Topic: Presidential debates - page 5. (Read 2330 times)

Why?

Six months ago everyone agreed to a lockdown because they'd "Flatten the curve." And now the goal is what? To avoid having members of the POTUS contenders get sick? To not get Covid until the vaccine is available, then take the vaccine, thus avoiding it entirely?

Plus as noted, the rapid response tests are skewed in favor of false positives, in order to get the number of false negatives as low as possible. There's a number of 1:5 I've seen as typical, one real covid infection for five positive test results.

And there's the recent CDC analysis of Covid mortality: 0.13%. So, who is articulating the end game for this Mask Theater, and what is it?

I expect the law on the distancing for the second debate to be relaxed, we need another debate to deal with some inadequacies from the previous. There should have been discussion on last night debate though the contestant are more of a subject to the president. The rating IMO dont seem reliable and I dont know if the parties are sincere enough to accept ratings that not good and take the lessons from them. The debates still looks like a norm with little effect on people's choices.

Masks and distancing are part of the problem, both for Covid, and for freedom, and for many other mental and physical diseases. Masks and distancing are part of the destruction of the economy at the same time that they increase Covid problems.

After chickening out of the debate Trump called on Barr to be the greatest AG in history and indict Biden lol.


He wants to be a dictator so bad.

Part of the problem with the White House outbreak is that they put a lot of trust into notoriously unreliable rapid tests while ignoring most of the distancing and mask guidelines. Trump's team refused to wear masks in the first debate. Trump's now sick along with 30+ people linked to the White House. The administration has not been transparent in this whole fiasco. Given all that a virtual debate is absolutely the right decision. Not everyone has a chopper on stand by and a team of doctors with experimental drugs

I'll give you this, cause it is totally right.

I suppose everyone who is entering the debate facility could also submit to a test, but even doing that isn't going to rule out everything -- as people could be too early in the process to test positive for a test.

Another day in paradise, lol.

[/quote]

Run a part of the "debate" with the sound off and you'll see what I mean.

In a courtroom, when someone doesn't agree with what a person on the stand is saying, or perhaps what one attorney is saying, they will make these sorts of expressions. They do this because the court prevents them from vocalizing, that'll get them tossed out.

She goes way overboard with this tactic. In this debate, it's virtually a continuous show.

Again, it's not just Trump, but anyone in his entourage who could be contagious. Or Biden's team too for that matter. Or anyone working at the venue. I don't think Trump personally infected 11 people in Cleveland.

It's unnecessary risk for no real benefit. It's one thing to waste billions of dollars on political campaigns but it's a whole new level to put people at risk for... what exactly? Prime time entertainment?

A good team coaching you is one thing, but a good team providing you real time answers to questions is another.

Obviously we all know that everyone is going to have debate prep and to be coached and such, but no one wants you to be spoon fed answers. That's my issue with it being online.

I get the health concerns though, and if the Trump campaign/admin is transparent with his test results leading up to the debate wouldn't we be fine? Also -- Could just kick the debate back for sometime. Trumps campaign manager is saying to have the debate on Oct 22nd and the 2nd one on the 29th.

Harris has many flaws, but face... seriously? With the orange combover as the POTUS, that's your concern?


It's not a high school test. If they have a good team to coach them - have at it. They will need a good team to govern. There is no debate important enough to risk health or life for, and I'm not talking just about the fossils on the stage but this:

Not a fan of a virtual debate. I really don't think it does enough to ensure that the candidates aren't being coached through their answers. And no, I'm not going to be the person who points at a particular candidate as says they're the one that is being coached instead of the other. Virtual debates don't fully allow for us to know that they're being genuine though.

Wouldn't President Trump be fine within CDC guidelines to have a debate? 14 days from when he got it. I think they may have even lowered the amount of time from 14 to 10 days as well.


I thought Pence did pretty well in this debate, but I think we all already knew that Pence was a good debater.

I've never been a fan of Harris, fucking cop, so I don't think I can give her a fair look.

While Pence was talking, Harris was continually, none stop moving between one of four or five facial expressions, I thought "cartoon-like". Pence came across as thoughtful and careful.

I really disliked that approach of Harris, although it may resonate with some.

Harris came up with a couple of significant "New Facts." (A) Harris/Biden are not going to destroy the jobs of the fracking industry. (B) Harris/Biden do not propose a rehash of the Green New Deal.

When Pence rebutted these points, she acted like he was an idiot. He replied that they were her platform, and she doubled down. Obviously these are new talking points or her idea not Bidens', or perhaps just outright fabrications.

I would have much preferred if she had carefully explained those positions, and just said they were a change of position, or hers, not Biden's, or whatever the situation may be.

Short story: Do four or five studied face expressions make someone look presidential?

Would you want her for president?

Biden should just ambush him by calling in while Trump is on Fox and Friends.

Trump throws a tantrum because he can't spread his "blessing"... no more debates I guess.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/08/politics/second-presidential-debate-virtual/index.html

After Obamacare was passed, in the 2010 congressional elections, Republicans gained 63 congressional seats and 6 senate seats. I don't understand why democrats are campaigning on Obamacare. It is not a popular program and will simply not resoniate with voters. 

Democrats have frequently achieved their policy goals via the courts that are too radical for voters to approve at the polls. If ACB is confirmed, they will no longer be able to do this. They appear to want to make the United States a one party state, not coincidentally, like China. 

I have read reports that the NYT reporting on this may not be accurate. The NYT reporting is relying on alleged classified information, and refuting this reporting could possibly jeopardize sources and methods of intelligence. My understanding is the basis for this intelligence is that the US found large amounts of cash in a house during a raid, and it is unclear as to the source of this cash.   

As everyone expected, it was a boring and near-meaningless debate between Politician Man and Politician Woman. Each side will view their candidate as winning, and will be slightly enthused if they watched the debate. Undecideds who lean toward Republican ideology will be pushed a bit in that direction, while undecideds who lean toward Democratic ideology will be pushed a bit in that direction. The next big headline will completely wipe out any real effects, probably within days.

Everyone was so shell-shocked from last week that any interruptions or time extensions are liable to be viewed as horrific, though what went on here was totally in-line with what would normally be considered a civil debate. Some interruptions are normal in a debate. Because people would obviously be especially sensitive this time, though, I'm surprised that Pence was as aggressive on bending the rules as he was, and some people will judge him harshly for it. Both candidates did clearly hobble themselves by being more strict about following the rules than is normal or comfortable.

Since the whole thing is electorally meaningless, it's a bit pointless to declare a winner, but I'll do so anyway. Kamala did OK, and I think that her points were on the whole slightly more appealing to average viewers, but Pence had much better delivery and ability to adapt/rebut. I think that if you took an undecided person, had them watch the whole debate, and then polled them before they watched any other news coverage, Pence would win by a comfortable margin.

Random notes based on my notes while watching:
 - Kamala's delivery is overall not terrible. She sounds like she knows what she's talking about. She looks less calm than Pence, though, with some stilted delivery of rehearsed lines and a poor ability to adapt.
 - Plenty of spin and dodging from Pence, but I see less obvious lying than Kamala
 - Pence runs too long too often
 - Kamala's virus points are probably more convincing to the average person
 - Effective point from Pence on Biden's handling of swine flu
 - Both dodged on questions of presidential succession. Pence's use of the "free time" seemed more effective.
 - Kamala got a lot of mileage out of Woodward's stuff, and it all comes across pretty effectively
 - Kamala makes several economic points that will be attractive to people (creating jobs, taxing the wealthy, protecting healthcare, infrastructure, etc.), though Pence's rebuttal was pretty effective
 - Pence was pretty successful at treating Kamala with kid gloves, to the point where she comes off as rude/aggressive in several exchanges.
 - Kamala's reference to a Pew poll showing that other countries trust Xi more than Trump is a novel and effective argument.
 - Kamala's arguments around Trump's interactions with Russia & Iran are too esoteric to be effective.
 - It's a good line of attack for Biden/Harris to connect the supreme court to the ACA, and Kamala made this argument effectively. Pence should've used his time to somehow rebut this strong argument, but instead he wasted his breath on the esoteric court packing point. He was successful in pressuring Biden/Harris further on court packing, but most people don't understand or care about this.
 - Pence ideologically has to defer to the grand jury in the Breonna Taylor case, but it looks really bad because it's such an esoteric argument. It's like defending O.J. Simpson: people "know" that Breonna Taylor was not treated fairly, and no amount of legal mumbo-jumbo is going to change their minds. He should've avoided mentioning her particular case at all. (BTW, pretty rich for "Copmala" to complain about grand juries.)
 - Good points from Pence on Kamala's terrible DA record. Trump/Pence should talk more about this.
 - He couldn't do the argument justice in 5 seconds, but it's good for Pence to dismiss Bush's cabinet members the "establishment". Trump/Pence should talk more about this, and openly recognize that the Democratic party wants to bring together the bipartisan group who are responsible for 30+ years of failure and put them back in power.


The fly was sent by the deep state to infect Pence with coronavirus and put Nacy Pelosi in charge!


There's apparently disagreement within the government on whether those bounties actually existed. (And random leaks from "the intelligence community" aren't trustworthy anyway...)

 I didn't actually notice it but for much of the time I was listening only.  I saw it the post-debate images though.  Funny!

Mike Pence wiped the floor and it was not even close. Kamala Harris is not a good debater period. There were so many opportunities on Harris to call Mike Pence out on healthcare which she completely blew (my view, Trump's biggest failure of his administration is healthcare).

Moderator, great job tonight. Better than Wallace's performance by a mile, but obviously she dealt with civil non-senile candidates.

From the first question you know it was gonna be a rough night for Kamala Harris. Moderator asked Harris what she would have done different in January and February and Harris did not answer the question at all. She would not have implemented a single policy proposal in January or February because the reality is, public policy can only be formed in response to a problem, not preceding one. COVID-19 was not something anyone predicted. She did not have a good response towards Biden calling the travel ban xenophobic either.

Now, Trump is obviously responsible for his verbiage about COVID. He sends mixed messages, but on policy he did okay. Harris could have launched an attack on this basis, she could have mentioned Trump's refusal to wear a mask too (btw, which I think she'd be completely right on), but she missed the mark.

Health care was an important topic and Harris didn't do a good job on outlining Trump's failures. She kept reverting back to pre-existing conditions which pretty much everyone believes will be covered. Obamacare is not the end all be all for preexisting conditions. Trump failed to repeal Obamacare, and he failed to pass a new healthcare plan. Again, Harris had a clear line of attack here that would be fair criticism and she didn't bother.

FlyGate: Mike Pence seemingly had a fly land on him, perhaps a fruit fly bred by Hillary Clinton and released by one of her staffers.

Packing the court is one of the more clinically insane things democrats believe in which is mentally retarded. I would love for someone to explain to me the rationale for packing the court, because even RBG denounced the idea. Even if you plan to pack the court, just fucking lie about it. You're literally going to destroy separation of powers by trying to legislate from the bench as a result of packing the court.

Foreign policy - Kamala Harris tried to dumb it down for Americans which I don't think they'll buy. She kept referencing other countries as "friends" like we're in grade school. To be fair, she does have a point that allies view America lesser than they did with Obama. Trump is responsible for that. It's also true that Trump has stood up to China who is responsible for the virus, responsible for covering it up, responsible for IP theft, responsible for concentration camps, and responsible for enabling NK. Undoubtedly, Trump was more tough on China.

Kamala Harris had a valid point on Russian bounties though. I felt Pence needed to respond to this but I'm not sure how he could have refuted the NYT reports. Guess it was best to take the hit but Pence did talk about Baghdadi and Soleimani, two dirt bags that should be dead.

Pinning Kayla Mueller's death on Obama was a bit unfair by Pence, but if you're being honest, Obama's foreign policy was a complete mess and the Iran Nuclear deal was worthless.

On law enforcement, I'm not even going to bother. Taylor was cleared by a jury of regular citizens and as a prosecutor, she should know that justice was served. The case was heard, but she doesn't want to upset the far left so I don't knock her for what she said on Taylor. Fact remains obviously, and Pence echoed this, Taylor was a victim, she died tragically. BTW, banning choke holds would not have saved George Floyd. Neck restraint is allowed, and there isn't evidence Floyd died from strangulation/choking. Harris, factually, said more things that were false in this segment than any other. Harris repeated so many lies on this topic it was hard to keep up. Purely emotional arguments, she said nothing substantial here.

Lastly - I'm curious to see what leftists (leftist, not liberals, so don't yell at me) think on Joe Biden taking you for a ride. Truly. Kamala Harris is so stupid, she thought she could pander to the far left during the primaries, then turn her back on them during the debates. And when Pence called her on her far left beliefs, all she did was smile and laugh. I said in my pre-debate post she would laugh and smile when pressed, and no surprise to anyone, she does. It comes across as arrogant, condescending, and inauthentic. Her taking massive pauses and smiling when Pence briefly interjected were unbelievable forced and she looked like a dumb ass doing it. God help us all when she's running in 2024. Oh, and "I'm speaking" is trending on twitter with 150k tweets, so you know Harris got demolished when the far left is trending something so meaningless as if she "clapped back" at Pence when in reality she smiled like a broken robot as Pence was dismantling her.

Well, at least it was watchable. Some missed opportunities for Harris. Why didn't she bring up Trump's nonsense about the cure for COVID-19 is beyond me.


It's clearly feeding answers to him straight from Trump.

Totally boring, but this is what debates typically look like.

I don't think we expected, after the last one, for both VP candidates to go through the same screaming match as before. No one liked that and it wouldn't make sense for that to happen, lol. But yeah, I did also notice the fly on Pences head, happens I guess.

Pence is doing well IMO. He always does well in debates though. Guy is a great softspoken Midwesterner. Did we expect anything else?