2016 US Presidential Elections | Trump Wins

Status
Not open for further replies.
It's about time someone in the media actually holds these politicians accountable instead of serving of softballs and waiting for the canned response.

I thought all 3 Fox journos did an oddly superb job. Anyone getting up on stage should be prepared for tough questions, which Trump is obviously not used to since he probably surrounds himself with agreeable sycophants throughout his businesses.
 
Maybe someone who just called an outspoken female an "attack bitch" doesn't have the most nuanced views on sexism.

It says a lot about the GOP mentality when a woman challenges Trump's misogynist idiocy on Twitter and gets attacked as being unfair.
 
I'm not sure yet if my vote goes to Bush, Cruz or Rubio. Bush has a problem with his last name and then I have Cruz which needs to fake his birthplace or we have a Canadian candidate and Rubio which I think I will vote for him. As for Trump or he goes away or he will damage the Republicans if he goes as an independent then we have another Ross Perot.
 
I'm not sure yet if my vote goes to Bush, Cruz or Rubio. Bush has a problem with his last name and then I have Cruz which needs to fake his birthplace or we have a Canadian candidate and Rubio which I think I will vote for him. As for Trump or he goes away or he will damage the Republicans if he goes as an independent then we have another Ross Perot.

Go with Cruz, please. :)
 
Here is Kelly's question:

"You've called women you don't like 'fat pigs,' 'dogs,' and 'disgusting animals.' Your Twitter account has several disparaging comments about women's looks, and you once told a candidate on Celebrity Apprentice that it would be a pretty picture to see her on her knees. Does that sound to you like the temperament of someone we should elect as president? And how will you answer the charge from Hillary Clinton, who is likely to be the nominee, that you are part of the war on women?"

Hardly anything wrong with that - he's just a old narcissist bully who can dish it out without being able to take it.
 
Here is Kelly's question:

"You've called women you don't like 'fat pigs,' 'dogs,' and 'disgusting animals.' Your Twitter account has several disparaging comments about women's looks, and you once told a candidate on Celebrity Apprentice that it would be a pretty picture to see her on her knees. Does that sound to you like the temperament of someone we should elect as president? And how will you answer the charge from Hillary Clinton, who is likely to be the nominee, that you are part of the war on women?"

Hardly anything wrong with that - he's just a old narcissist bully who can dish it out without being able to take it.
Seems fairly restrained if anything. Although his poll numbers will probably go up because of it.
 
Wonder whether he has binders full of women.
 
Here is Kelly's question:

"You've called women you don't like 'fat pigs,' 'dogs,' and 'disgusting animals.' Your Twitter account has several disparaging comments about women's looks, and you once told a candidate on Celebrity Apprentice that it would be a pretty picture to see her on her knees. Does that sound to you like the temperament of someone we should elect as president? And how will you answer the charge from Hillary Clinton, who is likely to be the nominee, that you are part of the war on women?"

Hardly anything wrong with that - he's just a old narcissist bully who can dish it out without being able to take it.

There's everything wrong with it. The journalists' function in the debate is to elicit information about the candidates' views and positions - not to offer their own. Their role is to question the candidates - not to judge them.

Kelly's contribution was a prejudicial characterization of Trump thinly disguised as a question. Her purpose was not to invite him to explain his attitude to women, but to damage Trump by using out of context quotation to stigmatize him as a woman-hater.
 
I have to admit I had an actual laugh out loud moment when he got bollocked for all those sexist comments against women and he simply said, "I was talking about Rosie O´Donnell." Ha ha. He looked like a little kid.

It was also great when he mentioned that all the money he donated to politicians from both sides was simply to get things in return.
 
There's everything wrong with it. The journalists' function in the debate is to elicit information about the candidates' views and positions - not to offer their own. Their role is to question the candidates - not to judge them.

Kelly's contribution was a prejudicial characterization of Trump thinly disguised as a question. Her purpose was not to invite him to explain his attitude to women, but to damage Trump by using out of context quotation to stigmatize him as a woman-hater.

First, you're presupposing that the journalists role in the questioning is something that it isn't. They are supposed to ask questions that are of general interest to the voting public. In this case, 53 percent of voters are women and may be interested in knowing whether or not Trump is a sexist based on the public record of things he has said in the past. Turns out from his subsequent post-debate reaction, the question was both relevant and essential. Second, there was nothing that she said that was out of context. It was completely relevant to the extent that it would almost certainly be asked if he faced Hillary Clinton in the general election.
 
It really showed Fox´s political power within the Republican and American political arena, getting the first debate, pretty much choosing who got to sit at the adult´s table, and to direct the debate. Obviously great ratings which to them and Ruppie and is what it´s all about..
 
Roger Stone, Trumps main advisor apparently resigned (or was sacked) today. Things are beginning to unravel, despite the fact he's still leading in the polls.
 
It was also great when he mentioned that all the money he donated to politicians from both sides was simply to get things in return.
This statement and the one he made about his bankruptcies pretty much ended whatever slim chance he had as a viable candidate for any serious Republican voter. Which Trump could care less about as this whole thing was a pisstake/publicity stunt for him anyways. 50/50 chance that he lasts until the LA debate next month.
 
It is a sad and extremely confusing state of affairs when you start to like Donald Trump. This may be the end of me.
 
Long may it continue, although sadly it won't.

I do think Fiorina has launched herself into the small group of legitimate contenders.
 
Black lives matter protestors interrupted Bernie. What are odds that shillary paid those people to interrupt Bernie?
 
I know. I don't think Hillary would do that(I mean it doesn't even make sense) How's Bernie hype in CA?

He has little hope anywhere imo. Too unvarnished and unsupported by the establishment, who have basically anointed Hillary as the only option. Best case for progressives is if he presses her into adopting more progressive issues into her platform. Could get interesting if Biden decides to run, but I doubt he has enough support to do much damage.
 
He has little hope anywhere imo. Too unvarnished and unsupported by the establishment, who have basically anointed Hillary as the only option. Best case for progressives is if he presses her into adopting more progressive issues into her platform. Could get interesting if Biden decides to run, but I doubt he has enough support to do much damage.

Even if she runs on a progressive platform she'll basically be a DINO president.
 
Even if she runs on a progressive platform she'll basically be a DINO president.

Well she certainly won't be a Republican, so she would have to be an establishment Democrat. The likes of Warren/Sanders and others being in the progressive wing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.