He isn't even complete crap. Unbelievable, George.
He isn't even complete crap. Unbelievable, George.
Trump rolls out with "No wonder you've been fighting ISIS your whole adult life" and she responds to go to her website.
If he keeps this up for another hour then he deserves to win.
He's basically talking to himself. This is ace.
She still doesn't get that she can't let it be a referendum about Trump. Everyone who will be put off by Trump already has been; she's got to offer something to the people (probably the majority) who think they're both terrible.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/...79923295600640
The leader of the free world will soon be... the Saint.
I reckon he has won this quite easily so far. There has obviously been a bit of bollocks, but he hasn't shown himself up, and all of her scripted lines have been shit.
Which I say as he ballses up his birth certificate answer.
Clinton's been better this past half, but I think the media consensus will be that Trump's won. Luckily, the media consensus seems to mean absolutely fuck all this election so who knows what it means.
Turned around there, I thought, Trump sort of reverted to his mean. I'd call it a score draw with penalties to Clinton but, again, I really have no idea how it will have gone down with the AMERICAN PEOPLE so who the fuck knows.
And the media will give it to Clinton.
Twitter dragged this one up.
Stone-cold killer.Term limits are for cucks.
Early debate results are a swing to Clinton in the election odds.
The biggest single hit to either candidate on the night was Trump's rambling, unfocused response to the nuclear weapon question. Clinton's (obviously prepared, but well-delivered) response really hammered it home. There's a good chance that either that or the "temperament" laughter are going to be the big takeaways from the debate.
538 noticed that Clinton managed to pick up and correct several Trump falsehoods without using the phrase "lie" or "liar". That doubles as helping her seem more likeable. It's an awful double-standard that she needs to do it, but she did, and it was clearly pre-mediated. They also reckon she should have gone in harder on the birth certificate stuff, but I'm not sure I agree with that. You don't need to do anything to make that sound sillier than it was, and nobody's forgotten that it happened.
Clinton needs to follow up with something more concrete, but it's a decent part one of three. I mean, we all essentially know that her policy is "more of the same please and thank you", but she at least needs to sound a little bit proactive. That said, both candidates must have noticed that whoever gets the most media in a given week loses ground in the polls. It must be a weird situation to manage.
EDIT: 538 on the outcome
As the debate winds down, I’d like to go back to the question from earlier — who’s the audience for this debate?
Given the unfavorable ratings for both candidates, it seems like one important audience is the type of voter who would like to vote for a major-party candidate but who doesn’t like Trump or Clinton. My sense is that this probably matters more for Trump than for Clinton. She’s a more conventional candidate, and we all know that there are a bunch of ways in which Trump is not — support from some party leaders has been hesitant (or nonexistent), and his policy positions, his history and his path to nomination have all been unusual.
By this measure, Trump did pretty well. He interrupted a lot and made lots of statements that his opponents won’t like, but he didn’t do anything outrageous or different from what he’s done in the past. His statements were fluid. There was no steak salesmanship. It’s probably too early to say, but for a voter who doesn’t want to stay home or vote for a party they don’t normally support, this seems like the kind of performance that would allow you to pull the “R” lever.Can't really argue with either of those conclusions. Sad that the bar for Trump is so low, mind.My editor tells me that readers want my subjective impressions of the debate, knowing full well that they’re subjective. And my impressions are that Clinton became a more plausible president tonight and Trump became a less plausible one.
The peso strengthened over the course of the debate.
EDIT: Trump sounding off about Bill's affair in the spin room. Classy stuff.
EDIT II: Or more precisely, not sounding off. The good old "I could talk about [DETAILS ABOUT THE THING I WANT TO TALK ABOUT], but I won't". A Trump special.
Trump's theme is "I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it" so you'd have to say this debate was perfectly on message today.
Not going to remotely bother any of his support.
'The cyber' has to be my favourite Trump meme of the election so far. I thought it was good the other day but claiming his 10 year old was on his way to being Anonymous with his 1337 skills was top, top stuff.
Although pretty much inferring that he hasn't paid federal tax the last few years has to be high up there.
P.S.
That was spectacularly boring. I was at least expecting some lulz but even those failed to arrive.
I feel that way reading most of Phonics posts tbh.
That hurt.
God... you sound just like your mum.Originally Posted by phonics
It was quite boring, I was expecting a bit more energy from Trump. Clinton did what she had to do, it's hard to watch her call out anyone on honesty given her record though. It's also hard to watch him deciding which of the ridiculous statements he's made in the past he wants to stick to and which he wants to backtrack on.
She's such an unconvincing speaker and so unfunny too. Reptilian tier for sure.
Then deal me in!
Trump was underwhelming and missed a lot of opportunities, but overall he was what his supporters wanted him to be: Trump. Clinton I thought did well and was as boringly poised, full of platitudes and focus group tested double speak as always.
Hillary probably edged it, but I don't think undecideds are looking for debate skills so maybe on the whole neutral to slightly in favor of Trump in the grand scheme of the election.
Of course the establishment media will fall over themselves declaring Hillary the winner, but nobody listens to them anyways.
Just seen some polls and Trump owned it according to MURICANS.
He's going to fucking walk it, isn't he.
Did they happen to be online polls?
I haven't watched the debate yet, but there was an air of West Wing 'if the thing is that he can't tie his shoes and it turns out he can, that's the ball game' in the build up to it so presumably by not saying 'nigger' or throwing his glass of water at Hillary, Trump will have won in the eyes of many.
Yeah why?
Lol at the concept of 'winning the debate.'
From what I've seen so far, who 'won' depends on the editorial slant of the source you're reading
Americans are generally even more stupid than us (see BREXIT) and their number one reaction to difficult questions (ala Brian Cox paradox theory this morning) is to completely regress and look to some fucking stupid shouty cunt that offers simple answers that to the enlightened will make everything worse. Humankind is doomed.
I'm sure whoever supports Trump will still support Trump, same for 'Hillary.' Those who haven't decided yet don't watch debates.
From initially thinking he was the worst candidate ever (which he is), I now really strongly want Trump to win. It doesn't matter to me what happens in America, so I'll go for the most entertaining option.
Trump sacked after two months to be replaced by Gareth Southgate.
Exactly.
That sounds like your marriage.
Stunning insight.
What if he starts WW3 and this time next year we're all conscripts digging in for a hellish winter in the Russian hinterlands?
So who won? What are the polls saying?
Only half decent poll so far post debate has Clinton ahead by 3 points in a 4 way race, vs. Trump being ahead by 1 pre-debate.
You're suggesting that the debate is pointless and won't change anything. It was the most-watched debate ever, and 38% of voters say that the debate will influence their decision, so -- you're wrong.
Not exactly what I said but I will say it now: That debate was pointless and won't change anything.
When you have a clown as one of the protagonists, people will come to watch the show.
'Influence their decision.' Not sure we could get much more vague than that. There is fuck all chance that 38% of the people who will show up to vote are still undecided. You know it, I know it, everybody knows it.
Now, I am not saying that debates are pointless, but that one most certainly was.
But, but... you said...
Anyways.
According to the article, "about 11% of voters are considered "debate persuadables" -- that is, they think the debates are important and are either third-party voters or only loosely committed to either major-party candidate." It won't decide the election but it will certainly have an impact.
Well, if the article says so...
In a world where the candidates are covered 24 hours a day for a full year before the election, it is unlikely that a debate will add any information which has not yet been discussed to death by the media beforehand. It could be done but that would require actual moderators and not someone just asking generic questions and then letting the candidates recite their identikit speech over and over, without ever questioning them even if they are blatantly lying/BSing/not even answering the question.
'I'll make the rich pay their fair share' she says.
How could anyone ever disagree with such a statement? Completely empty, meaningless. Yet that's what passes for 'actual policy' in these so called debates.
It's not according to the article, it's according to a recent poll. Unless you think that polls are equally pointless. Everything's pointless.
Polls are not pointless. They are ruining the democratic process.
lol at this.
Would make more sense the other way, given the debate.
Reply With Quote
