Candidates will speak again at same Oct. 20th dinner...

The BBC, possibly stung by recent criticism that it's pro-Clinton and anti-Trump, gave a fairly different take on the event this morning.

Basically said that it started ok but that it ended with both candidates attacking each other, against the tradition of the event and then the only clips they played were Donald's joke about Melania's speech (which seemed to go down well - I must admit, I thought it was quite funny) and then, almost as an afterthought mentioned that he then had a dig at Clinton, and finished by playing her dig at him struggling to translate the teleprompter from the original Russian.

If you weren't listening closely and missed the comment about him also criticising her, it gave the impression that he was ok and she was a bit nasty. Even if you picked up the comment, the fact they only played her dig, gave an impression of her being worse than him.

Accepting that most here think he's appalling (as do I) was he really the worse offender at the event or is that our bias and the BBC slant was more balanced?
 
Ethan Thane Athen said:
Accepting that most here think he's appalling (as do I) was he really the worse offender at the event or is that our bias and the BBC slant was more balanced?
Click to expand...


The snippets I haven't managed to avoid probably add up to a quarter or so of each's speeches, and he was horrendously political throughout. Savagely so.
Not cricket for that event.

Additionally... the custom is to be somewhat self-deprecating to allow for the jabs you throw later. He seems to think his wife is part of his own "self".

That's not it works. That's not how any of this works. :rolleyes:
 
Jim_MDP said:
The snippets I haven't managed to avoid probably add up to a quarter or so of each's speeches, and he was horrendously political throughout. Savagely so.
Not cricket for that event.

Additionally... the custom is to be somewhat self-deprecating to allow for the jabs you throw later. He seems to think his wife is part of his own "self".

That's not it works. That's not how any of this works. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Thanks. Yes I realise his comment about his wife's speech wasn't on message - but it was quite funny in and of itself. Unfortunately that was the only bit of his speech the BBC played so it didn't really illustrate that he'd 'attacked' Clinton, which made her dig at him look petty in comparison.
 
Jrrarglblarg said:
Trump was awkward and unfunny. Hillary was calm, clear, focussed and precise.

Hillary appeared genuinely amused by several jokes Donald attempted. Donald looked like he was trying not to swallow a spoon at her jokes, and his grin looked like the Joker gave it to him.

And Rudy G looked like he found pubes in his food.
Click to expand...
Yeah it seemed like her best performance yet.
 
timhau said:
It's a different setting altogether now that he isn't the eccentric (supposedly) billionaire celebrity buffoon, but a presidential candidate. They won't go "Oh, but that's just Donald being Donald" this time.

Of course, to the degree that he has values, they seem to have changed quite a bit in 10 - 15 years or so.
Click to expand...

You need to correct your text, you've mistyped years when you meant minutes.
 
Ethan Thane Athen said:
Thanks. Yes I realise his comment about his wife's speech wasn't on message - but it was quite funny in and of itself. Unfortunately that was the only bit of his speech the BBC played so it didn't really illustrate that he'd 'attacked' Clinton, which made her dig at him look petty in comparison.
Click to expand...


Yes, I can see how that mix of clips would play on your side. Overcorrection on the BBC's part?

And that bit about the speeches was funny, and Melania played along (thankfully). And while I missed it if it was there, it should have been followed immediately by a conciliatory word, or gesture, to say "I love you but I had to throw that one in there. Sorry.".
But it, by definition, was not "self-deprecating" and I haven't yet stumbled across a replay of anything else in his speech that was.

I believe in your parlance he'd be... a tosser. :rolleyes:

In mine... he's much worse.
 
Gawd... what a horrible speaker Trump is.

Just saw, again, the joke "Pardon me.", "Talk to me after I get into office."

That's pathetic.

The punchline is obviously... "Ask me again in February." Ba Dum Tsss.

:rolleyes:
 
Jim_MDP said:
Gawd... what a horrible speaker Trump is.

Just saw, again, the joke "Pardon me.", "Talk to me after I get into office."

That's pathetic.

The punchline is obviously... "Ask me again in February." Ba Dum Tsss.

:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Fox edited to make it funny - I missed his live performance and when I first saw it on Hannity it WAS funny. They cut it at "Pardon me." The audience would've picked up on the expression. You don't need a "closer" because it's a close by itself. The audience got it and laughed. That's the time to go off-script, but he read it through anyway. He has absolutely no feel for people's reactions unless they're screaming invectives at his opponents.

I take it the boos might have made it clear, but the early reporting just mentioned those and didn't report that he was actually heckled. Heckled at the Alfred Smith dinner? How off-key do you have to be?
 
He actually stood in front of that room and said that Hillary hates Catholics. I was expecting a punch line but none was forthcoming. Did he really expect to get the room on his side with that appalling comment? Such poor judgement. But I will bet that Bannon was delighted to have this coverage of his speech.
 
Foolmewunz said:
I grew up in Louisiana, Tennessee and Oklahoma. When fundies (previously referred to as bible-belters) refer to "the lord", they mean the "Have you come to...." guy, Jesus. They refer to God as God.

That is all I was referring to and it's pretty common knowledge.
Click to expand...

I guess we have different experiences. That's not something I've noticed.

But I certainly had misinterpreted you. I thought that you meant they speak about Jesus and not God, not that they use "the Lord" to refer to Jesus instead of God.
 
Jim_MDP said:
I can't believe how bad his performance is. I just can't.

He's had decades of speaking to full ballrooms of wealthy people. How can he misjudge his audience this time so badly?
Click to expand...


This hasn't stopped people from claiming that "Trump destroyed Hillary" and "she'll never recover from this", but then, these were internet comments posted in response to news stories and videos, so make of them what you will.
 
Jim_MDP said:
Yes, I can see how that mix of clips would play on your side. Overcorrection on the BBC's part?

And that bit about the speeches was funny, and Melania played along (thankfully). And while I missed it if it was there, it should have been followed immediately by a conciliatory word, or gesture, to say "I love you but I had to throw that one in there. Sorry.".
But it, by definition, was not "self-deprecating" and I haven't yet stumbled across a replay of anything else in his speech that was.

I believe in your parlance he'd be... a tosser. :rolleyes:

In mine... he's much worse.
Click to expand...

Yes could well be BBC over-correcting. A few days ago the Feedback programme on Radio 4 (the same channel with the report I mentioned upstream) was dominated by people 'outraged' at how the biased BBC reporting was giving Clinton a free ride (emails, emails!!) and picking on every little thing about Trump.

The response was pretty good - basically 'Well the emails are old news which we reported on extensively at the time and it was formally investigated and she was cleared of wrongdoing - besides plenty of previous politicians had similar setups. Meanwhile, we have reported on Trump so much because barely a day goes by without him doing something extraordinary / unprecedented and it would be bizarre not to report that.'

However, the BBC has been hammered lately and is really over-sensitive about being 'fair' (unfortunately all to often this materialises as 'give the nutter equal credence and time as the expert') so they may well have taken an overly 'balanced' approach following this criticism - indeed in this context they've given the nutter far more time than the expert ;)
 
From your description, it seems to me the BBC coverage of the Al Smith Dinner proves the documentary principle "every cut is a lie."

Trump got boos almost immediately, because he immediately went into stump-speech attack mode. Hillary got several good, snarky jabs in, but also managed to stay in the appropriate lane for the event. Donald was all over the road.
 
It is amazing that Donald managed to screw this up. He has been a celebrity for a long time and had a reality TV show starring him for years. I am quite certain that I would have done a better job than he did.
 
Last edited:
He couldn't get out of Ego-defense mode. His thin skin and narcissism leave him utterly unprepared for an event expecting humorous self-deprication. Everything was an attack on him, personally.
 
Tony Stark said:
It is amazing that Donald managed to screw this up. He has been a celebrity for a long time and had a reality TV show staring him for years. I am quite certain that I would have done a better job than he did.
Click to expand...

It's really not surprising. Celebrities only have to appeal to a large segment, not a majority, in order to be successful. Donald only knows how to be Donald, so that is a self-limiting factor to his presentation ability. Also he's pissed right now and the only way he knows to react is by thrashing about.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom