Kasich is likely done
-
That was the best debate so far and it was in large part due to the moderators. Cruz looked like a pussy complaining about them. If Cruz doesn't like questions about what the candidates "publically" say about each other in between debates, take it up with them. It's valid to ask people why did you say this about this person or that person. I liked that a couple of the candidates final got to put their balls on the table, Christie came off a lot better than the last debate. So did Kasich, Rubio and Paul. Still like Paul the best, he could do one of these debates on a moments notice cause he knows all this shit and doesn't need to be coached for weeks on what to say like you could tell Carson and Fiorina had done.
-
That was the best debate so far and it was in large part due to the moderators. Cruz looked like a pussy complaining about them. If Cruz doesn't like questions about what the candidates "publically" say about each other in between debates, take it up with them. It's valid to ask people why did you say this about this person or that person. I liked that a couple of the candidates final got to put their balls on the table, Christie came off a lot better than the last debate. So did Kasich, Rubio and Paul. Still like Paul the best, he could do one of these debates on a moments notice cause he knows all this shit and doesn't need to be coached for weeks on what to say like you could tell Carson and Fiorina had done.
That was the best debate so far and it was in large part due to the moderators. Cruz looked like a pussy complaining about them. If Cruz doesn't like questions about what the candidates "publically" say about each other in between debates, take it up with them. It's valid to ask people why did you say this about this person or that person. I liked that a couple of the candidates final got to put their balls on the table, Christie came off a lot better than the last debate. So did Kasich, Rubio and Paul. Still like Paul the best, he could do one of these debates on a moments notice cause he knows all this shit and doesn't need to be coached for weeks on what to say like you could tell Carson and Fiorina had done.
It wasn't the questions were mean...the questions were obviously biased and I was glad to see the moderators get called down for it. This debate was supposed to be focused on the economy not tabloid news.
Rubio made an excellent point about the mainstream media bias when asked about a liberal newspaper calling for him to resign for missing votes due to campaigning when the same liberal rag supported Kerry and Obama who missed even more votes when running and it wasn't an issue for this liberal rag when the democrat candidate missed votes to run.
-
They were asking the questions people want to be answered. Jeb Bush is riding Rubio for missing votes? Then ask Rubio about it. If what he says stands up to scrutiny (about others missing votes) then it should be the end of it.
-
Despite the best efforts of CNBC to have a food fight amongst the candidates, this became a debate about the economy, about tax policy, government spending and social security because the republican candidates refused to go along with the game/setup these lib moderators had set up.
-
I would much rather have moderators from the other side, because you don't get served these puffy questions. Except 'what's your greatest weakness' which most candidates avoided. You get questions people want to hear, not just repeated mantras and vague policy outlines.
-
From Steve's link:
He said it is “completely false” to say he would eliminate the programs.
“That’s a narrative that somebody is putting out there to scare people,” Mr. Carson said. If someone prefers the current government programs to the health-savings-account approach, “I’m not going to deny you the privilege of doing that,” he added.
*********************************************************
Still waiting for the link, Edward, where Carson said he wanted to get rid of it.Got it from Hillary, perhaps? Back it up.
I think Rubio did well, but I still don't like his justification about hating, not voting, and not running for re-election in the senate.
Carson did OK but didn't have much thrown his way.
Cruz did pretty well
Trump did OK, the personal senator gaffe didn't look so good - he actually said a weakness which was a surprise, otherwise did fine
Everybody else I'd call a loser (Bush big time), except maybe Kasich and Christie who did fine. Kasich let off the gas after the first 10 minutes I think that was a mistake.
From Steve's link:
He said it is “completely false” to say he would eliminate the programs.
“That’s a narrative that somebody is putting out there to scare people,” Mr. Carson said. If someone prefers the current government programs to the health-savings-account approach, “I’m not going to deny you the privilege of doing that,” he added.
*********************************************************
Still waiting for the link, Edward, where Carson said he wanted to get rid of it.Got it from Hillary, perhaps? Back it up.
He did an interview with fox news this past Sunday that gave the impression he wanted to get rid of medicare/medicaid for his $2000 HSA plan but then he clarified it later.
It would be voluntary/people could opt in. Obviously I wouldn't expect many adults to opt in (and pay more out of pocket) - but if it started at infancy it'd probably be better.
Give everybody $2000/year from the day they're born til the day they die. Pass it on to family and transfer balances between family. But you could also buy supplemental catastrophic insurance (typically extremely high deductible insurance coupled with the HSA)
But that's only the 79 mil people currently enrolled, if you enrolled at a later date you'd have a tiny savings account.
The biggest problem with it is giving everybody an average. Some people get like 1 physical per year, some get $200,000 operations. Everybody spends a different amount of money, so averaging it out would be pretty imbalanced.
I also don't like the simple 10-15% flat tax plan. I think that the tiered income tax is appropriate - also many deductions need to go, but some should stay.
-
I would much rather have moderators from the other side, because you don't get served these puffy questions. Except 'what's your greatest weakness' which most candidates avoided. You get questions people want to hear, not just repeated mantras and vague policy outlines.
I would much rather have moderators from the other side, because you don't get served these puffy questions. Except 'what's your greatest weakness' which most candidates avoided. You get questions people want to hear, not just repeated mantras and vague policy outlines.
Well no different from the campaign itself all the way to the State of the Union address.
WSS
-
Despite the best efforts of CNBC to have a food fight amongst the candidates, this became a debate about the economy, about tax policy, government spending and social security because the republican candidates refused to go along with the game/setup these lib moderators had set up.
Despite the best efforts of CNBC to have a food fight amongst the candidates, this became a debate about the
No it was 'because" of them that the debate ended up being substantive. Remember they're the ones aking the questions.
-
At one part of the debate the lib moderator John Hargrove told Rubio his tax plan favored the wealthy one percent over the average citizen and Rubio told him he had his facts wrong and that Hargrove who initially put out that story had to come back and correct his own story that Rubio's tax plan did not favor the most wealthy in the country. Hargrove denied it but the fact of the matter is Hargrove did correct his own wrong story. So now you have moderators either incompetent or flat out lying.
Also when Trump claimed credit for reducing the debate to 2 hours and Hargrove said the debate was always set for 2 hours that was either another flat out lie or incompetence by the moderator because CNBC absolutely did back down on the 3 hour debate when trump and Carson threatened to pull out if it was 3 hours.
And Cleve the republican candidates got to the point where they went into policy instead of answering the tabloid questions by the lib moderators. This was primarily in spite of the moderators not because of them.
-
I think Rubio did well, but I still don't like his justification about hating, not voting, and not running for re-election in the senate.
Carson did OK but didn't have much thrown his way.
Cruz did pretty well
Trump did OK, the personal senator gaffe didn't look so good - he actually said a weakness which was a surprise, otherwise did fine
Everybody else I'd call a loser (Bush big time), except maybe Kasich and Christie who did fine. Kasich let off the gas after the first 10 minutes I think that was a mistake.
From Steve's link:
He said it is “completely false” to say he would eliminate the programs.
“That’s a narrative that somebody is putting out there to scare people,” Mr. Carson said. If someone prefers the current government programs to the health-savings-account approach, “I’m not going to deny you the privilege of doing that,” he added.
*********************************************************
Still waiting for the link, Edward, where Carson said he wanted to get rid of it.Got it from Hillary, perhaps? Back it up.
He did an interview with fox news this past Sunday that gave the impression he wanted to get rid of medicare/medicaid for his $2000 HSA plan but then he clarified it later.
It would be voluntary/people could opt in. Obviously I wouldn't expect many adults to opt in (and pay more out of pocket) - but if it started at infancy it'd probably be better.
Give everybody $2000/year from the day they're born til the day they die. Pass it on to family and transfer balances between family. But you could also buy supplemental catastrophic insurance (typically extremely high deductible insurance coupled with the HSA)
But that's only the 79 mil people currently enrolled, if you enrolled at a later date you'd have a tiny savings account.
The biggest problem with it is giving everybody an average. Some people get like 1 physical per year, some get $200,000 operations. Everybody spends a different amount of money, so averaging it out would be pretty imbalanced.
I also don't like the simple 10-15% flat tax plan. I think that the tiered income tax is appropriate - also many deductions need to go, but some should stay.
I think Rubio did well, but I still don't like his justification about hating, not voting, and not running for re-election in the senate.
Carson did OK but didn't have much thrown his way.
Cruz did pretty well
Trump did OK, the personal senator gaffe didn't look so good - he actually said a weakness which was a surprise, otherwise did fine
Everybody else I'd call a loser (Bush big time), except maybe Kasich and Christie who did fine. Kasich let off the gas after the first 10 minutes I think that was a mistake.
I think Carson hit a homerun here - with the help of the audience....
-
^^^
Yea but that's kind of a soft ball. "I love their product, I did paid speeches for them, I was on their website without their permission - but I wasn't affiliated with them"
I think Carson did well, but nothing to change his standing really. Grilled about his tax plan his only response was "your math is wrong" "you're wrong", etc.
Trump did really well in that grilling/fact checking of Kasich, but I don't know why he dodged the question of H1B visas, I'm not sure why he did it because I agree with his stance on his website entirely.
-
Why is it fair game to ask Hillary questions about her past dealings and current stuff with the Clinton foundation, but Carson gets asked about supporting snake oil where he was clearly all over the product and this is unfair tabloid questioning?
-
"Yes, they employed me to speak about their product; I love their product; I take the product; but no, I'm not involved in the product."
Let's assume he's not. That he's on their website without his consent. A) That's honestly a bit dim - doesn't he have people who are supposed to take care of that for him?
He's basically still endorsing a product that claims to cure cancer/autism/whatever; when he's running on the platform of "being president isn't brain surgery!" he's really doing himself no favours by coming across as hugely misinformed about the treatment of those conditions. -
Why is it fair game to ask Hillary questions about her past dealings and current stuff with the Clinton foundation, but Carson gets asked about supporting snake oil where he was clearly all over the product and this is unfair tabloid questioning?
Why is it fair game to ask Hillary questions about her past dealings and current stuff with the Clinton foundation, but Carson gets asked about supporting snake oil where he was clearly all over the product and this is unfair tabloid questioning?
Carson is a likable, nice guy. Whenever he comes under criticism he says "you're wrong" and people just seem to be captivated by his gentle voice and forget about it.
Aside from Trump, who is grilled all the time, the rest of the GOP field seems to get soft balled by their peers - like Rubio, Fiorina, Bush (and his backdoor deal with Lehman bros' for FL retirement accounts - nobody talks about it), etc.
It's pretty much guaranteed that come general election time though, there won't be any soft balls from the Clinton side.
-
I didnt watch the Hillary show so I cannot say for certain if she even received such a question - my guess is that she didnt...
secondly I couldnt give a rats ass if Carson represented that company - the point was how the question was framed
by the CNBC panel guy and his follow up questioning Carsons vetting and his judgement.
Where the audience even distinguished the gotcha crap and Carson laughs it off and points out clearly -
" see they know! " ' Brilliant!
-
pssst MSM is DNC's Super PAc!! - Marco Rubio
-
The follow up wasn't good. It seemed like the guy was clutching at straws, when all he had to say was "really, you honestly expect us to believe that you have zero connection with the company you have endorsed and are on the website for, and continue to endorse on your podium?" and Carson would have been in trouble. As it is, he got a big get out of jail free card with the audience on side.
-
I think Rubio did well, but I still don't like his justification about hating, not voting, and not running for re-election in the senate.
Carson did OK but didn't have much thrown his way.
Cruz did pretty well
Trump did OK, the personal senator gaffe didn't look so good - he actually said a weakness which was a surprise, otherwise did fine
Everybody else I'd call a loser (Bush big time), except maybe Kasich and Christie who did fine. Kasich let off the gas after the first 10 minutes I think that was a mistake.
I think Carson hit a homerun here - with the help of the audience....
I think Rubio did well, but I still don't like his justification about hating, not voting, and not running for re-election in the senate.
Carson did OK but didn't have much thrown his way.
Cruz did pretty well
Trump did OK, the personal senator gaffe didn't look so good - he actually said a weakness which was a surprise, otherwise did fine
Everybody else I'd call a loser (Bush big time), except maybe Kasich and Christie who did fine. Kasich let off the gas after the first 10 minutes I think that was a mistake.
I think Carson hit a homerun here - with the help of the audience....
That was my favorite moment of the debate. The moderators sucked.
"The purpose of the military is to kill people and break things " - mike huckabee -
Carson - Cruz and Rubio's keen awareness of CNBC panel agenda and pointing it out...
and because Trump has shown that it is ok to kick theyre asses over stupid questions
-
I didnt watch the Hillary show so I cannot say for certain if she even received such a question - my guess is that she didnt...
secondly I couldnt give a rats ass if Carson represented that company - the point was how the question was framed
by the CNBC panel guy and his follow up questioning Carsons vetting and his judgement.
Where the audience even distinguished the gotcha crap and Carson laughs it off and points out clearly -
" see they know! " ' Brilliant!
I didnt watch the Hillary show so I cannot say for certain if she even received such a question - my guess is that she didnt...
secondly I couldnt give a rats ass if Carson represented that company - the point was how the question was framed
by the CNBC panel guy and his follow up questioning Carsons vetting and his judgement.
Where the audience even distinguished the gotcha crap and Carson laughs it off and points out clearly -
" see they know! " ' Brilliant!
Clinton got saved from the email question by Sanders, who said "WE'RE TIRED OF HEARING ABOUT IT" before she could answer. She ducked and dodged some other stuff, but it was pretty much soft balls.
The moderator failed in that regard when he went straight to it altering his personal judgement or however the end Q was.
The bottom line is: Carson has been directly involved with Mannatech for YEARS (and even endorsed their product on the stage!) - but he said it's total propaganda and false.
Carson called it "propaganda", the moderator failed and turned it into more of a personal attack.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login