1, of course. I have too much self respect to waste my time watching a bunch of caffeine-free communist gas bags talking about total bureaucratic domination...

-1 I give no time to leftist drones. The proof of the DNC treason was O-care, all D's walking lockstep to lead the nation into government enslavement.

Debate?
Has Bill Clinton been re-writing the dictionary again?
0 = wouldn't watch unless I was guaranteed $50 million for Atlantis infrastructure

It was more boring than my first girlfriend who later became a nun because she had absolutely zero libido. Oh well, my second girlfriend was a nymphomaniac, so it all evened out in the end. I give the debate a -1 (minus one).

I can summarize this "debate" in one paragraph:
Q - There are accusations of you cheating on your wife. How do you respond to that?
A - Let me tell you; I have to be honest with you; the first week of our marriage we were truly close and honest with each other, and we were honest with the American people. Truthfully, there is no basis for this accusation.

I can't watch it. There isn't enough anti nausea mediation in the state to keep me from hurling. Besides - what they will discuss is so predictable that any of us in the Gulch could give the answers. I would rather watch paint dry.

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.

I usually watch such things, the better to know what the other side is "thinking." (Use of scare quotes intentional.)

But with this venue? Her Royal Highness Queen Hillary I, loony old Bernie Sanders and the slate of also-rans?

No thanks. That's one snake pit I don't need to look into.

Just the idea of watching that actually felt repulsive.
I gave it a 0 waste of time and an insult to my intelligence before that leftist spew of blather actually came on. .

Typical question: "Just how evil are Republicans"

Yea, boring, maybe even sickening if the questions are presented in a way as to facilitate and compliment the responder...
Unless- Hilary makes a fool of herself, now that might ignite some interest.

Sh*%. I'm too busy working to watch that mess. I have taxes to pay... So, I give it a "0".

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.

Simple 0. What for ? why?

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

1

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.

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.

I had to skip the intros so I didn't vomit, but from 10 minutes in it was predictable & boring. The only reason I didn't fall asleep is because I was learning how to use a new smartphone while the 'debates' (read that as talking points) played in the background.

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.