# 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:** 8
**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 29, 2015, 7:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/third-republican-debate/733155/141 "2015-10-29T19:31:45Z")
> [@Barkis\_is\_Willin](#): > > What’s baffling is how you get from moderator, which means arbitrator or mediator, to instigator. A moderator, whether it’s a press member or not, is not there to enter the debate. A good moderator will let the candidates sort it out among themselves whose ideas are crap and whose are worthy. > > The press can do their job, as you explain it, when they’re not moderating debates. They can do interviews, speak or write opinion pieces and execute their agenda any number of ways. > > And I would agree the Fox moderators also let their agenda get in the way of their moderation. But they looked like gold star pros compared to the CNBC team. I’m not really concerned about the dictionary definition of moderator. What I’m interested in is debates which actually fulfill their purpose of helping voters make up their minds about candidates. I think the crux of the question is really what role should moderators have when candidates’ positions are actively contradicted by basic reality. You seem to be suggesting their role should be ‘none’, but I don’t agree. I want moderators to help voters understand the candidate/reality disconnect when it’s there. > [@Sam\_Lowry](#): > > But calling Trump on his nonsense isn’t likely to get him to admit that it’s nonsense. He’ll just say that he’s not crazy, the leaders who have come before are crazy and losers and idiots. It’s not a productive use of time. This is especially true of Trump, but also holds true for the other candidates. Sure, of course. Until voters demonstrate they care that candidates are lying to them, candidates will continue to lie. Journalists should still point out when this is happening. ---
**Author:** ![Ann\_Hedonia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ann_hedonia/32/319_2.png) [@Ann\_Hedonia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ann_Hedonia)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2015, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/third-republican-debate/733155/142 "2015-10-29T20:24:21Z")
Some of my random thoughts Just wondering, did they give Carly a choice between Ms. and Mrs? “Mrs. Fiorina” grated my nerves every time I heard it. I was amused at all the intense anti-government rhetoric, especially since most of the candidates are career politicians. It seemed kind of like going to church and hearing the preacher ranting about how much God sucks and he isn’t real anyway and we are fools to believe. And, I admit my attention was wavering, but was it Huckabee whose great health care reform plan involved curing cancer? Lastly, there were lots of statistics bandied around about how much the economy had tanked since “the day Barack Obama was elected”. I noticed they didn’t say “took office” and I figured that was because the economy was in free fall (due to being driven of the cliff by Republicans) during the 10 weeks or so between the election and inauguration. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2015, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/third-republican-debate/733155/143 "2015-10-29T20:26:28Z")
Yes. Huckabee’s affordable health care plan is based on curing cancer, so total system costs will go down. He really did say that. You’re right - if government is so bad, why do they all want to run it? ---
**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 29, 2015, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/third-republican-debate/733155/144 "2015-10-29T20:27:53Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Yes. Huckabee’s affordable health care plan is based on curing cancer, so total system costs will go down. He really did say that. > > **You’re right - if government is so bad, why do they all want to run it?** Because government is bad if _someone else_ is running it. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2015, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/third-republican-debate/733155/145 "2015-10-29T20:32:24Z")
> [@Barkis\_is\_Willin](#): > > So in other words, you feel it’s the moderator’s job, _not the other participants in the debate,_ to point out a candidate’s flaws? Oh, sure, I’m good with _that._ But there’s a difference between _flawed ideas, and ideas that are batshit insane._ And AFAIAC, it’s anyone’s and everyone’s job to point out the latter. YMMV, and clearly does. > [@](#): > > The whole purpose of the debate is to let the candidates sort it out. When the moderator starts hurling insults and setting traps, he gets in the way of the debate. This was a _trap??_ Sounded to me like he was just checking to make sure Trump hadn’t changed his mind on any of that batshit stuff. ---
**Author:** ![GrandWino](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/grandwino/32/67_2.png) [@GrandWino](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GrandWino)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2015, 9:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/third-republican-debate/733155/146 "2015-10-29T21:13:18Z")
Hey, just found out I’ll be attending the debate in Milwaukee on 11/10. Can’t fucking wait. ---
**Author:** ![GrandWino](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/grandwino/32/67_2.png) [@GrandWino](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GrandWino)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2015, 9:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/third-republican-debate/733155/147 "2015-10-29T21:17:11Z")
Also, when you don’t like the question or don’t have a good answer - the fallback is to attack the question and the person asking it (media). This has been going on forever. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2015, 9:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/third-republican-debate/733155/148 "2015-10-29T21:46:28Z")
> [@Gyrate](#): > > Not even DNC shills. Daytime talkshow hosts, maybe. It’s not that they wanted the Democrats to win; they just wanted a shitstorm of a circus to boost ratings. The clowns at CNBC certainly earned the shitstorm they created for themselves. It will be interesting to see if/when any of these “alleged” moderators are replaced at their regular CNBC jobs. ---
**Author:** ![emcee2k](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7bcc69/32.png) [@emcee2k](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/emcee2k)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2015, 9:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/third-republican-debate/733155/149 "2015-10-29T21:53:23Z")
After watching that, I’m really questioning whether Jeb even really wants to be president. Also, at this point, it’s clear the truth just doesn’t matter in the Republican primary. It’s one thing when you can stretch the truth a bit and count on the viewer not following up with a fact check. Now it’s to the point where they can flat out out lie, get called on it right there in the same program, and it doesn’t hurt them at all. Ben Carson called himself out! He said he had “no involvement” with Mannatech and in the same breath said he did paid speeches for them. Then he actually endorsed their product in his response. The audience’s response was to boo the moderator for suggesting that involvement with snake oil dealers might speak to his judgement. Yes, the moderator should have had a cite about the visas ready from Trump’s website, but I doubt it would have made any difference. The audience would have probably booed her for playing a “gotcha”. ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2015, 9:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/third-republican-debate/733155/150 "2015-10-29T21:56:56Z")
> [@Barkis\_is\_Willin](#): > > If you think a rhetorical question that serves no purpose other than to ridicule the candidate, whomever it may be, is appropriate for a debate, then we’re just not going to agree. Moderators are not supposed to play a game of “gotcha” with the candidates. I think you and **BobLibDem** both have a point. The statements that Harwood was quoting were all things that Trump has said _ **repeatedly** _, to the point that they are essentially themes of his campaign. I do think that then leading into the question “Is this a comic book version of a presidential campaign?” was unnecessarily hostile, but it’s only the wording and not the substance of the question that was, arguably, problematic. What if Harwood had itemized those same quotes and then asked something like, “Did you mean those statements seriously? Can you explain why voters should take them seriously?”. Would that have been acceptable? If so, was there really much of a substantive difference? ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2015, 10:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/third-republican-debate/733155/151 "2015-10-29T22:00:30Z")
> [@GrandWino](#): > > Also, when you don’t like the question or don’t have a good answer - the fallback is to attack the question and the person asking it (media). This has been going on forever. When the “alleged” moderator Harwood’s leadoff question is asking if a candidate’s campaign is a comic book campaign, asshole Harwood is attacking the candidate. Nobody cares what Harwood’s opinion is. Nobody attended, or tuned in, to hear Harwood say anything. Real moderators are supposed to be impartial. CNBC ended up looking like a 3rd-rate circus, and their moderators acted like 4th-rate, extremely biased, clowns. I wonder when CNBC will again be allowed to host a debate? ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2015, 10:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/third-republican-debate/733155/152 "2015-10-29T22:05:08Z")
If you’re having 12 “debates” pretty much everybody is going to be “allowed” to host one. ---
**Author:** ![marshmallow](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/df705f/32.png) [@marshmallow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/marshmallow)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2015, 11:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/third-republican-debate/733155/153 "2015-10-29T23:59:02Z")
Can someone point to a crazier political debate involving actual politicians? One that doesn’t take place in America. I’m envisioning some post-colonial developing democracy where the literacy rate is like 20% and they’re talking about the scourge of witches and evil spirits, or how condoms cause AIDS. But they might believe in evolution and worker rights, so it’s a balance. ---
**Author:** ![Irishman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/b487fb/32.png) [@Irishman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Irishman)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2015, 12:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/third-republican-debate/733155/154 "2015-10-30T00:21:47Z")
> [@Renee](#): > > Really? He really said that? (I’m not watching, cause I don’t have tv) Yes, it was in response to the moderator prodding him to say something negative about Trump, so he basically refused to play that game. > [@DSeid](#): > > Readily admit I just flipped to it every so often but did catch Trump stating that the moderator was mistaken and that he never called Rubio Zuckerberg’s personal senator. It is in one of [his position papers.](https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions/immigration-reform) > > Did they ever circle back to call him on that? They went back to it later, and she cited his website, but he just answered a different question and moved on. What’s really messed up is in this debate, he said he approved of bringing in foreign workers under whatever you want to call it, “visas” or “work permits”. But in the cited article he’s arguing against increasing these permits. Somehow that got glossed over. Rubio picked up the ball and said increase the permits, but first require the jobs be offerred in the USA for 120 days and that the salary has to be higher for the foreigners and that if any company abuses the policy they be barred from using it again. Wait, doesn’t that mean more government overseers and inspectors and whatnot? Big government? > [@BobLibDem](#): > > Here’s the question that set of Cruz’s temper tantrum: > > I thought the question was fair and rather than answer this substantive question, he chose to go on a tirade about the moderation. Then after his time was up, he whined about not getting a chance to answer it. What an ass. He picked an inopportune time to make a very valid point. He used up all his allotted time and more to point out the poor behavior of the moderators, and then argued he should have more time to answer the actual question because… liberals. I think his criticism was valid to a degree. The problem is he just got asked a substantive policy question, what he was arguing they should be asking, and he didn’t answer it. So that kinda undercuts his point a bit. > [@adaher](#): > > I am pretty annoyed that Carson denied involvement with Mannatech and managed to endorse their product in the same answer. Yeah, he denied involvement, admitted giving paid speeches to them, and endorsed their product. > [@Peremensoe](#): > > But that right there _was_ the moderator’s fault; she wasn’t prepared with the cite. Yes, she should have had that cite at hand. Later she did return with it from his own website, but the impact was less. > [@](#): > > Moreover, while the “personal Senator” line is a slightly weird hyperbole, it is true that Zuckerberg’s lobby has worked with Rubio on the H1B issue–which is [a legitimate one in which Trump, or rather his campaign, is not obviously wrong](http://www.boston.com/news/politics/2015/08/18/why-donald-trump-attacking-mark-zuckerberg-immigration/qA5w9OIGpYGo7lN9jBUiKL/story.html). A serious debate question would have focused on the substance of the issue, not the shot at Rubio. But this debate he said he supported it. > [@Barkis\_is\_Willin](#): > > I take it you turned on the debate at that moment because prior to that it was a complete clown show from the CNBC crew. The first question right out of the gate had no objective other than to ridicule Trump as a “comic book candidate.” Like Trump or not, that’s bad form. The moderators were constantly walking on candidates’ responses, walking on each other and generally just flubbed up the whole thing. While I appreciate the simplicity of the set up and then the stinger, I think it could have been phrased less attack. He could have said, “Do you think the American people take these positions seriously?” or “Do you think you can win the general election advocating these positions?” or even call for some specific. > [@Sam\_Lowry](#): > > Well the best questions would be to ask him for specifics on how he would go about implementing some of his ludicrous plans, and having reports on the ready on how some of his ideas would destroy the country, but that still wouldn’t do any good. He’d just yell about how smart he is and how his ideas will work and the experts who say they won’t are just jealous losers. Yeah, but when Carson Daly tried it at the Town Hall, he just pushed it off by saying he could get into specifics but then wasted all his time with his “Bing bing bing” nonsense. > [@Jas09](#): > > Did Carly really claim that 92% of the job losses after 2008 (or maybe it was under Obama) were women’s jobs? Or did I mishear her on that (I was primarily watching the ball game)? > > That can’t be right, can it? Did she just mis-speak? She actually said that. > [@Ann\_Hedonia](#): > > Just wondering, did they give Carly a choice between Ms. and Mrs? “Mrs. Fiorina” grated my nerves every time I heard it. Why? She is married. > [@](#): > > And, I admit my attention was wavering, but was it Huckabee whose great health care reform plan involved curing cancer? His plan to save Medicare is to cure cancer, diabetes, heart disease, and alzheimers. Now it’s true that chronic illness, especially those related to aging, are the biggest medical costs. But it’s not like we’re sitting around “Oh, we should try to _cure_ these diseases!” Tons of money is going to research to cure all of these. We could throw the entire Medicare budget for the next 5 years at them and we can’t guarantee any results. In the meantime, we have a bunch of people who are sick and needing financial assistance to pay for their medical care. Ridiculous! > [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > You’re right - if government is so bad, why do they all want to run it? They want to be elected President so they can eliminate the position. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2015, 12:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/third-republican-debate/733155/155 "2015-10-30T00:21:51Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > When the “alleged” moderator Harwood’s leadoff question is asking if a candidate’s campaign is a comic book campaign, asshole Harwood is attacking the candidate. Nobody cares what Harwood’s opinion is. Nobody attended, or tuned in, to hear Harwood say anything. Real moderators are supposed to be impartial. All this fucking crying about how the CNBC moderators didn’t suck up to the candidates is ridiculous. CNBC is, more or less, a channel that does not support Republicans. Any of the Republican candidates that were not prepared to answer barbed questions are complete idiots. I’ll add that I’m sick and tired of the attitude that moderators of a presidential debate are supposed to be “impartial”, which as best I can tell from the posts in this thread, means “lob softballs”. I want the moderators to ask serious questions in the hope of getting serious answers. It appears that only the latter part of the equation did not happen last evening. ---
**Author:** ![Dr.Drake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ad7895/32.png) [@Dr.Drake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dr.Drake)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2015, 12:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/third-republican-debate/733155/156 "2015-10-30T00:30:02Z")
> [@Irishman](#): > > Why? She is married. Because it is outdated to use an honorific that codes a woman’s marital status when we have a widely accepted alternative. Her husband, or lack thereof, is totally irrelevant to her presence in the debates, even more so than her imaginary qualifications. She should be Ms. Fiorina, unless she has stated a preference for Mrs. ---
**Author:** ![D\_Anconia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/67e7ee/32.png) [@D\_Anconia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/D_Anconia)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2015, 1:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/third-republican-debate/733155/157 "2015-10-30T01:28:48Z")
> [@Dr.Drake](#): > > She should be Ms. Fiorina, unless she has stated a preference for Mrs. Do you know what her preference is, or are you just guessing? ---
**Author:** ![MindsEye\_Watering](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mindseye_watering/32/3619_2.png) [@MindsEye\_Watering](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MindsEye_Watering)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2015, 2:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/third-republican-debate/733155/158 "2015-10-30T02:22:28Z")
> [@Frank](#): > > All this fucking crying about how the CNBC moderators didn’t suck up to the candidates is ridiculous. CNBC is, more or less, a channel that does not support Republicans. Any of the Republican candidates that were not prepared to answer barbed questions are complete idiots. > > I’ll add that I’m sick and tired of the attitude that moderators of a presidential debate are supposed to be “impartial”, which as best I can tell from the posts in this thread, means “lob softballs”. I want the moderators to ask serious questions in the hope of getting serious answers. It appears that only the latter part of the equation did not happen last evening. This. If elected president, this CNBC moderation would be a doddle compared to what they would face as President. Gonna act like a whiny child and complain about the questions then? ---
**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, 2:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/third-republican-debate/733155/159 "2015-10-30T02:37:19Z")
> [@Frank](#): > > All this fucking crying about how the CNBC moderators didn’t suck up to the candidates is ridiculous. CNBC is, more or less, a channel that does not support Republicans. Any of the Republican candidates that were not prepared to answer barbed questions are complete idiots. > > I’ll add that I’m sick and tired of the attitude that moderators of a presidential debate are supposed to be “impartial”, which as best I can tell from the posts in this thread, means “lob softballs”. I want the moderators to ask serious questions in the hope of getting serious answers. It appears that only the latter part of the equation did not happen last evening. This post mischaracterizes criticism of the moderators and illustrates a gross misunderstanding of what a debate is supposed to be. A debate is not an interview. If you don’t know why moderators are supposed to be neutral, maybe do some research. The Commission for Presidential Debates says: “Above all, choose a moderator or panelists whom you and the debate participants trust to be professional and fair.” The CNBC team is pretty much getting universally lambasted. Even some pretty liberal commentators thought Ted Cruz was right. ---
**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, 2:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/third-republican-debate/733155/160 "2015-10-30T02:49:23Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > These moderators injected themselves into the debate. These moderators failed as moderators. They excelled as DNC shills. Why is it that any time somebody comes out in opposition to the Republican candidates, they must be on the side of the Democrats? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/third-republican-debate/733155.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/third-republican-debate/733155.md?page=9)