Inquisition or Debate?

[Guest]

This morning, Lindsey Graham was on "Morning Joe". He first said it was very tough being in the first group with no one in the audience. Graham then went on to say the main group moderators had questions for Trump "that were more like an inquisition than a debate". He said Megan Kelley set the stage against Trump by asking who would not support the other candidates or pledge not to run as a third party.

[Guest]

FOX was just playing the game of poking the stick at the animals.
It was a sort of cheap shot way to start the debate. The same question could have been asked somewhere along the way, and in my opinion been more effective.

Unfortunately all the candidates have predictable hot buttons and the media, all of them, push the one they want when they think it is opportune to do so.....and the candidates know it.....especially Trump, hence he is very easy to goad into a rant (may or may not be a negative!).

I think there was a little too much schtick in the moderators tone last night.

[Guest]

It was obvious to me that Donald Trump was set up to look bad from the get go. And he is stating his case about that, and who can blame him? That was a firing squad ( no pun intended).

[Guest]

This morning, Lindsey Graham was on "Morning Joe". He first said it was very tough being in the first group with no one in the audience. Graham then went on to say the main group moderators had questions for Trump "that were more like an inquisition than a debate". He said Megan Kelley set the stage against Trump by asking who would not support the other candidates or pledge not to run as a third party.

It was a farce, a complete waste of everyone's time. The whole thing was set up to discredit Trump in the worst possible way, and it ended up making them all like ineffectual. Fox blew this one. The "establishment" do not want him around and they came up with the most stupid questions to make him look like a jerk .................... They should have run a proper debate with everyone getting the chance to reply to political questions, not the junk they pulled out.

[Guest]

As I said earlier in another thread, Trump answered the question very well actually and it was a question that was asked of others in the past.

The press is making more than ever about it, but what he said was.....he would support the Republican candidate if he 'respected" that person.

Later in the debate, he went out of his way to look at Jeb Bush and say how much he respected him.

He has leverage now and why throw it away....he likes the attention and it does in fact give him power within the party. We are OVER A YEAR away from anything so it is positioning now.

"Donald Trump told Sean Hannity tonight that he wouldn’t make the pledge to support the nominee and not run third party because he’s using it as leverage with the Republican Establishment. He says he’s starting to like the establishment and may at some time make the pledge. But for now he sees the leverage is important and won’t give it up."

Read more: TRUMP on Third Party Question: Why should I give up my leverage with Republican Establishment? » The Right Scoop - (http://therightscoop.com/trump-on-third-party-question-why-should-i-give-up-my-leverage-with-republican-establishment/#ixzz3i8EFMk6H)

[Guest]

Meanwhile the Democrats have a Trump wannabe....

"Martin O’Malley’s campaign plans to organize debates outside the six-debate framework announced by the Democratic National Committee, a move that flouts Democratic party rules and risks excluding the former Maryland governor from sanctioned debates.

O’Malley, who is struggling to gain traction in his challenge to Hillary Clinton for the Democratic presidential nomination, has long called for more debates that would give him more airtime on a national stage. The DNC has limited the number of debates to six and threatened to exclude presidential candidates who debate outside that framework.

The DNC rule “tramples over everything that is important about the democratic process,” said Jake Oeth, O’Malley’s state director in Iowa. “We welcome anyone who wants to participate and we hope to engage in open conversation with anyone.”


Martin O'Malley Plans Revolt Against Hillary Clinton Over Debate Rules (http://time.com/3987454/democratic-debates-hillary-clinton-martin-omalley/)

[Guest]

I believe that the first question was an act genius. Everyone has been asking the same question of Trump. FOX did not aim the question at Trump, even though the motivation was to get him to sound off. Better to get it out in the open. I doubt it bothered him at all. I believe it is his intention to draw all the shots to him and away from the other candidates. He says he hates Hillary so I doubt he would sabotage the party to get her elected. Hilary is going to have a hard time shooting at so many candidates, especially when that pesky Trump is being so aggressive. Just sit back and enjoy the show. Watch as Fiorina moves up to the varsity team.

[Guest]

It was a farce, a complete waste of everyone's time. The whole thing was set up to discredit Trump in the worst possible way, and it ended up making them all like ineffectual. Fox blew this one. The "establishment" do not want him around and they came up with the most stupid questions to make him look like a jerk .................... They should have run a proper debate with everyone getting the chance to reply to political questions, not the junk they pulled out.

Your opinion. I don't agree. Everyone has been asking the same question about Trump's intentions. It was the perfect question to start the debate.
Ms. Fiorina finally got the spotlight she deserved. She could easily beat Clinton, and I would love to see the two of them battle. Clinton would look the old hag she is.

[Guest]

Meanwhile the Democrats have a Trump wannabe....

"Martin O’Malley’s campaign plans to organize debates outside the six-debate framework announced by the Democratic National Committee, a move that flouts Democratic party rules and risks excluding the former Maryland governor from sanctioned debates.

O’Malley, who is struggling to gain traction in his challenge to Hillary Clinton for the Democratic presidential nomination, has long called for more debates that would give him more airtime on a national stage. The DNC has limited the number of debates to six and threatened to exclude presidential candidates who debate outside that framework.

The DNC rule “tramples over everything that is important about the democratic process,” said Jake Oeth, O’Malley’s state director in Iowa. “We welcome anyone who wants to participate and we hope to engage in open conversation with anyone.”


Martin O'Malley Plans Revolt Against Hillary Clinton Over Debate Rules (http://time.com/3987454/democratic-debates-hillary-clinton-martin-omalley/)

O'Malley apologized!! He apologized for saying that "all lives matter." This upset the blacks, so he hastily apologized for not being politically correct. Even Biden is more of a man than that wimp.

[Guest]

Your opinion. I don't agree. Everyone has been asking the same question about Trump's intentions. It was the perfect question to start the debate.
Ms. Fiorina finally got the spotlight she deserved. She could easily beat Clinton, and I would love to see the two of them battle. Clinton would look the old hag she is.

This is the spotlight she deserves:

"there’s no way Carly Fiorina can ignore her tenure at Hewlett-Packard, which she ran as CEO for six tumultuous years before the board ousted her in 2005. By that time, the company’s stock had lost about half its value and tens of thousands of people had lost their jobs."

She would appear to be excellent Presidential material.

[Guest]

It was a farce, a complete waste of everyone's time. The whole thing was set up to discredit Trump in the worst possible way, and it ended up making them all like ineffectual. Fox blew this one. The "establishment" do not want him around and they came up with the most stupid questions to make him look like a jerk .................... They should have run a proper debate with everyone getting the chance to reply to political questions, not the junk they pulled out.


First, I thought the question appropriate and well timed. Certainly it was/is the elephant in the room and it would not have been right to make another candidate bring it up. I thought it was very well done.

The debate was great given the number of participants.

I find it refreshing to hear all the different views on subjects myself and with that many folks in the race, I would be hard pressed to come up with a better format.

If they had allowed each candidate sufficient time as suggested, the debate would still be going on.

It was a great intro debate.

[Guest]

Your opinion. I don't agree. Everyone has been asking the same question about Trump's intentions. It was the perfect question to start the debate.
Ms. Fiorina finally got the spotlight she deserved. She could easily beat Clinton, and I would love to see the two of them battle. Clinton would look the old hag she is.

What are you talking about? Carly got no more than 5 minutes of air time. She wasted some of it being sarcastic about not getting a phone call from Bill Clinton. She then said she had spoken to more world leaders than any other candidate- except for Hillary Clinton. That was giving Hillary props as a person who has experience in foreign affairs.

The only way you are going to see Hillary and Carly debate is in your dreams. Carly would have to be the Republican nominee for President for such a debate and that is not going to happen.

[Guest]

This is the spotlight she deserves:

"there’s no way Carly Fiorina can ignore her tenure at Hewlett-Packard, which she ran as CEO for six tumultuous years before the board ousted her in 2005. By that time, the company’s stock had lost about half its value and tens of thousands of people had lost their jobs."

She would appear to be excellent Presidential material.

Here we go. Okay...first I strongly suggest that instead of quoting sound bites or

PUTTING QUOTES ON THIS FORUM WITH NO ACCREDITATION WHICH IS A VIOLATION OF THE TOTV RULES AND ALSO THE US COPYRIGHT LAWS

that maybe you should read a bit about the circumstances surrounding all the mergers involved and the bursting of the tech bubble.

Not a defense of her by any stretch but without even knowing where you go the quote you typed in....well, hard to check any further than what I know from reading business publications.

[Guest]

What are you talking about? Carly got no more than 5 minutes of air time. She wasted some of it being sarcastic about not getting a phone call from Bill Clinton. She then said she had spoken to more world leaders than any other candidate- except for Hillary Clinton. That was giving Hillary props as a person who has experience in foreign affairs.

The only way you are going to see Hillary and Carly debate is in your dreams. Carly would have to be the Republican nominee for President for such a debate and that is not going to happen.

I suppose we will be getting more attacks on Ms Fiorina (I do not know her well enough to call her Carly) as she was the clear "winner" of the initial debate.

Not sure what that does for her except nobody much knew her and now they know so the heat will pick up.

She wasted nothing....she made it clear that she KNEW more world leaders than anyone by a former secy of state which is important in todays age. Note the President of the US knows less folks than her :)

But it is so early...do not waste all your ammo because you will be tearing down people and I hate to see it so spread out with so many candidates.

MS Clinton is easy....she has been around so very very very long and has been saying the same things over and over.

[Guest]

Great debate! Entertaining, informative, insightful. No softball questions thrown. We have an unbelievable line up this year. Really good candidates. I liked Carly, Cruz, rubio, Christie, Carson, Huckabee, and still like Trump. Not polished, not a politician, but a tell it like it is type of candidate. Some really good punches in there and some great answers. Wonder if the Dems will get the hardball questions to keep it fair.

[Guest]

I agree it was a complete waste of time for everyone. The candidates did not answer questions but only gave their own talking points that aides had previously prepared for them. Walker was the biggest joke out there followed by Paul, Huckabee, Cruz, Carson, and then Bush.

Trump spoke his mind and it looks as though Fox's plan to make him look like a clown failed completely.

Go independent, Donnie!

[Guest]

I agree it was a complete waste of time for everyone. The candidates did not answer questions but only gave their own talking points that aides had previously prepared for them. Walker was the biggest joke out there followed by Paul, Huckabee, Cruz, Carson, and then Bush.

Trump spoke his mind and it looks as though Fox's plan to make him look like a clown failed completely.

Go independent, Donnie!

iNTERESTING and CONFUSING critique.

The candidates had one minute to respond.

Seems like someone had a pre conceived idea going in.

EVERYONE I heard EXPECTED the talking point because of the restrictions.

To get depth do some reading on positions on each candidate.

[Guest]

medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer


In a press release, Donald Trump crowns a winner in the first GOP debate last night. Unsurprisingly, the winner is Donald J Trump by a landslide.

No way would Fox have three times the viewers of the last debate, if it were not for Trump being on the stage.

And no need for Fox or the RNC to worry about any other candidate running a third party campaign because no other candidate has the money to do it. A third party run would take tons of money and lots of organization. Trump has the money, but whether he has the organization remains to be seen.

[Guest]

This is the spotlight she deserves:

"there’s no way Carly Fiorina can ignore her tenure at Hewlett-Packard, which she ran as CEO for six tumultuous years before the board ousted her in 2005. By that time, the company’s stock had lost about half its value and tens of thousands of people had lost their jobs."

She would appear to be excellent Presidential material.

She seems to be in pretty good company....Steve Jobs was "ousted" by his board of directors also.
:popcorn:

[Guest]

I watched Happy Hour and Prime Time. Take it for what it is worth I believe Bill Hemmer and Martha McCallum as moderators did a better job than the prime time moderators!

[Guest]

Donald Trump Declares His Debate A Giant Success (http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/trump-debate-victory?utm_content=buffer8f578&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer)


My link in the above post did not work. Trying this again.

[Guest]

This is the spotlight she deserves:

"there’s no way Carly Fiorina can ignore her tenure at Hewlett-Packard, which she ran as CEO for six tumultuous years before the board ousted her in 2005. By that time, the company’s stock had lost about half its value and tens of thousands of people had lost their jobs."

She would appear to be excellent Presidential material.

Your post is not a surprise. I wonder if any of those folks got killed, and whether she blamed this on a video. Did she say "what difference does it make?" Did she jeopardize national security by breaking classified materials storage laws?

Between the two, Fiorina is still the better choice, over the sea hag.

[Guest]

She seems to be in pretty good company....Steve Jobs was "ousted" by his board of directors also.
:popcorn:

That's true. Good shot! :clap2:

[Guest]

" Did she say "what difference does it make?"

Please give the entire quotation and the context that the statement was given in.

[Guest]

" Did she say "what difference does it make?"

Please give the entire quotation and the context that the statement was given in.

Here we go again..........

[Guest]

I watched Happy Hour and Prime Time. Take it for what it is worth I believe Bill Hemmer and Martha McCallum as moderators did a better job than the prime time moderators!

I totally agree with you. I felt the earlier debate was much better orchestrated and that the moderators did a much better job. I would call the difference between the 2 debates as follows - the first one was a professional job while the second was more for entertainment.

[Guest]

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/08/upshot/bush-and-trump-arent-among-the-gop-debate-winners.html?_r=0&abt=0002&abg=1

Did not really see Trump as winning the debate last night.

[Guest]

" Did she say "what difference does it make?"

Please give the entire quotation and the context that the statement was given in.

Why?

[Guest]

" Did she say "what difference does it make?"

Please give the entire quotation and the context that the statement was given in.

Do you have access to a computer? Do you know how to use the google search function? Educate yourself, you will be a better person for it.

[Guest]

Do you have access to a computer? Do you know how to use the google search function? Educate yourself, you will be a better person for it.

:clap2:

[Guest]

I have to agree that the first debate seemed the better of the two, if you want to call it a debate. More like a question and answer session to get to know a candidate. I thought the second debate started out really well, and got folks fired up. Then it turned into witty comments, where Huckabee and Carson won out, and Walker tweaked the funny bone a bit with his legitimate comment hinting that the Chinese and Russians probably know more about Hillary's email than congress. All in all, it was a couple hours entertainment. I didn't miss any of my shows, since I have a DVR.

Like the little kid told the preacher when exiting the church after the service, having proudly placed his twenty five cents in the offering plate. "Pretty good show for a quarter." I got my quarter's worth.

I am really anticipating a good show in the Democrat debate where we will get to watch Hillary debate Hillary. Wonder which one will win, the old sea hag or the new "re-defined" Hillary? Aw heck "what difference does it make."

[Guest]

I really do enjoy listening/reading the Clinton die hards jump on anything regarding/relating Fiorina.

Their worst nightmare is to have another female on the ticket thus neutralizing what they think they have as an advantage.

Fiorina looks the camera in the face...Clinton does not unless scripted, staged and directed when to do what.

Fiorina dresses like an executive feamle who takes pride in how she looks....Clinton doesn't know how to or just doesn't care.

Fiorina says what she means....Clinton says what the audience wants to hear (sometimes).

Fiorina has is honest and forthright...Clinton is a liar, untrustworthy and unethical.

Fiorina is feminine....Clinton is........tired!

I wouldn't worry about a Fiorina/Clinton debate. Clinton for sure will not be there.

[Guest]

Still waiting for the poster in post 10, to supply the source for the quotation given.

I asked for this in post 13, and it is required by TOTV regulations or

Can we simply make things up, put them in quotation marks to make them seem authentic ?

I think it is vital to integrity.

Not saying there is no link, but if I know simply making things up and posting them is ok...well, it is not obviously it is not only a violation of TOTV regs, but of US LAW.

Since we have the guest monikers, we cannot tell who the poster is but sure hope she will...oops...he/she will follow the law.

[Guest]

Still waiting for the poster in post 10, to supply the source for the quotation given.

I asked for this in post 13, and it is required by TOTV regulations or

Can we simply make things up, put them in quotation marks to make them seem authentic ?

I think it is vital to integrity.

Not saying there is no link, but if I know simply making things up and posting them is ok...well, it is not obviously it is not only a violation of TOTV regs, but of US LAW.

Since we have the guest monikers, we cannot tell who the poster is but sure hope she will...oops...he/she will follow the law.

I empathize with your concern over the liberal interest and slurs from the poster. However, there are several such quotes available from the liberal media supporting that slight on her resume'. What they don't include, out of fear(or pointed disregard) is the circumstances surrounding the firing and the stock market standings of other big businesses during that time period.

This is what I have been waiting for and hoped for when she ran in California. I wanted to see her pitted against Hillary in a one on one. Hillary will have to pull out all her black magic witchcraft to get the upper hand on Fiorina. Fiorina is a force that many of the veteran politicians on stage better be wary of. Liberals won't know what to do if they can't use the sexist term during the campaign. Up to now, I have favored Kasich, but I would gladly vote for her if I think she can win.

[Guest]

I really do enjoy listening/reading the Clinton die hards jump on anything regarding/relating Fiorina.

Their worst nightmare is to have another female on the ticket thus neutralizing what they think they have as an advantage.

Fiorina looks the camera in the face...Clinton does not unless scripted, staged and directed when to do what.

Fiorina dresses like an executive feamle who takes pride in how she looks....Clinton doesn't know how to or just doesn't care.

Fiorina says what she means....Clinton says what the audience wants to hear (sometimes).

Fiorina has is honest and forthright...Clinton is a liar, untrustworthy and unethical.

Fiorina is feminine....Clinton is........tired!

I wouldn't worry about a Fiorina/Clinton debate. Clinton for sure will not be there.

:agree:

[Guest]

I empathize with your concern over the liberal interest and slurs from the poster. However, there are several such quotes available from the liberal media supporting that slight on her resume'. What they don't include, out of fear(or pointed disregard) is the circumstances surrounding the firing and the stock market standings of other big businesses during that time period.

This is what I have been waiting for and hoped for when she ran in California. I wanted to see her pitted against Hillary in a one on one. Hillary will have to pull out all her black magic witchcraft to get the upper hand on Fiorina. Fiorina is a force that many of the veteran politicians on stage better be wary of. Liberals won't know what to do if they can't use the sexist term during the campaign. Up to now, I have favored Kasich, but I would gladly vote for her if I think she can win.

I understand what you are saying totally !!

My concern, and frankly those who read this forum more more than entertainment value or juvenile entertainment should be concerned about posters using quotes without a link.

If that is allowed, you can simply make things up to support whatever you want and put it in quotes with no link. Now their is not context or even the simplest of idea if it is even true.

It also violates TOTV rules.

To me every poster should be on guard and if in fact the ADMIN even looks at political, THIS TOPIC and instance should be taken very seriously.

I will certainly not even consider a post with a statement attributed to someone with no links. Even if not in quotes, if a poster says someone said something I will investigate before responding, thus I hope ADMIN who knows who posts by IP address will address this matter with that poster.

[Guest]

Fiorina certainly put Chris Matthews in his place today. Wow, she is sharp!

[Guest]

Fiorina certainly put Chris Matthews in his place today. Wow, she is sharp!

She certainly is. After all, anyone who can render him speechless is a force to be reckoned with..........Go Carly!!

If she doesn't get the nomination, I could definitely see her as VP or in a cabinet position. What a breath of fresh air!

[Guest]

She certainly is. After all, anyone who can render him speechless is a force to be reckoned with..........Go Carly!!

If she doesn't get the nomination, I could definitely see her as VP or in a cabinet position. What a breath of fresh air!

What a real female candidate looks and acts like!

[Guest]

Can you imagine a Fiorina/Rubio ticket? How would Hillary manage her rhetoric? She'd be hard pressed to hit on minority issues and hard to use the sexist card. What a conundrum.

[Guest]

What a real female candidate looks and acts like!

I really do not think she will get the nomination but you have to imagine her and MS Clinton on the same stage together debating.

Just the vision of that is compelling and then taking down the old tired talking points that MS Clinton, at least thus far, is throwing out.

[Guest]

I really do not think she will get the nomination but you have to imagine her and MS Clinton on the same stage together debating.

Just the vision of that is compelling and then taking down the old tired talking points that MS Clinton, at least thus far, is throwing out.

It would be a very classy take down, with Fiorina coming out on top of course. Yes, I would love to see that one!