2020 POTUS election

[Billiejeens]

Today isn't "decision day". We need to see the debates first.

Why?

We need to see both men answering relevant questions about the policies they want implemented.
We need to see their awareness, and seriousness for the job interview.
I remember when Papa Bush lost a debate for looking at his watch instead of paying attention.
I can only imagine the hilarious gaffes Biden will come out with.

Nope
We fired him for going back on
Read my lips.

 

[dblack]

If you saw any of Trump's recent pressers he does just fine. He must be listening to his debate coaches.

How long do you think that's going to last, when Biden doesn't take the bait and Trump starts getting frustrated? After that, I think he's going to find excuses for why there shouldn't be a 2nd or 3rd debate.

There are 3 scheduled debates. If Joe skips out on them he is not a serious candidate. He fails the job interview.

He's not going to skip the debates. Trump's the one likely to find excuses when he can't get under Biden's skin. If his people have told him anything, it's to not let Trump bait him, but just point whenever he goes off on an irrelevant tangent.

copied from the post just above yours (#35)
"...I'd want to hear each candidate talk, at length, about their ideology, their philosophy of government."

I want to hear interesting college level intellectual debates. Not shouting matches or shit sling fests. Not a battle of "one liners" either. There is an ocean of difference between the candidate's positions on almost everything, energy, immigration, taxes, defund the police, voting rules, reparations, green new deal, gun control, open borders, single payer healthcare, free college, China, Iran, NK, gangs, antifa, BLM, riots, statues, and on and on and on....

Agreed. But again, I ask, have you ever seen a televised debate with room for anything like that level of discourse? All I see are canned questions that are either softballs - no doubt injected by the campaigns - or irrelevant gotchas to provoke gasps from the crowd. I'll vote for the first candidate to call bullshit on the whole thing.

 

[kyzr]

We need to see both men answering relevant questions about the policies they want implemented.
We need to see their awareness, and seriousness for the job interview.

Have you EVER seen that happen in a televised debate? I sure haven't.

I remember when Papa Bush lost a debate for looking at his watch instead of paying attention.

Exactly. Doesn't that seem moronic?

Its not moronic. Its a job interview. The guy either wants to be there or not. He was probably too old to care.
That's why its important. Its a job interview between two men for 1 job. Who wants it more, and who is the best candidate.

So you think Clinton was better than Bush because Bush looked at his watch? Sorry, that makes no sense.

For the debate to be worthwhile to me, I'd want to hear each candidate talk, at length, about their ideology, their philosophy of government. Instead it's a ridiculous game show full of gotchas and gaffes. It's just a demagoguery contest.

1. It wasn't a big deal to me, but it was to the MSM, the talking heads analyzing who won. I always (used to) look at my watch.
2. I agree about hearing the candidates debate the serious issues, but the <<<<spin>>>> room is where they say who won the debate based on "partisan" gaffes and spin. Truth isn't truth and facts aren't necessarily facts. It depends which partisan playbook you're reading from.

It sounds like you're making my argument. It's a media circus, and that's about it. A spectacle for the braying jackasses in the media. It doesn't show us anything important about the candidates, other than, perhaps, their complete lack of dignity and self-respect.

Totally agree. Its up to the moderators to set and enforce the rules to keep the debate on track. The Trump-Clinton debates were ok. Here's a summary of the 1st:

10 Moments That Mattered From Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump's First Debate

Clinton and Trump faced off in their first general election debate.

abcnews.go.com

 

[Billiejeens]

If you saw any of Trump's recent pressers he does just fine. He must be listening to his debate coaches.

How long do you think that's going to last, when Biden doesn't take the bait and Trump starts getting frustrated? After that, I think he's going to find excuses for why there shouldn't be a 2nd or 3rd debate.

There are 3 scheduled debates. If Joe skips out on them he is not a serious candidate. He fails the job interview.

He's not going to skip the debates. Trump's the one likely to find excuses when he can't get under Biden's skin. If his people have told him anything, it's to not let Trump bait him, but just point whenever he goes off on an irrelevant tangent.

copied from the post just above yours (#35)
"...I'd want to hear each candidate talk, at length, about their ideology, their philosophy of government."

I want to hear interesting college level intellectual debates. Not shouting matches or shit sling fests. Not a battle of "one liners" either. There is an ocean of difference between the candidate's positions on almost everything, energy, immigration, taxes, defund the police, voting rules, reparations, green new deal, gun control, open borders, single payer healthcare, free college, China, Iran, NK, gangs, antifa, BLM, riots, statues, and on and on and on....

Agreed. But again, I ask, have you ever seen a televised debate with room for anything like that level of discourse? All I see are canned questions that are either softballs - no doubt injected by the campaigns - or irrelevant gotchas to provoke gasps from the crowd. I'll vote for the first candidate to call bullshit on the whole thing.

We hire a team.

 

[kyzr]

Today isn't "decision day". We need to see the debates first.

Why?

We need to see both men answering relevant questions about the policies they want implemented.
We need to see their awareness, and seriousness for the job interview.
I remember when Papa Bush lost a debate for looking at his watch instead of paying attention.
I can only imagine the hilarious gaffes Biden will come out with.

Nope
We fired him for going back on
Read my lips.

OK, that's true. But I'm very happy with the Newt-Clinton balanced budget. I think there was even a surplus. So I'm not a fan of tax cuts and big deficits.

 

[dblack]

We need to see both men answering relevant questions about the policies they want implemented.
We need to see their awareness, and seriousness for the job interview.

Have you EVER seen that happen in a televised debate? I sure haven't.

I remember when Papa Bush lost a debate for looking at his watch instead of paying attention.

Exactly. Doesn't that seem moronic?

Its not moronic. Its a job interview. The guy either wants to be there or not. He was probably too old to care.
That's why its important. Its a job interview between two men for 1 job. Who wants it more, and who is the best candidate.

So you think Clinton was better than Bush because Bush looked at his watch? Sorry, that makes no sense.

For the debate to be worthwhile to me, I'd want to hear each candidate talk, at length, about their ideology, their philosophy of government. Instead it's a ridiculous game show full of gotchas and gaffes. It's just a demagoguery contest.

1. It wasn't a big deal to me, but it was to the MSM, the talking heads analyzing who won. I always (used to) look at my watch.
2. I agree about hearing the candidates debate the serious issues, but the <<<<spin>>>> room is where they say who won the debate based on "partisan" gaffes and spin. Truth isn't truth and facts aren't necessarily facts. It depends which partisan playbook you're reading from.

It sounds like you're making my argument. It's a media circus, and that's about it. A spectacle for the braying jackasses in the media. It doesn't show us anything important about the candidates, other than, perhaps, their complete lack of dignity and self-respect.

Totally agree. Its up to the moderators to set and enforce the rules to keep the debate on track. The Trump-Clinton debates were ok. Here's a summary of the 1st:

10 Moments That Mattered From Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump's First Debate

Clinton and Trump faced off in their first general election debate.

abcnews.go.com

Huh? Every single snippet in that video was irrelevant nonsense. Empty insults, bragging - lying, a bunch of stupid one liners designed to make nice sound bites. Nothing at all like the substantive discussion you referenced earlier.

 

[kyzr]

If you saw any of Trump's recent pressers he does just fine. He must be listening to his debate coaches.

How long do you think that's going to last, when Biden doesn't take the bait and Trump starts getting frustrated? After that, I think he's going to find excuses for why there shouldn't be a 2nd or 3rd debate.

There are 3 scheduled debates. If Joe skips out on them he is not a serious candidate. He fails the job interview.

He's not going to skip the debates. Trump's the one likely to find excuses when he can't get under Biden's skin. If his people have told him anything, it's to not let Trump bait him, but just point whenever he goes off on an irrelevant tangent.

copied from the post just above yours (#35)
"...I'd want to hear each candidate talk, at length, about their ideology, their philosophy of government."

I want to hear interesting college level intellectual debates. Not shouting matches or shit sling fests. Not a battle of "one liners" either. There is an ocean of difference between the candidate's positions on almost everything, energy, immigration, taxes, defund the police, voting rules, reparations, green new deal, gun control, open borders, single payer healthcare, free college, China, Iran, NK, gangs, antifa, BLM, riots, statues, and on and on and on....

Agreed. But again, I ask, have you ever seen a televised debate with room for anything like that level of discourse? All I see are canned questions that are either softballs - no doubt injected by the campaigns - or irrelevant gotchas to provoke gasps from the crowd. I'll vote for the first candidate to call bullshit on the whole thing.

That's why I think elections are just about propaganda and the deep-state and MSM getting their candidate elected, period.
They control both parties to an extent, and too much of the "news/propaganda" programming.
The Bush-Gore debates were ok. The Clinton-Trump debates were superficial. I'm very much looking forward to the 1st debate in (57) days.

 

[dblack]

If you saw any of Trump's recent pressers he does just fine. He must be listening to his debate coaches.

How long do you think that's going to last, when Biden doesn't take the bait and Trump starts getting frustrated? After that, I think he's going to find excuses for why there shouldn't be a 2nd or 3rd debate.

There are 3 scheduled debates. If Joe skips out on them he is not a serious candidate. He fails the job interview.

He's not going to skip the debates. Trump's the one likely to find excuses when he can't get under Biden's skin. If his people have told him anything, it's to not let Trump bait him, but just point whenever he goes off on an irrelevant tangent.

copied from the post just above yours (#35)
"...I'd want to hear each candidate talk, at length, about their ideology, their philosophy of government."

I want to hear interesting college level intellectual debates. Not shouting matches or shit sling fests. Not a battle of "one liners" either. There is an ocean of difference between the candidate's positions on almost everything, energy, immigration, taxes, defund the police, voting rules, reparations, green new deal, gun control, open borders, single payer healthcare, free college, China, Iran, NK, gangs, antifa, BLM, riots, statues, and on and on and on....

Agreed. But again, I ask, have you ever seen a televised debate with room for anything like that level of discourse? All I see are canned questions that are either softballs - no doubt injected by the campaigns - or irrelevant gotchas to provoke gasps from the crowd. I'll vote for the first candidate to call bullshit on the whole thing.

That's why I think elections are just about propaganda and the deep-state and MSM getting their candidate elected, period.
They control both parties to an extent, and too much of the "news/propaganda" programming.
The Bush-Gore debates were ok. The Clinton-Trump debates were superficial. I'm very much looking forward to the 1st debate in (57) days.

Hmm.... brings me back to my original question -why? You seem to agree the debates are a shitshow. What gives?

 

[kyzr]

We need to see both men answering relevant questions about the policies they want implemented.
We need to see their awareness, and seriousness for the job interview.

Have you EVER seen that happen in a televised debate? I sure haven't.

I remember when Papa Bush lost a debate for looking at his watch instead of paying attention.

Exactly. Doesn't that seem moronic?

Its not moronic. Its a job interview. The guy either wants to be there or not. He was probably too old to care.
That's why its important. Its a job interview between two men for 1 job. Who wants it more, and who is the best candidate.

So you think Clinton was better than Bush because Bush looked at his watch? Sorry, that makes no sense.

For the debate to be worthwhile to me, I'd want to hear each candidate talk, at length, about their ideology, their philosophy of government. Instead it's a ridiculous game show full of gotchas and gaffes. It's just a demagoguery contest.

1. It wasn't a big deal to me, but it was to the MSM, the talking heads analyzing who won. I always (used to) look at my watch.
2. I agree about hearing the candidates debate the serious issues, but the <<<<spin>>>> room is where they say who won the debate based on "partisan" gaffes and spin. Truth isn't truth and facts aren't necessarily facts. It depends which partisan playbook you're reading from.

It sounds like you're making my argument. It's a media circus, and that's about it. A spectacle for the braying jackasses in the media. It doesn't show us anything important about the candidates, other than, perhaps, their complete lack of dignity and self-respect.

Totally agree. Its up to the moderators to set and enforce the rules to keep the debate on track. The Trump-Clinton debates were ok. Here's a summary of the 1st:

10 Moments That Mattered From Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump's First Debate

Clinton and Trump faced off in their first general election debate.

abcnews.go.com

Huh? Every single snippet in that video was irrelevant nonsense. Empty insults, bragging - lying, a bunch of stupid one liners designed to make nice sound bites. Nothing at all like the substantive discussion you referenced earlier.

Exactly. Thats the debate the moderators created. It was NOT the intellectual debate we all wanted. Only (57) days to the 1st Trump-Biden debate.

 

[kyzr]

If you saw any of Trump's recent pressers he does just fine. He must be listening to his debate coaches.

How long do you think that's going to last, when Biden doesn't take the bait and Trump starts getting frustrated? After that, I think he's going to find excuses for why there shouldn't be a 2nd or 3rd debate.

There are 3 scheduled debates. If Joe skips out on them he is not a serious candidate. He fails the job interview.

He's not going to skip the debates. Trump's the one likely to find excuses when he can't get under Biden's skin. If his people have told him anything, it's to not let Trump bait him, but just point whenever he goes off on an irrelevant tangent.

copied from the post just above yours (#35)
"...I'd want to hear each candidate talk, at length, about their ideology, their philosophy of government."

I want to hear interesting college level intellectual debates. Not shouting matches or shit sling fests. Not a battle of "one liners" either. There is an ocean of difference between the candidate's positions on almost everything, energy, immigration, taxes, defund the police, voting rules, reparations, green new deal, gun control, open borders, single payer healthcare, free college, China, Iran, NK, gangs, antifa, BLM, riots, statues, and on and on and on....

Agreed. But again, I ask, have you ever seen a televised debate with room for anything like that level of discourse? All I see are canned questions that are either softballs - no doubt injected by the campaigns - or irrelevant gotchas to provoke gasps from the crowd. I'll vote for the first candidate to call bullshit on the whole thing.

That's why I think elections are just about propaganda and the deep-state and MSM getting their candidate elected, period.
They control both parties to an extent, and too much of the "news/propaganda" programming.
The Bush-Gore debates were ok. The Clinton-Trump debates were superficial. I'm very much looking forward to the 1st debate in (57) days.

Hmm.... brings me back to my original question -why? You seem to agree the debates are a shitshow. What gives?

Why do you buy an occasional Powerball ticket?
There's always a chance that the debate will be a classic winner. Even if the odds say no.

 

[dblack]

If you saw any of Trump's recent pressers he does just fine. He must be listening to his debate coaches.

How long do you think that's going to last, when Biden doesn't take the bait and Trump starts getting frustrated? After that, I think he's going to find excuses for why there shouldn't be a 2nd or 3rd debate.

There are 3 scheduled debates. If Joe skips out on them he is not a serious candidate. He fails the job interview.

He's not going to skip the debates. Trump's the one likely to find excuses when he can't get under Biden's skin. If his people have told him anything, it's to not let Trump bait him, but just point whenever he goes off on an irrelevant tangent.

copied from the post just above yours (#35)
"...I'd want to hear each candidate talk, at length, about their ideology, their philosophy of government."

I want to hear interesting college level intellectual debates. Not shouting matches or shit sling fests. Not a battle of "one liners" either. There is an ocean of difference between the candidate's positions on almost everything, energy, immigration, taxes, defund the police, voting rules, reparations, green new deal, gun control, open borders, single payer healthcare, free college, China, Iran, NK, gangs, antifa, BLM, riots, statues, and on and on and on....

Agreed. But again, I ask, have you ever seen a televised debate with room for anything like that level of discourse? All I see are canned questions that are either softballs - no doubt injected by the campaigns - or irrelevant gotchas to provoke gasps from the crowd. I'll vote for the first candidate to call bullshit on the whole thing.

That's why I think elections are just about propaganda and the deep-state and MSM getting their candidate elected, period.
They control both parties to an extent, and too much of the "news/propaganda" programming.
The Bush-Gore debates were ok. The Clinton-Trump debates were superficial. I'm very much looking forward to the 1st debate in (57) days.

Hmm.... brings me back to my original question -why? You seem to agree the debates are a shitshow. What gives?

Why do you buy an occasional Powerball ticket?
There's always a chance that the debate will be a classic winner. Even if the odds say no.

Fair enough. On that note, when the debate airs, I'll be driving to the convenience store to buy lottery tickets. Much better odds.

 

[Zorro!]

Trump will take it unless the PA and WI governors try to overturn the election results in their states.

DEMOCRATS TALKING ABOUT SOULS IS LIKE CAR SALESMEN TALKING ABOUT MORALS: Is America’s “soul” up for election? What if it loses?

Politics used to be about things like tax cuts. When politics was about tax cuts and subsidies and spending on projects and putting a stop sign at the end of the street, Americans could bear to get a little more or a little less from election to election. An election result could be disappointing. But it was not catastrophic. Quality of life is very important to Americans. But quality of life is not all-important. Americans will argue with each other over quality-of-life issues. But they will not kill each other over them. Settling things like tax cuts through elections worked out just fine.

But politics is not about things like tax cuts anymore. Now politics is all about causes. Causes like Black Lives Matter. Causes like LGBTQ+. Causes like Climate Change. Causes like Defunding the Police. Causes like Systemic Racism, and Open Borders, and Reproductive Rights, and Trans Rights, and Dismantling the Cis-Normative Patriarchy. And on. And on.

You cannot settle causes like these by vote. For one thing, they are indivisibles. They will not bear compromise. To suggest compromise may be considered a form of "violence." Nor may you watch, in silence, as the issues unfold -- for silence, too, may be considered a form of "violence." Besides, many of the issues are simply unsolvable. Politics has no answer to them.

Which leads to the larger reason causes like these cannot be settled by vote: Causes like these bear too great a resemblance to religion -- the nature of man, his original sin, his fallenness, and his salvation from it. Politics cannot settle disputes over dogma. They are neither soluble nor dissoluble.

Elections cannot decide causes like these. Yet these causes dominate 2020 election journalism. The 2020 election is not about quality of life. In fact, it is not about life at all. In 2020, the election is about our "soul." Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden says this election is a "battle for the soul of the nation." He has said it repeatedly and prominently. Senator Kamala Harris independently has said the same thing, even before receiving the nod for vice-presidential nominee: "The task is to fight for the soul of our country."

 

[MadChemist]

America needs to see for themselves the obvious mental decline Biden has.
It is pitifully obvious that the media and the DNC are hiding Biden away.
The little conference he did the other day, he messed up several times...mispoke a couple other times but more importantly he was reading almost everything he said. It was scripted.
We all need to see how he performs unscripted, and under pressure. The Democrats and the media will do everything they can to prevent the debates.

Can you point to the “obvious mental decline” of Biden?

I can provide plenty for Trump

You have an "obvious" meter ? Or some kind of scale you can use to rate the two candidates ?

I've never seen one.

But here is the word of someone who worked with Biden.

I am sure we'll get a response that is some kind of DNC stall-out talking point.

Former Biden stenographer says candidate a 'shell of his former self', 'would be a stomach-churning disaster'

'It is a complete difference from what he was in 2017. He’s lost a step and he doesn’t seem to have the same mental acuity as he did four years ago.'

www.lawenforcementtoday.com