Carly Fiorina won the ‘Happy Hour’ debate. By a lot.

[ABX]

arly Fiorina was the only woman on stage at the so-called "Happy Hour" debate on Thursday night. She was also the only one of the seven candidates who made clear that she deserves more attention -- and a more prime spot in the debates -- as the campaign continues.

From the start, Fiorina was poised and confident. She followed a halting and seemingly nervous answer by Texas Gov. Rick Perry with a fluid riff on why she was running and how she was best positioned to beat Hillary Clinton. And, she closed that first answer with this quotable (and good) line: "The highest calling of leadership is to challenge the status quo and unlock the potential of others. We need a leader who will lead the resurgence of this great nation and unlock its potential once again."...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/08/06/carly-fiorina-won-the-happy-hour-debate-by-a-lot/ 

[NavyCanDo]

I was very impressed.  Kept thinking, wouldn't it be nice if Hillary was the other person on the stage and they went head to head in a debate.

[Carling]

I was very impressed.  Kept thinking, wouldn't it be nice if Hillary was the other person on the stage and they went head to head in a debate.

Two pro-gay candidates on the same stage.  Fiorina is 100% for civil unions for gays, and says gay marriage isn't a federal issue.  I agree with fully with those views.

I'm fine with that, but the changing morals of the GOP conservative base amuses me.

Hell, JimRob is on TOS running excuses for Trump's abysmal performance.  Is he hoping Trump covers this quarter's Beg-a-thon?  I'm guessing yes...

[ABX]

Two pro-gay candidates on the same stage.  Fiorina is 100% for civil unions for gays, and says gay marriage isn't a federal issue.  I agree with fully with those views.

I'm fine with that, but the changing morals of the GOP conservative base amuses me.....

Interestingly enough, that makes her a lot closer to Reagan and Barry Goldwater. Reagan fought and won to end the ban on homosexuals teaching in schools. Goldwater was the first major politician to call for legal civil unions for homosexuals.

[Free Vulcan]

Two pro-gay candidates on the same stage.  Fiorina is 100% for civil unions for gays, and says gay marriage isn't a federal issue.  I agree with fully with those views.

I'm fine with that, but the changing morals of the GOP conservative base amuses me.

Hell, JimRob is on TOS running excuses for Trump's abysmal performance.  Is he hoping Trump covers this quarter's Beg-a-thon?  I'm guessing yes...

As socially conservative as I am, I was willing to compromise on civil unions for the reason of making sure estates upon death go to the partner instead of the govt slurping them up. I've also never felt gay marriage was a federal issue to decide. Then they peed in their punch bowl with the nazi bake-my-cake thug routine and blew it, but till then that was my stance.

[EC]

Pretty much the same here. I always have separated actual marriage in the sight of God from the civil contract anyway and thought it was unfair that two people couldn't enter into the sort of civil contract which covers inheritance (and more importantly hospital rights) simply because they were the same sex.

The loud, squeaky and obnoxious ones are doing their damnedest to make me change my mind though.

[Bigun]

As socially conservative as I am, I was willing to compromise on civil unions for the reason of making sure estates upon death go to the partner instead of the govt slurping them up. I've also never felt gay marriage was a federal issue to decide. Then they peed in their punch bowl with the nazi bake-my-cake thug routine and blew it, but till then that was my stance.

I have NEVER had a problem with civil unions in states where they are allowed. It's the federal government sticking it's nose where it doesn't belong that I object to!

[ABX]

Pretty much the same here. I always have separated actual marriage in the sight of God from the civil contract anyway and thought it was unfair that two people couldn't enter into the sort of civil contract which covers inheritance (and more importantly hospital rights) simply because they were the same sex.

The loud, squeaky and obnoxious ones are doing their damnedest to make me change my mind though.

That's pretty much been my opinion. Government taxation and property contracts (ie marriage) are not the same as religious sacraments. The latter are instructions for the followers of the faith.  They happen to share the same name and the government does recognize the latter as contributing to the former. The problem is many in various denominations demanded government bless their sacrament, thus making government part of their religion. I see no where in the Bible where God demands you go before Herod or Rome and have any sacrament blessed and the rulers made a party to the contract. Those are personal instructions to each believer.

[Free Vulcan]

The loud, squeaky and obnoxious ones are doing their damnedest to make me change my mind though.

And that's been the problem. We were told they just wanted to get married. Now they think since they are legalized that they have legal room to do whatever they please in the name of civil rights and destroy anyone who disagrees with them, while they also shove every other sexual 'orientation' down my throat with their LGBTQSNAFUBAR agenda.

[EC]

I've a fair few gay and trans friends and most of them are as embarrassed as hell by the militant ones (probably says more about the type of person I'm comfortable with as a friend than anything grand about LGBTQetc as a whole) as Christians are by the Westboro arseholes.

Someone always over-reaches. The Left tend to do that more than the Right, whether through their stupidity or our more risk averse nature. They'll keep pushing until they get the inevitable backlash, then sit there looking dumb and wondering what happened.