2016 Presidential Debates: Third Debate

Blue Velvet

Moderator emeritus
Original poster
Jul 4, 2004
21,652
123
All good things must come to an end…

...and so, Act III of this ongoing drama; the dénouement, the climax of 2016’s presidential debates – Donald Trump v. Hillary Clinton, 9pm ET Weds… liiiiiive from Las Vegas!

Act III – here’s hoping it’s Return of the King, the one that sweeps the Oscars. Not Matrix Revolutions or Return of the Jedi.

Curtain up!

(Clinton on points)
 
  • Like
Reactions: D.T.

tshrimp

macrumors 6502
Mar 30, 2012
366
2,656
My prediction.

1. Moderators will also be debaters.
2. Moderators will ask terrible questions spurring on scandal talk instead of issues.
3. Trump will talk over Hillary, and fail to capitalize on the softballs from Clinton.
4. Clinton will have the evil grin while Trump talks.
5. Clinton, no matter how good or bad she does, will be declared the winner.
5. We will walk away thinking to ourselves...really, we chose these 2.
7. I will listen to the fact checkers and realize that fact checkers need fact checkers.
 
Last edited:

oneMadRssn

macrumors 601
Sep 8, 2011
4,738
11,030
New England
Here are the questions I am have, that I am curious to see answered tomorrow. In my view, this is truly Trump's last chance to salvage any hope. He will have a favorable moderator. If any of the questions below turn out to be answered in the negative tomorrow, then he just can't get out of his own way and losing this is entirely his own fault.
  • Will Trump actually be willing to talk concrete policy proposals? Until now he has done little more than whine about what is allegedly bad without explaining why it is bad and without proposing any actual policy changes?
  • Will Trump challenge Clinton on her policy positions? Until now he has mostly just brought up past scandals?
  • Will more than 50% of the "facts" asserted by Trump be true? More than 75%?
 
  • Like
Reactions: LizKat

tshrimp

macrumors 6502
Mar 30, 2012
366
2,656
But something could still hit the media cycle re; Trump... who knows. Personally I would like the debates to be ONLY the issues.
Agree. I just hope the moderators steer the debate away from the scandals and onto the issues.
 
  • Like
Reactions: samcraig

samcraig

macrumors P6
Jun 22, 2009
16,609
34,760
USA
The conduct in the emails and the FBI documents ARE issues. You just don't care about them. Sound familiar?
Oh Zin. Give it a rest. I would like the "scandals" of out this debate so each candidate can talk about their various platforms and their specific plans. Do you not get that? Because that's been mostly missing from both of the debates. I don't want to hear about emails or sexual assault tomorrow. Will it happen? Probably. Unavoidable. But like I wrote - I want to hear about their actual plans.

For example - will Donald attack congress and that it's a "disaster" or will he speak to his 5 point plan? And so on. I'm not saying the other things aren't important or that they aren't issues. I'm saying for this debate - I would rather they be left off the table.

But you seem to have a problem with semantics. Or you just think you can create straw man arguments whenever you want.
 

oneMadRssn

macrumors 601
Sep 8, 2011
4,738
11,030
New England
The conduct in the emails and the FBI documents ARE issues. You just don't care about them. Sound familiar?
Those aren't issues, those are scandals.

Issues pertaining to a president are things like the budget, criminal justice reform, foreign policy, military, climate change, the economy, etc. Specifically, talking about the issues should include actual forward-looking policy proposals, rather than dwelling on "feelings."
 

\-V-/

Suspended
May 3, 2012
3,151
2,619
Oh Zin. Give it a rest. I would like the "scandals" of out this debate so each candidate can talk about their various platforms and their specific plans. Do you not get that? Because that's been mostly missing from both of the debates. I don't want to hear about emails or sexual assault tomorrow. Will it happen? Probably. Unavoidable. But like I wrote - I want to hear about their actual plans.

For example - will Donald attack congress and that it's a "disaster" or will he speak to his 5 point plan? And so on. I'm not saying the other things aren't important or that they aren't issues. I'm saying for this debate - I would rather they be left off the table.

But you seem to have a problem with semantics. Or you just think you can create straw man arguments whenever you want.
Why would you want corruption at the highest level out of the debate? That is one of the most vital aspects of this presidency right now. She shouldn't even be allowed to run with what she's done. You're kidding yourself if you think this issue isn't as important as it actually is. Hillary wants to be President of the World.


Those aren't issues, those are scandals.

Issues pertaining to a president are things like the budget, criminal justice reform, foreign policy, military, climate change, the economy, etc. Specifically, talking about the issues should include actual forward-looking policy proposals, rather than dwelling on "feelings."
If you think this is a matter of just "feelings" then I don't know what to tell you. Many of us would like a real debate about real issues ... except all the issues Hillary brings up are in direct conflict with ... herself. She is two-faced and says whatever she needs to say for her convenience. Trump talks about nothing every debate and Hillary lies. So them talking about issues isn't really meaningful to anyone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zin

zin

macrumors 6502
May 5, 2010
488
6,436
United Kingdom
Oh Zin. Give it a rest. I would like the "scandals" of out this debate so each candidate can talk about their various platforms and their specific plans. Do you not get that? Because that's been mostly missing from both of the debates. I don't want to hear about emails or sexual assault tomorrow. Will it happen? Probably. Unavoidable. But like I wrote - I want to hear about their actual plans.

For example - will Donald attack congress and that it's a "disaster" or will he speak to his 5 point plan? And so on. I'm not saying the other things aren't important or that they aren't issues. I'm saying for this debate - I would rather they be left off the table.

But you seem to have a problem with semantics. Or you just think you can create straw man arguments whenever you want.
Donald will probably attack Hillary for risking America's national security, failing to comply with a federal subpoena, and risking American DS agents' lives for photo-ops in foreign countries. Hillary will probably attack Donald by screaming "Misogyny!" for half an hour.

A debate on policy (which I think is what you were saying after I going back to read it, as opposed to 'issues') is not going to happen because attacking the opponent's character is fair game. It always has been. No point expecting anything different from these two geezers of all people.
 
  • Like
Reactions: samcraig

zin

macrumors 6502
May 5, 2010
488
6,436
United Kingdom
Those aren't issues, those are scandals.

Issues pertaining to a president are things like the budget, criminal justice reform, foreign policy, military, climate change, the economy, etc. Specifically, talking about the issues should include actual forward-looking policy proposals, rather than dwelling on "feelings."
They are certainly issues when it comes to judgement.
 

samcraig

macrumors P6
Jun 22, 2009
16,609
34,760
USA
Why would you want corruption at the highest level out of the debate? That is one of the most vital aspects of this presidency right now. She shouldn't even be allowed to run with what she's done. You're kidding yourself if you think this issue isn't as important as it actually is. Hillary wants to be President of the World.



If you think this is a matter of just "feelings" then I don't know what to tell you. Many of us would like a real debate about real issues ... except all the issues Hillary brings up are in direct conflict with ... herself. She is two-faced and says whatever she needs to say for her convenience. Trump talks about nothing every debate and Hillary lies. So them talking about issues isn't really meaningful to anyone.
Trump lies too. That's not a deflection - but it's a fact. He's two-faced and says whatever he needs to say for convenience.

So if you're going to make a point - just say that a debate is futile because who are you going to believe anyway.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ronntaylor

oneMadRssn

macrumors 601
Sep 8, 2011
4,738
11,030
New England
If you think this is a matter of just "feelings" then I don't know what to tell you. Many of us would like a real debate about real issues ... except all the issues Hillary brings up are in direct conflict with ... herself. She is two-faced and says whatever she needs to say for her convenience. Trump talks about nothing every debate and Hillary lies. So them talking about issues isn't really meaningful to anyone.
Let's dissect this for a moment.

"If you think this is a matter of just "feelings" then I don't know what to tell you."
I did not mean to imply that the recent hacked emails are a matter of just feelings. I apologize if this was unclear. I was referring to Donald's typical debate rhetoric talking about how this and that is a disaster, or this and that are terrible. All of us can list things that are bad all day long - it's not productive. I'd rather hear how he plans to fix something rather than just complain about it.
"Many of us would like a real debate about real issues ... except all the issues Hillary brings up are in direct conflict with ... herself. She is two-faced and says whatever she needs to say for her convenience."
That's your opinion. She has certainly changed per position, but her current position is consistent with what the electorate wants. That is one of the points of a democracy, it forces our politicians to respond to and adapt to changes in popular opinion.

Some changes in position are good. For example, her change of opinion about the Iraq war is a good thing, it's a good change. So it her change with regard to gay marriage. Positive changes are good.

Flip-flopping is only bad when a politician adopts a popular view, and the flip-flops to an opposite view for their own benefit. Hilary is certainly guilty of the latter sometimes, but not as often as some make it out to be. For example, Obama's flip-flop on government transparency should be condemned. That is a bad change.
"Trump talks about nothing every debate and Hillary lies."
Pretty much all fact-checkers agree, Trump lies about 75% of the time. That is, he lies more often than he tells the truth. Every 4 facts Trump states, 3 are provably false. Hilary lies about 30% of the time. So to call Hilary a liar compared to Trump is plainly disingenuous.​