RNC Chair Reince Priebus Wednesday night's (very dumb) CNBC Republican debate had barely ended before the RNC and individual campaigns were whining and kvetching -- to reporters, their moms, to Pinterest, and everywhere else -- that the questions were SO MUCH UNFAIRNESS to the brilliant slate of Republican presidential candidates onstage.
I agree. The tone, even when reading them in print as opposed to hearing them out loud, is combative, sarcastic, and borderline rude. As though the moderators wanted them all to lose their tempers, or were expecting them to make fools of themselves anyway, so why not accelerate things?
Which of course was impossible because these candidates are such serene, even-keeled, sensible individuals that's there no way they can be so easily provoked.
Why are people so dismissive of the questions? I thought they were the usual queries one expects from the Jerry Spinger Show (come on people have you SEEN the candidates participating in this C-list reality show? You didn't expect an actual debate between this bunch of jokers did you? This crowd is just step away from having a sassy Black transvestite rip Donald's weave off.)
Or to put another way the "infotainment" contenders are getting thier questions-equivalent.
Related to my earlier point, since Donald Trump is a pseudo-lebrity shouldn't he already be use to handling such questions? Was't this covered in Intermediate Fame-Whoring 101? The Kardashians are laughing at the Trump-stain for being rattled by questions that are probably less intense than TMZ bombardment.
Well I can see why they are crying like stuck pigs. Not sure why folks here see them as combative. For the most part the questions start out with a statement usually by the person being asked. Then it asks them to defend that statement. As close as you can probably get to an actual debate given this format. In a formalized debate a proposition is given then one side advocates for and the other side is against. Here it was you said______ defend that statement. The questions were definitely more substantive than in say a game show or Miss America (I know I'll get beat for that one) any any teabaglicon candidate talk show like fix or cnn.
Moderators? We don't need no stinkin' moderators. The next debate, 120 minutes, 11 speakers, each speaker gets 10 minutes to talk about whatever they want, and no one's allowed to interrupt them.
Lithium, if you get manic or Xanax, if you get anxious. Or Bourbon, in memory of John Boner.
#getabrainmoran
I agree. The tone, even when reading them in print as opposed to hearing them out loud, is combative, sarcastic, and borderline rude. As though the moderators wanted them all to lose their tempers, or were expecting them to make fools of themselves anyway, so why not accelerate things?
As I read them, the phrase that kept going through my head was, "Let's you and him fight."
Which of course was impossible because these candidates are such serene, even-keeled, sensible individuals that's there no way they can be so easily provoked.
Nope, it's Trey Gowdy after reading reviews of his Benghazi hearing performance.
Why are people so dismissive of the questions? I thought they were the usual queries one expects from the Jerry Spinger Show (come on people have you SEEN the candidates participating in this C-list reality show? You didn't expect an actual debate between this bunch of jokers did you? This crowd is just step away from having a sassy Black transvestite rip Donald's weave off.)
Or to put another way the "infotainment" contenders are getting thier questions-equivalent.
Related to my earlier point, since Donald Trump is a pseudo-lebrity shouldn't he already be use to handling such questions? Was't this covered in Intermediate Fame-Whoring 101? The Kardashians are laughing at the Trump-stain for being rattled by questions that are probably less intense than TMZ bombardment.
Their handling of the questions is indicative of how they would handle the presidency, i.e., not very well.
Well I can see why they are crying like stuck pigs. Not sure why folks here see them as combative. For the most part the questions start out with a statement usually by the person being asked. Then it asks them to defend that statement. As close as you can probably get to an actual debate given this format. In a formalized debate a proposition is given then one side advocates for and the other side is against. Here it was you said______ defend that statement. The questions were definitely more substantive than in say a game show or Miss America (I know I'll get beat for that one) any any teabaglicon candidate talk show like fix or cnn.
Moderators? We don't need no stinkin' moderators. The next debate, 120 minutes, 11 speakers, each speaker gets 10 minutes to talk about whatever they want, and no one's allowed to interrupt them.
What? I don't know that...AAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
When they lose the WH again in 2016, will the GOP cry "no fair!" and fire the American voters?
You heard it here first.
Nice potty mouth...
Snark on my part. Sarahbaracuda told folks she had a tubal ligation, well before her cross-country surprise labor and delivery.
well, you want this then.