Trump pulls out of GOP Debate Moderated by Megyn Kelly

[Fern]

Fox News raised this rabid dog and now is bites them in their right wing asses 🙂

Fox News didn't "raise" him. FN is 'establishment' and has appeared to oppose him from the start. I seem to recall very early some dispute between FN and Trump that required Trump and Ailes to meet etc.

The 'truce' is over.

Fern

 

[soundforbjt]

Fox News didn't "raise" him. FN is 'establishment' and has appeared to oppose him from the start. I seem to recall very early some dispute between FN and Trump that required Trump and Ailes to meet etc.

The 'truce' is over.

Fern

You're forgetting how they loved him during the birther debate...

 

[flexy]

If your "debate" is rigged

No, the debate(s) are not rigged.

The fact that at debates or elsewhere, a politician MIGHT at some point face inconvenient or "unfair" questions is a result of that in the US, opinions and the press are free. A politician, at times, might or will (FORTUNATELY!) also have to face questions "they don't like".

This is not a despotic regime like China where opinions must be conform and where biased/unfair/inconvenient questions are not allowed.

You should be ashamed that you see it as a sign of "strength" that he dodges questioning that COULD be unfair.

You are in fact fortunate that you're living in a society where politicians CAN at times face "unfair" questions - if you don't like it I recommend you pack and move to NK or China. There, such sure won't occur.

You should also think about your potential president who is not comfortable with the fact that here/there in the US there is freedom of opinion and freedom of the press.

He can't handle this? Then he has no business to run for office in this country!

 

[flexy]

Of course, avg. Americans can't think further than "Megyn Kelly".
Screw Megyn Kelly, it's not about "Megyn Kelly".

It's about a guy who avoids questions that he deems "unfair", like it's something UNHEARD OF a guy running for prez might face "unfair" questions.

So deal with it. This is America, the free world. Can't handle unfair questions?
Oh cry me a river! Then you shouldn't live in America and in particular not get into politics. Problem solved.

 

[Vic]

Of course, avg. Americans can't think further than "Megyn Kelly".
Screw Megyn Kelly, it's not about "Megyn Kelly".

It's about a guy who avoids questions that he deems "unfair", like it's something UNHEARD OF a guy running for prez might face "unfair" questions.

So deal with it. This is America, the free world. Can't handle unfair questions?
Oh cry me a river! Then you shouldn't live in America and in particular not get into politics. Problem solved.

Exactly. A President needs to be capable of facing unpleasant, and even 'unfair,' scenarios. Trump has proven that he lacks this ability.

 

[Vic]

Fox News didn't "raise" him. FN is 'establishment' and has appeared to oppose him from the start. I seem to recall very early some dispute between FN and Trump that required Trump and Ailes to meet etc.

The 'truce' is over.

Fern

How is it that the multi-billionaire real estate mogul and media personality is not 'establishment' too?

 

[Fern]

Except I can't think of any situation where they haven't been fair to him. Can you give examples?

The very first debate.

IMO, the beginning part of the debate was nothing other than Megyn Kelly going after him and inviting the other candidates to pile on. (This kind of naked attempt to get the candidates to sling poo was later denounced, and rightly so, when MSNBC did it.)

Kelly started off with Trump and asked him inappropriate (for a debate) questions such as about him calling Rosie O'donnell a 'fat pig' (or something similar).

It's a question suitable for an interview. But how the hell do all the candidates debate that?

It also struck me as a clear attack by Mygan Kelly on Trump for being a misogynist.

That's all fair game but again, it doesn't belong in a debate format. The debate is supposed to be between candidates, not the candidate and the 'celebrity' moderator. Follow up questions by a moderator? Sure, but that's not what happened there.

And thereafter Trump and Kelly had a 'twitter war'. I don't think she has any business doing that. She can no longer claim to be journalist (assuming she ever could've).

To me it just seems more of trend I really dislike: So called 'news' people trying to make themselves the center of the story and become celebrities. I think they should be in the background, after all the point is to learn the candidates' positions etc., not to propel some 'news' person to celebrity status.

IIRC, Kelly had just recently promoted into a prime time evening slot. She may have been trying to 'live up' to that, or garner attention to improve her ratings (thus a higher salary etc.)

I agree with the "conceited" remark above. Her sense of self importance has become obnoxious recently.

Fern

 

[compuwiz1]

How is it that the multi-billionaire real estate mogul and media personality is not 'establishment' too?

Maybe because he hasn't worked in Congress for 30+ years helping fuck over the American people? He's not a member of that good ol' boys club. He's a threat to their existence.

 

[Subyman]

I doubt that Trump can show up and participate: Fox has given his podium to Paul.

It appears Fox News has moved to ensure Trump doesn't participate.

Fern

I don't agree with that. It was Trump's choice. I don't believe Kelly's first debate question was inappropriate. Trump did say those things and he damn well have a justification for them because I can't quickly recall another recent presidential candidate who has slung so much vitriol toward random people as he has. Those are important questions especially for women voters. One of the most important things for me is if they show a collaborative and respectful history. Trump is the complete opposite of that.

 

[Subyman]

Maybe because he hasn't worked in Congress for 30+ years helping fuck over the American people? He's not a member of that good ol' boys club. He's a threat to their existence.

And a billionaire shrewd businessman is your white knight? I'm having a hard time relating to this "fucked up America" that people keep parroting. America is doing well. Electing a billionaire whose entire existence has been focused on increasing his net worth isn't the way toward prosperity for all.

 

[LegendKiller]

Is this your first election or something? There have been plenty of contentious moments during debates in the past. I'd take applause anyday over racist signs and public beat downs of protesters. If you want entertainment then watch the Kardashians.



You so easily hand wave away 200+ years of American history as a sham. That "sham" has worked quite well and has led to 44 successful regime changes over our history leading us to today being the most powerful country in the world. We are already great. People tend to forget that.

Which past? Between candidates? Lol, it has been a joke more recently.

Did I say it was always a problem?

 

[Subyman]

Its been a joke since Trump joined.

 

[LegendKiller]

No, the debate(s) are not rigged.

The fact that at debates or elsewhere, a politician MIGHT at some point face inconvenient or "unfair" questions is a result of that in the US, opinions and the press are free. A politician, at times, might or will (FORTUNATELY!) also have to face questions "they don't like".

This is not a despotic regime like China where opinions must be conform and where biased/unfair/inconvenient questions are not allowed.

You should be ashamed that you see it as a sign of "strength" that he dodges questioning that COULD be unfair.

You are in fact fortunate that you're living in a society where politicians CAN at times face "unfair" questions - if you don't like it I recommend you pack and move to NK or China. There, such sure won't occur.

You should also think about your potential president who is not comfortable with the fact that here/there in the US there is freedom of opinion and freedom of the press.

He can't handle this? Then he has no business to run for office in this country!

Bitch, please. We are given limited choices of candidates that are picked for us by the establishment. Why do you think so many of them are having a hissy fit that jeb or Rubio are being rejected?

It it is why the bimbo lead off with questions personally attacking trump. She could have asked about jebs druggy daughter and failure to raise his kids properly. Or Rubio and cruze's poor spending habits that show no fiscal responsibility and how that could apply to their role in the government. Or their support of amnesty which is being rejected by the Republicans as a whole. Or call them out on this "rebuild the military" but no. Just launch at trump. Why? Because it was personal and they want to get rid of them.

Walking into a trap is stupid when you can play your own game.

He is playing chess and you retards can't even play connect 4 with checkers pieces.

 

[Fern]

How is it that the multi-billionaire real estate mogul and media personality is not 'establishment' too?

He's not Republican establishment, not by a long shot.

The 'typical' political candidate has worked his/her way up. You think politicians are beholden to lobbyist, well think for a minute about how beholden they are to other politicians.

You're young and tying to work your way up, you're asking favors of the established politicians. They allow advice from their campaign professionals, lend them their network of volunteers, ground game organizations, raise money for them and often give them money from their own campaign chest. (A politician with excess campaign funds can legally do only two I can think of ATM with that excess: (1) keep it for the next election or (2) donate it to a similar nonprofit. The latter being another political campaign.)

As a Congressperson, how much azz do you have to kiss to get the committee appointment you want/need? That can make or break you. If you come from an agricultural district and can't get on committees overseeing agriculture you're no good to anybody in your state or district and you're gone next election cycle. The big donors will dump you asap.

I would guess Trump owes exactly zip to the established politicians, lobbyists and donors. I imagine that scares the shizz out of them. They got no chips to call in.

Fern

 

[LegendKiller]

Of course, avg. Americans can't think further than "Megyn Kelly".
Screw Megyn Kelly, it's not about "Megyn Kelly".

It's about a guy who avoids questions that he deems "unfair", like it's something UNHEARD OF a guy running for prez might face "unfair" questions.

So deal with it. This is America, the free world. Can't handle unfair questions?
Oh cry me a river! Then you shouldn't live in America and in particular not get into politics. Problem solved.

This is Meagan Kelly and the bought and paid for media. But I do so like watching liberals suddenly stick up for faux news.


Guess you guys can *never* dismiss them as biased or wrong now.

 

[LegendKiller]

The very first debate.

IMO, the beginning part of the debate was nothing other than Megyn Kelly going after him and inviting the other candidates to pile on. (This kind of naked attempt to get the candidates to sling poo was later denounced, and rightly so, when MSNBC did it.)

Kelly started off with Trump and asked him inappropriate (for a debate) questions such as about him calling Rosie O'donnell a 'fat pig' (or something similar).

It's a question suitable for an interview. But how the hell do all the candidates debate that?

It also struck me as a clear attack by Mygan Kelly on Trump for being a misogynist.

That's all fair game but again, it doesn't belong in a debate format. The debate is supposed to be between candidates, not the candidate and the 'celebrity' moderator. Follow up questions by a moderator? Sure, but that's not what happened there.

And thereafter Trump and Kelly had a 'twitter war'. I don't think she has any business doing that. She can no longer claim to be journalist (assuming she ever could've).

To me it just seems more of trend I really dislike: So called 'news' people trying to make themselves the center of the story and become celebrities. I think they should be in the background, after all the point is to learn the candidates' positions etc., not to propel some 'news' person to celebrity status.

IIRC, Kelly had just recently promoted into a prime time evening slot. She may have been trying to 'live up' to that, or garner attention to improve her ratings (thus a higher salary etc.)

I agree with the "conceited" remark above. Her sense of self importance has become obnoxious recently.

Fern

There are no more news people. They are opinion creators and projectors that work for billionaires who have an agenda, like soros or Murdoch.

The "debate" is a fucking sham.

 

[LegendKiller]

And a billionaire shrewd businessman is your white knight? I'm having a hard time relating to this "fucked up America" that people keep parroting. America is doing well. Electing a billionaire whose entire existence has been focused on increasing his net worth isn't the way toward prosperity for all.

Who else has the money and external influence not derived from DC politics and cocktail circuit to fight against political whores if not for a billionaire?

 

[Subyman]

Who else has the money and external influence not derived from DC politics and cocktail circuit to fight against political whores if not for a billionaire?

That doesn't change anything about what I said.

 

[Indus]

There are no more news people. They are opinion creators and projectors that work for billionaires who have an agenda, like soros or Murdoch.

The "debate" is a fucking sham.

I look forward to Trump being a no show at the general debates moderated by Megyn Kelly.

Trump will say.. his charm is beyond debating LOL.

 

[Subyman]

I'll be watching the debate. Will be interesting. I think the strongest stance they can make is to not say anything about him.

 

[Fern]

I don't agree with that. It was Trump's choice.

You're not understanding my point.

Yeah, he threatened it first.

Then FN assured he couldn't change his mind and show up by giving away his podium.

After all, I was responding to someone suggesting Trump would change his mind and show up. He can't now was my point.

I don't believe Kelly's first debate question was inappropriate.

Well we have different priorities.

I don't think calling Rosie O'donnell a pig is anywhere near the top. Polling shows most are concerned with (in no particular order) border security, economy, terrorism/national security, to name just a few.

And again, that's not a debate question. How the fck do the other candidates get in on that?

Trump did say those things and he damn well have a justification for them because I can't quickly recall another recent presidential candidate who has slung so much vitriol toward random people as he has. Those are important questions especially for women voters. One of the most important things for me is if they show a collaborative and respectful history. Trump is the complete opposite of that.

You sound like a Dem. They own the "war on women". I don't think I've ever even seen that listed anywhere in top concerns of voters, much less Repubs. Remember, this isn't a general election. This is the Repubs choosing their candidate.

Aside from the above, it's an interview question, not a debate question because it can't be debated and results in the other candidates being completely left out.

Fern

 

[Fern]

You're forgetting how they loved him during the birther debate...

As did all the other networks. Ratings, ratings man.

BTW: The bigwigs at FN hate that topic and think it's bad for Repub party. That gained him zero favor with them.

Fern

 

[Fern]

There are no more news people. They are opinion creators and projectors that work for billionaires who have an agenda, like soros or Murdoch.

The "debate" is a fucking sham.

I thought Fox Business News did a decent job.

Otherwise Anderson Cooper and Bret Baier seem decent as anchors. I've got no problem with them. (Remember, most with shows are, such as O'reilly or Matthews are not journalists and don't pretend to be.)

And there are some damn good reporters out there. They give no indication which way they lean personally. They just report straight up news with zero 'color'. Catherine Herrige and James Rosen for example. Heck, I've watched Bill press get downright rabid defending Rosen as a journalist.

Fern

 

[LegendKiller]

And for all of the libtards here trying to claim Trump is not "presidential" for not facing up against an obviously biased "moderator" and how could he ever deal with an "enemy" if he shies from such pressure, where the fuck is the DNC debate on Fox?


It has to be here somewhere?


Ohh, fuck, there is no debate on Fox. Now why the fuck is that?

Are your candidates too chickenshit? That doesn't seem "Presidential".

 

[Fern]

And for all of the libtards here trying to claim Trump is not "presidential" for not facing up against an obviously biased "moderator" and how could he ever deal with an "enemy" if she shies from such pressure, where the fuck is the DNC debate on Fox?


It has to be here somewhere?


Ohh, fuck, there is no debate on Fox. Now why the fuck is that?

Are your candidates too chickenshit? That doesn't seem "Presidential".

Oh no, you didn't!

:awe:

Fern