Support NeoGAF

[Leunam]

People like to bring up Hillary and her (lack of) charisma but I think Samantha Bee pretty much nailed it at the end here.

Clinton is no Obama, sure, but I think people are placing too much value on the 'I'd have a beer with him' factor and its a hell of a double standard. And charisma isn't a universal thing either, for all of Trumps hot air and belligerence he's still drawn lots of people to his rallies with his message not just because of what he says but because of how he says it.

 

[AkumaNiko]

 

[HMD]

At this point I expect Kanye West to make it as far as Trump in 2020.

 

[mugwhump]

So have there been any REAL polls yet?

 

[johnsmith]

So have there been any REAL polls yet?

Yeah. Clinton won.

CNN poll was 62% Clinton 27% Trump

 

[Xe4]

So have there been any REAL polls yet?

It looks like around a 2 point bounce for Clinton, putting her at around 3-5%, we'll know more by Friday and into the weekend.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features...unce-could-make-a-big-difference-for-clinton/

People like to bring up Hillary and her (lack of) charisma but I think Samantha Bee pretty much nailed it at the end here.

Clinton is no Obama, sure, but I think people are placing too much value on the 'I'd have a beer with him' factor and its a hell of a double standard. And charisma isn't a universal thing either, for all of Trumps hot air and belligerence he's still drawn lots of people to his rallies with his message not just because of what he says but because of how he says it.

Haha, I know it's been said, but watching that video makes it hilarious how everyone was saying Hillary needed to be playing 4-D chess to win the thing, while all Donald needed to do was not shit his pants. And Donald shit his pants.
The bar was set so low for him he tripped over it with his pants down.

 

[PHOENIXZERO]

Yeah, people who are already voting for Trump still will, same for Clinton and I doubt there's many who are truly undecided.

 

[effzee]

The real question is, does SNL even do good anything anymore.

If they wanted a good Trump they could have just hired Anthony Atamanuik and had James Adomian run in mid-debate as Bernie.

But SNL has to keep plugging their B-tier talent.

Yeah it does actually. Last few seasons have been great.

Shitting on SNL has just become thing people say.

 

[Armaros]

Yes, every single Clinton scandal across the decades is nothing more than a smear campaign. She is perfect, and you are a Good And Moral Person for your unblinking support of her. Keep telling yourself that. At least you're OK!

You can't even argue against Clinton without bringing up the classic false dichotomy of 'hillary is 100% guilty of what I'm arguing' vs 'that means you think she is Perfect'. One of the final destination of a failed argument.

And you claim you aren't biased.

 

[AndyD]

What I will not accept, however, is this hypocritical rubbish that she's some pure as the driven snow martyr, for whom a good thirty years of semi-regular scandals is either a smear campaign, conspiracy theories (though some certainly are) or ignorable blots on an otherwise flawless record. ...

(I also recognise and appreciate that while I think it says a lot that many people here continue to ignore the testimony of the victim about Clinton in this particular case, I'm not slagging off those who've responded to my points perfectly reasonably and fairly, even if we totally disagree.)

I guess I am failing to see this magical majority who hold her as some pure martyr. Nearly everyone acknowledges she is not perfect, no politician is. But the amount of hypocritical scrutiny she is held to because of being a Clinton and being a woman is ridiculous. I honestly don't recall Bush Jr. being held to the same super high scrutiny for his father's deeds. I do however recall Obama being held to impossible standards for being black. You really need to reframe your position and arguments to be grounded in reality in this aspect.

That said, are you an attorney, a public defender or a judge, or involved in the legal practice in a significant way? Because if not, then most who are would tell you that the actions in this case are not unusual. They are not abnormal, and it's only with hindsight that you can question it. And your questioning of experts based on statements without evidence is ludicrous. These experts are called that for a reason. They often see routine and extreme cases on a regular basis and have a far better understanding of the events than the victim. They are able to have an often criticized by lay persons professional detachment that allows them to look at the events, facts and evidence and frame them appropriately for the judge and jury. Do mistakes happen, sure, but by and large arm chair second guessing by lay people later is meaningless. It amount to the very same type of witch hunts you decry.

Personally, I think part of why I'm not a big fan of Clinton is because of how she compares to Obama. He was a charismatic, younger black person leading a hype train campaign based on hope and change, and Clinton is just another stuffy old white person. It's especially glaring since Obama's elections are the only ones I've been old enough to vote in.

I'm thrilled to see a woman on her way to the white house, but in most other respects it feels like a step backward.

I don't hate her or think she's a snake, though, and I will be voting for her.

This I agree with. She is no Obama, not even close, but it's undeniable she is nevertheless laying down the foundation for future women. That said I think it was Obama's incredible skill and polish that got him elected and reelected relatively smoothly. If Clinton were on the same level Trump would be laughed out of the US. And if Obama were not as able as he is, he would have lost.

 

[ZealousD]

http://i.imgur.com/CtbiHHu.jpg

So.... Carly Fiorina?

 

[Leona Lewis]

Washington (CNN)The Commission on Presidential Debates revealed in a one-sentence statement Friday that Donald Trump's audio was impacted earlier in the week.

"Regarding the first debate, there were issues regarding Donald Trump's audio that affected the sound level in the debate hall," the commission said in a statement. No other details were immediately made available.

What issues could there have been? He obviously heard Hillary well enough to interrupt her 51 times.

 

[EmpressInYellow]

What issues could there have been? He obviously heard Hillary well enough to interrupt her 51 times.

And moreover...why does it matter? The audience was specifically instructed not to make noises or respond to what the candidates said, so it's not even like it was potentially depriving him of applause.

 

[SparkleMotion]

And moreover...why does it matter? The audience was specifically instructed not to make noises or respond to what the candidates said, so it's not even like it was potentially depriving him of applause.

You think there's nothing wrong with the audience having trouble hearing half of the debate?

 

[MrSaturn99]

What issues could there have been? He obviously heard Hillary well enough to interrupt her 51 times.

I can't.

 

[Ithil]

You think there's nothing wrong with the audience having trouble hearing half of the debate?

Did the 80 million people watching have trouble hearing him?

 

[EmpressInYellow]

You think there's nothing wrong with the audience having trouble hearing half of the debate?

I think whether or not the people in the auditorium heard the debate is largely irrelevant to the actual effect/fallout of the debate, given that the overwhelming majority of people who watched it weren't in the auditorium.

 

[rokkerkory]

Yeah. Clinton won.

CNN poll was 62% Clinton 27% Trump

But liberal news media can't be trusted