09-26-2016, 10:20 PM | #2251 | ||
We deny our creators.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Reduces construction time
Posts: 3,070
|
Quote:
Quote:
Rejoice, you have plausible deniability.
__________________
"It does not matter anymore. We cannot change the past. The future will have to do."
-Windham Khatib Last edited by Blastoise; 09-26-2016 at 10:26 PM. |
||
09-26-2016, 10:30 PM | #2252 | |
Fog Badge
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,513
|
Quote:
Try 2% Or 3% Hell, maybe 0%, who the fuck even knows Maybe soon we'll get Vitamin D, whole, and lactose-free. If we're really lucky, maybe even organic. Of course the NY Post, The Daily Caller, and Breitbart will tell you it's far higher than that though. Can't imagine why. |
|
09-26-2016, 10:32 PM | #2253 | |
Barghest Barghest Barghe-
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
09-26-2016, 10:34 PM | #2254 |
A New and Original Person
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 949
|
This debate was more or less what we would've expected. Hillary talked shop, Trump was Trump. In a contest of "who knows their fucking shit", Hillary continues to run up the scoreboard, however Trump hangs in there with a cult of personality bonus. I don't particularly care about brand names, so it's fairly intuitive who I think did the better job.
Also, frankly I think the moderator needs to be more forceful. Fact check candidates who are blatantly lying (obvious limits, but if Trump or Clinton claim that they invented the internet or can outbench Obama or say crime is up when it's down or down when it's up, call them out for lying. They deserve it). And make them answer the goddamn question, enough of the bait and switch where you give a ten word lip service so you can go talk about whatever you want. Grill them and make them cut the bullshit so we can get some real answers to the concerns we have. The moderator should be more than just the person who gives topics and occasionally tries to manage the clock. I don't want somebody who just keeps the candidates in check, I want somebody to hold the candidates accountable. You're running for President, for Christ's sake. You owe it to us. |
09-26-2016, 11:54 PM | #2255 | |||
Problematic Fave
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: VA
Posts: 3,199
|
Quote:
Whatever. I'm not gonna fight on this, since it definitely coulda been worse. Quote:
He seems willing to try, which is refreshing coming from a Republican candidate. Regardless, tonight's debate gave attention to his plans for minority communities. As I am not a minority community, nor do I have much experience with them, I'm not going to be able to conclusively say if it was effective or not. Gut feeling is that he's gotten words in people's ears. But Hillary got to yap on about criminal justice for a long time and that might resonate with minority communities more - especially since Trump stuck his foot up his own ass with the whole "Law and Order" speech. Whether or not it's the right thing to do is not up for debate; whether or not it's what black communities want is. And I don't think that the vocal groups like BLM want more cops on the streets. I'm not going to pretend that Trump is polling well with minority communities now. I'll hope that he polls well, but I'm not going to be surprised if he crashes and burns in that voting bloc. THAT SAID, it was a little amusing watching Hillary and Trump try to fight each other over something they clearly agree on. I'm glad that Trump said "I agree with Secretary Clinton" so much - made him seem far more rational than he's come across as in the past. Quote:
Unless you're talking about his off-stage personality, which you pretty much just know about secondhand through responses to cherrypicked tweets.
__________________
|
|||
09-27-2016, 12:00 AM | #2257 | |
Problematic Fave
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: VA
Posts: 3,199
|
Quote:
I think this is a bias thing because when I asked my mother she said that Hillary was "all talk." Buuuut both of us care way more about the political circus than about either candidate's policy stances SO
__________________
|
|
09-27-2016, 12:04 AM | #2258 | ||||
Problematic Fave
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: VA
Posts: 3,199
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
|
||||
09-27-2016, 12:12 AM | #2259 |
Foot, meet mouth.
|
"This is not to say I am unequivocally a Trump supporter. However, I will continue to act as if he won the debate or as if he is a superior candidate in any way, shape or form."
You're in denial. You're in denial because you're exactly as shitty a person as every other Trump supporter. You just don't want to own up to it. Everyone here knows it. Everyone here knows that none of Trump's barbaric proposals would affect you remotely as much as it would affect other people on this forum. Everyone here knows that you would love for Trump to be less shitty so that you could pretend to support him and his barbaric policies openly. Because you agree with them all.
__________________
Spoiler: show |
09-27-2016, 12:39 AM | #2260 | ||
Fog Badge
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,513
|
Quote:
Quote:
Last edited by deoxys; 09-27-2016 at 12:51 AM. |
||
09-27-2016, 12:49 AM | #2261 | |
A New and Original Person
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 949
|
Quote:
It's a shame he's not a Senator. The guy'd be great at filibustering. |
|
09-27-2016, 01:18 AM | #2262 |
Naga's Voice
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: somewhere gay idk
Posts: 3,279
|
Just from the shit I've seen on iFunny I'd hardly think Trump won this debate. Talk about the emails all you want, but now Trump has the tweets that his team deleted as he said stuff to directly contradict them.
__________________
|
09-27-2016, 01:29 AM | #2263 |
Problematic Fave
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: VA
Posts: 3,199
|
The main problem with defending Trump as a candidate is that all his moves are strategic short-term, as election winners. It's what attracted me towards him as a viable candidate in the first place (his policies being nearly identical to Hillary's definitely helped my mental opinion of him).
It's hard to say "Yes I really think that the all-style, no-substance candidate is the best choice to run our country," but I really can't help it; so much of the presidential office is flavor, and Trump just tastes so sweet compared to sour Hillary, salty Bernie, and bitter Johnson. Hillary has one game winner up her sleeve (which Trump has been on like a dog with a bone): she's politically experienced. As much as Trump likes to talk about how Obama was a bad president, his weaknesses came from his inexperience - and Trump is not politically experienced. His mistakes could be equal to or even greater in magnitude to Obama's. This is not to agree with Trump that Obama had a bad presidency. Only that he had weaknesses. Because he's a human being. Clear? I think the Obama administration did a pretty good job during its 8 years of life. This is ALSO not to say that the Obama administration was perfect, or that Trump has NO valid criticisms of it. If Hillary wasn't posturing as "Obama 2: Feminist Boogaloo" she'd have some choice words to say about him, too. And again, I say this with love. It's getting her elected, so it's a good thing. I support feminism, and, as stated, I liked the Obama administration. I just think that Hillary was treading cautiously on the subject of Obama's mistakes because of her political trappings. Trump called her out on it, actually - hitting pretty hard that she was playing nice with Obama now but got ugly against him during the 2008 election. Honestly? I think there is substance. I think Trump needs to peel his tiny little hands away from his closely-guarded secrets and let people see what the fuck he's planning on doing. But he won't, because he's Trump, and staying quiet on things lets him hit from unexpected angles during negotiations and debates - such as his near-constant agreement with Clinton on several issues that people expected him to fight on. He's afraid that Hillary's going to steal his policy stances (which, let's face it, is something she's already done - see: energy) and present herself as the Democratic version of an already-moderate Republican. This is something that he wants to avoid at all costs. UNFORTUNATELY this little bit of petty politics is currently costing him an easy landslide election. Or an embarrassing landslide defeat, if the American public decides it doesn't like what he has to say. Until then, the race remains inaccurately close.
__________________
|
09-27-2016, 02:02 AM | #2264 | |
Problematic Fave
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: VA
Posts: 3,199
|
Quote:
EDIT: Oh boo I have 3rd grade level reading comprehension and missed that you already brought up the emails. (tweets are meaningless. also hillary's tweet game is pretty fire)
__________________
|
|
09-27-2016, 06:25 AM | #2265 |
Golden Wang of Justice
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,936
|
Hillary won the debate but not by enough. Trump didn't hit on immigration, which was either his fault, the topics' "fault" or both. He's certainly still in the game, and I don't think he did anything to substantially hurt his cause.
__________________
Mozz's Van, named after Bulbagardens creditor, was a hidden forum section where staff members could share pictures of their tiny penises and engage in homosex. Sadly, HAVA media, Bulbagardens new corporate overlord, forced it's closure. Can't have porn on a children's website. |
09-27-2016, 07:49 AM | #2266 | |
我が名は勇者王!
|
Quote:
Obama failed because #1 he set his sights too high, and #2 he couldn't control the Democratic Party. Neither reason is mutually exclusive, with #2 being the primary problem. And it's not like I, or anyone could blame him - the Democratic Party is too large, too pork barrel to control, whether the president be Obama, Bill or Hillary. Obamacare could have happened in its unadulterated form if it came about through the Republican Party side of things. The Democrats were the ones who stripped it apart well before the Republicans got a shot, and it was the Democrats who made Obamacare within comment range of the Republicans in the first place. That said, if I call "inability to control one's party" a weakness, your original point still stands that it's a shared weakness between Trump and Obama.
__________________
あなたの勇気が切り開く未来
ふたりの想いが見つけだす希望 今 信じあえる あきらめない 心かさね 永遠を抱きしめて |
|
09-27-2016, 07:50 AM | #2267 |
Foot, meet mouth.
|
Amazing to note that the rules for a debate thread on some random subforum are more strict than those for a Presidential debate, isn't it?
(Noted, anyway.) Anyway, Shuckle just said that "Trump's policies are nearly identical to Hillary's." So it shouldn't be at all surprising that he thinks Trump "won" the debate. Or that Trump is a reasonably candidate for President.
__________________
Spoiler: show |
09-27-2016, 08:17 AM | #2268 | |
Naga's Voice
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: somewhere gay idk
Posts: 3,279
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
09-27-2016, 10:51 AM | #2269 | ||
Archbishop of Banterbury
|
Quote:
At most, the debate might've swung some people who hadn't been paying attention up until now and were planning on voting Republican out of habit/because they're tired of Obama and 8 years of Democrat White House over away from Trump, but it's going to have minimal impact on Trumps coalition of people who're sick and tired of the same old politics, people who (not unjustifiably) hate Clinton's guts, and the racists. The first one of those three is the most substantial and the one Clinton needs to strike for (alongside undecided voters who might otherwise swing Republican this time for aforementioned reasons) but given her long history in politics and singular lack of charisma/public speaking talent, that's easier said than done. She's fighting against the same force that propelled Sanders, caused Brexit and elected Corbyn. >Alleged moderator bias in favour of Clinton For what it's worth, Holt is a registered Republican. Imo he stuck to callung outright mistruths, which given Trump makes more of those than Clinton would mean he was pressing him more than her.
__________________
Quote:
Last edited by Concept; 09-27-2016 at 01:28 PM. |
||
09-27-2016, 01:49 PM | #2270 |
Golden Wang of Justice
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,936
|
I'm interested to see how many people turned off the debate after the first half hour. By the time it was over, 10:45p EST, I was p much in bed because I'm 78 years old
__________________
Mozz's Van, named after Bulbagardens creditor, was a hidden forum section where staff members could share pictures of their tiny penises and engage in homosex. Sadly, HAVA media, Bulbagardens new corporate overlord, forced it's closure. Can't have porn on a children's website. |
09-27-2016, 02:43 PM | #2271 |
A New and Original Person
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 949
|
Apparently the Nielsen ratings say that viewership remained highly throughout the night.
|
09-27-2016, 03:24 PM | #2272 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,729
|
Crack is super addictive after all.
|
09-27-2016, 03:27 PM | #2273 | |||
Problematic Fave
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: VA
Posts: 3,199
|
Quote:
Essentially, her claim is that Obama didn't know enough about the traditional responsibilities and duties of the President. He didn't work closely enough with Congress, he didn't navigate the political scene with enough savvy, and his "bipartisan wrangling" was just him and his Democratic allies tearing apart the language of the bills they produced in the vague hopes that Republicans would like them. Which, let's be fair, is consistent with all the events that actually happened...but that doesn't make it true. So I'm gonna chalk that up to a rumor and not try to force the issue. Quote:
I felt that Trump benefited from having fewer people on stage - he showed some pretty tight focus last night and kept returning to the specific issues he wanted to address. He fired some tough shots at Hillary which was his entire intention for tonight's debate. But I don't think that Trump is a racist sociopath, so take that with a grain of salt. I wish he'd just get a fucking move on and lay out his policy positions like Hillary has, but realistically that's not going to happen because he's not running on policy positions, he's running on "I can create good policy positions because I'm a smart and effective businessman." Quote:
I shouldn't have said "biased trash moderator" but I like strong words.
__________________
|
|||
09-27-2016, 04:04 PM | #2274 | |
Archbishop of Banterbury
|
>Shuckle
By substance, I (and any commentator) means policy positions. Like sure, you're not going to do what Clinton will, great. Nor would Putin, Gaddafi, Kim Jong, etc. The world is filled with politicians who wouldn't do what the status quo in the West is, but as bad as the West's status quo is most of the other explicitly spelled out options are worse. Unless you're explicitly spelling out your policy positions, in detail, and those are better than status quo candidates like Clintons, a candidate has no substance - and is therefore worth neither our time nor our votes. At the end of the day, the only thing that's going to have an impact on our lives once they're on office is the specific policy detail, so it's the one and only thing that should matter for our votes too.
__________________
Quote:
|
|
09-28-2016, 05:43 PM | #2275 | |
Problematic Fave
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: VA
Posts: 3,199
|
The debate was reasonable and the aftermath is a shitshow. At times I find myself shaking my head and wondering "Did they even watch the debate?"
Disgraceful. Quote:
Presidents need to be able to roll with the punches and take action against unforeseen threats and crises. Trump's argument is that Clinton would do a worse job than him and cited her actions as Sec. of State as proof of this. Clinton's argument varies slightly and reaches into other parts of the Presidency: representation. Her claim is a little scattered but boils down to "questionable moral character," and cites his actions as a businessman and public figure as proof of this. Each candidate is trying to undermine the strengths of the other. I mentioned their respective running platforms a while ago. Problem with Trump's argument is that Clinton isn't doing it by herself, she's got a whole legion of people making sure she does her job right and for the right people. She's also very experienced on the political scene, and will have the know-how to get shit done (which is why she's hammering home policy positions rather than judgment calls). Problem with Clinton's argument is that it's full of inaccuracies and reaches unreasonably far to try to find Trump being intentionally misleading when really he's just being Trump. I mean. Not like Hillary knows anything about people trying to find malice in her mistakes :^)
__________________
Last edited by Shuckle; 09-28-2016 at 05:53 PM. |
|
Lower Navigation | ||||||
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 2 (0 members and 2 guests) | |
Thread Tools | |
|
|