• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Presidential Debates

Foolmewunz said:
It's actually not so foolish considering it's Trump. He's directly stated in the primaries that if he wasn't given the nomination when he was leading his supporters would riot. The whole "pledge" thing was created for him in the GOP, too. Why isn't it a logical extrapolation after he's been telling the rabble that he'll only lose if it's rigged to ask if he'll accept the results.

Further, he needs to be asked if he'll accept the election night results. Some of his advisors (some people are saying) are suggesting that they have enough "evidence" to contest the results in court.

Fair question. Unfairly presented in a debate because it was truly a Trump question.
Click to expand...

ETA: Turns out it was a very good question. When asked by the NYT to confirm it, he's now responding "We'll have to see."

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/09/30/p...residential-debate-hillary-clinton/index.html
 
The Big Dog said:
The Sid blumenthal thread is thataway >>
Click to expand...

I hate to blow your mind, but regardless of whether Blumenthal spread the Kenya rumor or not (and evidence is fairly thin), Trump certainly did. For years, including years after the birth certificate had been released. Quite publicly, too.

So, whether you like it or not, talking about Trump's birtherism is fair game.
 
Darat said:
In the debate hall, but there is no admission that it prevented him speaking or interfered with hearing and responding to Clinton and the moderator. So no matter what the problem was it doesn't seem to be able to excuse his performance.
Click to expand...
And yet people will try. Including him. The Big Dog already did, in fact.
 
CapelDodger said:
And yet people will try. Including him. The Big Dog already did, in fact.
Click to expand...

Hell, I'll defend him a wee bit. He claimed there was a mic problem, and it appears he was correct. I can imagine being distracted by audio issues in the middle of a debate.

So, I can imagine delivering a somewhat less than perfect performance as a result.

I also think that the effect on his performance is likely not that significant. I doubt we will see a significantly improved performance hereafter.
 
quadraginta said:
His style is to claim that that is what he has always said and anyone who says differently is lying,and any videos or any other sort of record of him saying anything different are taken out of context or are hoaxes.
Click to expand...


It's a very Nineteen Eighty-Four, "We have always been at war with Eastasia," behavior.

phiwum said:
Hell, I'll defend him a wee bit. He claimed there was a mic problem, and it appears he was correct. I can imagine being distracted by audio issues in the middle of a debate.
Click to expand...


But the audio issue was apparently just one of volume, and not a significant one, either.

That he didn't mention it during the debate might mean he wasn't even aware of it. He probably only found out about it afterwards, when someone (possibly one of his staff) mentioned it to him.

And even if he was a aware of it, how much of a mental strain is it to just speak louder?
 
Last edited:
I recall him being louder than Clinton, but he was shouting while she was talking. Was the mike "problem" that he couldn't physically drown out her words when screaming objections at her?
 
phiwum said:
Hell, I'll defend him a wee bit. He claimed there was a mic problem, and it appears he was correct. I can imagine being distracted by audio issues in the middle of a debate.

So, I can imagine delivering a somewhat less than perfect performance as a result.
Click to expand...
Could he be put off his stride if he hadn't prepared? A bit Zen, that one ...

I also think that the effect on his performance is likely not that significant. I doubt we will see a significantly improved performance hereafter.
Click to expand...
Trump's performance aside, there's his content, lack of stamina, and whining about the microphone and his unfair treatment. None of that's good for him.
 
William Parcher said:
Trump has been telling the press that the world only heard half of his potential brilliance during the debate because half of his mind was distracted by the audio issue during the debate. He actually said that!
Click to expand...
So, actually the audio issue made us see and hear more brilliance? :p

Beelzebuddy said:
I recall him being louder than Clinton, but he was shouting while she was talking. Was the mike "problem" that he couldn't physically drown out her words when screaming objections at her?
Click to expand...
Probably.
 
I have questions about debate strategy.

Trump said, "I agree with her on one thing. The single greatest problem the world has is nuclear armament, nuclear weapons, not global warming, like you think and your -- your president thinks. "

What would have happened if Clinton responded "'your president'? Surely you mean our president, don't you?"
 
The Big Dog said:
Huh, did not realize that so many Hillary fans were truthers too until tonight.

Damn.

Hillary 2016!
Click to expand...
So, applying your whimsical logic here... Since you're a fervent Trump supporter, readers should infer that you support all of Trump's positions, actions, and attitudes. Right?

Edited by jsfisher: 
<snip> Edited for compliance with Rule 12 of the Membership Agreement.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Big Dog said:
Huh, did not realize that so many Hillary fans were truthers too until tonight.

Damn.



Hillary 2016!
Click to expand...
:confused:

ETA: Looked up the quote.

TBD, that's just weird. I mean, just to be clear, the quote is weird, but that was done by someone not here and not really significant. Your use of it, though, is just weird.
 
Last edited:
Ladewig said:
I have questions about debate strategy.

Trump said, "I agree with her on one thing. The single greatest problem the world has is nuclear armament, nuclear weapons, not global warming, like you think and your -- your president thinks. "

What would have happened if Clinton responded "'your president'? Surely you mean our president, don't you?"
Click to expand...
That would have had quite some impact, I think. Shame she missed it.

"Who's your President? Vladimir Putin?" would be overkill on stage, but not here. :)
 
Meadmaker said:
:confused:

ETA: Looked up the quote.

TBD, that's just weird. I mean, just to be clear, the quote is weird, but that was done by someone not here and not really significant. Your use of it, though, is just weird.
Click to expand...

Uh, it was from Rosie o'donnell.

It is weird that you are not paying attention to the thread.
 
varwoche said:
So, applying your whimsical logic here... Since you're a fervent Trump supporter, readers should infer that you support all of Trump's positions, actions, and attitudes. Right?

<snip>
Click to expand...

Edited by jsfisher: 
Moderated content and response to same redacted.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Foolmewunz said:
ETA: Turns out it was a very good question. When asked by the NYT to confirm it, he's now responding "We'll have to see."

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/09/30/p...residential-debate-hillary-clinton/index.html
Click to expand...

I have no idea which of my computer settings is switched the wrong way, but I spent five minutes trying to read that page before giving up.

.......

That quote sums up the entire campaign right there.
To many Democrats that quote means rational and clear evidence will not change Trump's mind therefore he is obviously unfit for president.
To many Republicans that quote means Trump is trolling the MS media and the Democratic Party; everyone exaggerates a bit when running for office, and if you manage to get a little dig in there, then so much the bette.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom