Originally Posted by sir_eccles (Post 11782287)

See also Kansas.

Originally Posted by FlaviusAetius (Post 11782296)

First, I referenced the series of debates, not last night's debacle. The moderators don't identify themselves as such, but starting with George Stephanopolis (a true Clinton operative) and Candy Crowley, and working down, the rank and file are overwhelmingly left of centre and outright hostile to Republicans.

Originally Posted by FlaviusAetius (Post 11782296)

First, I referenced the series of debates, not last night's debacle. The moderators don't identify themselves as such, but starting with George Stephanopolis (a true Clinton operative) and Candy Crowley, and working down, the rank and file are overwhelmingly left of centre and outright hostile to Republicans.

Originally Posted by FlaviusAetius (Post 11782296)

Rubio correctly identified the main stream media as a Democratic SuperPac. It's just a fact of life and to deny it is to ignore reality. That's why we have to read the UK papers to get a more balanced view of things in this country.

Originally Posted by Giantaxe (Post 11782302)

I don't think it's a "fact" at all. The Republicans have made a science - I choose that word deliberately - out of playing the victim of the "lamestream media".

Originally Posted by zargof (Post 11782285)

Why is it whenever a Republican gets asked a hard question they complain about left wing bias? Let's face it, all the candidates' tax plans are a bunch of shite where people pay less tax and the economy magically grows to compensate. That worked really well when Bush cut taxes.

Originally Posted by zargof (Post 11782288)

You missed Huma Abedin and Noam Chomsky asking the questions last night?

Originally Posted by zargof (Post 11782299)

Don't forget that Commie Megyn Kelly asking Trump all those mean and nasty questions.

Originally Posted by Giantaxe (Post 11782302)

Right, you referenced a series of debates, not just last night's. So specifically in terms of last night's do you believe the moderators were "Clinton operatives and left-wing activists"? They were absolutely left of centre. Now Santelli wasn’t, but he wasn’t a player, and Cramer just made a fool of himself.

And, yeh, how dare Candy Crowley correct Romney's false contention on what Obama said after Benghazi!

The truth about what Candy Crowley said - CNNPolitics.com

I see CNN did its own fact checking. The point is that she bailed out Obama – not her job, although of course it really was.

I don't think it's a "fact" at all. The Republicans have made a science - I choose that word deliberately - out of playing the victim of the "lamestream media".

Glad you like reading The Guardian though...

Originally Posted by FlaviusAetius (Post 11782327)

There is a Wiki article on Reagan’s tax cuts that discusses the pros and cons of his plan that reduced the top rate to 28% for individuals. Economists, as usual, are all over the place, but revenues did double during his administration, despite the cut. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reaganomics So a revenue neutral tax cut plan might not devastate the economy and might do some good.

Originally Posted by sir_eccles (Post 11782383)

Wait what?

https://twitter.com/RealBenCarson/st...77986854559744

Originally Posted by FlaviusAetius (Post 11782327)

They were absolutely left of centre. Now Santelli wasn’t, but he wasn’t a player, and Cramer just made a fool of himself.

Originally Posted by FlaviusAetius (Post 11782327)

There is a science of victimology and the Republicans are late to the game. Hillary had one shining moment of victimhood many years ago when Rick Lazio threatened her with a piece of paper he asked her to sign during a debate. Lazio “invaded her space” and that is something Rubio would be well to avoid – could cost him the election.

Originally Posted by FlaviusAetius (Post 11782327)

You have to read the DM, the Torygraph, the Guardian and Times to get the full picture of what's going on this side of the pond. Don't you do the same?

Originally Posted by Giantaxe (Post 11782397)

It's odd that you didn't mention that Gore did exactly the same thing to Bush in exactly the same election season. But I guess that didn't fit the "point" you were trying and failing to make. The fact is that both broke debate rules by their actions.

The Daily Mail? Really?

Originally Posted by FlaviusAetius (Post 11782444)

As I recall, Bush was male, so "invading his space" wasn't fatal. But Hillary in the Senate debate and Hillary in the upcoming Presidential debate remains female. So "invading her space" could be fatal to Rubio's or Cruz's debate performance and probably the election as a result, since the gender card will be central to her campaign. Different rules, depending on which side of the gender divide you're on. Thought you would have known that.:ohmy:

Originally Posted by FlaviusAetius (Post 11782444)

Daily Mail? Sure: CNBC's Republican debate off the rails as Donald Trump, Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio go to war | Daily Mail Online

Originally Posted by Giantaxe (Post 11782453)

This is more the standard of the Daily Mail's US coverage:

Oregon TSA agents 'forced 90-year-old woman to take off her shirt and bra' | Daily Mail Online

Originally Posted by Giantaxe (Post 11783125)

"Republicans will not air February debate on NBC

...

Republican National Committee (RNC) Chairman Reince Preibus said CNBC's moderators subjected the candidates to unfair, "mean-spirited" questions"

Republicans will not air February debate on NBC - BBC News

And the BBC's analysis:

"The Republican National Committee has been sharply criticised by some campaigns for its handling of the debates, so this move could be seen as an attempt to deflect blame onto that traditional conservative punching bag, the media"

Yep, that is spot on.