmly opposed abortion rights, a change that set even further apart Giuliani’s support for a woman’s right to an abortion.
Romney, meanwhile, got a chance to address concerns among some voters over his Mormon faith. Huckabee, a former Baptist minister, suggested that Romney had revealed himself as not being particularly religious because he has said his faith would not determine his decisions on important issues.
Romney said the question was not what faith a president observed, but whether that faith informed his belief in “American values.”
“The great values we share are American values,” he added.
Romney drew support from Brownback, a leading figure in the conservative evangelical Christian movement, who said: “We’ve had 40 or 50 years of trying to run faith out of the public square. ... This isn’t something that divides us.”
Actor, ex-speaker loom large
Beyond the challenge of being heard above their declared rivals, the candidates are also laboring to emerge from the shadows cast by two men who were not there, former Sen. Fred Thompson of Tennessee and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich of Georgia.
Neither man has said whether he will run, but Thompson has been speaking widely before conservatives and Republican groups in recent weeks. Friday night, he is scheduled to speak to a gathering of Republicans in nearby Orange County, one of the most conservative counties in the nation.
Rep. Zach Wamp, R-Tenn., an adviser to Thompson, said Thompson would almost certainly announce “in early summer” that he was running.
Gingrich, meanwhile, has kept a lower profile, but he has said he will decide whether to run by September.
The Quinnipiac poll illustrated the depth of Republicans’ desire for different candidates. Even though they are not yet running, Thompson polled third, at 14 percent, while Gingrich was tied with Romney, at 8 percent.
Against that background, the lesser-known candidates worked to get a hearing for their signature issues.
For Hunter and Tancredo, that was a crackdown on illegal immigration. Time and again, Hunter reminded voters of his role in the building of a wall on the Mexican border in Southern California, while Tancredo repeatedly urged the adoption of “secure* borders.”
For Huckabee and Thompson, the main argument was their readiness to take office as governors with long records of accomplishment.
For Gilmore, the goal was to reinforce his main campaign appeal as the only “true conservative” in the race. He said that, unlike some of his rivals, he had “remained consistent” to his conservative ideals and had never “flipflopped from one year to the next.”
Brownback sought to challenge Gilmore for that mantle, returning to core issues important to conservative religious voters, especially his opposition to same-sex marriage and all abortion.
Paul, meanwhile, used the opportunity to give a second airing to the traditional Libertarian principles he espoused as a candidate in 1988 on the Libertarian ticket. Alone among the candidates, he opposed issuance of identity cards to immigrants and called for abolition of the Internal Revenue Service.
They do not even have any clue of what true freedom is. Most believe that since they can drive around and shop at any mall they wish, they are free.
Meanwhile, when something "bad" happens they look around and question why the government "allows" that to happen.
xd9fan
Member
wow cool on drudge Ron Paul is in 3rd place on tonights poll!
D.S. Ambrose
Member
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2006
- Messages
- 29
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032553/
Who stood out from the pack? * 28827 responses
Sam Brownback 3.3%
Jim Gilmore 1.6%
Rudy Giuliani 17%
Mike Huckabee 4.6%
Duncan Hunter 2.3%
John McCain 10%
Ron Paul 26%
Mitt Romney 27%
Tom Tancredo 3.3%
Tommy Thompson 4.3%
Who showed the most leadership qualities? * 28492 responses
Sam Brownback 3.1%
Jim Gilmore 2.2%
Rudy Giuliani 19%
Mike Huckabee 4.5%
Duncan Hunter 2.5%
John McCain 14%
Ron Paul 22%
Mitt Romney 25%
Tom Tancredo 3.1%
Tommy Thompson 4.5%
Who was the most convincing candidate? * 28351 responses
Sam Brownback 3.8%
Jim Gilmore 2.1%
Rudy Giuliani 17%
Mike Huckabee 5.3%
Duncan Hunter 2.6%
John McCain 12%
Ron Paul 25%
Mitt Romney 25%
Tom Tancredo 3.4%
Tommy Thompson 4.6%
Who had the most rehearsed answers? * 27878 responses
Sam Brownback 4.8%
Jim Gilmore 2%
Rudy Giuliani 22%
Mike Huckabee 2.9%
Duncan Hunter 2.2%
John McCain 30%
Ron Paul 5.2%
Mitt Romney 23%
Tom Tancredo 2.8%
Tommy Thompson 4.9%
Who avoided the questions? * 27054 responses
Sam Brownback 6.7%
Jim Gilmore 3.9%
Rudy Giuliani 34%
Mike Huckabee 3.9%
Duncan Hunter 3.6%
John McCain 18%
Ron Paul 5.8%
Mitt Romney 13%
Tom Tancredo 4.7%
Tommy Thompson 6.4%
Who had the best one-liner? * 27232 responses
Sam Brownback 4%
Jim Gilmore 2%
Rudy Giuliani 15%
Mike Huckabee 8.5%
Duncan Hunter 2.7%
John McCain 16%
Ron Paul 22%
Mitt Romney 18%
Tom Tancredo 4.8%
Tommy Thompson 6.2%
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18421356/
Pic shamelessly hijacked from another poster on a different forum:
Yeah, The Dr. is not electable...
Who stood out from the pack? * 28827 responses
Sam Brownback 3.3%
Jim Gilmore 1.6%
Rudy Giuliani 17%
Mike Huckabee 4.6%
Duncan Hunter 2.3%
John McCain 10%
Ron Paul 26%
Mitt Romney 27%
Tom Tancredo 3.3%
Tommy Thompson 4.3%
Who showed the most leadership qualities? * 28492 responses
Sam Brownback 3.1%
Jim Gilmore 2.2%
Rudy Giuliani 19%
Mike Huckabee 4.5%
Duncan Hunter 2.5%
John McCain 14%
Ron Paul 22%
Mitt Romney 25%
Tom Tancredo 3.1%
Tommy Thompson 4.5%
Who was the most convincing candidate? * 28351 responses
Sam Brownback 3.8%
Jim Gilmore 2.1%
Rudy Giuliani 17%
Mike Huckabee 5.3%
Duncan Hunter 2.6%
John McCain 12%
Ron Paul 25%
Mitt Romney 25%
Tom Tancredo 3.4%
Tommy Thompson 4.6%
Who had the most rehearsed answers? * 27878 responses
Sam Brownback 4.8%
Jim Gilmore 2%
Rudy Giuliani 22%
Mike Huckabee 2.9%
Duncan Hunter 2.2%
John McCain 30%
Ron Paul 5.2%
Mitt Romney 23%
Tom Tancredo 2.8%
Tommy Thompson 4.9%
Who avoided the questions? * 27054 responses
Sam Brownback 6.7%
Jim Gilmore 3.9%
Rudy Giuliani 34%
Mike Huckabee 3.9%
Duncan Hunter 3.6%
John McCain 18%
Ron Paul 5.8%
Mitt Romney 13%
Tom Tancredo 4.7%
Tommy Thompson 6.4%
Who had the best one-liner? * 27232 responses
Sam Brownback 4%
Jim Gilmore 2%
Rudy Giuliani 15%
Mike Huckabee 8.5%
Duncan Hunter 2.7%
John McCain 16%
Ron Paul 22%
Mitt Romney 18%
Tom Tancredo 4.8%
Tommy Thompson 6.2%
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18421356/
Pic shamelessly hijacked from another poster on a different forum:
Yeah, The Dr. is not electable...
You let me know when Ron Paul reaches 1%
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...s/republican_presidential_nomination-192.html
Last week when the Dems did their "debate" I voted for Cucinich. Always like to vote for the most absurd candidate. I'm sure many Dems did the same thing tonight.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...s/republican_presidential_nomination-192.html
Last week when the Dems did their "debate" I voted for Cucinich. Always like to vote for the most absurd candidate. I'm sure many Dems did the same thing tonight.
gyp_c2
Member
sheesh...
...I think Fred will win hands down...He'll look like a giant compared to these guyz...Be nice if RP could snuggle into the VP slot...though.
...I think Fred will win hands down...He'll look like a giant compared to these guyz...Be nice if RP could snuggle into the VP slot...though.
Lets all hope Fred gets into the race because he's the only person with a good chance of winning the nomination and a shot in hell of beating the Democrats that actually represents some good conservative views.
Romney is a set of teeth, Guliani pitches a tent every time someone mentions NYC, and the rest are all bunched together with not enough recognition other than that are "that republican guy". And then theres Paul, the libertarian wearing a republican suit so he can actually get some traction. I'm crossing my fingers for Fred and y'all should do the same.
Romney is a set of teeth, Guliani pitches a tent every time someone mentions NYC, and the rest are all bunched together with not enough recognition other than that are "that republican guy". And then theres Paul, the libertarian wearing a republican suit so he can actually get some traction. I'm crossing my fingers for Fred and y'all should do the same.
I was shocked to see Ron Paul up there last night. Maybe I've been out of touch. Maybe the debate organizers were sure he'd come across as a reactionary nutball but it's interesting too see how well he seems to have fared against the others although it could be as nemoaz suggests, dems voting for what they feel is the most "absurd" candidate. The GOP is in desperate need of someone to pull them back to the right though.
D.S. Ambrose,
I just noticed the same thing you pointed out with your screen-caps. I guess it pays to read the whole thread before commenting
Before the debate:
Giuliani: 41%
McCain 31%
Romney 28%
After the debate:
Paul: 38%
Romney: 30%
Giuliani: 23%
Question is, was this poll freeped? I have tiny reason to hope given that the numbers were in line with the mainstream polls prior to the debate.
I just noticed the same thing you pointed out with your screen-caps. I guess it pays to read the whole thread before commenting
Before the debate:
Giuliani: 41%
McCain 31%
Romney 28%
After the debate:
Paul: 38%
Romney: 30%
Giuliani: 23%
Question is, was this poll freeped? I have tiny reason to hope given that the numbers were in line with the mainstream polls prior to the debate.
High Planes Drifter
Member
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2006
- Messages
- 1,204
I think Paul did ok. I think he missed a couple of opportunities to really shine, and didnt get all of his points accross with the little bit of time he was given, but he did ok. Giuliani flopped if you ask me. Romney looked comfortable, I still dont like him but he did look poised. Tancredo studdured multiple times; maybe he was nervous, but he studdured badley a few times. In the next debate I hope Paul gets more time, and I really hope he takes advantage of opportunities better.
Sindawe
Member
On Fred Thompson and the issues.
One indicator is his past voting record.
http://www.ontheissues.org/senate/Fred_Thompson.htm
One indicator is his past voting record.
http://www.ontheissues.org/senate/Fred_Thompson.htm
RNB65
Member
If that group is the best the GOP can come up with, Billary is smiling from ear to ear this morning.
I hesitate to even bring this up since it is so far off topic, but then again it has already been brought up.I can disprove the "religion" of Evolution" easily to anyone who will pay attention with an open mind. If you believe evolution you have bought the biggest and stupidest lie that has ever been told. Goes back to the old saying that "If you tell a lie long enough, loud enough, and often enough the people will believe it". And also, "People will believe a bigger lie more easily than a little lie".
Sindawe
Member
PM inbound.
Do you believe we now have bacteria resistant to the most commonly used antibiotics?
Natural selection in effect, my friend. That's "evolution."
Outlaw Man
Member
Based solely on looks, manurisms, and the way he answered the questions (not necessarily the answers he gave, though), Romney looked the most Presidential. I actually liked a few of his answers, but as others stated, it's hard to trust anyone who could win an office in MA. Although, I did like his comment that if he and Kennedy agreed on legislation that one of them must not have read it.
Guiliani impressed me with his answer to the difference between Shiites and Sunnis. I didn't expect him to know the difference, and I surely didn't expect him to answer the question without using it as a chance to talk about something else. The rest of the debate did absolutely nothing to help him, and I'm happy for that.
I don't think Ron Paul's non-interventionist ideas would necessarily endanger the US. It's not a total opposition to war, but an opposition to going to war without a good reason. I firmly believe if Congress declared war he'd fight it to the best of our abilities. But, being a flight surgeon he's seen the effects of war first-hand, moreso than most of the other candidates put together, and he desires to avoid those effects when they aren't necessary. Political gain is not a reason to go to war. Attacking the US, on the other hand, is a very good reason.
On the subject of evolution, I don't think it's realy a fair question to ask them for just a yes or no answer. Evolution and Christianity aren't necessarily exclusive, but someone saying they believe in Evolution will likely lose some of the Christian votes. Do I believe in natural selection? Absolutely. It's a basic form of evolution, and I'm certain it still happens. Even being a Christian I can believe in the possibility of animals evolving from other animals. Look at how different house cats are from their wild ancestors. I can't say evolution hasn't gone farther than that. I don't believe we decended from monkeys - that's where I draw the line. But it's hard to say that as "yes" or "no." But people automatically have their preconcieved notions of what evolution entails. I personally had no problem with McCain's answer. It's probably how I would have answered in the short time he had.
Guiliani impressed me with his answer to the difference between Shiites and Sunnis. I didn't expect him to know the difference, and I surely didn't expect him to answer the question without using it as a chance to talk about something else. The rest of the debate did absolutely nothing to help him, and I'm happy for that.
I don't think Ron Paul's non-interventionist ideas would necessarily endanger the US. It's not a total opposition to war, but an opposition to going to war without a good reason. I firmly believe if Congress declared war he'd fight it to the best of our abilities. But, being a flight surgeon he's seen the effects of war first-hand, moreso than most of the other candidates put together, and he desires to avoid those effects when they aren't necessary. Political gain is not a reason to go to war. Attacking the US, on the other hand, is a very good reason.
On the subject of evolution, I don't think it's realy a fair question to ask them for just a yes or no answer. Evolution and Christianity aren't necessarily exclusive, but someone saying they believe in Evolution will likely lose some of the Christian votes. Do I believe in natural selection? Absolutely. It's a basic form of evolution, and I'm certain it still happens. Even being a Christian I can believe in the possibility of animals evolving from other animals. Look at how different house cats are from their wild ancestors. I can't say evolution hasn't gone farther than that. I don't believe we decended from monkeys - that's where I draw the line. But it's hard to say that as "yes" or "no." But people automatically have their preconcieved notions of what evolution entails. I personally had no problem with McCain's answer. It's probably how I would have answered in the short time he had.
tulsamal
Member
And I guess the fact that 90% of my DNA is the same as the other animals on Earth is just some kind of a coincidence? Or maybe it is just one of those things God created "to mislead us." I asked a Sunday School teacher when I was about 10 about all the dinosaur bones and how could the Earth only be 6000 years old? He told me that the dinosaurs never really existed. God just created the Earth with all those fossilized bones down there to mislead the people whose faith wasn't strong enough. Now I hear some of them saying that dinosaurs actually lived but it was at the same time as the Garden of Eden. Yeah, that makes just about as much sense. Ignore the inconvenient 99.9% of facts and try to convince me that the .01% that doesn't fit right proves everything else is false. That's not the way science works.
The most important thing about ANY scientific theory isn't whether or not it is 100% correct and totally proven beyond question. It is whether the theory is "useful" in understanding what we see in the real world. Evolutionary theory _seems_ to explain the natural world, DNA, the fossil record, etc, better than anything else. If somebody comes up with something that works better, science will be happy to test it and even adopt it if it proves out. But the new theory is going to have to be based on real science that can be tested by other scientists across the world. It has to be testable and it has to make predictions that can drive further research. Otherwise it simply amounts to "God buried the dinosaurs just to confuse us."
Gregg
The most important thing about ANY scientific theory isn't whether or not it is 100% correct and totally proven beyond question. It is whether the theory is "useful" in understanding what we see in the real world. Evolutionary theory _seems_ to explain the natural world, DNA, the fossil record, etc, better than anything else. If somebody comes up with something that works better, science will be happy to test it and even adopt it if it proves out. But the new theory is going to have to be based on real science that can be tested by other scientists across the world. It has to be testable and it has to make predictions that can drive further research. Otherwise it simply amounts to "God buried the dinosaurs just to confuse us."
Gregg
- Status