Inquisition or Debate? Inquisition or Debate? - Talk of The Villages Florida

Inquisition or Debate?

 
Thread Tools
  #1  
Old 08-07-2015, 06:57 AM
Guest
n/a
 
Posts: n/a
Default Inquisition or Debate?

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.
  #2  
Old 08-07-2015, 07:25 AM
Guest
n/a
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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.
  #3  
Old 08-07-2015, 07:25 AM
Guest
n/a
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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).
  #4  
Old 08-07-2015, 07:30 AM
Guest
n/a
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guest View Post
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.
  #5  
Old 08-07-2015, 07:32 AM
Guest
n/a
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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 -
  #6  
Old 08-07-2015, 07:35 AM
Guest
n/a
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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
  #7  
Old 08-07-2015, 07:35 AM
Guest
n/a
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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.
  #8  
Old 08-07-2015, 07:38 AM
Guest
n/a
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guest View Post
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.
  #9  
Old 08-07-2015, 07:43 AM
Guest
n/a
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guest View Post
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
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.
  #10  
Old 08-07-2015, 07:58 AM
Guest
n/a
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guest View Post
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.
  #11  
Old 08-07-2015, 07:59 AM
Guest
n/a
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guest View Post
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.
  #12  
Old 08-07-2015, 08:05 AM
Guest
n/a
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guest View Post
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.
  #13  
Old 08-07-2015, 08:11 AM
Guest
n/a
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guest View Post
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.
  #14  
Old 08-07-2015, 08:15 AM
Guest
n/a
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guest View Post
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.
  #15  
Old 08-07-2015, 09:26 AM
Guest
n/a
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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.
 

Tags
trump, group, inquisition, graham, morning, debate, stage, set, megan, kelley, run, party, pledge, candidates, support, moderators, tough, lindsey, joe, audience, questions, main


You are viewing a new design of the TOTV site. Click here to revert to the old version.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:09 PM.