March 10,2016 GOP Debate thread

[HamburgerBoy]

lol, we haven't had a female president therefore Islam isn't the most misogynistic major religion. Great fact checking.

 

[compuwiz1]

Some fact checking has been released.

I called two of them:
http://bigstory.ap.org/article/2cf8...ap-fact-check-gop-claims-immigrants-education

Full of spin and falsehoods, as well as a leftist site. They don't quite paint the picture properly.

 

[ivwshane]

Full of spin and falsehoods, as well as a leftist site. They don't quite paint the picture properly.

The AP is a leftist site?

Why are you so fucking stupid? Damn you are annoying!

 

[ivwshane]

More fact checking:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/03/11/fact-checking-the-12th-gop-debate/

 

[compuwiz1]

The AP is a leftist site?

Why are you so fucking stupid? Damn you are annoying!

You have never annoyed me? Alright, I was messing with you. I'm gonna read it again tomorrow, but I found something in there that struck me as opinion, not fact. Let's continue later.

 

[michal1980]

wait, havent you been a vocal trump supporter?.

nope. trumps a fucktard.

 

[dank69]

For those of you wondering why it was so civil it's because the RNC demanded that they keep it G-rated this time.

 

[HomerJS]

Full of spin and falsehoods, as well as a leftist site. They don't quite paint the picture properly.

Really?

Ted says he will end welfare for illegals. Illegals are already ineligible for welfare.


Any other falsehoods YOU would care to spin??

 

[HomerJS]

I give it 5 points. Sort of serious, not a complete clown show, for a change.

I find it fascinating anyone would vote for a party where a successful debate means it wasn't a clown show.

 

[LegendKiller]

I find it fascinating anyone would vote for a party where a successful debate means it wasn't a clown show.

As opposed to a party where if you promise unlimited free shit to everybody you still can't win, despite winning more votes, because the party as preempted the people with a system intended to benefit only those who promise unlimited free shit to the .01%.

The clown show is a symptom of the disease, not the disease. The disease being that our democracy has been usurped and the only people who can get in are those who appeal to populism, whether left or right, to an extreme.

 

[fskimospy]

As opposed to a party where if you promise unlimited free shit to everybody you still can't win, despite winning more votes, because the party as preempted the people with a system intended to benefit only those who promise unlimited free shit to the .01%.

That seems to be a sign of the system working, despite your usual ridiculous hyperbole. Sanders is the guy proposing unrealistic plans and he's losing. Not only is he losing the superdelegate battle, but he's also gotten many many fewer votes than Hillary.

In addition, not only is she not promising unlimited free shit to the .01%, she proposes to raise their taxes. So long as we're talking about the person promising 'unlimited free shit to the .01%, we should talk about the person who is actually promising to give massive amounts of money to the ultra rich, and that's Donald Trump.

The clown show is a symptom of the disease, not the disease. The disease being that our democracy has been usurped and the only people who can get in are those who appeal to populism, whether left or right, to an extreme.

US democracy has definitely seen better days, but let's not fool ourselves. Republicans are responding to Trump's personality. He might be using populist rhetoric, but the policies he's put forth are anything but populist. They are the standard conservative giveaways to the ultra rich.

I find it ironic that you complain about the system serving the .01% and then support the guy who wants to give them way way more money than any other candidate. Did you actually buy the part where he lied about wanting to raise taxes on the rich?

 

[LegendKiller]

That seems to be a sign of the system working, despite your usual ridiculous hyperbole. Sanders is the guy proposing unrealistic plans and he's losing. Not only is he losing the superdelegate battle, but he's also gotten many many fewer votes than Hillary.

In addition, not only is she not promising unlimited free shit to the .01%, she proposes to raise their taxes. So long as we're talking about the person promising 'unlimited free shit to the .01%, we should talk about the person who is actually promising to give massive amounts of money to the ultra rich, and that's Donald Trump.



US democracy has definitely seen better days, but let's not fool ourselves. Republicans are responding to Trump's personality. He might be using populist rhetoric, but the policies he's put forth are anything but populist. They are the standard conservative giveaways to the ultra rich.

I find it ironic that you complain about the system serving the .01% and then support the guy who wants to give them way way more money than any other candidate. Did you actually buy the part where he lied about wanting to raise taxes on the rich?

Yeah, forgot, she was at goldman and others promising to crack down on them.

Lol.

I still maintain his tax plan is bad.

 

[fskimospy]

Yeah, forgot, she was at goldman and others promising to crack down on them.

Lol.

I still maintain his tax plan is bad.

So to be clear, you're going to stick it to Goldman Sachs and others similar to them by supporting the guy who wants to repeal Dodd-Frank and shower the .01% with the single largest tax break in history.

That will sure show them! There is no candidate in the field better for the .01% than Trump. He's giving them everything they ever wished for and more.

 

[LegendKiller]

So to be clear, you're going to stick it to Goldman Sachs and others similar to them by supporting the guy who wants to repeal Dodd-Frank and shower the .01% with the single largest tax break in history.

That will sure show them! There is no candidate in the field better for the .01% than Trump. He's giving them everything they ever wished for and more.

You do realize that a lot of dodd frank is a disaster? The regulators have gone too far in a nonsensical manner across the board.

Frtb is a complete joke, ssfa is a terrible measurement of relative risk. Risk retention added too much complexity. Volcker rule, same. Everybody is trying to slow roll Basel 3 now because they see how horrid it is even the regulators.

Look at the cfpb and disparate impact, terrible.

 

[fskimospy]

You do realize that a lot of dodd frank is a disaster? The regulators have gone too far in a nonsensical manner across the board.

Frtb is a complete joke, ssfa is a terrible measurement of relative risk. Risk retention added too much complexity. Volcker rule, same. Everybody is trying to slow roll Basel 3 now because they see how horrid it is even the regulators.

Look at the cfpb and disparate impact, terrible.

I know that people in the finance industry hate Dodd-Frank, but that's to be expected. Overall it's been quite successful so far if you look at objective analysis.

All that aside, can you explain why you complain about the system unfairly pushing the interests of the .01% while simultaneously backing the candidate who is doing the most to further the interests of the .01%? Serious question, if he were actually on the payroll of Goldman Sachs to promote their interests how different would his stated policies be? Can you ever remember any candidate who was trying to do more to help the ultra rich while screwing the little guy?

 

[SP33Demon]

Some fact checking has been released.

I called two of them:
http://bigstory.ap.org/article/2cf8...ap-fact-check-gop-claims-immigrants-education

That actually helps Trump's case. Most of eveyrthing he said was at least partly true.

 

[SP33Demon]

Really?

Ted says he will end welfare for illegals. Illegals are already ineligible for welfare.


Any other falsehoods YOU would care to spin??

Their spouses are eligible. You surely aren't suggesting that all illegals are single are you? lol

 

[fskimospy]

Their spouses are eligible. You surely aren't suggesting that all illegals are single are you? lol

Glad to see you agree that illegal immigrants aren't eligible. Are you now saying you would like to strip eligibility for benefits from people if they marry an illegal immigrant? That would seem to be highly illegal.

 

[SP33Demon]

That seems to be a sign of the system working, despite your usual ridiculous hyperbole. Sanders is the guy proposing unrealistic plans and he's losing. Not only is he losing the superdelegate battle, but he's also gotten many many fewer votes than Hillary.

In addition, not only is she not promising unlimited free shit to the .01%, she proposes to raise their taxes. So long as we're talking about the person promising 'unlimited free shit to the .01%, we should talk about the person who is actually promising to give massive amounts of money to the ultra rich, and that's Donald Trump.



US democracy has definitely seen better days, but let's not fool ourselves. Republicans are responding to Trump's personality. He might be using populist rhetoric, but the policies he's put forth are anything but populist. They are the standard conservative giveaways to the ultra rich.

I find it ironic that you complain about the system serving the .01% and then support the guy who wants to give them way way more money than any other candidate. Did you actually buy the part where he lied about wanting to raise taxes on the rich?

So free college for everyone is only something sanders says? How about medicare for all? Hillary is the biggest fraud on stage, at least sanders tells you he's raising taxes to pay for it. She just recants his slogans that work but nobody checks how she's going to pay for it. The truth? She's not going to without raising taxes on everyone.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

That actually helps Trump's case. Most of eveyrthing he said was at least partly true.

would ANYTHING actually hurt drumpf's case in your world?

 

[fskimospy]

So free college for everyone is only something sanders says? How about medicare for all? Hillary is the biggest fraud on stage, at least sanders tells you he's raising taxes to pay for it. She just recants his slogans that work but nobody checks how she's going to pay for it. The truth? She's not going to without raising taxes on everyone.

Her policies are probably the most realistic of any candidate running on either side. It's also bizarre to say that only Sanders tells you that he's going to raise taxes, as raising taxes is explicitly part of Hillary's college plan. Did you not know this?

Sanders' policies are actually highly dishonest as he drastically underestimates the funds required to implement them. (by more than a trillion in some cases.) Also, Hillary isn't advocating Medicare for all, she's advocating for basically continuing the ACA.

That being said, I find it highly ironic that someone who supports Donald Trump thinks they can criticize other people's plans for being unrealistic and deceptive. lol.

 

[Jhhnn]

You do realize that a lot of dodd frank is a disaster? The regulators have gone too far in a nonsensical manner across the board.

Frtb is a complete joke, ssfa is a terrible measurement of relative risk. Risk retention added too much complexity. Volcker rule, same. Everybody is trying to slow roll Basel 3 now because they see how horrid it is even the regulators.

Look at the cfpb and disparate impact, terrible.

Yearning for the good old days of the Ownership Society & self regulated banking?

No wonder you love Donald.

 

[nickqt]

would ANYTHING actually hurt drumpf's case in your world?

I can give you a whole host of things Trump could say that would destroy his ability to win the nomination.

https://goplifer.com/2016/02/20/gaffes-that-would-ruin-trump/

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

I can give you a whole host of things Trump could say that would destroy his ability to win the nomination.

https://goplifer.com/2016/02/20/gaffes-that-would-ruin-trump/

LOL, well played :thumbsup:

 

[ivwshane]

would ANYTHING actually hurt drumpf's case in your world?

You know the answer, we have fluffer one and fluffer two here and they will defend trump no matter what! Trump could shoot one of them and they would still find a reason why his actions were justified.

Fluffer and flufferer!