I hope I'm not deluding myself when I say these guys seem so DATED, so entirely without authority or gravitas. And excepting McCain, without scruples or sense.

Part of the problem is the foolishness of the question. It is set up so that many (if not most) people would torture. It is about one person being hurt/killed or hundreds/thousands. It does address the fact that we never have a situation where we KNOW that the people in custody have the information. Sure, the guys might have been planning one attack, but how do we know that they have information on the next attack. JM answer made the most sense. Rudy is an ass.

I am so excited about Ron Paul it's ridiculous. He's the only candidate that disagrees with any other candidate, and the only candidate who agrees with us on issues like Iraq.

Ron Paul is a ding dong who wants to go back on the Gold Standard. Talk about your dated issues.

He's also opposed to torture, which means he has absolutely no chance at the Republican nomination. These people want to torture and torture more and harder. I'm surprised none of them said "it's unfortunate, but torturing some innocent people is necessary to protect our freedoms".

Don't count these fucks out yet. Torture is VERY POPULAR with the American people.

Ron Paul has as much of a chance as Dennis Kucinich, but he stands by his principles, unlike any of those other assholes, and you have to admire him for that.

keshmeshi: I don't know. Fox News held an "American Idol" style text message vote after the debate, and Ron Paul was a very close #2 with 25% of the vote, after Mitt Romney with 29%. McCain got 4%!

I don't know if anything similar has been done with the Democrats, but I doubt Kucinich would get anywhere near 25%, even if the vote was held at MoveOn.org.

yeah, but he's a libertarian. gross.

These asshats were falling all over themselves to out-torture the other guy. The correct answer is: "Brit, that has to be the single most ridiculous question I've ever heard on a presidential debate. You're an idiot. Next question?"

The real truth is that those polls mean nothing, because nobody but nobody votes on the issues. They vote on leadership and personality.

And if there was a poll question that said "if you knew that a new torture program had a 95% chance of stopping future 9/11s, but also knew that it would condemn 10,000 innocent people per year to life-ending suffering, would you do it?", 85% of the American people would say "yes" without any hesitation at all.

Be afraid. Torture is a big winner for the R's.

@9: did you know that 73% of all statistics are made up on the spot?

Very funny, harf. Now, were you able to grasp the meaning of what I wrote above? Or would you like me to say it again, slower, and with smaller words?

PS: we reached 3,400 yesterday.

In the next Republican debate:

Brit Hume: "Lets say hypothetically that some Asian looking dudes with laser guns destroyed an oil refinery in Texas. Would you nuke North Korea into glass?"

Mitt Romney: "Yes. Absolutely. And furthermore, I'd nuke South Korea too, just for good measure."

fnarf - if what you say is true, that 85% would say yes without hesitation, then i am araid this is more than just a republican problem no matter how you look at it. and what % would say yes with hesitation? that would mean over 3/4 of democrats would be in favour of tortue as well...

which -- if true -- is sad.

Fnarf,

I understood, thanks for the snarky reply and the insight into your humorless world. I suppose bleating about speculative statistics works for the navel-gazing echo chamber that is often the Seattle left, so I take no offense that you were so sensitive to my remark.

@6

OK, he probably has a better chance than Kucinich, but I don't see the godbags in the party letting him slip by.

suqmejlx riztxjsk mpab rldyvfse avyts bkxjvh wehlsukpd

suqmejlx riztxjsk mpab rldyvfse avyts bkxjvh wehlsukpd