• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Presidential Debate #2 |Washington University| Grab me right in the Ken Bone

Who won?

Results are only viewable after voting.
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Maledict

Member
teruterubozu said:
I'm surprised someone from UK is relying on polls after Brexit.
Click to expand...

The polls called Brexit correctly. Leave was ahead in the aggregate of polling.

It is a complete myth that the polls were wrong on Brexit. The amount of panic in this forum over the polls at the time shows that.

I really don't understand d where this myth has come from given that it's objectively false and happened less than 6 months ago. Maybe people are getting it confused with the 2015 election?
 
E

elfinke

Member
Accurate summary/transcription:

http://waitbutwhy.com/2016/10/second-presidential-debate.html

Martha: Okay last question, thank fucking god.

Audience Question: It sounds kind of fun and hilarious to make you two say something nice about each other. Go.

Clinton: His kids aren’t terrible people. Somehow.

Trump: The bitch can fight.

Anderson: I’d like to extend my thanks and apologies to the 790 million people who watched this. Goodnight.
Click to expand...

Thanks America for that wonderful shitshow. I wanna see the receipts of a few of these so-called 'undecided voters' given their reactions throughout the show to different things, Ken Bone notwithstanding.

I'd be embarrassed if that were a debate between parents over who is to be the captain of a little league team. Well, embarrassed for one of them anyway.

Good fucking grief at Trump, and at anyone who thinks he was anything other than sniffingly horrible; I have to put some of it down to education and cultural differences, otherwise I can't possibly comprehend how that conclusion can be found. Just his vocabulary and general sentence structure is so far from what I would call 'capable to be President of local sports club', never mind leader of a country.

Any time he opens his trap he is shown up as someone not capable of eloquently, lucidly, clearly, enunciating publicly, and he strikes me as probably not used to speaking to a female who is acting in an adversarial position to him, given how quickly he turns to speaking loudly or interrupting Hilary (something something temperament). Even on subjects that he probably does legitimately know something about (like tax, or money), it seems he is blinded by pussy-grabbing rage and consequently unable to clearly expound any policy or ideas, instead relying on 'great', 'big', believe me' etc Trumpisms and three-word slogans, all sure signs that you're dealing with someone who isn't interested in expanding their base.

After enjoying Obama's glorious skills as an orator for the past 8 years, I just can't believe that Trump has been given this platform to talk from - the content of what he says barely even matters, which makes it all the more ridiculous when when he does speak, and he lies and says... well we know... there's a public litany of shit to this end, #sextape at 3am being the most recent.

I'm still ashamed that this country elected Tony-fucking-Abbott into its highest office, but even with our bar set that low Trump has me turning away from the screen in face-puckered yuck expressions.
 
I

Ithil

Member
Fox_Mulder said:
Just seen the debate...
Yep, Trump is going to win. Sorry Usa/World.

The problem with Hillary is that she isn't able to create empathy with people.
Click to expand...

So you think Trump, who answered a young woman's question about her experiencing Islamophobia by blaming Muslims for it and doubling down on his own Islamophobia, is empathetic?
 
V

VariantX

Member
Stop It said:
Because the other 45% are the limits to Trump's support anyway. He's playing to his base and honestly think it's going to carry him to victory.

He has no idea how to broaden his appeal so had stopped trying. Does anyone remember his hilarious attempts to court black voters? He's done. No he didn't crash and burn last night but he's incapable of righting the ship now.

By election night he's going to basically stand alone. The question is now does the rest of the GOP get out now and hope they can save the Senate and Congress. They're in catch 22 land because Trump can tell his base to screw them for screwing him. If that happens? 2 years at least of Democratic domination of US politics, yey!
Click to expand...

Those were NEVER attempts to court black people, they were attempts to seem less racist to undecided white people and white people uncomfortable with his racism. His entire pitch was basically," your lives suck, vote for me what do you have to lose?" Thats it, beginning to end. He says this in the midst of a fight for equal treatment under the law and unjustified killings perpetrated by law enforcement. If he doesn't know what black people and other minorities have to lose by now because people have taken to the streets in protest for it, he ain't trying to know.
 
R

Ravensmash

Member
Trump just came across as an angry child throughout a lot of that debate.

Sadly, I presume that means a lot of his base thought he did a good job. The best job.

It's actually quite surreal thinking back to what I just watched...
 
M

Maledict

Member
Gattsu25 said:
I thought this was a false narrative. Didn't the polls show Brexit winning near the end and people just thought the polls were wrong?
Click to expand...

Yep, that's exactly what happened. We didn't want to believe it - heck, even the leave voters in the thread were doubting it would happen. But the polls were right.

2015 general election was the big polling misfire. I think people conflate the two - which is wrong, because a British general election is *insanely* hard to poll compared to a referendum or a USA presidential election. When The country has been polled on simpler things (Brexit, Scottish independence) the polls have generally got it right.
 
A

AnotherDayAnotherDollar

Banned
Window said:
Just started watching. The last debate could be considered entertaining (in the way watching Trump's buffoonery has been). But this is just tragic. The level of conversation here has absolutely tanked. The audience certainly didn't help. Ultimately it all reflects the fact that almost 40% of the US population is willing to vote for this man. America needs to enter into some serious introspection after this election.


As an outsider observer as well, I agree. Trump's rise as not been caused by the sheer force of his own will but by the will of a large part of US voters. This should be obvious of course but the realization didn't set in till looking at what the response has been by a segment of the population over the past few days and towards the debate.
Click to expand...

There will always be conservative nutcases everywhere. Didn't Trudeau barely best Harper who is insane and had proven to be insane? The brexit vote as well. Not excusing 40% of America supporting Trump, and probably 20% being racists religious nut jobs, but it's not a US only thing.
 
O

Ozigizo

Member
Ravensmash said:
Trump just came across as an angry child throughout a lot of that debate.

Sadly, I presume that means a lot of his base thought he did a good job. The best job.

It's actually quite surreal thinking back to what I just watched...
Click to expand...

But it only appealed to his base, which is not what he needed to do.
 
M

mjp2417

Banned
Glass Joe said:
No. In fact I never offered an opinion on the email scandal. Simply replying to a poster who, to me, came off as saying that Trump would jail his opponents just to do so, which is contextually misleading.
Click to expand...

"You'll be in jail" is an unambiguous threat of pure political retribution. There is nothing "contextually misleading" about it.
 
I

Ithil

Member
Glass Joe said:
In jail over the email scandal, not because she's merely a political opponent. Judging by the rest of your post, you're following the race well. There'a no need to try to trick the uninformed reader in that manner, it's simply deceptive and underhanded.
Click to expand...

He directly stated he would order the justice department to appoint a special prosecutor for her. That is politicizing the justice department, which is straight out of Nixon's playbook
 
G

Ganondolf

Member
Maledict said:
No it wasn't. I'm not sure where you were reading, but as a U.K. Person the polls were absolutely not like that at all. We had HUGE amounts of panicking over the fact the polls had swung towards leave at the end in the Brexit threads in this forum over it.

I really don't understand where this Brexit myth came from. The result was completely inline with the average of the polling, and in fact leave had the slight edge in the aggregate.
Click to expand...

This is YouGov (UK biggest polling site) Eve of Vote Poll which shows Remain in front by a very small margin:

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2016/06/22/final-eve-poll-poll/

although polls did swing to leave in the month before the vote it swung back according to polls before the vote. also telephone polls showed a 72% Stay vote whilst online was a lot closer.
 
E

Eidan

Member
One thing I learned last night, is that a lot of GAF is very impressed by puffed up machismo and aggressiveness.

Trump looked disheveled and restless the entire night, and everything he said was tailor made to appeal to the angry uneducated white men that have turned him into their sacred cow.

Unfortunately, the Breitbart reader base alone isn't enough to win an election. He did nothing to reverse the perception that the veil of normalcy has fallen from his campaign. The freak show has been laid bare, and saying he would jail his political opponent isn't going to change that. He lost last night, and he's losing the election, I'm much more interested in the Senate races now.
 
T

tanooki27

Member
Glass Joe said:
In jail over the email scandal, not because she's merely a political opponent. Judging by the rest of your post, you're following the race well. There'a no need to try to trick the uninformed reader in that manner, it's simply deceptive and underhanded.
Click to expand...

the FBI frigging absolved her.

poor play by you trying to trick people into thinking Trump's agenda in this regard is anything less than extralegal strongman bullshit
 
benjipwns

benjipwns

Banned
ClosingADoor said:
Sure, the media isn't perfect. But if you can't see the difference between let's say CNN airing a report or opinion panel about an election, and a corporation buying ad space with the intend to promote or vilify a candidate, I don't know what to tell you.
Click to expand...
Well, I was being a bit exaggerated as I do see a difference, the latter is more honest in its advocacy than CNN.

ClosingADoor said:
And yes, there are restrictions on the press and speech in certain cases. Sometimes that is needed to protect the public.
Click to expand...
How is the public protected by having their First Amendment protected rights suppressed by the government in violation of the law?

SG-17 said:
The Constitution established the 3/5ths clause and protections for slavery in its text.
Click to expand...
The 3/5ths clause was a good thing, not far enough, it should have been 0/5ths but better than the alternative. So it gets a partial pass on that.

There are no protections for chattel slavery in the text. Slavery itself is clearly in violation of the Fifth Amendment and it's unfortunate that the Thirteenth Amendment did not abolish it.

There is a rather unfortunate temporary restriction on Congress outlawing importation of slaves for twenty years, and Article Four, Section Three is an even more unfortunate imposition on states that wished to block slavery. But nothing is perfect and compromise was needed. The fugitive slave laws were notably absent in the Articles of Confederation so that was certainly a backwards step in the name of compromise.

SG-17 said:
Constantly changing and adjusting, to demand perfect absolute adherence to the specific words of the law without exception or compromise is fucking foolish.
Click to expand...
I changed one word in this quote. Because it's important. It's not a "document" it's the law. And it states:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances
Click to expand...
It's crystal clear. You want to change that to grant Congress the power to abridge those rights, you fucking amend it. You don't destroy liberty and the rule of law like the Court did in Dred Scott or Plessy and justify it because "things change."

The law provides a process for changing it, you don't just handwave the clear text of the law because you want to suppress the rights of some minority. (Well, I mean you can, and clearly the government does and has, but ideally it follows the law and ideally citizens support the idea of the government at least following the law.)

tanooki27 said:
the FBI frigging absolved her.
Click to expand...
No, it didn't. Comey reprimanded her actually, he simply found no grounds to charge her with anything. Which is appropriate from the known facts. She clearly did screw up and violate regulations, but it didn't rise to criminal negligence or worse.
 
G

Ganondolf

Member
K

Kinyou

Member
Ithil said:
He directly stated he would order the justice department to appoint a special prosecutor for her. That is politicizing the justice department, which is straight out of Nixon's playbook
Click to expand...
Can't believe that happened. It's like something you'd expect to hear from a dictator.
 
G

Gattsu25

Banned
SlipperyFishes said:
http://www.comres.co.uk/polls/daily-mail-itv-news-eu-referendum-poll-2/
https://ig.ft.com/sites/brexit-polling/
https://yougov.co.uk/news/2016/06/22/final-eve-poll-poll/
All in the morning of the vote.
Click to expand...
First link is treating surveys and polls similarly. Seems sloppy.

Last two are talking about how a +10 point Remain lead evaporated into just a 2 point lead (likely within the margin of error) indicating a hard swing toward Brexit that people didn't take seriously until Brexit happened.
 
RocknRola

RocknRola

Member
I kinda fell asleep at about the 1h30 mark, when they were talking about energy policies I think (?). Not sure, I was barely awake at that point.

Did I miss anymore shenanigans and dirt throwing?
 
C

ClosingADoor

Member
benjipwns said:
Well, I was being a bit exaggerated as I do see a difference, the latter is more honest in its advocacy than CNN.


How is the public protected by having their First Amendment protected rights suppressed by the government in violation of the law?
Click to expand...
The public is not the same as corporations. Corporations are not individuals, so they do not enjoy the same rights. For example, they can't vote and neither should they.

Corporations due to their nature can have access to vastly larger resources then individuals, and can use those to push their agenda forward. That should not always be accepted, since the agenda of corporations would be to create more shareholder value, which is not always in the public interest. So restricting their rights somewhat is not a bad thing.
 
G

Glass Joe

Member
mjp2417 said:
"You'll be in jail" is an unambiguous threat of pure political retribution. There is nothing "contextually misleading" about it.
Click to expand...

If you agree he's saying it in context of the email scandal - which you feel would be political retribution - then okay. If you think he quipped "you'll be in jail" with no context around it, then I'd have to offer a different perspective.
 
M

metalslimer

Member
RocknRola said:
I kinda fell asleep at about the 1h30 mark, when they were talking about energy policies I think (?). Not sure, I was barely awake at that point.

Did I miss anymore shenanigans and dirt throwing?
Click to expand...

Last Question was say something nice about each other

Clinton: You have nice kidss
Trump: She is a fighter who never gives up
 
R

rashbeep

Banned
Gordon Shumway said:
Was this mic broken as well? Sounded like he was taking bigger bumps than last time..
Click to expand...

ziQk1ZJ.jpg
 
T

taoofjord

Member
Baron von Loathsome said:
Clinton: C
Trump: D

Clinton had an opportunity to get Trump by the balls and failed to capitalize on it, but on the bright side, that's more than you can say for Trump.
Click to expand...

I think she did pretty great, all things considered. Not sure why you expected that of her. Going after Trump in that way would have probably just blown up in her face.
 
E

excelsiorlef

Member
Glass Joe said:
If you agree he's saying it in context of the email scandal - which you feel would be political retribution - then okay. If you think he quipped "you'll be in jail" with no context around it, then I'd have to offer a different perspective.
Click to expand...

He's literally threatening to circumvent the FBI to throw her in jail for something that isn't a crime...

She
Did
Not
Commit
A
Crime

This isn't a matter of opinion it's legal fact
 
G

Glass Joe

Member
tanooki27 said:
the FBI frigging absolved her.

poor play by you trying to trick people into thinking Trump's agenda in this regard is anything less than extralegal strongman bullshit
Click to expand...

You should follow the conversation. I only stated that Donald's threat was in relation to the email scandal and not merely out of the blue.
 
C

captive

Joe Six-Pack: posting for the common man
Roboleon said:
So your position here is that threatening to jail a political opponent for something the justice system has already investigated and determined to not be worthy of prosecution is normal statesmanlike behavior, and not behavior we usually associate with despots in states with a questionable understanding of the basics of a constitutional democracy?
Click to expand...
But Loretta Lynch is one of Clinton's choices for Supreme Court, obviously it's a conspiracy.
 
T

Tingle

Member
Glass Joe said:
If you agree he's saying it in context of the email scandal - which you feel would be political retribution - then okay. If you think he quipped "you'll be in jail" with no context around it, then I'd have to offer a different perspective.
Click to expand...

So you are saying its okay for Trump to threaten to jail Clinton for a crime as long as he pretends its not just pure political pettiness? Even when the FBI itself said Clinton shouldn't be jailed after their investigation and didn't commit a crime?
 
D

DragonSworne

Banned
taoofjord said:
Not sure why you expected that of her. Going after Trump in that way would have probably just blown up in her face.
Click to expand...


Or it would have caused the Republicans to pull Trump off the ticket which is the last thing we need. Keep Trump around as long as possible to guarantee victory for the Democrats.
 
S

SlackAdjuster

Member
This shit is all funny until you realize one of these two buffoons will be running our country shortly. The possibly good part about any of it, no matter who is elected - this type of nonsense might be exactly what we need as a country to wake up and realize we need to make some serious changes in the way we do things.
 
S

shinra-bansho

Member
Glass Joe said:
If you agree he's saying it in context of the email scandal - which you feel would be political retribution - then okay. If you think he quipped "you'll be in jail" with no context around it, then I'd have to offer a different perspective.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure if you're being deliberately obtuse but directing the Justice Department to investigate a political opponent under the foregone premise that you will put them in jail, is a dictatorial abuse of power that would make the likes of Vladimir Putin proud.
 
E

excelsiorlef

Member
SlackAdjuster said:
This shit is all funny until you realize one of these two buffoons will be running our country shortly. The possibly good part about any of it, no matter who is elected - this type of nonsense might be exactly what we need as a country to wake up and realize we need to make some serious changes in the way we do things.
Click to expand...


?

Two buffoons?

Also who is laughing?
 
C

Crimson_Gold

Member
SlackAdjuster said:
This shit is all funny until you realize one of these two buffoons will be running our country shortly. The possibly good part about any of it, no matter who is elected - this type of nonsense might be exactly what we need as a country to wake up and realize we need to make some serious changes in the way we do things.
Click to expand...

Oh boy...it isn't even close. One is a capable person with baggage and the other one is grabbing life and every woman he can by the pussy
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
[TNYT] Brazil Blocks X After Musk Ignores Court Orders
Social News Community 2
69
3K
ManaByte replied
[Bustle] Please Respect Mia Khalifa’s Rebrand
6 7 8 9 10
499
70K
Maiden Voyage replied
  • Locked
Pfizer’s Covid Vaccine Over 90% Effective, applying for FDA authorization later this month
2
67
8K
TaylorSwiftFan replied
Dakrest Dungeon 2 first look reveals a sequel done right
Opinion News 2
60
11K
Bartski replied
Big Business and Government: Grand conspiracy or ramblings of a mad man?
3
2K
Soodanim replied
Top Bottom