Total Posts:41|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Should Republicans restructure the debates?

RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 12:48:57 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
The interest of the Republicans in having the debates is to expose Republicans to the different views of the candidates so they can pick a candidate. The interest of Fox news is to make an exciting show that boosts ratings. The interest of the rest of the media is to make Republicans look as bad as possible to help Democrats get elected. The debate last night showed the CNBC biased agenda, as did the CNN debate before that.

I'm thinking the Republican National Committee should change the debate hosting so that more questions of interest to Republican voters are asked. Maybe they could get American Enterprise Institute or Breitbart or some conservative organizations to host some of the debates, so that more questions of interest to Republican voters would be asked. Not all the debates, but maybe half. Candidates will have to face the biased mainstream media in the general election, so they need to be tested. So, sure, have Rachel Maddow quizzing Christie and Cruz sometimes. But the mainstream media wastes a lot of time repeating criticisms that have been answered and trying to pit candidates against each other on non-policy issues.
YYW
Posts: 36,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 12:54:57 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
I don't think there is any question that CNBC disgraced themselves, and I don't think there is anyone who really doubts that they were incompetent to host the debate. Clearly, CNBC has no business hosting debates. CNN did a better job. But, even when FOX did their thing, it was pretty bad.

The bottom line here is that you've got media outlets which are trying to get ratings, and the way they do that is to get the candidates to say outlandish things, they talk about stupid issues (e.g. the regulation of fantasy football), and they pit candidates against each other.

If I was in charge, I would not deal with CNBC again... I doubt I'd call them and let them know how stupid I thought their "moderators" were, because I don't want them running a crusade against my party (if the GOP were my party). But, (1) I totally understand why Republicans would be unhappy with the way last night's debate transpired; and (2) I think that CNBC --as a more or less bottom feeding news outlet anyway-- had no business hosting the thing.

The debate seriously embarrassed CNBC.
Tsar of DDO
ben2974
Posts: 767
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 1:24:36 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
It's unfortunate that the republicans had to go through another round of this. Marco Rubio took a swing at the liberals last night when he argued that the mainstream media was the democratic superpac. And I kind of agree there. When I read opinion on news sites like the NYTimes and find that people are saying that the Republicans are like "babies on a stage" or acting like "clowns," I figure that the media had done its job in portraying the republican candidacy as a well funded joke.
TN05
Posts: 4,492
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 1:40:36 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/29/2015 12:48:57 PM, RoyLatham wrote:
The interest of the Republicans in having the debates is to expose Republicans to the different views of the candidates so they can pick a candidate. The interest of Fox news is to make an exciting show that boosts ratings. The interest of the rest of the media is to make Republicans look as bad as possible to help Democrats get elected. The debate last night showed the CNBC biased agenda, as did the CNN debate before that.

I'm thinking the Republican National Committee should change the debate hosting so that more questions of interest to Republican voters are asked. Maybe they could get American Enterprise Institute or Breitbart or some conservative organizations to host some of the debates, so that more questions of interest to Republican voters would be asked. Not all the debates, but maybe half. Candidates will have to face the biased mainstream media in the general election, so they need to be tested. So, sure, have Rachel Maddow quizzing Christie and Cruz sometimes. But the mainstream media wastes a lot of time repeating criticisms that have been answered and trying to pit candidates against each other on non-policy issues.

My idea would be just to have the RNC directly run it. Pick top six candidates, collectively, agree on the moderators, and sell the rights to air to the networks. Win-win for all involved. No reason to ever let a network run it ever again.
inferno
Posts: 10,556
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 3:14:36 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/29/2015 12:48:57 PM, RoyLatham wrote:
The interest of the Republicans in having the debates is to expose Republicans to the different views of the candidates so they can pick a candidate. The interest of Fox news is to make an exciting show that boosts ratings. The interest of the rest of the media is to make Republicans look as bad as possible to help Democrats get elected. The debate last night showed the CNBC biased agenda, as did the CNN debate before that.

I'm thinking the Republican National Committee should change the debate hosting so that more questions of interest to Republican voters are asked. Maybe they could get American Enterprise Institute or Breitbart or some conservative organizations to host some of the debates, so that more questions of interest to Republican voters would be asked. Not all the debates, but maybe half. Candidates will have to face the biased mainstream media in the general election, so they need to be tested. So, sure, have Rachel Maddow quizzing Christie and Cruz sometimes. But the mainstream media wastes a lot of time repeating criticisms that have been answered and trying to pit candidates against each other on non-policy issues.

So what. Politics is a dirty game. The Republicans looked very last night because they realize they they do not have a cohesive enough message that resonates soundly with the general public. And the Democrats are gonna walk into the White House once again in 2016. Its just that simple.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 3:15:49 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/29/2015 1:40:36 PM, TN05 wrote:
At 10/29/2015 12:48:57 PM, RoyLatham wrote:
The interest of the Republicans in having the debates is to expose Republicans to the different views of the candidates so they can pick a candidate. The interest of Fox news is to make an exciting show that boosts ratings. The interest of the rest of the media is to make Republicans look as bad as possible to help Democrats get elected. The debate last night showed the CNBC biased agenda, as did the CNN debate before that.

I'm thinking the Republican National Committee should change the debate hosting so that more questions of interest to Republican voters are asked. Maybe they could get American Enterprise Institute or Breitbart or some conservative organizations to host some of the debates, so that more questions of interest to Republican voters would be asked. Not all the debates, but maybe half. Candidates will have to face the biased mainstream media in the general election, so they need to be tested. So, sure, have Rachel Maddow quizzing Christie and Cruz sometimes. But the mainstream media wastes a lot of time repeating criticisms that have been answered and trying to pit candidates against each other on non-policy issues.

My idea would be just to have the RNC directly run it. Pick top six candidates, collectively, agree on the moderators, and sell the rights to air to the networks. Win-win for all involved. No reason to ever let a network run it ever again.

That is an excellent. Although I did not have a huge issue with cnbc, if the Republicans really take issue with it, they should get the questions their voters actually want answered.
inferno
Posts: 10,556
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 3:23:41 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/29/2015 1:24:36 PM, ben2974 wrote:
It's unfortunate that the republicans had to go through another round of this. Marco Rubio took a swing at the liberals last night when he argued that the mainstream media was the democratic superpac. And I kind of agree there. When I read opinion on news sites like the NYTimes and find that people are saying that the Republicans are like "babies on a stage" or acting like "clowns," I figure that the media had done its job in portraying the republican candidacy as a well funded joke.

The media slams both sides of the aisle. Its just that the Republican Party is still seen as the party of old white men. And this has been haunting them since Bush was out of office. Doesn't look good for them right now.
ben2974
Posts: 767
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 3:52:54 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/29/2015 3:23:41 PM, inferno wrote:
At 10/29/2015 1:24:36 PM, ben2974 wrote:
It's unfortunate that the republicans had to go through another round of this. Marco Rubio took a swing at the liberals last night when he argued that the mainstream media was the democratic superpac. And I kind of agree there. When I read opinion on news sites like the NYTimes and find that people are saying that the Republicans are like "babies on a stage" or acting like "clowns," I figure that the media had done its job in portraying the republican candidacy as a well funded joke.

The media slams both sides of the aisle. Its just that the Republican Party is still seen as the party of old white men. And this has been haunting them since Bush was out of office. Doesn't look good for them right now.

I don't see how any of that explains how/why the moderators engage with the republicans the way they do. The difference here is that the republicans are given questions purposely crafted to incite bashing among themselves. I personally think they are taking advantage of an ability to exacerbate the preexisting discord among the republican platform. Everyone knows there's a lack of a republican leadership amidst the cultural evolution of the evolving American demographic. They've been losing ground on cultural issues, and with nobody in the party to claim direction, republicans on all fronts are scrambling to direct the new generation of republicans. I think this is why the republican candidates are particularly vulnerable in this election cycle and this is why the personal and inflammatory questions targeted to Republicans is unacceptable.
inferno
Posts: 10,556
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 4:01:30 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/29/2015 3:52:54 PM, ben2974 wrote:
At 10/29/2015 3:23:41 PM, inferno wrote:
At 10/29/2015 1:24:36 PM, ben2974 wrote:
It's unfortunate that the republicans had to go through another round of this. Marco Rubio took a swing at the liberals last night when he argued that the mainstream media was the democratic superpac. And I kind of agree there. When I read opinion on news sites like the NYTimes and find that people are saying that the Republicans are like "babies on a stage" or acting like "clowns," I figure that the media had done its job in portraying the republican candidacy as a well funded joke.

The media slams both sides of the aisle. Its just that the Republican Party is still seen as the party of old white men. And this has been haunting them since Bush was out of office. Doesn't look good for them right now.

I don't see how any of that explains how/why the moderators engage with the republicans the way they do. The difference here is that the republicans are given questions purposely crafted to incite bashing among themselves. I personally think they are taking advantage of an ability to exacerbate the preexisting discord among the republican platform. Everyone knows there's a lack of a republican leadership amidst the cultural evolution of the evolving American demographic. They've been losing ground on cultural issues, and with nobody in the party to claim direction, republicans on all fronts are scrambling to direct the new generation of republicans. I think this is why the republican candidates are particularly vulnerable in this election cycle and this is why the personal and inflammatory questions targeted to Republicans is unacceptable.

Because Republicans are seen as the core of the establishment. They are old fashioned, narrow minded, bigoted, prejudice, stoic, out dated, and behind the times. The bulk of America as it stands today is Liberal. We are in a new age of progressiveness right now.
inferno
Posts: 10,556
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 4:02:24 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/29/2015 12:54:57 PM, YYW wrote:
I don't think there is any question that CNBC disgraced themselves, and I don't think there is anyone who really doubts that they were incompetent to host the debate. Clearly, CNBC has no business hosting debates. CNN did a better job. But, even when FOX did their thing, it was pretty bad.

The bottom line here is that you've got media outlets which are trying to get ratings, and the way they do that is to get the candidates to say outlandish things, they talk about stupid issues (e.g. the regulation of fantasy football), and they pit candidates against each other.

If I was in charge, I would not deal with CNBC again... I doubt I'd call them and let them know how stupid I thought their "moderators" were, because I don't want them running a crusade against my party (if the GOP were my party). But, (1) I totally understand why Republicans would be unhappy with the way last night's debate transpired; and (2) I think that CNBC --as a more or less bottom feeding news outlet anyway-- had no business hosting the thing.

The debate seriously embarrassed CNBC.

Who cares. CNBC is a Liberal network and its about business. The object was to entertain and get ratings. Move along.
ben2974
Posts: 767
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 4:16:14 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/29/2015 4:02:24 PM, inferno wrote:
At 10/29/2015 12:54:57 PM, YYW wrote:
I don't think there is any question that CNBC disgraced themselves, and I don't think there is anyone who really doubts that they were incompetent to host the debate. Clearly, CNBC has no business hosting debates. CNN did a better job. But, even when FOX did their thing, it was pretty bad.

The bottom line here is that you've got media outlets which are trying to get ratings, and the way they do that is to get the candidates to say outlandish things, they talk about stupid issues (e.g. the regulation of fantasy football), and they pit candidates against each other.

If I was in charge, I would not deal with CNBC again... I doubt I'd call them and let them know how stupid I thought their "moderators" were, because I don't want them running a crusade against my party (if the GOP were my party). But, (1) I totally understand why Republicans would be unhappy with the way last night's debate transpired; and (2) I think that CNBC --as a more or less bottom feeding news outlet anyway-- had no business hosting the thing.

The debate seriously embarrassed CNBC.

Who cares. CNBC is a Liberal network and its about business. The object was to entertain and get ratings. Move along.

I'll respond to my segment here because what you said to me and what you said here indicates you feel it's okay to completely discredit a whole platform that represents a sizable portion of the US population. You've obviously proven in this thread that you condone bias/
inferno
Posts: 10,556
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 4:20:46 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/29/2015 4:16:14 PM, ben2974 wrote:
At 10/29/2015 4:02:24 PM, inferno wrote:
At 10/29/2015 12:54:57 PM, YYW wrote:
I don't think there is any question that CNBC disgraced themselves, and I don't think there is anyone who really doubts that they were incompetent to host the debate. Clearly, CNBC has no business hosting debates. CNN did a better job. But, even when FOX did their thing, it was pretty bad.

The bottom line here is that you've got media outlets which are trying to get ratings, and the way they do that is to get the candidates to say outlandish things, they talk about stupid issues (e.g. the regulation of fantasy football), and they pit candidates against each other.

If I was in charge, I would not deal with CNBC again... I doubt I'd call them and let them know how stupid I thought their "moderators" were, because I don't want them running a crusade against my party (if the GOP were my party). But, (1) I totally understand why Republicans would be unhappy with the way last night's debate transpired; and (2) I think that CNBC --as a more or less bottom feeding news outlet anyway-- had no business hosting the thing.

The debate seriously embarrassed CNBC.

Who cares. CNBC is a Liberal network and its about business. The object was to entertain and get ratings. Move along.

I'll respond to my segment here because what you said to me and what you said here indicates you feel it's okay to completely discredit a whole platform that represents a sizable portion of the US population. You've obviously proven in this thread that you condone bias/

Its not an issue of biasedness. Because you like your party for your own specific reasons, and I like mines. The issue is about the hatred, and cultural disdain that the Republicans seem to have with people of color and their idea on gender related matters. They have a bad stain on their garment, that they have been reluctant to get rid of and this is a sign of incompetence in the eyes of many. They have a lot of growing up to do my friend. We wont even talk last about the Speaker of The House here.
ben2974
Posts: 767
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 4:31:50 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/29/2015 4:20:46 PM, inferno wrote:
At 10/29/2015 4:16:14 PM, ben2974 wrote:
At 10/29/2015 4:02:24 PM, inferno wrote:
At 10/29/2015 12:54:57 PM, YYW wrote:
I don't think there is any question that CNBC disgraced themselves, and I don't think there is anyone who really doubts that they were incompetent to host the debate. Clearly, CNBC has no business hosting debates. CNN did a better job. But, even when FOX did their thing, it was pretty bad.

The bottom line here is that you've got media outlets which are trying to get ratings, and the way they do that is to get the candidates to say outlandish things, they talk about stupid issues (e.g. the regulation of fantasy football), and they pit candidates against each other.

If I was in charge, I would not deal with CNBC again... I doubt I'd call them and let them know how stupid I thought their "moderators" were, because I don't want them running a crusade against my party (if the GOP were my party). But, (1) I totally understand why Republicans would be unhappy with the way last night's debate transpired; and (2) I think that CNBC --as a more or less bottom feeding news outlet anyway-- had no business hosting the thing.

The debate seriously embarrassed CNBC.

Who cares. CNBC is a Liberal network and its about business. The object was to entertain and get ratings. Move along.

I'll respond to my segment here because what you said to me and what you said here indicates you feel it's okay to completely discredit a whole platform that represents a sizable portion of the US population. You've obviously proven in this thread that you condone bias/

Its not an issue of biasedness. Because you like your party for your own specific reasons, and I like mines. The issue is about the hatred, and cultural disdain that the Republicans seem to have with people of color and their idea on gender related matters. They have a bad stain on their garment, that they have been reluctant to get rid of and this is a sign of incompetence in the eyes of many. They have a lot of growing up to do my friend. We wont even talk last about the Speaker of The House here.

I think i'm a moderate, but you'd be shocked to know that I'm feeling the Bern.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,240
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 4:31:59 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/29/2015 4:20:46 PM, inferno wrote:
At 10/29/2015 4:16:14 PM, ben2974 wrote:
At 10/29/2015 4:02:24 PM, inferno wrote:
At 10/29/2015 12:54:57 PM, YYW wrote:
I don't think there is any question that CNBC disgraced themselves, and I don't think there is anyone who really doubts that they were incompetent to host the debate. Clearly, CNBC has no business hosting debates. CNN did a better job. But, even when FOX did their thing, it was pretty bad.

The bottom line here is that you've got media outlets which are trying to get ratings, and the way they do that is to get the candidates to say outlandish things, they talk about stupid issues (e.g. the regulation of fantasy football), and they pit candidates against each other.

If I was in charge, I would not deal with CNBC again... I doubt I'd call them and let them know how stupid I thought their "moderators" were, because I don't want them running a crusade against my party (if the GOP were my party). But, (1) I totally understand why Republicans would be unhappy with the way last night's debate transpired; and (2) I think that CNBC --as a more or less bottom feeding news outlet anyway-- had no business hosting the thing.

The debate seriously embarrassed CNBC.

Who cares. CNBC is a Liberal network and its about business. The object was to entertain and get ratings. Move along.

I'll respond to my segment here because what you said to me and what you said here indicates you feel it's okay to completely discredit a whole platform that represents a sizable portion of the US population. You've obviously proven in this thread that you condone bias/

Its not an issue of biasedness. Because you like your party for your own specific reasons, and I like mines. The issue is about the hatred, and cultural disdain that the Republicans seem to have with people of color and their idea on gender related matters. They have a bad stain on their garment, that they have been reluctant to get rid of and this is a sign of incompetence in the eyes of many. They have a lot of growing up to do my friend. We wont even talk last about the Speaker of The House here.

Don't fight hate with hate Gandhi.
inferno
Posts: 10,556
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 4:46:48 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/29/2015 4:31:50 PM, ben2974 wrote:
At 10/29/2015 4:20:46 PM, inferno wrote:
At 10/29/2015 4:16:14 PM, ben2974 wrote:
At 10/29/2015 4:02:24 PM, inferno wrote:
At 10/29/2015 12:54:57 PM, YYW wrote:
I don't think there is any question that CNBC disgraced themselves, and I don't think there is anyone who really doubts that they were incompetent to host the debate. Clearly, CNBC has no business hosting debates. CNN did a better job. But, even when FOX did their thing, it was pretty bad.

The bottom line here is that you've got media outlets which are trying to get ratings, and the way they do that is to get the candidates to say outlandish things, they talk about stupid issues (e.g. the regulation of fantasy football), and they pit candidates against each other.

If I was in charge, I would not deal with CNBC again... I doubt I'd call them and let them know how stupid I thought their "moderators" were, because I don't want them running a crusade against my party (if the GOP were my party). But, (1) I totally understand why Republicans would be unhappy with the way last night's debate transpired; and (2) I think that CNBC --as a more or less bottom feeding news outlet anyway-- had no business hosting the thing.

The debate seriously embarrassed CNBC.

Who cares. CNBC is a Liberal network and its about business. The object was to entertain and get ratings. Move along.

I'll respond to my segment here because what you said to me and what you said here indicates you feel it's okay to completely discredit a whole platform that represents a sizable portion of the US population. You've obviously proven in this thread that you condone bias/

Its not an issue of biasedness. Because you like your party for your own specific reasons, and I like mines. The issue is about the hatred, and cultural disdain that the Republicans seem to have with people of color and their idea on gender related matters. They have a bad stain on their garment, that they have been reluctant to get rid of and this is a sign of incompetence in the eyes of many. They have a lot of growing up to do my friend. We wont even talk last about the Speaker of The House here.

I think i'm a moderate, but you'd be shocked to know that I'm feeling the Bern.

Im a Moderate too. But I do know the difference between a Liberal and a Repub. I can truly say character wise I prefer a Liberal aaaaaaaaaany day of the week. =)
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 6:22:16 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/29/2015 3:23:41 PM, inferno wrote:
The media slams both sides of the aisle. Its just that the Republican Party is still seen as the party of old white men. And this has been haunting them since Bush was out of office. Doesn't look good for them right now.

The Democrats had four old white men and one old white ultra-establish woman. The Republicans have a black man, two Hispanics, a business woman, young candidates and old candidates, establishment insiders and upstart outsiders. You're out of your mind if you think Republicans have the conventional lineup.

I think Hillary is steaming towards her coronation. The promise of free stuff and total irresponsibility is probably impossible for Republicans to overcome. However, the purpose of the debates is to let Republicans choose who they want, not to provide media attacks on Republicans. You can think of it as setting up the Glorious Victory of the People's Revolution when the last believer in freedom is vanquished. So let the Republicans hear about the issues they care about, and pick their candidate.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 6:25:26 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/29/2015 6:22:16 PM, RoyLatham wrote:
At 10/29/2015 3:23:41 PM, inferno wrote:
The media slams both sides of the aisle. Its just that the Republican Party is still seen as the party of old white men. And this has been haunting them since Bush was out of office. Doesn't look good for them right now.

The Democrats had four old white men and one old white ultra-establish woman. The Republicans have a black man, two Hispanics, a business woman, young candidates and old candidates, establishment insiders and upstart outsiders. You're out of your mind if you think Republicans have the conventional lineup.

I think Hillary is steaming towards her coronation. The promise of free stuff and total irresponsibility is probably impossible for Republicans to overcome. However, the purpose of the debates is to let Republicans choose who they want, not to provide media attacks on Republicans. You can think of it as setting up the Glorious Victory of the People's Revolution when the last believer in freedom is vanquished. So let the Republicans hear about the issues they care about, and pick their candidate.

In a debate that was centered around economics - what question would you really want?
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 6:26:42 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
The problem with the RNC organizing the debates the directly is that they would then open themselves to criticism of favoritism. No matter who they put into the primetime debate, those in the happy hour debate would claim it was unfair. Still, it would be a lot better than letting liberals moderate all the debates,
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 6:35:06 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
...The issue is about the hatred, and cultural disdain that the Republicans seem to have with people of color and their idea on gender related matters. They have a bad stain on their garment, that they have been reluctant to get rid of and this is a sign of incompetence in the eyes of many. They have a lot of growing up to do my friend. We wont even talk last about the Speaker of The House here.

This is an amazing comment. A black candidate is currently leading the polls for the Republican nomination for president, edging Tump in the last poll, and the field of candidates is genuinely diverse. But liberals are absolutely blinded by ideology. The truth is that Liberals care about nothing except power. Lying is okay if it leads to power. Nothing is out of bounds if it leads to authoritarian rule by liberals. The only use of minorities is as tools of consolidating power.
inferno
Posts: 10,556
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 6:37:49 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/29/2015 6:35:06 PM, RoyLatham wrote:
...The issue is about the hatred, and cultural disdain that the Republicans seem to have with people of color and their idea on gender related matters. They have a bad stain on their garment, that they have been reluctant to get rid of and this is a sign of incompetence in the eyes of many. They have a lot of growing up to do my friend. We wont even talk last about the Speaker of The House here.

This is an amazing comment. A black candidate is currently leading the polls for the Republican nomination for president, edging Tump in the last poll, and the field of candidates is genuinely diverse. But liberals are absolutely blinded by ideology. The truth is that Liberals care about nothing except power. Lying is okay if it leads to power. Nothing is out of bounds if it leads to authoritarian rule by liberals. The only use of minorities is as tools of consolidating power.

So what. Just because you see a guy like Ben Carson on stage, that does not change the hearts of men. Hillary Clinton said this to Black Lives Matter protesters.
You cannot say racism doesn't exist anymore simply because we have a Black president here in the US. The underlying foundation of which this country was founded still exist today. The GOP is good at hiding their true intentions and their agenda to those who are willing to follow.
inferno
Posts: 10,556
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 6:41:48 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/29/2015 6:22:16 PM, RoyLatham wrote:
At 10/29/2015 3:23:41 PM, inferno wrote:
The media slams both sides of the aisle. Its just that the Republican Party is still seen as the party of old white men. And this has been haunting them since Bush was out of office. Doesn't look good for them right now.

The Democrats had four old white men and one old white ultra-establish woman. The Republicans have a black man, two Hispanics, a business woman, young candidates and old candidates, establishment insiders and upstart outsiders. You're out of your mind if you think Republicans have the conventional lineup.

I think Hillary is steaming towards her coronation. The promise of free stuff and total irresponsibility is probably impossible for Republicans to overcome. However, the purpose of the debates is to let Republicans choose who they want, not to provide media attacks on Republicans. You can think of it as setting up the Glorious Victory of the People's Revolution when the last believer in freedom is vanquished. So let the Republicans hear about the issues they care about, and pick their candidate.

Since when was people getting social security become irresponsibility. There is a need for some form of welfare because this is a security blanket set in place so people can put money back into a system that is fundamentally flawed and inadequate on a larger scale. In other words it is irresponsible for clowns like Bush to send jobs overseas, invest in meaningless wars, and into other countries for personal gain. Now if you would look at the other side of the picture you might learn a thing or two.
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,068
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 8:41:39 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/29/2015 6:37:49 PM, inferno wrote:
At 10/29/2015 6:35:06 PM, RoyLatham wrote:
...The issue is about the hatred, and cultural disdain that the Republicans seem to have with people of color and their idea on gender related matters. They have a bad stain on their garment, that they have been reluctant to get rid of and this is a sign of incompetence in the eyes of many. They have a lot of growing up to do my friend. We wont even talk last about the Speaker of The House here.

This is an amazing comment. A black candidate is currently leading the polls for the Republican nomination for president, edging Tump in the last poll, and the field of candidates is genuinely diverse. But liberals are absolutely blinded by ideology. The truth is that Liberals care about nothing except power. Lying is okay if it leads to power. Nothing is out of bounds if it leads to authoritarian rule by liberals. The only use of minorities is as tools of consolidating power.

So what. Just because you see a guy like Ben Carson on stage, that does not change the hearts of men. Hillary Clinton said this to Black Lives Matter protesters.
You cannot say racism doesn't exist anymore simply because we have a Black president here in the US. The underlying foundation of which this country was founded still exist today. The GOP is good at hiding their true intentions and their agenda to those who are willing to follow.

Ben Carson is in the lead because the GOP voters care more about a person's character than their race. This isn't a matter of the party officials selecting a black man to not look racist; this is the candidate who the majority of GOP voters are favoring.
If Ben Carson wins the nomination then any future claims of GOP racism against Blacks will (hopefully) come off as retarded. The Dems have played the racism card for the past few years/decades quite successfully.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
inferno
Posts: 10,556
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 8:45:44 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/29/2015 8:41:39 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 10/29/2015 6:37:49 PM, inferno wrote:
At 10/29/2015 6:35:06 PM, RoyLatham wrote:
...The issue is about the hatred, and cultural disdain that the Republicans seem to have with people of color and their idea on gender related matters. They have a bad stain on their garment, that they have been reluctant to get rid of and this is a sign of incompetence in the eyes of many. They have a lot of growing up to do my friend. We wont even talk last about the Speaker of The House here.

This is an amazing comment. A black candidate is currently leading the polls for the Republican nomination for president, edging Tump in the last poll, and the field of candidates is genuinely diverse. But liberals are absolutely blinded by ideology. The truth is that Liberals care about nothing except power. Lying is okay if it leads to power. Nothing is out of bounds if it leads to authoritarian rule by liberals. The only use of minorities is as tools of consolidating power.

So what. Just because you see a guy like Ben Carson on stage, that does not change the hearts of men. Hillary Clinton said this to Black Lives Matter protesters.
You cannot say racism doesn't exist anymore simply because we have a Black president here in the US. The underlying foundation of which this country was founded still exist today. The GOP is good at hiding their true intentions and their agenda to those who are willing to follow.

Ben Carson is in the lead because the GOP voters care more about a person's character than their race. This isn't a matter of the party officials selecting a black man to not look racist; this is the candidate who the majority of GOP voters are favoring.
If Ben Carson wins the nomination then any future claims of GOP racism against Blacks will (hopefully) come off as retarded. The Dems have played the racism card for the past few years/decades quite successfully.

ACTUALLY.....it is because the mainstream part of White America does not trust themselves, or the establishment. That's code word for WPS.
White Power Structure. And you were saying. =)
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 8:45:51 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Ben Carson is in the lead because the GOP voters care more about a person's character than their race. This isn't a matter of the party officials selecting a black man to not look racist; this is the candidate who the majority of GOP voters are favoring.
If Ben Carson wins the nomination then any future claims of GOP racism against Blacks will (hopefully) come off as retarded. The Dems have played the racism card for the past few years/decades quite successfully.

Thinking that it is the democrats that care only about optics is the implication, right? Then, being dismissive about "racism in the GOP" if they elect a black man? The two don't fit.
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,068
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 8:54:49 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/29/2015 8:45:51 PM, TBR wrote:
Ben Carson is in the lead because the GOP voters care more about a person's character than their race. This isn't a matter of the party officials selecting a black man to not look racist; this is the candidate who the majority of GOP voters are favoring.
If Ben Carson wins the nomination then any future claims of GOP racism against Blacks will (hopefully) come off as retarded. The Dems have played the racism card for the past few years/decades quite successfully.

Thinking that it is the democrats that care only about optics is the implication, right? Then, being dismissive about "racism in the GOP" if they elect a black man? The two don't fit.

The GOP voters are not favoring Ben Carson because he's black. But them favoring him helps prove they're not racist.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,068
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 8:55:35 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/29/2015 8:45:44 PM, inferno wrote:
At 10/29/2015 8:41:39 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 10/29/2015 6:37:49 PM, inferno wrote:
At 10/29/2015 6:35:06 PM, RoyLatham wrote:
...The issue is about the hatred, and cultural disdain that the Republicans seem to have with people of color and their idea on gender related matters. They have a bad stain on their garment, that they have been reluctant to get rid of and this is a sign of incompetence in the eyes of many. They have a lot of growing up to do my friend. We wont even talk last about the Speaker of The House here.

This is an amazing comment. A black candidate is currently leading the polls for the Republican nomination for president, edging Tump in the last poll, and the field of candidates is genuinely diverse. But liberals are absolutely blinded by ideology. The truth is that Liberals care about nothing except power. Lying is okay if it leads to power. Nothing is out of bounds if it leads to authoritarian rule by liberals. The only use of minorities is as tools of consolidating power.

So what. Just because you see a guy like Ben Carson on stage, that does not change the hearts of men. Hillary Clinton said this to Black Lives Matter protesters.
You cannot say racism doesn't exist anymore simply because we have a Black president here in the US. The underlying foundation of which this country was founded still exist today. The GOP is good at hiding their true intentions and their agenda to those who are willing to follow.

Ben Carson is in the lead because the GOP voters care more about a person's character than their race. This isn't a matter of the party officials selecting a black man to not look racist; this is the candidate who the majority of GOP voters are favoring.
If Ben Carson wins the nomination then any future claims of GOP racism against Blacks will (hopefully) come off as retarded. The Dems have played the racism card for the past few years/decades quite successfully.


ACTUALLY.....it is because the mainstream part of White America does not trust themselves, or the establishment. That's code word for WPS.
White Power Structure. And you were saying. =)

What are you even saying?
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 8:57:54 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Thinking that it is the democrats that care only about optics is the implication, right? Then, being dismissive about "racism in the GOP" if they elect a black man? The two don't fit.

The GOP voters are not favoring Ben Carson because he's black. But them favoring him helps prove they're not racist.

1) Are you implying that the Democrats like Obama because he is black?

2) Are you saying that - even though you are not choosing Carson for optics, it should prove once and for all that Republicans aren't raciest?

The GOP has a race problem because the GOP has a race problem. The part will not get better until it recognized its issues.
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,068
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 9:00:43 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/29/2015 8:57:54 PM, TBR wrote:
Thinking that it is the democrats that care only about optics is the implication, right? Then, being dismissive about "racism in the GOP" if they elect a black man? The two don't fit.

The GOP voters are not favoring Ben Carson because he's black. But them favoring him helps prove they're not racist.

1) Are you implying that the Democrats like Obama because he is black?

Yes and no. Regardless, the Dems aren't the ones accused of being a large bloc of White supremacists.

2) Are you saying that - even though you are not choosing Carson for optics, it should prove once and for all that Republicans aren't racist?

While GOP voters may, as all humans do, have a mild subconscious racial bias, it proves that they're not trying to discriminate against minorities, or at least not blacks.

The GOP has a race problem because the GOP has a race problem. The part will not get better until it recognized its issues.

The "race problem" is that the Black and Hispanic communities have been duped into believing a lie. It's not so much about what the GOP is offering (or not offering).
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
inferno
Posts: 10,556
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 9:01:44 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/29/2015 8:57:54 PM, TBR wrote:
Thinking that it is the democrats that care only about optics is the implication, right? Then, being dismissive about "racism in the GOP" if they elect a black man? The two don't fit.

The GOP voters are not favoring Ben Carson because he's black. But them favoring him helps prove they're not racist.

1) Are you implying that the Democrats like Obama because he is black?

2) Are you saying that - even though you are not choosing Carson for optics, it should prove once and for all that Republicans aren't raciest?

The GOP has a race problem because the GOP has a race problem. The part will not get better until it recognized its issues.

He doesn't understand the Black Face deception. Its a trick of the tail that the establishment has been using for hundreds of years. Lets put a face of color in the midst to manipulate those who have unrealistic expectations of racial harmony in a post segregated world. Racism is the elephant in the room. Its our culture. It will never end.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2015 9:03:30 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
The "race problem" is that the Black and Hispanic communities have been duped into believing a lie. It's not so much about what the GOP is offering (or not offering).

I will not attempt to speak for blacks for Hispanics, however, it is NOT largely the democrats out with signs saying nasty things about "foreigners go home", and regardless of how YOU feel, the GOP IS the home to raciest. That is not to say all republicans are raciest, but most raciest are republicans.

Fix your own house, and stop blaming others.