View Full Version : GOP Debate
Who watched it? Strange debate and the CNBC moderators were idiots. The candidates did call them on it several times. I thought most of the candidates actually handled themselves fairly well but there were some odd responses to questions that had nadda to do with the Q asked. I consider such debates politicians simply saying what they think people want to hear so rarely do much to sway my opinions of them. I thought Rubio and Cruz were the stand outs of the night.
Being a Libertarian oriented person and independent voter, Paul is closest to my personal positions from the GOP line up, but he didn't add anything or stand out in that debate.
CNNs write up.
Republican debate: Winners and losers
Washington (CNN)The third Republican presidential debate is in the books after the top 10 leading GOP candidates debated for more than two hours.
With fewer than 100 days until the first ballots are cast, the CNBC-hosted event was a critical test for many of the campaigns reaching the make-or-break point of their campaigns. A few candidates rose to the moment with strong performances that could bolster their standings in the polls and their pad their campaigns' coffers. But not everyone is leaving Colorado with a smile on their face.
Here's our take on the night's winners and losers:
http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/29/politics/republican-debate-2015-winners-losers/index.html
I missed it.. But seems a lot of people are not happy at all.
The moderators performed poorly, but that isn't all that surprising considering the network. Bush mistakenly took the bait early on, by engaging Rubio. Bush was really the only candidate that looked bad. Heck, even Christie performed well and didn't do anything to hurt his campaign, unfortunately. That stage is still too crowded for much of any meaningful debate to occur.
If you watched the GOP debate last night, for those of us in the "biz" of supplements, it was a real let down to learn Carson uses this MLM product (he stated it clearly during the debate) and appears to have direct financial ties to them, although he denied that during the debate. Maybe the plus side is he's not anti supplement, but for a smart doctor...
Ben Carson's Mannatech Problem
The GOP candidate denied any relationship with the controversial health-supplement company. His record says otherwise.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/10/ben-carson-mannatech/412987/
The moderators performed poorly, but that isn't all that surprising considering the network. Bush mistakenly took the bait early on, by engaging Rubio. Bush was really the only candidate that looked bad. Heck, even Christie performed well and didn't do anything to hurt his campaign, unfortunately. That stage is still too crowded for much of any meaningful debate to occur.
That was a weird attack by Bush and Rubio really slapped him down hard making Bush look petty. It's not like Rubio is Bush's main threat.
Bush's attack on Rubio was very ill advised. If he ends ups falling out of the race this will be what everyone says was the beginning of the end for Bush.
Can we pleeeeeease get some kind of federal agency set up to regulate fantasy football leagues? It is about time for government to get involved.
Bush's attack on Rubio was very ill advised. If he ends ups falling out of the race this will be what everyone says was the beginning of the end for Bush.
Best thing Bush could have done (if he felt compelled to comment on that topic at all) would have been to do what Rubio did and point out Obama et al missed even more votes during their campaign run and point out it's a non issue. That would have made him look good vs bad as he did.
The moderators were in attack mode, cnbc should be ashamed, they were disgraceful. Cruz really stepped up and changed the narrative as well as Rubio and others.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XmUqzJnf8zY
The debate was good for three things: 1) they all banded together and showed the asshats (moderators) they were idiots. The MSM needed to be called out like that. 2) the debate showed there continues to be no clear consensus as to front-runner. 3) generally speaking the candidates stayed on-issue.
Bush is seriously losing ground, and attacking Rubio was a bad idea. Rubio and Cruz did very well. Trump is still Trump.
I'll just leave this here:
https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/presidential-candidate-ben-carson-shilling-for-mannatech-with-his-own-alternative-cancer-cure-testimonial/
Right up there with "I did not have sex with that woman." For those of us in the "biz" of supplements, it was a real let down to learn Carson uses this MLM product (he stated it clearly during the debate) and appears to have direct financial ties to them, although he denied that during the debate. Maybe the plus side is he's not anti supplement, but for a smart doctor...
brickboy240
10-29-15, 10:44
Cruz handled the moderators pretty well.
Jeb came off as petty and grasping to hold on to what is left of his campaign.
Trump was....well...Trump! I loved his jabs at Kasich.
Carson lost nor did he gain any ground...really.
Cruz handled the moderators pretty well.
Jeb came off as petty and grasping to hold on to what is left of his campaign.
Trump was....well...Trump! I loved his jabs at Kasich.
Carson lost nor did he gain any ground...really.
As mentioned, too many in the debate for anything but sound bites. Maybe a few will drop out after this debate. As Carson caught in a "I didn't have sex with that woman" moment (denial used to be the best friend of the would be politician before the internet...) I suspect his moment in the sun will fade now. I know any interest I may have had just dissipated.
Bush's attack on Rubio was very ill advised. If he ends ups falling out of the race this will be what everyone says was the beginning of the end for Bush.
Is that a bad thing? I did not see it but I would think if Bush wants to shoot himself in the foot, I'll lend him a gun. I heard the whole thing sucked. Even some of the NBC morning shows were talking about how bad it was regarding the questions. That's bad when NBC tells you that your questions were agenda driven idiocy.
As Carson caught in a "I didn't have sex with that woman" moment (denial used to be the best friend of the would be politician before the internet...) I suspect his moment in the sun will fade now.
So what happened with him? I did not get to see it and haven't really heard anything other than wtf regarding the question panel.
So what happened with him? I did not get to see it and haven't really heard anything other than wtf regarding the question panel.
I linked two articles above on that with comments. They asked him about his financial connections to an MLM supplement company, he flat out denied any relationship to it other than some speaking engagements, and it was (an easy to disprove) bold faced lie.
That's bad when NBC tells you that your questions were agenda driven idiocy.
Especially when it's their peeps. One plus for the Trumpster is that he said he is for the 2nd amendment and the no gun zones are a disaster. A mod said he had a couple businesses that were gun free and asked if he would change that. He said he would.
Heck, even Christie performed well and didn't do anything to hurt his campaign, unfortunately. That stage is still too crowded for much of any meaningful debate to occur.
Yes, and that tub of lard could go a long way to clearing out a bit.
I would like to see it thinned right now to
Carson
Trump
Paul
Fiorina
Cruz
Jindal
Rubio
I linked two articles above on that with comments. They asked him about his financial connections to an MLM supplement company, he flat out denied any relationship to it other than some speaking engagements, and it was (an easy to disprove) bold faced lie.
Oh, ok, sorry, missed that reply.. will check.. .. yeah, that's not good. You would think he would be smarter than to try that. I mean when you admit to having stabbed someone what's a little MLM scandal on the side, lol? Yep, agree that won't go over well. I can see him clearing out now but I would expect the Libs will try to keep him in.
brickboy240
10-29-15, 11:19
The absolute best at handling the media, had to be Ted Cruz.
People marvel at Trump's ability to handle big media but if you ask me, Ted Cruz really knows how to handle the morons.
sevenhelmet
10-29-15, 11:33
I didn't watch, but I heard the audience was booing the CNBC "moderators". Sounds like they were pretty biased going into the debate.
Oh, ok, sorry, missed that reply.. will check.. .. yeah, that's not good. You would think he would be smarter than to try that. I mean when you admit to having stabbed someone what's a little MLM scandal on the side, lol? Yep, agree that won't go over well. I can see him clearing out now but I would expect the Libs will try to keep him in.
Indeed you would!
The absolute best at handling the media, had to be Ted Cruz.
People marvel at Trump's ability to handle big media but if you ask me, Ted Cruz really knows how to handle the morons.
Beck was saying Cruz has an audiographical memory. Apparently if he hears something, it gets logged zeros and ones. My wife has that unique gift to a degree..;) Anyhow, the video I posted a page or two back he addresses the offensive comments from the mods exactly in the same order they addressed the candidates. I do agree with Beck that Cruz would be the one to negotiate deals, he doesn't miss or forget a thing. Cruz has always been our top pick and most likely will remain.
Terrible moderators. Once again, they showed how eager they were to get Trump in particular. I don't recall ever seeing an internet fact check run by a moderator DURING a debate.
Rubio is slick, dangerous, and ignorant.
Cruz is brilliant and dangerous.
Carson is weird as hell.
Kasich is the perfect candidate- for 2000.
Bush is in real trouble.
Trump is my GOP choice, if any.
Is that a bad thing? I did not see it but I would think if Bush wants to shoot himself in the foot, I'll lend him a gun. I heard the whole thing sucked. Even some of the NBC morning shows were talking about how bad it was regarding the questions. That's bad when NBC tells you that your questions were agenda driven idiocy.
Don't think it is a bad thing at all. Hope he ends this sooner rather than later. I was just saying this is what others will point to as his big mistake.
Moose-Knuckle
10-29-15, 13:41
The GOP needs to flip the bird to the MSM and no longer participate in any of these ambushes, oh I mean "debates".
They have the money to host their own and have them moderated by the likes of Mark Levin.
The GOP needs to flip the bird to the MSM and no longer participate in any of these ambushes, oh I mean "debates".
They have the money to host their own and have them moderated by the likes of Mark Levin.
I agree, but the debates like last night illustrate the point that the MSM is a propaganda machine for the left and lacks any seriousness in actually addressing the issues. Fantasy football as a serious question? Come on! Hitlery will claim that media bias is one of those "vast right wing conspiracies", but the performance of the moderators last night is impossible to define in any way other than bias. The dozens of people who watched the debate instead of the World Series were able to see that.
I agree, but the debates like last night illustrate the point that the MSM is a propaganda machine for the left and lacks any seriousness in actually addressing the issues. Fantasy football as a serious question? Come on! Hitlery will claim that media bias is one of those "vast right wing conspiracies", but the performance of the moderators last night is impossible to define in any way other than bias. The dozens of people who watched the debate instead of the World Series were able to see that.
Are they still playing the World Series?
Don't think it is a bad thing at all. Hope he ends this sooner rather than later. I was just saying this is what others will point to as his big mistake.
One thing these guys need to remember, when Bush does finally drop out all his RINO money changers will shift their support to one of the other nine. That will be the next target to eliminate before the primary. Any bets as to who they'll default to?
KalashniKEV
10-29-15, 17:00
Bush's attack on Rubio was very ill advised. If he ends ups falling out of the race this will be what everyone says was the beginning of the end for Bush.
That was his death blow.
The fantasy football thing was the coup de gras.
One thing these guys need to remember, when Bush does finally drop out all his RINO money changers will shift their support to one of the other nine.
The will be forced to choose between Rubio and Cruz.
They will pick Rubio.
Trump was....well...Trump! I loved his jabs at Kasich.
Trumpzilla put Kasich in the dirt. They should have played taps for him at the end. Game over for what's-his-name.
Kasich, Christie Creme, Graham...? Who else do they have? Billery?
titsonritz
10-29-15, 22:39
Those libtard moderators were being dickheads with their bullshit ambush questions that lacked any substance of the real issues that should be addressed in a presidential debate. I think their little game backfired on them, Cruz especially handed them theirs asses but most got in a punch or two. Cruz and Rubio were the standouts with an honorable mention to that toad Christie. Trump must have stopped off at one of the local smoke shops, he was more mellow than usual. Bush shot himself in the foot when he tried to slab Rubio, he seemed whipped. It is well past time to weed some losers out.
The field definitely needs to be thinned out! Not just a bit but by at least half. There are easily 6 possibly more that are just wasting time and money being in the race. At this point I'd say that Trump, Cruz, Rubio, Carson and Fiorina are the class of the field. Paul, Kasich, Christie, Graham, Santorum, Pataki, Gilmore and sadly Jindal all definitely need to call it quits.
The GOP needs to flip the bird to the MSM and no longer participate in any of these ambushes, oh I mean "debates".
They have the money to host their own and have them moderated by the likes of Mark Levin.
Levin, Limbaugh, Hannity, etc. would be a good moderator panel for the R's & D's to face. I haven't watched the debates this time around due to how piss poor the liberal media hacks did last time. Listening to a comparison on talk radio between how the R's & D's were treated during their debates made me cringe. The obvious bias is blatantly apparent.
No, I think Rush, et al., would be equally as biased. I like the town hall format, have a "professional" moderator, but let "real people" ask the questions.
The modern "debate" format has been turned into a freaking circus.....
I'll just leave this here:
https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/presidential-candidate-ben-carson-shilling-for-mannatech-with-his-own-alternative-cancer-cure-testimonial/
Right up there with "I did not have sex with that woman." For those of us in the "biz" of supplements, it was a real let down to learn Carson uses this MLM product (he stated it clearly during the debate) and appears to have direct financial ties to them, although he denied that during the debate. Maybe the plus side is he's not anti supplement, but for a smart doctor...
I watched / stuffed through about 90% of the controversial speech from 2004 that is embedded in the link that you provided. The commentary in the link is fairly slanted and seems to misrepresent the speech and what Carson said. For example, the author of that hit piece said that Carson claimed to have bone mets from his prostate CA, and seemed to suggest that the product cured those mets. In reality, Carson clearly said in the speech that he misread his MRI due to a congenital bone marrow anomaly which made him initially think that he had bone mets. He went on to clearly say that the cancer was contained within the prostate and cured by the surgery. From what I can tell from watching the speech, Carson said nothing more than the product made him feel better. He never claimed or even insinuated that it cured his cancer.
If 4 paid speeches are the extent of his financial involvement then it's going to be a non-issue.
Outlander Systems
10-30-15, 09:19
When the establishment lickspittles (Bush, Rubio) are gone, I'll start taking these things seriously.
I watched / stuffed through about 90% of the controversial speech from 2004 that is embedded in the link that you provided. The commentary in the link is fairly slanted and seems to misrepresent the speech and what Carson said. For example, the author of that hit piece said that Carson claimed to have bone mets from his prostate CA, and seemed to suggest that the product cured those mets. In reality, Carson clearly said in the speech that he misread his MRI due to a congenital bone marrow anomaly which made him initially think that he had bone mets. He went on to clearly say that the cancer was contained within the prostate and cured by the surgery. From what I can tell from watching the speech, Carson said nothing more than the product made him feel better. He never claimed or even insinuated that it cured his cancer.
If 4 paid speeches are the extent of his financial involvement then it's going to be a non-issue.
I'd agree with that, but his connection seems clearly far deeper than that. It's also a less than noble MLM company that's had to settle large settlements for its claims and marketing, and you'd think one of the most successful surgeons around would have the sense to avoid some MLM selling complete snake oil. It seriously speaks to his judgement capabilities for me at least for me. Your mileage may vary.
I'm (obviously) pro supplement and use and recommend a bunch myself (if the data supports it) but my opinion of anyone with such an education aligning themselves to an MLM like that, speaks volumes for me on various levels. It might be I'm too close to it from an industry perspective, but is also appears he made a bold faced lie on national TV.
Am I the only one who thinks Fiorina stole the show? She was by far the most focused, articulate and "presidential" candidate I saw there.
I'm a Ben Carson and Rand Paul fan, and they may be the most intelligent candidates running, especially Dr Carson, but I fear he is too nice to get into the trenches with Hillary, and her attack minions would decimate him. However, I would love to see how the left handles ridiculing Dr Carson - any time the right does the same to Obama, we are accused of racism.
Both Carson and Paul have superior ideas and a more Libertarian philosophy, which is fine by me. I think Dr Carson would make a great president, but he and Dr Paul aren't going to get the nomination. Carson maybe as VP.
In spite of some great sound bites, I'm not a Rubio, Cruz or Christie fan. The pundits say they won the debate, but I disagree.
Trump would be fun to watch debate Hillary, but he is too polarizing to win a general election. Many love him. More hate him. If he gets the nomination, say good bye to the Hispanic vote, the black vote, the Libertarian and Independent vote, and especially the women vote. Cruz is too tied to the evangelical wing. He will lose a sizeable percent of Independents and Libertarians. Rubio is Establishment. Bush is a goof. Christie has poor creds - he sucks up to Obama and is not what I would call a solid 2A friend. Everyone else (especially Bush) should just go away.
Fiorina is smart, articulate, and focused. She hasn't yet let an opponent or moderator get under her skin, and a debate of Fiorina vs Hillary might be very interesting. It would eliminate the "it's time for a women" argument to support one side over the other.
Everyone has baggage. Hell, Hillary has so much baggage she needs a team of mules to haul it all (also referred to as the MSM).
I think a Fiorina/Carson ticket would be great.
I really like Carson he had the right answers for everything. I unfortunately think he was to soft spoken. In an election Hilary would walk all over him in a debate, even if he was the one who was right on all the questions.
While trump is an ass clown he'd stand up to hilary, unfortunately I think in a public debate he'd slip and call her a carpet muncher or some similar name and cause an issue.
I also think Carson is the answer to the race debate and all the shit Obama has stirred trying to destroy America. Carson can tell the #BLM folks to get a life, and they can't pull the race card on him.
Carson can and will stand there and say "I am a black man that went from nothing in Detroit to a Neuro Surgeon. Being black in America is not an excuse for your failure. I did it, so can you." This is the race baiters worst nightmare.
Carson/Fiorina ticket would get me all excited. Idea's I can stand behind with al the bases covered so the left can't wine about no blacks and woman.
The CNBC mods stepped in it so bad, they've got CNN covering their butts. Birds of a feather after all...
http://money.cnn.com/2015/10/30/media/cnbc-gop-debate-reactions-shellshocked/index.html
Still, they don't even recognize that they're admitting to what they did:
But some of the same employees also said they were proud that the moderators had pointedly challenged the GOP candidates and potentially changed the course of the presidential race.
That's all they care about, wounding the GOP candidates enough to get their man Hillary elected. Disgraceful. :mad:
Yep, I think Meet The DePressed is doing a special this Sunday with schmuck Todd to announce the end of the Bush dynasty.
all the time promoting the Clinton dynasty.. They don't even try to hide it any longer. It's full on State owned media.
Am I the only one who thinks Fiorina stole the show? She was by far the most focused, articulate and "presidential" candidate I saw there.
Fiorina is smart, articulate, and focused. She hasn't yet let an opponent or moderator get under her skin, and a debate of Fiorina vs Hillary might be very interesting. It would eliminate the "it's time for a women" argument to support one side over the other.
I think a Fiorina/Carson ticket would be great.
Perhaps we're watching a different Fiorina. I saw, in the 2nd debate (her first main debate appearance), her get rattled by Trumps attacks on her HP record to the point that she sounded like a bad interviewee reciting a list of why nothing was her fault at the last job. She was also totally humorless and rattled off 500 billion dollars in military spending she got from a Heritage Foundation report with not a clue how we're supposed to pay for it.
On Wednesday, she was uninspiring and uninteresting. Her pedantic arguments about finding a cost basis may inspire someone. It isn't me.
Wrap that up in a zeal to prosecute big new wars, a repudiation of the kind of diplomacy Reagan and Bush used to outlast the USSR- helpfully pointed out by Rand Paul- and you have a baggage-ridden, messianic harpy who seems like an incompetent demagogue.
Moose-Knuckle
10-30-15, 23:49
No, I think Rush, et al., would be equally as biased. I like the town hall format, have a "professional" moderator, but let "real people" ask the questions.
Actually Mark Levin would make the perfect moderator, as he possess an encyclopedia amount of knowledge on Constitutional Law. He would not pull any punches and ask the hard questions. Mark Savage is another one that would pour it on if given the chance.
The modern "debate" format has been turned into a freaking circus.....
Debates themselves are not the problem, it's the modern media. Historically there have been some epic debates, this was all before the profession of journalism was hijacked.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.