Author Topic: Town halls and debates 2020  (Read 17177 times)

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Town halls and debates 2020
« on: September 18, 2020, 12:56:23 PM »
There was no thread dedicated to the presidential candidate 'performance' broadcasts, so here we go.

There are now two nationally televised town halls in the books, one by Trump and one by Biden, with at least three debates to go.  What are your thoughts?

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Town halls and debates 2020
« Reply #1 on: September 18, 2020, 01:02:39 PM »
Trump town hall: was pretty predictable, he came across pretty much as we have seen him in the past 4.5 years... and as predicted, he was braggadocious, less than honest, and living in a parallel universe at times.

Biden town hall: also fairly predictable, felt everybody's pain, played on his common-man roots, and for those who've been paying attention, did not come across as a doddering invalid; quite the opposite: he was so effective at communicating, and had such command of the topics, that Bill O'Reilly claimed he must have been fed the questions in advance.

wmLambert

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Town halls and debates 2020
« Reply #2 on: September 18, 2020, 01:26:56 PM »
Trump town hall: was pretty predictable, he came across pretty much as we have seen him in the past 4.5 years... and as predicted, he was braggadocious, less than honest, and living in a parallel universe at times.

Biden town hall: also fairly predictable, felt everybody's pain, played on his common-man roots, and for those who've been paying attention, did not come across as a doddering invalid; quite the opposite: he was so effective at communicating, and had such command of the topics, that Bill O'Reilly claimed he must have been fed the questions in advance.

Yes, Trump came across as expected, but so did the questions. Trump is never questioned, but attacked constantly. He was very gentle with some of the rudest questioners I've ever heard. Remarkable that wasn't mentioned.

As for Biden - his questions were generally about Trump - not about his own record. Did you hear any questions about the economy under Obama-Biden? Y'know - the ever spreading distance between the wealthy and the poor? Ot the drop in median income? And then the follow-up that Trump reversed both those trends. The question asks itself, Will you go back to the failed system or continue what worked for Trump?
« Last Edit: September 18, 2020, 01:29:05 PM by wmLambert »

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Town halls and debates 2020
« Reply #3 on: September 18, 2020, 01:47:54 PM »
he was so effective at communicating, and had such command of the topics, that Bill O'Reilly claimed he must have been fed the questions in advance.

Hah, yeah, cause that would never happen  ::)

That said I didn't watch it so maybe he really did have a command of the topics, but such a response (that he must have cheated) is completely obvious blowback from Hillary doing exactly that. Even if he played it totally straight the DNC made their bed in arousing suspicion of this sort.

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Town halls and debates 2020
« Reply #4 on: September 18, 2020, 02:12:35 PM »
The other, more likely option being, Bill O'Reilly is so used to hearing incoherent, non-grammatical non sequiturs from Trump that he has forgotten what a semi-lucid, relatively coherent interlocutor sounds like, and assumes that full sentences and fully fleshed-out ideas must be the result of cheating. :D

But let's run with the cheating bit, then: Biden is supposed to have memorized all those responses with his early-onset-dementia-brain.  I guess people have to shelve that accusation then, if he is able to memorize a couple of hours of prepared dialog.

wmLambert

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Town halls and debates 2020
« Reply #5 on: September 18, 2020, 11:33:14 PM »
The other, more likely option being, Bill O'Reilly is so used to hearing incoherent, non-grammatical non sequiturs from Trump that he has forgotten what a semi-lucid, relatively coherent interlocutor sounds like, and assumes that full sentences and fully fleshed-out ideas must be the result of cheating. :D

But let's run with the cheating bit, then: Biden is supposed to have memorized all those responses with his early-onset-dementia-brain.  I guess people have to shelve that accusation then, if he is able to memorize a couple of hours of prepared dialog.

Too bad, you dismiss Trump's communication skills by calling them "incoherent, non-grammatical non sequiturs." There's not a Democrat in a committee meeting in the past couple of years that doesn't fit that mold better than Trump. What Trump is able to do is communicate like a real person talking to his friends, with twice as much energy and fun as anyone else in the room. In the semi-lucid manner that Biden has established, he is good at answering softball questions with no serious grilling. In tonight's appearance talking about RBG, he read his entire statement, constantly looking down to the written script. The debates will be interesting.

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Town halls and debates 2020
« Reply #6 on: September 29, 2020, 10:11:24 PM »

fizz

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Town halls and debates 2020
« Reply #7 on: September 30, 2020, 01:52:24 AM »
Not only Canada.

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Town halls and debates 2020
« Reply #8 on: September 30, 2020, 03:33:04 AM »
Trump was his usual self in the debate. Biden, however, was so poorly prepared to handle Trump's manner and tactics that either he is too inept for words, or else his entire prep team should be fired. You would think they would have had professional hecklers training him to shrug off Trump's side-remarks, as well as coaches to tell him things that are actually in line with the current trend in newspeak. But Biden could scarcely get a single sentence out without stumbling multiple times, let alone saying anything definitive on any topic. It reminds me of Hillary's prep, which was "don't say anything substantive, just let Trump defeat himself." And the Democrats are making the same mistakes again, in the same ways. How could Biden hesitate and finally refuse to answer entirely when asked if he would have endorsed calling in the National Guard for riots, or whether he supports BLM? That's like the hottest topic in current events besides COVID, and he abstains? When asked about actually popular leftist issues he couldn't even state them in the same terms the actual left does, which only proves what I had previously thought, which is that he isn't really a liberal in that sense at all, just a political person working for Democrat handlers. Ironically Trump literally said that in the debate, which admittedly made me laugh.

And it's sad, because I would have been so happy for a Sanders or even Warren run at the Presidency, and while rolling my eyes at Trump's childish remarks through the debate I had to suffer through Biden being just intolerable to listen to. All those times he looked right at the camera addressing the American people...oh god. Once again, if Trump is elected we'll know exactly who's to blame. But I already thought that the DNC would rather have Trump win than Sanders. Trump can always be an easy devil to sneer at, whereas a Sanders Presidency would mean their precious power structure would be in jeopardy, but with no great Satan to point at. So far safer for them to have four more years of Trump - to the point where it almost feels like Biden is a fall guy, where his loss would create more anti-right animosity which is in a bizarre sense a win-win for the DNC.

After some amount of watching the debate my wife said "What an idiot." I asked, "which one," to which she of course replied "Both."

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Town halls and debates 2020
« Reply #9 on: September 30, 2020, 07:55:48 AM »
On the other hand, what did Trump manage to succeed at?

He probably (both of them did) managed to depress voter turnout.  So a win there for Trump.

But he did nothing to appeal to women voters, of whose support Trump desperately needs to improve.  Without increasing his support with women, Trump is going to have a hard time winning again.

Then there was his refusal to denounce white supremacy.  He already has that vote locked in. Would denouncing violent actions by specific white supremacists depress that vote more than the votes he would make up elsewhere (I'm thinking of those suburban women again)?  Of course, it's possible that the zero sum game of denouncing one part of his coalition would be seen as backing down to the bogeyman of "violent blacks", which would more broadly affect his electoral support, presumably.

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Town halls and debates 2020
« Reply #10 on: September 30, 2020, 08:44:30 AM »
Trump was his usual self in the debate. Biden, however, was so poorly prepared to handle Trump's manner and tactics that either he is too inept for words, or else his entire prep team should be fired.
That's a bit unfair; I'm sure Biden's team planned on having ear plugs ready to use, but Trump's team made it a point that no ear pieces were allowed.  What was he going to do - threaten to pull over the car and make Trump walk the rest of the way home?

But seriously, this sounds like post hoc rationalization.  If he didn't respond, he would have been labeled 'weak'.  If he had verbally fought back in exactly the same way, he would have lost the high road of being the only sane person standing on the podium.

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Town halls and debates 2020
« Reply #11 on: September 30, 2020, 09:04:38 AM »
Trump was his usual self in the debate. Biden, however, was so poorly prepared to handle Trump's manner and tactics that either he is too inept for words, or else his entire prep team should be fired.
That's a bit unfair; I'm sure Biden's team planned on having ear plugs ready to use, but Trump's team made it a point that no ear pieces were allowed.  What was he going to do - threaten to pull over the car and make Trump walk the rest of the way home?

Should future moderators have the power to turn off mics? Nothing short of that is going to stop Trump from being a bully and talking over everyone. Even then I wouldn't put it past him to walk over to Joe or the mod to yell into their mic.

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Town halls and debates 2020
« Reply #12 on: September 30, 2020, 09:13:08 AM »
I was wondering about that.  Trump knows there is no one to enforce the rules, so he can break them with impunity.  I would say take away his time, but he would ignore that as well.  Trump played offense as the best defense idea last night.  Do not let Biden have any time to put ideas together. Trump was all about holding Biden back, not making his own case.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Town halls and debates 2020
« Reply #13 on: September 30, 2020, 10:55:04 AM »
Does any of it even matter, I wondered? I assumed that anyone watching the debate would only be there to cheer on their team. Then I talked to a friend of mine, who I respect, who was actually watching to help decide whom to back. Then she told me her son was going to decide based on who won the VP debate. Strange world.

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Town halls and debates 2020
« Reply #14 on: September 30, 2020, 11:01:29 AM »
Personally, I think debates are worse than useless for the purposes of choosing presidents.

It's like asking Olympic sprinters to compete in rhythmic gymnastics competitions as a prerequisite for racing 100 metres in competition.

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Town halls and debates 2020
« Reply #15 on: September 30, 2020, 11:03:41 AM »
Does any of it even matter, I wondered? I assumed that anyone watching the debate would only be there to cheer on their team. Then I talked to a friend of mine, who I respect, who was actually watching to help decide whom to back. Then she told me her son was going to decide based on who won the VP debate. Strange world.

Strange indeed. I figure true undecideds are at less than 5% of the electorate and probably unlikely to vote at this point. So I think maybe 1-2% of likely voters wouldn't already know who they are voting for. I think Trump is just trying to get out is base at a really high rate and Biden is trying to get moderates/dissatisfied Trump voters out to vote who don't want to vote for Trump again but aren't sold on Biden. Biden is depending on Trump to get the vote out for the Democratic base.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Town halls and debates 2020
« Reply #16 on: September 30, 2020, 11:11:28 AM »
Personally, I think debates are worse than useless for the purposes of choosing presidents.

It's like asking Olympic sprinters to compete in rhythmic gymnastics competitions as a prerequisite for racing 100 metres in competition.

It's not really dumber than corporate interviews where people ask "where do you see yourself in 5 years".

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Town halls and debates 2020
« Reply #17 on: September 30, 2020, 11:17:25 AM »
Yah, but the airwaves aren't being highjacked by Joe in HR interviewing Mary for a sales rep position.

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Town halls and debates 2020
« Reply #18 on: September 30, 2020, 11:17:39 AM »
USA Department of Homeland Security, on domestic terrorism: “we assess that white supremacist extremists - who increasingly are networking with likeminded persons abroad - will pose the most persistent and lethal threat.”

Donald Trump: “Hold my beer.” (OK, OK, he really just told them to “stand by”)

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Town halls and debates 2020
« Reply #19 on: September 30, 2020, 11:29:17 AM »
Yah, but the airwaves aren't being highjacked by Joe in HR interviewing Mary for a sales rep position.

You weren't going to watch American network TV last night anyway, were you? :)

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Town halls and debates 2020
« Reply #20 on: September 30, 2020, 11:44:41 AM »
Then there was his refusal to denounce white supremacy.  He already has that vote locked in. Would denouncing violent actions by specific white supremacists depress that vote more than the votes he would make up elsewhere (I'm thinking of those suburban women again)?  Of course, it's possible that the zero sum game of denouncing one part of his coalition would be seen as backing down to the bogeyman of "violent blacks", which would more broadly affect his electoral support, presumably.

I think it's a bit partisan to ask why Trump wouldn't denounce people voting for him, when you could surely detect Biden likewise refusing to say anything negative - or even anything at all - about some of the radical voter base supporting him. Check out his 'answer' to the BLM question. Realistically one cannot anymore expect a politician to take sides against part of a coalition supporting them, it's all too power-oriented with no conscience on either side.

But seriously, this sounds like post hoc rationalization.  If he didn't respond, he would have been labeled 'weak'.  If he had verbally fought back in exactly the same way, he would have lost the high road of being the only sane person standing on the podium.

What in the world to do in response to Trump's tactics is exactly what he had to be prepped for. Unless we're willing to grant that Trump's 'debate' tactics are unbeatable, surely there would be some method of self-presentation and response that could make Trump look bad and you look good. But honestly Biden doesn't have it in him; he's neither charismatic, nor mentally sharp, nor dignified enough to look like Trump's bad behavior is rolling off him. He just sort of did nothing other than try to weakly repeat the mantras his team told him to say over and over (e.g. "He has no plan" and "you the American people should have a voice"). Yes, other like Jeb Bush failed miserably to parry Trump's attacks, but you'd think that in a contest of this magnitude they'd be, I dunno, bringing in xenolinguistics teams to find a way for Biden to speak through Trump's alien lingo.

Should future moderators have the power to turn off mics? Nothing short of that is going to stop Trump from being a bully and talking over everyone. Even then I wouldn't put it past him to walk over to Joe or the mod to yell into their mic.

It's not a terrible idea, given that 2 min uninterrupted responses was the goal. I think what Trump wanted was just a back-and-forth without moderation. Actually as someone who has disdain for 'parliamentary style debate' (which this wasn't really, but is in the same vein) I tend to side with the view that better discourse comes of a freeflowing back and forth. Of course that presupposes both parties are acting in good faith, so in Trump's case it might not be enough to allow him and his opponent to just go at it like Jerry Springer. It's too bad Trump kept interrupting, though, because at such times as he was waiting his turn he looked much better up there. If only someone would tell him to strategically interrupt only occasionally, rather than constantly and without cessation. The moderator would have certainly allowed some small amount of side-comments if they were constrained in degree, and in fact the moderator was quite amenable to sometimes allowing the candidates to pose the next question for their opponent.

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Town halls and debates 2020
« Reply #21 on: September 30, 2020, 12:17:27 PM »
What in the world to do in response to Trump's tactics is exactly what he had to be prepped for. Unless we're willing to grant that Trump's 'debate' tactics are unbeatable,
"Unbeatable" is an interesting choice of words.  If somebody is intent on simply talking over the opponent and the moderator, ignoring time limits and any type of decorum, then no, there is really nothing that a debater can do to rein in that person.  There is no use in "beating" that intent anyway. You've perceived Biden in a particular way, but many others think Biden simply made lemonade - not particularly good lemonade, mind you, but lemonade nonetheless.

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Town halls and debates 2020
« Reply #22 on: September 30, 2020, 12:18:15 PM »
Yah, but the airwaves aren't being highjacked by Joe in HR interviewing Mary for a sales rep position.

You weren't going to watch American network TV last night anyway, were you? :)
:D

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Town halls and debates 2020
« Reply #23 on: September 30, 2020, 12:27:00 PM »
Then there was his refusal to denounce white supremacy.  He already has that vote locked in. Would denouncing violent actions by specific white supremacists depress that vote more than the votes he would make up elsewhere (I'm thinking of those suburban women again)?  Of course, it's possible that the zero sum game of denouncing one part of his coalition would be seen as backing down to the bogeyman of "violent blacks", which would more broadly affect his electoral support, presumably.

I think it's a bit partisan to ask why Trump wouldn't denounce people voting for him, when you could surely detect Biden likewise refusing to say anything negative - or even anything at all - about some of the radical voter base supporting him. Check out his 'answer' to the BLM question. Realistically one cannot anymore expect a politician to take sides against part of a coalition supporting them, it's all too power-oriented with no conscience on either side.

But seriously, this sounds like post hoc rationalization.  If he didn't respond, he would have been labeled 'weak'.  If he had verbally fought back in exactly the same way, he would have lost the high road of being the only sane person standing on the podium.

What in the world to do in response to Trump's tactics is exactly what he had to be prepped for. Unless we're willing to grant that Trump's 'debate' tactics are unbeatable, surely there would be some method of self-presentation and response that could make Trump look bad and you look good. But honestly Biden doesn't have it in him; he's neither charismatic, nor mentally sharp, nor dignified enough to look like Trump's bad behavior is rolling off him. He just sort of did nothing other than try to weakly repeat the mantras his team told him to say over and over (e.g. "He has no plan" and "you the American people should have a voice"). Yes, other like Jeb Bush failed miserably to parry Trump's attacks, but you'd think that in a contest of this magnitude they'd be, I dunno, bringing in xenolinguistics teams to find a way for Biden to speak through Trump's alien lingo.

Should future moderators have the power to turn off mics? Nothing short of that is going to stop Trump from being a bully and talking over everyone. Even then I wouldn't put it past him to walk over to Joe or the mod to yell into their mic.

It's not a terrible idea, given that 2 min uninterrupted responses was the goal. I think what Trump wanted was just a back-and-forth without moderation. Actually as someone who has disdain for 'parliamentary style debate' (which this wasn't really, but is in the same vein) I tend to side with the view that better discourse comes of a freeflowing back and forth. Of course that presupposes both parties are acting in good faith, so in Trump's case it might not be enough to allow him and his opponent to just go at it like Jerry Springer. It's too bad Trump kept interrupting, though, because at such times as he was waiting his turn he looked much better up there. If only someone would tell him to strategically interrupt only occasionally, rather than constantly and without cessation. The moderator would have certainly allowed some small amount of side-comments if they were constrained in degree, and in fact the moderator was quite amenable to sometimes allowing the candidates to pose the next question for their opponent.

Very reasonable and forgiving coming from a place were you don't realistically expect better from a politician. Its a great way to avoid any personal responsibility about who one might support.
History is full of understanding people not demanding better and then when  "this is not going to end well" happens wonder how did this happen. Wasn't me

Trump is saying and encouraging very dangerous things and any support even if half hearted, is support. We one stands is clear

"Stand back and stand by" Says the commander to his followers.   
« Last Edit: September 30, 2020, 12:29:59 PM by rightleft22 »

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Town halls and debates 2020
« Reply #24 on: September 30, 2020, 12:35:50 PM »
Very reasonable and forgiving coming from a place were you don't realistically expect better from a politician. Its a great way to avoid any personal responsibility about who one might support.
History is full of understanding people not demanding better and then when  "this is not going to end well" happens wonder how did this happen. Wasn't me

My advice on this issue has perennially been to never support a politician you have no respect for, or who is a bad candidate. It's others who are stuck on the tactical voting necessity where stopping the evil villain justifies voting for someone who shouldn't be President. That is what gets us where we are. As I mentioned in another thread, it just devolves into voting for R or D, and you might as well erase the candidate's name from the ballot. In any case, my point above wasn't to vote for Trump, it's what if Trump wins the left will have only themselves to blame for permitting a candidate like Biden to "represent" them.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Town halls and debates 2020
« Reply #25 on: September 30, 2020, 12:36:29 PM »
Taking a page from hockey, I think any debater that violates the rules should sit in a soundproof penalty box for two minutes while their opponent berates them without opportunity for rebuttal. Trump and Biden would have both spent time there.

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Town halls and debates 2020
« Reply #26 on: September 30, 2020, 12:42:50 PM »
"Unbeatable" is an interesting choice of words.  If somebody is intent on simply talking over the opponent and the moderator, ignoring time limits and any type of decorum, then no, there is really nothing that a debater can do to rein in that person.  There is no use in "beating" that intent anyway.

I used it not because I think he's unbeatable but because so far no one has figured out how to beat it, as if it's unbeatable. All the most illogical methods have been tried, from ignoring it to foolishly getting flustered or trying to fight back in exactly the same manner. You'll either be made to look weak, or else inept at Trump's own tactic. But I am convinced that there is a tenable way to handle a guy who speaks like Trump, they just don't have the person to do it. I am convinced Sanders could have looked good vs Trump, btw, so it's not even some abstraction. Alternatively, a candidate light on their feet with some wit in their head could do it too. You need the ability to deftly roll with the attacks, answer side comments swiftly with witty remarks of your own, but without getting nasty or upset. It's not all that difficult, but you need a good background in repartee. Put an actor up there, for instance, and you could have a contest of entertainers. Or put up someone with great debate chops with high energy and a sense of humor, and you have Trump's foil.

You see, these are all fun questions to pose, but the bottom line is the DNC wasn't about to explore who they could find to lead the party as a means of disrupting Trump and rebranding the face of the DNC. No, they wanted an old-time party man they could control, who would do their bidding, not disturb anyone, and keep the corporate interests at the forefront of the agenda. So they were going to back Biden, and once he won try to figure out how to get him to beat Trump. But the problem is it's too late by then, he wasn't the guy to do it. Their presumption that any idiot could beat Trump is what lost it for them last time, and might do again.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Town halls and debates 2020
« Reply #27 on: September 30, 2020, 12:48:30 PM »
"Unbeatable" is an interesting choice of words.  If somebody is intent on simply talking over the opponent and the moderator, ignoring time limits and any type of decorum, then no, there is really nothing that a debater can do to rein in that person.  There is no use in "beating" that intent anyway.

I used it not because I think he's unbeatable but because so far no one has figured out how to beat it, as if it's unbeatable. All the most illogical methods have been tried, from ignoring it to foolishly getting flustered or trying to fight back in exactly the same manner. You'll either be made to look weak, or else inept at Trump's own tactic. But I am convinced that there is a tenable way to handle a guy who speaks like Trump, they just don't have the person to do it. I am convinced Sanders could have looked good vs Trump, btw, so it's not even some abstraction. Alternatively, a candidate light on their feet with some wit in their head could do it too. You need the ability to deftly roll with the attacks, answer side comments swiftly with witty remarks of your own, but without getting nasty or upset. It's not all that difficult, but you need a good background in repartee. Put an actor up there, for instance, and you could have a contest of entertainers. Or put up someone with great debate chops with high energy and a sense of humor, and you have Trump's foil.

You see, these are all fun questions to pose, but the bottom line is the DNC wasn't about to explore who they could find to lead the party as a means of disrupting Trump and rebranding the face of the DNC. No, they wanted an old-time party man they could control, who would do their bidding, not disturb anyone, and keep the corporate interests at the forefront of the agenda. So they were going to back Biden, and once he won try to figure out how to get him to beat Trump. But the problem is it's too late by then, he wasn't the guy to do it. Their presumption that any idiot could beat Trump is what lost it for them last time, and might do again.

Regardless of discussion of tactics, yes absolutely. I donated to Sanders and talked him up to friends. And despite what some perception of me might be based on particular discussions here, I'm far from backing all of Sander's policies - some of which could be disasters. But he had integrity, he doesn't come with a whiff (or stink) of corruption, he didn't advocate racist policy, and he doesn't grope random women. I would trust that the Congress would have kept his most leftist policies off the table. Just like 4 years ago, Democrats have elevated the most flawed candidate out of the 22 they had available. Even a crappy mayor from a medium sized town would have inspired me more. Warren and the others HANDED this torch to Biden, and now he's going to burn them with it.

Wayward Son

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Town halls and debates 2020
« Reply #28 on: September 30, 2020, 12:48:57 PM »
Quote
I think it's a bit partisan to ask why Trump wouldn't denounce people voting for him, when you could surely detect Biden likewise refusing to say anything negative - or even anything at all - about some of the radical voter base supporting him.

Well, I hope this settles once and for all that Donald J. Trump is the white supremacist's choice in this election, and that he greatly values their votes, so much so that he would rather be considered one of them than to denounce them.  >:(

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Town halls and debates 2020
« Reply #29 on: September 30, 2020, 12:53:52 PM »
Yes, I got that, and your continued use of the concept of beating or unbeatable means you missed the point.

If somebody's intent is to yell for 90 minutes and literally drown out the sound from the moderator and the debate opponent completely, there is no "beating" that.  Of course, almost all people would denounce such a tactic, but if the intent is to do exactly that, then there is no "beating" that intent.  of course, that is NOT what Trump did last night, but in some ways, it is equivalent.  If somebody is intent on consistently interrupting and talking over one's opponent as Trump did, and ignores moderation, and only occasionally lets the other person speak uninterrupted, and the intent is to do exactly that, then there is no "beating" that either.

If the moderator had the ability to mute interruptions, that would address the issue, but that is not a question for the other debater.

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Town halls and debates 2020
« Reply #30 on: September 30, 2020, 01:01:21 PM »
Very reasonable and forgiving coming from a place were you don't realistically expect better from a politician. Its a great way to avoid any personal responsibility about who one might support.
History is full of understanding people not demanding better and then when  "this is not going to end well" happens wonder how did this happen. Wasn't me

My advice on this issue has perennially been to never support a politician you have no respect for, or who is a bad candidate. It's others who are stuck on the tactical voting necessity where stopping the evil villain justifies voting for someone who shouldn't be President. That is what gets us where we are. As I mentioned in another thread, it just devolves into voting for R or D, and you might as well erase the candidate's name from the ballot. In any case, my point above wasn't to vote for Trump, it's what if Trump wins the left will have only themselves to blame for permitting a candidate like Biden to "represent" them.

If Trump wins the right will have only themselves to blame for standing by and supporting a man who says and does some very dangerous things providing support for organisations that should not be given that support.  Blame that on the left if you will but those who support Trump support what he stands for. All of it.


Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Town halls and debates 2020
« Reply #31 on: September 30, 2020, 01:20:52 PM »
If Trump wins the right will have only themselves to blame for standing by and supporting a man who says and does some very dangerous things providing support for organisations that should not be given that support.  Blame that on the left if you will but those who support Trump support what he stands for. All of it.

There is no need to assign blame to only one party in this, so you don't need to play the "if I blame the left then I'm supporting the right" game. The left has completely made their own bed on this, as they did in 2016. Actually it's worse now than then, because in Hillary's case I kind of got it: she was a legacy candidate that was being groomed back in Bill's Presidency. In Biden's case I was floored 6-7 years ago when they were floating the idea of running him against Hillary. My reaction was something like "why would anyone vote for him?" I was fairly convinced at that time that the polls showing strong support for him were baloney. But if you want to blame the right then go ahead, their pools of candidates have been pathetic for the last two Republican primaries as well. But do recall, in case you forgot, that the entire RNC *did* oppose Trump the entire way through the 2016 primary, and simply failed utterly to stop him winning the candidacy. Only after he was the general candidate were they forced into the dilemma of "supporting him" (i.e. trying to win the election) or, what, shilling for Hillary, their most hated arch-nemesis? At that point there is no value in any mention of 'supporting' him.

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Town halls and debates 2020
« Reply #32 on: September 30, 2020, 01:29:58 PM »
If Trump wins the right will have only themselves to blame for standing by and supporting a man who says and does some very dangerous things providing support for organisations that should not be given that support.  Blame that on the left if you will but those who support Trump support what he stands for. All of it.

There is no need to assign blame to only one party in this, so you don't need to play the "if I blame the left then I'm supporting the right" game. The left has completely made their own bed on this, as they did in 2016. Actually it's worse now than then, because in Hillary's case I kind of got it: she was a legacy candidate that was being groomed back in Bill's Presidency. In Biden's case I was floored 6-7 years ago when they were floating the idea of running him against Hillary. My reaction was something like "why would anyone vote for him?" I was fairly convinced at that time that the polls showing strong support for him were baloney. But if you want to blame the right then go ahead, their pools of candidates have been pathetic for the last two Republican primaries as well. But do recall, in case you forgot, that the entire RNC *did* oppose Trump the entire way through the 2016 primary, and simply failed utterly to stop him winning the candidacy. Only after he was the general candidate were they forced into the dilemma of "supporting him" (i.e. trying to win the election) or, what, shilling for Hillary, their most hated arch-nemesis? At that point there is no value in any mention of 'supporting' him.

It was you that brought up blame I brought up responsibility. Your blaming Trumps election on the left while taking no responsibility for the support being given to what Trump represents and what he 'encouraging'.
Your arguments are reasonable, forgiving the right of all accountability. If only the left could nominate a better candidate. No thought on if the right might want to stand behind a better candidate. "We can expect no better" so why seek it out? Not our fault.

2016 you may be forgiven.  For 2020 those standing by Trump are making a statement about what they really stand for.
 
« Last Edit: September 30, 2020, 01:34:07 PM by rightleft22 »

NobleHunter

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Town halls and debates 2020
« Reply #33 on: September 30, 2020, 01:34:36 PM »
There is no need to assign blame to only one party in this, so you don't need to play the "if I blame the left then I'm supporting the right" game. The left has completely made their own bed on this, as they did in 2016. Actually it's worse now than then, because in Hillary's case I kind of got it: she was a legacy candidate that was being groomed back in Bill's Presidency. In Biden's case I was floored 6-7 years ago when they were floating the idea of running him against Hillary. My reaction was something like "why would anyone vote for him?" I was fairly convinced at that time that the polls showing strong support for him were baloney. But if you want to blame the right then go ahead, their pools of candidates have been pathetic for the last two Republican primaries as well. But do recall, in case you forgot, that the entire RNC *did* oppose Trump the entire way through the 2016 primary, and simply failed utterly to stop him winning the candidacy. Only after he was the general candidate were they forced into the dilemma of "supporting him" (i.e. trying to win the election) or, what, shilling for Hillary, their most hated arch-nemesis? At that point there is no value in any mention of 'supporting' him.

They could have spent the last four years since the election not supporting him. They could have tried to replace him in the primaries for this election. They could have done something other than throw their full weight behind him.

They could have treated him like an existential threat to American democracy.  They didn't and now he is.

Wayward Son

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Town halls and debates 2020
« Reply #34 on: September 30, 2020, 01:39:32 PM »
Fenring is right.  The RNC is not to blame for Trump becoming their candidate.  At least, until this year, when the RNC is so totally in Trump's pocket they didn't even bother to come up with a platform other than "Whatever Trump says."  ;D

No, the full, entire, complete responsibility for electing Trump goes to every single person who voted, and will vote, for him.  At this point, the only reason to vote for him is because you firmly believe that the other major candidate would be much, much worse.  And after last night's performance of interruptions, out-and-out lies, and bullying, how anyone would believe Biden is much, much worse is beyond me.

In this case, "weakness" of a candidate is not an excuse, since Trump is a dumpster fire that will burn this country if supported.  If he is re-elected, his voters have no excuse this time.  They are completely responsible for whatever Trump does next.

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Town halls and debates 2020
« Reply #35 on: September 30, 2020, 01:48:39 PM »
They could have spent the last four years since the election not supporting him. They could have tried to replace him in the primaries for this election. They could have done something other than throw their full weight behind him.

They could have treated him like an existential threat to American democracy.  They didn't and now he is.

I hear you, but this feels like super-armchair quarterbacking. With so much money at stake, special interests, and all the rest, you really think they are going to sabotage the incumbent on purpose in a historically unprecedented undermining of the sitting President? I mean, it's technically possible for them to have done these things, just as it's technically possible for the DNC to have admitted fault in the Hillary election and tried to mend their ways without rigging elections, and supported a maverick candidate like Sanders. But as we both (at this point) know, neither party is going to go out on a limb and try to revolutionize politics or do the right thing. They both know how few swing voters are at stake, both want to win bottom line, and both won't shoot themselves in the foot just to do the right thing.

In IMO it would be nicer if things went the way you said, knowing both parties would play ball and fight for America rather than their own private interest. But as that's not the landscape we're dealing with it doesn't seem fair to me for you to condemn the RNC for failing to do what there's no way the DNC would do in their place.

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Town halls and debates 2020
« Reply #36 on: September 30, 2020, 01:50:16 PM »
Your arguments are reasonable, forgiving the right of all accountability. If only the left could nominate a better candidate. No thought on if the right might want to stand behind a better candidate. "We can expect no better" so why seek it out? Not our fault.

You might want to go back and reread what I wrote, since this comment is already addressed above. The RNC did not support Trump or want him to be their candidate. Unless you mean what NH wrote, that they should have disowned him in this current election and ran a new Republican primary?

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Town halls and debates 2020
« Reply #37 on: September 30, 2020, 01:58:22 PM »
In IMO it would be nicer if things went the way you said, knowing both parties would play ball and fight for America rather than their own private interest. But as that's not the landscape we're dealing with it doesn't seem fair to me for you to condemn the RNC for failing to do what there's no way the DNC would do in their place.

When the DNC nominates and continues to support a candidate as bad as Trump we'll talk. Biden isn't great but he's in the norm of American presidents. My guess is he'll be ranked below Obama in terms of effectiveness and slightly above the Bushes. He's the expected president. Republican voters tried the outsider, burn it all down candidate and when stuff actually started burning down they blamed Biden??? Trump has an ad from the shop owner in Wisconsin who had his store burned down claiming that Biden is too weak to defend America. But his store was burned down in the last year (one can hope/pray) of Trump's presidency. The sad thing is I don't think he sees the irony in his statement.

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Town halls and debates 2020
« Reply #38 on: September 30, 2020, 02:08:42 PM »
When the DNC nominates and continues to support a candidate as bad as Trump we'll talk.

Just for the record, I thought Hillary was a much worse candidate than Trump. Not in terms of, shall we say, decorum, but in terms of the net harm globally I expected each to be guilty of.

Quote
Trump has an ad from the shop owner in Wisconsin who had his store burned down claiming that Biden is too weak to defend America. But his store was burned down in the last year (one can hope/pray) of Trump's presidency. The sad thing is I don't think he sees the irony in his statement.

Just want to parse this statement since it sounds like you're saying that Trump is responsible for the violence in the protests (or perhaps for the protests themselves)? Your logic seems to be something like: this guy doesn't realize that Trump is the cause of the burning of his business, and by supporting Trump he's sabotaging his own interest, whereas Biden would have been better for him. Is that what you meant? I suppose something about Trump's response to the protests is involved in this reasoning, that he caused an uptick in the violence.

I ask because it seems beyond dispute to me that the policing problem in America had nothing to do with Trump directly, that this protest movement got started under Obama, that Biden (in his refusal to address the question of supporting BLM) would at minimum have been more permissive of the protests compared to Trump, and that this shop owner clearly prefers the law and order side of things more so than the anti-police side of things. With all that more or less being factual IMO, what's left is whether you still feel there's room to actually blame Trump for the actions of Trump's opponents on the streets, which seems far-fetched, to say the least. I also think it's entirely concordant for a law-and-order preferring business owner to prefer a R candidate, especially one very vocal about not tolerating rioting. So I'm not quite sure what you mean about it being ironic that he would support Trump.

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Town halls and debates 2020
« Reply #39 on: September 30, 2020, 02:10:52 PM »
Your arguments are reasonable, forgiving the right of all accountability. If only the left could nominate a better candidate. No thought on if the right might want to stand behind a better candidate. "We can expect no better" so why seek it out? Not our fault.

You might want to go back and reread what I wrote, since this comment is already addressed above. The RNC did not support Trump or want him to be their candidate. Unless you mean what NH wrote, that they should have disowned him in this current election and ran a new Republican primary?

Not sure what I'm missing when I read over you comments. Perhaps its a disagreement on statements like "RNC did not support Trump or want him to be their candidate" Which is true at the start but were soon going all in. Who gets to be responsible for that?

NH said what I was trying to communicate better.  2020 no excuses or turning a blind eye. 

Mynnion

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Town halls and debates 2020
« Reply #40 on: September 30, 2020, 02:13:28 PM »
I was a little surprised Biden didn't jump on Trump when he stated that the vaccine would be delivered quickly to all Americans and that the military could vaccinate 200K a day.  Let's do the math.  Assuming that 40% of Americans choose to get vaccinated it would take just under 2 years for the military to vaccinate that 40% (roughly 131.2 Million).  Of course we all know the military won't be vaccinating the majority of Americans but even so spouting out that every one will be vaccinated in a month or two is total BS.  Again that's what happens when you fail to listen to your medical advisors.

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Town halls and debates 2020
« Reply #41 on: September 30, 2020, 02:18:55 PM »
I was a little surprised Biden didn't jump on Trump when he stated that the vaccine would be delivered quickly to all Americans and that the military could vaccinate 200K a day.  Let's do the math.  Assuming that 40% of Americans choose to get vaccinated it would take just under 2 years for the military to vaccinate that 40% (roughly 131.2 Million).  Of course we all know the military won't be vaccinating the majority of Americans but even so spouting out that every one will be vaccinated in a month or two is total BS.  Again that's what happens when you fail to listen to your medical advisors.

An interesting calculation, but I suppose to play devil's advocate we could imagine that those most at risk would be singled out as the first wave of vaccinations. For kids and young adults to wait 2 years is still not "fast" but arguably the point would be that the cure would get going quickly for those who need it most and the instances of infection reduced asap. That said I have zero idea whether Trump's claim is at all plausible.

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Town halls and debates 2020
« Reply #42 on: September 30, 2020, 02:20:41 PM »
Just want to parse this statement since it sounds like you're saying that Trump is responsible for the violence in the protests (or perhaps for the protests themselves)? Your logic seems to be something like: this guy doesn't realize that Trump is the cause of the burning of his business, and by supporting Trump he's sabotaging his own interest, whereas Biden would have been better for him. Is that what you meant? I suppose something about Trump's response to the protests is involved in this reasoning, that he caused an uptick in the violence.

I ask because it seems beyond dispute to me that the policing problem in America had nothing to do with Trump directly, that this protest movement got started under Obama, that Biden (in his refusal to address the question of supporting BLM) would at minimum have been more permissive of the protests compared to Trump, and that this shop owner clearly prefers the law and order side of things more so than the anti-police side of things. With all that more or less being factual IMO, what's left is whether you still feel there's room to actually blame Trump for the actions of Trump's opponents on the streets, which seems far-fetched, to say the least. I also think it's entirely concordant for a law-and-order preferring business owner to prefer a R candidate, especially one very vocal about not tolerating rioting. So I'm not quite sure what you mean about it being ironic that he would support Trump.

Its ironic that he somehow associates his shop being burned down with Biden being weak. That Trump's "strength" is somehow effective at protecting him. Because all this crap blew up under Trump. BLM protests existed before Trump but Trump is like throwing gasoline on the fire. If you can't see that, just look at Portland. The violence got worse when Trump responded in "strength". Its calmed down after the feds left. No federal buildings burned to the ground that's what all you claimed would happen if the feds left, complete destruction of federal property, instead things started calming back down.

Its not ironic he supports Trump, its ironic he somehow associates the destruction of his shop with Biden's "weakness" and Trump will "protect" people like him. It wouldn't be ironic if Trump wasn't the incumbent.

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Town halls and debates 2020
« Reply #43 on: September 30, 2020, 02:29:46 PM »
Its not ironic he supports Trump, its ironic he somehow associates the destruction of his shop with Biden's "weakness" and Trump will "protect" people like him. It wouldn't be ironic if Trump wasn't the incumbent.

Thanks for clarifying that. Your comments make some sense in that case, but I think it's not too complicated to assume the shop owner blames the left in general, with Biden being (in his opinion) someone who would bow down to violent protesters. So while it's technically counterfactual that Biden was personally responsible, maybe the idea is more that he would have just let it happen whereas at least Trump tried to stop it. I get your belief that Trump himself exacerbated the violence, but if we're weighing Trump's response vs Biden's probable lack of a response, then it becomes a pragmatic evaluation of which would be more effective at protecting businesses, rather than an ironic misunderstanding on the part of the shop owner.

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Town halls and debates 2020
« Reply #44 on: September 30, 2020, 03:01:50 PM »
I was a little surprised Biden didn't jump on Trump when he stated that the vaccine would be delivered quickly to all Americans and that the military could vaccinate 200K a day.  Let's do the math.  Assuming that 40% of Americans choose to get vaccinated it would take just under 2 years for the military to vaccinate that 40% (roughly 131.2 Million).  Of course we all know the military won't be vaccinating the majority of Americans but even so spouting out that every one will be vaccinated in a month or two is total BS.  Again that's what happens when you fail to listen to your medical advisors.

America has a reasonably robust network of providers that can give a vaccine. What we don't have is a system to prioritize who gets the vaccine first. Somehow I doubt Trump has developed one over the last 6 months. We give flu vaccines to 40-60% of the population every year. So talking about having the military try to do this is probably a horrible idea.

Its just a matter of getting enough vaccine supply out to providers while prioritizing high risk populations first without causing extra delays. Doctors, nurses, first responders, and people in nursing homes should go first while the supply is limited. Then the supplies should be shipped out along to the usual vendors to get the rest of the population vaccinated. Vaccine supply is the choke point not providers who can give a shot.

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Town halls and debates 2020
« Reply #45 on: September 30, 2020, 03:22:04 PM »
Its not ironic he supports Trump, its ironic he somehow associates the destruction of his shop with Biden's "weakness" and Trump will "protect" people like him. It wouldn't be ironic if Trump wasn't the incumbent.

Thanks for clarifying that. Your comments make some sense in that case, but I think it's not too complicated to assume the shop owner blames the left in general, with Biden being (in his opinion) someone who would bow down to violent protesters. So while it's technically counterfactual that Biden was personally responsible, maybe the idea is more that he would have just let it happen whereas at least Trump tried to stop it. I get your belief that Trump himself exacerbated the violence, but if we're weighing Trump's response vs Biden's probable lack of a response, then it becomes a pragmatic evaluation of which would be more effective at protecting businesses, rather than an ironic misunderstanding on the part of the shop owner.

If we're weighing Trumps responses - which exasperated the situations, and Biden probable lack of a response -, based on WHAT?
Its this type of reasoning that's the problem. Based just on Biden's personalty he is much more likely to have responded in a way that would have calmed protesters then endorse riots. But sure Biden would "probably" do nothing, no not just nothing but change the laws to make looting the destruction of property legal.   It the Law and Order Trump, who consistently flaunts laws, who will protect them.

Its not ironic that the shop owner trusts the fire fighter that starts and or throws fuel on the fires its playing the useful idiot
« Last Edit: September 30, 2020, 03:24:43 PM by rightleft22 »

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Town halls and debates 2020
« Reply #46 on: September 30, 2020, 03:22:48 PM »
America has a reasonably robust network of providers that can give a vaccine. What we don't have is a system to prioritize who gets the vaccine first.

Oh sure we do. Trump. Trump's family. Trump's friends. Russia. Other.

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Town halls and debates 2020
« Reply #47 on: September 30, 2020, 03:43:42 PM »
Looking at the issues, the Democrats and Biden in particular aren't doing much to encourage conservatives to vote for them. The only encouragement they offer with help from Trump is Trump's personality. Obviously, it just grates on some people. Just looked up "grates" to make sure I used it correctly and it gave me a great description for Trump. He's got a "sandpaper personality".

The thing about Biden is he and his handlers apparently think that admitting any mistakes is weakness. Trump called Biden out on not wanting travel restrictions. Biden couldn't admit he was wrong. All he could do was call Trump out on masks. Biden is right about the masks. I've said that since the very beginning. Trump was wrong and so were our so called experts who told people not to wear masks but Trump sort of admitted it and pulled out his mask. Biden refused to admit he was wrong about the travel restrictions.

Trump also called Biden out on the individual mandate. Biden couldn't debate it's constitutionality but just pointed out that getting rid of Obamacare would hurt people. I think Trump is right about Obamacare. It's clearly unconstitutional. The leftists on the Supreme Court ignored the Constitution the way they usually do. Roberts contorted the law to be a tax when it was specifically not passed as a tax. So Biden refused to address the main point. There is no power in the Constitution that grants the federal government the right to make it illegal for citizens not to buy a product from for-profit corporations. Trump was also right about the public option being the camel's nose under the tent to get rid of private insurance and also about how premiums are way too high. Biden wasn't persuasive about how regardless of what so many others in the Democrat Party are saying, Biden IS the Democrat Party. Please... nobody is buying that. I happen to agree that the public option is better than Obamacare. At least it's Constitutional. And it wouldn't have to end private insurance either. But Biden isn't being realistic about how he's in charge of the agenda. Biden's always been more of a yes-man than a true leader and there's little to no doubt that he'd be a rubber stamp on anything that came out of a Democrat controlled Congress.

Biden also didn't make a lot of sense about keeping businesses open by giving them money for protective gear. For many businesses there isn't a good way to operate safely regardless of protective gear. Gyms, dine-in restaurants, movie theaters, cruise lines, air travel, and so on. The hard choice on many of them is either to live with the risk of some people dying or have the businesses go out of business. Or just give them money to keep them solvent until it's over which would be too expensive.

As for the style, I thought that being able to turn off their mics wouldn't be a bad idea either. It wouldn't have to be disrespectful. Just going into the debate everyone knows that the rules are setup so when it's the other person's two minutes then one of the mics is shut off during that time.

On issues, whatever Trump's personality there is a huge gap in the issue-divide between Democrats and Republicans.





wmLambert

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Town halls and debates 2020
« Reply #48 on: September 30, 2020, 03:46:32 PM »
Too much deflection in today's posts. Biden lost the debate by a landslide, especially in the Latino and Black snap polls that gave Trump a huge victory. Chris Wallace is a Never-Trumper, and is today under attack for propping up Biden. He may lose his "newsman" reputation.

Dan Bongino's take on the Trump strategy is appropriate from someone with his Intel training and experience. Trump had multiple imperatives and accomplished all of them. He stood up for his base, and made Biden fight against his Left wing base. What Bongino pointed at was Trump defending his supporters, marking his total endorsement from law enforcement (Biden could not name a single endorsement from them.) When Wallace refused to ask Biden about the new official report on Biden's reprehensible actions in international affairs and his allowing his son to gather millions from Russian oligarch's and China, Trump asked him about the $3.5 million dollar payment to Hunter from the wife of the mayor of Moscow, Biden freaked and said, "that was debunked." Except the official and documented report says the opposite. Trump forced Biden to distance himself from the Socialist Left of Bernie and AOC. He no longer supports the Green New Deal; he said he is the Party now. When his numbers were challenged on his green ideas, Biden said his wrecking the economy would create jobs, even as Trump is increasing jobs far faster than he and Obama ever did. Biden said his "plan" would cost a few million, and Trump said the costs were Trillions. Wallace did ask Biden about his Supreme Court list, and Biden refused, saying you would have to vote him in to find out.

If anyone was actually listening and ignoring Biden's insults in place of clear responses, the debate was solidly in Trump's corner. Trump did interrupt Biden, again, preplanned to rattle him. Many analysts said those already decided would not be effected - but the content was undisputed to Trump's benefit, (except for the MSM) and all those Trump was aiming at could have been reached. The Left and the MSM are pushing that Trump was swinging too hard, but for those with a less jaundiced attitude put Trump as winning, and Biden being urged not to participate in future debates.

The one thing Trump did not get across well was the individual increases in salary and family income. He did mention the lowest unemployment for groups that Obama made worse: Latinos. Blacks, Asians, etc. and also pointed to the turnaround in service improvement in the VA and the total improvement in lowering drug pricing, and the GOP support for not excluding preconditions from health insurance, the way the Left continues to lie about.

One other thing that may have done more damage to Biden was his refusal to admit his need for covert communications. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aI4PrU8DHdw - The wire being tucked under his lapel was seen by millions, and a device under his sleeve may have been a mic, as used with a Savox SEP110 Inductive Loop for Covert Communication. Reuters has already poopoohed the wire (which moved laterally as he moved it, as a wrinkle in his shirt, and the mic on his sleeve as a crucifix he wears in honor of his son. Why he had to move a wrinkle under his jacket several times during the debate was not explained. The Crucifix is more believable, because he was already in front of a microphone.
« Last Edit: September 30, 2020, 03:53:24 PM by wmLambert »

DJQuag

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Town halls and debates 2020
« Reply #49 on: September 30, 2020, 03:56:58 PM »
Cherry -

There is a segment of the population that is willing to vote for Biden, in the worst case, and there are people who think the whole thing is *censored* so why does it matter.

The latter case is what they're fighting for.(Biden and Trump.) Do you really think that Trump's debate performance helped him with those voters?