Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Who won the debate?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by JBark View Post
    Scandals? She's gone to jail? Been impeached? No. You WANT to believe a lot of made up crap....
    Made up?

    She had government documents and the devices containing them destroyed with "bitbleach" and hammers. That's not made up.

    What was her motive?
    {}

    "Any story sounds true until someone tells the other side and sets the record straight." -Proverbs 18:17

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Escape2Victory View Post
      Late to the party, I just watched the full debate.

      Clinton was the more polished performer, as you would expect from a former lawyer. I also felt the questions played to her strengths. Immigration is a top issue and it was not discussed or fed as a question, yet we got a question from the host about Obamas birth certificate. I felt there was subltle bias in the questioning in favour of Clinton.

      As the more natural debator, Clinton probably got the upper hand on scoring specific point against Trump, however I still think she lost for two reasons. Firstly, as someone in a position of power for a long time, she has ownership of many of the problems Trump raised. Secondly, I think people are tiring of professional politicians who put on a good media show but don't deliver for the people. A polished debating performance is not the asset it used to be. People are angry and it doesn't look like Clinton gets it. She may pay for that.
      I don't think you're wrong, but like a few people I think you're pulling in outside impressions to color the sense of victory. In the context of the debate itself, Clinton's edge was very pronounced in both behavior, clarity, and poise. She was still stiff, formal, and fake, but compared to Trump she came out looking better - often because of his failures, not her successes. I deliberately didn't lay out just what "winning" meant because I wanted to allow debate and personal interpretation, but my personal view was to look at the debate in as objective a manner as possible.

      If someone was a tabula rasa and this debate was their first exposure to the candidates, who would they finger as coming out ahead?

      Now, the reason I said you're not wrong is because you're right about the anger, and Hillary's "victory" is hardly decisive. It helped her, but it is not guaranteed to have any lasting impression. She's plagued with issues and the anti-establishment fervor on both sides of the aisle mean her experience can be a double-edged sword, and the same issues before the debate are still trailing her.

      Her victory is entirely relative. It's like winning a marathon with the worst time ever - it's a win, but it doesn't make you an athletic hero either. And again, all those same issues are still in play - Hillary may have one-upped Trump in the first debate and won, but Trump was not defeated.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Daemon of Decay View Post
        I don't think you're wrong, but like a few people I think you're pulling in outside impressions to color the sense of victory. In the context of the debate itself, Clinton's edge was very pronounced in both behavior, clarity, and poise. She was still stiff, formal, and fake, but compared to Trump she came out looking better - often because of his failures, not her successes. I deliberately didn't lay out just what "winning" meant because I wanted to allow debate and personal interpretation, but my personal view was to look at the debate in as objective a manner as possible.

        If someone was a tabula rasa and this debate was their first exposure to the candidates, who would they finger as coming out ahead?

        Now, the reason I said you're not wrong is because you're right about the anger, and Hillary's "victory" is hardly decisive. It helped her, but it is not guaranteed to have any lasting impression. She's plagued with issues and the anti-establishment fervor on both sides of the aisle mean her experience can be a double-edged sword, and the same issues before the debate are still trailing her.

        Her victory is entirely relative. It's like winning a marathon with the worst time ever - it's a win, but it doesn't make you an athletic hero either. And again, all those same issues are still in play - Hillary may have one-upped Trump in the first debate and won, but Trump was not defeated.
        To be honest i don't think many ACG members properly understand the subtext to the election and it is why almost no one here gave Trump a prayer when I tipped him early on as a Republican candidate.

        The unspoken subtext is that the election is a referendum on multiculturalism. Multiculturalism has been such a powerful and effective movement that it has shut down debate on any challenge to its existence. Trump has blown the doors off and that debate is now playing out. I still think this is something of taboo subject with voters themselves and you won't see it spoken about much. I also think the polls will underestimate Trump for the same reason.

        That is the prism through which I watched the debate. It didn't matter that Clinton gave the more assured debating performance. She did not look or speak like someone who grasped the subtext, instead clinging to old comforts of political correctness and pious multiculturalism. It was a lost opportunity to give reassurance that she understood the subtext and could act on it. Instead she looked like a politician behind the curve, yesterday's President. I'm not sure her act is going to wash, but American voters will deliver their verdict.
        Ne Obliviscaris, Sans Peur

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Escape2Victory View Post
          To be honest i don't think many ACG members properly understand the subtext to the election and it is why almost no one here gave Trump a prayer when I tipped him early on as a Republican candidate.

          The unspoken subtext is that the election is a referendum on multiculturalism. Multiculturalism has been such a powerful and effective movement that it has shut down debate on any challenge to its existence. Trump has blown the doors off and that debate is now playing out. I still think this is something of taboo subject with voters themselves and you won't see it spoken about much. I also think the polls will underestimate Trump for the same reason.

          That is the prism through which I watched the debate. It didn't matter that Clinton gave the more assured debating performance. She did not look or speak like someone who grasped the subtext, instead clinging to old comforts of political correctness and pious multiculturalism. It was a lost opportunity to give reassurance that she understood the subtext and could act on it. Instead she looked like a politician behind the curve, yesterday's President. I'm not sure her act is going to wash, but American voters will deliver their verdict.
          You don't see people in America complaining about multiculturalism because that's inherent to an immigrant nation. The US isn't as homogenous as European nation-states, where there is a general rule of one ethnicity being dominant and being the foundation for the state (Germans for Germany, Croatians for Croatia, Poles for Poland). The melting pot ideal of American immigration has always been a two-way street - even though this has always lead to outbursts of anti-immigrant sentiment ("No Irish Allowed") in waves.

          Group moves to US -> current groups get upset at loss of dominance and shifting culture -> immigrants become integrated while changing cultural norms are normalized -> new group moves to US -> current groups get upset at loss of dominance and shifting culture -> etc.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Escape2Victory View Post
            To be honest i don't think many ACG members properly understand the subtext to the election and it is why almost no one here gave Trump a prayer when I tipped him early on as a Republican candidate.

            The unspoken subtext is that the election is a referendum on multiculturalism. Multiculturalism has been such a powerful and effective movement that it has shut down debate on any challenge to its existence. Trump has blown the doors off and that debate is now playing out. I still think this is something of taboo subject with voters themselves and you won't see it spoken about much. I also think the polls will underestimate Trump for the same reason.

            That is the prism through which I watched the debate. It didn't matter that Clinton gave the more assured debating performance. She did not look or speak like someone who grasped the subtext, instead clinging to old comforts of political correctness and pious multiculturalism. It was a lost opportunity to give reassurance that she understood the subtext and could act on it. Instead she looked like a politician behind the curve, yesterday's President. I'm not sure her act is going to wash, but American voters will deliver their verdict.
            I happened to be in the barber shop yesterday. They almost always have their tv on Fox news. There was a political author on one of their segments. They were discussing why, even though most people think Hillary won the debate, the poll numbers hadn't changed. He said it was because Hillary came across as smug, arrogant, and pompous. I've forgotten what he said about Trump, but it wasn't anymore complimentary than what he said about Hillary.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by BorderRuffian View Post
              Made up?

              She had government documents and the devices containing them destroyed with "bitbleach" and hammers. That's not made up.

              What was her motive?
              You tell me. Why hasn't she been prosecuted?
              John

              Play La Marseillaise. Play it!

              Comment


              • Originally posted by phil74501 View Post
                I happened to be in the barber shop yesterday. They almost always have their tv on Fox news. There was a political author on one of their segments. They were discussing why, even though most people think Hillary won the debate, the poll numbers hadn't changed. He said it was because Hillary came across as smug, arrogant, and pompous. I've forgotten what he said about Trump, but it wasn't anymore complimentary than what he said about Hillary.
                One must also remember that these candidates are both despised by the nation. Support for the candidate of choice is often just about how horrible they imagine the other one to be, and no debate is going to change this.

                Hell, I guarantee you that if Trump had spent 15 minutes of the debate calling Jews money-grubbing thieves a large body of posters here would still vote for him on Election Day. For the frightened partisan, the nightmare of a Trump/Hillary presidency is enough to make them excuse quite a lot of muck - and they're not going to be swayed by a debate.

                Hillary's victory was not decisive. It was said just right after the debate, but her being declared the winner like being told you passed a test - there is still a big difference between a C- and an A+. Hillary's C- was not enough to shake things up.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Daemon of Decay View Post
                  One must also remember that these candidates are both despised by the nation. Support for the candidate of choice is often just about how horrible they imagine the other one to be, and no debate is going to change this.

                  Hell, I guarantee you that if Trump had spent 15 minutes of the debate calling Jews money-grubbing thieves a large body of posters here would still vote for him on Election Day. For the frightened partisan, the nightmare of a Trump/Hillary presidency is enough to make them excuse quite a lot of muck - and they're not going to be swayed by a debate.

                  Hillary's victory was not decisive. It was said just right after the debate, but her being declared the winner like being told you passed a test - there is still a big difference between a C- and an A+. Hillary's C- was not enough to shake things up.
                  Again, I suggest you have not grasped the underlying subtext. Trump attacking Jews would have been a disaster for him, an extremely significant shift of position. Conversely, Clinton giving a nod to the fact that the Muslim world produces high risk cultures, rather than continue the line we are all the same, would have been highly significant too and positive for her vote.
                  Ne Obliviscaris, Sans Peur

                  Comment


                  • Before the usuals dismiss the source, this story hit the radio news as their lead story at 3PM Eastern.
                    Presidential Debate Commission Admits Trump’s Mic Was Messed Up

                    http://dailycaller.com/2016/09/30/pr...was-messed-up/
                    “Breaking News,”

                    “Something irrelevant in your life just happened and now we are going to blow it all out of proportion for days to keep you distracted from what's really going on.”

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by SRV Ron View Post
                      Before the usuals dismiss the source, this story hit the radio news as their lead story at 3PM Eastern.
                      Presidential Debate Commission Admits Trump’s Mic Was Messed Up

                      http://dailycaller.com/2016/09/30/pr...was-messed-up/
                      An just what didn't you hear the Donnie say?

                      Where he got his coke from? sniff, sniff

                      From your link




                      "Ask not what your country can do for you"

                      Left wing, Right Wing same bird that they are killing.

                      you’re entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by JBark View Post
                        You tell me. Why hasn't she been prosecuted?
                        Have you already forgotten Bill and Loretta's runway meeting? So you tell me.......

                        John Gotti was called the Teflon Don. Bill Clinton was called Slick Willie. No Teflon for the Clintons, just Slick. As in slime. And that slime obviously covers Hillary as well.

                        She has a massive media propaganda machine covering her tracks. She has the powers that be in her pocket, including many prominent Republicans.

                        The fix is in, the deck is stacked and so many other clichés, but it's for real.
                        ALL LIVES SPLATTER!

                        BLACK JEEPS MATTER!

                        BLACK MOTORCYCLES MATTER!

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Gixxer86g View Post
                          Have you already forgotten Bill and Loretta's runway meeting? So you tell me.......

                          John Gotti was called the Teflon Don. Bill Clinton was called Slick Willie. No Teflon for the Clintons, just Slick. As in slime. And that slime obviously covers Hillary as well.

                          She has a massive media propaganda machine covering her tracks. She has the powers that be in her pocket, including many prominent Republicans.

                          The fix is in, the deck is stacked and so many other clichés, but it's for real.
                          Right. The nation is run by a pro-Hillary conspiracy. That is the only answer.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Half Pint John View Post
                            An just what didn't you hear the Donnie say?

                            Where he got his coke from? sniff, sniff

                            From your link




                            And, where did you fabricate that link from? The Clinton News Network link from the article?

                            Why is it no one hears him inhaling on the mike at his live speeches?

                            If you want to discuss the use of coke, you should ask Hillery about Bill Clinton drug use. http://www.nationalenquirer.com/cele...g-use-scandal/
                            “Breaking News,”

                            “Something irrelevant in your life just happened and now we are going to blow it all out of proportion for days to keep you distracted from what's really going on.”

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Escape2Victory View Post
                              To be honest i don't think many ACG members properly understand the subtext to the election and it is why almost no one here gave Trump a prayer when I tipped him early on as a Republican candidate.

                              The unspoken subtext is that the election is a referendum on multiculturalism. Multiculturalism has been such a powerful and effective movement that it has shut down debate on any challenge to its existence. Trump has blown the doors off and that debate is now playing out. I still think this is something of taboo subject with voters themselves and you won't see it spoken about much. I also think the polls will underestimate Trump for the same reason.

                              That is the prism through which I watched the debate. It didn't matter that Clinton gave the more assured debating performance. She did not look or speak like someone who grasped the subtext, instead clinging to old comforts of political correctness and pious multiculturalism. It was a lost opportunity to give reassurance that she understood the subtext and could act on it. Instead she looked like a politician behind the curve, yesterday's President. I'm not sure her act is going to wash, but American voters will deliver their verdict.
                              Well thought out evaluation of the subliminal currents of American politics.

                              Most Americans have no idea what multiculturalism is nor all the other post modernist movements like intersectional feminism. Even the well educated have trouble grasping the corrupting influence Marxist ideology and it's disdain for liberal democracy has had on otherwise humanitarian movements. While the intellectual "elite" go about congratulating themselves for supporting the humanist candidate it amounts to little more than virtue signalling.

                              It isn't just multiculturalism it is a general disdain for the kind of objective evaluation of the possible that destroys the value of regressive liberalism. Sometimes it's sophomoric nature is evident, remember the 60's chant make love not war but most of the time the rhetorical skill of the adherents clouds the issues. Underneath the rhetoric is the child like belief that we can have it all without paying for it. Clean energy without nuclear waste, woman married to the state without dysfunctional families, free love without AIDS, anti war movements that don't get Nixon's elected and wars expanded into Cambodia, welfare states that do not expand relative poverty, the benefits of capitalism without greed, government funded science that doesn't become politicized, the motto is basically if it feels good believe in it. Yes it is true that the left has captured the bulk of the intellectual class but it is not true that they have a grasp of the practical consequences of liberal policies.

                              Hillary doesn't just represent the status quo but incompetence clothed in pseudo sophistication. If you believe things can continue as they have them voting for her makes sense but if you believe as I do that the circus and bread party is nearing it's end vote for anyone else.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Gixxer86g View Post
                                Have you already forgotten Bill and Loretta's runway meeting? So you tell me.......

                                John Gotti was called the Teflon Don. Bill Clinton was called Slick Willie. No Teflon for the Clintons, just Slick. As in slime. And that slime obviously covers Hillary as well.

                                She has a massive media propaganda machine covering her tracks. She has the powers that be in her pocket, including many prominent Republicans.

                                The fix is in, the deck is stacked and so many other clichés, but it's for real.
                                Yes the massive media conspiracy, all getting together to omit any wrongdoing by Clinton and make up negative quotes by Trump. They even get a double to do all the sound bites where he makes his outlandish/ridiculous remarks.

                                Why doesn't that sound ridiculous when you have it going through your head? Why don't you think about it, toss it around, feel if it makes any sense. How does anyone get that much power...especially someone not holding an office. Someone whose husband screwed up royally and must have broken many good relations in D.C.

                                If, and this is a big if, she is slick than the same goes for Trump. He's a billionaire who has screwed many people, abused many women, been sued countless times, and has just as many skeletons as anyone, and the money to make the mess go away. He talked about making campaign contributions for the very reason of buying favors; that's the way it is done. I can't believe she would be capable of anything he is not...unless he is stupid. Look what he did about the beauty queen. He didn't deny that he abused her emotionally in public he just turned it around to make her look bad. It is her fault. She is no angel, she made a sex tape, etc. None of this should matter in a sane world but in his demented, abusive and sexist world these things matter. Of course she never made a sex tape, but that doesn't bother him, he'll attack her anyway.

                                The people that support him vary from the sexists, racists, fearful and xenophobes (and more) and they are all downright insecure. The fact that no living president from either party will support him should mean something and I have to wonder how you view that.
                                John

                                Play La Marseillaise. Play it!

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X