The Official GOP Debate Thread

[SunsetBengal]

(08-07-2015, 10:49 AM)GMDino Wrote: I can't see where Cruz did anything to separate himself but he didn't poop on the stage.  Trump showed exactly why he'd be a poor politician / president.  he can NOT handle criticism at all.  There's a difference between not being PC and insulting anyone who disagrees with you.

My wife commented on Rubio's ears too!  

Saw a tweet that said Paul needs to decided between the two haircuts he has. 

This is a first release of polling data of conservatives, after the debate.  Cruz soared.

http://libertynews.com/2015/08/breaking-5000-conservatives-vote-in-post-debate-poll-donald-trump-tanks-while-cruz-and-fiorina-surge/

[GMDino]

(08-07-2015, 06:56 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: This is a first release of polling data of conservatives, after the debate.  Cruz soared.

http://libertynews.com/2015/08/breaking-5000-conservatives-vote-in-post-debate-poll-donald-trump-tanks-while-cruz-and-fiorina-surge/

No I mean among sane people. 

[*bfine32*]

(08-07-2015, 06:56 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: This is a first release of polling data of conservatives, after the debate.  Cruz soared.

http://libertynews.com/2015/08/breaking-5000-conservatives-vote-in-post-debate-poll-donald-trump-tanks-while-cruz-and-fiorina-surge/

When the forum turns more to actual debate and less to interview process Cruz will make huge strides. He will also take a large percentage of the Trump backers when/if he flames out.

[GodHatesBengals]

Lol. Trump won the debate by virtue of being the stupidest human being on the stage, which is exactly what your average Republican is looking for in a President.

[BmorePat87]

(08-07-2015, 06:56 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: This is a first release of polling data of conservatives, after the debate.  Cruz soared.

http://libertynews.com/2015/08/breaking-5000-conservatives-vote-in-post-debate-poll-donald-trump-tanks-while-cruz-and-fiorina-surge/

Egh, I'll wait for actual polls. That online survey is even more flawed than the TIME and Drudge Report surveys that I almost posted but realized weren't that legitimate. 

In TIME's defense, they had 100,000 more people vote, and Cruz only has 5% and it was open to anyone. DR too. Drudges' had half a million people vote and Cruz did much better, getting 2nd with 15% (to the Donald's 45%).

Basically, these online surveys are meaningless right now. They reflect the population who visit these sites more than reality. 

[*bfine32*]

(08-07-2015, 08:41 PM)GodHatesBengals Wrote: Lol. Trump won the debate by virtue of being the stupidest human being on the stage, which is exactly what your average Republican is looking for in a President.

I really haven't heard anybody reputable suggest Trump won the debate.

[StLucieBengal]

Cruz did well.

He didn't speak much but made the most when he did, I really thought Cruz, Rubio, and Rand had a lot of substance. Which is a good sign for the new breed of GOP.

Low information voters would think Christie and Huckabee had great nights.

[StLucieBengal]

(08-07-2015, 08:46 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Egh, I'll wait for actual polls. That online survey is even more flawed than the TIME and Drudge Report surveys that I almost posted but realized weren't that legitimate. 

In TIME's defense, they had 100,000 more people vote, and Cruz only has 5% and it was open to anyone. DR too. Drudges' had half a million people vote and Cruz did much better, getting 2nd with 15% (to the Donald's 45%).

Basically, these online surveys are meaningless right now. They reflect the population who visit these sites more than reality. 

Online polls are engaged people. Polling is very subjective and easily manipulated. And the professional pollsters are bad at it as well. Easy to get their answers they want..

[BmorePat87]

(08-07-2015, 09:35 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Online polls are engaged people.    Polling is very subjective and easily manipulated.    And the professional pollsters are bad at it as well.    Easy to get their answers they want..

It can be, but that's why we look at reputable polling firms.

[StLucieBengal]

(08-07-2015, 09:43 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: It can be, but that's why we look at reputable polling firms.

Polling firms cater to who is paying them.

[*michaelsean*]

(08-07-2015, 08:41 PM)GodHatesBengals Wrote: Lol. Trump won the debate by virtue of being the stupidest human being on the stage, which is exactly what your average Republican is looking for in a President.

Yeah the billionaire, the pediatric neuro surgeon and a guy Alan Dershowitz called off the charts brilliant. All morons.

[BmorePat87]

(08-07-2015, 09:47 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Polling firms cater to who is paying them.

Who is paying Gallup and Pew?

[StLucieBengal]

(08-07-2015, 10:31 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Who is paying Gallup and Pew?

You know exactly what I am talking about, polls can be manipulated by question structure. There are some better than most. But to pretend that these polls are without bias is a little ridiculous. That's all i am saying.

Perfect example is the last election. Some had Romney winning because in polling they didn't count on the youth vote because it's so erratic. Obama campaign did because they knew how many voters they farmed.

[BmorePat87]

(08-07-2015, 11:24 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: You know exactly what I am talking about, polls can be manipulated by question structure.   There are some better than most.   But to pretend that these polls are without bias is a little ridiculous.   That's all i am saying.    

Perfect example is the last election.  Some had Romney winning because in polling they didn't count on the youth vote because it's so erratic.   Obama campaign did because they knew how many voters they farmed.

How is asking "who would you vote for" biased? I understand how some questions can be phrased in a way to lead voters, but that's why we scrutinize professional polling to eliminate that. 

Also, you're giving an example of hypothetical poll not being completely representative of the voter turnout population, which has nothing to do with being biased but more to do with not being able to guess the turnout. 

If we look at independent polling for 2012, you'll see that none had Romney winning beyond the margin of error:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/general_election_romney_vs_obama-1171.html

However, to get back to what we were actually discussing (real polls versus online polls), I have to imagine that a voter poll from Breitbart or Drudge would have had Romney winning by more than what these independent polls had. Why? Because those who frequent those sites are predominately conservative. Likewise, a DailyKOS poll would have been far more in favor of Obama.

[StLucieBengal]

(08-08-2015, 12:01 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: How is asking "who would you vote for" biased? I understand how some questions can be phrased in a way to lead voters, but that's why we scrutinize professional polling to eliminate that. 

Also, you're giving an example of hypothetical poll not being completely representative of the voter turnout population, which has nothing to do with being biased but more to do with not being able to guess the turnout. 

If we look at independent polling for 2012, you'll see that none had Romney winning beyond the margin of error:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/general_election_romney_vs_obama-1171.html

However, to get back to what we were actually discussing (real polls versus online polls), I have to imagine that a voter poll from Breitbart or Drudge would have had Romney winning by more than what these independent polls had. Why? Because those who frequent those sites are predominately conservative. Likewise, a DailyKOS poll would have been far more in favor of Obama.

Well the sample size is never 50/50. And what good is any poll with a margin of error over 4%?

A poll from drudge or breitbart would be perfect for a GOP primary.

I'm not saying online polls are the best. Just saying you can find bias in any of these polls.

[Belsnickel]

Any online poll open to anyone visiting the site is bunk. Using browser cookies and/or multiple email addresses one can manipulate the results themselves. Not to mention the sample set is never indicative of the actual populous you are looking to represent because there is no care taken to use demographics to determine the figures. Any online poll is junk and is not actual statistics.

[GMDino]

As I said Trump's true color are starting to shine through the facade.

http://onpolitics.usatoday.com/2015/08/08/trump-on-megyn-kelly-she-had-blood-coming-out-of-her-wherever/

Quote:Donald Trump’s slamming of Megyn Kelly continued on Friday night, with the presidential candidate seeming to imply that Kelly’s aggressive questioning during the first GOP debate was because she was on her period.

During an interview with CNN’s Don Lemon, Trump unleashed a rather graphic criticism of the journalist:

Quote:Well, I just don’t respect her as a journalist. I don’t think she’s very good. I think she’s highly overrated… She starts asking me all sorts of ridiculous questions, and you could see there was blood coming out of her eyes. Blood coming out of her wherever. She was, in my opinion, she was off-base.

Trump added that he wasn’t alone in his critiques, pointing to responses to the debate from people on Twitter.

Kelly took Trump to task during Thursday’s GOP debate, at one point calling him out: “You’ve called women ‘fat pigs,’ ‘dogs,’ ‘slobs,’ ‘disgusting animals.'”

“Only Rosie O’Donnell,” Trump cut in.

While Kelly has not responded to Trump’s Friday comments, other have. Fellow GOP candidate Carly Fiorina tweeted her disapproval:



And RedState’s Erick Erickson uninvited Trump from the conservative blog’s gathering in Atlanta this weekend:

His comment was inappropriate. It is unfortunate to have to disinvite him. But I just don’t want someone on stage who gets a hostile question from a lady and his first inclination is to imply it was hormonal. It just was wrong.

Cue the people "not defending him" that this is just the establishment trying to attack him.

[Brownshoe]

(08-08-2015, 08:47 AM)GMDino Wrote: As I said Trump's true color are starting to shine through the facade.

http://onpolitics.usatoday.com/2015/08/08/trump-on-megyn-kelly-she-had-blood-coming-out-of-her-wherever/


Cue the people "not defending him" that this is just the establishment trying to attack him.

Trump knows this will push peoples buttons, and he knows that any publicity is good publicity. That isn't me agreeing with him. Personally I think he's an idiot.

[GMDino]

(08-08-2015, 08:51 AM)Brownshoe Wrote: Trump knows this will push peoples buttons, and he knows that any publicity is good publicity. That isn't me agreeing with him. Personally I think he's an idiot.

The sad part is there are a lot of people who don't think he's an idiot but rather he's a "straight shooter".

Too man people have confused being famous with being right.

[*PhilHos*]

Ok, I finally got around to watching clips of the debate and, honestly, I can see why Trump has so many supporters. Dude is NOT a politician and he seems to have no filter on his mouth. Don't forget that the majority of people in this country are sick of political correctness and Trump is riding that hard right now. I don't think it's enough to get him to the White House, but these other candidates need to do SOMETHING or else we're gonna see Trump as the Republican candidate.

I didn't watch the full debate, but after the various clips I did see, I'm starting to like Kasich.