I will happily give the HT for this title to Howie Carr's quote of Billy Bulger
http://howiecarrshow.com/gop-debate-no-earthquakes/
While the Beltway is crooning about the majesty of Carly Fiorina-if she won, then the truth was a loser last night is all I can say-the only thing I am sure about is that the debate was way too long.
It seems to me that there were two halves of the debate. The first hour and a half was about was Bill O'Reilly put it Jake Tapper saying to the other GOP candidates Trump likes this for lunch. Why is he wrong?
http://lastmenandovermen.blogspot.com/2015/09/last-night-was-about-stopping-trump.html
Carly Fiorina's great moment was basically Tapper tying Trump's hands behind his back and giving Carly a very friendly invitation to slap and kick him.
Those who gloat that Trump didn't dominate ignore that the basic rules set by Tapper was that Trump was not allowed to dominate.
But the second half was about not much. You feel like you could have ended easily before ten and lost nothing.
So unlike the media the only thing I'm sure about is that it was way too long.
By the third hour of CNN's GOP presidential debate, the candidates looked like long-distance runners fading in the final lap: A sweating Marco Rubio ran his hands through his hair, Chris Christie's face turned red, a sagging Donald Trump grasped his lectern for support and, at times, seemed to crumple into his suit.
By the time moderator Jake Tapper asked each of the 11 participants to pick a Secret Service code name, a question meant to provoke bright responses but that fell flat, the combatants were out of gas and operatives were getting restless for the post-debate the spin room.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/09/gop-debate-cnn-disaster-213766#ixzz3m0N9mQCh
"Like a really brutal boxing match between equals, the CNN Republican presidential debate was long and bloody and not terribly conclusive."
"For the second time in two debates, the moderators had a big impact. But while the Fox debate revolved around a network decision to demolish (or at least rein in) one candidate -- Donald Trump -- the CNN debate was skewed heavily by a format that began nearly every question with a quote from one candidate about another, and then allowed follow-up by the candidate quoted. This naturally favored the more combative and quote-worthy candidates, and also guaranteed another Trump-heavy debate."
"The candidates who had been on the receiving end of the most errant Trump snarks -- about Fiorina’s experience and Jeb’s wife -- had a great opportunity to make hay, and Fiorina took full advantage of it."
"Her deftly delivered line about women hearing exactly what he said after he tried to spin it away (which managed also to underline a criticism Trump had made of Jeb Bush for dissing women’s health care services) was the line of the night, and was probably only partly offset by the back-and-forth with Trump about her, er, ah, interesting business career. I couldn’t really tell whether Fiorina’s rapid-fire detail on national security issues came across as showing her policy chops or mixing up a word salad."
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/cafe/why-the-crazy-long-cnn-debate-solved-none-of-the-gop-s-problems
To me it came across as she really studied the kind of stuff that Trump got stumped on few weeks ago-the names of the heads of ISIS,and the difference between Hamas and Hezbollah. The irony is Trump is actually right. Showing off this kind of pedantic knowledge doesn't tell us much about qualification for office.
So I'm with Ed Kilgore-I don't know if much got decided last night.
"Above all, I don’t think this debate did much to solve any of the Republican Party’s problems. Did it “take down” Donald Trump, as so many hoped? I don’t think so, despite the bountiful opportunities the other candidates -- at the earlier “J.V.” debate, where the first four questions were about Trump, as at the main event -- had to do so. Did it “winnow” the field? Nobody did that badly, and the candidates with the least steam, like Mike Huckabee, are already committed to a living-off-the-land county-by-county effort in Iowa. Did the “uprising” on behalf of “outsider” candidates with dubious qualifications abate? Probably not; whatever ground Carson lost was probably gained not by the “experienced” pols but by Fiorina, whose background remains a real time bomb that only Trump has tried to exploit."
That's what's not appreciated. Trump was right about her time at HP-and her talk about him 'using debt' or declaring bankruptcy is besides the point-though maybe not at a GOP debate where 'debt' is a dirty word.
Still, will the actual GOP voters take it the way the pundits did? I have reason to doubt. Just look at this Fox News poll where Trump was declared the winner.
http://fox5sandiego.com/2015/09/16/poll-who-do-you-think-won-the-cnn-gop-debate/
http://howiecarrshow.com/gop-debate-no-earthquakes/
While the Beltway is crooning about the majesty of Carly Fiorina-if she won, then the truth was a loser last night is all I can say-the only thing I am sure about is that the debate was way too long.
It seems to me that there were two halves of the debate. The first hour and a half was about was Bill O'Reilly put it Jake Tapper saying to the other GOP candidates Trump likes this for lunch. Why is he wrong?
http://lastmenandovermen.blogspot.com/2015/09/last-night-was-about-stopping-trump.html
Carly Fiorina's great moment was basically Tapper tying Trump's hands behind his back and giving Carly a very friendly invitation to slap and kick him.
Those who gloat that Trump didn't dominate ignore that the basic rules set by Tapper was that Trump was not allowed to dominate.
But the second half was about not much. You feel like you could have ended easily before ten and lost nothing.
So unlike the media the only thing I'm sure about is that it was way too long.
By the third hour of CNN's GOP presidential debate, the candidates looked like long-distance runners fading in the final lap: A sweating Marco Rubio ran his hands through his hair, Chris Christie's face turned red, a sagging Donald Trump grasped his lectern for support and, at times, seemed to crumple into his suit.
By the time moderator Jake Tapper asked each of the 11 participants to pick a Secret Service code name, a question meant to provoke bright responses but that fell flat, the combatants were out of gas and operatives were getting restless for the post-debate the spin room.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/09/gop-debate-cnn-disaster-213766#ixzz3m0N9mQCh
"Like a really brutal boxing match between equals, the CNN Republican presidential debate was long and bloody and not terribly conclusive."
"For the second time in two debates, the moderators had a big impact. But while the Fox debate revolved around a network decision to demolish (or at least rein in) one candidate -- Donald Trump -- the CNN debate was skewed heavily by a format that began nearly every question with a quote from one candidate about another, and then allowed follow-up by the candidate quoted. This naturally favored the more combative and quote-worthy candidates, and also guaranteed another Trump-heavy debate."
"The candidates who had been on the receiving end of the most errant Trump snarks -- about Fiorina’s experience and Jeb’s wife -- had a great opportunity to make hay, and Fiorina took full advantage of it."
"Her deftly delivered line about women hearing exactly what he said after he tried to spin it away (which managed also to underline a criticism Trump had made of Jeb Bush for dissing women’s health care services) was the line of the night, and was probably only partly offset by the back-and-forth with Trump about her, er, ah, interesting business career. I couldn’t really tell whether Fiorina’s rapid-fire detail on national security issues came across as showing her policy chops or mixing up a word salad."
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/cafe/why-the-crazy-long-cnn-debate-solved-none-of-the-gop-s-problems
To me it came across as she really studied the kind of stuff that Trump got stumped on few weeks ago-the names of the heads of ISIS,and the difference between Hamas and Hezbollah. The irony is Trump is actually right. Showing off this kind of pedantic knowledge doesn't tell us much about qualification for office.
So I'm with Ed Kilgore-I don't know if much got decided last night.
"Above all, I don’t think this debate did much to solve any of the Republican Party’s problems. Did it “take down” Donald Trump, as so many hoped? I don’t think so, despite the bountiful opportunities the other candidates -- at the earlier “J.V.” debate, where the first four questions were about Trump, as at the main event -- had to do so. Did it “winnow” the field? Nobody did that badly, and the candidates with the least steam, like Mike Huckabee, are already committed to a living-off-the-land county-by-county effort in Iowa. Did the “uprising” on behalf of “outsider” candidates with dubious qualifications abate? Probably not; whatever ground Carson lost was probably gained not by the “experienced” pols but by Fiorina, whose background remains a real time bomb that only Trump has tried to exploit."
That's what's not appreciated. Trump was right about her time at HP-and her talk about him 'using debt' or declaring bankruptcy is besides the point-though maybe not at a GOP debate where 'debt' is a dirty word.
Still, will the actual GOP voters take it the way the pundits did? I have reason to doubt. Just look at this Fox News poll where Trump was declared the winner.
http://fox5sandiego.com/2015/09/16/poll-who-do-you-think-won-the-cnn-gop-debate/
No comments:
Post a Comment