I will not grade it because it's after the fact now. I don't fight what they say, I now try to repeat it, quote it if possible, and then attempt to put forward the facts: "Where does the money come from for this free stuff?" "Who pays, obviously not the politicians, but it comes out of your pocket in advance whether you'll personally ever use it or not." Do you really believe the constitution was wrong on the Second Amendment? How does the lack of a second amendment actually work in North Korea, what are the Russians experiencing now, how about the Australians? I've got friends from down under, they feel they were duped. What is the average tax rate in Copenhagen? At 60.2%, Denmark last year had the highest top personal income tax rate among the 34 countries in the OECD. Are you willing to give up 60% or more of your wages so others can benefit from you working? Or might you suppose that you will just stop working and instead just take your "fair share"? "Who will do the work then to earn the money for the government to give away?" "Has the government ever given you any money that you didn't first give them?"

The RNC needs to stop arguing and fighting with the DNC, and just start repeating what the the DNC says, explaining it to those that clap like trained seals that these ideas are nice, but it's just not possible unless every successful person is sucked down to the same level as our average poorest. Has anyone noticed there are even some poor plumbers out there but we hardly ever see a poor politician? Each of us only need to convert one eligible voter, that shouldn't be so hard, and if you can do more please do so. No arguable rhetoric, just the facts.

Just my two cents worth, I could be wrong, you decide.

Lack of substance and style.

I should have included negative values.

What...what, what?...was I snoring? What did I miss?

1

Remember, Yorkies are lap dogs.

Wish I could argue but I think you're right.

Good point. The reaction to all that Socialist talk was crazy. I hope it represents less than half the voters.

Haven't we been that for at least 20+ years?

The interesting part of this "debate" was to witness just how stupid more than half the nation is. Not the "candidates," for they were saying exactly what their sheeple wanted to hear.

That sums it up. Jim Webb was the least offensive. I won't be voting for any of these clowns either.

She won by default. I think it's more accurate to say the others lost or at the least blew a rare opportunity.

I thought a debate meant that people expressed differing opinions and defended them by using facts and logic. That wasn't even close to a debate since they all had pretty much the same opinions. They claim that Hillary won. Won? What? It was more like a horserace in which the only horse was running against four Yorkies.

I heard some of it over my radio. I say "some of
it" because I DID fall asleep. But no big deal. It
was a surprise to hear Hillary Clinton defending
capitalism at all (of course I consider that merely
hypocrisy on her part); but no matter, I'm not going to vote for any of those Democrats, any-
way. Of them all, I consider Jim Webb about
the least bad. But I'm not going to vote for any
of them.

I thought O'Malley would go after Hillary. He complained they needed more debates but then he agreed with most of what she and Sanders said. What a joke.

On the Herbie Boring Scale which runs from -10 to + 10 it was a -12. At least the first few minutes were. I even got bored from listening to the putzes, er, make that pundits, tell us about it. Thank goodness for the History Channel.

As I noted elsewhere, I couldn't force myself to watch more than about 30 seconds at a time over the period of about 15 minutes. My brain was about explode so I got out the Bailey's and coffee and a good book.

Of course. Our elections have become auctions - "vote for me, I'll give you more of someone else's stuff."

It was slightly worse than I expected. If any one of these nut jobs win in 2016 we will be The Socialist States of America.