joether
Posts: 5195
Joined: 7/24/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: bounty44
brett baier, megyn Kelly and chris Wallace, the moderators, announced the lineup tonight.
Moderators? Or lackeys making sure no tough questions are asked? We wouldn't want these candidates to think to hard or for themselves. We all recall what happened when the nation allowed a GOP candidates to 'speak freely' during a debate. And then did just the opposite. Who is that? Former President George W. Bush, whom stated "I will not conduct Nation Building into foreign countries". What would he do in Iran just four years later?
quote:
ORIGINAL: bounty44
the top ten in a combination of polls (I think they were Bloomberg, cbs, fox, Monmouth and Quinnipiac) will be on Thursday evening at 9 for two hours.
the bottom seven will be on earlier (5pm) and will be moderated by bill hemmer and Martha mccallum.
(apparently some candidates have already expressed some criticisms over fox's method.)
the order for the prime time show was Donald Trump, Jeb Bush, Scott Walker, Mike Huckabee, Ben Carson, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, Chris Christie, and John Kasich.
the order for the earlier one was Rick Perry, Rick Santorum, Bobby Jindal, Carly Fiorina, Lindsey Graham, George Pataki, and Jim Gilmore.
Going to be an amusing evening of laughter and chuckles. As each try to bash Obama and Hillary while giving nothing in real substance or worth, for how they would handle many pressing problems in the nation.
quote:
ORIGINAL: bounty44
I wish they'd stop using the word "debate" and instead call it a forum.
As President Jed Bartlett once stated "Multi-Person Press Conference".
quote:
ORIGINAL: bounty44
I believe the reason there are so many candidates, and ive said this before, is in large part because we dislike what Obama has done with the country and are dead set against 4-8 more years of it under Hillary---but I do wish there were less candidates. one wonders if 17 is a good thing, or possibly harmful.
No the primary reason for so many candidates can be summed up into one three letter word: EGO.
If you objectively look at each candidate, they are no different almost across the board on every issue, to any other candidate. Donald Trump and Jeb Bush would be the most 'diverse' gap on the issue of immigration and foreign policy. Of course that's like comparing 1/4th of an apple, and 26% of an apple. What's their 'take' on gun control? The same. Infrastructure? The same. Foreign Policy? The same. Iran Deal? The same. Healthcare? The same.
But those debates will be them bashing President Obama and Hillary Clinton. The chance they make a good argument is low. But then, their audience doesn't care if the argument is true or false; just that it is made.
All ego, no substance, bashing like little immature children, and none having a chance to be a US President in 2016. That about sums reality up there....
quote:
ORIGINAL: bounty44
i have said this elsewhere too---i really dislike how we select our candidates. id rather see some sort of round robin voting in the same way Olympic host cities are selected.
You select your candidates on a whole different criteria than liberals and moderates. You decide based 'how conservative the person is', as if their is a mathematical way to measure that! Liberals and moderates tend to decide on the ideas, thoughts, and more importantly, realistic concepts that they can deliver.
quote:
ORIGINAL: bounty44
i still have ted cruz, rand paul, scott walker and bobby Jindal as my favorites.
3/4ths of those recently were begging for money from the Koch brothers held at an exclusive resort hotel over the previous weekend. The Koch brothers didn't invite Mr. Trump. To which Mr. Trump accused Cruz, Paul, Walker, Bush, and one other as just puppets.
All of them want to shut down the US Government unless their viewpoints are 'paid'. Frankly, that's borderline treason.
quote:
ORIGINAL: bounty44
am looking forward to watching, but at the same time, i suspect it will be somewhat frustrating too. I think a forum with ten people might be too much. four would be a much better number.
Why would you limit competition? I thought your party was all about 'free market', 'capitalism', and 'free enterprising'? Why would you create....REGULATIONS.....that limits unfair political abilities by the candidates? The candidates would know their limits, right? They would....NEVER....do something that places this nation into undue strain or hardship because of their personality, right?
quote:
ORIGINAL: bounty44
would be nice to have an actual conversation about this without the typical left-right and interpersonal animosities...
To have an actual conversation, would imply dealing with those that dislike the GOP/TP. Given that you and others insult and attack me, I'm allowed to do the same right back. Don't like it? PERHAPS YOU SHOULDN'T DO IT IN THE FIRST PLACE!
All the GOP/TP candidates are....SHIT. I'm not saying this because I want mine to win and enjoy gloating about it. Each of those individuals have a staggering array of problems. These are not people with political baggage problems. These are people with Ego's so large and inflated that the damage this nation will experience will make what Bush did seem like small potatoes. The GOP/TP will pay a very heavy price in future years for this sort of shit. More so, none of these people represent the middle class. Most of the people voting for them, will NEVER, because wealthy. So these candidates need to 'sell' the idea that they can help you become wealthy, without trying, and you believing like its already in your future destiny.
Yeah, Hillary and Sanders both have some problems (even rough on a few topics). But compared to the GOP/TP candidates, they are squeaky clean!
|
an early start on the fox news republican candidates &q... - 
Profile
.gif){kind=avatar}
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread