Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
Who Will Be The 2016 Republican Nominee? (It's Donald Trump) Who Will Be The 2016 Republican Nominee? (It's Donald Trump)

01-27-2016 , 10:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shark Sandwich
Booked, would like the same death = no bet carve out though
Done
01-27-2016 , 10:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by spaceman Bryce
After thinking about it, I have decided the best vp pick for trump would be Rudy Guliani.
Both candidates are not allowed to be from the same state so one of them would have to 'move'.
01-27-2016 , 11:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sponger.
He asked him to reconsider and attend the debate, trump said he asked bill before the interview not to ask him that question, and oreilly said he never agreed to not ask him that question.
Eh that's not exactly what happened. Trump said they had an agrrement, then bill said something like I'm not gonna listen when someone asks me not to ask them something. So ya not sure whats going on there. Anyways trump didn't seem too bothered by it.
01-27-2016 , 11:30 PM
Not a great look for Trump to duck O'Reily's question. It's one thing if he snubs Megyn Kelly, but getting into the habit of avoiding questions all the time is gonna look a little beta.
01-27-2016 , 11:37 PM
Um I just watched the O'Reilly thing and Trump handled that expertly, O'Reilly was flailing between appeals to Christian virtue and some utility argument that it's better for Trump's GE chances to do these debates, it was rather pathetic.

Two less bad ways to deal with Trump: viciously troll/counter-troll him, get him angry and ranting about his Casinos or something, or just shut the **** up; the middle road is a total waste of time.
01-27-2016 , 11:42 PM
wonder if cnn and msnbc go live (f it we'll do it live!) with trump tomorrow. why not? they get neilson'd and that is guaranteed better than chris and wolf and all sitting around.
01-27-2016 , 11:48 PM
i hope so
01-28-2016 , 12:02 AM
Half to think every non-FOX property will be at the Trump event
01-28-2016 , 12:48 AM
They're already referring to tomorrow's event as the VP Debate.
01-28-2016 , 01:43 AM
O'Reilly shamelessly begging Trump to come to the debate was GOLD.
01-28-2016 , 03:12 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sponger.
He asked him to reconsider and attend the debate, trump said he asked bill before the interview not to ask him that question, and oreilly said he never agreed to not ask him that question.
Not true. O'Reilly admitted that he did agree not to ask, but couldn't help himself.
01-28-2016 , 07:34 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by metsandfinsfan
I do, I've sold cars and I work in collection. But even i know not to make completely ******ed offers
"sold" cars in past tense? sounds like you weren't very good at it.

you work in collections now? any chance that your job is driving you nuts and you're thinking of quitting? if so, you should consider making a thread in OOT
01-28-2016 , 08:02 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by +rep_lol
"sold" cars in past tense? sounds like you weren't very good at it.

you work in collections now? any chance that your job is driving you nuts and you're thinking of quitting? if so, you should consider making a thread in OOT
I was very good at it, I got promoted to finance manager as well. I just didn't like the hours so I took a 40 hour job in collections near the house and I'm much happier. But thanks for caring
01-28-2016 , 08:03 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clear Quality
Not true. O'Reilly admitted that he did agree not to ask, but couldn't help himself.
This is correct. O'Reilly flat out admitted he broke their agreement and basically said he hasn't let anyone dictate what he can ask. But as I said I think he handled it very well

Last edited by metsandfinsfan; 01-28-2016 at 08:10 AM.
01-28-2016 , 08:09 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chips Ahoy
Both candidates are not allowed to be from the same state so one of them would have to 'move'.
Not exactly true

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact...state-allowed/
01-28-2016 , 08:22 AM
I now assume Trump's VP will be a veteran, one who wasn't captured
01-28-2016 , 08:57 AM
01-28-2016 , 08:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by nyc999
I now assume Trump's VP will be a veteran, one who wasn't captured
Jim Web?
01-28-2016 , 09:03 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by daca
i suppose we can take comfort in that 31% of trump supporters have a tiny amount of sanity.
01-28-2016 , 09:07 AM
To be fair that question is idiotic in a vacuum. lol at anyone who answered would still support though.
01-28-2016 , 09:07 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ccotenj
i suppose we can take comfort in that 31% of trump supporters have a tiny amount of sanity.
Depends who he shot and why
01-28-2016 , 09:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by [Phill]
Its a little more complex than that. Ailes is the day to day power at FNC and he is Megyn Kelly's biggest supporter by far. Like he literally hand picked her and moved her up the ladder as his protégé. The fox release about Iran was all him.

Murdoch is a huge dick and everything but its not personal for him in any way. If it's a case of trump won't touch his media outlets as the nominee or even just the runaway leader down the line I have no doubt the call is coming in.

Trump needs fox way less than fox needs trump. You can't be the unofficial mouth piece for the rnc whilst the nominee is shifting you out. Trump has all the power right now IF (big if) his gamble skipping the debate doesn't fall flat.

If Kelly goes on the attack at the debate trump wins this battle and not even close.
Not arguing about Trump winning this battle but it's high profile enough to stir interest within Fox over and above the day to day running. Wont matter if Trump never stumbles but he is raising the risk of it being fatal if he stumbles - Murdoch is a very bad enemy to have. This is true even if Fox caves over this and will back Trump all the way if he keeps the momentum going.
01-28-2016 , 09:33 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulman
To be fair that question is idiotic in a vacuum. lol at anyone who answered would still support though.
well, the statement itself was idiotic, and made without qualifications, so it's not unfair to ask the question in a vacuum.

the statement was clear. there's no loss of context when asking it that way.
01-28-2016 , 09:35 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by metsandfinsfan
Depends who he shot and why
donald did not offer that type of context in his statement.
01-28-2016 , 09:39 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by metsandfinsfan
Depends who he shot and why
let me ask you. when you heard donald's statement about shooting someone. what exactly was teh type of person you think he was referring to? to me, i highly suspect he was NOT talking about a terrorist with a suicide vest on, but rather an innocent person. i am very curious to hear your interpretation of whom he meant he would shoot.

      
m