Presidential Debate 2020

#2,105
#2,105
BowlBrother85 said:
An honest person would say that Trump rendered the "debate" unwatchable, because of how much interrupting that he did. I would admit that Biden did some, and Chris Wallace holds some responsibility for not properly maintaining order, but it's obvious the Trump strategy was to bully and intimidate Biden into submission. However, Biden didn't always stop talking when Trump started... so that led to very little substantive discussion, and way too much cross talk among three people.

It was irritating to listen to.
Click to expand...


This is exactly correct.

And as I posted yesterday, I actually think this was the plan of BOTH candidates:

Trump intentionally disregard the rules to try to get Biden flustered into making a major mistake. I think Trump prepped with exactly this plan in mind. It was intentional, not instinct, as many have said. The worst thing that happened is that his base loved it because they already find his antagonism of any Dem or the media as worthy -- not matter how inappropriate to the moment it might be. So it really couldn't hurt him much to play the part of jackass. He's good at it.

Biden's team anticipated this. It wasn't hard to predict. Its what Trump did in 2016 in the primaries and with Clinton. And Trump's folks telegraphed for a month that Trump was going to be on the attack and be aggressive. I imagine his team prepped Biden by having stand ins interrupt and cajole, just as Trump did, with Biden standing there continuing to answer and ignore Trump as best he could. The goal was to show that he would not get flustered and had the stamina to listen to Trump's hooting and hollering for 90 minutes without showing any sign it genuinely bothered him.

Assuming those goals to be correct, while the value of the debate to the country was pretty much zero, in actuality they both did a good job of accomplishing what they wanted to do.
 
#2,106
#2,106
BigOrangeD said:
I think they should just have a cage match next time.
Click to expand...
The only thing that needs to change, is that the moderator needs to be able to cut the mic on the person who has finished speaking. That isn't having a "RIGGED" debate. It's called enforcing the rules and maintaining structure. It is aggravating as hell to listen to three people talking at the same time.

That headline is obviously biased towards Trump, and incredibly stupid.
 
#2,107
#2,107
BowlBrother85 said:
The only thing that needs to change, is that the moderator needs to be able to cut the mic on the person who has finished speaking. That isn't having a "RIGGED" debate. It's called enforcing the rules and maintaining structure. It is aggravating as hell to listen to three people talking at the same time.

That headline is obviously biased towards Trump, and incredibly stupid.
Click to expand...
Don't have a mod do it, just have it automated with a count down clock easy to see by each candidate. You may need to put them in a sound proof glass booth as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BowlBrother85
#2,110
#2,110
NorthDallas40 said:
We’ve covered it already. Go absorb it. Not playing your pedantic game.

Sticking with stupid even more after that post.
Click to expand...

You sulking because you figured out that “you can have collusion without a criminal conspiracy” is actually the opposite of what you’re saying, or have you just gotten to surly phase of your confusion?

The report details that offers of assistance were extended from Russian agents to the campaign and that, in some instances, the campaign was receptive. Call that whatever you want: Conspiracy, collusion, coordination, or just write another of your incoherent word salads and call it that. The actions of the campaign is what is significant to me, not what somebody else calls it or how it can be legally defined.

Which is exactly what BB85 was saying.
 
#2,111
#2,111
BowlBrother85 said:
The only thing that needs to change, is that the moderator needs to be able to cut the mic on the person who has finished speaking. That isn't having a "RIGGED" debate. It's called enforcing the rules and maintaining structure. It is aggravating as hell to listen to three people talking at the same time.

That headline is obviously biased towards Trump, and incredibly stupid.
Click to expand...

You guys sure fell for the "click bait".
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfanjustin
#2,114
#2,114
BowlBrother85 said:
Good question. That wasn't clear from the debate was it? Just about nothing was. The whole thing was a cluster***k on steroids.
Click to expand...
I would guess he doesn’t know. And his handlers like the uncertainty because if he supports it then that will hurt with Independent voters but if he comes out against it then he pissed off the base
 
  • Like
Reactions: BowlBrother85
#2,115
#2,115
RockyTop85 said:
You sulking because you figured out that “you can have collusion without a criminal conspiracy” is actually the opposite of what you’re saying, or have you just gotten to surly phase of your confusion?

The report details that offers of assistance were extended from Russian agents to the campaign and that, in some instances, the campaign was receptive. Call that whatever you want: Conspiracy, collusion, coordination, or just write another of your incoherent word salads and call it that. The actions of the campaign is what is significant to me, not what somebody else calls it or how it can be legally defined.

Which is exactly what BB85 was saying.
Click to expand...
No I’ve known it all along and it was the basis of my initial calling bull **** on you.

You are using a political term with no basis of proof as proxy for an actual legally defined crime and trying to spike the ball as having proven something. You’ve proved nothing from the details as there is no established bar of proof for the political hack term. It’s intellectually dishonest as a minimum but I’ve honed in on stupid as the root cause I think.
 
#2,116
#2,116
A composed and prepared Trump could have easily driven a stake into Biden during that debate. Instead he chose to try and be a bully which backfired when he got called out by the moderator
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols and BigOrangeD
#2,118
#2,118
NorthDallas40 said:
No I’ve known it all along and it was the basis of my initial calling bull **** on you.

You are using a political term with no basis of proof as proxy for an actual legally defined crime and trying to spike the ball as having proven something. You’ve proved nothing from the details as there is no established bar of proof for the political hack term. It’s intellectually dishonest as a minimum but I’ve honed in on stupid as the root cause I think.
Click to expand...
What term am I using when I say “call it whatever you want?”
 
#2,119
#2,119
utvolpj said:
A composed and prepared Trump could have easily driven a stake into Biden during that debate. Instead he chose to try and be a bully which backfired when he got called out by the moderator
Click to expand...
He was no where near as sharp as 2016. If he can’t get back to that form he’s done
 
#2,123
#2,123
utvolpj said:
A composed and prepared Trump could have easily driven a stake into Biden during that debate. Instead he chose to try and be a bully which backfired when he got called out by the moderator
Click to expand...
Except that the few times that he let Biden get on a role is when he didn’t look nearly as bad.
 
#2,125
#2,125
utvolpj said:
A composed and prepared Trump could have easily driven a stake into Biden during that debate. Instead he chose to try and be a bully which backfired when he got called out by the moderator
Click to expand...
Trump is just not good at debating or reading from a teleprompter or reading from a written speech. He excels at being on stage in rallies. That is where his strength lies for sure. Just being off the cuff and blasting away.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top