You're assigning willful intent to actions that are merely automatic reflex (nociception). An 18-week fetus does not have the necessary level of brain development to be conscious, and lives in a state of sedation and anesthesia.

Makes you a little sick reading about that though, right?

The reality is that Fox needs Trump more than Trump needs Fox - he's done fine in polling even with the obvious attempts to prop up Rubio/Cruz and bash him.

 

I think it's Fox making the bad move here - nobody goes to games to watch the umpires.

 

That's what I was thinking. I know you can't abandon one of your star reporters, but they could really lay it to Trump had they agreed to not use Kelly as a moderator but decided to call it "The Meghan Kelly/Fox debate" or something like that. I mean who the heck is going to watch now? We will not get these type of stories, but I'd love to read stories about how worthless this debate is w/out Trump. I mean they've had a batch of debates already; who would watch this bore-fest w/out crazy Donald Trump??

Edited January 27, 201610 yr by greg775

I think it is symbiotic between trump and the media. He hasn't had to spend hardly anything so far due to all the FREE media coverage he gets. If he isn't in the media for a few days, make some new outrageous claim and get back in the cycle.

You're assigning willful intent to actions that are merely automatic reflex (nociception). An 18-week fetus does not have the necessary level of brain development to be conscious, and lives in a state of sedation and anesthesia.

Exactly. Reminds me of the picture of the doctor's finger being gripped by a tiny hand that was all the rage.

So Trump did it. I didn't see the debate other than a few clips sprawled around the internet. Did anyone without Trump take charge?

So Trump did it. I didn't see the debate other than a few clips sprawled around the internet. Did anyone without Trump take charge?

 

Not really. Secondary frontrunners Cruz and Rubio both got beat up by the other candidates and the Fox mediators. Paul and Bush were solid. Christie, Kasich, and Carson were the same they've been in every debate ("fk terrorists 9/11 dems suck", "pleeeeeeeeeease look at my resume I have experience", "zzzzzzz").

Please somehow let Bush get back in this thing. Let cruz and trump fade. Please...pretty please.

His name is just doing too much damage. I wish it would do similar damage to Clinton.

His name is just doing too much damage. I wish it would do similar damage to Clinton.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix...-2016-campaign/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix...-2016-campaign/

Any article that says 44% of Americans have a POSITIVE view of Hillary is just wrong from the get go.

Any article that says 44% of Americans have a POSITIVE view of Hillary is just wrong from the get go.

 

She's got an 80%+ favorable rating on dems. Assume a 50/50 split of dems/republican. 80% x 50%= 40%

 

Math don't lie. ?

She's got an 80%+ favorable rating on dems. Assume a 50/50 split of dems/republican. 80% x 50%= 40%

 

Math don't lie. ?

 

Even Hillary loves have to admit this is pretty funny. We enter the first caucus with Hillary totally getting positive press. The NY Times editorial. The puff piece on how everyone loves Bill Clinton surfacing today. The media is so predictable. Right after the caucus for a few days there will be negative stories on the email or something else, then as we creep close to New Hampshire ... boom there will be more positive fluff on Hillary. I have no idea why the media want Democratic presidents so badly, but they do.

She's got an 80%+ favorable rating on dems. Assume a 50/50 split of dems/republican. 80% x 50%= 40%

 

Math don't lie. ?

If 80 percent of Dems love her, why were we getting stories recently that Hillary and Bernie were neck and neck in Iowa? I get the feeling it's going to be a Hillary runaway and Bernie will be close to dropping out after NH.

Sanders very clearly will win NH. It will be explained away because of the proximity to his home state and favorable demographics.

 

South Carolina and Nevada are another story.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016...terrifying.html

 

Are there any Republicans who disagree with her assessment as it has become increasingly likely Trump's going to sweep Iowa, NH and South Carolina?

 

 

Trump's ground game is actually a lot better than he's being given credit for...

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/20...ps-secret-army/

 

 

 

 

Edited February 1, 201610 yr by caulfield12

If 80 percent of Dems love her, why were we getting stories recently that Hillary and Bernie were neck and neck in Iowa? I get the feeling it's going to be a Hillary runaway and Bernie will be close to dropping out after NH.

 

because they love him too and can only choose one.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-l..._opinions_pop_b

 

How the Dems theoretically attack Trump in the general, and whether it would actually work or not...of course, not taking into consideration a potential Bloomberg run throwing things into more chaos.

Edited February 1, 201610 yr by caulfield12

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-l..._opinions_pop_b

 

How the Dems theoretically attack Trump in the general, and whether it would actually work or not...of course, not taking into consideration a potential Bloomberg run throwing things into more chaos.

You don't attack Trump. You just feed the beast. Set him up to sound like a jackass, which he will do for you. That will continue to fire up the base, but equally repel anyone not in that deep base, thus ensuring a Dem victory.

 

I still don't believe Trump wins the nomination anyway.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-l..._opinions_pop_b

 

How the Dems theoretically attack Trump in the general, and whether it would actually work or not...of course, not taking into consideration a potential Bloomberg run throwing things into more chaos.

 

I'm pretty confident that Bloomberg only runs if Bernie beats Hillary. I don't see Bloomberg taking on Hillary.

You don't attack Trump. You just feed the beast. Set him up to sound like a jackass, which he will do for you. That will continue to fire up the base, but equally repel anyone not in that deep base, thus ensuring a Dem victory.

 

I still don't believe Trump wins the nomination anyway.

If he wins Iowa, I see him taking the nomination. If he doesn't, than sure, something interesting could happen. Even than, I feel like it is Cruz. The non Cruz / Trump republicans need to figure out which one is going to stay in the race and the rest absolutely need to disappear and fast (presumably the first to win a state's primary of the non Cruz / Trump group will be the one who "stays" in the race).

Hillary is winning this thing and it will not even be close. I want to vote Republican and think I would like Christie or Bush but if you told me either dropped out two weeks ago I would not be surprised.

 

Remember when Carley was in the conversation and then Carson.

 

Sanders will win Iowa and NH and then will not be heard from again.

 

The Republican party is a disaster.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-po...-caucuses-work/

 

Educational piece on what a caucus is and how it works (in relation to Iowa). Some opinion in there as well, but thought some people might find it useful.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-po...-caucuses-work/

 

Educational piece on what a caucus is and how it works (in relation to Iowa). Some opinion in there as well, but thought some people might find it useful.

 

Democratic Caucus = actually a caucus

 

Republican Caucus = a primary where you have to vote at a specific time rather than within the usual 12 hour window

I bet Mike O'Malley 3 fans are excited for the caucus.

 

COURT US, HILLARY AND BERNIE FANS

Just want to point out that the winner of Iowa, pretty often across parties doesn't win the nomination. Happens plenty.