Game Thread Third GOP Debate / CNBC / WEDNESDAY 5PM PST

[magnifier661]

Didn't we spend 11 hours exploring that exact question recently?

Asked and answered...

barfo

We did and ironically the democrats were bitching and whining about it. Pot meet kettle

 

[barfo]

We did and ironically the democrats were bitching and whining about it. Pot meet kettle

But you say it's ok to bitch and whine about questions like that. Pot meet kettle.

barfo

 

[magnifier661]

But you say it's ok to bitch and whine about questions like that. Pot meet kettle.

barfo

No, there is a difference to a possible criminal hearing than a debate. Like I said, if moderators were asking questions like the two I gave examples of, the DNC would probably cut power to the event.

 

[barfo]

No, there is a difference to a possible criminal hearing than a debate. Like I said, if moderators were asking questions like the two I gave examples of, the DNC would probably cut power to the event.

And I ask again, which questions do you think the moderators did ask that were like the two you made up?

barfo

 

[magnifier661]

And I ask again, which questions do you think the moderators did ask that were like the two you made up?

barfo

Um.. Calling someone a comic book candidate for starters?

 

[barfo]

Um.. Calling someone a comic book candidate for starters?

Right, I stipulated that as one way back in post #90. Any others?

barfo

 

[magnifier661]

Right, I stipulated that as one way back in post #90. Any others?

barfo

Here's a montage for you to review.



If the democrats were asked in this manner, there would be riots in the streets.

 

[barfo]

Here's a montage for you to review.



If the democrats were asked in this manner, there would be riots in the streets.

I watched the whole debate, I don't need the cliff notes. I was asking YOU what questions YOU think were unfair in the way that your examples for Bernie and Hillary were.

barfo

 

[magnifier661]

I watched the whole debate, I don't need the cliff notes. I was asking YOU what questions YOU think were unfair in the way that your examples for Bernie and Hillary were.

barfo

Yes. When a moderator, whom are supposed to hold an unbiased position, should hold themselves in a high regard. Personal insults and baiting are for commentators. Sorry...

 

[barfo]

Yes. When a moderator, whom are supposed to hold an unbiased position, should hold themselves in a high regard. Personal insults and baiting are for commentators. Sorry...

So, you can't identify any other questions that you think were unfair?

barfo

 

[magnifier661]

So, you can't identify any other questions that you think were unfair?

barfo

I gave you the montages of unfair behavioral questioning. And as we already discussed, the DNC refuses to be hosted by Fox because they know the questions will be hard.

There's also a reason why the democrats won't even go on Fox to interview with their commentators. Talk about pussies

 

[barfo]

I gave you the montages of unfair behavioral questioning. And as we already discussed, the DNC refuses to be hosted by Fox because they know the questions will be hard.

There's also a reason why the democrats won't even go on Fox to interview with their commentators. Talk about pussies

I think you are evading the question. What questions, specifically, do YOU think were unfair?

I am beginning to think that you are just parroting the party line here and you haven't actually thought about whether the questions were in fact unfair/insulting and why.

barfo

 

[magnifier661]

But let's just review the transcripts shall we? http://time.com/4091301/republican-debate-transcript-cnbc-boulder/

HARWOOD: And make Americans better off because your greatness would replace the stupidity and incompetence of others.

HARWOOD: Let’s be honest. Is this a comic book version of a presidential campaign? -- badgering

HARWOOD: We’re at 60 seconds, but I gotta ask you, you talked about your tax plan. You say that it would not increase the deficit because you cut taxes $10 trillion in the economy would take off like…

(CROSSTALK)

HARWOOD: Hold on, hold on. The economy would take off like a rocket ship.

TRUMP: Right. Dynamically.

HARWOOD: I talked to economic advisers who have served presidents of both parties. They said that you have as chance of cutting taxes that much without increasing the deficit as you would of flying away from that podium by flapping your arms. -- badgering

QUINTANILLA: You want to bring 70,000 pages to three?

FIORINA: That’s right, three pages.

QUINTANILLA: Is that using really small type? -- adding an opinion

FIORINA: You know why three?

QUINTANILLA: Is that using really small type? -- adding an opinion

QUINTANILLA: Senator Cruz. Congressional Republicans, Democrats and the White House are about to strike a compromise that would raise the debt limit, prevent a government shutdown and calm financial markets that fear of — another Washington-created crisis is on the way.

Does your opposition to it show that you’re not the kind of problem-solver American voters want? -- Again, speaking for americans? See the slight?

I'll add more

 

[magnifier661]

QUINTANILLA: Does that not speak to your vetting process or judgment in any way. -- Again, infusing their commentary and opinion, which ironically was followed by loud boo's

QUINTANILLA: Mr. Trump, you’ve said you have a special permit to carry a gun in New York.

TRUMP: Yes.

QUINTANILLA: After the Oregon mass shooting on October 1st, you said, “By the way, it was a gun-free zone. If you had a couple of teachers with guns, you would have been a hell of a lot better off.”

TRUMP: Or somebody else. Right.

QUINTANILLA: Would you feel more comfortable if your employees brought guns to work? -- This entire exchange, in which they told the candidates they are talking economics shows their lack of staying on topic and keeping to the policies on economics.

HARWOOD: Governor Huckabee, you’ve written about the huge divide in values between middle America and the big coastal cities like New York and Los Angeles. As a preacher as well as a politician, you know that presidents need the moral authority to bring the entire country together.

The leading Republican candidate, when you look at the average of national polls right now, is Donald Trump. When you look at him, do you see someone with the moral authority to unite the country?

 

[barfo]

But let's just review the transcripts shall we? http://time.com/4091301/republican-debate-transcript-cnbc-boulder/

Yes, let's do.

HARWOOD: Let’s be honest. Is this a comic book version of a presidential campaign? -- badgering

That is not badgering. Insulting, probably yes. Of course, the answer to Harwood's question is actually "yes", but it is a rude question. Of course Trump himself is quite rude, so I'm not sure he can really complain about that.

HARWOOD: I talked to economic advisers who have served presidents of both parties. They said that you have as chance of cutting taxes that much without increasing the deficit as you would of flying away from that podium by flapping your arms. -- badgering

Again, not badgering. However, it is a statement and not a question.

QUINTANILLA: Is that using really small type? -- adding an opinion

That's not an opinion, that's a question. It is a skeptical question, and an attempt to be humorous, but I don't see how it is insulting or unfair.

Does your opposition to it show that you’re not the kind of problem-solver American voters want? -- Again, speaking for americans? See the slight?

The question does not attempt to speak for Americans, nor is it a slight. It's a reasonable question, and an opportunity to state why the candidate opposes the budget deal and how they would have done it better and/or how they are a great problem solver due to x, y, z experience. It's actually a softball question.

I'll add more

Please do.

barfo

 

[magnifier661]

http://time.com/4091301/republican-debate-transcript-cnbc-boulder/
Yes, let's do.



That is not badgering. Insulting, probably yes. Of course, the answer to Harwood's question is actually "yes", but it is a rude question. Of course Trump himself is quite rude, so I'm not sure he can really complain about that.



Again, not badgering. However, it is a statement and not a question.



That's not an opinion, that's a question. It is a skeptical question, and an attempt to be humorous, but I don't see how it is insulting or unfair.



The question does not attempt to speak for Americans, nor is it a slight. It's a reasonable question, and an opportunity to state why the candidate opposes the budget deal and how they would have done it better and/or how they are a great problem solver due to x, y, z experience. It's actually a softball question.



Please do.

barfo

Oh give me a break. If any of those questions were asked to the democrats, they would be crying like the babies they are. It's really tiring of the double standard liberals put on republicans. It's actually pretty embarrassing really. I'll post the democrat debate and you will see the soft balls they toss their way

 

[barfo]

Yes, let's look at the democratic debate transcript:

Secretary Clinton, I want to start with you. Plenty of politicians evolve on issues, but even some Democrats believe you change your positions based on political expediency.

Will you say anything to get elected?

Do you change your political identity based on who you're talking to?

I fail to see how that's any less 'hostile', 'badgering', 'insulting', 'unfair' or what-have-you than the R debate.

barfo

 

[barfo]

CHAFEE: Anderson, you're looking at a block of granite when it comes to the issues. Whether it's...

COOPER: It seems like pretty soft granite.

How is that any less insulting than calling Trump's campaign a cartoon?

barfo

 

[magnifier661]

http://chicago.suntimes.com/news/7/71/1023775/cnn-democratic-debate-transcript

 

[magnifier661]

How is that any less insulting than calling Trump's campaign a cartoon?

barfo

Absolutely not. The questions were pressing, but not insulting. As you saw, I didn't put those questions that were pressing on the CNBC debate. Some questions to Trump, Carly and Rubio were fair and tough questions.

 

[MarAzul]

Mrs. Clinton (very straight face) to whom were you telling the truth, Charles Woods (father of Tyrone Woods) or the Egyptian Ambassador as cause of the attack at Benghazi?

Mrs. Clinton, have you apologized for lying to Mr. Woods?

Mrs. Clinton, have you corrected the explanation you gave to Mrs Smith as to the cause of the attack that killed her son in Benghazi?

Mrs. Clinton, when do you plan to apologize to the American people for spinning the yarn about the video causing the attack?

Mrs. Clinton, did you request Navy support to stand by Benghazi after the initial attacks and the British decided to pull out?

Why Not?

Mrs. Clinton, do you know how many hours away the Destroyer base in Italy is from Benghazi? Assuming Flank speed.

Mrs. Clinton, What was so urgent to require the US personnel to be in Benghazi after the British left because it was too dangerous?

Mrs. Clinton, What would you do over if possible to prevent the blunder you allowed to go down in Benghazi?

 

[magnifier661]

Reading the later part of the transcripts for the democrat debate were all softballs.

Just saw the GOP say that they had a contract from CNBC that all questions were about economical questions, yet they brought up gun laws, morality, and other social issues. That, in itself, is reason enough to suspend them.

 

[barfo]

QUINTANILLA: Does that not speak to your vetting process or judgment in any way. -- Again, infusing their commentary and opinion, which ironically was followed by loud boo's

Mags, mags, mags. There you go again.

Let's leave aside that fact that Carson had just blatantly lied about his involvement with the company. Asking whether endorsing a very questionable company (multi-level marketing quackery) as a medical doctor says anything about his judgement is a completely reasonable question. The question does not 'infuse commentary and opinion'. It's a simple, straightforward question, one that he will surely be asked again if his campaign survives. The boos were not ironic.


barfo

 

[Denny Crane]

Carson didn't lie about his involvement with the company. You are repeating lies about him.

He was a paid spokesman, and had 4 engagements to do so in 11 years. Those engagements arranged by a speakers' bureau, not directly with the company.

Hillary made $25M making similar speeches in the last year or so. She certainly has no particular relationship with many who paid her.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...605fbe-fb4d-11e4-9ef4-1bb7ce3b3fb7_story.html

 

[barfo]

Carson didn't lie about his involvement with the company. You are repeating lies about him.

He was a paid spokesman, and had 4 engagements to do so in 11 years. Those engagements arranged by a speakers' bureau, not directly with the company.

Hillary made $25M making similar speeches in the last year or so. She certainly has no particular relationship with many who paid her.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...605fbe-fb4d-11e4-9ef4-1bb7ce3b3fb7_story.html

Sorry, no.

"Well, that’s easy to answer: I didn’t have an involvement with them," replied Carson, a former pediatric neurosurgeon. "That is total propaganda. And this is what happens in our society -- total propaganda. I did a couple speeches for them. I did speeches for other people. They were paid speeches. It is absolutely absurd to say that I had any kind of relationship with them. Do I take the product? Yes. I think it’s a good product."

Dr. Ben Carson's business manager acknowledged Thursday that the Republican presidential candidate did have a "contract" with a medical supplement company at some point.

Armstrong Williams told CNN's Jake Tapper that he negotiated the retired neurosurgeon's contract himself.

Yet Williams told Tapper on "The Lead" that he thought it was fair for Quintanilla to ask Carson about his ties to the company. He argued that Carson wasn't involved hammering out the details of his speeches or testimonials for the company, though.

"Nothing is ever what it appears to be," he said. "What is good about this is that I actually negotiated the contract as his business manager."

If you've got a contract with someone (to endorse their products, in particular) then you have 'an involvement', at least according to plain English.

barfo

 

[Denny Crane]

Here's the whole story, barfo.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczy...ntradicts-him-mannatech-question-a#.khy4pogJ0

I saw Armstrong Williams on CNN yesterday. He said no such things.

He said Carson agreed to do a show for PBS and that Mannatech later became a sponsor. Carson wasn't paid, and he didn't hawk any products. The show was done in Phoenix. The contract was with PBS or the production.

And that Carson's "relationship" consisted of Mannatech hiring Carson to do 4 speeches over a 11 year period. Mannatech paid the speakers bureau which took a cut and paid Carson.

 

[Denny Crane]

“Sometimes you get involved with people who have not the best of intentions,” Carson’s business manager, Armstrong Williams, told the National Review when the conservative outlet asked about the candidate’s relationship with Mannatech earlier this year. “They’re using him to publicize their website, to monetize it, get people to believe that this is endorsed by Dr. Carson. The facts don’t match the reality of what they’re promoting to their audience. These things have their own biology and a way of solving themselves. It’s not our job to go out and say that ‘Mannatech is a bad company, Mannatech exploited Dr. Carson.’ What we have to do is a better job in vetting these companies that approach. We get this all the time.”

 

[e_blazer]

I don't mind a few gotcha questions in a debate, and as Barfo points out, CNN did give the Democrat candidates a few of those. But the CNBC debate was billed as being about economics and the pinhead moderators are supposed to know that and ask questions and moderate the debate such that viewers can get a good idea of where the candidates stand on economic issues. Other than challenging Carson on his number on his flat tax proposal, does anyone really think that the debate achieved its objectives? It was a train wreck. The moderators were more interested in putting out cutesy questions trying to embarrass the candidates and get them to attack each other than in fostering a legitimate debate.

 

[barfo]

"Well, that’s easy to answer: I didn’t have an involvement with them," replied Carson

“Sometimes you get involved with people who have not the best of intentions,” Carson’s business manager, Armstrong Williams, told the National Review

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/396193/ben-carsons-troubling-connection-jim-geraghty

QUINTANILLA: Does that not speak to your vetting process or judgment in any way.

What we have to do is a better job in vetting these companies that approach.

So... hmm.

barfo

 

[barfo]

“They’re using him to publicize their website, to monetize it, get people to believe that this is endorsed by Dr. Carson. The facts don’t match the reality of what they’re promoting to their audience.

uhm... there are videos of Carson endorsing the product. Hell, he endorsed it again at the debate. How you gonna (believably) deny that?

barfo