First 2020 Presidential Debate

[Recursoinominado]

7 minutes ago, Opo said:

U don't understand green. 

[Thewritersunion]

I’m proud to announce that this debate sucks. 

[Preety_India]

The second presidential debacle is scheduled on Oct 15 and the last debacle is on Oct 22.

 

[Matt Skinner]

Couldn’t help myself ?

(Yes I’m voting for Biden; honestly I don’t think he’s that big of a douche from what I know. He’s just old and a politician.)

Edited September 30, 2020 by Matt Skinner

[DocWatts]

Just imagining a world where Bernie is taking Trump to task on the bullshit erupting out of his mouth (and doing so with conviction in a way that connects with people), instead of an uninspiring old man who's plan is to hope that Trump self destructs and he wins by default, without having to inspire people or get anyone excited for what a Biden presidency would look like.

Might as well have had a loaf of white bread at that other podium for all the good that these debates are doing. Trump has had four years to make an ass of himself; I just hope that working class and elderly people in the Swing states have become sick of Trump's antics, and that a peaceful transition of power can take place (can't believe I'm actually saying this).

[Harikrishnan]

5 hours ago, Recursoinominado said:

You guys seem to forget how Trump won in the first place! He was way too dominant in debates, made everyone look like passive amateurs, he knew how to control the crowd reaction in all debates that had one, he was a walking meme getting massive media exposure and several viral videos on the internet because of this. That's how the public began to saw him as a strong leader.

Yes, he is kind of dumb and low-consciousness but so are most of American population and they respond to strength rather than smart and well formed opinions (which they cannot relate at all).

He manipulated the publics fear talking non-stop about topics like China and presenting himself as the strong solution, the one with the firm hand needed to do the job.

Remember that people judge not by what they hear but by how it is said and who is saying it.

I am all on board with what you said. Thats why i feel trump is gonna win if these is how next 2 debates end up.

Yes, he is kind of dumb and low-consciousness but so are most of American population and they respond to strength rather than smart and well formed opinions.  I will also like to add this forum doesnt even represent .00000001% of voters in america.

Edited September 30, 2020 by Harikrishnan

[Harikrishnan]

1 minute ago, Husseinisdoingfine said:

 Trump has no chance of winning

I also hope same.

[Jodistrict]

If you want a sense for how far America has declined in civility and intelligence compare the debates last night to the Kennedy-Nixon debates.  

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbrcRKqLSRw
 

[DocWatts]

25 minutes ago, Husseinisdoingfine said:

I swear Trump has no chance of winning

If we had a system in America that was as democratic as it claims to be then sure. With the rules being what they are, we've had two of the last five elections go to the candidate who lost the popular vote.

Edited September 30, 2020 by DocWatts

[Scholar]

Watching the fall of an empire. It's interesting, Trump cannot really lose in these kinds of debates. He can deny everything, and usually only people already motivated against him will make the effort to check whether he is lying or not. Additionally he can play completely outside of the rules of decency, because he is Trump. He will not get damaged at all by disrupting Biden or arguing with a moderator. He can go for the lowest blows, and he was probably holding back for the future debates aswell.

 

I think this is a perfect manifestation of the failure of the american political system. Your system is a relic of the past and you seem to have lost the ability to reform. It seems like your system is not equipped to handle 21st century market forces and technology.

[aurum]

This whole thing reinforced my belief that we should do away with "debates" and replace them with something else entirely. The very idea of "debating" is very Orange, with assumptions of objective facts and rational inquiry as the method to get to the bottom of them.

Call me naive, but it would be amazing to turn on the TV and just see actual dialogue and conversation between candidates. No one attacking or defending, instead just sharing their beliefs and perspective. That in my mind would be how a Green presidential election would look.

[DocWatts]

18 minutes ago, aurum said:

This whole thing reinforced my belief that we should do away with "debates" and replace them with something else entirely. The very idea of "debating" is very Orange, with assumptions of objective facts and rational inquiry as the method to get to the bottom of them.

Call me naive, but it would be amazing to turn on the TV and just see actual dialogue and conversation between candidates. No one attacking or defending, instead just sharing their beliefs and perspective. That in my mind would be how a Green presidential election would look.

Agreed, but the system you're describing only works if both sides are acting in Good Faith and have a modicum of respect for one another, otherwise the whole thing falls apart. In a healthy and functioning Democracy, the system you're describing would be the way to go.

Becomes very hard to have a meaningful dialogue when the opposing political factions are living in completely different versions of reality. Only way I could see that happening is if the moderator is a stage Yellow person with a deep understanding of how to facilitate dialogue between people with wildly different worldviews, *and* both parties were there in Good Faith.

Edited September 30, 2020 by DocWatts

[aurum]

3 minutes ago, DocWatts said:

Agreed, but the system you're describing only works if both sides are acting in Good Faith and have a modicum of respect for one another, otherwise the whole thing falls apart. In a healthy and functioning Democracy, the system you're describing would be the way to go.

Becomes very hard to have a meaningful dialogue when the opposing political factions are living in completely different versions of reality. Only way I could see that happening is if the moderator is a stage Yellow person with a deep understanding of how to facilitate dialogue between people with wildly different worldviews, *and* both parties were predisposed to at least respect one another to some degree.

I agree, we are obviously not ready for such an enlightened presidential debate just yet. The good that is coming out of this is that we are being shown with great clarity how poor our current way of doing things is.

[Zega]

@Husseinisdoingfine  I've been to Idaho and other solid red states. Trump winning is more likely than you may think.

[Opo]

31 minutes ago, Zega said:

@Husseinisdoingfine  I've been to Idaho and other solid red states. Trump winning is more likely than you may think.

Anecdotes are not that accurate. 

[Gidiot]

I disagree with people saying Trump won because he was aggressive, that may work with the Republican primary and party which he overtook, but for the general election he largely won because Hillary was received as crooked and had a lot of baggage as well as a arrogant campaign strategy, also people didn’t know how he would govern and also thought they were fed up with types like Hilary, now that he’s been president for four years and ruined much of the country we have a choice to go back to stability or uncertainty and I think people want certainty as well as to feel loved which Biden is sending that message, Biden doesn’t have any scandals or emails coming out to haunt him and a lot of people just see trump as a bully.

[Leo Gura]

Trump became more unhinged in the second half which didn't look as good for him.

[Hardkill]

9 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Trump became more unhinged in the second half which didn't look as good for him.

So, then who do you think had better optics and tone overall for the entire debate?

 

[Leo Gura]

31 minutes ago, Hardkill said:

So, then who do you think had better optics and tone overall for the entire debate?

I think people who love a strong-man will love Trump's aggressive style. That is all his supporters already though. They love him regardless. They will see it as a clear victory against sleepy Joe.

Overall it seems like Trump's over-aggressive style turned off most centrist/undecided voters, which is who matters most:

But don't forget, the dumber people are, the more they will be swayed by aggression and bullying. And the American voters have always been pretty dumb.

Anyone who isn't obviously anti-Trump at this point is so dumb and uninformed that it's hard to even justify allowing them vote. But here we are. Democracy by the selfish and ignorant.

[Preety_India]

 

Some people might be swayed to not vote for Trump.