Democrat Debate- Impressions and Tells

[Mertex]

Hillary knocked it out of the park.....doubt any of the clowns will be able to hold a candle to her.





he Democrats' first debate took place in Las Vegas on Tuesday evening. Compared to the two GOP debates, this CNN-hosted debate was more substantial and less impolite. Here’s an instant analysis from three political scholars.

A decisive victory for Clinton
Anthony Gaughan, Drake University

Hillary Clinton gave a commanding performance in the first Democratic presidential debate. Both stylistically and substantively, she reminded voters of why the Clinton brand is still such a formidable force in American politics. After Tuesday night’s debate, there can be no doubt that Hillary Clinton is the prohibitive favorite to win her party’s presidential nomination.
http://theconversation.com/scholars-on-the-democratic-debate-hillary-wins-bernie-hits-a-nerve-48961

 

[Vigilante]

Did they talk about this?

 

[Vigilante]

Did she mention her polling?

 

[Vigilante]

Did she come across as a Kinder, and Gentler Hildebeast?

 

[Vigilante]

Ted Cruz: Dem Debate Was More Socialism, Pacifism, Weakness (Fox- 3 min video)

Fox News: The Kelly File copied by Tea Party You Tube ^

 

[Mertex]

It is not their fault that the Republicans were asked questions about their opinion/opposition of another candidates action/stated platform and the Democrats weren't asked any of those questions.

If you're talking about the Republican debate that was hosted by Faux News......I guess they're not too bright over at Faux to put their candidates in that position and ask some of the questions they did.....but, the CNN Republican debate didn't ask any question that would cause Trump to insult Rand Paul and minimize his being there because he was low on the polls, or Scott Walker's telling Trump they didn't need an Apprentice in the WH, or Trump telling Bush he is low energy and criticized him for speaking Spanish and Paul bringing up Jeb Bush smoking pot....so, which questions exactly elicited that type of attack on each other?

 

[Mertex]

And I think that was an improvement. The Rockefeller wing of the party had to change tactics and cooperate with traditional conservatives, though George Herbert Walker Bush reversed that largely while maintaining the Reagan labeling.

An improvement? Republicans can't even get someone to step up and take the position of Speaker of the House, they have ended up losing arguments and have handed Democrats victory over some of the issues they were willing to shut the government down over.....like not funding PP, or not agreeing on the Iran Deal, and not being able to repeal Obamacare, something they want so badly they have brought it up 50 times? So explain to me how that is an improvement?

 

[AvgGuyIA]

Overnight debate numbers have the Dems at about half the GOP viewership, and that isn't good for the Dems no matter how you spin it.


Overnight ratings point to Democratic debate record

The total viewer number for Tuesday's matchup will be released on Wednesday afternoon. It will be much lower than both recent Republican debates, but the early data suggests there was still a surprising surge of interest in Clinton, Bernie Sanders, Martin O'Malley, Lincoln Chafee and Jim Webb's first time together on stage.

Heading into Tuesday night, there was unanimous agreement that the total audience would be lower than the 25 million who tuned in for Fox's Republican debate on August 6. That debate -- fueled by Donald Trump -- shattered all previous primary debate records.

Proof the DNC base is low information, but definitely voters. Republicans and conservative read books and keep informed about issues. On the DNC side, it's only the radical lesbian feminists who do that.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

Trump twitterin during debatge got a lot of chatter.


Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) | Twitter


"@TimCooperTweets: How amazing is it that the #1 trending topic is @realDonaldTrump talking about the #DemDebate-more than the debate itself

I'm not good at Twitter and can't figure out how to see his tweets. I was seeing others tweets about his tweets. I go to his tweet home page and its static...no recent content from him during the debate. Where do you go to view the tweets of people you are following?

 

[AvgGuyIA]

Here's thing. Nobody except the fanatic liberal crazies are going to vote for any of these candiates.

Oh, Gawd, Rook you are so wrong, fatally wrong on that one.

Millions of Americans are out of work after decades of their lives avoiding criminal activity, working hard and saving and now they are on the edge of being wiped out totally while the fat cat bankers on Wall Street and corporations make windfall profits hand over fist. They watch while their hard working kids graduate from college and cant find a damned job because Republicans have been signing free trade treaties that are exporting their jobs and their futures. Many of them cant afford to put their kids through college and so bright energetic talent is simply lost to us while some H1-B serf takes the job instead so once again corporations can make bigger profits.

And the American middle class workers are seething with rage from it all. And Republicans just don't seem to get it.

I will never hire H1B people. Companies that hire H1 are just pure greediness. Good lord how can we stop this...

When it comes to the H1Bs, I stand with the liberals.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

Apparently, all of them forgot that it is the Republicans who control BOTH houses of the Congress. I couldn't contain my laughter.

Yeah, well how's that working for you? Same-sex marriage, the Iran Deal, funding for Planned Parenthood.........that is funny, they only think they control both houses of Congress.

Yep.

Useless bunch of impotent Benghazi pubs has control and email they're still not Benghazi doing email anything. Nothing.

Well, they did Benghazi stop a couple of jobs email bills and jobs/housing for vets. And they keep Benghazi passing those email phony repeal insurance for 80 million Americans bill.

Republicans are not called the Do Nothings for nothing.

Meanwhile, President Obama is governing.

If a pub were to get into the WH, nothing would change except the working/poor classes would lose more.

You saying under Obama the middle class is expanding? LOL!! The middle class is shrinking under Obama.

Thanks to President Obama, we've just about regained all that we lost under the Cheeney administration.

Was just looking at my TIA-Creff. We are retired and will live out our lives in comfort but we lost a lot under Bush. We're now at the Bush recession point - thanks to Obama.

But then, our economy always does better with a Dem in the WH.

Everyone lost under Bush and it takes time to get that back. But, you never really get it back.

. Obama gave $85Billion per month to Wall Street so your 401k nest egg would grow like a bubble, which is about to burst.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

Did anyone notice the commercials. I always pay attention to stuff like that. There was the sappy one about that Suffragette movie and the Walmart one about low wages. Then there was an immigration one asking whether 1 million legal immigrants per year is the right number. The first two were targeted to a Dem audience. Not sure what to make of the last one

Those people couldn't find jobs that paid a decent wage because wetbacks and H1Bs work for shit wages.

 

[JimBowie1958]

JB you are,right that repubs need to address people's pocketbook issues more,fully but you go overboard on the corporation thing. Dems are as deep up,the ass of corporations as repubs as Obama has proven. Let's,not,forget,that,polls,show that a vast majority of citizens feel,the country is headed in the wrong direction. The narrative of tea party as extremists is a media myth. The tea party wants rule of law, the constitution and smaller govt. the dems want socialism by whatever name you want to call it, a failed system, and a totally unamerican animal. They are the extremists even with geniuses like Mertex telling us the only reason the liberals have gone so far left is cause the repubs are so far right. Liberal logic for dummies. Mertex is wrong that repubs have not accomplished anything in congress, they have accomplished far more than Harry Reid, but she is,right that repubs have done everything Obama wanted. And you wonder why we want a change of leadership. Carson, trump, Rubio, and especially Fiorino would eat Hilary's lunch in a debate, and I'll take all bets on that one. In a general election Hilary would lose big with freebies for everyone especially illegals. She is already losing core support among women, and is behind most of the top,tier repubs in head to head matches. With her lengthy public exposure her flip flops are legendary and documented. She is the whore,of expediency and the country sees it.

The best review of the debate was the notion that this was an exercise for the democratic base. If you look at it that way it explains the extreme leftist rhetoric.

I agree with almost all of this except that you are not seeing the underlying reasons for the revival of socialism, and I'll do a separate post on that. We are entering a very uncertain and chaotic period economically and we are not yet braced for it.

But Hillary is not my worry, she is a political whore, and her claim of wanting to double the immigration that Obama let in is going to kill her in the election.

It is Sanders whom I most respect and think is the biggest threat to the GOP because I think he is sniffing the upheaval I will describe in another thread. The GOP and the establishment of both parties are going to be caught flat footed on this much as they were by the toxic mortgage debt problems of 2008.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Apparently, all of them forgot that it is the Republicans who control BOTH houses of the Congress. I couldn't contain my laughter.

Yeah, well how's that working for you? Same-sex marriage, the Iran Deal, funding for Planned Parenthood.........that is funny, they only think they control both houses of Congress.

Yep.

Useless bunch of impotent Benghazi pubs has control and email they're still not Benghazi doing email anything. Nothing.

Well, they did Benghazi stop a couple of jobs email bills and jobs/housing for vets. And they keep Benghazi passing those email phony repeal insurance for 80 million Americans bill.

Republicans are not called the Do Nothings for nothing.

Meanwhile, President Obama is governing.

If a pub were to get into the WH, nothing would change except the working/poor classes would lose more.

You saying under Obama the middle class is expanding? LOL!! The middle class is shrinking under Obama.

Thanks to President Obama, we've just about regained all that we lost under the Cheeney administration.

Was just looking at my TIA-Creff. We are retired and will live out our lives in comfort but we lost a lot under Bush. We're now at the Bush recession point - thanks to Obama.

But then, our economy always does better with a Dem in the WH.

Everyone lost under Bush and it takes time to get that back. But, you never really get it back.

. Obama gave $85Billion per month to Wall Street so your 401k nest egg would grow like a bubble, which is about to burst.

The problem is that there are so many bubbles, we are 'about' to see a destruction of financial capital that will far surpass 2008. It will hasten the changes toward a more individualized and fractured largely cashless barter economy.

Biggest of all it is going to scare a great many Americans toward socialism much like they were in the 1930's. Socialism 'Lite' is not a catastrophic change, and through the wonders of our democratic republic, we will be able to allay the fears of the public to a great degree through largely symbolic programs. But capitalism is going to take a large hit below the waterline and pro-Democrat financiers I think are waiting for a Republican to get into office again so they can yank that rug out.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Those people couldn't find jobs that paid a decent wage because wetbacks and H1Bs work for shit wages.

Our immigration is going to reverse for a while in the not-too distant future. More Americans will emigrate overseas to Europe and Russia to find work and they will see how hard that is to do. This fantasy that liberals have of a whole new set of ethnicities displacing the older more established ones is a classic case of static analysis.

The Democratic party is going to see some gains on the left but losses in demographics as their core constituencies return to the ethnics of the 1950s and the newer immigrants get largely chased out of the country.

The Democratic Party of 20150 will be considered grossly racist by the Democrats of today, if they could see it.

 

[JimBowie1958]

And I think that was an improvement. The Rockefeller wing of the party had to change tactics and cooperate with traditional conservatives, though George Herbert Walker Bush reversed that largely while maintaining the Reagan labeling.

An improvement? Republicans can't even get someone to step up and take the position of Speaker of the House, they have ended up losing arguments and have handed Democrats victory over some of the issues they were willing to shut the government down over.....like not funding PP, or not agreeing on the Iran Deal, and not being able to repeal Obamacare, something they want so badly they have brought it up 50 times? So explain to me how that is an improvement?

Because we are talking about different time frames. I was speaking of it being an improvement for the GOP when it became led by a populist former Democrat, Ronald Reagan, and the blue blood Rockefeller wing had to yield to the firebrand. Then Bush the elder reversed much of what Reagan accomplished accenting the worst and ditching the best aspects of Reaganism while still paying lip service to it all.

A lot of things have changed since then, the biggest one was the two major parties elites of the Professional Political Class got together and took over the debate forums from the League of Women Voters and set the rules to exclude third Party candidates. They have increased the threshold of getting on the ballot in each state and have recruited the talking heads in the mass media and isolated the independent voices of Schaffly, Sobran, Roberts and others to marginal media on the internet mostly. So we now face what is essentially a duopoly of our political system and the people running it have not taken an honest and fresh pulse of the American people in decades. I think that is what is driving the outsider fad this year and it looks like the Democrats are going to suppress theirs but not the GOP. I think either Trump, Carson, or Firorina will take the nomination, and certainly not the designated heir Jebba the Bush.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Trump twitterin during debatge got a lot of chatter.


Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) | Twitter


"@TimCooperTweets: How amazing is it that the #1 trending topic is @realDonaldTrump talking about the #DemDebate-more than the debate itself

I'm not good at Twitter and can't figure out how to see his tweets. I was seeing others tweets about his tweets. I go to his tweet home page and its static...no recent content from him during the debate. Where do you go to view the tweets of people you are following?

Facebook. Sorry I don't tweet or twitter either.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Yeah, well how's that working for you? Same-sex marriage, the Iran Deal, funding for Planned Parenthood.........that is funny, they only think they control both houses of Congress.

Yep.

Useless bunch of impotent Benghazi pubs has control and email they're still not Benghazi doing email anything. Nothing.

Well, they did Benghazi stop a couple of jobs email bills and jobs/housing for vets. And they keep Benghazi passing those email phony repeal insurance for 80 million Americans bill.

Republicans are not called the Do Nothings for nothing.

Meanwhile, President Obama is governing.

If a pub were to get into the WH, nothing would change except the working/poor classes would lose more.

You saying under Obama the middle class is expanding? LOL!! The middle class is shrinking under Obama.

Thanks to President Obama, we've just about regained all that we lost under the Cheeney administration.

Was just looking at my TIA-Creff. We are retired and will live out our lives in comfort but we lost a lot under Bush. We're now at the Bush recession point - thanks to Obama.

But then, our economy always does better with a Dem in the WH.

Everyone lost under Bush and it takes time to get that back. But, you never really get it back.

. Obama gave $85Billion per month to Wall Street so your 401k nest egg would grow like a bubble, which is about to burst.

The problem is that there are so many bubbles, we are 'about' to see a destruction of financial capital that will far surpass 2008. It will hasten the changes toward a more individualized and fractured largely cashless barter economy.

Biggest of all it is going to scare a great many Americans toward socialism much like they were in the 1930's. Socialism 'Lite' is not a catastrophic change, and through the wonders of our democratic republic, we will be able to allay the fears of the public to a great degree through largely symbolic programs. But capitalism is going to take a large hit below the waterline and pro-Democrat financiers I think are waiting for a Republican to get into office again so they can yank that rug out.

OK. Let me ask for clarification. You know that a financial crisis worse than 2008 is going to happen....it is inevitable. And...this will happen when the next Republican president is in office......because pro-Democrat financiers are going to force the crisis. On purpose. They are planning it now.

Is that it?

 

[JimBowie1958]

It is not their fault that the Republicans were asked questions about their opinion/opposition of another candidates action/stated platform and the Democrats weren't asked any of those questions.

If you're talking about the Republican debate that was hosted by Faux News......I guess they're not too bright over at Faux to put their candidates in that position and ask some of the questions they did.....but, the CNN Republican debate didn't ask any question that would cause Trump to insult Rand Paul and minimize his being there because he was low on the polls, or Scott Walker's telling Trump they didn't need an Apprentice in the WH, or Trump telling Bush he is low energy and criticized him for speaking Spanish and Paul bringing up Jeb Bush smoking pot....so, which questions exactly elicited that type of attack on each other?

It wasn't a closely guarded secret that CNN was going to try and generate a larger audience by setting the candidates on each other, and there were plenty of willing dupes to do it, and each of them fell in the polls afterwards. People don't like seeing other candidates getting nasty with each other though they will give a pass to the guy hitting back, unlike field sports, lol.

 

[LoneLaugher]

And I think that was an improvement. The Rockefeller wing of the party had to change tactics and cooperate with traditional conservatives, though George Herbert Walker Bush reversed that largely while maintaining the Reagan labeling.

An improvement? Republicans can't even get someone to step up and take the position of Speaker of the House, they have ended up losing arguments and have handed Democrats victory over some of the issues they were willing to shut the government down over.....like not funding PP, or not agreeing on the Iran Deal, and not being able to repeal Obamacare, something they want so badly they have brought it up 50 times? So explain to me how that is an improvement?

Because we are talking about different time frames. I was speaking of it being an improvement for the GOP when it became led by a populist former Democrat, Ronald Reagan, and the blue blood Rockefeller wing had to yield to the firebrand. Then Bush the elder reversed much of what Reagan accomplished accenting the worst and ditching the best aspects of Reaganism while still paying lip service to it all.

A lot of things have changed since then, the biggest one was the two major parties elites of the Professional Political Class got together and took over the debate forums from the League of Women Voters and set the rules to exclude third Party candidates. They have increased the threshold of getting on the ballot in each state and have recruited the talking heads in the mass media and isolated the independent voices of Schaffly, Sobran, Roberts and others to marginal media on the internet mostly. So we now face what is essentially a duopoly of our political system and the people running it have not taken an honest and fresh pulse of the American people in decades. I think that is what is driving the outsider fad this year and it looks like the Democrats are going to suppress theirs but not the GOP. I think either Trump, Carson, or Firorina will take the nomination, and certainly not the designated heir Jebba the Bush.

Trump, Carson or Fiorina. That's awesome analysis. Are you a betting man?