Posts Tagged ‘Presidential Debate
[Click above to embiggen: what came to mind when she walked out tonight in her President Snow Halloween Costume from The Hunger Games.]
Who: This will be a debate between Tea Leoni and Nick Nolte. Seriously, if you don’t even know who is debating then I don’t now why you are reading anything on a political site. This might end up being the most-talked-about debate that’s ever happened anywhere this week. This whole month even. At the very least, this whole year! Either the Hilldenburg or the Trumptanic is going down. One shall stand. One shall fall. Where the hell have you been?
What: Third and final presidential debate between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump
When: Wednesday 10/19/16 at 700pmCT
Where: Technically Las Vegas, but most will be watching it via the YouTubes via the Internets. I will be watching the CSPAN feed so I don’t have to listen to the talking heads, but I’m using YouTube as a backup in case CSPAN freezes up.
Why: Because we are friends like this, I will watch the whole thing for you and do a live stream of thought while taking notes. I’m not going to correct typos or edit this afterwards, so it’s not a transcript. It is just my thoughts on what happened and what was being said as it all happened. I will try to be informative and entertaining, in an informtaining kind of way. People like to complain about political events and say they aren’t fun to watch, but to me this is as exciting as any sportsball match. It’s like ancient Roman gladiatorial combat. And everything possible is stacked against Trump. He is like a saber-toothed tiger in the Coliseum and every dirty trick is being employed by all sides. The stage is set for him to make and change history if he wants to. He really is the master of his destiny if that’s what he wants to do. So far, he sure has been more fun to watch than Mittens Romney or John McLame ever were.
It’s always interesting to go to sleep after a presidential debate and then wake up the next morning thinking about what just happened. Some debates in the past — especially any featuring Mitt Romney or John McCain — could have put you to sleep. Not last night’s throw down between Hillary and Trump, however. Here are some thoughts I have this morning after watching what I think was the most exciting and surreal presidential debate ever.
1. The Town Hall format is a stupid sham. Let’s be real about this. Why continue this farce? First, the people allowed int he audience are all specifically selected by some polling company. They say they are “undecideds” (which to me means they are so stupid that they couldn’t choose between a Big Mac and chicken nuggets if they had five hours at a Drive-Thru) but is that really true? Listen to the questions asked by the ones that were allowed to talk. I think they way they phrased things or the topics they chose to talk about reveal that they aren’t “undecided” at all. On top of that, CSPAN revealed how the whole process works: once these “undecided” people are chosen, they are given four cards to fill out, with one question per card. Then, Anderson Cooper and Martha Raddatz or people working for them went through the cards and selected which ones they wanted people to ask during the debate. I don’t think you can really still call something a Town Hall forum if you pick what people are allowed to ask. Isn’t the whole point of a Town Hall that regular people stand up and speak and it’s all unpredictable? Like going to a local village board meeting. No one clears what you can talk about beforehand. The Presidential Debate Commission needs to retire this Town Hall format because it’s just become a time-waster, with various people in an audience asking canned, pre-approved questions that were selected by the debate moderators. So what’s the point of even having these “townspeople” when they have been essentially gagged and muted and are just reading lines prepared for them?
2. Trump did what Mitt Romney and John McCain should have done in years past…and I cheered! I really loved it when Trump would call out Anderson Cooper and Martha Raddatz on their bias and the way that they would interrupt Trump but not Hillary. Haven’t we all had enough of this? During these debates, Trump and Hillary will get into some interesting exchanges…but then the moderators jump in and want to move things along to some other schizophrenic topic. Why not allow the American people to hear from the candidates? The moderators seem to feel that they have this one moment in the spotlight and they want to get as much out of the spotlight as possible, so they interrupt and tell the candidates to stop talking to prove that they are important. What they don’t realize is that nobody cares about these moderators. If they need to feel special and important, they should get a therapist to tell them how special they are for $400/hour. Why can’t the two candidates just have a conversation for 90 minutes and talk about their differences and why they each feel they should have the job of being president? Why do we need Anderson Cooper and Martha Raddatz and Lester Holt and that Hispanic/Asian Woman from the VP debate? What value do they add to the proceedings?
3. Trump was really effective using humor against Hillary. There is no comeback possible for ridicule. He made her look really stupid with some well-delivered humorous jabs. This is something that Republicans never seem to understand, but regular people gravitate towards. My favorite line from Trump last night popped up during an exchange where Hillary said that Trump should never be president…and he told her she wouldn’t want that because she’d be in jail. I hope he keeps hammering the promise that if he’s elected he will demand a special prosecutor to look over the FBI’s mishandling of that email investigation. I believe that FBI Director Comey should be in jail too, along with current AG Loretta Lynch. Everyone who engaged in political posturing and interfered with that investigation needs to go to jail. And stay there for a while. I know that there must still be good and decent people working at the FBI. This is similar to how we are always told that there are good Muslims out there, somewhere. Even though no one can ever find these good Muslims, they are supposedly out there somewhere. If that’s true, then I don’t understand why those mythical good Muslims don’t speak out against the other Muslims who are killing gays, mistreating women, blowing things up, and plotting against the United States. If there really are good people still working in the FBI, then they need to come out from hiding and speak out against Director Comey and Loretta Lynch. The FBI has destroyed its credibility and can no longer be trusted, just as the IRS cannot be trusted. Do people think this will get better or worse with the Clintons back in the White House?
4. It was surreal having Bill Clinton’s victims in the audience. They need to come to the next debate too. But when they tell their stories, they need to understand that most people have never heard any of this before. Sometimes when they speak, they think it’s the 1990s again and everyone knows all the details. Millennials are the laziest and most self-absorbed generation we’ve ever had in this country. If it didn’t happen 15 minutes ago, they don’t know about it. If it happened before they were even born, you might as well be telling them about dinosaurs eating breakfast in the Jurassic period. Bill’s victims need to understand just how attention-deficit and ignorant Millennials are…so when they speak, they need to do more to get the Millennials to understand how horrific everything was that Bill did to them. They can’t mince words or hold back. Millennials don’t have the patience or the natural smarts to pick up on euphemisms and innuendo. And it’s Millennials who really need to hear this stuff, because the rest of us lived through it all and remember it.
5. The Establishment really wants to stop Trump and it’s clear that the GOP is part of the Establishment. We are in such a strange place politically right now. I think it’s clear we have three true parties at the moment, even if only two are recognized formally: we have the Democrats, who were taken over the Left and will continue to be a far-Left party for the foreseeable future, based on how popular Bernie Sanders ended up being. Then we have the GOP, which is clearly run by the Establishment…and that Establishment wants Hillary Clinton to win because she is seen as one of them. And if Hillary would win, nothing would change and the Establishment would keep its comfy existence. And then there’s the Deplorables, which I think is actually the majority of the country. The Deplorables are looked down upon by Democrats and the Establishment. Trump might be running under the Republican framework but he is clearly the candidate of the Deplorables…which I define as people who love America and hate what the Establishment has been doing to this country.
If Hillary Clinton would win, I think that all of the tension and stress and problems we have now will just get worse. There will be years of continued scandal, since she proved that she creates new scandals instead of just trying to hide things her husband did. All of this email business and Benghazi and Libya and now Syria are her own scandals. The things she does that George Soros tells her to do are all on her, not her husband. I don’t know who wants to sit through all of this unraveling and new terrible things happening for the next four years.
On the other hand, you have Donald Trump, who has proven that he’s not afraid to shake things up or burn things to the ground. He was brave enough to do things that John McCain and Mitt Romney never had the guts to do during these debates. He horrified the Establishment by calling those moderators out and by punching back twice as hard at everything the Left threw at him in recent days.
Isn’t that who you’d want to be president? A fighter? A brass-knuckled pugilist who will take the fight to everyone who deserves to be punched down a few pegs? I don’t know about you, but that’s what I want to see. The entire Establishment needs to come crashing down. I saw that back in 2008 and felt that everything has been rigged in the last 8 years, with George Soros in particular having too much power and sway over our country. He is a living, breathing James Bond villain…and no one does a damn thing about him.
Do you think that Hillary Clinton would ever do anything about George Soros?
I’m not sure if Donald Trump would have it on his agenda, but I think there’s at least a chance that Soros would be stopped by Trump. If anyone on earth would move against Soros, it would be Trump. That became clear again during the debate last night, as I think when Trump brought up Soros twice it was the first time ever that this evil creature was ever discussed during a presidential debate. That’s a start.
I can’t wait to see what happens on October 19th, though I wish these things went on longer and I wish there were no interruptions of the candidates from the sock puppets who are moderating. Let’s try the last one without a moderator and see what happens.
What did you think of the debate last night?
What: The Second Presidential Debate between Hillary and Trump
When: Sunday 10/09/16, sometime between 630pmCT and 800pmCT (hell if I know when it really starts)
Where: On the tee-vee and also on computers via the Internets and YouTubes. Also CSPAN.
Why: Because we are friends like this, I’ve blocked out the whole night to watch all of this for you so you don’t have to. You’re welcome. What follows is not a transcript. It’s just stream of consciousness as things happen. I won’t go back and edit or spellcheck any of this, so ignore the typos. I’m just reacting to what I see happening on the screen.
[Click above to embiggen: the First Presidential Debate, available to watch on the YouTubes via the Internets on your computer.]
For those of you who can’t get enough of the First Presidential Debate, you can watch it on the YouTubes for yourself. I also wrote a live thought stream of what I observed as it originally aired, which you can find here. It’s an hour or so now after the debate ended and I thought I would take the time here to circle back and highlight some of what I believed was most important from tonight’s event.
Here are the Top Ten Takeaways from the Hofstra University Hillary Clinton vs. Donald Trump debate on 9/26/16:
10. What the Hell is wrong with Republicans that they allow known Media figures (aka, Democrat operatives) to moderate these debates? I ask this every four years…and feel like I will have to keep asking it every four years for the rest of my life. It’s similar to how I keep asking why the Hell we allow the Iowa Caucus to be first every time and wield such disproportionate influence over the nominating process…or why we even allow the ridiculous caucuses to exist in the first place and we don’t mandate secret ballot primaries for all elections. It’s things like this that make the conspiracy theorists amongst us believe that the deck really is stacked and some globalist overlord like George Soros really does dictate how we all must live…and that our elections are all just a fraud and facade. I really don’t understand why Republicans go along with all the things they go along with. It makes me wistfully miss the days when I used to be a Democrat, because it sucks being on the side of people who are so stupid that they refuse to stop doing things that help their opponents. Sometimes, being a Republican since 2008, I feel like I’m best friends with Lindsay Lohan: I see all the things she needs to stop doing — or at least seriously address — but nothing I say or do can ever get her to stop doing these things. It’s like being in an especially cruel and inventive corner of Hades, with the Cassandra-like eternal damnation of having to watch people repeat the same destructive mistakes forever…with them refusing to change and becoming instantly amnesiac soon after the same recurring problems befall them over and over and over again. Forever.
For the life of me, I will never understand why known Media figures like Lester Holt are allowed to moderate these presidential debates. This is no fault against Holt per se — who behaved himself better than Candy Crowley did, but more on Holt later — but rather my astonishment that Republicans keep allowing Democrat operatives to play Lucy to their Charlie Brown and consistently snatch the football away. Why are big-name Media stars used when someone completely unknown (but experienced and proven to be neutral) could handle being a debate moderator much better?
It’s not like the big name Media people are needed to draw ratings. No one is tuning in to a presidential debate to see Lester Holt. Those eyeballs are there to see the candidates (and hope for fireworks). I think the debate moderators should be completely unknown individuals. They should be used once and only once and someone else should be chosen the next time. These people should be professionals of some sort, but with a neutral bias and a need to maintain their professional credentials. Maybe they are attorneys, administrative judges, or arbitration moderators. I would look for this type of person: someone who is used to the pressure of being in a high-stakes environment and who has a lot of practice with combative parties and who is skilled at adhering to rules and enforcing rules in a professional way. I would hope that someone like that would not want to look foolish on television and would, thus, behave in a dignified and professional way while moderating a presidential debate.
The problem with consistently using big Media stars is that these people are entertainers in a sense: they have their fans and their niche audiences and they play to that. Lester Holt came into moderating this debate with admonitions from the Left about not letting Trump get away with anything and instructions from fellow Hillary supporters to go easy on her…and Holt played to that. He knows where his bread is buttered and who does his buttering. Having a totally unknown person fill the role of moderator would remove all of this. I wouldn’t even allow the person to be known before the debate started. The moderator is irrelevant anyway. Why not publish the questions in advance so there are no “Gotcha!” nonsense moments? It really should be the two candidates squaring off, with each one responsible for making their cases for their own candidacies.
Really, these debates should just have an administrative time-keeper and someone to gently step in to tee up the next topic of conversation between the two candidates. In that sense, it should function like two opposing attorneys in a courtroom delivering closing remarks to a jury, with a judge just sitting up there presiding over the order of the proceedings but not fact-checking anyone or rigging things one way or another.
9. Trump didn’t go for Hillary’s throat or ask her about any of her major lies…does someone tell Republican candidates to not go for the throat? This to me is like Mittens Romney back in 2012 not going after Obama over Benghazi or John McCain not doing anything memorable during his own debates in 2008. I feel like someone takes the Republican candidate aside and tells that person not to hit the Democrat too hard…or else. Were all of Trump’s kids accounted for tonight? Was anyone missing and being held captive somewhere as insurance that Trump wouldn’t go for Hillary’s throat? What else explains no questions to her about Benghazi, her many strange lies about her emails, her odd relationship with Saudi Arabian operative Huma Abedin, her bizarre health problems, etc. I feel that Trump has GOP consultants (who are best known for losing, not winning, elections) in his ear telling him not to do this and not to do that. But, this is why Republicans lose elections. The people watching want a good show. They want to hear hard-hitting questions being asked and see politicians be truly grilled.
I think that Trump was cautioned to not become another Rick Lazio. Remember him? He was the strange little man who went up against Hillary in her first run for the Senate. That race was competitive until he came at her with some weird piece of paper, giving her the chance to make a concerned and shocked face at him that implied she was afraid for her physical safety. Lazio was toast after that and Hillary comfortably sailed to victory. Every few years, Lazio threatens to run for something else again and people pretty much beg him not to and remind him that he’s terrible. He is a lawyer at some firm that few people have ever heard of and will go to his grave being “That Guy Who Was a Jerk in the Debate With Hillary Sixteen Years Ago.” Even I had to look his name up. I thought it was Lasko at first.
Was Trump told not to be a new Lazio/Lasko/Whatever? I really hope that Donald Trump is not listening to GOP consultants. To me, that is like taking sportsball advice from the Washington Generals. Why take advice from the people who couldn’t win to save their lives?
Read the rest of this entry »