Discussion for article #241821
Quicker than I thought. Otherwise, no surprise.
1 Like
Help me to find a gender positive version of “pussies.” I’m an old fart and I need the cultural hand-up. Thx.
2 Likes
if each candidate gets 4 minutes for opening and closing speeches, that leaves time for one question.
8 Likes
Interesting that Trump and Carson sent a joint letter to CNBC – it’s almost as if they’re acting in concert. Talk about throwing your weight around, I would have thought Chris Christie would be the first to do that.
1 Like
Isn’t Trump and Carson not showing up good news?
4 Likes
Now each candidate will have at best one question each on maybe possibly a policy question. More likely they’ll attack each other. So the likelihood is a wasted opportunity at a “debate” with a stronger possibility at it being a cat fight. Solidifying the idea that the GOP are incompetent morons and the democrats remain the only viable choice.
Two hours, …I don’t think Trump can stay focus for 10 minutes before getting ADHD bored into a coma. Carson will defend getting a gun stuck in his ribs at a Popeye’s, Rand Paul will water the rug on his head, Bush will claim he understands poor people, and the rest of the know nothings will clamor that they want a turn.
2 Likes
Pretty much everybody but Bush and Rubio blew up at this. Paul and Carson’s were just the first to go off on the conference call.
This should really be no surprise. Opening and closing statements are the norm for any political debate forum. I have no idea why CNBC even proposed such a nonsensical idea.
I’m an “old fart” as well. After a short perusal of on-line dictionaries … ummmm “some” synonyms I would not repeat here under any circumstances…
Best I found would be “cony”… an old word slang referencing a rabbit.
Or just call 'em a coward and have done with it.
3 Likes
Thx. Sometimes hard to shake my blue collar roots, but “cowards” it is. 
2 Likes
Bush and Rubio were probably asking the FSM to please let the top two in the polls to drop out of the debate. Not sure that would work out well for them, however. Who knows.
It’s only going to get worse for republicans with these two around.
This is like the players getting together and demanding that the NFL’s rules be entirely changed. What a fucking joke and shame on CNBC. This just proves it’s more important to CNBC to have its “access” to the candidates and their horseshit kabuki theater clown show than it is to the candidates to have the opportunity to access CNBC’s audience.
Why?
Ad revenue.
Next up: Candidates will be submitting the questions the moderators are required to ask them and demanding access to teleprompters to deliver their answers.
5 Likes
CNBC “may” bow to Trump and Carson? Are you kidding? They’ll fold like a cheap card table.
2 Likes
Meh. They’re pussy dickheads. There. Fair and balanced. Or how about “eunuch” since I suppose that’s arguably “genderless” (in a way) and conveys their mealy-mouthed craven impotence…or does that offend Carly since she doesn’t have manjunk to chop off and female mutilation is a taboo topic? I guarantee you I can invent a silly whining session about any of them you can come up with.
The whole “find a non-offensive way to insult someone” thing makes no sense to me and I’m of the younger generation you’re supposedly blaming for it haha. It’s counterprodcutive to the whole point of insulting them. We call people pussies when they’re cowards, dickheads when they’re obstinate manchildren, douchebags, cocksuckers, motherfuckers, nutless, asshat, assholes, bitches, fartknocker, etc. etc. etc., and the entire point is to offend and insult and demean, belittle, degrade and convey some negative connotation. Some apply better to women and some apply better to men. Oh well. Other than a few choice words though, if a person the insult is NOT directed at is somehow taking offense to it, they need to check their reality-o-meter as far as I’m concerned. It’s not about them and the world doesn’t revolve around them and your intent was to be offensive in the first place, so do it right and do it well.
1 Like
Our British cousins call them “munts.”
1 Like
So let them boycott. What is wrong with these people?
3 Likes
There’s an easy solution to the time crunch. At this point, there is a wide gulf in the poll numbers between the top six (Trump, Carson, Rubio, Fiorina, Bush, Cruz) and the rest. Send the others to the kiddie table. We don’t need ten on the main stage just because natural selection happened to leave us with ten fingers.
2 Likes
Try “wuss”, or the plural “wusses.”
2 Likes
So?
It won’t take the chickens long to decide that they are all going to wind up in a pot, simmering, if they are collectively stupid enough (and no, I would NOT put it past them) to elect any of this gaggle as a phony President.
Two hours?
90 minutes?
30 seconds of a political advert?
The real question here is how long ignorant people need in terms of exposure to decide how stupid someone else is, when compared with themselves.
of course cnbc will do anything to accommodate trump. he brings the eyeballs, and that’s all those failing channels care about. but once he loses the election, and considering the free reign msnbc/nbc has given to trump so far with their daily live coverage of his events and his call-ins, look for him to get his own hosting gig on msnbc, or at the very least a fill-in for joescar.
i also noticed that the fox/nbc women covering him are younger and blonder than melania … she better watch out; she could find herself booted out of trump world…