Kamala-Trump Debate

[vibv]

2 hours ago, Hardkill said:

[Deleted]

It's sexist to judge women by their looks.

Men have the privilege to be ugly.

Edited September 12 by Leo Gura

[questionreality]

• 13 hours ago, questionreality said:

  Kamala clearly won the debate, she defeated him psychologically. From the very beginning she went up to him, shook his head when he didn't expect him and threw him off guard.

  The turning point was when she commented on his crowd sizes and said that people were leaving them early because the rallies are boring. He never really recovered after that - it triggered him very badly.

  She won the psychological fight - she used his weaknesses against him (his fragile ego).

  You can see how comfortable she looks from her body language, and how she controlled the debate throughout most of the time.

   

  What I do want to do add - is I don't think it was the moderator's job to fact check Trump, but of Kamala's. 

I can see why the conservatives are outraged - it's a debate between two candidates, and that was clearly not the moderators' jobs.

To fact check one candidate and not the other (even though Trump said a lot more inaccurate things than Kamala did) is clearly not right.

 

[Leo Gura]

16 minutes ago, questionreality said:

To fact check one candidate and not the other (even though Trump said a lot more inaccurate things than Kamala did) is clearly not right.

It is clearly right when one lies more than the other.

Any time Trump is allowed to lie without a fact-check is a preversion of our culture.

Edited September 12 by Leo Gura

[El Zapato]

19 minutes ago, questionreality said:

• What I do want to do add - is I don't think it was the moderator's job to fact check Trump, but of Kamala's. 

I can see why the conservatives are outraged - it's a debate between two candidates, and that was clearly not the moderators' jobs.

To fact check one candidate and not the other (even though Trump said a lot more inaccurate things than Kamala did) is clearly not right.

 

But letting Trump sway opinions with his 35,000 lies is worse...He earned his treatment.  And how much fairness do psychopaths deserve?  Trump is a socially transmitted disease.

[El Zapato]

5 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

It is clearly right when one lies more than the other.

Any time Trump is allowed to lie without a fact-check is a preversion of our culture.

yeah, exactly...I have a pretty simple view of social dynamics.  It is a process of the Hegelian Dialectic, and it is always tugging to create a balance.

[Frylock]

1 hour ago, questionreality said:

• To fact check one candidate and not the other (even though Trump said a lot more inaccurate things than Kamala did) is clearly not right.

 

Facts don't care about your feelings.

[questionreality]

• 1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

  It is clearly right when one lies more than the other.

  Any time Trump is allowed to lie without a fact-check is a preversion of our culture.

  Except It's a debate, in which only two people are involved. If it wasn't a debate, it would be a different story.

• To not fact check Kamala a single time shows a clear bias from the moderators, which is just a very bad look.

If you want to allow fact checking from the moderators, then you need to create a new format.

 

[questionreality]

1 hour ago, El Zapato said:

But letting Trump sway opinions with his 35,000 lies is worse...He earned his treatment.  And how much fairness do psychopaths deserve?  Trump is a socially transmitted disease.

 

39 minutes ago, Frylock said:

Facts don't care about your feelings.

The debate is between two people - not four. Please tell me the last time it happened, that the moderators of presidential debates were fact checking?

If you can't see the problem of fact checking only one candidate and not fact checking the other a single time, then I pity you.

Your bias speaks for itself and it's amusing to see this on an "actualized" forum

 

Edited September 12 by questionreality

[El Zapato]

8 minutes ago, questionreality said:

 

The debate is between two people - not four. Please tell me the last time it happened, that the moderators of presidential debates were fact checking?

If you can't see the problem of fact checking only one candidate and not fact checking the other a single time, then I pity you.

Your bias speaks for itself and it's amusing to see on an "actualized" forum

 

Here's the thing:  One person says they believe that the economy is better under Biden-Harris, the other says Haitian immigrants are eating the neighborhood's cats and dogs?  Who would you fact check (while ensconced in a real-time discussion).  A non-biased person would not have to ruminate on that for long.  But in truth, I am highly biased.  I know that something is seriously wrong with right-wingers.  And, I came to that conclusion from serious study ranging over 40 years.  Sorry 'bout dat'.

Prior to the advent of Dump, fact checking was foregone because everyone knew politicians lie as a way of life.  Dump took it down fifty notches to the outer rim of the first layer of hell

Edited September 12 by El Zapato

[zurew]

40 minutes ago, questionreality said:

To not fact check Kamala a single time shows a clear bias from the moderators, which is just a very bad look.

Thats why they gave Trump the last word every single round.

Also thats why they let Trump to not answer any question in a direct way and to ramble on.

 

You would shout "bias", in a scenario where there are two people  - one who shat his pants and gets called out for it, and the other who didn't shit his pants doesn't get called out for the same thing.

Edited September 12 by zurew

[lostingenosmaze]

2 hours ago, questionreality said:

To fact check one candidate and not the other (even though Trump said a lot more inaccurate things than Kamala did) is clearly not right.

 

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

It is clearly right when one lies more than the other.

Lex Fridman shivered in his bed as you posted this 

[Frylock]

1 hour ago, questionreality said:

The debate is between two people - not four. Please tell me the last time it happened, that the moderators of presidential debates were fact checking?

If you can't see the problem of fact checking only one candidate and not fact checking the other a single time, then I pity you.

Your bias speaks for itself and it's amusing to see this on an "actualized" forum

 

Facts don't care about your feelings.

[questionreality]

1 hour ago, El Zapato said:

Here's the thing:  One person says they believe that the economy is better under Biden-Harris, the other says Haitian immigrants are eating the neighborhood's cats and dogs?  Who would you fact check (while ensconced in a real-time discussion).  A non-biased person would not have to ruminate on that for long.  But in truth, I am highly biased.  I know that something is seriously wrong with right-wingers.  And, I came to that conclusion from serious study ranging over 40 years.  Sorry 'bout dat'.

Prior to the advent of Dump, fact checking was foregone because everyone knew politicians lie as a way of life.  Dump took it down fifty notches to the outer rim of the first layer of hell

Both should be fact checked, if fact checked at all. It's a debate between 2 people, not 4.

If you want to change the format - that's a different thing.

1 hour ago, El Zapato said:

 I know that something is seriously wrong with right-wingers.  And, I came to that conclusion from serious study ranging over 40 years.  Sorry 'bout dat'.

Left-wingers are just as bad, but you don't see it due to bias. Over the last 10 years especially they have shown their true colors.

 

45 minutes ago, zurew said:

Thats why they gave Trump the last word every single round.

And? If Kamala wanted to continue, they would of let her also. But it was part of her strategy to let him ramble on and make himself look bad.

45 minutes ago, zurew said:

Also thats why they let Trump to not answer any question in a direct way and to ramble on.

Kamala also did not answer all the questions directly, starting from the 1st one that she was asked. Did you totally forget this?

45 minutes ago, zurew said:

You would shout "bias", in a scenario where there are two people  - one who shat his pants and gets called out for it, and the other who didn't shit his pants doesn't get called out for the same thing.

Very bad analogy.

This is a debate that we are talking about - you either fact check both candidates on everything or you don't at all.

 

 

 

[BlueOak]

@questionreality

You have no left-wing major parties in America.

You have an authoritarian right party.
And a center-right party.

These two maintain power due to their corporate donors, institutions, and foreign governments, who, as a balance like to maintain a certain level of authoritarianism while removing all socialism and balancing libertarianism. 

Both of them have fascist elements, I mention this because both of them use conspiracy in their messaging. Yes, the Republicans do it habitually, and most of their influencers invent stories or run with memes and conspiracies to earn money, but they have taught the liberals to use it also from time to time. If anyone wants to refute that, I can once again trot out the themes of fascism for anyone.

Also, there should be four people in that debate. It's supremely stupid that the population of your country tolerates a two-person binary debate or two-party democracy where everything can be scripted and run so predictably easily. I understand why the stability overall helps the structure of your country, but it's also so structured it stifles the natural flow of it.

Trump is fairly predictable in his responses, Kamala can almost be given cue cards about how he will respond. Touch his ego and its all he can focus on, it's so easy.

On another note fact-checking is good. It reduces conspiracy, reducing fascist influence, and yes both sides should be fact-checked. But that would only apply if people wanted accurate facts, rather than feeling good. Trump is a feel-good vibes candidate, which has worked for him for many years, but he's going to lose because its so open and exposed now. That and he's old, he's got so many cases against him and honestly in his governing, he's less predictable in his whims than a boring right-wing corporate liberal. This is without even adding in abortion and 2020 as thorns in his side over and over again.

Edited September 12 by BlueOak

[DocWatts]

20 minutes ago, questionreality said:

Left-wingers are just as bad, but you don't see it due to bias. Over the last 10 years especially they have shown their true colors.

Going to stop you right there. Left-wingers didn't incite a violent coup because they lost an election.

The gaslighting by folks who are trying to downplay and make excuses for the MAGA Cult is insane (though its completely in line with how fascism tends to operate).

Edited September 12 by DocWatts

[ted73104]

Donald Trump was cooked in the debate, blaming the moderators for doing "a bad job" isn't going to save Trump. Just look at the polls in the swing states now.

In my opinion, Donald Trump has to agree to another round of debate with Harris, and he has to get his stuff together and beat Harris on the debate stage or else this isn't going to just be Kamala's night, it's going to be Kamala's year!

[zurew]

1 hour ago, questionreality said:

And? If Kamala wanted to continue, they would of let her also. But it was part of her strategy to let him ramble on and make himself look bad.

And, you claimed bias and they gave Trump the last word almost every case.

Why do you suddenly talk about her strategy, when this specific thing wasn't about her, but about what the moderators did.

Also the thing you are saying there doesn't make any sense, because they could have let him ramble on without giving him the last word in almost every  round

1 hour ago, questionreality said:

This is a debate that we are talking about - you either fact check both candidates on everything or you don't at all.

Which is a made up rule you created.

Trump didn't get fact checked on everything.

If you want to argue there shouldn't be any fact checking by the moderators in principle - go for it, but if you want to argue bias, you will need to make a seperate argument for that , because so far you had no good response to the times where Trump got almost all the last words in the debate and other than that, the moderators could have gone 100x more harder on Trump if they really wanted to.

Edited September 12 by zurew

[Alex4]

I think Kamala did a solid job. 

[El Zapato]

1 hour ago, DocWatts said:

Going to stop you right there. Left-wingers didn't incite a violent coup because they lost an election.

The gaslighting by folks who are trying to downplay and make excuses for the MAGA Cult is insane (though its completely in line with how fascism tends to operate).

Exactimundo.  Since all those people left...Nyuk! Nyuk! Nyuk! the Dem party, the Dems have been showing their true colors which are a desire to set society on the upward track to a higher level of consciousness.  And it is so, so, difficult for the other party to understand... .  They simply do not have the wiring to glimpse what that means. Unfortunately, according to Dr. James Fallon (now deceased) and me they are on the road to extinction.  Again, a tragedy, but nature knows best.  

[DocWatts]

3 hours ago, BlueOak said:

@questionreality

You have no left-wing major parties in America.

You have an authoritarian right party. And a center-right party.
 

If we wanted to be more precise, the Dems are effectively a centrist party with a Center-Left (social-democrats like Bernie, AOC), and a Center-Right (neoliberals like Hilary Clinton and Obama) wing. With Biden and Harris falling somewhere in the between these two wings.

If America has a parliamentary system, the Dems would probably be two or three different parties.

Edited September 12 by DocWatts