# Third Republican Debate **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [October 1, 2015, 4:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/third-republican-debate/733155 "2015-10-01T16:41:55Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 10
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2015, 6:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/third-republican-debate/733155/181 "2015-10-30T18:25:52Z")
Well, red-haired Irish women do, if TV means anything. ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2015, 6:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/third-republican-debate/733155/182 "2015-10-30T18:28:24Z")
> [@aaelghat](#): > > Republicans Call Off Upcoming NBC Debate because of (in the Republican view) the CNBC fiasco: > > [https://gop.com/nbc-letter/](https://gop.com/nbc-letter/) Poor, wittle babies. Was someone not PC enough? > [@](#): > > While debates are meant to include tough questions and contrast candidates’ visions and policies for the future of America, CNBC’s moderators engaged in a series of “gotcha” questions, petty and mean-spirited in tone, and designed to embarrass our candidates. Really sucks to be on the receiving end for a change. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2015, 6:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/third-republican-debate/733155/183 "2015-10-30T18:32:10Z")
NBC previously, with a very piously and solemnly worded announcement, cut all ties with Trump due to his race baiting. But you know who’s hosting SNL next week? It’s all posturing. If the money’s there, the deals will be made. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2015, 6:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/third-republican-debate/733155/184 "2015-10-30T18:48:43Z")
Meh. “… pending further discussion … suspending …” Already they have them spread heavy on the Fox and overtly conservative outlet side: “with Fox News and CNN having three each; and one each for ABC, CBS, NBC, CNBC, Fox Business Network, and a conservative media outlet to be announced.” (Wiki) The NBC one is one of only two after NH and Iowa and is right before the big groups go in early March. They gonna give a fourth (fifth if you count Fox Business Network) to Fox? One to Cartoon Network? Just drop one? Discussion will pend and reassurances of real news professionals moderating will be given and it will still happen. What the ratings will be by then I don’t know. I am guessing the next one on Fox Business Network will not be a big ratings getter even without a World Series on. ---
**Author:** ![Rick\_Kitchen](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rick_kitchen/32/522_2.png) [@Rick\_Kitchen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick_Kitchen)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2015, 7:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/third-republican-debate/733155/185 "2015-10-30T19:08:34Z")
If the Republicans can’t handle CNBC journalists, how can they deal with Vladimir Putin? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2015, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/third-republican-debate/733155/186 "2015-10-30T19:15:30Z")
Hell of a lot better than they could handle Rachel Maddow! I’m guessing that MSNBC wasn’t part of their considerations… ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2015, 7:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/third-republican-debate/733155/187 "2015-10-30T19:29:23Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > CNBC is a business news television channel. _Business_ news. People tuned in to the GOP Candidate’s Debate to hear what the business policy positions of the Republican candidates were. > > NO ONE tuned in to hear what Moe, Larry, and Harwood had to say. Ask policy questions. Ask business related questions. And then stay out of the way. I’ve witnessed high school debates that were run in a more professional and _business-like_ manner. > > The CNBC “alleged” moderators injected themselves INTO the debate. These assholes lied, asked childish questions, and they argued with the candidates. The audience spoke out loud and clear when they BOOOOOO’d the moderators. Maybe the audience has higher standards and expectations than you do? > [@Do\_Not\_Taunt](#): > > Where did they lie? What’s a question you actually found childish? And when the candidates spout actual, verifiable nonsense, the moderators should call them on it (“argue with the candidates.”) Anything less is a dereliction of their duty. > > I don’t think anyone thought the moderators did a great job. They were in a tough position, trying to herd ten clueless, bloviating cats, but both the CNN and Fox moderators did a better job in this respect. But the problem isn’t in the questions they asked, and it isn’t because they made an attempt to interject a little reality from time to time. True, but I have to add: I rather have a media that is booed for making questions that many in a crowd do not like, rather than having a media that cheers the crowd. [http://www.politico.com/blogs/michaelcalderone/0909/Fox\_producer\_rallied\_tea\_party\_protesters.html](http://www.politico.com/blogs/michaelcalderone/0909/Fox_producer_rallied_tea_party_protesters.html) > [@](#): > > Fox producer rallied tea party protesters I do think there was value on what happened because I was not aware that not only Carson demonstrated gross ignorance of medical matters (that should had been his strength) but that he is also a quack. > **[Inside Ben Carson’s Cancer Scam](https://www.thedailybeast.com/inside-ben-carsons-cancer-scam)** > > ‘Glyconutrients’ worked so well that the doctor said he didn’t need to have surgery. So why did he wait until he was a spokesman to say how they saved his life? > [@](#): > > Ben Carson credited a nutritional supplement for helping save his life from cancer, yet he never mentioned it during interviews about his illness until he started shilling for its manufacturer. > > Carson was a spokesman for Mannatech, which claimed its “glyconutrients” could treat cancer, autism, multiple sclerosis, and AIDS. “The wonderful thing about a company like Mannatech is that they recognize that when God made us, He gave us the right fuel,” Carson said in a 2013 speech praising the company. On Wednesday, he denied any involvement with Mannatech. > > Carson even credited the supplements as being powerful enough that he didn’t need surgery for advanced prostate cancer. Dallas Weekly reported in a 2004 interview that Carson “said his decision to have a medical procedure resulted from his concern for those people who might neglect traditional medical procedures because they had learned of his personal experience with supplements.” ---
**Author:** ![TonySinclair](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/49beb7/32.png) [@TonySinclair](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TonySinclair)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2015, 8:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/third-republican-debate/733155/188 "2015-10-30T20:11:57Z")
> [@](#): > > Carson even credited the supplements as being powerful enough that he didn’t need surgery for advanced prostate cancer. Dallas Weekly reported in a 2004 interview that Carson “said his decision to have a medical procedure resulted from his concern for those people who might neglect traditional medical procedures because they had learned of his personal experience with supplements.” Holy crap, the guy who told a huge national audience (over 20 million IIRC) that they should ignore their family doctor’s recommendations about when to get their kids vaccinated, is claiming that he voluntarily and unnecessarily let them cut open his taint and remove his prostate, just in case the five people who knew he had prostate cancer might not follow traditional medical procedures if he didn’t, because OBVIOUSLY if Ben Carson doesn’t get surgery, I’m not going to either? And if it hasn’t been mentioned yet, his [business manager](http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/armstrong-williams-carson-mannatech-contract) today said that yes, he had indeed been under contract to Mannatech, so he can’t even stop himself from lying about stuff that’s extremely easy to check. He’s not only an idiot, he’s a pathological liar. And he’s leading the polls. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2015, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/third-republican-debate/733155/189 "2015-10-30T20:47:43Z")
> [@Rick\_Kitchen](#): > > If the Republicans can’t handle CNBC journalists, how can they deal with Vladimir Putin? Actually, it looks like the GOP candidates handled Moe, Larry, and Harwood very easily. It’s the talking heads on CNBC who couldn’t handle an autographed picture of Vladimir Putin. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![What\_Exit](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/what_exit/32/10652_2.png) [@What\_Exit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/What_Exit)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2015, 8:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/third-republican-debate/733155/190 "2015-10-30T20:53:46Z")
> [@TonySinclair](#): > > Holy crap, the guy who told a huge national audience (over 20 million IIRC) that they should ignore their family doctor’s recommendations about when to get their kids vaccinated, is claiming that he voluntarily and unnecessarily let them cut open his taint and remove his prostate, just in case the five people who knew he had prostate cancer might not follow traditional medical procedures if he didn’t, because OBVIOUSLY if Ben Carson doesn’t get surgery, I’m not going to either? > > And if it hasn’t been mentioned yet, his [business manager](http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/armstrong-williams-carson-mannatech-contract) today said that yes, he had indeed been under contract to Mannatech, so he can’t even stop himself from lying about stuff that’s extremely easy to check. > > He’s not only an idiot, he’s a pathological liar. And he’s leading the polls. Carson will fade and eventually it will probably be Rubio and Cruz leading. At least Rubio I can stomach. Cruz is not someone I could support at all. He is so far to the right though I think he would lose easily to HRC in a general election. BTW: Trump is leading, Carson is only 2nd. He is leading a few states though. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2015, 8:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/third-republican-debate/733155/191 "2015-10-30T20:59:57Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > True, but I have to add: I rather have a media that is booed for making questions that many in a crowd do not like, rather than having a media that cheers the crowd. Of course it’s true. The media was boo’d because they were supposed to be impartial moderators. The audience expected business and financial experts to ask business and financial questions. The alleged moderators were expected to act like adults, and not truculent children with an ax to grind. CNBC very publically pissed on their own reputation. ---
**Author:** ![Barkis\_is\_Willin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a183cd/32.png) [@Barkis\_is\_Willin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Barkis_is_Willin)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2015, 9:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/third-republican-debate/733155/192 "2015-10-30T21:00:53Z")
> [@Do\_Not\_Taunt](#): > > Where did they lie? Only since you asked, Harwood straight up lied twice. First, was this question to Rubio: _The Tax Foundation, which was alluded to earlier, scored your tax plan and concluded that you give nearly twice as much of a gain in after-tax income to the top one-percent as to people in the middle of the income scale. Since you’re a champion of Americans living paycheck to paycheck, don’t you have that backward?_ Rubio responded that’s not true and that Harwood even had to correct himself for making the same assertion previously. Harwood denied that. John Harwood tweet from Oct 14: \*CORRECTING earlier tweet: Tax Foundation says Rubio benefits lowest 10% proportionally more (55.9) than top 1% (27.9%). \* His second lie was so stupid I can’t imagine why he bothered. When Trump said he and other candidates negotiated the time of the debate down to two hours from three, Harwood just had to throw in there, “this debate was always going to be two hours.” We know that’s a lie because moments earlier when Carly Fiorina asked for more time to answer, Harwood said, “you candidates wanted to shorten this debate…oh go ahead.” Plus the negotiation from 3 to 2 hours was pretty public knowledge beforehand. There may have been others, but those were the most obvious. ---
**Author:** ![Do\_Not\_Taunt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/do_not_taunt/32/2968_2.png) [@Do\_Not\_Taunt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Do_Not_Taunt)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2015, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/third-republican-debate/733155/193 "2015-10-30T21:01:52Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > Actually, it looks like the GOP candidates handled Moe, Larry, and Harwood very easily. It’s the talking heads on CNBC who couldn’t handle an autographed picture of Vladimir Putin. 😃 I wonder why Reince Priebus (\*) doesn’t think so. (\*) I cannot think, say, or write his name without wanting to turn it into Prince Rebus. ---
**Author:** ![Do\_Not\_Taunt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/do_not_taunt/32/2968_2.png) [@Do\_Not\_Taunt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Do_Not_Taunt)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2015, 9:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/third-republican-debate/733155/194 "2015-10-30T21:05:47Z")
> [@Barkis\_is\_Willin](#): > > Only since you asked, Harwood straight up lied twice. First, was this question to Rubio: > > _The Tax Foundation, which was alluded to earlier, scored your tax plan and concluded that you give nearly twice as much of a gain in after-tax income to the top one-percent as to people in the middle of the income scale. Since you’re a champion of Americans living paycheck to paycheck, don’t you have that backward?_ > > Rubio responded that’s not true and that Harwood even had to correct himself for making the same assertion previously. Harwood denied that. > > John Harwood tweet from Oct 14: > > \*CORRECTING earlier tweet: Tax Foundation says Rubio benefits lowest 10% proportionally more (55.9) than top 1% (27.9%). \* I don’t see the lie. In the debate, he compared the top 1% to people in the _middle_ of the income scale. As far as I know, he’s correct. His earlier tweet, which you quote here, doesn’t mention the middle, and compares the top 1% and bottom 10%. > [@](#): > > His second lie was so stupid I can’t imagine why he bothered. When Trump said he and other candidates negotiated the time of the debate down to two hours from three, Harwood just had to throw in there, “this debate was always going to be two hours.” We know that’s a lie because moments earlier when Carly Fiorina asked for more time to answer, Harwood said, “you candidates wanted to shorten this debate…oh go ahead.” Plus the negotiation from 3 to 2 hours was pretty public knowledge beforehand. > > There may have been others, but those were the most obvious. [WaPo doesn’t agree.](https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2015/10/28/trump-beats-chest-over-length-of-cnbc-debate/) Sounds like zero documented lies. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2015, 9:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/third-republican-debate/733155/195 "2015-10-30T21:06:50Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Hell of a lot better than they could handle Rachel Maddow! I’m guessing that MSNBC wasn’t part of their considerations… I’m sure that will happen right after the hate-mongers on MSNBC apologize for all of the false stories and false rumors they created about Chris Christie being responsible for Bridgegate??? But I don’t believe that has ever been a part of MSNBC’s considerations. Better luck next millennium. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2015, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/third-republican-debate/733155/196 "2015-10-30T21:27:18Z")
> [@What\_Exit](#): > > BTW: Trump is leading, Carson is only 2nd. He is leading a few states though. And in [the last nationwide poll](http://www.cbsnews.com/news/cbsnyt-poll-ben-carson-edges-out-donald-trump/) released. FWIW. > [@](#): > > Ben Carson has surpassed Donald Trump and now narrowly leads the Republican field in the race for the nomination in the latest national CBS News/New York Times Poll. > > Twenty-six percent of Republican primary voters back Carson, giving him a four-point edge over Trump (22 percent). Support for Carson has quadrupled since August. MOE +/- 7%. ---
**Author:** ![TonySinclair](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/49beb7/32.png) [@TonySinclair](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TonySinclair)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2015, 9:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/third-republican-debate/733155/197 "2015-10-30T21:43:17Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > I’m sure that will happen right after the hate-mongers on MSNBC apologize for all of the false stories and false rumors they created about Chris Christie being responsible for Bridgegate??? If you could be more specific? I don’t watch MSNBC all day, and Al Sharpton, whom I don’t consider to be a journalist, used to have a show, so I can’t say for sure that nobody on MSNBC got the story wrong. But you were responding to a post that mentioned Maddow, and I do watch her, and if you have a cite for her getting the story wrong without a prompt correction (I think her show transcripts are all posted) I would like to see it, because my recollection is that she was scrupulous in attributing the orders to Christie’s staff, and produced the emails that proved it. But point of order, no matter who in his office gave the order, isn’t Christie responsible for it in the same sense that Hillary is responsible for the security in Benghazi? ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2015, 9:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/third-republican-debate/733155/198 "2015-10-30T21:52:41Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > Of course it’s true. > > The media was boo’d because they were supposed to be impartial moderators. The audience expected business and financial experts to ask business and financial questions. [snip] Business groups do think that it is interesting to point to the kind of deals Carson was involved with. > **[What Is Mannatech?](https://www.ibtimes.com/what-mannatech-ben-carson-connected-controversial-supplement-company-gop-debate-2161884)** > > GOP presidential contender Ben Carson has done speeches and videos for the controversial supplement company referenced in Wednesday's presidential debate. > [@](#): > > In the third Republican primary debate Wednesday, leading candidate Ben Carson downplayed his connections to Mannatech, a controversial health supplement company based in Texas. The company sells “glyconutritional supplements” that its website says “give your body what it needs to help it grow and stay strong.” > > But the company has a checkered past, as referenced by CNBC moderator Carl Quintanilla in Wednesday’s debate, held in Boulder, Colorado. “There’s a company called Mannatech, a maker of nutritional supplements, with which you had a 10-year relationship,” Quintanilla asked the former neurosurgeon, via The Atlantic. “They offered claims that they could cure autism and cancer. They paid $7 million to settle a deceptive-marketing lawsuit in Texas and yet your involvement continued. Why?” The guys at the International Business Times do not look at the booing, they also think it was a good question. > [@](#): > > Quintanilla was referencing a 2009 lawsuit settled by Mannatech that alleged the company had allowed for “deceptive” and “illegal” testimonials at sales meetings and sales materials that suggested the company’s products could treat or cure serious medical issues like Down Syndrome, cystic fibrosis, autism and cancer, the Wall Street Journal reported. The suit, filed by the Texas attorney general in 2007, also alleged the company sold a disc entitled “Back from the Brink” that “provided example after example of how ‘glyconutrients’ (i.e., Mannatech’s products) cured, treated or mitigated diseases including but not limited to toxic shock syndrome, heart failure, asthma, arthritis, Lou Gehrig’s disease, attention deficit disorder and lung inflammation,” via the National Review. The civil complaint noted that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration had notified Mannatech on multiple occasions that its materials had made illegal drug claims, according to the Journal. The company agreed and avoided false marketing claims, and the co-founder agreed to not serve as an officer or director for five years. ---
**Author:** ![duality72](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/duality72/32/3910_2.png) [@duality72](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/duality72)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2015, 11:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/third-republican-debate/733155/199 "2015-10-30T23:37:13Z")
> [@Do\_Not\_Taunt](#): > > I don’t see the lie. In the debate, he compared the top 1% to people in the _middle_ of the income scale. As far as I know, he’s correct. His earlier tweet, which you quote here, doesn’t mention the middle, and compares the top 1% and bottom 10%. It’s even worse than that. Rubio’s plan only got the favorable rating for 1% versus poor because [the plan as submitted to the Tax Foundation would be a massive expansion of the welfare state](http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2015/10/are-we-allowed-say-marco-rubio-lying-about-his-tax-plan). After getting the numbers back, Rubio’s campaign insists that’s not how the plan will work, but they keep using the bogus numbers because it makes them look good. A plan scored the way the Rubio campaign says it would work would show the poor getting a small fraction of the benefit to the top 1%, but that plan has never been submitted to the Tax Foundation. Not only is Harwood not lying, Rubio is the deceitful one trying to pull a huge bait-and-switch with his plan and hoping the voters aren’t smart enough to notice. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2015, 11:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/third-republican-debate/733155/200 "2015-10-30T23:54:10Z")
Wondered if the Tax Foundation had responded, and they did, they said something. Didn’t understand a word, don’t know if it supported Rubio’s version or not. Usually when that happens, its by design, but hereya go, **Clarifying the Distributional Effects of the Rubio-Lee Tax Plan** > **[Clarifying the Distributional Effects of the Rubio-Lee Tax Plan | Tax Foundation](https://taxfoundation.org/clarifying-distributional-effects-rubio-lee-tax-plan)** > > Last night’s Republican primary debate focused on the U.S. economy and contained several extended discussions of tax policy. At one point in the debate, Senator Marco Rubio and moderator John Harwood went back and forth about which taxpayers would... [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/third-republican-debate/733155.md?page=9) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/third-republican-debate/733155.md?page=11)