The Debate Thread

I thought it was boring. I was on a date. Halfway through I stopped paying attention to the tv and back to my date. Some decrepit old man came over to complain that I was "practically screaming" while he trying to watch tv. I told him I was sorry he picked the wrong establishment tonight and now much choose hearing me between me or going elsewhere.

Your response to the debate doesn't surprise me a bit. :rolleyes:
 
Holt wasn't moderating? He interrupted the speeches almost as many times as Trump did.

CtVCnlSXEAA_YBO.jpg
 
I thought it was boring. I was on a date. Halfway through I stopped paying attention to the tv and back to my date. Some decrepit old man came over to complain that I was "practically screaming" while he trying to watch tv. I told him I was sorry he picked the wrong establishment tonight and now much choose hearing me between me or going elsewhere.

Well aren't you the bad ass. Ignore your date and be so loud that you are bothering other people.

Yeppers. Nice date.
 
I thought it was boring. I was on a date. Halfway through I stopped paying attention to the tv and back to my date. Some decrepit old man came over to complain that I was "practically screaming" while he trying to watch tv. I told him I was sorry he picked the wrong establishment tonight and now much choose hearing me between me or going elsewhere.

I thought it was a waste of two hours as well.

Maybe those who dislike both candidates have a point.

We have a condescending pre-programmed robot running against an ill prepared poorly spoken guy with no experience.

Maybe we need Gary after all. :(
 
Well aren't you the bad ass. Ignore your date and be so loud that you are bothering other people.

Yeppers. Nice date.

You think I'm a bad ass based upon that post?

You need to get out of the house sometime.

Even I'm bored with my day to day actions.
 
Holt wasn't moderating? He interrupted the speeches almost as many times as Trump did...

Vox is one of the most biased POS liberal websites out there.

As usual you are much more likable in one of your busybody personas.
 
Donald denying he's been spewing his birther crap straight through 2016:

I mean, you know, now everybody in the mainstream’s gonna say, that’s not true.

Yes Donald because it's not true.
 
I have a real problem with a moderator controlling the mikes or fact checking. It is up to the candidates to make their views known or challenge their opponents statements. After all when they are president there will be no moderator in the room to help them. I would prefer no moderator at all. We should get to see how they act on their own terms.

Can one shut down the other? Can one take control of the debate? In real life that is what any President of any country has to do all the time.

No place for shrinking violets.

In a true debate each side gets a certain time to speak and people can only interrupt for various points directed at the moderator, like point of clarification or point of order.
That is what I mean by controlling the microphones, so during one candidates time to speak the other could only speak to the moderator.
It was just an idea, but I would really like the "debates" to be true debates on the real issues on hand.

As to Hillary dealing with interruptions, I am sure she is a pro at it, most women are since most women get interrupted all the time.
 
In a true debate each side gets a certain time to speak and people can only interrupt for various points directed at the moderator, like point of clarification or point of order.
That is what I mean by controlling the microphones, so during one candidates time to speak the other could only speak to the moderator.
It was just an idea, but I would really like the "debates" to be true debates on the real issues on hand.

As to Hillary dealing with interruptions, I am sure she is a pro at it, most women are since most women get interrupted all the time.

I thought he did a terrible job of moderating. I haven't seen a breakdown of the time, but my guess is Hillary far exceeded Trump's time despite all of the interruptions.
 
In a true debate each side gets a certain time to speak and people can only interrupt for various points directed at the moderator, like point of clarification or point of order.
That is what I mean by controlling the microphones, so during one candidates time to speak the other could only speak to the moderator.
It was just an idea, but I would really like the "debates" to be true debates on the real issues on hand.

As to Hillary dealing with interruptions, I am sure she is a pro at it, most women are since most women get interrupted all the time.

Noor you know I like you but we disagree on this very basic point. I feel that there should be no moderator enforcing rules of a debate. In real life no president can fall back on this when in negotiations. I would like to see how the candidates handle themselves with no rules.
 
It sounds like things would go better if the moderator had control over the mics so when one spoke, the other could not interrupt.


I actually thought he might not interrupt (or at least not do it constantly), because it's not really something we've seen much of in general election debates (reason being that people don't like it). But it just underscores that it's the only way he knows how to debate, and he's not disciplined enough to learn a new way.

And it's also apparent that he just isn't the same without a live audience egging him on. There were a few interjections from the audience, but he needs the Roman circus atmosphere from the primaries -- which makes sense because he's an entertainer first and foremost.

And without the crowd serving as a cue to the viewers at home as to who is landing punches, Trump has to fall back on his substance, which if you actually read his answers in print is truly incoherent on virtually everything.
 
I actually thought he might not interrupt (or at least not do it constantly), because it's not really something we've seen much of in general election debates (reason being that people don't like it). But it just underscores that it's the only way he knows how to debate, and he's not disciplined enough to learn a new way.

And it's also apparent that he just isn't the same without a live audience egging him on. There were a few interjections from the audience, but he needs the Roman circus atmosphere from the primaries -- which makes sense because he's an entertainer first and foremost.

And without the crowd serving as a cue to the viewers at home as to who is landing punches, Trump has to fall back on his substance, which if you actually read his answers in print is truly incoherent on virtually everything.

Very true. I also wondered what Hillary meant by "investing in the middle class". WTF does that mean.
 
In real life no president can fall back on this when in negotiations. I would like to see how the candidates handle themselves with no rules.

In real life no president who wasn't a disaster would need the regulation Trump would require in negotiations--especially in international negotiations. Nor would negotiations even happen with a president with the history of defaulting on his word and stiff-arming deals that Trump has.
 
In real life no president who wasn't a disaster would need the regulation Trump would require in negotiations--especially in international negotiations. Nor would negotiations even happen with a president with the history of defaulting on his word and stiff-arming deals that Trump has.

What if a president said if you want free money or troops or the solution to your problems you have to go along with (fill in the bank).

I know this has been done but the countries seem to resent it. Maybe it's time to say "fine. go it on your own". We have our own problems.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top