Presidential Debate 09-26-16

[SciFiFisher]

Clinton was poised, articulate and spoke about the issues.

Trump was his usual and interrupted at least 70 times in a 90 minute debate.

CNN is already predicting that Hilary won.

[SciFi Chick]

I'm watching it now, and, so far, it has really increased my respect for Clinton and made me want to punch Trump in the face, just to watch him bleed. I haven't done anything violent since the age of six, so this is significant.

[Rommie]

LOUD NOISES

I woke up at 3am to watch this one. Honestly, if you remember the people these debates are for are those who haven't decided yet, in that context Hillary will come out ahead (or, at minimum, stop Trump's momentum of recent weeks). Sure, he had maybe a half hour where he was talking about the economy and sounded decent about it, but I surely wasn't the only one watching his temper tantrums astounded to think this man could be president.

So many moments to choose from, but the one that really got to me was when he was in the middle of a ranting tantrum and shouted how he had the temperament to be president, but Hillary doesn't... and the audience laughed. I did too at home, and am sure a few million others did too as an involuntary reaction, to have watched an hour and a half by that point of a loud, childish man and an unfazed woman claim that. So surreal.

So yeah, I think what Trump really needed this time was something similar to Reagan, where everyone wasn't sure of him before the first debate and then he came out as this nice, thoughtful guy talking about a city on a hill and hope. Frankly, for Trump even if he'd done more of what he did in that first half hour, people undecided on him would have been way more open. But I don't think this guy really struck anyone who wasn't already onboard as someone you want to represent you.

At least, I really hope so, and really hope my absentee ballot comes in time for my crucial Florida vote!

[Swift]

I didn't watch any of it live (there were more important things happening, like the Indians clinching the AL Central). I saw various snippets on the news this morning and in my Facebook feed. I have yet to see a convincingly unbiased and complete assessment from some sort of news organization.

All of my liberal Facebook friends quoted stuff proving Hillary won. My very conservative nephew-in-law quoted stuff showing Trump won.

Honestly, if you remember the people these debates are for are those who haven't decided yet,

I've heard the same from other sources, and heard some polling number that 20% were undecided. I cannot fathom how anyone could be undecided. Unless the Dali Lama was actually running against Satan, I'm not sure there could be two more different people. Anyone who isn't decided at this point should just not be allowed to vote.

[pumpkinpi]

I listened to bits of an analysis on NPR this morning. I didn't catch the intro or outro, so I don't know who was speaking. But there was a black Trump supporter, saying that Trump isn't racist. When he talks about getting rid of/banning immigrants, he's talking about American values.

And he said Clinton was the racist one. I don't remember his rationale. I'll have to try to find the transcript to fill in the gaps.

[Cyborg Girl]

Yeah, there were a lot of things I expected of this debate. Literally collapsing on my knees with laughter was... not exactly one of those things.

Clinton was sharp and on point, Trump was a pompous blundering idiot. I have no idea how anyone could think Trump won this. I've never seen a debate so one-sided before.

Edit: @pumpkinpi, ah geeze. Stuff like that always gives me a headache.

[vendic]

Clinton was sharp and on point, Trump was a pompous blundering idiot. I have no idea how anyone could think Trump won this. I've never seen a debate so one-sided before.

If you think people that voted for Trump in the primaries did so because he was eloquent, classy, gave off an air of intelligence and diplomacy, then sure you can't understand why people think Trump won the debate. These are qualities you hold important.

Others are looking for someone that is as angry as they are. Someone who seems to be out of control, just as their lives are out of control. People can't see how doing the same thing over and over is going to change anything. People are looking for something beyond the status quo because the status quo sucks for them.

When the people are angry they do strange things. Remember Russia with Gorbachev and Yeltsin. One was sane, the other a drunk nut job. Guess who got into power in the end.

Note, I have not seen the debate, I care for neither of the candidates. I'm just pointing out that value systems vary with who you are and what conditions you are living under at the time. IOW, if the USA was doing great with the majority of people being happy, Trump would have gotten nowhere in his presidential bid. The fact that he is the Republican choice by far isn't a result of Trump's skill. It's a reflection of the state of the people in the USA and should for all intents and purposes be a huge warning flag to those in power: that things need to change. But that won't happen this election cycle which will only make the next one more critical.

[Swift]

I listened to bits of an analysis on NPR this morning. I didn't catch the intro or outro, so I don't know who was speaking. But there was a black Trump supporter, saying that Trump isn't racist. When he talks about getting rid of/banning immigrants, he's talking about American values.

Unfortunately, they are long standing American values.

You've got to be taught to be afraid
Of people whose eyes are oddly made,
And people whose skin is a diff'rent shade,
You've got to be carefully taught.

You've got to be taught before it's too late,
Before you are six or seven or eight,
To hate all the people your relatives hate,
You've got to be carefully taught!

If you think people that voted for Trump in the primaries did so because he was eloquent, classy, gave off an air of intelligence and diplomacy, then sure you can't understand why people think Trump won the debate. These are qualities you hold important.

Others are looking for someone that is as angry as they are. Someone who seems to be out of control, just as their lives are out of control. People can't see how doing the same thing over and over is going to change anything. People are looking for something beyond the status quo because the status quo sucks for them.

When the people are angry they do strange things. Remember Russia with Gorbachev and Yeltsin. One was sane, the other a drunk nut job. Guess who got into power in the end.

Exactly. Same thing happens when people are afraid. The entire Republican convention was about making people afraid.

Unfortunately, whether we wish to admit it or not, many people are illogical and irrational, and believe in things that they wish to believe in, evidence to support or not (thus most religions). Arguing facts at them will not sway these beliefs, whether they are political or otherwise.

[Cyborg Girl]

@vendic, @Swift

With respect, whether things change this election cycle depends on the state of the Senate IMO. The current crop of Republicans have basically made a name for themselves childishly obstructing everything Pres. Obama tries to do. If the Senate doesn't get more Democrats, or at least a bunch of Republicans who don't suck, the same will happen to Clinton if she gets in.

I'd also question whether Trump's base is worked up just about the economy, but I already posted about that, and saw people deny the article I linked, without citing any evidence to back that denial.

I should not need to mention that Trump's trickle-down economics are bog-standard Republican fare, and the definition of "doing the same thing over and over again." I should also not need to point out that, for a guy who is supposedly anti-establishment, Trump has a lot of backing from the wealthy elite. The fact is that, as corrupt and bought out as the US government is, it is not entirely friendly to corporate interests; one-percenters would benefit more from abolishing all oversight and regulation, which is basically what Trump proposes.

tl;dr Trump is not a common people's candidate, he's a plant for the oligarchs (whether or not he knows it). If people are voting for him for economic reasons, they are being conned big time.

This would not be the first time, either, that a country's elite supported an "anti-establishment" candidate for their own benefit:

http://archive.adl.org/braun/dim_13_2_forgetting.html

Look - I basically agree with you guys. But I think it needs to be pointed out that the current broken situation in the US is, in a large part, caused by the same ideological forces now supporting Trump. Popular support for him is not the result just of irrational, misdirected anger, but of scapegoating.

[Thumper]

Popular support for him is not the result just of irrational, misdirected anger, but of scapegoating.

Of course, it's always someone's fault. It's certainly not "my" fault I'm in the situation I'm in. Trump wants me to give him the power to punish "them" for what they've done to "me."

[squ1d]

Trump was an incoherent blustering moron, and Clinton wasn't.

But that is completely irrelevant in these times of populist anti-intellectualism.

In the past, anyone behaving like Trump would have been carted off to a mental asylum after such a display, certainly his polls would have plummeted.

Not anymore.

After he becomes President in November, I wonder who he'll nuke first?

[Swift]

With respect, whether things change this election cycle depends on the state of the Senate IMO. The current crop of Republicans have basically made a name for themselves childishly obstructing everything Pres. Obama tries to do. If the Senate doesn't get more Democrats, or at least a bunch of Republicans who don't suck, the same will happen to Clinton if she gets in.

I think the Senate is less important than you think it is. Even if the Democrats take the Senate, they are not going to take the House; the Republicans have done too good a job gerrymandering congressional districts. If Clinton gets in, the Republican House will block anything she tries to do, with or without the Senate. It will be four more years of the same kind of obstructionism we see now.

I'm not going to try to predict the Senate, it depends on all the individual races, and I'm not going to go research that. All I know is Ohio; I won't vote for Portman, but I'm pretty confident he will win reelection.

Look - I basically agree with you guys. But I think it needs to be pointed out that the current broken situation in the US is, in a large part, caused by the same ideological forces now supporting Trump. Popular support for him is not the result just of irrational, misdirected anger, but of scapegoating.

I don't claim to know the cause of the problems in the US; they are entirely too big and complex for me to solve. But as for Trump's support, I'm not quite sure what the difference is between "irrational, misdirected anger" and "scapegoating", but I suspect his support comes from both, and various oligarchs (as you phrase it) trying to manipulate the situation. None of these are contradictory.

[vendic]

@vendic, @Swift

With respect, whether things change this election cycle depends on the state of the Senate IMO...

Completely contradicted by this study: https://scholar.princeton.edu/sites/def ... cs.doc.pdf

It makes next to no difference who is in power.
Most people know this fact in their gut, but refuse to accept it with their head. Thus they go on acting like there is no problem. That voting their "right" person in will make a difference.
It just won't. To fix a problem, it must first be acknowledged as a problem.
Only then do you have options to change it.

[Thumper]

After he becomes President in November, I wonder who he'll nuke first?

Axis of Evil Australia, New Zealand, and Bora Bora?

[Cyborg Girl]

You know what, I already had this argument yesterday a bunch of socialists from synagogue, so I'm bowing out. I'm getting a bit tired of repeatedly of telling people twice my age that it's worthwhile not to let the world burn down.

Clinton's crowd can be reasoned with. Trump's cannot. If that's not enough for you, nothing will be, and I will never convince you.

[SciFi Chick]

All of my liberal Facebook friends quoted stuff proving Hillary won. My very conservative nephew-in-law quoted stuff showing Trump won.

I'm pretty certain I'm not biased on this. If I watched this debate not knowing who either of these people were, I would, based on debating rules, say that Hillary Clinton won.

It's the first Presidential debate I've ever watched from start to finish. I, literally, wanted to punch Trump in the nose, and I'm not a violent person. He is just wretched... and dumb as a box of rocks! A perfect example of how success is often more about the circumstances you're born into than any other factor.

[vendic]

You know what, I already had this argument yesterday a bunch of socialists from synagogue, so I'm bowing out. I'm getting a bit tired of repeatedly of telling people twice my age that it's worthwhile not to let the world burn down.

Clinton's crowd can be reasoned with. Trump's cannot. If that's not enough for you, nothing will be, and I will never convince you.

What?

You wrote:

I have no idea how anyone could think Trump won this.

I was trying to explain it. Don't read into it any more than that.

[vendic]

Oh, GJ, you don't need to bow out of this thread.
I'm done now anyway.
As I explained a few days ago, Tuesday is when I go back to being a hermit as I have a shit load of stuff to do. Well, it's Tuesday and my time here has come to an end.
Don't be upset. I never meant to upset you. I was trying to explain why people see things differently to you.
Doesn't mean that they are right. Doesn't even mean they are wrong.

Till we meet again.
bye bye.

[Parrothead]

For the first 20 minutes or so, Trump was pretty good. From that point on he went downhill quickly, it was clear he hadn't put in time to do any prepping. I don't really care for either candidate and am happy I don't have to make a decision, I'd be looking at third party options.

Both candidates have mentioned they want to re-negotiate NAFTA. If it comes to that, I'm sure there will be parts of the agreement Canada or Mexico may wish to re-negotiate and there would have to be willingness to open those issues, too.

Hillary talking creating jobs, creating clean green energy. Be weary. We have a provincial gov't that came to power claiming the same thing. In the past 10 years, the number of jobs created (in that sector) were nowhere near those promised and hydro rates have steadily increased. Some manufacturing has left the province due to the increased hydro rates. We pay high rates for wind/solar energy which is first to be purchased, much of it generated during low peak hours, winds up getting sold to other jurisdictions at pennies/kWh.

I'm with swift, other things going on, Blue Jays fighting for the first AL wild card slot. We took of 4 from the Yankees. WCoH continues tonight.

[pumpkinpi]

I'm with swift, other things going on, Blue Jays fighting for the first AL wild card slot. We took of 4 from the Yankees. WCoH continues tonight.

The Tigers handed it to the Jays this weekend. They were on a good streak, but on Saturday their closer gave up 5 in the 9th to lose it, and I predict they are not going to recover. And sorry, but if it's Jays-O's, I have to root for the O's!

[Swift]

I, literally, wanted to punch Trump in the nose, and I'm not a violent person. He is just wretched... and dumb as a box of rocks!

That's insulting to rocks.

[code monkey]

...

After he becomes President in November ...

squ1d!!!!!

don't you have something better to do than invoking nightmares? go practice the piano.

[squ1d]

...

After he becomes President in November ...

squ1d!!!!!

don't you have something better to do than invoking nightmares? go practice the piano.

Waking nightmares!

As for Piano .... 2 hours so far today.

[Parrothead]

I'm with swift, other things going on, Blue Jays fighting for the first AL wild card slot. We took of 4 from the Yankees. WCoH continues tonight.

The Tigers handed it to the Jays this weekend. They were on a good streak, but on Saturday their closer gave up 5 in the 9th to lose it, and I predict they are not going to recover. And sorry, but if it's Jays-O's, I have to root for the O's!

Veep debate tonight, I'll be watching Orioles vs Blue Jays in the AL wild card game. Winner faces Texas. Last year's series between Texas and Toronto got quite nasty at times.

[SciFi Chick]

Yeah. I'm pretty sure I don't give a fuck about the veep debate either.