2016 US Presidential Race - Mod Warning in OP

jobbridge4life

The Black Oil wrote: »

Pathetic that they're still obsessed with that, really.

It just demonstrates how little of real substance the Republicans have to say.

alaimacerc

ECO_Mental wrote: »

This whole "bleeding from wherever" comment has to be the end of him.

One almost finds oneself thinking he's worried that he's not been "forced" to bow out yet, and is doubling down on the outrage until he is...

Amerika

The Black Oil wrote: »

Pathetic that they're still obsessed with that, really.

The Christie/Obama hug? Ancient history to most. And you say this because of the debate? Oh, please! Fox news screwed that debate up. Rather than focusing on the issues and differences between the Republicans and Hillary Clinton, the presumed democratic candidate, FNC turned it into a ‘gotcha’ reality show. Hopefully the next debate will focus on the issues.

Brian?

Amerika wrote: »

The Christie/Obama hug? Ancient history to most. And you say this because of the debate? Oh, please! Fox news screwed that debate up. Rather than focusing on the issues and differences between the Republicans and Hillary Clinton, the presumed democratic candidate, FNC turned it into a ‘gotcha’ reality show. Hopefully the next debate will focus on the issues.

Ha! You're angry at "fair and balanced" Foxnews for showing some slight impartiality? You were hoping for a pile of softball questions?

It was up to the candidates to differentiate themselves. They weren't debating Hilary, they were debating each other.

Amerika

Brian? wrote: »

Ha! You're angry at "fair and balanced" Foxnews for showing some slight impartiality? You were hoping for a pile of softball questions?

It was up to the candidates to differentiate themselves. They weren't debating Hilary, they were debating each other.

No, I was hoping the debate would be more focused on jobs, the economy, regulations, and governmental overreach... Silly me.

KingBrian2

We learned something from the debate. The GOP don't like Mexico.

Brian?

Amerika wrote: »

No, I was hoping the debate would be more focused on jobs, the economy, regulations, and governmental overreach... Silly me.

I didn't realise you'd never seen a primary debate before. They're all like this.

Amerika

KingBrian2 wrote: »

We learned something from the debate. The GOP don't like Mexico.

Sure we do. Most of the establishment Republicans bend over backwards for them, just like Democrats.

Amerika

Brian? wrote: »

I didn't realise you'd never seen a primary debate before. They're all like this.

I've seen plenty. The next GOP debate is at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library and is sponsored by CNN and Christian broadcasters, the Salem Media Group. I have hopes for the next one as CNN will probably pull out all the stops to try and redeem itself after the Candy Crowley debate debacle. I do hope Carly Fiorina makes the lineup for the next one.

Overheal

Candy Crowley, the moderator who stuffed Romney's own sock in his mouth for trying to inject spin into the debate? I could see how GOP/Republican/Right-leaning voters would have been upset by that. :rolleyes:

(video title not my first choice)

Amerika

Overheal wrote: »

Candy Crowley, the moderator who stuffed Romney's own sock in his mouth for trying to inject spin into the debate? I could see how GOP/Republican/Right-leaning voters would have been upset by that. :rolleyes:

(video title not my first choice)

That's one way of looking at it. Then there's the more accurate one, accepted by most, that she voided her debate moderator responsibilities and perpetuated the Obama lie that his vague statement was in direct regard to the terrorists attack on our mission in Benghazi.

Overheal

Amerika wrote: »

That's one way of looking at it. Then there's the more accurate one, accepted by most, that she voided her debate moderator responsibilities and perpetuated the Obama lie that his vague statement was in direct regard to the terrorists attack on our mission in Benghazi.

Either way, we can both agree Benghazi will come up during this election cycle.

ECO_Mental

Overheal wrote: »

Either way, we can both agree Benghazi will come up during this election cycle.

Why are the GOP so upset about Bengahazi? And Fox still harp on about it like it some silver bullet they have on Clinton. From what I can see its just because she or obama didn't say it was a "terrorist attack" the five minutes after it happened it just them a couple of days to say it. Am I right or is there more to it?

Don't want to derail the thread but this apparently is a massive issue with the GOP and will form part of the election

Brian?

Amerika wrote: »

That's one way of looking at it. Then there's the more accurate one, accepted by most, that she voided her debate moderator responsibilities and perpetuated the Obama lie that his vague statement was in direct regard to the terrorists attack on our mission in Benghazi.

This again? Romney was caught out because he was out manoeuvred. He should have known exactly what President Obama said. The was enough wiggle room in the statement for Obama to use later, it was clever politics.

The moderator actually did a decent job I'm that debate. Romney lost because he was sloppy and robotic. To describe it as a debacle is nonsense.

The next GOP debate will be similar to the last one. It's the nature of primary debates with this many candidates.

Brian?

ECO_Mental wrote: »

Why are the GOP so upset about Bengahazi? And Fox still harp on about it like it some silver bullet they have on Clinton. From what I can see its just because she or obama didn't say it was a "terrorist attack" the five minutes after it happened it just them a couple of days to say it. Am I right or is there more to it?

Don't want to derail the thread but this apparently is a massive issue with the GOP and will form part of the election

The GOP accuse Clinton of a coverup, when in reality it was negligence and incompetency that was the problem.

ECO_Mental

Brian? wrote: »

The GOP accuse Clinton of a coverup, when in reality it was negligence and incompetency that was the problem.

What do they think she is covering up, the 25000 employees that work for the state dept all the CIA that operate out of these embassies.

Do the GOP think that she personally reviews the security of every one of their embassies,seems a pretty loose argument. I am sure that they have fleets of staff from CIA NSA feeding them intel, and the embasador on the ground I am sure would know better as well.

But what do I know

Brian?

ECO_Mental wrote: »

What do they think she is covering up, the 25000 employees that work for the state dept all the CIA that operate out of these embassies.

Do the GOP think that she personally reviews the security of every one of their embassies,seems a pretty loose argument. I am sure that they have fleets of staff from CIA NSA feeding them intel, and the embasador on the ground I am sure would know better as well.

But what do I know

It's hard to know what they're actually accusing Clinton of.

http://gawker.com/what-the-****-is-all-this-benghazi-****-an-explainer-499776059

Hande hoche!

Seems like Rick Perry might be dropping out of the race.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/aug/10/rick-perry-stops-paying-2016-campaign-staff-south-/#.VclMKcikcOU.twitter

Amerika

Brian? wrote: »

This again? Romney was caught out because he was out manoeuvred. He should have known exactly what President Obama said. The was enough wiggle room in the statement for Obama to use later, it was clever politics.

The moderator actually did a decent job I'm that debate. Romney lost because he was sloppy and robotic. To describe it as a debacle is nonsense.

The next GOP debate will be similar to the last one. It's the nature of primary debates with this many candidates.

No she didn't. Crowley later admitted that in the debate Romney was right and she was wrong. And if she had stuck to her duties as moderator the problem wouldn’t have arisen in the first place.


Benghazi remains important as an example of a failure of leadership and a decision process on Clinton's part, and of lies utilized to protect political futures.

20Cent

There's been something like nine investigations into Bengazi. Why do they keep looking for a scandal?
Obama called it terrorism the next day on the Whitehouse lawn.
The republicans vetoed the budget for extra security in embassies by the way.

Manach

It would be an interesting compare and contrast to discuss US foreign policy as it related to the initial decision to both invade and destablise Libya in the first place as well as the wider role of US in the region, ie if candidates support the use of drones outside of militarised zones.

BoJack Horseman

Manach wrote: »

It would be an interesting compare and contrast to discuss US foreign policy as it related to the initial decision to both invade and destablise Libya in the first place as well as the wider role of US in the region, ie if candidates support the use of drones outside of militarised zones.

wrt Libya, the US was relatively ambivalent militarily

It was Sarkozy & Cameron who lead that charge, however both have degraded their respective militaries to such an extent that they needed the US to do some of the heavy lifting.

a tin-pot dictator was beyond the combined 'might' of the UK & France who ran out of missiles by day 3.

I dont doubt that Obama would have preferred Gadaffi gone, But I doubt it was ever a priority for him.

AFAIK most candidates are ok with the use of UAVs in America, at least on its border.
They are much handier & cheaper than using manned flight.

I think Rand Paul voiced misgivings wrt to surveillance permissions/warrants on individuals?

Amerika

20Cent wrote: »

There's been something like nine investigations into Bengazi. Why do they keep looking for a scandal?
Obama called it terrorism the next day on the Whitehouse lawn.
The republicans vetoed the budget for extra security in embassies by the way.

They're not looking for scandal, their looking for the truth and accountability. It is obvious from the latest investigation that anything done prior was inadequate because of all the information Clinton and the State department refused to turn over to investigators.

And no he didn't call the attack terrorism the next day on the White House lawn. He was making a general statement about terrorism.

jobbridge4life

Amerika wrote: »

They're not looking for scandal, their looking for the truth and accountability. It is obvious from the latest investigation that anything done prior was inadequate because of all the information Clinton and the State department refused to turn over to investigators.

And no he didn't call the attack terrorism the next day on the White House lawn. He was making a general statement about terrorism.

Republicans vetoed extra monies for embassy security. You are done. Finished. Pick another wart to pick at (fruitlessly).

Amerika

jobbridge4life wrote: »

Republicans vetoed extra monies for embassy security. You are done. Finished. Pick another wart to pick at (fruitlessly).

Yes, the GOP controlled House did initially approve about $330 million less than what the administration requested. But in the final bill which passed with bipartisan support after adjustments by the Senate, put the amount much closer to the administration's target. So, what did the Administration do with that extra money? Apparently it didn't much go into security.

jobbridge4life

Amerika wrote: »

Yes, the GOP controlled House did initially approve about $330 million less than what the administration requested. But in the final bill which passed with bipartisan support after adjustments by the Senate, put the amount much closer to the administration's target. So, what did the Administration do with that extra money? Apparently it didn't much go into security.

It doesn't matter because even if it was one cent it was one cent more than the Republicans in the House were going to give. The whole party is nothing more than loons, hypocrites, and the occasional hero.

Amerika

jobbridge4life wrote: »

It doesn't matter because even if it was one cent it was one cent more than the Republicans in the House were going to give. The whole party is nothing more than loons, hypocrites, and the occasional hero.

Well, that's an improvement from being labeled Gypsies, Tramps and Thieves I guess.

ECO_Mental

I think what's sad and disgusting is that the GOP are using a tragedy where a US ambassador and staff died to make political capital:(

I think if the US state dept knew that the embassy was going to come under attack they would have sent in a SEAL team ASAP or bomb the F*** out of the place. To imply that Hillary or any body in the state dept would say "ah sure they'll be grand" if they got warning is comical

Amerika

ECO_Mental wrote: »

I think what's sad and disgusting is that the GOP are using a tragedy where a US ambassador and staff died to make political capital:(

I think if the US state dept knew that the embassy was going to come under attack they would have sent in a SEAL team ASAP or bomb the F*** out of the place. To imply that Hillary or any body in the state dept would say "ah sure they'll be grand" if they got warning is comical

Ah yes, Democrats - good, Republicans - evil.

No they didn't! They told those who might have been able to help, to stand down.

But back to Hillary... Video, Mob? What do you think of Hillary’s statement, when she knew form the onslaught of the attack that it was terrorist group and not a mob, and had nothing to do with a video? Is the guy who made the video still sitting in jail? This is not the type of person our country deserves as our next leader.

jobbridge4life

Amerika wrote: »

Well, that's an improvement from being labeled Gypsies, Tramps and Thieves I guess.

OMG Cher reference... you know how to win me over Chica.