• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

August 6, 2015 Debate(s?) -- OFFICIALY OFFICIAL DEBATE THREAD. CLICK HERE NOW!

deacvision7 said:
Also sexist.

No chance you say that about a man.
Click to expand...

Because I'm a heterosexual male. A gay man who finds Bret Baier attractive would probably make a similar comment about him.
 
PhDeac said:
Because I'm a heterosexual male. A gay man who finds Bret Baier attractive would probably make a similar comment about him.
Click to expand...

no. a homosexual man wouldn't be commenting on baier's legs. come on.
 
Huckabee says we can't decrease Social Security benefits because 20 milion Americans rely on SS for 90% or more of their retirement income. He immediately transitions to saying we can keep social security the same and be okay because his new Flat Tax (on sales) would improve SS funding.

Ummm...the 20 million people mentioned in the first sentence pay 0 taxes now, and would have to pay a shit ton of taxes under the Flat Sales Tax. So that is literally the exact same end result as reducing their SS benefits up front.

So many things like this just make me shake my head....
 
I only saw snippets of the debate, and I have not yet read this thread but what is that orange gunk on Trump's face? Really, the guy looks like he should be on stage with David Bowie and the Spiders from Mars. Does he need a dermatologist, or do I need a TV repairman?
 
Reviewing the debate in my head this morning and I think Christies exchange with rand might cost him. I do think he won the exchange with his finalComment of hugging the victims families(which was a brilliant recovery by he way for a huge haymaker thrown by Paul) but in the end he is going to need Paul's crew to vote for him and I am not certain that he can get them back after that scathing interaction.

I don't think he had a whole lot of choice on it. Paul and he are just polar opposites on the issue and the question basically threw the two of them in the ring together, but that may be a good example of winning the battle of damaging your chances in the war.
 
Speaking of hugging, I don't get why hugging the President after a massive natural disaster is a negative at all. It just shows that for some people, partisanship is more important than humanity.

Just like booing a gay service member last election was.
 
I missed the debate last night and am just watching now. Five minutes in it's clear the purpose is to discredit Trump as much as possible.
 
dot com said:
I missed the debate last night and am just watching now. Five minutes in it's clear the purpose is to discredit Trump as much as possible.
Click to expand...

Yep. Fox is done with him leading the polls.
 
FckVwls said:
Huckabee says we can't decrease Social Security benefits because 20 milion Americans rely on SS for 90% or more of their retirement income. He immediately transitions to saying we can keep social security the same and be okay because his new Flat Tax (on sales) would improve SS funding.

Ummm...the 20 million people mentioned in the first sentence pay 0 taxes now, and would have to pay a shit ton of taxes under the Flat Sales Tax. So that is literally the exact same end result as reducing their SS benefits up front.

So many things like this just make me shake my head....
Click to expand...

No, someone who relied on SS for 90% of their income would receive a prebate under the Flat Tax (at least Huckabee's version) that would render their sales tax rate at 0. Not that Huckabee isn't a clown otherwise, and his views on SS are completely wrong, but your point is not correct.
 
The Fox move to destroy Trump is pretty fascinating. Piss him off and he could go 3rd party and end any chance of a GOP win, so it's pretty much a full-on game of chicken at this point.

Plus, do people really think Donald Trump wants to be President? Like, 4 years in office, doing the job of President every day? Ditching his private life and his business? I just don't see it. Now he gets to play the victim to the far right establishment attackers, build support across moderates on both sides - even if they don't actually want him to be President - and come out of this run as the popular voice of unbought reason. AND he alone holds the election in the balance.

At face value it seems like a horrible strategy by Fox and friends. Seems even worse based on the "gotcha" questions like bankruptcy that Trump made them look like idiots on.
 
DCDeac said:
The Fox move to destroy Trump is pretty fascinating. Piss him off and he could go 3rd party and end any chance of a GOP win, so it's pretty much a full-on game of chicken at this point.

Plus, do people really think Donald Trump wants to be President? Like, 4 years in office, doing the job of President every day? Ditching his private life and his business? I just don't see it. Now he gets to play the victim to the far right establishment attackers, build support across moderates on both sides - even if they don't actually want him to be President - and come out of this run as the popular voice of unbought reason. AND he alone holds the election in the balance.

At face value it seems like a horrible strategy by Fox and friends. Seems even worse based on the "gotcha" questions like bankruptcy that Trump made them look like idiots on.
Click to expand...

Yeah that is the problem ... Trump would be an absolutely awful president, but he is significantly smarter in these types of settings than any of the rest of this field of idiots. So he has them by the balls and he knows it.
I wonder if behind the scenes he cuts a financial deal where everyone else (hell probably even Fox News) chips in $10 million each to buy him out of the race. So he would get paid $100 million not to run.
 
If most everyone in this country didn't get like a 1000 channels, would Fox News actually even exist? I mean I can think of maybe 1-2 folks that would actually purchase it as an a la carte. Man the mods for this debate were terrible and to basically go after Trump the way they did shows the GOP's desperation.
 
^ this guy has obviously never set foot in Mississippi. ESPN, SEC Network, and Fox News are the entire reason you purchase cable TV.
 
Last edited:
it is amusing when deacvision gets on his high horse over stupid shit
 
 
Wrangor said:
Reviewing the debate in my head this morning and I think Christies exchange with rand might cost him. I do think he won the exchange with his finalComment of hugging the victims families(which was a brilliant recovery by he way for a huge haymaker thrown by Paul) but in the end he is going to need Paul's crew to vote for him and I am not certain that he can get them back after that scathing interaction.

I don't think he had a whole lot of choice on it. Paul and he are just polar opposites on the issue and the question basically threw the two of them in the ring together, but that may be a good example of winning the battle of damaging your chances in the war.
Click to expand...

lol calling someone out for hugging a sitting president is a HUGE HAYMAKER lool
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top