Campaign 2016 - I'm Biden my time till I doctor the hearing.

[dxmnkd316]

Re: Campaign 2016 - I'm Biden my time till I doctor the hearing.

I'm still waiting for a halfway decent answer as to how CNBC screwed up.

[Handyman]

Re: Campaign 2016 - I'm Biden my time till I doctor the hearing.

I'm still waiting for a halfway decent answer as to how CNBC screwed up.

They didnt talk about Saint Reagan enough and only ask about Hillary's emails?

It isnt like CNBC is the liberal arm of NBC/Universal...the lame canard that they didnt play fair or ask the right questions because it was the GOP is fraudulent.

[dxmnkd316]

Re: Campaign 2016 - I'm Biden my time till I doctor the hearing.

Exactly. Like I said, if you can't handle some debate that irritates you or you can't handle the questions, then you are exactly right. They are frauds. It's a perfect word.

[Rover]

Re: Campaign 2016 - I'm Biden my time till I doctor the hearing.

They didnt talk about Saint Reagan enough and only ask about Hillary's emails?

It isnt like CNBC is the liberal arm of NBC/Universal...the lame canard that they didnt play fair or ask the right questions because it was the GOP is fraudulent.

Yeah, if you can't appeal to a network crowd that employs Rich Santelli and Larry Kudlow, who ARE you going to appeal to? CNBC is hard right Reaganite conservatism. Maybe that's out of style amongst the Cruz-Carson-Rubio crowd but they're about as liberal as Margaret Thatcher was.

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 - I'm Biden my time till I doctor the hearing.

Maybe this brouhaha will result in better debate questions in general. Substantive questions such as, "the CBO has estimated your tax plan will result in record deficits. What are the major aims of your tax plan and how would you achieve them without accumulating greater debt?" That is a different question than "Senator Bedfellow has called your wife "the Whore of Babylon." How do you respond to him?

Questions of bias aside, I think there is no question that the quality of questions and their use in helping Americans pick their chief executive leaves much to be desired.

[Rover]

Re: Campaign 2016 - I'm Biden my time till I doctor the hearing.

Taking a risk not wanting to field tough questions in the primary debates because what do they think will happen in the general election? As Mittens found out, sometimes the moderators actually do their job and correct you when you start lying on stage. Don't know if Zombie Jim Lehrer is still around to lob up boring and pointless questions, but if not the primaries are the time to test your mettle.

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 - I'm Biden my time till I doctor the hearing.

sometimes the moderators actually do their job and correct you when you start lying on stage

I don't agree with this. The opponent must call the candidate on his lies. The moderator's job is to stand in for the American people. It is not his job to grade the candidate's response. The adversarial aspect of a debate is encompassed by the rivalry between the candidates.

[5mn_Major]

Re: Campaign 2016 - I'm Biden my time till I doctor the hearing.

So this was 'great journalism' because it was Fox:

You've called women you don't like "fat pigs, dogs, slobs, and disgusting animals." You once told a contestant on Celebrity Apprentice it would be a pretty picture to see her on her knees. Does that sound to you like the temperament of a man we should elect as president, and how will you answer the charge from Hillary Clinton, who was likely to be the Democratic nominee, that you are part of the war on women?

And CNBC's journalism is too tough? It was the letters - NBC - that were too tough. Any candidate that can't be subjected to 'gotcha' journalism should not be president. The GOP actions are just a symptom of too much power in our political parties.

[Rover]

Re: Campaign 2016 - I'm Biden my time till I doctor the hearing.

I don't agree with this. The opponent must call the candidate on his lies. The moderator's job is to stand in for the American people. It is not his job to grade the candidate's response. The adversarial aspect of a debate is encompassed by the rivalry between the candidates.

Which why I'm only half kidding when I ask you if you work for CNN.

Its the moderator's job to keep the debate somewhat factual. Otherwise all you need do is lob unsubstantiated attacks at each other for 2 hours, and hope that your opponent runs out of time answering them all. So when Gerry Ford says there's no Soviet influence in Eastern Europe during the '76 debate, its not the moderator's job to look impassively on and let his opponent answer that. An incredulous look and asking him to repeat the assertion IS representing the American people. If Mittens wants to deny that Obama called the Benghazi attack terrorism, even though Obama did, if the moderator doesn't step in and referree that its a his word against Obama's even though Obama's claim in factually accurate and Romney was lying. That needs to be pointed out in the moment or the debates are useless. I know your false equivalency buddies at CNN might not agree , but there has to be some base level of accuracy in the moment when these candidates are on stage.

[Handyman]

Re: Campaign 2016 - I'm Biden my time till I doctor the hearing.

Maybe this brouhaha will result in better debate questions in general. Substantive questions such as, "the CBO has estimated your tax plan will result in record deficits. What are the major aims of your tax plan and how would you achieve them without accumulating greater debt?" That is a different question than "Senator Bedfellow has called your wife "the Whore of Babylon." How do you respond to him?

Questions of bias aside, I think there is no question that the quality of questions and their use in helping Americans pick their chief executive leaves much to be desired.

Do you think any of them would answer that type of question? They would either ignore it or be so vague no one would know what they said.

[unofan]

I don't agree with this. The opponent must call the candidate on his lies. The moderator's job is to stand in for the American people. It is not his job to grade the candidate's response. The adversarial aspect of a debate is encompassed by the rivalry between the candidates.

If the moderator stands for the American people, and a candidate lies to the moderator, he's lying to the American people. Your position would have us sit there and take it.

The other problem is these primary debates need more active moderators, because the candidates are not as adversarial as they would be on a general election and won't call out the lying of others. Someone has to.

But I will say, Hillary is looking more presidential by the day in comparison. She spent 11 hours getting grilled by GOP congressmen intent on bringing her down without losing her temper once. These buffoons are losing their collective shiat over a two hour debate in front of an inept but hardly malicious panel of reporters.

[unofan]

Do you think any of them would answer that type of question? They would either ignore it or be so vague no one would know what they said.

Ted Cruz's rant about the moderators was in response to such a question. He then got bonus points from the crowd when the moderator moved on after he used his time bashing the moderator by making a snarky response about the moderator not wanting an answer to the question.

This whole thing is a farking circus. If the stakes weren't so high, it'd be great entertainment. The fact that one of Rubio, Cruz, Trump, or Carson is going to get at least 45% of the vote for president is tragic enough. The fact that they have a non-zero chance of winning the whole thing is beyond pale.

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 - I'm Biden my time till I doctor the hearing.

If the moderator stands for the American people, and a candidate lies to the moderator, he's lying to the American people. Your position would have us sit there and take it.

I don't see it that way. First of all, the opponent is supposed to call out the lie. Secondly, the post-debate fact checking will catch the lie, and then the lie will become the story and backfire against the liar. Carly told a whopper about a fictitious PP video and was eviscerated after the debate. Carson's nose grow three inches when he lied about the fraudulent company he's flacked for, and now he's being damaged.

If the moderator does this, then it all gets lost in accusations of bias. Plus, most candidate falsehoods have some fraction of "truthiness," and the moderator may well not be giving questions in good faith by taking a discussion down a particular line. The media has a different mechanism for doing that sort of inquisitorial interaction -- the interview. The debate is a different animal.

The other problem is these primary debates need more active moderators, because the candidates are not as adversarial as they would be on a general election and won't call out the lying of others. Someone has to.

It's true that in the GOP debate all the GOP candidates will lie about Obama and Hillary in roughly the same way, but that's OK. The debate is for the GOP nomination, not the general election. The discriminator should be how the GOP candidates differ, not in what ways they are similarly mendacious. One of these toad stools is going to win the nomination. In the general election, their opponent and the editorial media will call them on their lies. But not the moderator. The only refereeing the moderator should do is in regards to the debate procedures. So, they should cut the mics when time expires, and grant additional time to compensate for interruptions (and punish the interrupter). For that matter, the only live mic during the original response should be the candidate speaking. The moderator's job is Roberts Rules. It's up to the candidates, the news departments, the editorial boards, and the public to fact check and weigh the arguments.

But I will say, Hillary is looking more presidential by the day in comparison. She spent 11 hours getting grilled by GOP congressmen intent on bringing her down without losing her temper once. These buffoons are losing their collective shiat over a two hour debate in front of an inept but hardly malicious panel of reporters.

I agree. I don't personally care for SHE!, but she's going to be my standard-bearer in the general and I have no worries how well she will handle the pressure and counter-attack when the inevitable lies and dirty tricks are attempted. She is a Panzer tank and the GOP field are dyspeptic ballerinas.

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 - I'm Biden my time till I doctor the hearing.

Which why I'm only half kidding when I ask you if you work for CNN.

CNN's in the tank for Hillary, Rover. You wish I agreed with them.

[Rover]

Re: Campaign 2016 - I'm Biden my time till I doctor the hearing.

CNN's in the tank for Hillary, Rover. You wish I agreed with them.

You're older than I thought! CNN hasn't been in the tank for any Democrats since the early 90's. They're so afraid of being accused of "biased" that they've overcompensated to the point of absurdity. Hence the reason only friends and family of employees are watching anymore.