EPT2020 Presidential Debate - Page 21
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9958 Posts
| ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States46248 Posts
On October 01 2020 03:41 Liquid`Drone wrote: NEW: Commission on Presidential Debates statement: "Last night’s debate made clear that additional structure should be added to the format of the remaining debates ... The CPD will be carefully considering the changes that it will adopt and will announce those measures shortly." I dunno what it entails, but hopefully it's something actually meaningful like muting the microphone of the person not designated to speak. I hope so. In a debate, the most powerful person in the room needs to be the moderator, not either of the speakers. Of course, the moderator shouldn't need to wield their power - as long as both speakers behave themselves - but it simply must be possible for the moderator to rein in the speakers and take back control of the debate, if required. And it was clearly required, last time. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
They should be seen as plug and play ideologies that can be plugged into different groups run by malcontents. The ideas of Antifa themselves didn’t kill a dude in Portland a month ago, it was some hardcore Antifa guy. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12488 Posts
On October 01 2020 04:30 Introvert wrote: As much as I wish I had time for "what happened to the parties! [in the South]" that will have to be for another day. The Democrat party has obviously moved left, just more slowly than the 30s and 40s and not always on all issues at once. The reason they came to "moderate" is because when the nation wasnt in economic crisis Democrat presidential candidates mostly got their clocks cleaned. Carter won after Nixon stomped in 72. Clinton came in after Reagan/Bush won three straight presidential elections with two being some of the largest landslides ever and the third being a huge rout. Even before FDR the GOP won a large majority of presidential races post civil war. And Carter, Clinton, and Obama all benefitted immensely from economic slowdowns. Democrats simply have some sort of self-preservation instinct that tells them that when they say "look at the polls our radical ideas are popular!", they are wrong. I'm reading that they had a good reason to do so, not that they didn't do it | ||
|
Lmui
Canada6223 Posts
Debate results polls from 538. tl;dr nothing really changed before/after around 60% thought Biden did well in the debate, 33% for Trump. In general Bidens policies were a lot more popular too. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
| ||
|
StasisField
United States1086 Posts
On October 01 2020 04:53 Danglars wrote: White supremacism and whatever the “nouveau return to western civilization” should be called are also idea. They should be seen as plug and play ideologies that can be plugged into different groups run by malcontents. The ideas of Antifa themselves didn’t kill a dude in Portland a month ago, it was some hardcore Antifa guy. You do realize why there is a distinction between an idea and an organization, right? The KKK has a national leader that directs the KKK's actions and messages. Power within white supremacist movements like the Klan are centralized in a national leadership. They are an organization. Antifa does not have that. There is no overarching "Antifa" that all other Antifa branches follow and listen to. That's why you can't label Antifa as a terrorist organization or as an organization in general because there is no "Antifa" organization. You have random, independent branches scattered all across the U.S. who are deciding what they believe Antifa stands for and how their branch should go about expressing their independently formed beliefs. They are not even close to the same. | ||
|
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9958 Posts
On October 01 2020 04:53 Danglars wrote: White supremacism and whatever the “nouveau return to western civilization” should be called are also idea. They should be seen as plug and play ideologies that can be plugged into different groups run by malcontents. The ideas of Antifa themselves didn’t kill a dude in Portland a month ago, it was some hardcore Antifa guy. Precisely. If you use dictionary definitions, the proud boys are a terrorist group, whereas the far right isn't a terrorist ideology (ie you can do far right politics without being a terrorist). So designating the far right a terrorist group would make no sense, right? | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On October 01 2020 05:14 StasisField wrote: You do realize why there is a distinction between an idea and an organization, right? The KKK has a national leader that directs the KKK's actions and messages. Power within white supremacist movements like the Klan are centralized in a national leadership. They are an organization. Antifa does not have that. There is no overarching "Antifa" that all other Antifa branches follow and listen to. That's why you can't label Antifa as a terrorist organization or as an organization in general because there is no "Antifa" organization. You have random, independent branches scattered all across the U.S. who are deciding what they believe Antifa stands for and how their branch should go about expressing their independently formed beliefs. They are not even close to the same. You’re confusing the lack of a hierarchical national organizing body, with the lack of organization. The KKK would still be bad if it wasn’t centrally run, and each city instead organized on its own. Their ideology is repugnant. It’s no wonder that so many of these independent bodies have contributed to violence. Biden should condemn Antifa if he really wants to draw a line against Trump. Too bad Trumps too all over the place to articulate the point. | ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
On October 01 2020 05:14 StasisField wrote: You do realize why there is a distinction between an idea and an organization, right? The KKK has a national leader that directs the KKK's actions and messages. Power within white supremacist movements like the Klan are centralized in a national leadership. They are an organization. Antifa does not have that. There is no overarching "Antifa" that all other Antifa branches follow and listen to. That's why you can't label Antifa as a terrorist organization or as an organization in general because there is no "Antifa" organization. You have random, independent branches scattered all across the U.S. who are deciding what they believe Antifa stands for and how their branch should go about expressing their independently formed beliefs. They are not even close to the same. Most of the right-wing nuts who have gone on killing sprees in the last decade weren't part of organizations either, though. | ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
On October 01 2020 05:14 Mohdoo wrote: Ted Wheeler, mayor of Portland, loaned himself $150,000 for his campaign. Portland limit on such a thing is $5,000. Needless to say, our left of Bernie candidate is hammering him pretty hard on it. https://twitter.com/sarah2020/status/1311347895665266688 So a rich person can't campaign for mayor in Portland with their own funds? | ||
|
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9958 Posts
On October 01 2020 05:35 IgnE wrote: Most of the right-wing nuts who have gone on killing sprees in the last decade weren't part of organizations either, though. So how do you police that? Designate all far right activity terrorism regardless of whether or not it is? | ||
|
Erasme
Bahamas15899 Posts
On October 01 2020 04:03 Danglars wrote: We saw, honestly, each debaters true self. Job accomplished, even if a messy job accomplished. If Trump repeats this kind of performance, he’s not likely to carry enough swing states (consider the amount of Obama-carried swing counties and swing states in 2016 that went Trump). For what it’s worth, Biden isn’t big on trying to nail Trump on policy; he wants a win on character and temperament and Trump’s record. What did you see ? | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
NrG.Bamboo
United States2756 Posts
On October 01 2020 03:51 Danglars wrote: The trouble is the debate commission is old as hell and needs to be junked and replaced in the internet age. One is president JFK’s appointee to the FCC. They’re mostly as old as Trump and Biden. Defund the commission. I feel like one of the biggest problems with this sort of a setting (outside of an inability to rein in the speakers) is that either person can just say bold claims that may or may not be true, and it doesn't really get fact-checked by anyone until afterwards (except the opponent who would obviously say things are false if they disagree anyway.) It's mostly making speeches towards each other, and it's on the viewer to believe/deny what's being said until they can research or refresh their memory later, which I suspect most people don't do. A while back when some people were trying to set up Joe Rogan to moderate conversation/debate between the two, I thought that was unironically a great idea. In a setting for which bullshit claims can be fact checked and arguments develop based on facts would be quite a thing to see from our presidential candidates. I think pulling up sources in real-time and going over them together would be a better demonstration of how each person actually intends on moving the country in a particular direction. For what it's worth, Trump agreed to the proposition. | ||
|
Starlightsun
United States1405 Posts
| ||
|
Simberto
Germany11945 Posts
On October 01 2020 06:01 Starlightsun wrote: I think I'd rather see an in depth debate on a specific issue too instead of 2 minute sound bytes on a bunch. Would reveal more about their knowledge and thought process to really dig in to one topic. Maybe each campaign could pick a topic they want to debate... Trump wanted to repeat the phrase law and order so bad... Would be nice to see his opponent get to pin him down on what specifically he means and how they contrast. The thousand lies a minute tactic would be less effective because the relevant facts could be researched beforehand. I absolutely agree with this. Better to talk about two things, but really, instead of barely touching 20 things. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
On October 01 2020 05:36 IgnE wrote: So a rich person can't campaign for mayor in Portland with their own funds? Basically. Portland has a deep disdain for the ethics associated with wealth. | ||
|
Zambrah
United States7393 Posts
On October 01 2020 06:56 Mohdoo wrote: Basically. Portland has a deep disdain for the ethics associated with wealth. I like the sound of that mentality | ||
| ||
