Quote:
Originally Posted by Guest
Fiorina and Rubio led the two discussions. The second one may have had a semblance of a debate a couple of times, but the candidates were too well behaved. Should have put a couple of liberals in there and then it would have looked like an episode of the walking dead, with blood and gore everywhere. Oh yeah!
|
I also was impressed with Rubio and Florina.
I will add that it is like the exhibition season in football. Long way to go and many more hurdles to over come.
No chance or time to extensively discuss much of anything and other than a few exchanges, not much dialogue between the candidates. BUT NO TIME on this one either.
As it progresses it will become more definitive and detailed, but I agree that based on confidence and supposed grasp of the issues, Rubio and Fiorina stood up.
Hoping further debates will meet this standard for sure.
I am not sure why any of the liberals are making fun. It seems the liberal pundits and the other networks had praise...
"With its big debate night in the can, the good news for Fox is that its usual enemies on the left hate it quite a bit less, at least for the moment.
At CNN, Brian Stelter provided a roundup of the “almost unanimously positive reviews” Fox’s “tough debate questions” generated. Included were a former Obama Administration official, a liberal magazine editor, a public radio host and BuzzFeed’s editor-in-chief. All had nothing but praise:"
https://s3.amazonaws.com/medeq/files...Fox-debate.jpg
There was criticism from some on the right which is to be expected. With that many folks and their followers, it is liking grading umpires in baseball. It all depended on what team you were on. Most of the complaints were very specific in who got passed over, etc.
Great debate night and look forward to more.