UGLI baby
Well-Known Member
I felt the same way for a while after the DNC, he's since surged in the polls, plus all the Mexico stuff.
Trump is BIG TIME again. Believe Me. Believe Me.
Call Your Shot (Presidential Race)
- Thread starter UGLI baby
- Start date
I felt the same way for a while after the DNC, he's since surged in the polls, plus all the Mexico stuff.
Trump is BIG TIME again. Believe Me. Believe Me.
RJF
Well-Known Member
He YUGE!
According to an NBC news poll trump won last night's Commander in Chief forum 63% to 37%. That is significant.
Joe Bagadonuts
Well-Known Member
I watched it. I'm shocked by that poll. I thought it was pretty much a draw. Both of them had multiple bad moments.
Red
Well-Known Member
I'm not surprised. Even his own network, NBC, said that Matt Lauer's performance was "a disaster". His own network. Concentrates on Clinton's emails, a well worn subject, and then cuts her short on other issues, because he spent at least 1/3rd of her allotted time on the emails. Lobbed softballs at Trump.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/john...matt-lauer-do-america-a-favor_b_11913788.html
"It’s beyond belief really that the beltway media would be treating political candidates vying for the highest office in the land through two separate lenses. One has to climb through hoops and the other just doesn’t have to urinate on stage."
As has been noted elsewhere, Trump seems to be held to a lower standard then Clinton. Almost as if so many pundits have decided "well, we know by now he's not very informed, so let's not be ridiculous and ask any questions that might challenge him intellectually".
Joe Bagadonuts
Well-Known Member
Lauer asked tough questions to both candidates. I liked that aspect of it. Do you think Trump was lobbed softballs? What were they? The only area where I feel like he may have fallen short with Trump is when he allowed him to claim he opposed Iraq. My understanding is that there's very little proof of Trump's position on that, but he was definitely asked in a Howard Stern interview where he answered, "Yeah, I guess so." That does not seem to support the adamant opposition that he claims to have had.
Clinton supporters are simply wrong about the number of interruptions. Lauer talked over Clinton 7 times. He talked over Trump 13 times. It was her reaction to being hurried that makes people believe she was being treated unfairly. Trump dealt with the interruptions much better, IMO.
Clinton came off looking very bad on the emails. Trump came off looking terrible on his ISIS strategy.
Can you mention a thing or two that each candidate looked good/strong on?
I'm assuming there had to have been a couple bright moments?
Joe Bagadonuts
Well-Known Member
Definitely.
Donald Trump didn't wet his pants.
Hillary Clinton remembered her throat losanges.
There were more, but those were the two that really stood out.
Joe Bagadonuts
Well-Known Member
BTW, the most disappointing moment of the event was when the ship didn't sink. Would have been a shame to lose all of those veterans/military personnel, and maybe Matt Lauer, but think what a sigh of relief the nation would breath if we got to reset this thing.
Jonah
Well-Known Member
I think the race going into the debates will be a toss up. I don’t know who will win and I doubt anybody else really knows either. Just a lot of wishful thinking or partisan boasting. As of today Clinton is the favorite but there’s almost two months to go and a lot can change.
Right now there are still an unusually large number of undecided voters (up to twenty percent of the electorate) which means the debates will matter much more than in recent elections. If Trump comes out of the debates looking composed and presidential and holds his own against Clinton’s better grasp of policy, her slim lead will vanish overnight. If he comes off looking out of his depth and full of himself, she will get a boost from which he probably won’t recover.
I’ve read where the debates this year will have less rapid fire questions from the moderators and instead have extended 15 minute segments on major topics and that the candidates will have the opportunity to respond to each other directly. Clinton has spent a lifetime immersed in public policy issues so this new format should work to her strength. I’ve been anybody but Trump since the day he first announced more than a year ago, but if Clinton can’t use the debates to finally showcase why she would be a better, more qualified president, she doesn't deserve to win.
Right now there are still an unusually large number of undecided voters (up to twenty percent of the electorate) which means the debates will matter much more than in recent elections. If Trump comes out of the debates looking composed and presidential and holds his own against Clinton’s better grasp of policy, her slim lead will vanish overnight. If he comes off looking out of his depth and full of himself, she will get a boost from which he probably won’t recover.
I’ve read where the debates this year will have less rapid fire questions from the moderators and instead have extended 15 minute segments on major topics and that the candidates will have the opportunity to respond to each other directly. Clinton has spent a lifetime immersed in public policy issues so this new format should work to her strength. I’ve been anybody but Trump since the day he first announced more than a year ago, but if Clinton can’t use the debates to finally showcase why she would be a better, more qualified president, she doesn't deserve to win.
Red
Well-Known Member
I had posted a somewhat lengthy reply here, but just now deleted it. Much of that reply involved my belief that you have often acted as an apologist for Trump in the Trump threads. Imagine? I'm sure you will wonder how can anyone think that, and that's the reason I deleted that reply. It just is not worth going back and forth on this anymore.
Joe Bagadonuts
Well-Known Member
I don't see why you think that's a softball. It's an extremely direct question that goes right to the heart of the matter. The fact that Lauer asked Trump but not Clinton may imply that he thinks it's a given that she is qualified but questionable that he is.
Also, what you are saying about your impressions of my opinion does not surprise or offend me. I don't know why you think it would. Of the two Clinton is the worse IMO, but both are far below the threshold of consideration for me. . That's why I won't be voting for either of them.
I don't see how you are interpreting my Stern comment as some sort of support of Trump, BTW. I'm the one saying that Matt Lauer shouldn't have let Trump get away with saying that he was an adamant opponent of the war when the small piece of public record we're aware of shows that was not the case. As for the Purple Heart thing, to me it sounded like an obvious joke. It seems like some people want to find a way to be offended by every single thing he says or does. For example, did you hear Bill Clinton yesterday explaining how "Make America great again" is actually racist code talk? Ridiculous.