Debate

[shu09]

The first couple of minutes were promising, but as expected it devolved into a shouting match. To be fair, it was Trump doing most of the shouting. Hillary played it cool most of the time but both candidates were lacking in substance.

Strategy-wise, Clinton did a great job slow-playing Trump. She dropped piece by piece of bait early on until Big Don couldn't resist anymore.

I suspect Clinton will get a bounce in the polls in the coming days. It's still her race to lose but she stopped most of Trump's recent momentum tonight.

 

[cernjSHU]

The first couple of minutes were promising, but as expected it devolved into a shouting match. To be fair, it was Trump doing most of the shouting. Hillary played it cool most of the time but both candidates were lacking in substance.

Strategy-wise, Clinton did a great job slow-playing Trump. She dropped piece by piece of bait early on until Big Don couldn't resist anymore.

I suspect Clinton will get a bounce in the polls in the coming days. It's still her race to lose but she stopped most of Trump's recent momentum tonight.

I think Hillary won the debate pretty clearly. He did not look Presidential and showed his temper. However, she lacked the knockout punch zinger that he was wide open for but she could not deliver that line like a Reagan or Bill Clinton could. It will be interesting to see what happens. Nothing will change Trump supporters but was this good enough for the undecided?

 

[Merge]

I think Hillary won the debate pretty clearly. He did not look Presidential and showed his temper. However, she lacked the knockout punch zinger that he was wide open for but she could not deliver that line like a Reagan or Bill Clinton could. It will be interesting to see what happens. Nothing will change Trump supporters but was this good enough for the undecided?

I'm assuming it was planned to not go for any zingers because she came out looking poised and trump looked like a tool. If she went for the zinger, trump would shoot back and would be better at it.

Hillary did what she needed to do. Trump was horrible throughout.

 

[SPK145]

Clinton was terrible. Trump was even worse. Advantage Clinton. Neither is presidential.

All I heard from Clinton was "more government, more government, more taxes, more taxes, more government, more government, more taxes, more taxes."

All I heard from Trump is "I'm an asshole, I'm an asshole, I'm an asshole."

Very scary with these two now that we've allowed the president to do whatever he/she wants ala Bush signing statements and Obama's executive actions.

 

[bluerock]

Political pundits give Clinton the win. Most online surveys give Trump a clear cut win, with the Drudge report at 80% Trump. So who won? Brutal to watch. Wanted to slap both of them at various points.
Scary is the best description.

 

[Merge]

Political pundits give Clinton the win. Most online surveys give Trump a clear cut win, with the Drudge report at 80% Trump. So who won? Brutal to watch. Wanted to slap both of them at various points.
Scary is the best description.

Online surveys are horrendous.

Clinton won. It wasn't close.

 

[HALL85]

HRC clearly won the debate which was awful in total, but the question is, will it move the needle on the vote? She looked liked she practiced for four days and spit out all of her rehearsed lines, and he looked like he didn't practice at all. Did he say China, Mexico or Hannity more times?

 

[Section112]

Sad state of affairs. Very little substance was discussed. He said she said. Seemed like Clinton got the best of Trump and Trump took the bait. I will be very unhappy with whomever wins the election as they both suck. There is not even a choice that is just OK in my opinion among the two. Both have massive fatal flaws. America is F'd with these two.

 

[CaptBob]

What a mess we have on our hands, it's a shame that the polls don't have a "none of the above" option. Hillary must have been practicing months on that fake smile or had it surgically implanted. How low

 

[Merge]

Hillary must have been practicing months on that fake smile or had it surgically implanted. How low

I don't like her either but I have seen a lot of people criticizing how she prepared for the debate... that is absurd.

She came in prepared. Why is that a bad thing?
Her performance was very similar to her debates in the primaries.

 

[Bobbie Solo]

Country will be fine domestically with Hillary, just like it is now. All you doomsayer conservatives need to relax with the hyperbole & see the real picture. She will cozy up to the big money interests & simply continue the status quo. She is not the crazy liberal that you all dream up & that I wish she was. There will be some progression on social issues, so that I like at least. Now if your biggest issue is our nat'l debt, theeeeen you might have a point. But no one short of Gary Johnson would even TRY to make a dent in that, so whatever. Republicans have proven that they won't despite what they say, that's for sure.

And guess what? With all your gerrymandering and ****ed up propaganda firmly in place, Congress will probably stay in the Republicans hands. So they will just block everything she wants to do anyway, just like now.

I do worry about her with our military overseas though. She will continue the great diplomacy makeover that the Obama admin has put forth. But I do worry about her willingness to thump her chest and send our boys into harms way for no good reason. She won't go backwards in Iran most likely b/c of her role in the great deal initially getting done, but who knows what she might do elsewhere. I hope her hawkishness is somehwat of a show for the election, but Libya, Iraq & Syria show otherwise.

 

[SPK145]

Very good post, bobbie.

 

[Piratz]

Rarely post on this board of the site, but the surreal campaign season continues. He looked worse than her but not nearly enough to put the election away yet, especially in this news cycle and with 6+ weeks remaining.

His supporters are not moving and I don't know what he's given the undecided voters other than someone who is not a "politican" (or perhaps more accurately in his case, just someone who hasn't held office, lol)?

Trump was Trump. This is exactly who he is, who he has been, and who he will always be. If you thought he'd pass up an emotional reaction for a systemic dismantlement of her long and sorted history, you're not going to get that even though doing that would be simplistic for any reasonable person given her long and sorted history.

bobbie's post is spot on. I'd also add I think Trump is actually closer to Hillary than his the conservatives in his party in terms of true mindset. He's kept it closeted well during this cycle.

Amazing these are the two candidates generated. It's a question of which is worse or more dangerous. The devil you know or the devil you don't?

 

[Bobbie Solo]

That's why getting money out of politics is the most important issue of our time. All other issues can be solved much easier if we had free & fair elections. We need an amendment to end fundraising. Publically fund elections, limit the amount of time campaigning can be done (like in the UK), create a more equal playing field, and slowly see the 2 party system die.

Once candidates are not at the behest of their donors, you will see more honest voting & campaigning, and from more people that actually live in the real world...not just plutocrats who see us as plebians and suck at the corporate teat to maintain power.

 

[cernjSHU]

That's why getting money out of politics is the most important issue of our time. All other issues can be solved much easier if we had free & fair elections. We need an amendment to end fundraising. Publically fund elections, limit the amount of time campaigning can be done (like in the UK), create a more equal playing field, and slowly see the 2 party system die.

Once candidates are not at the behest of their donors, you will see more honest voting & campaigning, and from more people that actually live in the real world...not just plutocrats who see us as plebians and suck at the corporate teat to maintain power.

I don't ever see the end of the two-party system. It is entrenched in this country. Quite frankly, I do not like the multi-party systems. It can and does lead to unstable governments whereas the two-party system leads to stability. When there are movements in this country which could develop into a third party, the Republicans or Dems will subsume it. And in the case of the Tea Party actually have taken over the Republican Party.

I think Citizens United is a terrible case which allows the uber wealthy to influence too many elections. Its just plain wrong. However, to think that we can get all money out of elections is just being naive.

 

[Bobbie Solo]

That pessimism is exactly what they want us to believe. Do you know the current generation is the only to not pass a constitutional amendment?

There is a relatively strong movement to pass this amendment, and one of the biggest organizations behind it is Wolf-PAC. They are choosing to bypass Congress, and getting the amendment passed state by state in the lower houses. So far they have the amendment passed fully in 5 states, with 7 more pending in the near future (likely to pass). If they get 2/3's of the states to pass the initiative, that will actually force a consitutional convention (yes, like the 1700's) where the amendment can be passed into law regardless of what the legislative & executive branches do or want. The founding fathers were pretty smart to inject that move into the Constitution, eh? Look it up.

Now, if they actually get near that point, of course it will force the two branches to address the situation and hopefully listen to the will of the people for once. They will do it imo just to avoid the embarrassment of such a clever legislative trick. And yes it requires a Herculean effort and is nowhere near happening. But incrementally is the only way to change these kind of things. I applaud their effort and hope against hope that it happens.

 

[Piratz]

Putting his politics and platform aside for a second, the campaign run by Bernie Sanders was a pretty good template for the type of movement needed. But generating that kind of energy is really tough to do. Look at the mountain he had to climb. Wasn't even enough for him.

And turnout becomes an issue. Will these people show to vote in our antiquated voting system?

Less than half the country decides who runs it. Usually only about 30-40% vote in non-Presidential Congressional terms. The country hasn't hit even as much as 60% turnout in a Presidential year in nearly 50 years (1968). Some years even below 50% for the President.

 

[cernjSHU]

Bobbie, that will never happen. Just look at the map to see you will never get 2/3 of the States to do this. However, with a Hillary victory, I do believe the Supreme Court's bent will change and I think the Court will reverse itself on Citizens United. This is the best chance of a change.

 

[SnakeTom]

To criticize Hillary for being prepared for the debate is ridiculous. You would expect anyone running for President to be prepared for the debates. Trump apparently came in to the debates minimally prepared if at all. To me it's scary to think that if a candidate comes in unprepared for the debates what he would do preparation wise as President. Do we really want a President that just shoots from the hips & makes decisions on their spur of the moment emotions.

Now I agree that the choice we are given is not good at all. Probably the worst combination of candidates that there has been in quite a long time, but I do think Hillary is the better of the two if only by default.

I have recently been reading a book on one of our great or near great Presidents - Harry Truman (ranked #6 by most of the historical society's). Harry had two motto's that both of this years candidates could learn by: 1. "the buck stops here" and 2. "it's amazing what you can accomplish if you do not care who gets the credit". Obviously Trump's ego is much too big for him ever give credit to another and Hillary seems to look for excuses when things go wrong rather than accepting the responsibility. (why in the world was she pointing a finger at Colin Powell regarding the e-mail controversy). Anyway that's my take on this election.

Tom K

 

[SPK145]

Tom,

1) Glad to see you back on the boards

2) Is that David MacCullough's (my favorite author) book on Truman?

 

[SnakeTom]

Tom,

1) Glad to see you back on the boards

2) Is that David MacCullough's (my favorite author) book on Truman?

No actually it is a book mostly about Truman's post presidency years. He's a very interesting man. Unlike the Presidents of today who make a fortune after leaving office, Harry refused all offers because he felt it improper to commercialize the presidency (and this was at a time when former Presidents did not receive a pension).

PS: I do intend to read the MacCullough book however even though it is 900+ pages -lol. It is considered to be the premier work on the Truman years.

Tom K

 

[SPK145]

PS: I do intend to read the MacCullough book however even though it is 900+ pages -lol. It is considered to be the premier work on the Truman years.

I've read all his books.

 

[Bobbie Solo]

I really hope, especially if Trump loses, some good books come out from his campaign insiders after Election Day. There's gotta be some funny and mind blowing nonsense that has gone on. Should be as entertaining as the ones about that moron Palin after '08.

 

[bluerock]

Truman was an excellent president and fascinating man. Interesting enough, if alive and in politics today , I think his conservative values would most likely lean him toward being a Republican. Wishful thinking ,lol

 

[SnakeTom]

Truman was an excellent president and fascinating man. Interesting enough, if alive and in politics today , I think his conservative values would most likely lean him toward being a Republican. Wishful thinking ,lol

The party labels mean little over time. It seems that what they stand for changes with each generation. It's hard to say what party Harry Truman or for that matter Eisenhower would be in today since both were centrists and both political parties have gone toward the extremes over time. Remember the Republican Party was the party of Lincoln while the Dem Party was the party of segregation for long periods of time. Pre WW2 & also WW1 it was the Dems that favored international involvement & the GOP were the anti war isolationists. Teddy Roosevelt the trust buster would probably be a Dem now while Woodrow Wilson was a segregationist that praised the KKK. Pre FDR black voters were Republicans.

However getting back to Truman he risked his Presidency to promote Civil Rights legislation and integrated the military by executive order which caused the Southern States to leave the Dem convention & run their own candidate for president. With the Dem left also splitting from the party to run former VP Henry Wallace for president what chance did Harry have to be re-elected? None according to the pollsters hence Dewey was a shoo in. Funny thing though when Harry left office in 1953 his poll numbers were were at an all time low. But history has since shown how great a president that he was. Just think of all the things that happened in that time span 1945-52. The end of WW2, dropping the bomb, the nuclear age, the cold war, the marshall plan, Truman Doctrine, Berlin blocade & airlift, TV, Korean War, and of course he was the first President to push equal rights.

Anyway I digress. Now what was the topic again - lol.

Tom K

 

[SnakeTom]

Just as a quick follow up to that last post on how party label & allegiances change, going back to the 40's and into the 50's the Solid South was always Dem while New England was Rock Ribbed Republican.

Tom K

 

[donnie_baseball]

Truman was an excellent president and fascinating man. Interesting enough, if alive and in politics today , I think his conservative values would most likely lean him toward being a Republican. Wishful thinking ,lol

You could probably say that about many historical Democrats. It's true for my ancestors, all dyed-in-the-wool working class Democrats. I'm certain that most of them would rather die a second death than vote for the party of transgender bathrooms and Cecile Richards.

I made the mistake of reading this thread before logging in. Did a certain boob say that the Iran deal was a "great" deal? Hoping this was sarcasm, but probably not.

 

[bluerock]

While growing up ,our household never even considered voting anything but Democratic. It was just the way it was. My grandfather ,who immigrated to America in the 1880s was influential in the Democratic Party and was appointed a judgeship by the county chairman. I still have a certificate signed by Woodrow Wilson for my grandfathers work with the party. I always voted Democratic into the 1980s for fear of being excluded from my family ( just joking). However I became more and more conservative. I try to stay independent, but my views are far more conservative today then ever.
I feel Trump would make a poor president, but Hillary is dishonest and not to be trusted.
No win situation.

 

[Piratz]

SnakeTom brings up a very important point on how the parties evolve to the times. This notion is why I also agree with cernj's take on the two-party system versus a more fragmented style. Every generation is different. For instance, "Obama Democrats" versus "Kennedy Democrats".

It's up to the citizens to stay engaged, participate, and drive a candidate/platform. It can be done and has been demonstrated many times.

Anyway, Trump is Trump. Why would he prepare? He thrives on fast-talk, double-talk, and general BS-ing. If he was remotely serious and willing to put in the work, he'd be lapping her by now and would likely to have my vote (not that it likely matters in NJ, lol). I have trouble casting my vote for someone like him. He's a circus. He's shown to be completely incompetent, IMO, and I'm not even sure what his political concepts are.

And his line of insults, ridiculousness, and childish behavior is making us dumber and more polarized as a nation, imo.

She's no prize either for many reasons, I know.

 

[Piratz]

I really hope, especially if Trump loses, some good books come out from his campaign insiders after Election Day. There's gotta be some funny and mind blowing nonsense that has gone on. Should be as entertaining as the ones about that moron Palin after '08.

I am sure it's wild in there. He's already had what, 3 campaign managers? The guy just does his own thing. Period.

He's beyond entertaining. The Tweeting, the craziness with Cruz, trashing John McCain, mocking the journalist in poor health, insults left and right, lol... Unreal.

A classic provocateur and showman. Built for what society has become. We kind of deserve it in a way. People lick it up. I wasn't even sure he wanted to President, but simply loved the campaigning, attention, and bazillion dollars of free press the media gave him.

But then it got serious and he actually could be President.

 

[shupat08]

I doubt any books can/will be written.

Pretty sure I heard somewhere that Trump makes everyone on his campaign - even unpaid volunteers at local levels - sign a lifetime non disclosure contract.

Can the contract be voided? Only a lawyer who has access to the contract would know.

But he knows he's a non serious, circus act candidate running a dumpster fire campaign. He won't let his name get laughed at for the rest of his life with the info that would come out in those books.

 

[HALL85]

At the end of the day the debate did nothing to change my opinions of both and that Neither of them will get my vote.

 

[Bobbie Solo]

Shupat I read the same. I just think someone will do it anyway and lawyer up. The lure of a big payday would be too large. Anyway alot of Trumps lawsuits are just bluster.

 

[cernjSHU]

At the end of the day the debate did nothing to change my opinions of both and that Neither of them will get my vote.

Who is your vote going to? Gary Johnson? Who is way out of his league and is a kook of some serious dimension. Jill Stein completely unfit.

the President will be either Trump or Clinton. Why not make your vote matter as distasteful it may be to you?

 

[shupat08]

Johnson doesn't know a foreign leader and what Aleppo is.

Stein - a doctor - says vaccines cause Austism.

..........................

Is NJ Weed Man running for President or is he still in jail?

 

[HALL85]

Why not make your vote matter as distasteful it may be to you?

Because I have a concious.

 

[Bobbie Solo]

Stein didn't say that. It's been debunked.

Gary Johnson being poor with foreign policy & also a libertarian means that we would lessen our military footprint, and therefore stop dropping bombs on brown people, brings our boys back home, and save some money. Sounds good to me.

 

[shupat08]

Stein didn't say that. It's been debunked.

Gary Johnson being poor with foreign policy & also a libertarian means that we would lessen our military footprint, and therefore stop dropping bombs on brown people, brings our boys back home, and save some money. Sounds good to me.

Debunked?

https://www.google.com/amp/amp.slat..._pandering_to_anti_vaxxers.html?client=safari

Her words. While she might not have said it outright. She's using the correct dog whistles to rile up and "give support" to the anti vaxxers.

Johnson literally doesn't know the name of any other world leader. And then he says "umm I'm having another Aleppo moment." That's scary. Sorry.... And while I am an opponent of nation building, neo conservativism etc etc I do understand that we live in a bi (maybe tri) polar world. And if we are not solving a problem (politically, giving aide, overseeing elections, negotiating, etc etc) you can bet you bottom dollar that Russia and China will. And they will gain more from political power throughout the world. None of that necessarily has to do with "going to war".

 

[cernjSHU]

Stein didn't say that. It's been debunked.

Gary Johnson being poor with foreign policy & also a libertarian means that we would lessen our military footprint, and therefore stop dropping bombs on brown people, brings our boys back home, and save some money. Sounds good to me.

Really? Have you watched this guy speak at all? Anytime there is any type of spotlight on him, he has major screw ups that no person running for President should have. On top of that, he has a silly. goofy, odd ball personality which is very disturbing. I think there is something wrong with him psychologically.

 

[bluerock]

Obviously, some people, Woody Johnson being one of them, contributed 18 million to Trump in a 24 hour period. So his message appeals to some people,or it's anti Hillary cash. Neither Hillary or Donald will get 1 cent from me.