The First Presidential Debate

[maxwelhse]

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to maxwelhse again.


Thats definitely a point of view I can agree with. Honestly, if Biden’s team were smart, they’d find an excuse not to debate again. As you said, Trump is going to come out even better in the next debate. Just like 2016 debates, the first was a **** show, but the next ones he dominated. He felt Biden out and saw his approach, now he can hammer home all the points he made that Biden couldn’t answer... SCOTUS, green new deal, Antifa, etc.

I wouldn’t be surprised if Biden “caught” covid before the next one... but that’d be another +1 for trump to be able to say “see, it isn’t as deadly as fake news makes it out to be, if old man joe can survive it why shut down the country?” I think Biden’s in for a tough month now.

So, to tie a bow in this to close the point up nicely, what I said in a lot more words is the same point fos made. So... You should probably go rep him instead.

And yes, I agree that if Trump can reel it in by about 50% that he should crush Biden in the next debates, but we kind of expected him to do that this time and that's not what we got.

Where things will get really good is if we have a new SCOTUS judge before the next one. If that happens, and Trump plays his cards right, he can force the democrats to talk about the constitution all night. There won't be enough popcorn in the world for that one.

 

[foszoe]

Actually, I absolutely agree with your first sentence, but "being Trump" appeals to his base not the average "Joe" LOL. I like that.

That was my biggest beef with Trump's performance. He pleased his base, at least his INGO base for sure. But that's the least appealing thing about Trump. Even some of his supporters will admit that. I wanted him to appeal to those who may not like the Trump Bluster but may agree with some of his positions or actions. In my opinion, he failed to do so.

What people aren’t realizing about the debate is trump doesn’t need to appeal to his base. We are already voting trump and he knows that. He’s trying to dismantle the left, and in that regard he did a fine job. Joe runs as being the “moderate” left candidate, so trump is trying to separate him from the radical leftists, which he did. Stacking the Supreme Court, scotus justice picks, green new deal, Antifa.... trump basically forced Biden to disown all of that, and by doing so made the radical left unmotivated to vote for Biden. Now the next debate he’s going to focus even more so on dismantling his positions and pushing the far left even further away from joe.

 

[Hatin Since 87]

So, to tie a bow in this to close the point up nicely, what I said in a lot more words is the same point fos made. So... You should probably go rep him instead.

And yes, I agree that if Trump can reel it in by about 50% that he should crush Biden in the next debates, but we kind of expected him to do that this time and that's not what we got.

Where things will get really good is if we have a new SCOTUS judge before the next one. If that happens, and Trump plays his cards right, he can force the democrats to talk about the constitution all night. There won't be enough popcorn in the world for that one.

In fairness, I was trying to rep you for the last half of your comment... not the interrupting part. I don’t think a moderator should interrupt 2 candidates debating, ask a question, put a few minutes on the board, let them hash it out and let the American people decide who did it better. A debate moderator should only ask a question, that’s it. The rest is up to the candidates. If they make themselves look like jackasses, so be it. That’s for the American voters to determine.

Also, I tried to rep fos earlier for a comment and couldn’t, so even if I were to rep him in your place I wouldn’t be able to. Another problem with moderators

 

[maxwelhse]

I agree, but I think in the moment trump was more focused on the fact the left continually fails to condemn any of the left wing groups that are actually causing violence. BLM and Antifa are responsible for all the destruction in the cities this year, not white supremacists. I think he wanted to hammer that point home, and by doing so failed to point out his stance on the KKK, which if fake news actually wasn’t biased, would already be well known.

That should have been another easy slam dunk: "I condemn all cowards that terrorize the good people of America." When Biden (and Wallace) push him to name names, he pulls the trigger on both barrels and launches into the whole sermon. If I remember the timing correctly, this would have been the perfect moment to twist the knife of Biden just pretending antifa isn't just some imaginary "thing". I could think up a couple of lines about both white hoods and black flags being unwelcomed in America and I didn't even stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night.

 

[Alpo]

I agree, but I think in the moment trump was more focused on the fact the left continually fails to condemn any of the left wing groups that are actually causing violence. BLM and Antifa are responsible for all the destruction in the cities this year, not white supremacists. I think he wanted to hammer that point home, and by doing so failed to point out his stance on the KKK, which if fake news actually wasn’t biased, would already be well known.

I didn't have any problem with his answer on the Proud Boys. It was clear to me he told them to back off. He missed an opportunity to state the case on the destruction of the left and the anger it creates among the majority of us who understand that BLM is run by Marxists.

But, I don't consider what he said to be a validation of White Supremacy. But, as a white guy, I'm pissed that my voice isn't heard when BLM is destroying anything and everything with no response from those who should be curb-stomping more than a few of them.

 

[Hatin Since 87]

Actually, I absolutely agree with your first sentence, but "being Trump" appeals to his base not the average "Joe" LOL. I like that.

That was my biggest beef with Trump's performance. He pleased his base, at least his INGO base for sure. But that's the least appealing thing about Trump. Even some of his supporters will admit that. I wanted him to appeal to those who may not like the Trump Bluster but may agree with some of his positions or actions. In my opinion, he failed to do so.

Exactly! I, personally, like his game plan... but I would prefer he focus more on appealing to people who don’t support him. Although, I’m not sure if people who don’t like trump will ever come around to liking trump. I’m not sure what else he can do to appeal to them, 500 billion to black communities, kkk a terrorist organization, peace in the east... if that hasn’t got their support I don’t think a few words are going to change that. Actions speak louder than words. I think he understands this, and that’s why he’s instead trying to separate the hardcore left from joe Biden’s moderate left, and show them that he doesn’t support the issues they want.

Id rep you, but as I said in the comment above, moderators interrupted my rep

 

[Hatin Since 87]

I didn't have any problem with his answer on the Proud Boys. It was clear to me he told them to back off. He missed an opportunity to state the case on the destruction of the left and the anger it creates among the majority of us who understand that BLM is run by Marxists.

But, I don't consider what he said to be a validation of White Supremacy. But, as a white guy, I'm pissed that my voice isn't heard when BLM is destroying anything and everything with no response from those who should be curb-stomping more than a few of them.

Im betting today he’s looking back at that moment and regretting exactly that. Missed opportunity, and easily would have put joe in a position to either defend BLM destruction or condemn it. The 2nd debate will be telling... did he learn what to capitalize on, or is he just going to continue to be a shark circling the waters without ever taking a bite? BLM and Antifa riots have been the motivation for a lot of new voters, I know a few that have never voted and are this year because of that... he definitely should’ve jumped on the opportunity when it presented itself.

 

[maxwelhse]

In fairness, I was trying to rep you for the last half of your comment... not the interrupting part. I don’t think a moderator should interrupt 2 candidates debating, ask a question, put a few minutes on the board, let them hash it out and let the American people decide who did it better. A debate moderator should only ask a question, that’s it. The rest is up to the candidates. If they make themselves look like jackasses, so be it. That’s for the American voters to determine.

Also, I tried to rep fos earlier for a comment and couldn’t, so even if I were to rep him in your place I wouldn’t be able to. Another problem with moderators

That's the format they both agreed to.

FWIW, the organizers are already talking about shutting the mics off for the opposing side during the allowed answer time at the future debates. If that rule is actually followed, and fairly, there shouldn't be any additional room to complain.

Personally... I don't there should be any time limit at all. Let them argue with each other for 18 hours straight if they want. Frankly, that's what I'd like to see. That's how congress behaves already.

 

[Alpo]

I don't see the value to either side for further debates. As has been observed, positions have already hardened among most voters. Another debate represents an opportunity for both of these yahoos to lose more votes. I can't see either one of them adept enough to generate a strong performance. Public speaking in a formal setting isn't a strength either one of them has.

Put Mike and Koala on the stage together an let them duke it out.

Then, let's end it and get to the voting booths (if you haven't mailed your ballot in already )

 

[Hatin Since 87]

That's the format they both agreed to.

FWIW, the organizers are already talking about shutting the mics off for the opposing side during the allowed answer time at the future debates. If that rule is actually followed, and fairly, there shouldn't be any additional room to complain.

Personally... I don't there should be any time limit at all. Let them argue with each other for 18 hours straight if they want. Frankly, that's what I'd like to see. That's how congress behaves already.

I like what Ben shapiro said. Don’t mute the mics, just make the other a chipmunk voice while the candidate is answering a question.

But yes, I wish they’d just sit in a room with them 2, and debate. No moderators, no time limit, nothing. Let’s hear them discuss issues they wanna argue about.

 

[maxwelhse]

I don't see the value to either side for further debates. As has been observed, positions have already hardened among most voters. Another debate represents an opportunity for both of these yahoos to lose more votes. I can't see either one of them adept enough to generate a strong performance. Public speaking in a formal setting isn't a strength either one of them has.

I can't say I have any understanding of the logic of undecided voters, but they do exist and something sways their opinion. With so many on "our" side complaining about media bias and everything else, the best way to get the word out is from the mouths of the horses themselves. If those horses are less articulate than Mr. Ed, then so be it.

If it's Giant Douche vs. Turd Sandwich again, then people should start paying attention in the primaries so we get better options.

 

[foszoe]

I'd like to see them lower the mikes like they did at the OSCARS that one time

Talk as long as you want until you are on the floor as the mic disappears from view.

I like what Ben shapiro said. Don’t mute the mics, just make the other a chipmunk voice while the candidate is answering a question.

But yes, I wish they’d just sit in a room with them 2, and debate. No moderators, no time limit, nothing. Let’s hear them discuss issues they wanna argue about.

 

[maxwelhse]

I like what Ben shapiro said. Don’t mute the mics, just make the other a chipmunk voice while the candidate is answering a question.

But yes, I wish they’d just sit in a room with them 2, and debate. No moderators, no time limit, nothing. Let’s hear them discuss issues they wanna argue about.

Hummm... As a counter thought, the party within their allowed time should be voiced over by either Morgan Freeman or James Earl Jones (parties get each guy based on coin toss) while the other side continues on in their actual voices.

Pretty sure I'd be more inclined to listen to Darth Vader or Red over either Trump or Biden, thus keeping my attention.

Or we could get crazy and go Samuel L Jackson vs. Patrick Stewart.

If we're just going to go full WWE/reality TV with our politics, let's lean into it already.

 

[Hatin Since 87]

I'd like to see them lower the mikes like they did at the OSCARS that one time

Talk as long as you want until you are on the floor as the mic disappears from view.

I have a feeling once the mic disappeared they’d both just begin shouting so they could still be heard.

 

[Hatin Since 87]

Hummm... As a counter thought, the party within their allowed time should be voiced over by either Morgan Freeman or James Earl Jones (parties get each guy based on coin toss) while the other side continues on in their actual voices.

Pretty sure I'd be more inclined to listen to Darth Vader or Red over either Trump or Biden, thus keeping my attention.

Or we could get crazy and go Samuel L Jackson vs. Patrick Stewart.

If we're just going to go full WWE/reality TV with our politics, let's lean into it already.

Only if we can have a special guest referee, like judge mills lane, and maybe a guy come running on stage and hit one with a steel chair. It’d be more exciting than what we got.

 

[Hatin Since 87]

Just rewatched the start of the debate. First question went to trump, who gave an uninterrupted answer for 2 minutes. Then goes to Biden who gave an uninterrupted answer for 2 minutes. Then back to trump, who was interrupted 3 times by Biden. Biden started the interruptions, not trump. He set the tone for interrupting the other.

 

[maxwelhse]

Only if we can have a special guest referee, like judge mills lane, and maybe a guy come running on stage and hit one with a steel chair. It’d be more exciting than what we got.

2 special refs: Jesse Ventura and Arnold Schwarzenegger. Both retired governors and both about as close to politically neutral as we could ever hope. Plus the place will be impervious to Predator attack.

 

[Hatin Since 87]

Honestly, kinda hoping they let Joe rogan be the moderator next time. Watching his podcast he always seems neutral and would more than likely have the same rules and tough questions for both.

 

[maxwelhse]

Just rewatched the start of the debate. First question went to trump, who gave an uninterrupted answer for 2 minutes. Then goes to Biden who gave an uninterrupted answer for 2 minutes. Then back to trump, who was interrupted 3 times by Biden. Biden started the interruptions, not trump. He set the tone for interrupting the other.

I know this is trivial as all hell, but Trump actually interrupted before Biden could even begin to answer his first question, and he interrupted him to thank him (of all things).

https://youtu.be/u_vRW75LH4c?t=1337

This one was so close it was hard to call until I watched it again:

https://youtu.be/u_vRW75LH4c?t=1457

So... Yeah, I'm gonna maintain my position that even though you're right on this except for me nit picking, that Trump carried the tone of the interruptions more than Biden did. I'm willing to review further analysis and change my opinion later, but that doesn't mean that it was a good performance for Trump even if Biden set the tone. It wasn't.

Here is the moment you're talking about and I agree that was the first legit interruption, and it was Biden:

https://youtu.be/u_vRW75LH4c?t=1485

 

[foszoe]

I should have been more specific. Who started the interruptions in the 2 min window. Is the time you are referring to was discussion time, if so I would expect some back and forth there.

Just rewatched the start of the debate. First question went to trump, who gave an uninterrupted answer for 2 minutes. Then goes to Biden who gave an uninterrupted answer for 2 minutes. Then back to trump, who was interrupted 3 times by Biden. Biden started the interruptions, not trump. He set the tone for interrupting the other.