2016 Election
Quote: ams288Can't believe that I'm here to defend FOX News and Megyn Kelly, but her question in that first debate to Trump was not a "gotcha question" in any way shape or form.
Same here.
Quote: amsTo quote a candidate's actual statements, and then ask them about them is not a gotcha question.
In fact, that is one of the only "real" questions that Trump has gotten this entire cycle.
Waaaaay too many journalists ask him softballs, or more often, just ignore and move on when he answers their relevant questions with flat out lies. No one challenges Trump's B.S. during interviews. Why? Because if they do, Trump will harass them on Twitter afterwards and he won't do their show anymore. And they need the ratings that a Trump interview brings in.
Megyn Kelly called out his B.S. and didn't back down, and we are in month 6 of Trump's hissy fit over it.
Well said. I do see kj's point, but that's giving in to the deflection he caused. The layers of BS he puts out there and the way his "trumpeters" bobble-head whatever splat he spits, and now y'all defending that deflection, means he never has to take responsibility for what he's said and done. She's willing to ride the scorn wave and force him to answer, or look like an ass not answering. She needs to be there.
would be brilliant of Trump to skip this
debate. He would own the media for
3 days. And that's just what's happening.
Every news show, radio and TV, this is
all they're talking about. FOX will lose
so much of the debate audience they'll
have to cut the amount they charge
for ads be 2/3's. Supposedly they are
in panic mode today, with Trump gone
who's gonna watch. Not me, BORING.
Quote: EvenBobI can't believe how much energy you people
expend in this thread. It's yours to waste, I
guess. AZ and I made a pact over a month
ago to ignore it, and our lives have been
immensely enriched.
Carry on, who cares..
????
You made a pact
What has changed?
Is AZ coming back?
Welcome back:-)
Don't blame you for coming back. Its a fun thread. We aren't going to change anybodys minds here. The logical point counter point is simply entertaining
Typical EB
EB-Rommney will win. reality Obama wins
EB- Ebola extremely contagious . reality Ebola very hard to get
EB-I will ignore this thread. reality he's back
lol
Megyn doesn't question the Trump directly, and the Trump doesn't spit in her direction.
Everybody's a winner, Hey Hey.
Fox and Trump are both big bad asses, neither wants to 'give in''..
On the other hand, Trump is self banning himself from the debate.
Without the Wizard's protection the other candidates can, and prolly will, take some serious shots at him.
The choices for those shots are almost endless.
I bought popcorn.
Never a dull moment ;-)
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/01/fox-statement-taunting-trump-was-all-roger-ailes.html
If the details are correct, I gotta hand it to Trump. He has FOX exactly where he wants them: begging him for mercy.
Quote: ams288Here's an interesting article on the current behind the scenes chaos at Fox News RE: Trump dropping out of the debate:
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/01/fox-statement-taunting-trump-was-all-roger-ailes.html
If the details are correct, I gotta hand it to Trump. He has FOX exactly where he wants them: begging him for mercy.
Too fast for me AMS :-)
Was just about to post something similar
The back story at Fox is fascinating
Ailes is so desperate to talk to Trump he called Trump's daughter Ivanka and wife, Melania.
Trump is saying he'll only talk to Rupert Murdoch directly
Last night, Ailes directed Sean Hannity to cancel Trump's interview.
Oreilly refused to cancel Trump
Talk is Oreilly is doing this to get back at Kelly
Kelly has surpassed Oreilly in ratings and he cant deal with that.
Added edit
More drama at foxnews.
Kelly had Michael Moore on her program last nite and he made fun of Trump and Kelly played along
This is too rich, the face of foxnews, has a leading Lib on her show and they mock the republican front runner
People at Fox are furious with Megyn.
"one of her fellow anchor's noting; 'That would be like Rachel Maddow laughing along with Charles Koch as he trashed Hillary Clinton!'"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3419173/Donald-Trump-feud-causes-panicking-Fox-News-CEO-Roger-Ailes-call-Ivanka-Melania-attempt-frontrunner-debate-ll-speak-Murdoch.html
Seeing as how that appears as nothing more than unsourced and malicious rumors, the one clear fact in in that is totally incorrect. In the November sweeps, as for much of 2015, O'Reilly was in comfortably in first place:Quote: terapinedLast night, Ailes directed Sean Hannity to cancel Trump's interview.
Oreilly refused to cancel Trump
Talk is Oreilly is doing this to get back at Kelly
Kelly has surpassed Oreilly in ratings and he cant deal with that.
"Every FNC daytime and primetime program delivered their most-watched week of 2015, led by “The O’Reilly Factor” with 3.6 million and “The Kelly File” with 3.2 million." Variety
That is nothing more than idle and harm-intending speculation. The widespread belief in the most affected circles is that Fox News and Megyn Kelly are supposedly out to derail Trump in favor of more mainstream candidates.Quote: terapinedAdded edit
More drama at foxnews.
Kelly had Michael Moore on her program last nite and he made fun of Trump and Kelly played along
This is too rich, the face of foxnews, has a leading Lib on her show and they mock the republican front runner
People at Fox are furious with Megan.
his hands and knees begging Trump to
do the debate. Trump gave him and Ailes
the proverbial finger. Good for him.
Screw FOX, and especially that skank
Megyn..
Skank: Derogatory term for a female, implying trashiness or tackiness.
Yeah, that about covers it.
Trump is likely going to win the nomination.
I've complained for eight years about Obama being a bad President with a lack of class and respect for the importance of his office.
I fear the same thing, in a different way, if there is a President Trump. This man wants to be leader of the free world and he can figure out how to get lots of publicity (free--this debate thing is insanely good for him...and maybe even Fox...no matter which way it goes) but he can't do it without tossing in random nastiness that I hope even the simplest of people can understand. You can't say you won't call someone something because it is not politically correct...because you just called them that anyway.
Really? This guy is the great hope for our nation? He's going to build a wall with Mexico's money? No, he's not. Perhaps he will cut aid to Mexico and build it with that and SAY that he built it with "Mexico's money"...but that is the same old bullshit we get now with Congress telling us they "cut" and "saved" money when they take a budget inflated by 10% and deflate it by 5% telling us they saved us billions. People actually believe that. No, buttheads, that is not YOUR money it is OUR money...why are you so free with spending it?
He's really said a lot of stuff that sounds great on the surface; he's given no way of actually getting most of it done. He's a publicity machine who can't stand to be insulted. As President, he will be insulted. Often. Is he going to waste time calling people out on Twitter or is he going to do the work of being President? Are we going to get basically the same government with a big mouthed bully with his finger on the button?
I've tired of his act. I don't think it is going away anytime soon. Yes, I said I would vote for him over a Democrat (at least the existing candidates) in the general election. I will, if it comes down to that because I don't like either viable Dem at all. I will do it with great concern over what he will actually do and say.
He's afraid of being on stage with like-minded Republicans where he only really has to speak for approximately 20 minutes due to the number of candidates....
It will be way worse when he has to talk substantively for 45+ minutes against an enemy. He can't do it.
Quote: ams288What are the odds that if Trump is the nominee, he will skip one or more of the debates against Hillary or Bernie?
He's afraid of being on stage with like-minded Republicans where he only really has to speak for approximately 20 minutes due to the number of candidates....
It will be way worse when he has to talk substantively for 45+ minutes against an enemy. He can't do it.
...and if he can't handle debating these challengers (I hesitate to call them enemies; they supposedly are all running to better the country), how will he do debating about things with REAL enemies?
...or even dealing with friends...
"I'm not going to say that the French are whiny little twerps because it isn't politically correct...but you know what I'm saying, right?"
Quote: ams288What are the odds that if Trump is the nominee, he will skip one or more of the debates against Hillary or Bernie?
He's afraid of being on stage with like-minded Republicans where he only really has to speak for approximately 20 minutes due to the number of candidates....
It will be way worse when he has to talk substantively for 45+ minutes against an enemy. He can't do it.
Its common in politics that poll leader balks at debates while poll trailer always wants debates
In todays information age with the 24/7 news cycle and talk radio chatter , debates are meaningless
For the press, its not about good arguments at a debate, its about the next gaff
How many people in Iowa are thinking to themselves, boy I really need this next debate to make a decision
The voters have already made up their mind
Its the smart move by Trump not to debate
He's winning
If he can win without a debate, why debate
Now if he wins the nomination and trails Clinton, then its in his best interest to debate
If he leads Clinton, he may decline to debate.
A poll leader has nothing to gain by debating
Quote: terapinedIts common in politics that poll leader balks at debates while poll trailer always wants debates
In todays information age with the 24/7 news cycle and talk radio chatter , debates are meaningless
For the press, its not about good arguments at a debate, its about the next gaff
How many people in Iowa are thinking to themselves, boy I really need this next debate to make a decision
The voters have already made up their mind
Its the smart move by Trump not to debate
He's winning
If he can win without a debate, why debate
Now if he wins the nomination and trails Clinton, then its in his best interest to debate
If he leads Clinton, he may decline to debate.
A poll leader has nothing to gain by debating
I'm not debating the worth of, well, debating...but some indications exist that "The voters have already made up their mind" is a long way from being completely true:
"With less than one week till the caucus, more than “one third (34.2 percent)” of those polled have yet to pick their candidate. 27 percent of those polled said they’ve changed their mind over the course of the campaign. The two most common factors for a voter switching their vote was their perception of a candidate’s electability or learning something new about that candidate."
https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2016/01/are-recent-iowa-polls-wrong
He may have more to lose by debating than not debating; on the other hand, the large number of votes that may change may not feel the same about him not showing.
Quote: terapined
In todays information age with the 24/7 news cycle and talk radio chatter , debates are meaningless
Great point. In the old days debates were when candidates were able to communicate their platform to the public. Today we have 24/7 news and media coverage and people can consume the information on their own schedule. Sadly today elections are even more about personality and charisma than they were in the past.
Quote: DRichGreat point. In the old days debates were when candidates were able to communicate their platform to the public. Today we have 24/7 news and media coverage and people can consume the information on their own schedule. Sadly today elections are even more about personality and charisma than they were in the past.
The irony here is that Trump has gotten more free media than any candidate in history, probably by some large multiple (not just by a little bit). So we've heard from him endlessly; wall to wall coverage of his events as breaking news, every sound bite uttered anywhere covered as straight news, etc. And what does all that information consist of? Quotes of the poll standings, nasty comments about other people, whining about situations he doesn't like.
Does anybody have ANY idea what he would do if he were President, or more specifically, HOW? I don't have the slightest idea what he expects to do, who's left to work with him, or how he would pay for any of it. I know he disparages women, blacks, latinos, immigrants, democrats, and most of the leadership of either party, along with the leaders of most of the rest of the world. Who is supposed to vote for him or support his non-existent policies? Where does he stand on anything other than by convenience in response to his perceived poll support? He hasn't told us any of this, and nobody's been able to pin him down on any of it, because when anybody tries, he just changes the focus to personal attacks or poll results. It's offensive and frustrating.
Quote: beachbumbabsThe irony here is that Trump has gotten more free media than any candidate in history, probably by some large multiple (not just by a little bit). So we've heard from him endlessly; wall to wall coverage of his events as breaking news, every sound bite uttered anywhere covered as straight news, etc. And what does all that information consist of? Quotes of the poll standings, nasty comments about other people, whining about situations he doesn't like.
Does anybody have ANY idea what he would do if he were President, or more specifically, HOW? I don't have the slightest idea what he expects to do, who's left to work with him, or how he would pay for any of it. I know he disparages women, blacks, latinos, immigrants, democrats, and most of the leadership of either party, along with the leaders of most of the rest of the world. Who is supposed to vote for him or support his non-existent policies? Where does he stand on anything other than by convenience in response to his perceived poll support? He hasn't told us any of this, and nobody's been able to pin him down on any of it, because when anybody tries, he just changes the focus to personal attacks or poll results. It's offensive and frustrating.
Reporter: Mr. Trump, how will you build the wall with Mexico?
Trump: You know, I am leading in every poll. I have won every debate. Sometimes you reporters act like women, you know...I'd call them bimbos, but that is not politically correct. Anyway, I win at everything and I don't see why those two Latinos are even in the race.
Quote: RonCReporter: Mr. Trump, how will you build the wall with Mexico?
Trump: You know, I am leading in every poll. I have won every debate. Sometimes you reporters act like women, you know...I'd call them bimbos, but that is not politically correct. Anyway, I win at everything and I don't see why those two Latinos are even in the race.
Trump has only one objective, its to win the nomination
If answering a reporters question honestly hurts his chances, he should not answer
If debating might hurt his chances, he should not debate
This all reminds me of the Robert Redford movie the Candidate
For a year, he runs for governor. That's his job, to be elected. Once he wins, he doesn't know what to do.
Maybe Trump would be a good President, maybe a bad one
But right now his job is to do whatever it takes to be elected and not do anything that hurts his chances
Any politician would be thrilled to be leading without having to answer any tough questions.
Trump right now is running the perfect campaign to get the nomination.
Quote: terapinedTrump has only one objective, its to win the nomination
If answering a reporters question honestly hurts his chances, he should not answer
If debating might hurt his chances, he should not debate
This all reminds me of the Robert Redford movie the Candidate
For a year, he runs for governor. That's his job, to be elected. Once he wins, he doesn't know what to do.
Maybe Trump would be a good President, maybe a bad one
But right now his job is to do whatever it takes to be elected and not do anything that hurts his chances
Any politician would be thrilled to be leading without having to answer any tough questions.
Trump right now is running the perfect campaign to get the nomination.
So what you're really saying is that Trump is mirroring and emphasizing the problems with an electorate that stands for nothing, doesn't care how or what things get done, but worships celebrity. Which comes close to proving he's running a faux candidacy, either for his own amusement or to make a point, or to destroy the current Republican/two-party political leadership or process and force it to rebuild. Which I said months ago (just FWIW, not really to prove anything), but the time could still come when he says, "I just did this to prove how effed up this country's political routine really is; I'm withdrawing. Good luck, y'all, and welcome to the job, President Clinton."
Quote: DRichI really hope that Trump and Sanders both get the nominations. Bloomberg said he would run in that scenario and although I know almost nothing about him, right now he would get my vote out of those three.
All I know about Bloomberg is he is really really anti-gun and anti-big soda cups.
Even if you're for him 100%, to me, it's not clear that he returns loyalty. He needs devotion, but is willing to cut you off just as quickly. Look how fast part of the rightwing was disposed. Trump figuratively gave the finger to all the National Review writers, and he's going at his critics at Fox News. Is that all about serving voters, or serving Trump? Was he ever a liberal or just an opportunist. Maybe he is more conservative? Is he just an opportunist? I've seen Presidents who have protesters removed (which always occurs sooner or later), but can't recall any who point and mock the person they are throwing out. "Get em out of here, throw em out." Some people love it when he takes on other people in power, but you have to wonder about people who are just average voters who can't offer anything, not even a photo opportunity. Will they even be gnats to him? When things go wrong, and they surely will, will Trump diminish his own responsibility and heap it on someone or something else. Does he seem to do it any other way now?
Well, those are my reservations. But maybe he would be a great President.
He wants the attention that comes from being President.
I've been saying this from day 1 of his campaign...
That's the thing that scares me. His Presidency would be entertaining, but truly disastrous for the country.
I love it.
Quote: HowManyThe fact that Trump and Bernie Sanders are viable candidates proves how much a disaster the Obama presidency has been.
I love it.
Completely incorrect.
The fact that Trump is a viable candidate proves how deranged the Republican Party has become. Republicans have suffered from ODS (Obama Derangement Syndrome) for 7 years. Their current primary mess is a direct result of it.
The fact that Bernie is a viable candidate affirms Obama's presidency. Had Obama been a disaster, Dems would have instantly gravitated to a safe, middle of the road candidate (see McCain in 2008 after the Bush disaster). The fact that a further left socialist is doing well does not prove the current Democrat president was a disaster...
I thought you were better than this.Quote: terapinedquote from 2 months ago, Dec 1 2015
????
You made a pact
What has changed?
Is AZ coming back?
Welcome back:-)
Don't blame you for coming back. Its a fun thread. We aren't going to change anybodys minds here. The logical point counter point is simply entertaining
Typical EB
EB-Rommney will win. reality Obama wins
EB- Ebola extremely contagious . reality Ebola very hard to get
EB-I will ignore this thread. reality he's back
lol
Quote: ams288All I know about Bloomberg is he is really really anti-gun and anti-big soda cups.
He isn't much against big-soda cups, he is mostly in favor of taxing it, which would have reduced the tax burden of all non-soda drinking residents. The other parts of the government was able to stop that, because they didn't like the idea of a tax that would be optional. Bloomberg only banned the big soda cups because for some reason the rest of the New York government couldn't stand in his way to carry out that order.
Quote: beachbumbabsThe irony here is that Trump has gotten more free media than any candidate in history, probably by some large multiple (not just by a little bit). So we've heard from him endlessly; wall to wall coverage of his events as breaking news, every sound bite uttered anywhere covered as straight news, etc. And what does all that information consist of? Quotes of the poll standings, nasty comments about other people, whining about situations he doesn't like.
Does anybody have ANY idea what he would do if he were President, or more specifically, HOW? I don't have the slightest idea what he expects to do, who's left to work with him, or how he would pay for any of it. I know he disparages women, blacks, latinos, immigrants, democrats, and most of the leadership of either party, along with the leaders of most of the rest of the world. Who is supposed to vote for him or support his non-existent policies? Where does he stand on anything other than by convenience in response to his perceived poll support? He hasn't told us any of this, and nobody's been able to pin him down on any of it, because when anybody tries, he just changes the focus to personal attacks or poll results. It's offensive and frustrating.
Trump gets wall to wall coverage because he is a master at creating action and providing inspiration. All focal talking points originate from his bringing the topic to the front in a direct manner. He talks about his accomplishments, which are many, to establish credibility. When it comes to talking about the US problems he doesn't talk much about himself, he talks in terms of WE. He brings alot of people together and gets them involved and working on the problems in order to have a resolution. That is what a leader does. He inspires others to succeed and provides the vision.
Trump has been consistent with his vision and principles for 30+ years. He has written books putting forth solutions to our Country's problems. He has also demonstrated an ability to change directions after being fully educated on a matter. What more can you ask of a leader?
This country is in desparate need of a committed leader to restore the destruction of our founding principles. This person needs to be uninfluenced by destructive special interests. They also have to be logical, decisive, and have the commitment to tackle the problems facing us. Trump is the only one who fits the bill in my opinion.
As far as Trump not doing the debate. There is no need. What he is doing is no different that what The RNC just did to NBC by moving there thing to CNN. NBC was not focusing on the candidates and using it for their own agendas. Trump is not shying away from a debate. He is not allowing himself to walk into an ambush by an agenda driven so called unbiased network. Good for him. This is equivalent to Reagan walking away from Gorbachev during Reykjavic Summit. Just as no agrement is better than a bad agreement, no debate is better than a poorly moderated debate. By the way Reagan didn't participate in the last debate in 1980 either.
Good to see the rest of the republicans getting some face time. Can't find the Donald? What channel is he on?
Quote: ams288Watched about 15 minutes of the Trumpless debate and zzzzzzzz.... Couldn't take anymore.
Agreed. I have been flipping back and forth between Debate and Trump event. Not impressed by either. The debate has the feel of the lower tier debate. Seems like the "big dog" is missing. How can you have a legitimate debate without the person leading all the polls participating?
Trumps event seems equally as lame. He "raised" over 5 million dollars for Veterans by having all his rich friends donate money and then read their names. Total exploitation of the veterans.
Now this is going to be very politically incorrect, but why did Megyn Kelly get a lesbian-ish makeover? (not that there's anything wrong with that). She looks like a blond Racheal Maddow up there. :/
Oh btw, interesting that Trump (via interview) and Fox News (via statement) have slightly differing views on the events of the day as far as Fox contacting Trump 3 different times begging him to attend the debate, but apparently both accounts include an admission by Fox apologized about it's statements about Trump being afraid of Megyn Kelly. Seems like Trump brought the great "fair and balanced" crew to their knees. That will be more evident tomorrow when ratings come out and we see that probably half of the 24 million that watched the last Fox debate, tuned in to this one.
Quote: BasesLoadedSo far debate looks like Megyn Kelly's audition for a job with one of the big networks. See her bickering with the candidates instead of stepping aside and letting them speak.
Good to see the rest of the republicans getting some face time. Can't find the Donald? What channel is he on?
CNN and MSNBC showed some but then cut away
livestream on the internet
Quote: MaxPenTrump gets wall to wall coverage because he is a master at creating action and providing inspiration. All focal talking points originate from his bringing the topic to the front in a direct manner. He talks about his accomplishments, which are many, to establish credibility. When it comes to talking about the US problems he doesn't talk much about himself, he talks in terms of WE. He brings alot of people together and gets them involved and working on the problems in order to have a resolution. That is what a leader does. He inspires others to succeed and provides the vision.
Trump has been consistent with his vision and principles for 30+ years. He has written books putting forth solutions to our Country's problems. He has also demonstrated an ability to change directions after being fully educated on a matter. What more can you ask of a leader?
This country is in desparate need of a committed leader to restore the destruction of our founding principles. This person needs to be uninfluenced by destructive special interests. They also have to be logical, decisive, and have the commitment to tackle the problems facing us. Trump is the only one who fits the bill in my opinion.
Well, Maxpen, Trump should probably hire you. Anyway, when I search around the web on Trump's history, I can find stuff like this which is not so positive. What say you?
Quote:it involves Trump making promises to Scotland that he didn’t keep (about the amount of his investment and the number of jobs that would be created; both were far far less than promised); he lied about how much he had invested when the truth was easily obtainable; he insulted and threatened anyone who crossed him, including the farmers and other people of modest means whose land was near the golf course he was building and who refused to sell to him; he tried to use the law to compel them to sell to him even though he didn’t need their land to actually build the course; and then he engaged in a war of insults with those he’d lied to. He squandered the goodwill of the people of Aberdeen who had originally supported the project—a luxury golf course and hotel—because of the money they thought it would bring to the stricken area.
http://neoneocon.com/2016/01/28/trumps-skeletons-are-outside-the-closet/
Quote: BasesLoadedFound Trump's rally on C-SPAN. Not in HD on my provider, looks blurry and cheesy.
Don't get me wrong. Trump doing this for the wounded vets is commendable. I hope this raises awareness and dollars for their plight. It's just under strange circumstances.
Quote: rxwineWell, Maxpen, Trump should probably hire you. Anyway, when I search around the web on Trump's history, I can find stuff like this which is not so positive. What say you?
http://neoneocon.com/2016/01/28/trumps-skeletons-are-outside-the-closet/
Sometimes in order to get things done you have to take the unpopular path. Scottish people are a fickle bunch when it comes to supposed "big shot Americans". When you have as many ventures as this guy has, some are bound to fail. His percentage of failure is absurdly low compared to averages. The clientel needed never arrived and therefore that course is not meeting expectation. Everyone likes to point fingers at failure.
I think Trump is capable of much success simply based on past performance. Watch him speak sometime and notice when he talks about changing America, it is done with WE will not I. Tonight at his event he turned the stage over to the beneficiaries of his fundraiser and took a seat in the audience. How many politicians would have stood on the stage? This was not for him. It was for the Vets. He turned lemons into lemonade and raised alot of money for a good cause. Probably saved a few Vets lives by giving John Wayne Walding the stage.
The guy doesn't get everything right, but he damn sure tries hard. I believe he has good intentions and I'd sure take him over any of the others, so far. I don't consider him a politician. He's more of a statesman. I doubt he'd even be intersted in a second term. He's more than likely doing it because of the understanding that we are dangling from the precipice of failure without change to the status quo.
I though Marco did well in some of the other debates, but tonight it felt like he was lecturing....talking down to me. Does anyone else feel like that or is it just me. Someone on one of the channels said it looked like Rubio had too much caffeine. That IS kind of the way it felt.
Quote: MaxPenTonight at his event he turned the stage over to the beneficiaries of his fundraiser and took a seat in the audience.
Well, some people see one thing; what I see is the "Trump" in big letters on his buildings, on a guy who has purposely sought a lot of celebrity and public exposure. Call me skeptical.
"Matthew 23:5
"Everything they do is done for people to see: They make their phylacteries wide and the tassels on their garments long;"
(Of course, I'm an atheist, so you can discount my quoting of a Bible verse, but it seems like a good point in his case, IMO)
I found his absence to be refreshing because you actually got to watch the candidates without the class clown making faces and saying things about this or that group. They looked a lot better without him there. I don't know what viewership was but I know I have a better picture of the candidates after this debate than after any of the others. I'm still not sold on a particular candidate but the debate last night was the most helpful of the bunch.
I also question the way Trump did his event "for the veterans"--I am glad that veterans are being supported, but was that part of it as sincere as it could have been or just a ratings ploy?
I guess he brought in that Omarosa lady...
I didn't miss Trump at all.
The losers debate
http://insider.foxnews.com/2016/01/29/frank-luntz-kelly-file-focus-group-has-overwhelming-reaction-donald-trump-skipping-gop
It is one thing to be disrespectful of politicians, media, and celebrities. That can go well for someone. If the perception becomes that he is disrespectful of the people he is trying to get to elect him, that could backfire in a big way. The disrespect of "them" is loved by "us"; the disrespect of "us"...well, not so much.
Liberals can label the debate whatever they want; they are trying to defend Hillary and Bernie has candidates so they can do nothing but attack the other side and hope it is effective. They know deep down that Hillary should not be President and I would wager that most of them may want bigger government, but they certainly don't want a socialist elected. "Sorry, Wiz, you gotta split those millions you got for your incredible idea up with everyone equally"...yeah, right...
Quote: RonC. There was a good amount of talk about him being disrespectful of the people of Iowa.
That's all spin talk from all the loser candidates advisors
All losers in a political races are desperate for debates.
Look at Cruz, so desperate he is offering millions to charity for a one on one debate. Its the desperate move of a loser
Nobody leading ever wants to debate, you have everything to lose.
Losers need debates because they have nothing to lose
Trump made the smart call
If you can win without debating, then don't debate
The objective is to win.
As Tiger Woods has said "2nd place sucks"
Quote: BasesLoadedSo far debate looks like Megyn Kelly's audition for a job with one of the big networks. See her bickering with the candidates instead of stepping aside and letting them speak.
Yep. It's the world we live in these days- "Look at me! Look at me!" The moderators think the debate is about THEM, not the candidates. Megyn Kelly is a pathetic, bimbo, skank. (she's not a member here, is she?)
The ONLY moderator that seems to a good job these days is Anderson Cooper.
Yet Hillary Clinton is having serious second thoughts about her hide-and-seek strategy. Could that mean that she senses that she's losing?Quote: terapinedNobody leading ever wants to debate, you have everything to lose.
Losers need debates because they have nothing to lose.
Quote: SanchoPanzaYet Hillary Clinton is having serious second thoughts about her hide-and-seek strategy. Could that mean that she senses that she's losing?
Oh absolutely
When she was dominating , she wanted few debates and the Dem party agreed and scheduled a few debates
Now that Bernie is doing well, she wants to debate
common sense
Same on the right
All those losers on Fox last nite are desperate to debate Trump
Their advisers spew all this BS about disrespecting the voters. Its the desperation arguments from losers
Cruz offering millions to charity just to debate Trump one on one.
Cruz is a total loser. Its a hail mary with seconds left and down by multiple touchdowns
Its the loser move.
Just give to charity no strings attached. That's a hero move. Cruz is no hero, he's a loser
They showed video during the debate
of Rubio and Cruz with opinions they
held in the past that differ from what
they say now. Word is they had some
real doozies lined up for Trump, and
with him gone they couldn't show
them. All Megyn Kelly's idea, she's
been working on it for months.
Quote: RonCLiberals can label the debate whatever they want; they are trying to defend Hillary and Bernie has candidates so they can do nothing but attack the other side and hope it is effective. They know deep down that Hillary should not be President
This made me LOL.
RonC somehow knows what liberals know "deep down."
Quote: terapinedThat's all spin talk from all the loser candidates advisors
All losers in a political races are desperate for debates.
Look at Cruz, so desperate he is offering millions to charity for a one on one debate. Its the desperate move of a loser
Nobody leading ever wants to debate, you have everything to lose.
Losers need debates because they have nothing to lose
Trump made the smart call
If you can win without debating, then don't debate
The objective is to win.
As Tiger Woods has said "2nd place sucks"
What? It was from a focus group. I don't know what the candidates or their folks had to say, but what I posted had only to do with the focus groups and then comments of my own.
...and the Tiger comment doesn't apply to the first couple of primaries. 2d place keeps you in the race for another round of primaries; the Iowa winner clearly does not always win the nomination. Trump may well win but he has not won a single vote yet. 2d place sucks later on...but not right now...
Quote: ams288This made me LOL.
RonC somehow knows what liberals know "deep down."
Liberals here and in the real world have been telling the GOP how the GOP can do better for years. I guess Liberals know the GOP but people on the other side can't say they know liberals?
I know a few liberals. They aren't impressed by Hillary or Bernie. They aren't impressed by the GOP candidates either.
Yes, Hillary is a bad candidate. Bernie is a candidate who is a socialist. I never said they wouldn't win; I just said that they are hard to defend as candidates so it is going to be the Democrat strategy to attack and attack hard.
