Democrat Debate

[Vince]

Wow! There are more than 2 candidates. Who knew? I hadn't heard anything about O'Malley, Webb & Chaffee for so long, I thought they'd drop out.

So, who's watchin'?

I will attempt to watch it. I have yoga tonight, so after I get my Zen on, I should be able to stomach part of it.

I can't stand Hillary to begin with. Couldn't watch a bunch of liberals and socialists on a debate.

 

[crabcake]

I firmly believe they all gathered in the green room pre-debate and conspired to avoid certain topics like anything to do with veterans, baby butchering, and dealing with our nation's debt.

 

[crabcake]

One funny tidbit - somewhere someone commented that none of the dem candidates would overly bash any of the other dem candidate because they didn't want to risk missing out on a sweet ambassadorship if they step aside.

Did they all sleep through Benghazi (which, by the way, she never finished addressing).

 

[Bann]

I firmly believe they all gathered in the green room pre-debate and conspired to avoid certain topics like anything to do with veterans, baby butchering, and dealing with our nation's debt.

They sure didn't spend any time talking about veterans, that's for sure.

Sanders was having a downright love fest for Clinton, however, SHE sucked up to Obama more times than I could count. I'm trying to decide which one had the worse performance of all - it's a tie for me between Webb and O'Malley. Webb came off as a weasely has been and O'Malley didn't look ready for prime time.

 

[Chris0nllyn]

Sanders bothers me a bit.

His rhetoric resonates with tons of folks. We can agree on some of his major issues, in principal, but his way of fixing that would literally make us go broke.

Chafee looked as nervous as a virgin on prom night.

O'Malley kept trying to harp on "green energy". You can tell he was coached by someone saying "any chance you get, talk about green energy by 2050".

Hillary was riding the audience's undying support of her. She downright refused to discuss a topic and the crowd went wild, while she smiled like a Disney movie villain.



I was amazed on how war-hawkish almost all of them were.

 

[This_person]

Conservative candidates

 

[PsyOps]

Sanders bothers me a bit.

His rhetoric resonates with tons of folks. We can agree on some of his major issues, in principal, but his way of fixing that would literally make us go broke.

Such as?

 

[This_person]

She downright refused to discuss a topic and the crowd went wild, while she smiled like a Disney movie villain.

Did you catch that? "Sec Clinton, would you like to respond to the weak but sound arguments raised by Gov Chafee?"

"No" (cue crowd going wild)


I would say it's shocking, but it's not. It's just sad.

 

[steppinthrax]

Did you catch that? "Sec Clinton, would you like to respond to the weak but sound arguments raised by Gov Chafee?"

"No" (cue crowd going wild)


I would say it's shocking, but it's not. It's just sad.

What's sad about it?

 

[steppinthrax]

I firmly believe they all gathered in the green room pre-debate and conspired to avoid certain topics like anything to do with veterans, baby butchering, and dealing with our nation's debt.

And the GOP never does these type of things??????

 

[Chris0nllyn]

Such as?

The Iraq war being "the worst foreign policy blunder in the history of our country", and that he wouldn't send troops back to the sand box.

I also agreed, in part, with his statements about corporate media and wall street that are running the country.

Did you catch that? "Sec Clinton, would you like to respond to the weak but sound arguments raised by Gov Chafee?"

"No" (cue crowd going wild)

I would say it's shocking, but it's not. It's just sad.

If was right after Bernie went on his tirade about her e-mail, and apparently folks don't care about her "damn e-mails". The crowd went nuts and she needed to gain momentum back.

Not to mention her essentially saying "I'm a woman, vote for me".

It helped that no one but Chafee was remotely negative toward her e-mail scandal.

Plus, she got 31:05 of speaking time. Bernie had 28:05. O'Malley, Webb, and Chafee had 17:56, 15:35, and 9:11 respectively.

 

[This_person]

What's sad about it?

That the crowd would go wild for a candidate saying, in effect, "I don't care enough about you lowly people that I'm going to respond to your valid questions about my judgment or my ability to handle classified information or the lack of credibility of America raised by someone in my own party - not a partisan attack against me, but someone in my own party."

They think that's a valid response, so much so that they actually liked it.

That's very sad.

 

[This_person]

It was right after Bernie went on his tirade about her e-mail, and apparently folks don't care about her "damn e-mails". The crowd went nuts and she needed to gain momentum back.

Not to mention her essentially saying "I'm a woman, vote for me"

Bingo!

 

[steppinthrax]

That the crowd would go wild for a candidate saying, in effect, "I don't care enough about you lowly people that I'm going to respond to your valid questions about my judgment or my ability to handle classified information or the lack of credibility of America raised by someone in my own party - not a partisan attack against me, but someone in my own party."

They think that's a valid response, so much so that they actually liked it.

That's very sad.

You didn't listen to the entire context...

When questioned about emails she responded. Bernie defended her and made a statement that I feel reverberated with everyone!!! "Enough with the emails". The Americans don't want to hear about this (something about that effect). When someone tried to attack her further on the emails she responded by saying "No"...

People laughed because it was quite obvious that any further response regarding this "email" issue would be foolish.

Esp... There are plenty of character as well as judgement faults with the whole slew of GOP candidates we have now.... Why don't we talk about those. Lets start with Trump????

 

[vraiblonde]

Esp... There are plenty of character as well as judgement faults with the whole slew of GOP candidates we have now.... Why don't we talk about those. Lets start with Trump????

We talked about that in the GOP debate thread (and a bunch of other threads). This thread is about the Democrats.

I, for one, am not willing to let Emailgate and Benghazi go. National security is important to me and I will not support a candidate who doesn't take it seriously. And while Hillary takes it more seriously than any of those other yahoos, clearly she's not quite serious enough.

 

[glhs837]

You didn't listen to the entire context...

When questioned about emails she responded. Bernie defended her and made a statement that I feel reverberated with everyone!!! "Enough with the emails". The Americans don't want to hear about this (something about that effect). When someone tried to attack her further on the emails she responded by saying "No"...

People laughed because it was quite obvious that any further response regarding this "email" issue would be foolish.

Esp... There are plenty of character as well as judgement faults with the whole slew of GOP candidates we have now.... Why don't we talk about those. Lets start with Trump????

So, I think there are two issues here. One is that this tactic of "I'll just acted ticked off and ignore valid questions" tactic that worked so well during the Benghazi hearings is BS. Any parent of a teenager has seen this act and sees through it. It's a BS tactic to avoid the questions. And the other issue is the attitude of "I'll ignore any personal fault or misconduct simply to get the flavor of candidate I want". It's a wrong attitude for both sides. If Rs do it, that doesn't make it right for Ds. We don't need a male president, we don't need a black president, we don't need a female president. We need a President who can lead for everybody. All the rest is BS.

 

[steppinthrax]

We talked about that in the GOP debate thread (and a bunch of other threads). This thread is about the Democrats.

I, for one, am not willing to let Emailgate and Benghazi go. National security is important to me and I will not support a candidate who doesn't take it seriously. And while Hillary takes it more seriously than any of those other yahoos, clearly she's not quite serious enough.

I have security clearance and work with classified information. If I had a Nickel for each time someone inadvertently released info or when there is some leakage (used unclassified equipment for classed work).

But of course when one party wants to attack another, we will make a BIG deal out of a few emails...... (esp to attack a candidate from a party that we don't like)....

Honestly, within the history of IT and the US gov, how many times do you think this happens? Also what percentage of it is caught? What percentage gets swept under the rug?

How about this.... lets talk about the real issues that are facing this country, issues that are affecting every man, woman and child v.s. about some god damn emails....

Also, you can't talk about one without talking about the other....

 

[steppinthrax]

So, I think there are two issues here. One is that this tactic of "I'll just acted ticked off and ignore valid questions" tactic that worked so well during the Benghazi hearings is BS. Any parent of a teenager has seen this act and sees through it. It's a BS tactic to avoid the questions. And the other issue is the attitude of "I'll ignore any personal fault or misconduct simply to get the flavor of candidate I want". It's a wrong attitude for both sides. If Rs do it, that doesn't make it right for Ds. We don't need a male president, we don't need a black president, we don't need a female president. We need a President who can lead for everybody. All the rest is BS.

I don't think she's ticked off. Hillary is pretty experienced with these situations and she damn well knew it would come up during the debate. She wasn't like a C- student getting ready to take a final exam LOL.

She responded to it in the manor that made sense if you listened to the back and forth exchange....

 

[PsyOps]

The Iraq war being "the worst foreign policy blunder in the history of our country", and that he wouldn't send troops back to the sand box.

I also agreed, in part, with his statements about corporate media and wall street that are running the country.

I agree on foreign entanglements. But none of them (at least of the little I watched; I had to get to bed) really articulated when they would see a valid use of military force. But I realize it’s easy to talk about it (a la Obama) when campaigning; then realize reality is far different inside that Whitehouse than inside.

“Corporate media and wall street that are running the country”? What Sanders is proposing is government ‘running the country’; which is a far more uncomfortable prospect. Sanders talks about taking down the fat cats while spouting the lie that this will translate into propping up the middle and lower class. Given the greed that exists in government, and Sanders want government to control this so-called transition of fiscal power, it will only result in the government benefiting from it. While the wealthy will be taken down, the middle class will only suffer more under these conditions.

 

[This_person]

You didn't listen to the entire context...

When questioned about emails she responded. Bernie defended her and made a statement that I feel reverberated with everyone!!! "Enough with the emails". The Americans don't want to hear about this (something about that effect). When someone tried to attack her further on the emails she responded by saying "No"...

People laughed because it was quite obvious that any further response regarding this "email" issue would be foolish.

You didn't listen to the entire context...

Bernie made his statement intended for headlines, and he succeeded. Cooper followed with (in essence), "yeah, that's all fine and dandy here in a Democrat primary audience, but it's not really true for most of the nation. Gov. Chaffee, you disagree with Sen Sanders, care to elaborate?" Gov Chaffee did elaborate with substance (weakly, but still some substance). Sec Clinton responded with, "#### you, America, I'm done with this."

That the crowd cheered that is sad.

Esp... There are plenty of character as well as judgement faults with the whole slew of GOP candidates we have now.... Why don't we talk about those. Lets start with Trump????

Why not talk about those in a Democrat Debate thread? Because it is outside the scope of the thread.

Also, the "they did it first" attitude is not acceptable. Are there character flaws with GOP candidates? Of course! And, they should be discussed. But, the point of discussing the faults of Democrats in a Democrat-Debate thread is to stick to that subject. If you'd like to list your faults of Trump, start a thread and I'll be glad to agree with many, probably disagree with some, and discuss others.

Why is there always a need from both sides to go to the, "yeah, but, let's not talk about our people's faults, let's talk about YOUR people's faults!"? GOP candidates have faults, and they're discussed. Let's now talk about DNC candidates' faults and strengths.