Republicans To Demand Debate Questions In Advance

[Redfish]

last time i checked, i'm an independent moderately conservative liberal with good common sense.

but enough about me, dufus.

"independent moderately conservative liberal with good common sense."


^^^^oxymoron.

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

How about we just get debate questions that are on issues instead of questions like "Mr Trump are you a comic book villain?"

How about Republican/rightwingers quit making shit up? Your question wasn't asked by CNBC and exists only in the mind of dupid Republicans - care to explain how you got it WRONG?
.

First question by a moderator.

"Let's be honest," he added. "Is this a comic-book version of a presidential campaign?

Go fuck yourself bitch. You need to get up to speed idiot.

Donald Trump confronted by John Harwood - Business Insider

You misquote Harwood's question by truncation of the basis of the question then fling your contrived ad hominem as if you've counted coup! That conduct is being as genuine and honest as Trump himself is on the stump.

Here is the entire question in its full context with only your bit underlined to display your dishonest shift of the context:

HARWOOD: "Mr. Trump, you’ve done very well in this campaign so far by promising to build a wall and make another country pay for it."

TRUMP: "Right"

HARWOOD: "Send 11 million people out of the country. Cut taxes $10 trillion without increasing the deficit."

TRUMP: "Right"

HARWOOD: "And make Americans better off because your greatness would replace the stupidity and incompetence of others."

TRUMP: "That’s right."

HARWOOD: "Let’s be honest."

(LAUGHTER)

HARWOOD: "Is this a comic book version of a presidential campaign?"

Debate Transcript: Republican Debate: Read the Transcript of the CNBC Debate

Do you believe Trump would build a WALL along the entire US/Mexico border and force Mexico to pay for it?
I say that is fantasy Bullshit!

Do you believe 11 million people can be rounded up, given due process and shipped back to their countries of origin easily?
I say that is loony tunes fantasy Bullshit!

Do you believe that cutting taxes by $10 trillion that the deficits and the Total Debt will not increase?
I say that is deep, deep fantasy Bullshit!

Do you believe Trump's self-proclaimed superiority, intellect and ability would replace the incompetent stupidity of other Americans and make "America great again"?
I say that is inflated ego fantasy Bullshit!

I see those as nothing more than extreme hubris and deep, deep, loony tunes, inflated ego fantasy Bullshit!

Or perhaps one could phrase it for a TV audience as, "... a comic book version of a presidential campaign!"

 

[hortysir]

With all the whining and crying from the Republican Presidential candidates about getting tough questions from the media, how long will it be before they are demanding the debate questions are given to them in advance so that they can prepare and manipulate their answers? Some are already suggesting they should have hand picked moderators. That would be the same thing. Soft ball questions, advance knowledge of the questions and answers prepared by their consultants and PR staffs.

"Republicans To Demand Debate Questions In Advance"

"how long will it be before they are demanding the debate questions are given to them in advance"

Which is it?

Just curious.

Neither

OP is a lie will a bullshit chaser

 

[Avatar4321]

The questions aren't the problem, the problem is the inability of Republican candidates for the highest office in the land being smart enough to turn a question, any question, into an answer about policy.I find it very-very funny that Republican candidates and their supporters are pissin' and moanin' about the questions that are/were/will be asked during the debate(s), when in fact-----IN FACT the candidates were simply not smart enough, simply not deft enough, simply not quick enough on their feet to turn questions into the policy points they wanted to make during the debate(s). Ben, Donald and the seven dwarfs should've been able to turn every question into an answer about policy, the way the Democrats did - why couldn't the Republicans?

exactly.



If there was introspection in the air during the overnight flight, the network isn't saying. The only statement CNBC released was one sentence right after the debate, around the same time the RNC joined candidates in condemning the debate questioning and said CNBC should be "ashamed."


"People who want to be President of the United States should be able to answer tough questions," CNBC spokesman Brian Steel said in an email.


'Shell-shocked' CNBC staffers had long flight home

Maybe they should ask tough questions then instead of nonsensical bs.

 

[nuhuh]

The questions aren't the problem, the problem is the inability of Republican candidates for the highest office in the land being smart enough to turn a question, any question, into an answer about policy.I find it very-very funny that Republican candidates and their supporters are pissin' and moanin' about the questions that are/were/will be asked during the debate(s), when in fact-----IN FACT the candidates were simply not smart enough, simply not deft enough, simply not quick enough on their feet to turn questions into the policy points they wanted to make during the debate(s). Ben, Donald and the seven dwarfs should've been able to turn every question into an answer about policy, the way the Democrats did - why couldn't the Republicans?

exactly.



If there was introspection in the air during the overnight flight, the network isn't saying. The only statement CNBC released was one sentence right after the debate, around the same time the RNC joined candidates in condemning the debate questioning and said CNBC should be "ashamed."


"People who want to be President of the United States should be able to answer tough questions," CNBC spokesman Brian Steel said in an email.


'Shell-shocked' CNBC staffers had long flight home

Maybe they should ask tough questions then instead of nonsensical bs.

They did ask tough questions. When they asked Carson about Mannatech, he responded this is propaganda, When they asked Rubio about his finances and using party money he responded I am not going to respond to discredited attacks from Democrats and political opponents. When Cruz was asked about his fiery rhetoric he began a anti-media rant.

These people don't want to answer tough questions so they took their ball and went home. Now they want to rewrite the rules but any attempt to color responses will be see through by the people.

 

[hortysir]

The questions aren't the problem, the problem is the inability of Republican candidates for the highest office in the land being smart enough to turn a question, any question, into an answer about policy.I find it very-very funny that Republican candidates and their supporters are pissin' and moanin' about the questions that are/were/will be asked during the debate(s), when in fact-----IN FACT the candidates were simply not smart enough, simply not deft enough, simply not quick enough on their feet to turn questions into the policy points they wanted to make during the debate(s). Ben, Donald and the seven dwarfs should've been able to turn every question into an answer about policy, the way the Democrats did - why couldn't the Republicans?

exactly.



If there was introspection in the air during the overnight flight, the network isn't saying. The only statement CNBC released was one sentence right after the debate, around the same time the RNC joined candidates in condemning the debate questioning and said CNBC should be "ashamed."


"People who want to be President of the United States should be able to answer tough questions," CNBC spokesman Brian Steel said in an email.


'Shell-shocked' CNBC staffers had long flight home

Maybe they should ask tough questions then instead of nonsensical bs.

They did ask tough questions. When they asked Carson about Mannatech, he responded this is propaganda, When they asked Rubio about his finances and using party money he responded I am not going to respond to discredited attacks from Democrats and political opponents. When Cruz was asked about his fiery rhetoric he began a anti-media rant.

These people don't want to answer tough questions so they took their ball and went home. Now they want to rewrite the rules but any attempt to color responses will be see through by the people.

I didn't get to catch the debate, and I don't know about the other two's instances, but I know Rubio's financial hiccup has been long past and settled.

From what clips I've seen the "moderators" were hurling 'gotcha' questions and trying to pit the participants against each other.
The purpose of a candidate debate is to learn of each member's policy stances and plans for fixing things.
Not if Marco thinks Trump's wall idea is dumb, but what are his proposals.

I did watch most of the Democratic debate and that's exactly what those candidates were allowed to do.

 

[Star]

The questions aren't the problem, the problem is the inability of Republican candidates for the highest office in the land being smart enough to turn a question, any question, into an answer about policy.I find it very-very funny that Republican candidates and their supporters are pissin' and moanin' about the questions that are/were/will be asked during the debate(s), when in fact-----IN FACT the candidates were simply not smart enough, simply not deft enough, simply not quick enough on their feet to turn questions into the policy points they wanted to make during the debate(s). Ben, Donald and the seven dwarfs should've been able to turn every question into an answer about policy, the way the Democrats did - why couldn't the Republicans?

exactly.



If there was introspection in the air during the overnight flight, the network isn't saying. The only statement CNBC released was one sentence right after the debate, around the same time the RNC joined candidates in condemning the debate questioning and said CNBC should be "ashamed."


"People who want to be President of the United States should be able to answer tough questions," CNBC spokesman Brian Steel said in an email.


'Shell-shocked' CNBC staffers had long flight home

Maybe they should ask tough questions then instead of nonsensical bs.

They did ask tough questions. When they asked Carson about Mannatech, he responded this is propaganda, When they asked Rubio about his finances and using party money he responded I am not going to respond to discredited attacks from Democrats and political opponents. When Cruz was asked about his fiery rhetoric he began a anti-media rant.

These people don't want to answer tough questions so they took their ball and went home. Now they want to rewrite the rules but any attempt to color responses will be see through by the people.

...and Republican/rightwingers are whinin' and cryin' about what they already screwed up, they're whinin' and cryin' to get the moderators to treat them with kid gloves in next debate - just like a batter doesn't argue balls and strikes to get the ump to change a call, the batter argues to catch a break on the next call.

Begs the question: should the candidates that will be handed the responsibility of taking the 3:00 AM phone call on the economy... terrorist attacks... sending GI's into harms way... etc, be asked softball questions by their pals, allies, and cronies? or-----or should they be smart enough, clever enough, have enough mental dexterity to handle (ehem!) uncomfortable questions?
.

 

[longknife]

hillary is simply the superior candidate, by far... the GOP keeps proving it every day.

 

[Slyhunter]

FBN will host an awesome debate.
The answer is use only moderators who will vote in the primary. Don't use moderators who want the other side to win.

 

[hazlnut]

Will they fact check themselves?

 

[Camp]

Some of the candidates are demanding only conservative moderators be allowed. A dance around the supposition that they will have plenty of advance notice about the questions that will be asked. They are asking for well-known conservative talking heads who discuss questions all day every day on their shows and or commentaries, leaving little doubt about the questions that will be asked.

 

[Star]

Some of the candidates are demanding only conservative moderators be allowed. A dance around the supposition that they will have plenty of advance notice about the questions that will be asked. They are asking for well-known conservative talking heads who discuss questions all day every day on their shows and or commentaries, leaving little doubt about the questions that will be asked.

Of course-----of course Republican candidates for president of the United States want conservative moderators - Republican candidates for POTUS can't handle the adversity---pewsh!---the adversity of being asked questions that they don't have fact checkable/honest answers for that will appeal to the extremist rightwing base and-----and appeal to the center-left majority of American voters.

Moderators scare Republican candidates for POTUS more than sending other people's children to foreign lands to fight unnecessary wars or letting homeless people starve.
.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

The limp, lame, plodding silly liberals are actually pretending that there was the slightest hint of legitimacy in the CNBC moderators' questioning?

Oh puuuhleaze!

 

[Camp]

Did Obama demand questions in advance when he did interviews on FOX with Bret Baier, Bill O'Rielly or Chris Wallace? Did he whine about having to be interviewed by conservative commentators? How many times has he accepted the challenge of being interviewed by FOX?

 

[IlarMeilyr]

Did Obama demand questions in advance when he did interviews on FOX with Bret Baier, Bill O'Rielly or Chris Wallace? Did he whine about having to be interviewed by conservative commentators? How many times has he accepted the challenge of being interviewed by FOX?

Wait. So you are ANOTHER goober who now assumes that there is any merit to the claim that the GOP has made any demands (or even requests) for the questions-in-advance?

This is funny.

 

[reconmark]

Did Obama demand questions in advance when he did interviews on FOX with Bret Baier, Bill O'Rielly or Chris Wallace? Did he whine about having to be interviewed by conservative commentators? How many times has he accepted the challenge of being interviewed by FOX?

Wait. So you are ANOTHER goober who now assumes that there is any merit to the claim that the GOP has made any demands (or even requests) for the questions-in-advance?

This is funny.

Next time do not be so fucking stupid!!!!

• • Will there be questions from the audience or social media? How many? How will they be presented to the candidates? Will you acknowledge that you, as the sponsor, take responsibilities for all questions asked, even if not asked by your personnel?
  • Will there be a gong/buzzer/bell when time is up? How will the moderator enforce the time limits?
  • Will you commit that you will not:
    • Ask the candidate to raise their hands to answer a question
    • As yes/no questions without time to provide a substantive answer
    • Allow candidate-to-candidate questioning
    • Allow props or pledges by the candidates
    • Have reaction shots of members of the audience or moderators during debates
    • Show an empty podium after a break (describe how far away the bathrooms are)
    • Use behind shots of the candidates showing their notes
    • Leave microphones on during the breaks
    • Allow members of the audience to wear political messages (shirts, buttons, signs, etc.). Who enforces?
  • What instructions will you provide the audience about cheering during the debate?
  • What are your plans for the lead-in to the debate (Pre-shot video? Announcer to moderator? Director to Moderator?) and how long is it?
  • Can you pledge that the temperature in the hall be kept below 67 degrees?

 

[IlarMeilyr]

I have a simpler alternative:

How about if we insist on using "journalists" to play the role of "moderators," maybe the "moderators" should at least pretend to be "objective." Does that not sound like a solution?

 

[Camp]

I have a simpler alternative:

How about if we insist on using "journalists" to play the role of "moderators," maybe the "moderators" should at least pretend to be "objective." Does that not sound like a solution?

To late. Country told the debate rebellion to STFU.

 

[regent]

Is it even a debate format, seems more like a series of spot commercials.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

I have a simpler alternative:

How about if we insist on using "journalists" to play the role of "moderators," maybe the "moderators" should at least pretend to be "objective." Does that not sound like a solution?

To late. Country told the debate rebellion the STFU.

Although you appear to have no way with words, I think I get the gist of what you were hoping to communicate.

And you are wrong.

Of course.

The 'debate rebellion' is just getting started. Only you mindless liberal sheep are whining "stfu."

NOBODY -- except a dyed in the wool liberal sheep -- believes that the CNBC hack moderators did their 'job" properly, fairly or well.

The GOP contenders (especially Cruz) who spoke most directly TO the moderators at that debate to call them out on their clear bias got terrific responses. In fact, the Cruz call-out to Carl and John in particular even got the people at large to discuss the undeniable bias of that hack moderation. It is NOT being swept under a rug this time and despite your efforts to marginalize the legitimate protest against such faux moderation, the "revolt" is already working.

I know this upsets you.

I'm good with that outcome, too.