Who won CNN's first Republican YouTube debate?

Huckabee has about as much chance as winning the presidency in 2008 as Pat Robertson did in 1988. The American people are not going to elect a right-wing preacher to be president, even if he is a progressive. This is not Iran.

 

The last thing this country needs is a preacher as president, baptist or otherwise.

 

Does that mean that the USA and/or God made one or two mistakes in this, in the past with the elections of Presidents John Quincy Adams in 1824 and James A. Garfield in 1880?

How about John Witherspoon, a signer of the Declaratiuon of Independence, the 6th President of Princeton, and a Presbyterian minister? Should he be discounted, as a 'preacher'?

While it is true that John Quincy Adams may not have technically been a preacher, he did, in fact, serve as a Vice-President and President of the American Bible Society for many years. (BTW, the first Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court; President of the Continental Congress from Dec. 10, 1778 to Sept. 27, 1779; and the author of 5 of the 85 essays known as Federalist Papers, plus a bunch of other important stuff, John Jay, also served as a VP of the ABS, and Presidents Rutherford B. Hayes and Benjamin Harrison also served as officers of the ABS. I realize I am getting a bit sidetracked, but the founder and first President of the ABS, Elias Boudinot, also was President of the United States under the Articles of Confederation from Nov. 4, 1782 to Nov. 2, 1783.)

A short look into many of the almost forgotten facts, about the lives of these, in many cases, lesser-known individuals is a fascinating and informative study, and, personally, I highly recommend it.

James A. Garfield was an active minister and elder for many years in the Disciples of Christ denomination, and was an extremely erudite individual, even to the point of being able to translate something spoken in English into Greek and Latin, and write it simultaneously with both hands. Interestingly he was also the only individual in History to be a US Representative, US Senator-elect (Nov. 2 1880), and President-elect of the US (officially from Dec.1, 1880), all at the same time, from Nov. 2, 1880 until he relinquished his Senatorship to be. Interestingly enough also, he would (after Chester A. Arthur) be succeeded in the next election by Rutherford B. Hayes as the President.

Upon being elected President, James A. Garfield relinquished his eldership supposedly saying, "I resign the highest office in the land to become President of the United States."

And whether or not one agrees with the policies and acts of a particular individual in the high office of President of the United States, one cannot accurately speak of Presidents such as Calvin Coolidge, Jimmy Carter, George W. Bush, and Abraham Lincoln, to name but a few more, apart from their 'Christian ideas'.

I have the highest personal, if not necessarily political, regard for President Jimmy Carter, who has been a Sunday School teacher for well over 60 years, including during the time he was Governor of Georgia and President of the United States.

I firmly believe in "the separation of church and state"!

I do not believe in "the separation of God and country"!

Ed

 

1880 is 127 years ago.

 

Q: Who won the debate?
A: Apparently Hillary Clinton. She got a supporter planted in the crowd to ask about gay stuff.

NATIONAL REVIEW SOURCE

 

You stole my line. I was going to say Hillary, but then I clicked on the thread .

 

Fred Thompson would have a much better chance of defeating the Democratic candidate.

 

I think Huck looked the best, but that's because he got the best questions. As usual, the two most conservative candidates, Paul, and Tancredo, were pretty much ignored.

 

I guess because he is an ex-preacher Huckabee is the best speaker of the GOP bunch. And he does know how to make wise cracks which endears him to those who are not policy wonks.

I guess if Huckabee was a limited government conservative he would be just about the perfect candidate for conservatives/libertarians.

 

Then he wouldn't get the good questions, either.

 

Which proves what? Has either the Constitution or God been changed in that 127 years? Or did I miss it, somehow?

Ed

 

I say Hillary, CNN and Anderson Cooper won.

 

Don't get me wrong, please. I have, at the minute, no clue as to whom I will support, in either the primaries or the general elections.

In any case, by the date of the KY Primary on May, 20, 1988, the nominations of both parties may already, and probably likely will have been determined, leaving the citizens of the Commonwealth of KY, two real choices - to 'confirm' the assured nominee, or to vote for some other, in effective protest.

Personally, I hope that not to be the case, with our citizenship getting a 'real voice' in the selection for both parties, but I seriously doubt that will be the case.

Unfortunately, the only effective real choice is much too often between "the evil of the two lessers".

Ed

 

The liberals over at CNN are so committed to open homosexuality in the U.S. armed forces that they flew in a retired homosexual Brig. Gen. Keith Kerr to participate in their Republican presidential debate Wednesday — so he could critique the GOP candidates’ responses to HIS OWN loaded YouTube question opposing “Don’t’ Ask, Don’t Tell.”


http://americansfortruth.com/news/cnns-pro-homosexual-debate-ploy-backfires.html

 

That Huckabee's chances of winning the presidency aren't very good.

 

Agreed! :thumbs:

 

Gov. Mike Huckabee may or may not have a good chance at winning the Presidency. He may or may not have a good chance of even winning the Republican nomination for the Presidency.

I would say that some others probably have a better chance, at either, frankly. Of course, I probably would not have guessed that two Southern State Governors would be among those elected to serve as President for three terms in the last 32 years, either, very far ahead of the fact.

And, yes, 1880 was 127 years ago.

But what does any one of these have to do with the statement of Dagwood that

or my own questions to your response

I sense a certain disconnect in your response to my questions, here, as well as a couple of other responses I've seen, frankly.

It is OK, I guess, that you may not agree with my choice(s) (not that you could have, since I have yet to even make it/them myself, as I posted), but does still not answer the questions I asked.

Ed