*****GOP Presidential Debate 9PM EST***** (Rush Limbaugh, unemployed, Vice President, Huckabee)

[Finn_Jarber]

Originally Posted by elan

"Fox News Moderators Bring a Sharpened Edge to the Republican Debate Stage"

With questions like, "What does God tell you to do?", I don't think so. And don't even get me started on Kelly, she acted like a schoolgirl.

Actually the question about God was a good one, because many Republican voters want to know which candidates are men of faith. Some were not, like Kasich, and that could cost them the Christian vote.

[Finn_Jarber]

Originally Posted by dsjj251

The questions were along the lines of "why arent you conservative enough".

I dont see that as a good line of questioning.

As for the answers, they were just as bad.

They asked Walker why should the people of this country elect him when he couldnt keep the promises he made to Wisconsin, and his answer was " The people of Wisconsin elected me 3 times".

You really think those types of answers are good ?????


I think I missed most of the questioned directed to Huckabee, so I cant speak on his answers.

I said many answers were good, but that does not mean all of them were good. There are always bad answers, and the bad ones will weed out the weaker candidates. Isn't that the purpose of the race? Many people like Walker, but he is very unlikely to win, because he, like Romney, lacks personality. There are better candidates in this race. Bush seems to lack personality and confidence too.

[armory]

Originally Posted by xsthomas

Trump saying he is not a politician, and doesnt have to be politically correct, does NOT give you a free ticket to say anything you want. You just cant have a person like that as a president.

Seeing as we have a sitting POTUS who says anything he wants we apparently can have person like that.

[dsjj251]

Originally Posted by Finn_Jarber

Actually the question about God was a good one, because many Republican voters want to know which candidates are men of faith. Some were not, like Kasich, and that could cost them the Christian vote.

But thats a good question from an ideological perspective, not a governing one, which was my point.

By that logic, the OP will be fine with a Democratic Debate question about Climate Change or gay marrige, but we full well the OP would not be fine with those questions and call them "tough","sharp", or "hard".

[dsjj251]

Originally Posted by Finn_Jarber

I said many answers were good, but that does not mean all of them were good. There are always bad answers, and the bad ones will weed out the weaker candidates. Isn't that the purpose of the race? Many people like Walker, but he is very unlikely to win, because he, like Romney, lacks personality. There are better candidates in this race.

I dont even dislike Walker, he was just the first to come to mind because I just thought that answer was God awful.

But im curious, give me an example of a Good Q and A from this debate.

I though Christie out of all of them gave the most detailed answers of anyone on the State, Kasich is the most ideologically similar to myself, but he never gave details, only generalizations and the questions to him were softballs in my opinion.

[Finn_Jarber]

Originally Posted by dsjj251

But thats a good question from an ideological perspective, not a governing one, which was my point.

By that logic, the OP will be fine with a Democratic Debate question about Climate Change or gay marrige, but we full well the OP would not be fine with those questions and call them "tough","sharp", or "hard".

A "tough" question for Hillary would be about Benghazi, but it won't be tough for her to answer because she is expecting it and is prepared. She is prepared for all questions relating to biggest criticism against her. That much is obvious, which is why most of the FOX questions might have sounded 'tough' but were not that tough for the candidates, because they are aware of their mistakes and have prepared to explain them away. The really hard questions are the ones which takes you by surprise.

[dsjj251]

Originally Posted by Finn_Jarber

A "tough" question for Hillary would be about Benghazi, but it won't be tough for her to answer because she is expecting it and is prepared. She is prepared for all questions relating to biggest criticism against her. That much is obvious, which is why most of the FOX questions might have sounded 'tough' but were not that tough for the candidates, because they are aware of their mistakes and have prepared to explain them away. The really hard questions are the ones which takes you by surprise.

Thats nice and all, but that doesnt speak to the context of my post.

You thought that was a good question because it spoke to the base. The OP says it was a tough question in general, but the OP isnt going to call a Democratic base question "tough". Or do you believe he would ?

I would really like this answer from the OP, but if not, ill just take your answer , and bookmark it for October(first Dem debate) and see how the world reacts.

[Finn_Jarber]

Originally Posted by dsjj251

I dont even dislike Walker, he was just the first to come to mind because I just thought that answer was God awful.

But im curious, give me an example of a Good Q and A from this debate.

I though Christie out of all of them gave the most detailed answers of anyone on the State, Kasich is the most ideologically similar to myself, but he never gave details, only generalizations and the questions to him were softballs in my opinion.

Huckabee was asked about the trans genders in the military, which was a question to test his views on social issues, hence a good question. He answered by saying the military is not a social experiment. He continued by explaining why we have a military (to keep us safe), and he didn't see how appeasing transgenders makes US any safer. In the process he made it clear he is pro-military, a social conservative and a man with well defined principles which is not willing to trade away. Good question, and a good answer. I like Huckabee. I also like his fair tax proposal. He explained even pimps and prostitutes would pay tax under that system.

[Finn_Jarber]

Originally Posted by dsjj251

You thought that was a good question because it spoke to the base.

It was a necessary question, not a tough one. Millions of people wanted to hear the answers. It was not a right, or wrong question, it was a simple question about them as persons.

The OP says it was a tough question in general, but the OP isnt going to call a Democratic base question "tough". Or do you believe he would ?

I can't speak for the OP, but if he is partisan, it won't matter how tough the questions to Dems are, they will be called 'softball'. Its the way a partisan mind rolls.

I would also like to know what is considered a 'tough' question for Hillary.

[dsjj251]

Originally Posted by Finn_Jarber

Huckabee was asked about the trans genders in the military, which was a question to test his views on social issues, hence a good question. His answered by saying the military is not a social experiment. He continued by explaining why we have a military (to keep us safe), and he didn't see how the transgender issue makes US any safer. In the process he made it clear he is pro-military, a social conservative and a man with well defined principles which is not willing to trade away. Good question, and a good answer.

I remember that one, And here is why I dont see that as a good answer( but decent question), he didnt actually answer the question.

What does the fact that the military isnt a social experiment have to do with whether or not a transgendered person should be able to serve. And how does someone who is transgendered serving in the military make it social experiment ?????

The argument has always been whether or not someone can perform when needed and he never said they didnt have the ability. He skirted around the actual question and gave a political answer.


That being said, you at least gave an example, which is much more than most people do in this forum when discussion things like this.