I hope y'all watching the debate

[Mosiah]

Yes, Jeb step to him like, what, maricon?!

The weird, non-presidential looking people are making sense and getting zero applause for it.

Good.

I want the presidential debates to feature two persons at opposite ends of the spectrum.

[Jangle]

Ripe breshe me seh

[Jangle]

Bush is a reluctant candidate carrying on the family business

[Jangle]

You have good trial lawyers and good research lawyers. Bush can search a book yuh see....but don't mek him defend yuh inna court.

[Islandman]

Wtf??? Trump is a doctor now?

[Islandman]

This woman cranky bwoy. Give her a.broom

[Jangle]

I think the ugly woman came out as the biggest winner and the black man and Bush the biggest losers. Chump's numbers will drop too.

[Mosiah]

This woman cranky bwoy. Give her a.broom

What's wrong with the one she's using now?

[Sir X]

That's what you think,you looking at this as a sane man,the Republican party has been hijacked by looneys that poll in unconventional ways in a different sphere.

All Trump needed to do was look decent, he did!

[Islandman]

Was thinking that as well. Who knows he might get another bump up in the polls for those insults he was throwing out, lol.

[Jangle]

Y'know you could be right

[Karl]

Last night's GOP debates: 1st debate was better.

In that first debate the debaters as group were more focused on matters affecting the country, solutions for the problems mentioned and tried to be cerebral.

The second debate was a school yard slug-fest. Kids excitedly and with great enthusiasm going at it. No one of the contestants appeared to know or care what the fight was about.

There was no 'how they keep the great things about this great and wonderful USA going, fix what needs fixing=identify problems and present solutions or add improvements...'. That 'stuff' was MISSING! They came out(side) to fight and fought they did.

The question is, what was it all about?

[Jangle]

Some comments on the debate:

Popular Now Newest Oldest Most Replied


C
Cliff 6 minutes ago 0
4

For the thoughtful voter who watched and listened carefully, it should be fairly clear that Carly 'won' the debate in terms of speaking clearly, with organized ideas and using well chosen words and phrases in good English, etc. She was assertive, strong, direct, bold, confident, extremely intelligent, error free and responsive. She challenged as her opportunities, although limited compared to some others, were allowed to her. She even asserted herself once despite the moderator/questioner trying to keep her from speaking. She did very well. I believe debate judges would give her the win. A+
Trump did not make a complete fool of himself as is his penchant but instead seemed a bit intimidated (if he can be intimidated) by the many intelligent people beside him and the national TV audience, etc. I am sure these group debate/discussion/Q&A sessions are unusual for him as he is used to being the boss and in charge and the Chairman of the Board type he gives orders and runs the meetings. He did OK though with a couple missed steps with the one on one challenges to his opponents. I give him a C+/B-. OK but not great certainly.
Bush has not been 'in' the race really since before he announced in my view as even his own Mother and brother were not supportive. He can't and won't win and should drop out now.
I give him a C which is as good as he can do given his intellectual and other personality limitations. He was a very good governor of Florida but he is NOT "Presidential" and lacks the self confident air and strength (no gravitas - spell ?).
Rubio was excellent and came in a very close SECOND to Carly. A He speaks well, confidently and knows the issues. He will make a great VP or good President. He would be well advised to make a deal with Carly to run as her VP partner. The two would make a great team and formidable to all opponents. They can win the Whitehouse together agains any challengers from either party easily.
Ben did well again and I would give him a solid B-. He is less assertive although he is slowly improving there and although he is not intimidated by anyone (he is a brilliant thinker), he is quite soft spoken and quiet and restrained in his manner and style. He overcomes this with very sharp responses and logical thinking and plain spoken frankness. He addresses all subject with the same almost scientific method approach to solving them. Good job. He could be a very good and maybe great President. A little more energy and power projection would make him the man to beat in this race. Time will tell if he comes forth as a strong leader type.
Christie did better than expected and was very forceful. He has so much negative baggage and was so downfallen before the race began (he started out way behind in my opinion) that I just don't think he can ever catch the pack. He has some skills but he is not the best choice and his style doesn't lend itselft to attracting a broad cross section of the public. C-
Kasich is a policy wonk and too much of an 'insider' in the year of the outsider it seems. I believe he would make a great Chief of Staff but he is not as likely to win this race - just a feeling I have. Nothing really bad except perhaps his somewhat obvious unwillingness to challenge Obama's Iran deal. After the debate he better clarified things but he may have hurt himself but refusing to denounce it and his willingness to let muslim refugees in is not a good position to take.I give him a C.
Nobody failed but Walker kind of got shortchanged in time and attention. He did OK but for some reason has been lost in the back of the pack. C for average. No mistakes but no way to break out and surge forward either. He needs a big break but no apparent thing likely to do it for him. He appears more like a Cabinet secretary such as Sec of Labor. LOL that would torque off the liberals for that to happen.
More

Expand Replies (1) Reply

• 
  R
  R Godfrey 6 minutes ago 0
  3
  
  It was hard to pick the least offensive smelling turd out of this enormous sh!tpile of candidates.
  -Trump regurgitated the same platitudes with no explanation of logistics or funding. Still an egomaniacal d-bag.
  -Bush looked like Paul did in the last debate due to his back and forth with Trump: weak, irritated, and a bit #$%$.
  -Fiorina looked as if she had just sniffed #$%$ the entire time and came off looking like a defensive ball buster.
  -Will Rubio ever get tired of inserting "the son of a bartender and maid from Cuba" in every response?
  -Cruz just makes my skin crawl with his over-dramatic looks at the camera and his...long...thoughtful...final...sentence... in EVERY RESPONSE.
  -Christie didn't contribute anything except an antiquated view of marijuana laws and chastisement of Trump and Fiorina, although they really did deserve it.
  -Huckabee is basically irrelevant with his phantom war on Christianity theory.
  -I forgot Scott Walker was even on stage.
  -Paul seemed like the voice of reason, which is scary; probably just a concerted effort to undo the damage he did to himself in the last debate.
  -Carson is intentionally being non-confrontational and non-offensive. As long as he stays away from topics where religion is involved, he seems reasonable but not particularly knowledgeable. He lost me when he said that someone who makes 10 billion dollars shouldn't be taxed any more than an average taxpayer.
  -Kasich seems like the most reasonable of the bunch, and may even be able to attract some democratic voters, but I don't know much about his past voting record and gubernatorial record.
  More
  
  Reply
• http://news.yahoo.com/scorecard-gop-...-election.html

[HL]

On the contrary, I prefer the lack of fanfare and circus in a candidate.

Measured, well thought out discourse have much more substance.

I like Carson.

Take Nanny P for example..............

[Jangle]

Carson lost it after last night. He's too reserved, plus after last night I noticed that he's got a tic. Not gwine work for 'Mercans.