2016 US Presidential Race - Mod Warning in OP

daithi1970

..Marco Rubio seems to be doing well so far...also,is it just me, or does Ted Cruz look like Ida Quagmire??

RobertKK

Carla Fiorini also doing well in my opinion.

Overheal

Overheal wrote: »

Not watching, as you have to pay for cable to watch through any mainstream means.

$4 billion collectively spent on the midterms, but people still want to upcharge Americans to 'participate' in democracy.

Bernie Sanders response to debate night includes free livestream of Students Town Hall:

(Available on repeat - literally skip to 28:30 unless you want to see people shuffling into their seats and other warmup stuff)

daithi1970

..it's hard to know who actually won..Jeb was the big loser though..

Wompa1

From what little I saw, they focused their remarks on Obama and Hillary...I'm guessing in an effort to marginalize Bernie Sanders

Overheal

You know, Republicans are poised to lose this election to students, women, blacks and latinos. Students are 10% of the population (3.3-3.5 million). Each with 2 parents that make up another 20% of the population or so. They may even have a voting-age sibling, another 5% of the vote. And how many families with students do you think will say 'no' to tuition reforms? And - how many other families are out there who would otherwise be in college but for lack of funding? another 10% of the vote?

Thargor

Manach wrote: »

So the main part of the post I can decipher is that he is accountable for his actions when he as a minor? Is this inclusive of all candidates now or should we go back to infants school to ensure that proper presidental style was shown at all times.

Heres a fun thought experiment, pretend Barrack Obama back in the 2008 or 2012 campaigns had told a delightful anecdote about the time he'd become angry and tried to gut one of his friends with a hunting knife or the time he'd told a gunman to go for the guy on the cash register instead and picture the Republican response to that story, I think they would have been pretty inclusive regardless of his age.

MightyMandarin

Manach wrote: »

The categorisation of loon seems to be those that are supportive of both the GoP and hold a pro-Life position instead of the cult of nihilism that abortion activists seem to embrace as their own shibboleth. As for taxes, this seems a return to clip away the behemoth of the modern state that now reaches with more rules and regulations that dwarf historic norms.

The categorisation of him as a 'loon' or just very weird has nothing to do with his beliefs on religion, abortion or taxes (although they are important issues). I think Carson is very weird because he says some very weird things ('give guns to Jews and they would've stopped the Holocaust' anyone? ).

Regardless of the fact that he's a world-renowned neurosurgeon, Carson just seems to say things that wouldn't be expected of a reasonably intelligent person, no matter how conservative or liberal they are.

He just seems like a softer-spoken, more intelligent Donald Trump.

Amerika

Overheal wrote: »

You know, Republicans are poised to lose this election to students, women, blacks and latinos. Students are 10% of the population (3.3-3.5 million). Each with 2 parents that make up another 20% of the population or so. They may even have a voting-age sibling, another 5% of the vote. And how many families with students do you think will say 'no' to tuition reforms? And - how many other families are out there who would otherwise be in college but for lack of funding? another 10% of the vote?

There is some truth to that, but they would probably vote Democratic no matter what. Luckily for the nation, though, predictions are those groups you mention aren’t expected to vote in large numbers in the presidential election, unless something changes.

Amerika

That debate proved one thing... The media IS in the tank for Democrats. Why the GOP lets members of the media who disparage republicans on an ongoing basis and would never vote GOP, ‘moderate’ a debate is beyond me. You’d think after the Candy Crowley debacle they would have learned something.

RobertKK

Looks like Ireland will be a side note in the US Presidential elections with Pfizer and Allergan in talks to merge and be domiciled in Ireland. Pfizer one of the US 's largest companies. Allergan became domiciled in Ireland earlier this year when they were taken over by Irish domiciled Actavis, but they took on Allergan's name - Allergan makes botox so you know who they are.
Now if this deal happens then Pfizer will become an Irish domiciled company.
A deal would be worth over $320 billion plus.

These tax inversions by US companies to lower tax countries is going to be a big issue in the elections, as more and more US companies are domiciling themselves in countries like Ireland.

Overheal

Amerika wrote: »

There is some truth to that, but they would probably vote Democratic no matter what. Luckily for the nation, though, predictions are those groups you mention aren’t expected to vote in large numbers in the presidential election, unless something changes.

Ah, predictions. Like all those polls that showed McCain winning all those states that he didn't?

Arguably the predictions are poorly modeled, and do not account for Sanders energizing dormant voter bases.

Amerika wrote: »

That debate proved one thing... The media IS in the tank for Democrats. Why the GOP lets members of the media who disparage republicans on an ongoing basis and would never vote GOP, ‘moderate’ a debate is beyond me. You’d think after the Candy Crowley debacle they would have learned something.

The GOP disparages itself though. That was the whole purpose of the Tea Party I thought. Then you let Trump run in the primary.

Brian?

RobertKK wrote: »

Looks like Ireland will be a side note in the US Presidential elections with Pfizer and Allergan in talks to merge and be domiciled in Ireland. Pfizer one of the US 's largest companies. Allergan became domiciled in Ireland earlier this year when they were taken over by Irish domiciled Actavis, but they took on Allergan's name - Allergan makes botox so you know who they are.
Now if this deal happens then Pfizer will become an Irish domiciled company.
A deal would be worth over $320 billion plus.

These tax inversions by US companies to lower tax countries is going to be a big issue in the elections, as more and more US companies are domiciling themselves in countries like Ireland.

In fairness, Pfizer is already a huge employer in Ireland. They make Viagra in Cork and have a massive site in Grange Castle. If they wanted to be tax domicile in Ireland wouldn't they have done it already? The Cork site is there 30 years.

jobbridge4life

Amerika wrote: »

That debate proved one thing... The media IS in the tank for Democrats. Why the GOP lets members of the media who disparage republicans on an ongoing basis and would never vote GOP, ‘moderate’ a debate is beyond me. You’d think after the Candy Crowley debacle they would have learned something.

Whiney moaney people who want to run the strongest power in the world and all they can do is complain about some tough questions... its an embarrassment.

Overheal

So given the media outcry, the republican outcry (and the republican media outcry) I wanted to know exactly what were these "highly offensive questions" asked of the candidates? So, the transcripted questions that candidates took offense to:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/10/28/the-third-republican-debate-annotating-the-transcript/ (clicking yellow text will pull up journalist annotations)

HARWOOD: Mr. Trump, you've done very well in this campaign so far by promising to build a wall and make another country pay for it.

TRUMP: Right.

HARWOOD: Send 11 million people out of the country. Cut taxes $10 trillion without increasing the deficit.

TRUMP: Right.

HARWOOD: And make Americans better off because your greatness would replace the stupidity and incompetence of others.

TRUMP: That's right.

HARWOOD: Let's be honest.

(LAUGHTER)

Is this a comic book version of a presidential campaign?

TRUMP: No, not a comic book, and it's not a very nicely asked question the way you say that.

Larry Kudlow is an example, who I have a lot of respect for, who loves my tax plan. We're reducing taxes to 15 percent. We're bringing corporate taxes down, bringing money back in, corporate inversions. We have $2.5 trillion outside of the United States which we want to bring back in.

As far as the wall is concerned, we're going to build a wall. We're going to create a border. We're going to let people in, but they're going to come in legally. They're going to come in legally. And it's something that can be done, and I get questioned about that. They built the great wall of China. That's 13,000 miles. Here, we actually need 1,000 because we have natural barriers. So we need 1,000.

We can do a wall. We're going to have a big, fat beautiful door right in the middle of the wall. We're going to have people come in, but they're coming in legally. And Mexico's going to pay for the wall because Mexico -- I love the Mexican people; I respect the Mexican leaders -- but the leaders are much sharper, smarter and more cunning than our leaders.

And just to finish, people say, how will you get Mexico to pay? A politician other than the people in the states -- I don't want to -- a politician cannot get them to pay. I can. We lose, we have a trade imbalance...

Excuse me, John.

... of $50 billion...

HARWOOD: We're at the 60 seconds.

TRUMP: ... believe me the world is peanuts by comparison.

HARWOOD: We're at 60 seconds, but I gotta ask you, you talked about your tax plan. You say that it would not increase the deficit because you cut taxes $10 trillion in the economy would take off like...

(CROSSTALK)

HARWOOD: Hold on, hold on. The economy would take off like a rocket ship.

TRUMP: Right. Dynamically.

HARWOOD: I talked to economic advisers who have served presidents of both parties. They said that you have as chance of cutting taxes that much without increasing the deficit as you would of flying away from that podium by flapping your arms.

TRUMP: Then you have to get rid of Larry Kudlow, who sits on your panel, who's a great guy, who came out the other day and said, I love Trump's tax plan.

(CROSSTALK)

HARWOOD: The Tax Foundation says -- has looked at all of our plans and -- and his creates, even with the dynamic effect, $8 trillion dollar deficit... QUICK: Gentlemen -- we'll -- we'll get back to this -- just a minute -- just a minute we're gonna continue this.

I wanna talk taxes...

QUINTANILLA: Hold it. We'll cut it back to you in just a minute. Becky's moving on.

QUICK: Dr. Carson, let's talk about taxes.

You have a flat tax plan of 10 percent flat taxes, and -- I've looked at it -- and this is something that is very appealing to a lot of voters, but I've had a really tough time trying to make the math work on this.

If you were to took a 10 percent tax, with the numbers right now in total personal income, you're gonna come in with bring in $1.5 trillion. That is less than half of what we bring in right now. And by the way, it's gonna leave us in a $2 trillion hole.

So what analysis got you to the point where you think this will work?

CARSON: Well, first of all, I didn't say that the rate would be 10 percent. I used the tithing analogy.

QUICK: I -- I understand that, but if you -- if you look at the numbers you probably have to get to 28.

CARSON: The rate -- the rate -- the rate is gonna be much closer to 15 percent.

QUICK: 15 percent still leaves you with a $1.1 trillion hole.

CARSON: You also have to get rid of all the deductions and all the loopholes. You also have to some strategically cutting in several places.

Remember, we have 645 federal agencies and sub-agencies. Anybody who tells me that we need every penny and every one of those is in a fantasy world.

So, also, we can stimulate the economy. That's gonna be the real growth engine. Stimulating the economy -- because it's tethered down right now with so many regulations...

QUICK: You'd have to cut -- you'd have to cut government about 40 percent to make it work with a $1.1 trillion hole.

CARSON: That's not true.

QUICK: That is true, I looked at the numbers.

CARSON: When -- when we put all the facts down, you'll be able to see that it's not true, it works out very well.

QUICK: Dr. Carson, thank you.

Clearly some of these questions are just bad, others are solidly on point.

FIORINA: Let me just say on taxes, how long have we been talking about tax reform in Washington, D.C.? We have been talking about it for decades. We now have a 73,000-page tax code.

There have been more than 4,000 changes to the tax plan since 2001 alone. There are loads of great ideas, great conservative ideas from wonderful think tanks about how to reform the tax code.

The problem is we never get it done. We have talked about tax reform in every single election for decades. It never happens. And the politicians always say it is so complicated, nobody but a politician can figure it out.

The truth is this, the big problem, we need a leader in Washington who understands how to get something done, not to talk about it, not to propose it, to get it done.

QUINTANILLA: You want to bring 70,000 pages to three?

FIORINA: That's right, three pages.

QUINTANILLA: Is that using really small type?

FIORINA: You know why three?

QUINTANILLA: Is that using really small type?

FIORINA: No. You know why three? Because only if it's about three pages are you leveling the playing field between the big, the powerful, the wealthy and the well-connected who can hire the armies of lawyers and accountants and, yes, lobbyists to help them navigate their way through 73,000 pages.

Three pages is about the maximum that a single business owner or a farmer or just a couple can understand without hiring somebody. Almost 60 percent of American people now need to hire an expert to understand their taxes.

So yes, you're going to hear a lot of talk about tax reform --

Just a smartass comment best left for twitter.

But for the most part for the next while, the questions were totally fine:

QUINTANILLA: We will come around the bend, I promise. This one is for Senator Rubio. You've been a young man in a hurry ever since you won your first election in your 20s. You've had a big accomplishment in the Senate, an immigration bill providing a path to citizenship the conservatives in your party hate, and even you don't support anymore. Now, you're skipping more votes than any senator to run for president. Why not slow down, get a few more things done first or least finish what you start?

Although,

QUINTANILLA: Well, do you hate your job?

Moving on..

HARWOOD: No, we're moving to Governor Bush. Governor, the fact that you're at the fifth lectern tonight shows how far your stock has fallen in this race, despite the big investment your donors have made.

HARWOOD: You noted recently, after slashing your payroll, that you had better things to do than sit around and be demonized by other people. I wanted to ask you --

BUSH: No, no. What I said was I don't believe that I would be president of the United States and have the same dysfunction that exists in Washington, D.C. now.

HARWOOD: OK.

BUSH: Don't vote for me if you want to keep the gridlock in Washington, D.C.

HARWOOD: Got it.

BUSH: But if you want someone who has a proven, effective leadership, that was a governor of a state, that transformed the culture there, elect me so I can fight for the American people and change the culture in Washington, D.C.

HARWOOD: But it's a -- OK. It's a -- it's a question about why you're having difficulty. I want to ask you in this context.

Ben Bernanke, who was appointed Fed chairman by your brother, recently wrote a book in which he said he no longer considers himself a Republican because the Republican Party has given in to know- nothingism. Is that why you're having a difficult time in this race?

QUICK: We'll get to everyone.

Ms. Fiorina, I -- I'd like to ask you a question. You are running for president of the United States because of your record running Hewlett-Packard. But the stock market is usually a fair indicator of the performance of a CEO, and the market was not kind to you.

Someone who invested a dollar in your company the day you took office had lost half of the dollar by the day you left. Obviously, you've talked in the past about what a difficult time it was for technology companies, but anybody who was following the market knows that your stock was a much worse performer, if you looked at your competitors, if you looked at the overall market.

I just wonder, in terms of all of that -- you know, we look back, your board fired you. I just wondered why you think we should hire you now.

QUICK: Mrs. Fiorina, it's interesting that you bring up Mr. Perkins, because...

(APPLAUSE) ...he said a lot of very questionable things. Last year, in an interview, he said that he thinks wealthy people should get more votes than poor people.

I think his quote was that, "if you pay zero dollars in taxes, you should get zero votes. If you pay a million dollars, you should get a million votes." Is this the type of person you want defending you?

And then the exchange that came out of nowhere:

QUINTANILLA: Senator Cruz. Congressional Republicans, Democrats and the White House are about to strike a compromise that would raise the debt limit, prevent a government shutdown and calm financial markets that fear of -- another Washington-created crisis is on the way.

Does your opposition to it show that you're not the kind of problem-solver American voters want?

CRUZ: You know, let me say something at the outset. The questions that have been asked so far in this debate illustrate why the American people don't trust the media.

(APPLAUSE) This is not a cage match. And, you look at the questions -- "Donald Trump, are you a comic-book villain?" "Ben Carson, can you do math?" "John Kasich, will you insult two people over here?" "Marco Rubio, why don't you resign?" "Jeb Bush, why have your numbers fallen?"

How about talking about the substantive issues the people care about?

(APPLAUSE)

QUINTANILLA: (inaudible) do we get credit (inaudible)?

CRUZ: And Carl -- Carl, I'm not finished yet.

CRUZ: The contrast with the Democratic debate, where every fawning question from the media was, "Which of you is more handsome and why?"

(LAUGHTER)

And let me be clear.

(CROSSTALK)

QUINTANILLA: So, this is a question about (inaudible), which you have 30 seconds left to answer, should you choose to do so.

CRUZ: Let me be clear. The men and women on this stage have more ideas, more experience, more common sense than every participant in the Democratic debate. That debate reflected a debate between the Bolsheviks and the Mensheviks.

(LAUGHTER)

And nobody watching at home believed that any of the moderators had any intention of voting in a Republican primary. The questions that are being asked shouldn't be trying to get people to tear into each other. It should be what are your substantive positions...

(CROSSTALK)

QUINTANILLA: OK. (inaudible) I asked you about the debt limit and I got no answer.

(CROSSTALK)

CRUZ: You want me to answer that question? I'm happy to answer the question...

(CROSSTALK)

CRUZ: Let me tell you how that question...

(CROSSTALK)

CRUZ: Let me tell you how that question...

(CROSSTALK)

HARWOOD: Senator Paul, I've got a question for you on the same subject.

CRUZ: ... so you don't actually want to hear the answer, John?

HARWOOD: Senator Paul?

CRUZ: You don't want to hear the answer. You just want to...

(CROSSTALK)

HARWOOD: You used your time on something else.

Senator Paul?

CRUZ: You're not interested in an answer.

(CROSSTALK)

They made up afterwards though,

QUINTANILLA: ...Before we go to break, we're clearly not having that beer you mentioned, but I'll give you 30 more seconds...

CRUZ: ...Then I'll buy you a tequila...

QUINTANILLA: OK.

CRUZ: ...Or, even some famous Colorado brownies.

Overheal

Oh and Christie's "rude" exchange over the very real problem that Fantasy football has become legalized gambling akin to day-trading..

QUINTANILLA: Governor Bush, daily fantasy sports has become a phenomenon in this country, will award billions of dollars in prize money this year. But to play you have to assess your odds, put money at risk, wait for an outcome that's out of your control. Isn't that the definition of gambling, and should the Federal Government treat it as such?

BUSH: Well, first of all, I'm 7 and 0 in my fantasy league.

QUINTANILLA: I had a feeling you were going to brag about that.

BUSH: Gronkowski is still going strong. I have Ryan Tannehill, Marco, as my quarterback, he was 18 for 19 last week. So I'm doing great. But we're not gambling.

And I think this has become something that needs to be looked at in terms of regulation. Effectively it is day trading without any regulation at all. And when you have insider information, which apparently has been the case, where people use that information and use big data to try to take advantage of it, there has to be some regulation.

If they can't regulate themselves, then the NFL needs to look at just, you know, moving away from them a little bit. And there should be some regulation. I have no clue whether the federal government is the proper place, my instinct is to say, hell no, just about everything about the federal government.

(CROSSTALK)

CHRISTIE: Carl, are we really talking about getting government involved in fantasy football?

(LAUGHTER)

We have -- wait a second, we have $19 trillion in debt. We have people out of work. We have ISIS and al Qaeda attacking us. And we're talking about fantasy football? Can we stop?

(APPLAUSE)

CHRISTIE: How about this? How about we get the government to do what they're supposed to be doing, secure our borders, protect our people, and support American values and American families. Enough on fantasy football. Let people play, who cares?

(CROSSTALK)

QUICK: I want to go back, if I can, to the issue of...

(CROSSTALK)

QUICK: I want to go back, if I may, to the... HARWOOD: Governor Christie, you've said something that many in your party do not believe, which is that climate change is undeniable, that human activity contributes to it, and you said, quote: "The question is, what do we do to deal with it?".

So what do we do?

CHRISTIE: Well, first off, what we don't do is do what Hillary Clinton and John Kerry and Barack Obama want us to do, which is their solution for everything, put more taxes on it, give more money to Washington, D.C., and then they will fix it.

Well, there is no evidence that they can fix anything in Washington, D.C.

HARWOOD: What should we do?

CHRISTIE: What we should do is to be investing in all types of energy, John, all types of energy. I've laid out...

HARWOOD: You mean government?

CHRISTIE: No, John. John, do you want me to answer or do you want to answer?

(LAUGHTER)

How are we going to do this?

(APPLAUSE)

Because, I've got to tell you the truth, even in New Jersey what you're doing is called rude. So...

(LAUGHTER)

We've laid out a national energy plan that says that we should invest in all types of energy. I will tell you, you could win a bet at a bar tonight, since we're talking about fantasy football, if you ask who the top three states in America are that produce solar energy: California and Arizona are easy, but number three is New Jersey.

Why? Because we work with the private sector to make solar energy affordable and available to businesses and individuals in our state.

We need to make sure that we do everything across all kinds of energy: natural gas, oil, absolutely. But also where it's affordable, solar, wind in Iowa has become very affordable and it makes sense.

That is the way we deal with global warming, climate change, or any of those problems, not through government intervention, not through government taxes, and for God's sake, don't send Washington another dime until they stop wasting the money they're already sending there.

HARWOOD: Thank you, Governor.

RobertKK

Brian? wrote: »

In fairness, Pfizer is already a huge employer in Ireland. They make Viagra in Cork and have a massive site in Grange Castle. If they wanted to be tax domicile in Ireland wouldn't they have done it already? The Cork site is there 30 years.

Actavis became an Irish company when it bought Dublin headquartered Warner Chilcott. Then Allergan became an Irish company when it was bought by Actavis, now Pfizer will become technically an Irish company if it buys Allergan.
Pfizer couldn't just declare itself an Irish company. It tried to buy Astrazeneca earlier in the year for the lower UK tax rates and it's cancer drugs.

Tax inversion is going to become a hot topic if Pfizer suddenly becomes headquartered in Dublin. A deal with Allergan would make it the largest pharma company in the world.
I read that Allergan paid an effective 4.8% tax rate on its profits compared to 25.5% paid by Pfizer.

The Randy Riverbeast

Is this a comic book version of a presidential campaign?

TRUMP: No, not a comic book, and it's not a very nicely asked question the way you say that.

Looks like Trump cant receive what he gives.

Eric Cartman

Last nights debate had such loaded questions from quick for trump and cruz. It was very clear she had it in for them.

it was less of a debate on policy and integrity and more a "lets riall up republicans against each other" debate.

InTheTrees

Overheal wrote: »

The GOP disparages itself though. That was the whole purpose of the Tea Party I thought. Then you let Trump run in the primary.

The conclusive evidence that The Media are all sympathetic to the democrats was when they asked Sarah Palin what newspapers she read.

Lefty media intellectuals and their gotcha questions.

ECO_Mental

InTheTrees wrote: »

The conclusive evidence that The Media are all sympathetic to the democrats was when they asked Sarah Palin what newspapers she read.

Lefty media intellectuals and their gotcha questions.

What's gotcha about that?? all she would have to say is wash post, NY times etc etc just seeing if a candidate actually knows our wants to know what is going on in the world not just reading guns weekly or the Fresno daily record.

Black Swan

InTheTrees wrote: »

The conclusive evidence that The Media are all sympathetic to the democrats was when they asked Sarah Palin what newspapers she read.

Lefty media intellectuals and their gotcha questions.

Newspapers are not sources of information for intellectuals, rather such journalistic media has been generally placed at the 7th to 8th grade level in reading ability (in accordance with K-12 USA reading standards).

I watched that Sarah Palin interview with Katie Couric, and Couric seemed as surprised as I was when Palin sputtered her answer regarding newspapers she read. Palin did not interview well during her entire 2008 campaign, even before Republican friendly Fox media. A qualified and experienced candidate needs to be capable of dealing with the Fourth Estate while running for high office, as well as if elected. Palin failed continuously to do so.

In fairness, 2 of the 3 moderators for the Colorado GOP debate did a terrible job, spouting divisive opinion-biased questions, rather than introducing meaningful content issues for debate. But just because these 2 failed to be objective in the performance of their responsibilities does not provide sufficient grounds to paint all media with the same brush (e.g., Fox does not have a "lefty media" audience, is not composed of intellectuals, and there are millions of Americans that follow Fox. In like manner the Wall Street Journal is not "lefty media," rather a source that tends to favour a financially conservative audience. The list goes on and on...).

Black Swan

Manic Moran wrote: »

For example RCP shows Carson as beating Clinton in every poll, albeit the margin is statistically slim.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_carson_vs_clinton-5119.html

I would be very cautious with RCP, given that they lean Republican historically, and may be selective when pairing polls vs candidate match-ups. Then again, I do use RCP as a convenient source to find several polls all in one place, but find their RCP averages problematic statistically, and their news articles and reports very Republican flavoured.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

jank

jobbridge4life wrote: »

Whiney moaney people who want to run the strongest power in the world and all they can do is complain about some tough questions... its an embarrassment.

Not at all. It is widely acknowledged now that CNBC made a balls of this debate.

Bill Maher on twitter

oh my god did i just hear Ted Cruz say something awesome that i agree with? Yes. The media is even stupider than the pols. Who's on first?

John Bresnahan (Chief political editor for politico.com) on twitter

Cruz rightly bashes CNBC for the way they are running this debate.

With such tough questions like 'What's your biggest weakness' and ''Donald Trump, are you a comic book villain?' or 'Ben Carson, can you do math?' they have a good basis to complain.

Overheal

jank wrote: »

With such tough questions like 'What's your biggest weakness' and ''Donald Trump, are you a comic book villain?' or 'Ben Carson, can you do math?' they have a good basis to complain.

First of all, that was not the question. The question was about inconsistencies with his proposed tax plan, a subject extremely appropriate to a debate forum.

In case you missed it:

QUICK: Dr. Carson, let's talk about taxes.

You have a flat tax plan of 10 percent flat taxes, and -- I've looked at it -- and this is something that is very appealing to a lot of voters, but I've had a really tough time trying to make the math work on this.

If you were to took a 10 percent tax, with the numbers right now in total personal income, you're gonna come in with bring in $1.5 trillion. That is less than half of what we bring in right now. And by the way, it's gonna leave us in a $2 trillion hole.

So what analysis got you to the point where you think this will work?

CARSON: Well, first of all, I didn't say that the rate would be 10 percent. I used the tithing analogy.

QUICK: I -- I understand that, but if you -- if you look at the numbers you probably have to get to 28.

CARSON: The rate -- the rate -- the rate is gonna be much closer to 15 percent.

QUICK: 15 percent still leaves you with a $1.1 trillion hole.

CARSON: You also have to get rid of all the deductions and all the loopholes. You also have to some strategically cutting in several places.

Remember, we have 645 federal agencies and sub-agencies. Anybody who tells me that we need every penny and every one of those is in a fantasy world.

So, also, we can stimulate the economy. That's gonna be the real growth engine. Stimulating the economy -- because it's tethered down right now with so many regulations...

QUICK: You'd have to cut -- you'd have to cut government about 40 percent to make it work with a $1.1 trillion hole.

CARSON: That's not true.

QUICK: That is true, I looked at the numbers.

CARSON: When -- when we put all the facts down, you'll be able to see that it's not true, it works out very well.

QUICK: Dr. Carson, thank you.

If you think it is unfair, well I disagree. Any candidate who gets up on stage and says things like

KASICH: I’m the only person on this stage that actually was involved in the chief architect of balancing the Federal Budget.
You can’t do it with empty promised. You know, these plans would put us trillions and trillions of dollars in debt.
I actually have a plan. I’m the only one on this stage that has a plan that would create jobs, cut taxes, balance the budget and can get it done because I’m realistic. You just don’t make promises like this.

RITCHIE: Well, I wish you would have asked that question years ago when they broke it. I mean, let me be honest with the people who are watching at home. The government has lied to you and they have stolen from you. They told you that your Social Security money is in a trust fund. All that’s in that trust fund is a pile of IOUs for money they spent on something else a long time ago.
And they’ve stolen from you because now they know they cannot pay these benefits and Social Security is going to be insolvent in seven to eight years. We’re sitting up here talking about all these other things; 71 percent of federal spending today is on entitlements, and debt service. And, that’s with zero percent interest rates.
Now, I’m the only person that’s put out a detailed plan on how to deal with entitlements. And we’ll save a trillion dollars over the next 10 years. And, here’s the difference between me and Hillary Clinton. What Hillary Clinton’s going to say, and has said before is, she wants to raise Social Security taxes.

HUCKABEE: You want to talk about what we’re going to be up against next year? I’m the only guy on this stage — you know, everybody has an “only guy” — “I’m the only guy this; I’m the only guy that.” Well, let me tell you one thing that I am the only guy: The only guy that has consistently fought the Clinton machine every election I was ever in over the past 26 years. And not only did I fight them, but I beat them.

..Should be expected to be put to task on any words they choose to let fly out of their mouth.

As for "which of you is more handsome" questions, Bernie Sanders had an answer to that months ago:

Cox: Do you think it’s fair that Hillary’s hair gets a lot more scrutiny than yours does?

Bernie: Hillary’s hair gets more scrutiny than my hair?

Cox: Yeah.

Bernie: Is that what you’re asking?

Cox: Yeah.

Bernie: O.K., Ana, I don’t mean to be rude here. I am running for president of the United States on serious issues, O.K.? Do you have serious questions?

Cox: I can defend that as a serious question. There is a gendered reason.

Bernie: When the media worries about what Hillary’s hair looks like or what my hair looks like, that’s a real problem. We have millions of people who are struggling to keep their heads above water, who want to know what candidates can do to improve their lives, and the media will very often spend more time worrying about hair than the fact that we’re the only major country on earth that doesn’t guarantee health care to all people.

Cox: It’s also true that the media pays more attention to what female candidates look like than it does to what male candidates look like.

Bernie: That may be. That may be, and it’s absolutely wrong.

Also scrutinizing the GOP is rather necessary, given the unbelievable amount of porkies they've told, according to Politifact.

http://www.politifact.com/

Might as well link the homepage, too many 'pants on fire' to link individually.

Overheal

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Not according to some projections anyway:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/h-a-goodman/polling-trajectory-shows-bernie-sanders-defeating-hillary-clinton_b_8406282.html

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Black Swan

When all is said and done November 2016, the last thing the Americans need is one party rule, with one party controlling both the Executive and Congress, along with eventual stacking of the US Supreme Court with one party favourites. One party rule circumvents the checks and balances of the 3 branches of government. Of course, be they Republicans or be they Democrats, they strive for one party rule, and try to convince the American people that one party rule is the best thing since sliced bread. Removing checks and balances increases the likelihood of abuse and corruption by the controlling one party. It's happened in the past, and it's very likely to occur in the future. The last time one party rule occurred, ObamaCare (aka RomneyCare) was forced through, truly a healthcare abomination that ultimately benefits private sector for profit medical insurance corporations, and not the people it's intended for, using government power to punish average American citizens that do not join the plan (for both RomneyCare when it existed in MA, and ObamaCare now in US).

20Cent

If they are the GOP debates why don't they organise moderators that are sympathetic to them?