October 28th Republican debate on CNBC - Official thread

alucard13mm said:
Maybe Rand needs to say some racist things to win.. Trump went up when he talked about mexicans. Carson went up (and even overtook Trump) when he talked about muslims.

Rand needs to be racist... whats an ethnic group/religion that pisses off republicans?.. -sarcasm-

I am just worried Rand might not make it into the next debate just because hes just on the bubble =\..., especially if more people from the kiddie table drops, rand might be downgraded.
Click to expand...

He should say if Trump is talking about deporting all illegals.. we should up the ante on that utopia and deport all liberals and socialists too, hehehe.
 
alucard13mm said:
Maybe Rand needs to say some racist things to win.. Trump went up when he talked about mexicans. Carson went up (and even overtook Trump) when he talked about muslims.

Rand needs to be racist... whats an ethnic group/religion that pisses off republicans?.. -sarcasm-

I am just worried Rand might not make it into the next debate just because hes just on the bubble =\..., especially if more people from the kiddie table drops, rand might be downgraded.
Click to expand...

If polls are in line with what happened tonight, he won't have a problem getting in next week. Kasich and maybe Christie are most likely to have a real problem though.
 
For those who watched, was there any debate question today about attempted knife/hammer attacks by Ben Carson on his friend/mother or about his temprament/biblical therapy?
 
O'Reilly's just an oversized child.

...needs to be put to bed early without dinner, teach him some manners.
 
THE ECONOMIST

The third Republican debate
Jeb Bush flops, Marco Rubio soars
Oct 29th 2015, 6:27 by J.A.

THE third televised Republican primary debate, held in Boulder, Colorado, on October 28th, was supposed to be about the economy. Yet it featured hardly any discussion of America’s big economic problems, its shortages of skills, poor education standards or rotten infrastructure; nor, for that matter, of its economic strengths. It was a ragged, ill-focused affair, in which the 11 participants traded mostly incredible tax-cutting pledges, bickered with one another, and griped about the moderators, who were representing the organiser, CNBC, and excruciatingly disorganised. Messy stuff, from which most of the candidates emerged more or less where they had started out—with a few important exceptions.

Two match-ups had dominated the run-up to the debate. First, that between the two front-runners, Donald Trump, a real estate tycoon and braggart, and Ben Carson, a soft-spoken neurosurgeon who holds some eye-wateringly right-wing views (he recently suggested the Holocaust would not have happened had Nazi Germany had looser gun laws). This duel probably ended in a draw. Mr Trump provided a couple of the debate’s more comical moments: including a flamboyant dismissal of John Kasich—“You know what? You can keep him!”—accompanied by a camp flick of his hand. Yet he was less dominant than he has been previously. That was perhaps because this week Mr Carson has started threatening to overtake him in the polls. Wanting very much to attack Mr Carson, Mr Trump wasn’t sure whether he should.

No one really knows what to make of Mr Carson. If his polling numbers are serious, he is the candidate whom everyone should want to attack—but he spoke for just seven minutes, 40% less than Carly Fiorina, another candidate who has never previously worked as a politician. And for at least three of those minutes he was virtually inaudible or unintelligible—for example, when trying to defend his plan for a flat tax that would, it is estimated, require a 40% cut in government expenditure to be viable. Yet Mr Carson, whose understated demeanour nicely offsets his reputation for being a medical genius, has been like this all along. At a time of high anti-political and anti-establishment feeling, his perceived authenticity is working for him.

He is unlikely to get the nomination, yet committed Republicans seem to hold Mr Carson in unusually high esteem—a frisson of goodwill, signified by a murmur of kind chuckles and sympathy, radiated from the audience almost whenever he spoke. Mr Trump was wise not to be rude to him; the moment—which will surely come—when he cannot help but be rude to Mr Carson will perhaps signal the unravelling of his campaign.

The other main face-off ended more conclusively. It was between the likeliest champions of the Republican establishment: Jeb Bush, a former governor of Florida and close relative of two former presidents; and Marco Rubio, a 44-year-old senator from Florida and son of poor Cuban immigrants. Mr Rubio cleaned up. He had Mr Bush, whose campaign raised more than $100m before it was even launched, on toast.

Primed to revive his campaign with a stirring performance, early on in the evening Mr Bush launched a ponderous and predictable attack on Mr Rubio, for his poor attendance record in the Senate. Mr Rubio responded with a put-down that was swift and deft—he noted that Mr Bush never used to care about such things, and was pretending to now merely for political reasons. Despite a big slowdown in his recent fundraising—which forced Mr Bush to cut his campaign payroll—he still has too much money in hand to bow out soon. Yet it is hard to see him coming back into contention now. Immediately after the debate ended, betting on Marco Rubio on Predictit, a political betting website, surged; punters reckon he has a 59% chance of bagging the nomination.

Among the supporting cast, there was a solid-enough performance from Mr Kasich to suggest he remains a viable emergency replacement for the role of establishment favourite. There was flair from Ted Cruz, a Mephistophelian senator from Texas, beloved of a, thankfully fairly small, right-wing fringe; and the usual pugnacious display from Chris Christie, the street-fighting governor of New Jersey. Mrs Fiorina, who spoke for longer than any other candidate, probably did as well as she did in the second debate, which she was reckoned to have won; but lacking novelty now, she made a lesser impression. She is accomplished, but too flagrantly opportunistic. And the fact is, her record as the boss of Hewlett-Packard, where she presided over a calamitous drop in the company’ share-price, sacked thousands of people, then was sacked herself, probably ended her political career before it even began.
 
Rand just needed to talk over Carly every time - he might decide to act less like a Senator with decorum on the floor of Congress,
but more like a bossy, ex-CEO (who won't talk to Putin, but sure needs to push into every conversation - at least Obama/Pentagon and Putin
are recently decided they wouldn't have air warfare over Syria - might not happen with neocon no-diplomacy Carly.

I hope she gets a mike shut-off switch from now on in her wanna-be VP bid.



.
 
randomname said:
THE ECONOMIST

The third Republican debate
Jeb Bush flops, Marco Rubio soars
Oct 29th 2015, 6:27 by J.A.

THE third televised Republican primary debate, held in Boulder, Colorado, on October 28th, was supposed to be about the economy. Yet it featured hardly any discussion of America’s big economic problems, its shortages of skills, poor education standards or rotten infrastructure; nor, for that matter, of its economic strengths. It was a ragged, ill-focused affair, in which the 11 participants traded mostly incredible tax-cutting pledges, bickered with one another, and griped about the moderators, who were representing the organiser, CNBC, and excruciatingly disorganised. Messy stuff, from which most of the candidates emerged more or less where they had started out—with a few important exceptions.

Two match-ups had dominated the run-up to the debate. First, that between the two front-runners, Donald Trump, a real estate tycoon and braggart, and Ben Carson, a soft-spoken neurosurgeon who holds some eye-wateringly right-wing views (he recently suggested the Holocaust would not have happened had Nazi Germany had looser gun laws). This duel probably ended in a draw. Mr Trump provided a couple of the debate’s more comical moments: including a flamboyant dismissal of John Kasich—“You know what? You can keep him!”—accompanied by a camp flick of his hand. Yet he was less dominant than he has been previously. That was perhaps because this week Mr Carson has started threatening to overtake him in the polls. Wanting very much to attack Mr Carson, Mr Trump wasn’t sure whether he should.

No one really knows what to make of Mr Carson. If his polling numbers are serious, he is the candidate whom everyone should want to attack—but he spoke for just seven minutes, 40% less than Carly Fiorina, another candidate who has never previously worked as a politician. And for at least three of those minutes he was virtually inaudible or unintelligible—for example, when trying to defend his plan for a flat tax that would, it is estimated, require a 40% cut in government expenditure to be viable. Yet Mr Carson, whose understated demeanour nicely offsets his reputation for being a medical genius, has been like this all along. At a time of high anti-political and anti-establishment feeling, his perceived authenticity is working for him.

He is unlikely to get the nomination, yet committed Republicans seem to hold Mr Carson in unusually high esteem—a frisson of goodwill, signified by a murmur of kind chuckles and sympathy, radiated from the audience almost whenever he spoke. Mr Trump was wise not to be rude to him; the moment—which will surely come—when he cannot help but be rude to Mr Carson will perhaps signal the unravelling of his campaign.

The other main face-off ended more conclusively. It was between the likeliest champions of the Republican establishment: Jeb Bush, a former governor of Florida and close relative of two former presidents; and Marco Rubio, a 44-year-old senator from Florida and son of poor Cuban immigrants. Mr Rubio cleaned up. He had Mr Bush, whose campaign raised more than $100m before it was even launched, on toast.

Primed to revive his campaign with a stirring performance, early on in the evening Mr Bush launched a ponderous and predictable attack on Mr Rubio, for his poor attendance record in the Senate. Mr Rubio responded with a put-down that was swift and deft—he noted that Mr Bush never used to care about such things, and was pretending to now merely for political reasons. Despite a big slowdown in his recent fundraising—which forced Mr Bush to cut his campaign payroll—he still has too much money in hand to bow out soon. Yet it is hard to see him coming back into contention now. Immediately after the debate ended, betting on Marco Rubio on Predictit, a political betting website, surged; punters reckon he has a 59% chance of bagging the nomination.

Among the supporting cast, there was a solid-enough performance from Mr Kasich to suggest he remains a viable emergency replacement for the role of establishment favourite. There was flair from Ted Cruz, a Mephistophelian senator from Texas, beloved of a, thankfully fairly small, right-wing fringe; and the usual pugnacious display from Chris Christie, the street-fighting governor of New Jersey. Mrs Fiorina, who spoke for longer than any other candidate, probably did as well as she did in the second debate, which she was reckoned to have won; but lacking novelty now, she made a lesser impression. She is accomplished, but too flagrantly opportunistic. And the fact is, her record as the boss of Hewlett-Packard, where she presided over a calamitous drop in the company’ share-price, sacked thousands of people, then was sacked herself, probably ended her political career before it even began.
Click to expand...

Hmm, why do I get the feeling they missed somebody completely?
 
12191658_907514719342798_6579741525726298052_n.jpg
 
Local Boulder paper Daily Camera stated that Kasich was the only one to get a cannabis question - which the moderator seemed to answer about taxation -
and then Kasich "pivoted" to what he wanted to talk about.

Rand certainly supports state rights like in Colorado, Washington, and now Oregon, but Kasich cvouldn't even come up with anything.
 
CPUd said:
One of them assumes only 1 person can talk at a time.
Click to expand...

Good pickup on that - it IS the way to get the number up -
just talk while someone else is talking a la the ex-HP CEO


Carly last night quoting Mr. Perkins from H-P Board : "The leadership she brought to H-P is exactly the leadership we need in Washington DC"



.
 
The debate was a farse, but it was very bad for Rand, IMO. Not only did he not get any time, the time he did get was basically squandered. He did not have a break out moment and did nothing but pump his (only 20 min) filibuster.

Not sure what positive spin you all can put on this. Boobus voter only saw Rand being shown the door.

He's by far the best candidate, but Rand didn't have the fire in the belly. He looked like his family was being held hostage or something.

A very bad 48 hours for Rand Campaign. I donated to him again just to feel better. SMDH.
 
Jeb, Christie and Kasich are done. Keep clearing the field for Rand.

There seemed to be a lot of crying and moaning about the CNBC moderators and questions. The questions were fine -- presidential candidates should be able to handle these amateurs with ease. The moderation was what was terrible -- don't let the candidates take over the debate. Keep the time roughly equal. It's not that hard.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

jct74
Official Vice Presidential debate thread - October 4, 2016
2 3 4
Replies
79
Views
5K
erowe1
erowe1
jct74
January 28th Republican debate on Fox News - Official Thread
45 46 47
Replies
932
Views
42K
spikel
S
jct74
November 10th Republican debate on Fox Business Network - Official Thread
54 55 56
Replies
1K
Views
40K
timosman
timosman
carlton
Official CNN GOP Debate Thread 12-15-15
62 63 64
Replies
1K
Views
47K
limequat
limequat
carlton
Rand on the Debate Bubble for CNBC
2 3
Replies
45
Views
3K
eleganz
eleganz
Back
Top