Debate Summary: From MSN which is not FOX.

The democrats lied a lot and mislead the viewers.

Summary
We found several falsehoods and misleading claims in the Democratic candidates’ first debate:

• Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton revised her earlier statement on the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal, claiming that she said she “hoped” it would be a “gold standard.” At the time, she said it was a gold standard.
• Sen. Bernie Sanders claimed that his plan to lift the cap on income subject to Social Security taxes would extend the program’s finances and expand benefits. He neglected to mention that the new taxes would not be used to calculate benefits for those paying them, a break from historical practice.
• Former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley claimed that “70 percent of us are earning the same, or less than we were 12 years ago.” Not true. Average weekly earnings for rank-and-file workers are up 5.8 percent.
• Former Rhode Island Gov. Lincoln Chafee said that his state “had the biggest drop of the unemployment rate over my four budgets of all but one state.” Actually, four states had larger percentage point drops, and 10 states had larger percentage declines over his tenure.
• Sanders claimed that African American youth unemployment was 51 percent, but that figure pertains to underemployment, which includes those working part-time and looking for full-time work.
• Clinton claimed that “we lose 90 people a day from gun violence.” That’s true, but only a third of those deaths are from homicides.
• Sanders wrongly said that the U.S. had “more wealth and income inequality than any other country.” The U.S. ranks 42nd in income inequality and 16th in terms of wealth held by the top 1 percent.
• Clinton said that using a personal email account “was allowed by the State Department.” It was, but federal rules also required Clinton to turn over her emails before she left office. She did so nearly two years after she left.

To expound on that one highlighted item;

Clinton on Gun Violence

In talking about the need for stronger gun control, Clinton said: “I think that we have to look at the fact that we lose 90 people a day from gun violence. This has gone on too long and it’s time the entire country stood up against the NRA.” Annual gun deaths do average about 90 people a day, but only a third of those are homicides.
Most gun deaths are suicides — a violent act, but not a crime, as some voters may think Clinton’s claim implied.
According to the most recent figures from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, there were a total of 33,636 firearm deaths in 2013. That’s 92 per day for the year. Sixty-three percent of them, or 21,175, were suicides. Homicides totaled 11,208, and the rest were unintentional discharges (505), legal intervention/war (467) and undetermined (281).

Even MSN backs up MY earlier assertion.

If you care to read the rest, it is pretty depression how stupid the democratic candidates think you all are.....don't disappoint them.

I don't find it interesting that only democrat not flagged was Webb.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politi...B&ocid=U142DHP

• Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton revised her earlier statement on the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal, claiming that she said she “hoped” it would be a “gold standard.” At the time, she said it was a gold standard.
  
• Clinton claimed that “we lose 90 people a day from gun violence.” That’s true, but only a third of those deaths are from homicides.
  
• Clinton said that using a personal email account “was allowed by the State Department.” It was, but federal rules also required Clinton to turn over her emails before she left office. She did so nearly two years after she left.

To expound on that one highlighted item;

....it is pretty depressing how stupid the democratic candidates think you all are.....don't disappoint them. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Your last statement "assumes" that Clinton knows better ... meaning she knows the "truth" and believes that the voters actually believe her lies.

Parrots don't "know better" .... they just repeat what they hear repetitively.

The primary difference is .....

.... parrots are generally colorful and enjoyable to observe. Hilarious is not.

Back to reality:

Frankly, what I found most repugnant throughout the debate was the non-stop drumbeat of "make the rich pay". Every single candidate found some way to work that into their rehearsed stump speeches. Jim Webb might have been the sole exception, unless he managed to work it in there when I stepped away.

Let me be clear. I am not rich, nor will I ever be rich. However, I don't begrudge those who have earned their wealth through their hard work, creativity, innovation, and risk taking. I deserve every penny that I work for myself, and so does every other American. It is not my place, nor anyone else's place to reach into a wealthy person's wallet at gunpoint, and take their hard earned money simply to give it away to others who have not worked for it.

Taxes may be the price we pay to live in a polite and well organized society, but they were never intended to be used to punish success, nor reward irresponsibility.

When Sanders envisioned a world where corporations are required to share profits with their employees, the top of my head exploded. Note to Sanders: Corporations DO share their profits with employees. They call it a PAYCHECK.

And this is why, though it may gag me, I will again with great reluctance vote for whoever the GOP vomits up for a candidate again. I've always been a moderate, and while both parties have drifted far to the left and right of center, the Democrats have honestly sailed so far over to the left that they have quite literally gone around the bend into La-La Land.

I heard someone on the radio referring to it as working for the government when the tax gets to 80% or better.

Frankly, what I found most repugnant throughout the debate was the non-stop drumbeat of "make the rich pay". Every single candidate found some way to work that into their rehearsed stump speeches. Jim Webb might have been the sole exception, unless he managed to work it in there when I stepped away.

Let me be clear. I am not rich, nor will I ever be rich. However, I don't begrudge those who have earned their wealth through their hard work, creativity, innovation, and risk taking. I deserve every penny that I work for myself, and so does every other American. It is not my place, nor anyone else's place to reach into a wealthy person's wallet at gunpoint, and take their hard earned money simply to give it away to others who have not worked for it.

Taxes may be the price we pay to live in a polite and well organized society, but they were never intended to be used to punish success, nor reward irresponsibility.

When Sanders envisioned a world where corporations are required to share profits with their employees, the top of my head exploded. Note to Sanders: Corporations DO share their profits with employees. They call it a PAYCHECK.

And this is why, though it may gag me, I will again with great reluctance vote for whoever the GOP vomits up for a candidate again. I've always been a moderate, and while both parties have drifted far to the left and right of center, the Democrats have honestly sailed so far over to the left that they have quite literally gone around the bend into La-La Land. Originally Posted by SinsOfTheFlesh

I work for a Corporation and I make damn good money, enjoy 5 weeks vacation a year plus 10 days personal sick leave a year which can be banked and with the economy even as bad as it's been have received a bonus every year for the last 8 years so I agree with you Sins Sanders is a Looney tunes socialist

Frankly, what I found most repugnant throughout the debate was the non-stop drumbeat of "make the rich pay". Every single candidate found some way to work that into their rehearsed stump speeches. Jim Webb might have been the sole exception, unless he managed to work it in there when I stepped away.

Let me be clear. I am not rich, nor will I ever be rich. However, I don't begrudge those who have earned their wealth through their hard work, creativity, innovation, and risk taking. I deserve every penny that I work for myself, and so does every other American. It is not my place, nor anyone else's place to reach into a wealthy person's wallet at gunpoint, and take their hard earned money simply to give it away to others who have not worked for it.

Taxes may be the price we pay to live in a polite and well organized society, but they were never intended to be used to punish success, nor reward irresponsibility.

When Sanders envisioned a world where corporations are required to share profits with their employees, the top of my head exploded. Note to Sanders: Corporations DO share their profits with employees. They call it a PAYCHECK.

And this is why, though it may gag me, I will again with great reluctance vote for whoever the GOP vomits up for a candidate again. I've always been a moderate, and while both parties have drifted far to the left and right of center, the Democrats have honestly sailed so far over to the left that they have quite literally gone around the bend into La-La Land. Originally Posted by SinsOfTheFlesh

The problem is that many haven't earned it that way. And why shouldn't corporations share profits with their employees? Some already do, it's called a bonus. That's not exactly a foreign concept.

I work for a Corporation and I make damn good money, enjoy 5 weeks vacation a year plus 10 days personal sick leave a year which can be banked and with the economy even as bad as it's been have received a bonus every year for the last 8 years so I agree with you Sins Sanders is a Looney tunes socialist Originally Posted by gary5912

What do you call your bonus? Is that not the corporation sharing the spoils with their employees? Perhaps if you think it's socialist, you should give it back.

The problem is that many haven't earned it that way. And why shouldn't corporations share profits with their employees? Some already do, it's called a bonus. That's not exactly a foreign concept. Originally Posted by WombRaider

What do you call your bonus? Is that not the corporation sharing the spoils with their employees? Perhaps if you think it's socialist, you should give it back. Originally Posted by WombRaider

It wouldn't be a bonus anymore if the gov't is standing over the corporation's shoulder and shaking them down for it.

Yes, some companies do share profits, offer bonuses, and other incentives. That is their choice. CHOICE is the keyword. If Sanders wants a corporation to profit share, then he needs to start a business and share profits with his employees.

Frankly, what I found most repugnant throughout the debate was the non-stop drumbeat of "make the rich pay". Every single candidate found some way to work that into their rehearsed stump speeches. Jim Webb might have been the sole exception, unless he managed to work it in there when I stepped away.

Let me be clear. I am not rich, nor will I ever be rich. However, I don't begrudge those who have earned their wealth through their hard work, creativity, innovation, and risk taking. I deserve every penny that I work for myself, and so does every other American. It is not my place, nor anyone else's place to reach into a wealthy person's wallet at gunpoint, and take their hard earned money simply to give it away to others who have not worked for it.

Taxes may be the price we pay to live in a polite and well organized society, but they were never intended to be used to punish success, nor reward irresponsibility.

When Sanders envisioned a world where corporations are required to share profits with their employees, the top of my head exploded. Note to Sanders: Corporations DO share their profits with employees. They call it a PAYCHECK.

And this is why, though it may gag me, I will again with great reluctance vote for whoever the GOP vomits up for a candidate again. I've always been a moderate, and while both parties have drifted far to the left and right of center, the Democrats have honestly sailed so far over to the left that they have quite literally gone around the bend into La-La Land. Originally Posted by SinsOfTheFlesh

I was out and about during most of the debate so I only saw bits and pieces of it. what I observed of Jim Webb he is the most realistic out of all the candidates. The democratic party should rally around him more. In my opinion Webb should get the democratic nomination. he had a strong closing statement too. he talked to the people out there instead of at them, like all the other candidates did.

Jim

I was out and about during most of the debate so I only saw bits and pieces of it. what I observed of Jim Webb he is the most realistic out of all the candidates. The democratic party should rally around him more. In my opinion Webb should get the democratic nomination. he had a strong closing statement too. he talked to the people out there instead of at them, like all the other candidates did.

Jim Originally Posted by Mr MojoRisin

Jim Webb is a old, white war hero. I'm surprised he wasn't booed off the stage.

Jim Webb is a old, white war hero. I'm surprised he wasn't booed off the stage. Originally Posted by gnadfly

Well as far as the other democratic candidates go, I like Jim Webb the most. in fact if he gets the nomination, I would consider voting for him.

jim

It wouldn't be a bonus anymore if the gov't is standing over the corporation's shoulder and shaking them down for it.

Yes, some companies do share profits, offer bonuses, and other incentives. That is their choice. CHOICE is the keyword. If Sanders wants a corporation to profit share, then he needs to start a business and share profits with his employees. Originally Posted by SinsOfTheFlesh

I don't have a problem with requiring it based on hitting certain numbers, etc. Wal-Mart for example, doesn't pay some of its store employees enough to keep them off welfare or food stamps. The world's largest retailer? That's embarrassing. No, I agree, requiring it is not optimal, but some companies wouldn't do it otherwise, even if it was earned.

Jim Webb is a old, white war hero. I'm surprised he wasn't booed off the stage. Originally Posted by gnadfly

You're thinking of the republican debates, where it's a fucking sideshow. Say what you will about the democratic debate, they conducted themselves like human beings and refrained from baseless attacks on each other.

Your last statement "assumes" that Clinton knows better ... meaning she knows the "truth" and believes that the voters actually believe her lies.

Parrots don't "know better" .... they just repeat what they hear repetitively.

The primary difference is .....

.... parrots are generally colorful and enjoyable to observe. Hilarious is not.

Back to reality:

Originally Posted by LexusLover

I don't like parrots they talk too much, lol.


Jim

You're thinking of the republican debates, where it's a fucking sideshow. Say what you will about the democratic debate, they conducted themselves like human beings and refrained from baseless attacks on each other. Originally Posted by WombRaider

Is that why the Dem debate barely got 15.3 million viewers on CNN, while CNN racked up around 23 million viewers for their GOP debate program, and Fox pulled in over 24 million for their GOP debate?

Yeah.. you got the electorate wrapped up and just sitting on the edge of their chairs to vote for Hillary in Nov 2016, right Woomby-Tunes?