|
I want to print and frame this one.
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 01:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 23:59 |
|
|
Joementum posted:Yeah, they're probably an even better buy today. even 538 disagrees at this point http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/jeb-bush-cnbc-republican-debate/
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 01:48
|
|
|
Winkie01 posted:Trip Gabriel this is obscene  recruiting 4 volunteers in a week? 63 supporters? these numbers would be embarrassing for a small town municipal campaign.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 01:49
|
|
|
Jeb's campaign is like an old, sick dog that can no longer get up to go outside to piss and poo poo. It's sad, almost heartbreaking to watch, and the dog still has a will to live, but you know you have to do the right thing and put it out of its misery. Jeb: Imagine a dog making GBS threads all over the floor -- forever.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 01:49
|
|
|
Sheng-ji Yang posted:even 538 disagrees at this point I don't think you understand the point. In all likelihood Bush's shares will rise and fall several more times before March even if he's not the nominee. That is what makes him a good buy right now. He's not going to drop out tomorrow and that's not what 538 is saying.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 01:49
|
|
|
Mitt Romney posted:Didn't some of the anti-Marco slides make an appearance about a week ago? Yes, the campaign have about the third of the deck to reporters last week.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 01:50
|
|
|
AARP LARPer fucked around with this message at 05:46 on Jan 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 01:56
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Jeb's campaign is like an old, sick dog that can no longer get up to go outside to piss and poo poo. It's sad, almost heartbreaking to watch, and the dog still has a will to live, but you know you have to do the right thing and put it out of its misery. Except this dog is also a piece of poo poo that is getting what it deserves.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 02:01
|
|
|
WTF is this crap? This is like something that would get you laughed out of a business school class, and believe me, business school is a joke (except for Wharton where Trump went, it's great and so is Trump). If some goober presented this to me I wouldn't give 'em a nickle. That is some 4th grade quality crap.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 02:01
|
|
|
Your PowerPoint presentations are amatuer-level, Jeb.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 02:04
|
|
|
Peachstapler posted:Your PowerPoint presentations are amatuer-level, Jeb. Some of them are nice slides, I've seen them. The people who made them are my friends, but let's face it, the presentation's a total disaster.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 02:07
|
|
|
Sheng-ji Yang posted:even 538 disagrees at this point Sort of. quote:And Republicans have a lot of alternatives. While Rubio has some problems too — his third-quarter fundraising was pretty abysmal, for instance — he fits the profile of the electable conservative. If Rubio were to falter, the Republican establishment would have a few backup options left, such as Christie or John Kasich (or in an emergency, even Mitt Romney). These candidates also have flaws, Christie especially, but they aren’t necessarily more severe than Bush’s. Not exactly a carillon ringing BUSH IS DEAD
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 02:08
|
|
|
What did !JEB! do at the debate? I hear he hosed up bad?
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 02:12
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:this is obscene lmao they searched for an entire week, made 10,000 phone calls and came up with 53 supporters
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 02:12
|
|
|
Skellybones posted:What did !JEB! do at the debate? I hear he hosed up bad? Everything he said was stupid and every interaction he had with other candidates ended with him looking like a loser.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 02:15
|
|
|
AARP LARPer fucked around with this message at 05:46 on Jan 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 02:15
|
|
|
Skellybones posted:What did !JEB! do at the debate? I hear he hosed up bad? He tried to call out Rubio for missing votes and got dunked on pretty hard.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 02:15
|
|
|
Teddybear posted:He tried to call out Rubio for missing votes and got dunked on pretty hard.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 02:18
|
|
|
Samurai Sanders posted:Because I only saw highlights I dunno the full context of Jeb's attack. Was there any? The moderators bring up an editorial in a Florida newspaper about Rubio's attendance. He knocks the question out of the park. Jeb! hasn't had enough, and whines that "as a constituent" he's offended.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 02:21
|
|
|
AARP LARPer fucked around with this message at 05:46 on Jan 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 02:21
|
|
|
Do Not Resuscitate posted:I feel the fact checking should be relegated to the post-debate analysis, but that's just my opinion and I don't know that I'm right I like you and agree with almost everything you say, but expecting the media and the American populace at large to pay attention to fact-checking after a debate just feels naive in the worst way. I mean, Carson's ludicrous tax plans weren't presented for the first time at these debates.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 02:25
|
|
|
Samurai Sanders posted:Because I only saw highlights I dunno the full context of Jeb's attack. Was there any? Do Not Resuscitate posted:iJeb! tried a "gotcha" attack on Marco and then Marco responded and then iJeb!... well... have you ever had one of those dreams where you're in some public space and you suddenly discover that you're naked or only clad in your underwear and you're mortified, wondering how the hell this could have possibly happened and how you're gonna escape? We witnessed a person experiencing a waking version of that dream on live national television. Yeah, I'll never understand this. I can see walking into something like that if it's off-the-cuff and spontaneous, but this was his prepared attack. Did he just figure that Rubio would fold up and start crying on stage and just not have a response? Do Not Resuscitate posted:I think they all were hoping that they'd be the next Candy Crowly starring in this year's version of the Please Proceed Governor clip that would go viral and make them a superstar. Do the media actually recognize that this was a correct and good thing to do? My understanding is that Crowley doing that was and is controversial. Joementum posted:
I kinda figure he was in the room - less about looking good to donors and more about acknowledging him.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 02:30
|
|
|
Don't forget that the biggest debate moment in 2012 was a moderator fact checking Romney
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 02:30
|
|
|
AARP LARPer fucked around with this message at 05:46 on Jan 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 02:31
|
|
|
This one is pretty eye popping. We loaded the question hard and 1/3rd still said "what the gently caress are you trying to start Iraq war part 3?"
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 02:33
|
|
|
AARP LARPer fucked around with this message at 05:47 on Jan 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 02:36
|
|
|
Do Not Resuscitate posted:Double Down describes the Romney campaign as being absolutely livid over Crowley's intrusion into the debate. They had carefully negotiated the debate rules beforehand and she was not to opine or otherwise insert her own views into the debate. I don't know that the level of criticism was fair, at least in terms of how vehement it was from the right. She is actually kind of timid about her comments and it's only after prompting from Obama that she flat-out backs up Obama's statement, but she's reticent about it. The Crowley incident and an MSNBC primary debate were repeatedly cited by Reince when they came up with the list of networks allowed to sponsor debates this time. Now they're complaining about CNBC (and there were complaints about the last two debates as well) because they don't seem to understand that outside of their little hugboxes their policies make no sense.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 02:39
|
|
|
Do Not Resuscitate posted:Yeah, I get it. There's that tension between being a journalist (and your duty to inform the public) and an impartial moderator and there's most likely a fair amount of pre-debate negotiation over the role of the moderators and the balance between the two.. The thing is, if you start in with the fact-checking, then you're in danger of falling down the rabbit hole and spending most of the debate having to correct every asinine statement made by every candidate and it's gonna be a rough night for you. That's fair. I just worry that if you're that worried about that rabbit hole, you end up spending the debate just giving candidates a rotating 30-60 second spot for them to deliver parts of their stump speeches. Which, blech -- that doesn't tell me anything. But I can see the problem. Joementum posted:Now they're complaining about CNBC (and there were complaints about the last two debates as well) because they don't seem to understand that outside of their little hugboxes their policies make no sense. This is my basic reaction. The democrats, aside from complaints about time (Webb, Lessig if he counts), haven't whined about what the moderators asked. And I don't think that's because the media is pro-Democrat. Xenophon fucked around with this message at 02:41 on Oct 30, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 02:39
|
|
|
They should just use the crawl underneath to relay a crack fact checking teams running findings 4 mins previous - Ben Carson - I didn't sell fart pills - false - see: any hit from googling ben carson and fart pills
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 02:43
|
|
|
Do Not Resuscitate posted:Nah, I come at it from a different angle. It was the worst moderation that I've seen at a presidential debate, full stop. You know, I like this analysis better than the way I was approaching it. Thank you.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 02:43
|
|
|
For the next Republican debate, I want a format where everything a candidate says has to be phrased in the form of a scathing attack on one of the other candidates on stage. And if a non-Republican candidate gets mentioned, whoever does it gets publicly whipped, because I'm so sick of them using Hillary as some sort of punchline (not that I like Hillary, I just find it stupid).
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 02:45
|
|
|
Joementum posted:The Crowley incident and an MSNBC primary debate were repeatedly cited by Reince when they came up with the list of networks allowed to sponsor debates this time. IMHO, any time moderators fact-check obvious lies from the candidate they're doing a service to the democracy. From what I watched last night, I saw the moderators asking legitimate followup questions, which seems like exactly what they should have been doing. These people are running for president. The country deserves for them to be asked actual tough questions. If they're such whiny babies that they can't handle getting asked a followup, or so reliant on spin that they can't handle having their lies called out publicly, maybe they should just go spend more time with their families. I really don't get why people are buying into this  BOOHOO THE MODERATORS WERE SO MEAAAANN narrative. It isn't their job to be nice.EDIT: there were some truly bad questions yes but some of the moderators asked actual real followup questions, which is so rare to see in American media that I think it balanced out the bad questions. Hieronymous Alloy fucked around with this message at 02:55 on Oct 30, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 02:48
|
|
|
Xenophon posted:The democrats, aside from complaints about time (Webb, Lessig if he counts), haven't whined about what the moderators asked. Well there was, "The American people are tired of hearing about your drat emails!"
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 02:49
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Well there was, "The American people are tired of hearing about your drat emails!" Yeah, that's fair. On the other hand, it compares pretty directly with Christie's complaint about the fantasy football question. Maybe I'm biased somehow but both those seem like legitimate media critiques because they're criticizing the media for following non-story, non-issue bullshit instead of asking substantive questions.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 02:52
|
|
|
So, according to Politico, there's going to be a summit meeting of many of the campaigns this weekend to discuss overthrowing the RNC's debate schedule and working out something different amongst themselves. The only problem is that all the campaigns have different ideas of what that something else should be. The meeting is being led by the Trump, Carson, Jindal(!), and Graham(!!) campaigns, and will be attended by the Fiorina, Huckabee, Paul, Rubio, and Santorum campaigns. (That's 9 out of 14/15 candidates depending on whether you count Gilmore) The short version is Trump wants shorter length, Carson wants easier questions, Jindal wants to get into the big kids' table, Graham wants two debates of 7 candidates each with the candidates randomly selected. http://www.politico.com/story/2015/10/gop-campaigns-rnc-debates-215371 Reince is not invited to this get together.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 02:58
|
|
|
Patter Song posted:The meeting is being led by the Trump, Carson, Jindal(!), and Graham(!!) campaigns, and will be attended by the Fiorina, Huckabee, Paul, Rubio, and Santorum campaigns. (That's 9 out of 14/15 candidates depending on whether you count Gilmore) whoa, are they not asking Bush what his opinihahahahahaha Patter Song posted:Carson wants easier questions
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 03:01
|
|
|
Apparently Jeb! is a fan of RSF's rather fun take on graphs: Seriously there has got to be a better way to display that data.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 03:03
|
|
|
AARP LARPer fucked around with this message at 05:47 on Jan 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 03:03
|
|
|
Xenophon posted:whoa, are they not asking Bush what his opinihahahahahaha Those are just the ones that are going to the Trump/Carson/Jindal/Graham-thrown party. They said they invited everyone. (I do not know whether Jim Gilmore is part of "everyone") The list of those not (yet?) attending are Cruz, Kasich, Jeb!, Christie, and Pataki. Of these only Cruz is relevant and I expect his campaign will not challenge Trump and Carson on this given hating debate moderators is his new thing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 03:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 23:59 |
|
|
TALK RADIO ROUND UP: Rush: The debate was terrible, Cruz was amazing, Rubio did really well. He also spun this into an attack on Romney, since Romney criticized alternative media(internet/talk radio), stating if it was up to Romney ALL MEDIA WOULD BE CNBC... Rush also thanked Donald Trump for changing the Republican party forever - They are now fighters...(I think most of them are trying to be Trump) Laid heavy criticism at the feet of Jeb, thinks it was a massive mistake to go after Rubio on a night where no one was attacking (save Kasich) thinks Kasich and Jeb stood out at the obvious establishment guys, and losers. Thinks Jeb should fire his hack campaign managers, reset. I turned it off after the first hour because I actually had to work. Hannity: More Cruz love, worst debate ever, CNBC should be ashamed, Jeb is a mess, Hannity is really tough and does MMA, asked Carson about the magic drink, Carson dodged again. Turned it off as my brain started melting. Levin/Master Shake: Screamed that it was the best debate ever. That Republicans are finally FIGHTING BACK AGAINST THE LAMESTREAM MEDIA. Thinks Prince Pubious should be fired and killed. Cruz is the greatest, they all followed Cruz. Trump was ok. Thanked Donald Trump for changing the Republican party. Went easy on Jeb, feels sorry for him at this point, thinks Kasich is a huge DOPE and a RINO. Turned it off after 45 minutes. Closed my eyes and all I see is Master Shake screaming about THE CONSTITUTION AND THE LIBERAL GOVERNMENT MONSTER OF TYRANNY COMING FOR YOUR RIGHTS WE THE PEOPLE.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 03:09
|
|
