|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
I like the theory that Trump doing decently was actually good for Clinton. The worst thing that could happen to her at this point would be Trump dropping out of the race entirely, which was a possibility if he had bombed here. I know she has to be saving some of her best attacks for the last debate.
|
On October 10 2016 13:57 OuchyDathurts wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2016 13:56 Netscape9 wrote:
What is with this awful poll? What if you don't support EITHER of them? Johnson and Stein fans? Yeah the poll options are kind of whack but that doesn't matter at all if there's bots screwing it up anyway dude lol.
You think it's being manipulated?
|
On October 10 2016 13:50 Kickstart wrote:
Yes but what amazes me is that Trump can get away with not talking about policy at all. Not only is it "I will fix this", "I will make it the greatest", "I know more about this than anyone", "I will punish ISIS greatly", but then he specifically says that a policy position his running mate outlined in the vice presidential debate is one he does not agree with and they have not spoken about.
About his lack of policy, I forget which section but there was one section in the debate where he talked for like a minute about what sounded like policy and then he rambled off on something random. For a second there he sounded coherent enough that I could see some sort of argument being formed, but he couldn't finish it off.
His core base doesn't care about policy, they just don't want Hillary elected. And Trump just perfectly represents them, calling Hillary names and rejecting anything she says as a lie.
Hillary's a perfectly fine candidate (30 years experience, big NY state senator, SoS, former First Lady) but Republicans have been smearing the Clinton name for 20 years (regardless whether you think it's true or false) and his core base are the people who buy into that completely.
|
United States44286 Posts
Last time I did a straight either or poll but it didn't really tell us who won given the audience wasn't 50:50 beforehand. I thought we might get more information about the degree the debate performance swung people by having the supporters who were unconvinced identify themselves as such. The winner of the debate is the person who wins votes through their rhetoric that they didn't already have, not the person who went in with 80% of the support and came out with a solid 75%.
|
On October 10 2016 13:58 Netscape9 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2016 13:57 OuchyDathurts wrote:On October 10 2016 13:56 Netscape9 wrote:
What is with this awful poll? What if you don't support EITHER of them? Johnson and Stein fans? Yeah the poll options are kind of whack but that doesn't matter at all if there's bots screwing it up anyway dude lol. You think it's being manipulated?
Jesus read the last 2 pages
|
On October 10 2016 13:58 Netscape9 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2016 13:57 OuchyDathurts wrote:On October 10 2016 13:56 Netscape9 wrote:
What is with this awful poll? What if you don't support EITHER of them? Johnson and Stein fans? Yeah the poll options are kind of whack but that doesn't matter at all if there's bots screwing it up anyway dude lol. You think it's being manipulated?
a moderator already said that a site admin told him it was
|
United States44286 Posts
On October 10 2016 13:58 Netscape9 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2016 13:57 OuchyDathurts wrote:On October 10 2016 13:56 Netscape9 wrote:
What is with this awful poll? What if you don't support EITHER of them? Johnson and Stein fans? Yeah the poll options are kind of whack but that doesn't matter at all if there's bots screwing it up anyway dude lol. You think it's being manipulated?
It's definitely being manipulated.
|
On October 10 2016 13:58 Blisse wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2016 13:50 Kickstart wrote:
Yes but what amazes me is that Trump can get away with not talking about policy at all. Not only is it "I will fix this", "I will make it the greatest", "I know more about this than anyone", "I will punish ISIS greatly", but then he specifically says that a policy position his running mate outlined in the vice presidential debate is one he does not agree with and they have not spoken about. About his lack of policy, I forget which section but there was one section in the debate where he talked for like a minute about what sounded like policy and then he rambled off on something random. For a second there he sounded coherent enough that I could see some sort of argument being formed, but he couldn't finish it off. His core base doesn't care about policy, they just don't want Hillary elected. And Trump just perfectly represents them, calling Hillary names and rejecting anything she says as a lie. Hillary's a perfectly fine candidate (30 years experience, big NY state senator, SoS, former First Lady) but Republicans have been smearing the Clinton name for 20 years (regardless whether you think it's true or false) and these are the people who buy into that completely.
His core base doesn't care about policy but his core base is inconsequential. He's got their vote wrapped up already. He's gotta get independents in his camp and they're going to want some actual adult thoughts put together.
|
Yeah there is no way this forum is 50-50 Trump/Clinton support.
Maybe 30/70 at a guess.
|
On October 10 2016 14:00 OuchyDathurts wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2016 13:58 Blisse wrote:On October 10 2016 13:50 Kickstart wrote:
Yes but what amazes me is that Trump can get away with not talking about policy at all. Not only is it "I will fix this", "I will make it the greatest", "I know more about this than anyone", "I will punish ISIS greatly", but then he specifically says that a policy position his running mate outlined in the vice presidential debate is one he does not agree with and they have not spoken about. About his lack of policy, I forget which section but there was one section in the debate where he talked for like a minute about what sounded like policy and then he rambled off on something random. For a second there he sounded coherent enough that I could see some sort of argument being formed, but he couldn't finish it off. His core base doesn't care about policy, they just don't want Hillary elected. And Trump just perfectly represents them, calling Hillary names and rejecting anything she says as a lie. Hillary's a perfectly fine candidate (30 years experience, big NY state senator, SoS, former First Lady) but Republicans have been smearing the Clinton name for 20 years (regardless whether you think it's true or false) and these are the people who buy into that completely. His core base doesn't care about policy but his core base is inconsequential. He's got their vote wrapped up already. He's gotta get independents in his camp and they're going to want some actual adult thoughts put together.
I agree, I was just talking about how off-topic he can be and how his rhetoric can still support so many voters.
|
On October 10 2016 14:04 Blisse wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2016 14:00 OuchyDathurts wrote:On October 10 2016 13:58 Blisse wrote:On October 10 2016 13:50 Kickstart wrote:
Yes but what amazes me is that Trump can get away with not talking about policy at all. Not only is it "I will fix this", "I will make it the greatest", "I know more about this than anyone", "I will punish ISIS greatly", but then he specifically says that a policy position his running mate outlined in the vice presidential debate is one he does not agree with and they have not spoken about. About his lack of policy, I forget which section but there was one section in the debate where he talked for like a minute about what sounded like policy and then he rambled off on something random. For a second there he sounded coherent enough that I could see some sort of argument being formed, but he couldn't finish it off. His core base doesn't care about policy, they just don't want Hillary elected. And Trump just perfectly represents them, calling Hillary names and rejecting anything she says as a lie. Hillary's a perfectly fine candidate (30 years experience, big NY state senator, SoS, former First Lady) but Republicans have been smearing the Clinton name for 20 years (regardless whether you think it's true or false) and these are the people who buy into that completely. His core base doesn't care about policy but his core base is inconsequential. He's got their vote wrapped up already. He's gotta get independents in his camp and they're going to want some actual adult thoughts put together. I agree, I was just talking about how off-topic he can be and how his rhetoric can still support so many voters.
Yeah that's true but this election is really weird like that. People hate both these candidates with blood rage.
|
On October 10 2016 14:04 Blisse wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2016 14:00 OuchyDathurts wrote:On October 10 2016 13:58 Blisse wrote:On October 10 2016 13:50 Kickstart wrote:
Yes but what amazes me is that Trump can get away with not talking about policy at all. Not only is it "I will fix this", "I will make it the greatest", "I know more about this than anyone", "I will punish ISIS greatly", but then he specifically says that a policy position his running mate outlined in the vice presidential debate is one he does not agree with and they have not spoken about. About his lack of policy, I forget which section but there was one section in the debate where he talked for like a minute about what sounded like policy and then he rambled off on something random. For a second there he sounded coherent enough that I could see some sort of argument being formed, but he couldn't finish it off. His core base doesn't care about policy, they just don't want Hillary elected. And Trump just perfectly represents them, calling Hillary names and rejecting anything she says as a lie. Hillary's a perfectly fine candidate (30 years experience, big NY state senator, SoS, former First Lady) but Republicans have been smearing the Clinton name for 20 years (regardless whether you think it's true or false) and these are the people who buy into that completely. His core base doesn't care about policy but his core base is inconsequential. He's got their vote wrapped up already. He's gotta get independents in his camp and they're going to want some actual adult thoughts put together. I agree, I was just talking about how off-topic he can be and how his rhetoric can still support so many voters.
Because the vast majority of people don't vote based on policy, rationality or rhetoric. They vote based on emotions. We can even see this in debates where people routinely have different opinions on who "won" a debate is they listened to audio only or where able to watch it live.
|
On October 10 2016 14:06 L_Master wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2016 14:04 Blisse wrote:On October 10 2016 14:00 OuchyDathurts wrote:On October 10 2016 13:58 Blisse wrote:On October 10 2016 13:50 Kickstart wrote:
Yes but what amazes me is that Trump can get away with not talking about policy at all. Not only is it "I will fix this", "I will make it the greatest", "I know more about this than anyone", "I will punish ISIS greatly", but then he specifically says that a policy position his running mate outlined in the vice presidential debate is one he does not agree with and they have not spoken about. About his lack of policy, I forget which section but there was one section in the debate where he talked for like a minute about what sounded like policy and then he rambled off on something random. For a second there he sounded coherent enough that I could see some sort of argument being formed, but he couldn't finish it off. His core base doesn't care about policy, they just don't want Hillary elected. And Trump just perfectly represents them, calling Hillary names and rejecting anything she says as a lie. Hillary's a perfectly fine candidate (30 years experience, big NY state senator, SoS, former First Lady) but Republicans have been smearing the Clinton name for 20 years (regardless whether you think it's true or false) and these are the people who buy into that completely. His core base doesn't care about policy but his core base is inconsequential. He's got their vote wrapped up already. He's gotta get independents in his camp and they're going to want some actual adult thoughts put together. I agree, I was just talking about how off-topic he can be and how his rhetoric can still support so many voters. Because the vast majority of people don't vote based on policy, rationality or rhetoric. They vote based on emotions. We can even see this in debates where people routinely have different opinions on who "won" a debate is they listened to audio only or where able to watch it live.
Interestingly, I had to leave about an hour into the debate, and I listened to the rest of it on the radio. Came back, a lot of people discussed the visual aspects of the last few minutes of the debate, and I had to go back to see those, lol.
|
On October 10 2016 13:27 RealityIsKing wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2016 13:19 LegalLord wrote:On October 10 2016 13:16 TheYango wrote:On October 10 2016 13:10 LegalLord wrote:
Well in any case, judging by Trump's effective damage control tonight, I think it's clear that this shitshow of a campaign will go on. Didn't catch the debate but this is what it looks like from what's being reported. Did Hillary really flub this that badly with everything stacked in her favor? I guess that's the running theme of this entire campaign isn't it. More so that Trump managed to effectively spin the tape story as "locker room banter I'm not proud of" while getting a few good potshots in. Hillary performed average, Trump stopped the bleeding on both counts. Next round, Trump better be ready to land on any possible biased media about how they just glanced over the Clintons' female victims while focusing on for whole 10 minutes on Trump's speech. He'll then need to hit her again with how Clinton won because of Superdelegates. Later he'll just need to expand on his tax system, how will he deal with foreign relationship and making sure that America can stop trade loss, how will he rebuild cities/towns reconstruction. And then its Trump Presidente 2016.
Whoever did debate prep this time deserves a raise.
|
On October 10 2016 14:06 L_Master wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2016 14:04 Blisse wrote:On October 10 2016 14:00 OuchyDathurts wrote:On October 10 2016 13:58 Blisse wrote:On October 10 2016 13:50 Kickstart wrote:
Yes but what amazes me is that Trump can get away with not talking about policy at all. Not only is it "I will fix this", "I will make it the greatest", "I know more about this than anyone", "I will punish ISIS greatly", but then he specifically says that a policy position his running mate outlined in the vice presidential debate is one he does not agree with and they have not spoken about. About his lack of policy, I forget which section but there was one section in the debate where he talked for like a minute about what sounded like policy and then he rambled off on something random. For a second there he sounded coherent enough that I could see some sort of argument being formed, but he couldn't finish it off. His core base doesn't care about policy, they just don't want Hillary elected. And Trump just perfectly represents them, calling Hillary names and rejecting anything she says as a lie. Hillary's a perfectly fine candidate (30 years experience, big NY state senator, SoS, former First Lady) but Republicans have been smearing the Clinton name for 20 years (regardless whether you think it's true or false) and these are the people who buy into that completely. His core base doesn't care about policy but his core base is inconsequential. He's got their vote wrapped up already. He's gotta get independents in his camp and they're going to want some actual adult thoughts put together. I agree, I was just talking about how off-topic he can be and how his rhetoric can still support so many voters. Because the vast majority of people don't vote based on policy, rationality or rhetoric. They vote based on emotions. We can even see this in debates where people routinely have different opinions on who "won" a debate is they listened to audio only or where able to watch it live.
Yes but I'm sure this is the first time a candidate can openly discriminate against multiple races, likely sexually assault numerous women while crudely and inappropriately commenting on them, fuel a hate-based campaign, allude to assassinations, encourage assault, encourage foreign hacking, and be completely ignorant of any kind of policy discussion, yet still have a significant chance of winning the presidency.
We will vote based on emotions, but generally we all still have bloody standards for people in charge. Trump somehow managed to bypass all of that.
|
|
|
On October 10 2016 14:04 Blisse wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2016 14:00 OuchyDathurts wrote:On October 10 2016 13:58 Blisse wrote:On October 10 2016 13:50 Kickstart wrote:
Yes but what amazes me is that Trump can get away with not talking about policy at all. Not only is it "I will fix this", "I will make it the greatest", "I know more about this than anyone", "I will punish ISIS greatly", but then he specifically says that a policy position his running mate outlined in the vice presidential debate is one he does not agree with and they have not spoken about. About his lack of policy, I forget which section but there was one section in the debate where he talked for like a minute about what sounded like policy and then he rambled off on something random. For a second there he sounded coherent enough that I could see some sort of argument being formed, but he couldn't finish it off. His core base doesn't care about policy, they just don't want Hillary elected. And Trump just perfectly represents them, calling Hillary names and rejecting anything she says as a lie. Hillary's a perfectly fine candidate (30 years experience, big NY state senator, SoS, former First Lady) but Republicans have been smearing the Clinton name for 20 years (regardless whether you think it's true or false) and these are the people who buy into that completely. His core base doesn't care about policy but his core base is inconsequential. He's got their vote wrapped up already. He's gotta get independents in his camp and they're going to want some actual adult thoughts put together. I agree, I was just talking about how off-topic he can be and how his rhetoric can still support so many voters.
I think it's because he tells a certain group of people what they want to hear and only that. Every response he had was "This thing is terrible, I'm going to fix it, Hilary and Obama are to blame". I don't think he ever deviated from that formula unless it was for self aggrandizement. If you tell any person what they most want to hear, they will forgive you the rest of your faults.
|
Missed the debate but I'll take it it ended up a draw?
All things given that's probably best case scenario for Clinton. Trump winning hard would have obviously been awful and Clinton winning (too hard) could lead to a Trump dropout which only introduces uncertainty for her. She wants him to stay in the race at about this level of support for now.
|
On October 10 2016 14:18 Starlightsun wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2016 14:04 Blisse wrote:On October 10 2016 14:00 OuchyDathurts wrote:On October 10 2016 13:58 Blisse wrote:On October 10 2016 13:50 Kickstart wrote:
Yes but what amazes me is that Trump can get away with not talking about policy at all. Not only is it "I will fix this", "I will make it the greatest", "I know more about this than anyone", "I will punish ISIS greatly", but then he specifically says that a policy position his running mate outlined in the vice presidential debate is one he does not agree with and they have not spoken about. About his lack of policy, I forget which section but there was one section in the debate where he talked for like a minute about what sounded like policy and then he rambled off on something random. For a second there he sounded coherent enough that I could see some sort of argument being formed, but he couldn't finish it off. His core base doesn't care about policy, they just don't want Hillary elected. And Trump just perfectly represents them, calling Hillary names and rejecting anything she says as a lie. Hillary's a perfectly fine candidate (30 years experience, big NY state senator, SoS, former First Lady) but Republicans have been smearing the Clinton name for 20 years (regardless whether you think it's true or false) and these are the people who buy into that completely. His core base doesn't care about policy but his core base is inconsequential. He's got their vote wrapped up already. He's gotta get independents in his camp and they're going to want some actual adult thoughts put together. I agree, I was just talking about how off-topic he can be and how his rhetoric can still support so many voters. I think it's because he tells a certain group of people what they want to hear and only that. Every response he had was "This thing is terrible, I'm going to fix it, Hilary and Obama are to blame". I don't think he ever deviated from that formula unless it was for self aggrandizement. If you tell any person what they most want to hear, they will forgive you the rest of your faults.
I mean everyone panders, but in the face of everything it's sad. Like politics actually have an affect on your well-being and completely dividing the Republican base with a candidate like Trump is just ludicrous. I'm starting to understand what and why people are talking about how this will reform the party.
|
On October 10 2016 14:15 Blisse wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2016 14:06 L_Master wrote:On October 10 2016 14:04 Blisse wrote:On October 10 2016 14:00 OuchyDathurts wrote:On October 10 2016 13:58 Blisse wrote:On October 10 2016 13:50 Kickstart wrote:
Yes but what amazes me is that Trump can get away with not talking about policy at all. Not only is it "I will fix this", "I will make it the greatest", "I know more about this than anyone", "I will punish ISIS greatly", but then he specifically says that a policy position his running mate outlined in the vice presidential debate is one he does not agree with and they have not spoken about. About his lack of policy, I forget which section but there was one section in the debate where he talked for like a minute about what sounded like policy and then he rambled off on something random. For a second there he sounded coherent enough that I could see some sort of argument being formed, but he couldn't finish it off. His core base doesn't care about policy, they just don't want Hillary elected. And Trump just perfectly represents them, calling Hillary names and rejecting anything she says as a lie. Hillary's a perfectly fine candidate (30 years experience, big NY state senator, SoS, former First Lady) but Republicans have been smearing the Clinton name for 20 years (regardless whether you think it's true or false) and these are the people who buy into that completely. His core base doesn't care about policy but his core base is inconsequential. He's got their vote wrapped up already. He's gotta get independents in his camp and they're going to want some actual adult thoughts put together. I agree, I was just talking about how off-topic he can be and how his rhetoric can still support so many voters. Because the vast majority of people don't vote based on policy, rationality or rhetoric. They vote based on emotions. We can even see this in debates where people routinely have different opinions on who "won" a debate is they listened to audio only or where able to watch it live. Yes but I'm sure this is the first time a candidate can openly discriminate against multiple races, likely sexually assault numerous women while crudely and inappropriately commenting on them, fuel a hate-based campaign, allude to assassinations, encourage assault, encourage foreign hacking, and be completely ignorant of any kind of policy discussion, yet still have a significant chance of winning the presidency. We will vote based on emotions, but generally we all still have bloody standards for people in charge. Trump somehow managed to bypass all of that.
I wonder if that's unique to this election or not. That hasn't come up in the past because we haven't put up such a miserable candidate. I strongly suspect if we had Romney as Trump 0.5 or McCain as Trump 0.5 you could have similar situations.
That said, the climate is much more ripe for it now. News over hyping things like terror and other negativity give extra support to Trump's authoritarianism. Hillary is much less likeable and less competent and Obama. I belive it's more a polarization/political climate phenomenon than it is a Trump one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
