The three hour CNN Hoax

[The Stranger]

Was it just me or was this debate about getting the R's to kill each other off for the benefit of the Liberals?
Very little if any substance question more about he said this about you and you need to attack back. Isn't this schoolyard politics like you seen when you were in 1st or second grade?

[txradioguy]

Was it just me or was this debate about getting the R's to kill each other off for the benefit of the Liberals?

Are you not entertained?

[thundley4]

I didn't watch it, but from what I've read this morning, most of the questions followed a single format.

"Carly Fiorina, Mr. Trump said you are an ugly old hag, how do you respond to that?"

It was all about causing more infighting than already exists.

[Chris_]

I didn't watch it, but from what I've read this morning, most of the questions followed a single format.

"Carly Fiorina, Mr. Trump said you are an ugly old hag, how do you respond to that?"

It was all about causing more infighting than already exists.

Anything to boost CNN's ratings... get them to attack each other.

I missed the first half hour, but I did get to watch all of the last 60 minutes.  Any one of those people would be a vast improvement over what resides at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue today.

[The Stranger]

Not bad for 61 years old though.

[olde north church]

Not bad for 61 years old though.

If you have a Jiminy Cricket fetish maybe ...

[The Stranger]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
 

[Ralph Wiggum]

Was it just me or was this debate about getting the R's to kill each other off for the benefit of the Liberals?
Very little if any substance question more about he said this about you and you need to attack back. Isn't this schoolyard politics like you seen when you were in 1st or second grade?

Couldn't watch it either, on my DVR.  But your analysis, Stranger, is precisely what I figured CNN would try to do.  There is a time & place to attack fellow Republicans.  THIS is the time to be ripping apart Obama, Clinton, Reid, Sanders, etc. and the POLICIES they stand for. My two cents.

[libertybele]

I watched the earlier debate and most of the prime time debate and came away with a different perspective.  I felt that CNN's objective was to create a debate among the candidates rather than asking each ofthe candidates the same question. For the most part it worked and it allowed the candidates a chance to show their personalities.  The only one that I felt CNN was trying to beat up on was Trump.

After watching the debate I disagree with the polls.  I felt that the clear winners were Huckabee, Rubio and Cruz.  However, once again, Cruz wasn't given a whole lot of time to speak and for that matter neither was Huckabee.  Huckabee's inclusion and praise of the other GOP candidates in general was refreshing as well as his take on the First Amendment and the lawlessness of the Supreme Court was spot on.  Rubio is not my favorite because of his pro-amnesty stance, but he was spot on about the situation in the middle east and correct in the fact who ever becomes president needs to be ready on day one.  Cruz's comments regarding what just happened with the nuke deal and the result came across very strong, truthful and to the point.  He also pointed out that he is the only candidate that has always been anti-amnesty.

Clear losers in my opinion were Trump, Bush and Carson.  Trump doesn't seem to have a clear cut plan only voices opinion.  Bush's pro-amnesty stance continues to sink him and Carson, well, I just can't imagine him as president, nor do I think he knows enough about the government in general to be president.

Fiornia was good, however, she jumped in when it wasn't her turn and she repeated many of her talking points from the last debate.  Nothing new really from her.

Paul's isolationist philosophy still scares me.  Kasich seemed hot headed and I was not impressed.  Walker was lack luster and didn't help himself out last night.  Christie seemed like he was trying to make up excuses as to why he's not a true conservative; how can he be as governor of New Jersey?

[txradioguy]

I watched the earlier debate and most of the prime time debate and came away with a different perspective.  I felt that CNN's objective was to create a debate among the candidates rather than asking each ofthe candidates the same question. For the most part it worked and it allowed the candidates a chance to show their personalities.  The only one that I felt CNN was trying to beat up on was Trump.

They want the mud slinging between the candidates.  Less chance of them actually getting to espouse their beliefs and/or plans about what to do to fix the country and win over people who might otherwise vote Dem.

[Chris_]

They want the mud slinging between the candidates.  Less chance of them actually getting to espouse their beliefs and/or plans about what to do to fix the country and win over people who might otherwise vote Dem.

That worked for the first hour or so. 

[thundley4]

rather than asking each of the candidates the same question.

That is what irritates me so much about the political debates. They aren't debates in the truer sense of the word. Each panelist should be asked the same questions on issues that matter.  Let people see where the policy differences are are. These debates are often more about personality than policy.

Electing a personality and not caring about policy gave us Bill Clinton and Obama.

[Ken8521]

Couldn't watch it either, on my DVR.  But your analysis, Stranger, is precisely what I figured CNN would try to do.  There is a time & place to attack fellow Republicans.  THIS is the time to be ripping apart Obama, Clinton, Reid, Sanders, etc. and the POLICIES they stand for. My two cents.

I don't disagree... but here's the issue.  There are so many candidates, and assuming you believe the polls... Trump is the favorite by a very large margin over everyone but Carson.  That means (at this point) the only way to even get a sniff of going against Clinton/Sanders/Biden/whoever in Nov '16.. You have to attack Trump and show why you're a better choice.  Once we can widdle this field down to a reasonable numbers (say, 3-5).. then I think you can go into attack mode on Clinton and Obama.  Right now, they have little choice but to attack each other, while also trying to attack Obama and Clinton.

If they were all just up there singing Kumbaya, then they may as well just all quit, as they're all getting killed except for Carson (again, assuming you believe the polls).  I've not had a chance to watch the whole debate yet... but one thing I know... there is NO WAY I'm voting for Jeb.  He is way to weak on immigration.

In the end, I think we'll end up with a better candidate because of this...

[The Stranger]

Everyone is talking of Trump not apologizing to Bush's wife. Shouldn't she have apologized to the American people for trying to scam us for her not paying federal customs. Is this the type of woman who should be the first lady, a mexican who if worth millions not wanting to pay her share.
http://www.sptimes.com/News/62299/State/Gov_Bush_says_his_wif.shtml

[Ralph Wiggum]

I don't disagree... but here's the issue.  There are so many candidates, and assuming you believe the polls... Trump is the favorite by a very large margin over everyone but Carson.  That means (at this point) the only way to even get a sniff of going against Clinton/Sanders/Biden/whoever in Nov '16.. You have to attack Trump and show why you're a better choice.  Once we can widdle this field down to a reasonable numbers (say, 3-5).. then I think you can go into attack mode on Clinton and Obama.  Right now, they have little choice but to attack each other, while also trying to attack Obama and Clinton.

If they were all just up there singing Kumbaya, then they may as well just all quit, as they're all getting killed except for Carson (again, assuming you believe the polls).  I've not had a chance to watch the whole debate yet... but one thing I know... there is NO WAY I'm voting for Jeb.  He is way to weak on immigration.

In the end, I think we'll end up with a better candidate because of this...

Good points.

[Lacarnut]

I doubt if I will watch another debate with that many participants. CNN decided to make this  a mud slinging contest. Three hours standing on the stage is too long and I learned next to nothing new. Insulting each other galore is what the liberal hacks wanted at CNN and that is what we got. Very little substance and a lot of hot air from the established Repubs.

Carla had the best lines. However, she does not have a clue about the military with her comment about the 6th fleet. Her worst flub of the night was claiming that a live baby was dissected at a Planned Parenthood facility. I despise this outfit but this is an outright lie on her part. If she starts to move up in the polls, the liberals will pounce on her like shit on stink about the latter comment. 

Cruz and Rubio might have gained a few points. Cruz is my second choice after Trump.

The remaining career politicians made little or no gains including Jeb.

Carson was flat but I doubt he lost any points in the polls. People that liked him before the debate will still support him after the debate.

Everyone was gunning for Trump and overall it was a C grade performance for him. Like Carson, his poll numbers will probably stay the same. Unlike Lunz, the dunce, with his post debate interviews with hand picked participants, Trump will probably be leading in most polls.

 Huckabuck, Paul, Fat Boy do not have a chance.
 

[Chris_]

CNN's embarrassing promo for the debate...

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Einqylg9Z_U[/youtube]

[obumazombie]

That is what irritates me so much about the political debates. They aren't debates in the truer sense of the word. Each panelist should be asked the same questions on issues that matter.  Let people see where the policy differences are are. These debates are often more about personality than policy.

Electing a personality and not caring about policy gave us Bill Clinton and Obama.

They got an awful lot of credit just for being black, with a little bit of credit thrown in for being libs.

[delilahmused]

I didn't watch it, but from what I've read this morning, most of the questions followed a single format.

"Carly Fiorina, Mr. Trump said you are an ugly old hag, how do you respond to that?"

It was all about causing more infighting than already exists.

I didn't think there was a lot of infighting. Fiorina & Trump didn't go at it in the way they hoped, at least. They asked her about it, she made her comment & that was it. There was some juggling back and forth about their records in business but that was about it. It wasn't as contentious as the first debate.

Cindie

[delilahmused]

I doubt if I will watch another debate with that many participants. CNN decided to make this  a mud slinging contest. Three hours standing on the stage is too long and I learned next to nothing new. Insulting each other galore is what the liberal hacks wanted at CNN and that is what we got. Very little substance and a lot of hot air from the established Repubs.

Carla had the best lines. However, she does not have a clue about the military with her comment about the 6th fleet. Her worst flub of the night was claiming that a live baby was dissected at a Planned Parenthood facility. I despise this outfit but this is an outright lie on her part. If she starts to move up in the polls, the liberals will pounce on her like shit on stink about the latter comment. 

Cruz and Rubio might have gained a few points. Cruz is my second choice after Trump.

The remaining career politicians made little or no gains including Jeb.

Carson was flat but I doubt he lost any points in the polls. People that liked him before the debate will still support him after the debate.

Everyone was gunning for Trump and overall it was a C grade performance for him. Like Carson, his poll numbers will probably stay the same. Unlike Lunz, the dunce, with his post debate interviews with hand picked participants, Trump will probably be leading in most polls.

 Huckabuck, Paul, Fat Boy do not have a chance.

It's not a lie. Watch The Video Planned Parenthood And Its Media Allies Deny Exists

"As for Fiorina’s quote, she is likely referring to the entirety of the 10 videos, including the seventh video released by the Center for Medical Progress. Watch the full video for yourself. It does, in fact, show a fully formed fetus, heart beating and legs kicking."

You should watch them before you comment. Don't just buy the media spin.

Cindie