The Presidential Debate

RJKarl

RJKarl

Banhammer'd
Joined
Mar 17, 2011
Messages
78,115
Reaction score
3,112
Location
HB, CA
A chihuahua could jump over the bar the press has set for Trump. If he doesn't take a dump on stage, lose his shit or be totally ignorant the media will say he did well. He needs to talk as little as possible. The more he lets Hillary talk. The better the talking heads will say he did.

Hillary needs to be a little looser and less wonky. She should also use the real names of some of the people Trump clearly ripped off like the cabinet makes in Philly ("Trump spent $300M on a casino but couldn't pay Mr. ___ for the slot cabinets he built) and rthe painter at Doral (Trump made Mr. ___ spend $300K in legal fees to be paid the $34,000 Trump owed him) and then about the wall and Mexico. Tie them together and say, our allies and adversaries know about these and more. Why would they trust him?

This would make his head explode while making it easy for the viewers to identify with those who got screwed. She should also poke him about his language, but not be snotty about it.

I'm not sure she can do this. I'm not sure she can be conversational versus confrontational, but that's the key.

I'm going revamp my "take a dump on stage" to -he can get away with it by saying , "I just took the best dump ever and it's huuuuuge."
 
I expect this debate to start out with good intentions, and devolve into mud slinging. There's no way Trump will sit back and take it quietly if Hillary mentions his past wrongdoings. And honestly, I think if he feels at any point he is losing he will start lobbing grenades. I really doubt Hillary will be the one to make it dirty. She's got millions in ad buys out there taking care of getting the message out about Trump being a shithead.

I hope the debate actually focuses on policy and plans, because that is the area where Hillary clearly has an edge on Trump.
 
There are so many traps Trump can set for Hillary by just being Trump. He can drag her into an ugly mudslinging battle. He can force her to fact check instead of presenting her policy. He can use utter nonsense to bait her into reactions that won't present well.

I hope that's what she's been practicing.
 
PhDeac said:
There are so many traps Trump can set for Hillary by just being Trump. He can drag her into an ugly mudslinging battle. He can force her to fact check instead of presenting her policy. He can use utter nonsense to bait her into reactions that won't present well.

I hope that's what she's been practicing.
Click to expand...

I agree, but I'm inclined to believe she has a very cool head on her and won't overreact.

Trump can't win a policy debate that involves details. If the questions focus on details, he will speak in generalizations and that's where Hillary should be prepared to score points on him. No doubt her memory of facts (so long as they aren't related to her email server) surpasses Trump's.

I find myself wanting to watch the debate purely for the entertainment value.
 
Presidential debates are basically meaningless, as far as I'm concerned. I agree that this one has the potential to be highly entertaining, though, and I'll watch at least some of it to see where it goes.
 
My favorite debate ever was Dick Cheney vs John Edwards. I honestly thought Cheney was going to beat Edwards to a pulp once they got off stage. There was genuine hatred in his eyes and voice.
 
Shorty said:
Presidential debates are basically meaningless, as far as I'm concerned. I agree that this one has the potential to be highly entertaining, though, and I'll watch at least some of it to see where it goes.
Click to expand...

It amazes me that so many posters continue to think that knowledge of policy details has any real importance in a debate like this. I guess it just proves that highly educated people can sometimes have a hard time grasping simple concepts. There isn't going to be enough time to go into complex policy details in this debate....and the overwhelming majority of the voters who will be watching don't care about them even if there was enough time. If Hillary thinks that she can win this debate with a superior knowledge of policy details, she & her supporters are going to be very disappointed.

Presidential debates are a lot like golf. How well you score is determined by how few bad shots you hit, not by how many good shots you make.

If the Trump we see Monday night is like the Trump we have seen during the last few weeks, I think he could well be leading in the polls by the end of next week. As Pat Buchanan said in the article I posted, there are millions of voters out there who are not going to vote for Hillary but do not yet feel comfortable voting for Trump. They are wanting to vote for Trump, if he will just calm some of their anxieties about him. This debate is all about Trump. There is nothing Hillary can do to get anyone to support her who is not already supporting her. She can quote policy details until the cows come home and it won't make one bit of difference. If Trump performs just reasonably well, he will be a big winner. If he flies off the handle and loses his cool, he will be a big loser. In either case, it's all up to Trump.
 
Hillary's new ads (mirror ad, talking about a child with disabilities) have telegraphed her line of attack. Paint Trump as a deplorable asshole, wholly unfit for office.

Trump could diffuse a lot of that by using his opening statement to apologize for prior statements about the Khans, women, and the reporter. He's tried to put the birthers behind him and wants to reassure wary subarbanites that he's not a straight up racist by going to a Black church. Admitting mistakes and apologizing isn't his thing and may not come off as sincere or credible, but would definitely throw Hillary off. Problem is the rest of the debate would be on policy, where Trump is at a decided disadvantage. Hillary's magical earpiece aside, Trump clowned main stream media by conning them into letting him call in for interviews for months. Had talking points directly in front of him. Presidency is largely an open book test; debates, not so much.

Hillary's temper rivals Christie's, so she can't get baited. Was amazed that Christie held it together during the debates. If Trump's getting crushed on policy, he'll be all over the server, CGI, Benghazi, Monica, and Bubba fucking around. She better have prepared remarks to deflect those attacks back on Trump, who can be easily baited (to put it mildly).
 
FuckmouthedRube said:
Hillary's new ads (mirror ad, talking about a child with disabilities) have telegraphed her line of attack. Paint Trump as a deplorable asshole, wholly unfit for office.

Trump could diffuse a lot of that by using his opening statement to apologize for prior statements about the Khans, women, and the reporter. He's tried to put the birthers behind him and wants to reassure wary subarbanites that he's not a straight up racist by going to a Black church. Admitting mistakes and apologizing isn't his thing and may not come off as sincere or credible, but would definitely throw Hillary off. Problem is the rest of the debate would be on policy, where Trump is at a decided disadvantage. Hillary's magical earpiece aside, Trump clowned main stream media by conning them into letting him call in for interviews for months. Had talking points directly in front of him. Presidency is largely an open book test; debates, not so much.

Hillary's temper rivals Christie's, so she can't get baited. Was amazed that Christie held it together during the debates. If Trump's getting crushed on policy, he'll be all over the server, CGI, Benghazi, Monica, and Bubba fucking around. She better have prepared remarks to deflect those attacks back on Trump, who can be easily baited (to put it mildly).
Click to expand...

Trump really can't lose. If he apologizes (basically goes against the whole "tell it like it is anti-PC" attitude), his base isn't going anywhere. If he literally throws feces at Clinton, his base would LOVE it improving his GOTV. He can do nothing wrong in this debate. Literally nothing. Except MAYBE hug Obama.
 
bobknightfan said:
It amazes me that so many posters continue to think that knowledge of policy details has any real importance in a debate like this. I guess it just proves that highly educated people can sometimes have a hard time grasping simple concepts. There isn't going to be enough time to go into complex policy details in this debate....and the overwhelming majority of the voters who will be watching don't care about them even if there was enough time. If Hillary thinks that she can win this debate with a superior knowledge of policy details, she & her supporters are going to be very disappointed.

Presidential debates are a lot like golf. How well you score is determined by how few bad shots you hit, not by how many good shots you make.

If the Trump we see Monday night is like the Trump we have seen during the last few weeks, I think he could well be leading in the polls by the end of next week. As Pat Buchanan said in the article I posted, there are millions of voters out there who are not going to vote for Hillary but do not yet feel comfortable voting for Trump. They are wanting to vote for Trump, if he will just calm some of their anxieties about him. This debate is all about Trump. There is nothing Hillary can do to get anyone to support her who is not already supporting her. She can quote policy details until the cows come home and it won't make one bit of difference. If Trump performs just reasonably well, he will be a big winner. If he flies off the handle and loses his cool, he will be a big loser. In either case, it's all up to Trump.
Click to expand...

Not sure inviting Gennifer Flowers to sit front row at the debate will ease any undecided voter's anxieties. I know Hillary started the gamesmanship with inviting Mark Cuban but his response just feels slimy and it plays into the narrative that Trump can be easily baited.
 
Newenglanddeac said:
Not sure inviting Gennifer Flowers to sit front row at the debate will ease any undecided voter's anxieties. I know Hillary started the gamesmanship with inviting Mark Cuban but his response just feels slimy and it plays into the narrative that Trump can be easily baited.
Click to expand...

No one considering voting for trump sees that as a problem. Literally no one. The guy is telling the truth that he could shoot someone in the street, and his supporters aren't flipping. Bobs, if Trump shot someone in Times Square, would you change your vote to Hillary?
 
Deacfreak07 said:
No one considering voting for trump sees that as a problem. Literally no one. The guy is telling the truth that he could shoot someone in the street, and his supporters aren't flipping. Bobs, if Trump shot someone in Times Square, would you change your vote to Hillary?
Click to expand...

Oh totally agree on trumps base. This or shooting someone in Times Square would only make them support him more.

But anyone who's given any thought of flipping from Hillary/Johnson/UND to Trump (because he's "appeared" more presidential lately) has just been reminded that Trump has less self control than Kim Jong Un.
 
Newenglanddeac said:
Oh totally agree on trumps base. This or shooting someone in Times Square would only make them support him more.

But anyone who's given any thought of flipping from Hillary/Johnson/UND to Trump (because he's "appeared" more presidential lately) has just been reminded that Trump has less self control than Kim Jong Un.
Click to expand...

Has anyone been legitimately doing that?
 
I guess it's theoretically possible that a chunk of reported undecideds (or even those who Id'ed for a candidate) were actually trump supporters unwilling to admit it. But I highly doubt that group accounts for the entire bounce trump has seen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top