More claims first debate was "rigged"

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by thermodynamic, Oct 5, 2016.

  1. thermodynamic Suspended

    thermodynamic

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    USA
    #1
    .
    .
    .
    CAUTION: OFFENSIVE LANGUAGE IS USED, by presenter in video and by respondents of the video or its content.
    .
    A TV-G summary: The guy says nothing about anyone's facial gestures. He only cites how Trump was given far more harsh questions.
    .
     
  2. jkcerda macrumors 6502

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
  3. LizKat macrumors 68040

    LizKat

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2004
    Location:
    Catskill Mountains
    #3
    Um... I got as far as "Jewish-owned media" in that video... and bailed on his opinion, or his pitch...

    No sale here on allegation that Trump got handed harsher questions. The questions were the questions, his answers are what provoked the followups. And, on followups, Trump had ample opportunity to bring up Clinton's issues of judgment, recklessness regarding security and email handling. He couldn't focus on it, or on anything. I was surprised, actually. It was like there she was, easy target on those two issues, but Trump was talking trash about trivia instead of leaning in on her weaknesses. Maybe he got counseled not to sound like he was picking on her. Poor advice if that's what happened. When is he going to pick on her. Now, all this time after that debate? And to say again that it was somehow rigged? Rest of the planet moved on except for counting how many days he spent taking out the straw scarecrow Ms. Machado. Trump is just... dense.

    Right, a big Z.

    Guess we'll find out what Trump thinks of being asked harsh questions by potential voters on Sunday night. Now a voter is not a target you really want to aim at. He does everything backwards though, eh?
     
  4. thermodynamic thread starter Suspended

    thermodynamic

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    USA
    #4
    Why wouldn't he lean in on her weaknesses?

    Otherwise, you both make excellent points, I bailed on that (person's) diatribe once my jaw stopped dropping, and there probably is no difference because I suspect many voters' minds are made up by now.

    Sunday will be very interesting, so many things people could bring up that were already brought up by the candidates, to the point that it would be a bigger surprise if those issues weren't for the debate?
     
  5. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #6
    "Why Trump was asked the hostile questions but Hillary was not?"

    First off, the question is so open to interpretation and one's point of view that it is meaningless. How does one measure and quantify hostility?

    During the video (which I did not finish) they quote Trump as saying they didn't ask HRC about her email. Now I didn't watch the debate, but from what I understand H did indeed have to answer questions about that very subject. If so, weren't those hostile questions?

    In the end I have to wonder why you think this youtube rant warrants debate. It doesn't appear to be particularly intelligent or insightful.
     
  6. LizKat, Oct 5, 2016
    Last edited: Oct 6, 2016

    LizKat macrumors 68040

    LizKat

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2004
    Location:
    Catskill Mountains
    #7
    Well exactly. One would expect him to lean in on email and security, and I did expect him to either segue into it or just go there and see how she reacted, maybe get her off balance. He had a couple opportunities to extend inquiry into those weaknesses of hers. But he let pass his chances to do that for some reason, or got rattled after his not bad first 20 minutes or so. After that she's standing there grinning like this is a lot of fun, really... and he gets mad over that since he's not having fun any more and anyway why is she smiling.

    Trump wasn't prepared for the difference of one-on-one versus those GOP primary debates, he's not used to extended periods of being drilled on stuff solo out there, and he doesn't know how to listen while thinking "where do i want to take this?"

    He is more attuned to "do i like what I'm hearing? no? they're fired!!" not thinking okay now it's time to say "well hey lady you're one to hammer on my saying that my plans are secret, when who even knows who took our plans the last time you knew what they were?" etc etc.

    No. He was just AWOL on substance, reactive to her jabs or to Holt's followups, lost in two minutes ago, five minutes ago and getting ticked he didn't nail the previous question or remember to use that great line Rudy fed him in prep, what was it... meanwhile he's not sure he hears her next snarky remark about his policy positions, he's unable to stay in the now, gasping like a fish grabbed up off the end of the dock in a net. And then at the end there, with the Machado surprise, he really just lost it.

    WHERE DID YOU FIND THAT.

    Seriously?

    You're supposed to prepare for being surprised out of your socks and shrug it off like you knew it was coming and throw back one of some prepared, generic deflections, followed by one of four or five prepared attacks on a weak point that can be jammed into the current context. It takes a little homework. He didn't do it.

    How about something like "well you say that's her story, I'm not going to demean her by commenting on that now." Then be firm and move on. It's how that's done. I mean just dish back a put down, since Clinton was clearly trying to put him down with it. Hand it back. Go dignified, fake-protective of Machado. He gets so insulted by someone having the temerity to confront him --over anything!-- that he just can't think. He could read this tonight and process it, but still not be able to use it in the last debate on Oct 19th.

    I'd hardly recommend he confront a voter in that way on Sunday. Need something different there. He can be quick and sure in certain ways, but he can't take direction even from himself, apparently. The results can be funny if the whole thing is an SNL skit on TV. But, it's not. This is Trump running to be our President, showing us he can manage any situation on the fly. But, he can't.
     
  7. Jess13 Suspended

    Jess13

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2013
    #8
    Friendly FYI: There is high likelihood Mossad was involved in doing just that.

    Remember, on the afternoon of 9/11 Mossad operatives were arrested just outside Manhattan with traces of still-classified explosive(s) in their vehicle, after two of them (Yaron Shmuel and Sivan Kurzberg) had been witnessed happily celebrating the attack on the World Trade Center. This, after they filmed the first plane hit the first tower with foreknowledge, with Yaron later failing his FBI polygraph on foreknowledge. Tons more to say than just this, but yeah.
     
  8. LizKat macrumors 68040

    LizKat

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2004
    Location:
    Catskill Mountains
    #9
    That canard again... it seems worse than a bad penny.

    What's that example they give in statistics courses about not mistaking correlation for causality?

    Something about the rise of Protestant missionary-sponsored schools in Cuba coincident with an increase in total percentage of sugarcane devoted to production of Cuban rum?

    I might not have that quite right or might have spoilt a punchline. Anyway, bah humbug! Or let's hear the alternative scenarios vs causality. When is Mossad not Mossad.. etc.

    On topic: if the first debate was "rigged" then it was rigged by Trump declining several opportunities to challenge Clinton on two weak points, the email server setup and the handling of classified material in emails. Then we have to ask once again "Why would he not lean in on her weaknesses?" Maybe because they've been worn so thin they're no longer serviceable?
     
  9. Jess13 Suspended

    Jess13

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2013
    #10
    Canard? What are you talking about? Israeli intelligence operatives were arrested on 9/11 just outside Manhattan with traces of still-classified explosive(s). This is PDF 5, PP. 109-110 of the FBI’s Full Field Investigation report:


    PDF5PP109110.png
     
  10. Thomas Veil macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    OBJECTIVE reality
    #11
    Wow. With all the Arabs celebrating and dancing and all the Israelis celebrating and dancing, it was like a regular middle east Soul Train out there.

    With your host, Ahmad Epstein.
     
  11. samcraig macrumors P6

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2009
    #12
    At the end of the day, both Candidates are responsible for what they say and should take ownership. Trump's biggest "enemy" at the debate wasn't the mic, wasn't the questions, etc - it was himself.
     
  12. thermodynamic thread starter Suspended

    thermodynamic

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    USA
    #13
    Good point, "hostility" is histrionic; a more accurate term might be called "partisan bias" - meaning "one side got asked more glaring questions about controversies while the other side's controversies were not brought up". I think that's what people refer to.

    Another good point - it's a youtube rant. Without the profanity it'd be as boring as any other youtube video discussing the same thing.

    Also, why not watch the whole debate instead of making an inference by claiming "H did indeed"? That's something we should both do, watch it in its entirety and to then make more insightful comments since I too have only responded to what others have claimed. (I've only seen clips of the debate and for all I know they might be tightly edited in an attempt to spin.)

    There's another debate coming up anyway. That one probably will be worth the time to watch at the time.
    --- Post Merged, Oct 6, 2016 ---
    True, Sanders did say he was sick and tired about hearing the "damn emails"?



    Surprised to see how long the video trails after the quote, but she seems to be in total agreement with him on what he followed up on as reason for saying "who gives a **** about the emails, here's why". Trump didn't mention emails, he focused more on jobs and the national debt and what the US has to show for it too.
     
  13. mudslag macrumors regular

    mudslag

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2010
  14. LizKat macrumors 68040

    LizKat

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2004
    Location:
    Catskill Mountains
    #15
    ... who knew "statistics" was a trigger word?! ... I'm so sorry... ;)
     
  15. lowendlinux Contributor

    lowendlinux

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2014
    Location:
    North Country (way upstate NY)
    #16
    Just because it was funny
     

Share This Page