Jacksonville Jaguars Fan Forums

Quote:Going into this debate I was like Carson and Rubio as my top candidates. Rubio is losing my vote with his people's rights, no boots on the ground, wimpy attitude. Carson is right. We need to declare war on Isis. Rubio's plan to enable other Arabs to do the fighting is the same thing Obama is doing.

Rubio lost this debate, he will probably go far down in the polls after it.  He usually does good in debates but it shows he is not ready to be President.

I only saw the second half of the debate, but from what I saw, Rubio looked good, Carson looked like he wanted to take a nap, and Trump looked like an idiot. 

 

Cruz talked about carpet bombing, but I don't think he really means carpet bombing, because he said we carpet bombed in the first Gulf War, but actually, it was precision bombing, not carpet bombing. 

 

Then Trump was called on to defend his idea of killing the families of terrorists, and really he can't defend that at all, since that would be murder.  He got pretty mad and flustered when Jeb went at him about all his crazy ideas. 

 

Jeb is still a really bad candidate, who every time he's about to make a good point, he stumbles over his words.  

 

Christie kept saying no one was interested in what the other candidates were talking about.   I guess he was trying to stand out, but if no one is interested in the debate, why are they doing it?  

 

Carly Fiorina is a snarling, humorless little you know what.   She actually played the gender card at one point, quoting a sexist remark by Margaret Thatcher. 

 

They all kept saying how afraid we all are right now, but, I don't see that in my dealings with people.  I think US citizens are taking terrorism in stride, going about our business.   Half these candidates are openly willing to violate the Constitution and the Geneva Conventions.  

 

Frankly, some of those candidates last night scared me a lot more than ISIS does.  

Trump getting good debate reviews. Did nothing spectacular but also nothing to hurt his already dominant position. Lead likely to increase yet again.

Ranking:

 

1. Trump looked good in this debate. Personally, I think it was his best one yet. He had no real "gotcha" moments like the previous debates. It was shameful what CNN did on the nuclear triad question though. I am pretty sure half the candidates on stage didn't know what it was (I sure didn't), but going to Rubio immediately after to try and "school" Trump was an obvious setup.

2. Rand Paul was on point this debate, his best yet as well. He was knowledgable and absolutely destroyed Rubio's credibility. Going after Trump gains him no favors though, and is not a good way to get votes.

3. Cruz looked good, but he has to recognize that some times you gotta shut up. The way he and Trump played off each other near the end was great.

4. Carson looked sleepy and lost at times.

5. Rubio looked bad. He will likely drop voters to Cruz. His stance on immigration is too weak for him to be a serious contender, and he was exposed.

6. Christie is a warmonger. Irrelevant.

7. Fiorina is a very annoying warmonger. Irrelevant.

8. Jeb Bush tries to act tough but comes off as a quivering fool. Irrelevant.

9. Kasich is irrelevant.

 

The debate was kind of boring, to be honest. The next one needs to be no more than 5 candidates.

 

Trump was also the only one who brought up restoring America's decaying infrastructure and how it could have been done had we not wasted trillions in Iraq. He came across as the most moderate candidate in the group and easily the most authentic.

 

Also, what was with the crowd? Did Rand Paul have his fan club there? Who the hell was booing Trump? You want me to believe that the man with 42% in the polls is going to get booed but the man at 3% is getting raucous cheers? The crowd had to be filled with RNC/CNN plants.

None of the above.

How do people think Trump looked good in any of these debates? He literally throws out one liners and calls people names. When he is pushed further he either shrugs, makes a face, or falls back on his "we will be great again" or "we don't win anymore" routine.

Quote:How do people think Trump looked good in any of these debates? He literally throws out one liners and calls people names. When he is pushed further he either shrugs, makes a face, or falls back on his "we will be great again" or "we don't win anymore" routine.

 

I've watched enough debates to see the difference between empty rhetoric and genuine emotion, I guess. I don't think he is a great debater in a traditional sense, nor does he have experience in debates. However, personally, I don't believe this election is about eloquent speaking, heritage (my father was a mailman, my grandfather smoked cigars, muh brother/father), or "experience". It is about connecting with the American people and their desire for change in a corrupt system. People are a lot more conscious of the political machine than in the past thanks to the internet, and that is why Trump is able to reverberate their desires and gather support like he does. Before Trump even showed up, many people believed we "weren't winning" and that this country is truly lost. A sizable portion of the voter base also see right through the modern politician, and Trump sees it as well. This is why he also appeals to moderates, independents, republicans, and democrats.

 

So while he may often repeat his stump phrases, or make silly faces, he also appears human, and he appears to genuinely desire a change in the system. That is why people support him. Or at least why I do.

I feel like if Trump ultimately wins the presidency, he'll tire of it within a year and want a do a TV show. 

 

Honestly though, he has no details on any of his crazy plans of action. I think Rubio and Cruz won that one. 

Quote:I've watched enough debates to see the difference between empty rhetoric and genuine emotion, I guess. I don't think he is a great debater in a traditional sense, nor does he have experience in debates. However, personally, I don't believe this election is about eloquent speaking, heritage (my father was a mailman, my grandfather smoked cigars, muh brother/father), or "experience". It is about connecting with the American people and their desire for change in a corrupt system. People are a lot more conscious of the political machine than in the past thanks to the internet, and that is why Trump is able to reverberate their desires and gather support like he does. Before Trump even showed up, many people believed we "weren't winning" and that this country is truly lost. A sizable portion of the voter base also see right through the modern politician, and Trump sees it as well. This is why he also appeals to moderates, independents, republicans, and democrats.

 

So while he may often repeat his stump phrases, or make silly faces, he also appears human, and he appears to genuinely desire a change in the system. That is why people support him. Or at least why I do.

 

He has stuck to a consistent message his entire campaign. Sure, he isn't strong on foreign policy, but clearly that doesn't bother his followers.

Quote: 

Honestly though, he has no details on any of his crazy plans of action. I think Rubio and Cruz won that one. 

 

What details have Rubio and Cruz provided that you support? I think it is kind of scary that Rubio openly supports war with Russia by enforcing a no-fly zone where they are stationed. Also, Cruz has already pushed forward a bill, along with Rand, on curbing refugee and Islamic immigration to the US. It failed 89-10 in the Senate. What makes you believe he could pass that same bill as President when he couldn't get it passed as senator?

 

Also, since you are under the impression Trump hasn't laid out any policy, please see https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions

Quote:What details have Rubio and Cruz provided that you support? I think it is kind of scary that Rubio openly supports war with Russia by enforcing a no-fly zone where they are stationed. Also, Cruz has already pushed forward a bill, along with Rand, on curbing refugee and Islamic immigration to the US. It failed 89-10 in the Senate. What makes you believe he could pass that same bill as President when he couldn't get it passed as senator?

 

Also, since you are under the impression Trump hasn't laid out any policy, please see https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions

 

Do you think Trump actually means it when he says he would kill the families of terrorists?  

Quote:Do you think Trump actually means it when he says he would kill the families of terrorists?  

 

Hopefully. A lot more effective than carpet bombing innocents trying to root out ISIS in civilian centers.

Quote:Hopefully. A lot more effective than carpet bombing innocents trying to root out ISIS in civilian centers.

 

I don't think he can get elected on a platform of intentionally killing innocent people, even if they are related to terrorists.   At least, I hope not.  

 

The way Trump wants to rope everyone into this conflict and put them in the enemy camp is about the dumbest wartime strategy I have ever heard of.   Banning all Muslims from the country and killing the families of terrorists?   Crazy.   What's he going to say next?   That we should exterminate all the Muslims?  

It almost seems like Trump is pulling a George Costanza when he was trying to get fired, but they end up liking him more every time he says something.

Quote:I don't think he can get elected on a platform of intentionally killing innocent people, even if they are related to terrorists.   At least, I hope not.  

 

The way Trump wants to rope everyone into this conflict and put them in the enemy camp is about the dumbest wartime strategy I have ever heard of.   Banning all Muslims from the country and killing the families of terrorists?   Crazy.   What's he going to say next?   That we should exterminate all the Muslims?  

 

Why is specifically killing the family of terrorists crazy, but destroying entire towns in bombing runs seeking them out is A-OK? The reason he is popular is because he speaks bluntly. Other politicians on the stage refuse to do so. They say they want to carpet bomb ISIS, but hide the fact that carpet bombing involves HUGE amounts of collateral damage and innocent deaths. Rather than carpet bombing innocents, Trump says he targets terrorist families specifically to root them out, no complete destruction of innocent towns and lives. The United States even did it when they blew up Gaddafi's palace, killing his grandsons. This isn't some new revelation.

Quote:Also, what was with the crowd? Did Rand Paul have his fan club there? Who the hell was booing Trump? You want me to believe that the man with 42% in the polls is going to get booed but the man at 3% is getting raucous cheers? The crowd had to be filled with RNC/CNN plants.

Rand has a cult following (and I mean that in the good way) like his dad did. Trump has 60-ish percent of the Republican Party hating him. Both responses were to be expected.

 

Quote:How do people think Trump looked good in any of these debates? He literally throws out one liners and calls people names. When he is pushed further he either shrugs, makes a face, or falls back on his "we will be great again" or "we don't win anymore" routine.

Yeah, I've noticed that. It seems that Trump supporters are after style, not substance.

 

Quote:Hopefully. A lot more effective than carpet bombing innocents trying to root out ISIS in civilian centers.

Killing the innocent families of terrorists is wrong on many levels--diplomatic, legal and moral. When a murderer shoots and kills someone in this country, the murderer's entire family is not executed. That's because we, unlike ISIS, are a civilized people, hopefully above committing our own acts of terrorism as revenge.

Quote:Why is specifically killing the family of terrorists crazy, but destroying entire towns in bombing runs seeking them out is A-OK?

 

 

Both are crazy.   Not to mention, really really bad strategy if we want to defeat ISIS. 

While killing families is not the solution, he just makes the point that terrorist DO care about something, and that is typically it. Probably could have left the killing part out, but from a high level, he has a valid point.

Quote:Both are crazy.   Not to mention, really really bad strategy if we want to defeat ISIS. 

 

Well, I think Rubio, Jeb, and Fiorina also said a solution was to continue arming "moderate rebels" and train them to fight against ISIS. As history has proven time and time again, that will land us right back where we are today, fighting a newly armed radicalized group. That is also a crazy idea.

 

So that leaves us with three options:

 

1. Full scale invasion of 50,000+ troops (even UN coalition would be nice, but highly unlikely). Lock down the middle-east, then leave after we have "done the job" ala Iraq.

2. Allow the Levantines to evacuate the Levant, immigrate and integrate with western nations, and give the Levant to ISIS.

3. Do nothing at all.

 

Are those crazy as well? What is not crazy?

Wonder why Congress was coined as the do nothing Congress? Watch this debate. They can't get along on the same team. Personal agendas and one upmanship seemed to be the status quo.

Build up the 6 th fleet. Carpet bomb. Missiles in Poland. Wow.


Wait till Hillary uses Carlys quote on women getting things done.


Many of these candidates can look down at their own feet after last night and see a bullet hole.


The GOP , IMO, had better get someone more centrist to get nominated than the the few I heard last night that are dying to push that button and thumping their chests proclaiming how tough they are.