We've had l;iberals moderate a Republican debate. So when will conservatives moderate a Dem debate?

[Little-Acorn]

It's always a kick to see the resident liberals whining, "How can they defeat terrorists if they can't even answer hard questions" or something along those lines...

...while carefully avoiding any chance of their candidates entering a debate where Republicans or conservatives ask the questions.

Do these people even realize how ridiculous they look?

 

[Arianrhod]

Nowhere in post #1 (OP) is the word conservative used.

Somewhere along the way some plagiarist liberal modified part of the OP and you were foolish enough to quote that.

Nonsense. A liberal would have corrected the word "l;iberal." You're making a very serious allegation there, and of course you can't prove it.

It's always a kick to see the resident liberals whining, "How can they defeat terrorists if they can't even answer hard questions" or something along those lines...

...while carefully avoiding any chance of their candidates entering a debate where Republicans or conservatives ask the questions.

Do these people even realize how ridiculous they look?

What's ridiculous is someone who asks for feedback and then ignores it to create their own little echo chamber.

Let's say you got to pick the Dream Team of "safe" conservative moderators. Who would they be and what questions would they ask?

Please ignore this post as you have all the others.

 

[FJO]

Nowhere in post #1 (OP) is the word conservative used.

Somewhere along the way some plagiarist liberal modified part of the OP and you were foolish enough to quote that.

Nonsense. A liberal would have corrected the word "l;iberal." You're making a very serious allegation there, and of course you can't prove it.

It's always a kick to see the resident liberals whining, "How can they defeat terrorists if they can't even answer hard questions" or something along those lines...

...while carefully avoiding any chance of their candidates entering a debate where Republicans or conservatives ask the questions.

Do these people even realize how ridiculous they look?

What's ridiculous is someone who asks for feedback and then ignores it to create their own little echo chamber.

Let's say you got to pick the Dream Team of "safe" conservative moderators. Who would they be and what questions would they ask?

Please ignore this post as you have all the others.

Did you bother to go back to post #1 and read it again?
Perhaps I should have said "misquoted" instead of "modified".

Read the body of post #1 and don't get hung up on the title.

 

[Arianrhod]

Meanwhile, your boy Trump just announced he's imitating something that's been part of the Sanders platform from the get-go.

First Hillary, now the Trumpster.

 

[amrchaos]

We've had a debate between Republicans with outright leftist political hacks asking the questions.

When will we have a debate between Hillary, Bernie, and the usual suspects held with Pat Buchanan, Sean Hannity, Jeanine Pirro, and Charles Krauthammer asking the questions and the followups?

Never ever EVER ever.
And I do mean NEVER.

(Besides, what network would be dumb enough to try this? If you say you are going to hold a debate, the last thing you would do is introduce partisan egotist as moderators! No way to say these 'moderator' are impartial.

Nor is there any guarantee that:
1. The questions will be substantial
2. If they will get passed the first question
3. The candidates will be allowed to answer any question.

The network will be accused of partisanship!)

 

[Nyvin]

This is basically what happened:

The moderators brought up the stupid economic ideas of the candidates and flatly said "this is really dumb, can you explain it?"

and obviously the candidates can't explain their stupid economic plans. They look dumb and then later they complain they're being mistreated. Cruz complained after being asked a question about the death penalty of all things.

The right wing conservaworld media laps this up and starts attacking "liberal" CNBC, and now everyone on this forum and elsewhere is trying to pan this idea that the moderators on CNBC were liberal hacks.

 

[Nyvin]

Nowhere in post #1 (OP) is the word conservative used.

Somewhere along the way some plagiarist liberal modified part of the OP and you were foolish enough to quote that.

Nonsense. A liberal would have corrected the word "l;iberal." You're making a very serious allegation there, and of course you can't prove it.

It's always a kick to see the resident liberals whining, "How can they defeat terrorists if they can't even answer hard questions" or something along those lines...

...while carefully avoiding any chance of their candidates entering a debate where Republicans or conservatives ask the questions.

Do these people even realize how ridiculous they look?

What's ridiculous is someone who asks for feedback and then ignores it to create their own little echo chamber.

Let's say you got to pick the Dream Team of "safe" conservative moderators. Who would they be and what questions would they ask?

Please ignore this post as you have all the others.

Did you bother to go back to post #1 and read it again?
Perhaps I should have said "misquoted" instead of "modified".

Read the body of post #1 and don't get hung up on the title.

Why do you insist on ignoring the (rather long...) title? It's actually quite a significant part of the OP.

 

[Arianrhod]

We've had a debate between Republicans with outright leftist political hacks asking the questions.

When will we have a debate between Hillary, Bernie, and the usual suspects held with Pat Buchanan, Sean Hannity, Jeanine Pirro, and Charles Krauthammer asking the questions and the followups?

Never ever EVER ever.
And I do mean NEVER.

(Besides, what network would be dumb enough to try this? If you say you are going to hold a debate, the last thing you would do is introduce partisan egotist as moderators! No way to say these 'moderator' are impartial.

Nor is there any guarantee that:
1. The questions will be substantial
2. If they will get passed the first question
3. The candidates will be allowed to answer any question.

The network will be accused of partisanship!)

They can't even say what questions their pet moderators should ask.

Given such descriptors as "carnage," they don't seem to know the difference between a Presidential debate and the WWE.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

This is basically what happened:

The moderators brought up the stupid economic ideas of the candidates and flatly said "this is really dumb, can you explain it?"

and obviously the candidates can't explain their stupid economic plans. They look dumb and then later they complain they're being mistreated. Cruz complained after being asked a question about the death penalty of all things.

The right wing conservaworld media laps this up and starts attacking "liberal" CNBC, and now everyone on this forum and elsewhere is trying to pan this idea that the moderators on CNBC were liberal hacks.

You mean they weren't?

 

[FJO]

Nowhere in post #1 (OP) is the word conservative used.

Somewhere along the way some plagiarist liberal modified part of the OP and you were foolish enough to quote that.

Nonsense. A liberal would have corrected the word "l;iberal." You're making a very serious allegation there, and of course you can't prove it.

It's always a kick to see the resident liberals whining, "How can they defeat terrorists if they can't even answer hard questions" or something along those lines...

...while carefully avoiding any chance of their candidates entering a debate where Republicans or conservatives ask the questions.

Do these people even realize how ridiculous they look?

What's ridiculous is someone who asks for feedback and then ignores it to create their own little echo chamber.

Let's say you got to pick the Dream Team of "safe" conservative moderators. Who would they be and what questions would they ask?

Please ignore this post as you have all the others.

Did you bother to go back to post #1 and read it again?
Perhaps I should have said "misquoted" instead of "modified".

Read the body of post #1 and don't get hung up on the title.

Why do you insist on ignoring the (rather long...) title? It's actually quite a significant part of the OP.

I am NOT ignoring it.

I DO NOT respond to titles. I respond to actual posts. In this particular case the actual post did not have the word "conservatives" in it. The title is NOT the significant portion of the thread, the actual post is.

 

[Arianrhod]

This is basically what happened:

The moderators brought up the stupid economic ideas of the candidates and flatly said "this is really dumb, can you explain it?"

and obviously the candidates can't explain their stupid economic plans. They look dumb and then later they complain they're being mistreated. Cruz complained after being asked a question about the death penalty of all things.

The right wing conservaworld media laps this up and starts attacking "liberal" CNBC, and now everyone on this forum and elsewhere is trying to pan this idea that the moderators on CNBC were liberal hacks.

You mean they weren't?

Suppose you got to handpick the moderators for the next debate. What questions would you imagine they'd ask?

 

[leftwinger]

All of those people are RINO's.

I may have to change my Avatar. I see RINO I start to think like RINO. I am starting to say things but then do other?

 

[leftwinger]

How are they going to defeat terrorists if they can't defeat hard questions?

I agree. Back to Milk Toast Romney and McCain they just "took it". Mushy-headed RINO go-along get-along.

Why don't the Candidate(s) simply say "that is a ridiculous gotcha question" and proceed to talk about whatever important topic? Why play along? What "they" gonna do? Cut the Mic? Police Usher you offstage?

Get tough, $20T headed for another financial collapse. We had 8 years RINO and 8 years commie. No mas!

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

This is basically what happened:

The moderators brought up the stupid economic ideas of the candidates and flatly said "this is really dumb, can you explain it?"

and obviously the candidates can't explain their stupid economic plans. They look dumb and then later they complain they're being mistreated. Cruz complained after being asked a question about the death penalty of all things.

The right wing conservaworld media laps this up and starts attacking "liberal" CNBC, and now everyone on this forum and elsewhere is trying to pan this idea that the moderators on CNBC were liberal hacks.

You mean they weren't?

Suppose you got to handpick the moderators for the next debate. What questions would you imagine they'd ask?

Depends on who the moderators were. But I bet if it were on Fox, it would be much fairer than what took place on CNBC. After all, Fox went out of their way to ask similar questions in the first Republican debate to demonstrate they are not bias. To no surprise, the Republican candidates called them out too.

And if you watched the last debate and the Democrat debate, ask yourself, which debate did you learn more about the candidates issues? In the Democrat debate, they seemed to cover all bases: how each one would expand the welfare state, how each hated guns, how each wanted to get even with rich people, how each one would create more government dependents; all issues Democrat voters were interested in.

The Republican debate? How Kasich felt about Trump. How Trump felt about Kasich. How Kasich felt about Carson. How Bush felt about Rubio. I mean come on now. Be serious.

 

[bripat9643]

We've had a debate between Republicans with outright leftist political hacks asking the questions.

When will we have a debate between Hillary, Bernie, and the usual suspects held with Pat Buchanan, Sean Hannity, Jeanine Pirro, and Charles Krauthammer asking the questions and the followups?

Looks like no liberals want to address the question so far.

Not so. You're just not getting the answers you want. Life doesn't work that way.

We understand leftwing turds with never respond to a straight question with a straight answer. We just want to watch you squirm as you try to weasel out of it.

 

[Arianrhod]

This is basically what happened:

The moderators brought up the stupid economic ideas of the candidates and flatly said "this is really dumb, can you explain it?"

and obviously the candidates can't explain their stupid economic plans. They look dumb and then later they complain they're being mistreated. Cruz complained after being asked a question about the death penalty of all things.

The right wing conservaworld media laps this up and starts attacking "liberal" CNBC, and now everyone on this forum and elsewhere is trying to pan this idea that the moderators on CNBC were liberal hacks.

You mean they weren't?

Suppose you got to handpick the moderators for the next debate. What questions would you imagine they'd ask?

Depends on who the moderators were. But I bet if it were on Fox, it would be much fairer than what took place on CNBC. After all, Fox went out of their way to ask similar questions in the first Republican debate to demonstrate they are not bias. To no surprise, the Republican candidates called them out too.

And if you watched the last debate and the Democrat debate, ask yourself, which debate did you learn more about the candidates issues? In the Democrat debate, they seemed to cover all bases: how each one would expand the welfare state, how each hated guns, how each wanted to get even with rich people, how each one would create more government dependents; all issues Democrat voters were interested in.

The Republican debate? How Kasich felt about Trump. How Trump felt about Kasich. How Kasich felt about Carson. How Bush felt about Rubio. I mean come on now. Be serious.

You're certainly correct about the Republican debates and, while I admire your spin on the Democratic debate, I don't agree with it. Still, you're the first poster in this thread to offer a rational, well-thought-out reply - thank you!

 

[Arianrhod]

We've had a debate between Republicans with outright leftist political hacks asking the questions.

When will we have a debate between Hillary, Bernie, and the usual suspects held with Pat Buchanan, Sean Hannity, Jeanine Pirro, and Charles Krauthammer asking the questions and the followups?

Looks like no liberals want to address the question so far.

Not so. You're just not getting the answers you want. Life doesn't work that way.

We understand leftwing turds with never respond to a straight question with a straight answer. We just want to watch you squirm as you try to weasel out of it.

Since you have yet to offer anything but insults, you apparently expect insults in return. Would that excite you?

 

[ScienceRocks]

I think telling the voters that we will abolish ssi, medicare, educational department and slash funding for everything is likely to turn a lot of people off. I wouldn't be honest as republican ideas are shit.

 

[bripat9643]

We've had a debate between Republicans with outright leftist political hacks asking the questions.

When will we have a debate between Hillary, Bernie, and the usual suspects held with Pat Buchanan, Sean Hannity, Jeanine Pirro, and Charles Krauthammer asking the questions and the followups?

Looks like no liberals want to address the question so far.

Typical.

What's typical is this sort of childishness from the right, whining about 'liberals' and 'the media,' conservatives trying to place the blame anywhere but where it truly belongs.

Christians "whined" about being fed to they lions.

Leftwing turds like you seem to think you're entitled to take cheap shots at conservatives on their dime.

 

[bripat9643]

I think telling the voters that we will abolish ssi, medicare, educational department and slash funding for everything is likely to turn a lot of people off. I wouldn't be honest as republican ideas are shit.

When were those questions brought up during the debate?