Posted on 08/07/2015 4:06:39 PM PDT by GoneSalt
Trump’s battles with Kelly will probably further burnish the anchorwoman’s reputation as a tough-as-nails television star. The conservative cable news channel has sought to market Kelly as a strong and independent voice.
Inside Fox, the view at the end of the debate was that all three moderators — Kelly, Bret Baier and Chris Wallace — had fared well, and that Kelly was the stand-out.
Some political observers said that Fox’s post-debate coverage seemed tilted against Trump, partly because of a Frank Luntz focus group, convened by Fox and televised immediately after the debate, that had an anti-Trump tone.
Trump was incensed by the focus group.
“Where did you find that dumb panel” he asked Luntz via Twitter.
He also tweeted that Luntz is “a low class slob who came to my office looking for consulting work and I had zero interest. Now he picks anti-Trump panels!”
(Excerpt) Read more at wtvr.com ...
Good deal! So, whom have you supported in the last 5 election cycles?
“News Flash! Fox is so proud of their 3 flacks’ performance last night that they preempted BOR”
O’Riley isn’t there on any Friday night.
Megyn is a lawyer and smart. She also happens to be pretty. She is also raising three small children with her author husband.
Well, that question was put to all of the candidates - not Trump alone, though anyone with a modicum of intelligence knew right away that he was the target.
Yes, I heard his response, and I respect that answer. He made it clear that if a RINO wins the primary, he won't pledge to support him. That showed me that his principles matter more to him than political expediency.
He also left the door open to running as an Independent, should the Republicans nominate someone else, or try to freeze him out in some way.
Some think a third party run by Trump would automatically hand the election to the Dems, but I'm not so sure that conventional wisdom holds at this dire moment in our nation's history.
Americans are simply burning for a real leader to step forth and vanquish the evil specter of leftism that is destroying everything we hold dear. The crying hearts of millions of betrayed Americans is what stands behind Trump's amazing level of support. They might actually give the presidency to a leader who's broken away from both major parties.
As far as Trump's personality quirks, all I can say is, don't cross him and everyone will be happy. From what I've seen so far, he's only sunk his teeth into those who honestly deserved it. Yeah, he bites hard, and most folks aren't used to seeing that in a major public figure.
I admit, it's a bit off-putting, but I chalk that up to my own softened sensibilities. I've been living in a wussified country for far too long, and dammit, some of it's rubbed off on me. Truth be told, it's actually the right time for someone to get mad and break a few jaws around here.
People talk about wanting a tough leader who's not afraid to go to bat for the American people, yet when we get one, a lot of folks get upset when he does just that. We saw the same weird phenomena with Sarah Palin, who was mercilessly attacked (even on FR) for being nothing more than a stalwart defender of true American values.
I'd love to see Trump exhibit more of the statesmanlike qualities I admire in a leader, but he's winning hearts and minds because he's showing the one thing Americans want to see most, and the one thing our politicians are most lacking in -- Guts.
That's all very nice, but she went to the dark side last night. Whatever her other qualities, that was just wrong, and inexcusable.
She tried to bring down the frontrunner of the Republican primary, which is completely out of bounds for any journalist, and a blatant attack on our system of self government and free elections.
Hmmm.......can't say I'm surprised. Didn't Santorum mention something about that in an after-debate interview?
We had a cobbled-together hookup from my wife's laptop to the living room TV and it kept buffering and glitching. I missed seeing those t-shirts.
Point taken. But to put the two liars on for a second round is IN YOUR FACE to their viewers. I know I no longer need Fox.
Unfortunately the MSM with GOP's knowledge turned a debate into a political game show, full on with the blond going into a Nancy Grace routine.
I agree. It will be a storm to weather for the ages. I really hope he hangs in there.
Can’t blame Trump if he bolts the GOP and runs as an independent.
After last nights hatchet job on him, it’s clear the GOP does not want him.
Many here do not want him to have a fair shake either.
So, he will probably bolt the GOP and take 15-20% of the vote with him.
Probably a bigger % than Perot got.
Who can blame him after the hatchet job last night.
Just another example of how Trump will call ‘em as he sees ‘em - even when calling out those who have the ability to tilt the playing field. Some would have a “spokesman” whine about how unfair it was, Trump carries his own water and draws a line in the sand with his own toe.
IMHO Trump is, as conservatives go, shallow. I don’t get the sense that he has read FA Hayek, or even Thomas Sowell. In his bluster about people being “stupid” &c, he is right - we all are. Trump assures us that he is not stupid - but that does not imply - even if true - that he would be able to make the government smart. Because the trouble with government at present, as it has always tended to be, is arrogance - precisely the failing that appears to me to be Mr. Trump’s salient flaw.What I do know is that Kelly and Wallace did damage to Fox.
That was my first impression, and then I convinced myself to accept their rationale that we needed to see the candidates’ weaknesses, and how they would respond to probes of them.Which has merit, ultimately - but, on further review, they were playing “gotcha” with Trump. And dissipating the time which would have been well spent allowing the candidates to put their best foot forward. There is a time and place for hard questions. That forum was the place for softball questions. For sure, nobody else will ask them of Republicans.
The audience was, according to Rush, a record for non-sports cable programming, about 24 million. Which happens to be similar to the size of Limbaugh’s own audience. So there they are putting on a program for Rush’s audience, and behaving as the anti Limbaugh. When they know perfectly well that their audience is the same people as Rush’s, it is insulting and arrogant to project the conceit that they are wiser than we.Yeah, they damaged Fox’s brand. Big Time.
The problem is that you Trump supporters think that Drudge polls are reflective or accurate. The problem, is that with Drudge, we could vote multiple times. This is why Rand did so well.
Of interest, that focus group seemed to reflect what most of us think...that Cruz, when people hear from him, will start winning more support.
...his was also at a time when PDS was running high, and Sarah needed support from everyone on the right. I simply could not believe that two of the brightest stars of the conservative right were shooting Sarah down like that....
&&&
Told me all I need to know about how conservative they actually are. I guess it’s the Mary Matalin kind of “conservative”: I am not really a conservative, but I play one on TV.
Don't know why you keep repeating that spin, but I guess you have to use whatever useless crap you have in your arsenal to tear Trump down.
Multiple screen shots were posted here, of people trying to re-vote in Drudge's online poll. When they did so, they got a notice, clearly visible at the top of the results tab that said: "Your vote has already been recorded."
Now, I heard that if you took the time to empty your computer's cache and deleted your cookies, you might be able to vote again, but I haven't seen any evidence to support that. Even if that were true, roughly 600,000 people voted in that poll. How many of them do you honestly think went to all that trouble to vote again?
Use your head, man. Such a number would be statistically invisible.
Then how did Paul get such a big bump for doing well in the poll? Many of us on here and many polled didn’t think he did well enough to deserve his standing...
And yes, I was able to do it multiple times.
Sure, you could go to the poll and 'vote', but after your initial vote registered with the polling software, your other 'votes' didn't count. That was gone over in detail on Thursday night.
Now, did you actually game the system and cheat, like I described in my last reply? If so, you're among a number so small it's statistically invisible, in a poll of 600,000 people.
He is a pragmatic deal-maker and a bit of a fighter; if he happens to be on the right side of things it is not through any kind of grand understanding of conservative or classic liberal principle. He is not the kind to have read and internalized Hayek, or the Federalist Papers.
I like what he is doing to upset the GOP applecart, he is forcing all these guys who favor amnesty to at least pretend that they don't.
But Trump is guided by Trump. Whatever he does will be right in his eyes. So while I am enjoying him, I am behind Cruz. He is a fighter, and his principles are clear.
The Pauls attract exactly the sort of basement dwelling conspiracy nerds who will sit at a computer all night, cheating some online poll, just to make their guy look good.
His fundraising numbers show the real strength of his campaign.
Like his dad before him, Rand doesn't stand a chance of ever becoming president.
Ah, now that might have been the case. Thanks for the clarification. I assumed it was casting my vote numerous times.
Now, why was Rand so high?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.