2016 Presidential debate debate

[jamil]

It's nice to see all this high-fiving.

Have any of you bothered to read the results in the NYT or WaPo today? Or look at the number/ratio of lies last night?

I turned the debate off after awhile. The only indication I have that it might not have been a great night for the Trumpster is that a neighbor went outside and pulled up his Trump/Pence sign and stuck it in the trash.

But, according to INGO, Trump was the big winner.

Delusion knows no limit.

I haven't seen the debate yet. I'll have to reserve my opinion for after. But. How many Hillary supporters did the fact checking? How many Hillary supporters wrote the articles? We know from the leaked DNC emails that they tend to give at least some journalists marching orders. How far does that go? And I'm not saying conservative news doesn't get marching orders from the RNC. But what basis is there to believe any journalists in the environment they've created. These days they almost don't bother to hide it.

 

[Tombs]

It's nice to see all this high-fiving.

Have any of you bothered to read the results in the NYT or WaPo today? Or look at the number/ratio of lies last night?

I turned the debate off after awhile. The only indication I have that it might not have been a great night for the Trumpster is that a neighbor went outside and pulled up his Trump/Pence sign and stuck it in the trash.

But, according to INGO, Trump was the big winner.

Delusion knows no limit.

I want everyone to take a close look at the bolded text and take notes. This is how you ruin your entire argument and relay to the people that you are arguing against that the last straw you have to grasp is to project your problems on your opponent.

I thought Trump was done 5 minutes into the debate. As soon as the gloves came off, I went and bought myself a hat, because he's in this for the long haul and demonstrated he is capable of winning it.

 

[Alpo]

I haven't seen the debate yet. I'll have to reserve my opinion for after. But. How many Hillary supporters did the fact checking? How many Hillary supporters wrote the articles? We know from the leaked DNC emails that they tend to give at least some journalists marching orders. How far does that go? And I'm not saying conservative news doesn't get marching orders from the RNC. But what basis is there to believe any journalists in the environment they've created. These days they almost don't bother to hide it.

It's the normal fact check org's. You can either trust them or not. I scanned the "falsehoods" and some are definitely false, supported with prior videotaped comments. Some affirmations have been debunked by both the dems and repubs. So, it seems that at some point you'll have to make a determination whether to believe the candidates and all that entails, or recognize that they don't tell the truth on occasion and that happened last night.

No one is forcing you to believe anything. You don't need to ask the question when the debate is available for your review.

 

[Tombs]

It's the normal fact check org's. You can either trust them or not. I scanned the "falsehoods" and some are definitely false, supported with prior videotaped comments. Some affirmations have been debunked by both the dems and repubs. So, it seems that at some point you'll have to make a determination whether to believe the candidates and all that entails, or recognize that they don't tell the truth on occasion and that happened last night.

No one is forcing you to believe anything. You don't need to ask the question when the debate is available for your review.

If you think so. The majority of it is nonsense like this:

For the record he said "acid or bleached."

 

[foszoe]

It's nice to see all this high-fiving.

Have any of you bothered to read the results in the NYT or WaPo today? Or look at the number/ratio of lies last night?

I turned the debate off after awhile. The only indication I have that it might not have been a great night for the Trumpster is that a neighbor went outside and pulled up his Trump/Pence sign and stuck it in the trash.

But, according to INGO, Trump was the big winner.

Delusion knows no limit.

Fact checking in its infancy was a welcome breath of fresh air so to speak.

Nowadays, when i find I fact check the fact checkers and find them to be in error, I don't trust any of them.

Of course I am one of those who will insist in any conversation that Al Gore never said "I invented the internet".....

The biggest one to me this cycle is whether or not Trump supported the war in IRAQ.

Finding no evidence that He did not support the war is not equivalent to him not supporting the war.

The only info I can find that the fact checkers use is the below quote:

"Yeah, I guess so" is not unequivocal support for the war to any reasonable person. It is the response of a person who has not given the subject a lot of thought.




[FONT=&quot]Others have looked, but no one else — including PolitiFact and the Washington Post Fact Checker — has been able to find any evidence to support his claims, either. Now, BuzzFeed reports that Trump indicated his support for war in a radio interview with shock jock Howard Stern on Sept. 11, 2002 — a little more than six months before the war started.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Stern asked Trump directly if he supported going to war with Iraq, and Trump hesitantly responded, “Yeah, I guess so.”[/FONT]

 

[Alpo]

I want everyone to take a close look at the bolded text and take notes. This is how you ruin your entire argument and relay to the people that you are arguing against that the last straw you have to grasp is to project your problems on your opponent.

I thought Trump was done 5 minutes into the debate. As soon as the gloves came off, I went and bought myself a hat, because he's in this for the long haul and demonstrated he is capable of winning it.

Perhaps. Perhaps not. I'll be glad to wait for more polling to come through. 35 high-fives on INGO and a hat purchase are meaningless when compared with national results. I really don't mind that you fail to recognize a meltdown when it occurs. When it happens, I'm sure you'll blame something other than the undesirability of Trump as president.

http://www.factcheck.org/2016/10/factchecking-the-second-presidential-debate/

 

[printcraft]

If you think so. The majority of it is nonsense like this:

For the record he said "acid or bleached."

Oh that **** is just too much. Come on NBC fact checkers.

It's like saying "NO NO she just used a hammer to destroy her devices she didn't intended to destroy the evidence too!!"

 

[Alpo]

Fact checking in its infancy was a welcome breath of fresh air so to speak.

Nowadays, when i find I fact check the fact checkers and find them to be in error, I don't trust any of them.

Of course I am one of those who will insist in any conversation that Al Gore never said "I invented the internet".....

The biggest one to me this cycle is whether or not Trump supported the war in IRAQ.

Finding no evidence that He did not support the war is not equivalent to him not supporting the war.

The only info I can find that the fact checkers use is the below quote:

"Yeah, I guess so" is not unequivocal support for the war to any reasonable person. It is the response of a person who has not given the subject a lot of thought.




[FONT="]Others have looked, but no one else — including [URL="http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/feb/06/donald-trump/donald-trump-overstates-his-early-opposition-iraq-/"]PolitiFact[/URL] and the Washington Post Fact Checker — has been able to find any evidence to support his claims, either. Now, BuzzFeed reports that Trump indicated his support for war in a radio interview with shock jock Howard Stern on Sept. 11, 2002 — a little more than six months before the war started.[/FONT]
[FONT="]Stern asked Trump directly if he supported going to war with Iraq, and Trump hesitantly responded, “Yeah, I guess so.”[/FONT]

Personally, who supported or did not support the war is meaningless. There was a tremendous amount of disinformation put into the pipeline by the Bush Administration. And I, along with most Americans, were pissed at anything and anyone in the mideast associated with Islam. We wanted revenge.

The fact that no WMD's were found seems to be less important than our failure to properly administer a country (ala MacArthur) post-victory.

 

[Tombs]

Personally, who supported or did not support the war is meaningless. There was a tremendous amount of disinformation put into the pipeline by the Bush Administration. And I, along with most Americans, were pissed at anything and anyone in the mideast associated with Islam. We wanted revenge.

The fact that no WMD's were found seems to be less important than our failure to properly administer a country (ala MacArthur) post-victory.

Yeah, that excuse flies fine for Afghanistan. It does not work for Iraq.

 

[Alpo]

You need to explain that comment. Your shorthand is not decipherable by me.

 

[ATM]

Personally, who supported or did not support the war is meaningless. There was a tremendous amount of disinformation put into the pipeline by the Bush Administration. And I, along with most Americans, were pissed at anything and anyone in the mideast associated with Islam. We wanted revenge...

I'd be very interested to expand on this train of thought in another thread:

https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...423008-15-years-deception;-9-11-reviewed.html

Besides the disinformation you note here, where there other deceptions of possible note leading up to perpetual foreign wars?

 

[dusty88]

It's nice to see all this high-fiving.

Have any of you bothered to read the results in the NYT or WaPo today? Or look at the number/ratio of lies last night?

I turned the debate off after awhile. The only indication I have that it might not have been a great night for the Trumpster is that a neighbor went outside and pulled up his Trump/Pence sign and stuck it in the trash.

But, according to INGO, Trump was the big winner.

Delusion knows no limit.

Tell your neighbor I'll bring him a Johnson sign if he wants it

 

[dusty88]

Personally, who supported or did not support the war is meaningless. There was a tremendous amount of disinformation put into the pipeline by the Bush Administration. And I, along with most Americans, were pissed at anything and anyone in the mideast associated with Islam. We wanted revenge.

The fact that no WMD's were found seems to be less important than our failure to properly administer a country (ala MacArthur) post-victory.

I think you make some good points there. I wasn't "gun ho" on Iraq but I basically believed the reasoning.

I do give some credibility to those who foresaw what I would turn into, specifically Ron Paul. I tend to put more credence in why someone supported or opposed it though than "if" they supported or opposed it.

 

[Tombs]

You need to explain that comment. Your shorthand is not decipherable by me.

It doesn't take a paragraph to say that your excuses for war were incomprehensible.

Yes, we were pissed at the islamic world, yes we had to get the people who attacked us. So we went into Afghanistan to go after the Taliban.

Iraq was nonsense from start to finish that left any rational people in the country scratching their heads when it was even brought up. Mindless drones ate up the government propaganda and supported it whole heartedly, yes. The evidence they demonstrated on national television were a few satellite images showing trucks being moved, that they tried to use to fabricate a story about WMDs.

Moral of the story: Don't believe everything the government tells you when it wants to overthrow a legitimate foreign government for self serving interests. *Cough*Syria, Assad*Cough*

 

[Alpo]

My excuses? Rational people?

LOL

You were, what, 15 then?

 

[printcraft]

Does hitlary know who she wants to back in Syria against Assad?

 

[Tombs]

Does hitlary know who she wants to back in Syria against Assad?

Yes, clearly. She wants to back ISIS to overthrow Assad in proxy warfare against the Russians, forcing them to throw money at the situation and economically harm them.

 

[printcraft]

Well, that can't be a good idea..... unless....

 

[BugI02]

It's nice to see all this high-fiving.

Have any of you bothered to read the results in the NYT or WaPo today? Or look at the number/ratio of lies last night?

I turned the debate off after awhile. The only indication I have that it might not have been a great night for the Trumpster is that a neighbor went outside and pulled up his Trump/Pence sign and stuck it in the trash.

But, according to INGO, Trump was the big winner.

Delusion knows no limit.

NY Times, WaPo. Come on Alpo, might as well just go to The Hag's twitter account to get analysis as unbiased as that

 

[BugI02]

I haven't seen the debate yet. I'll have to reserve my opinion for after. But. How many Hillary supporters did the fact checking? How many Hillary supporters wrote the articles? We know from the leaked DNC emails that they tend to give at least some journalists marching orders. How far does that go? And I'm not saying conservative news doesn't get marching orders from the RNC. But what basis is there to believe any journalists in the environment they've created. These days they almost don't bother to hide it.

+1 If Trump accomplishes nothing else he's totally torn the cover off just how far in the bag for Clinton/ Democ Rats the MSM really is. I must admit, even though I've always believed the MSM had a liberal/progressive bias, I had never imagined the true depth of their perfidy. And it's bloody hard to shock me, anymore