PDA

View Full Version : Thoughts About the Upcoming Debate...



FindersKeepers
09-23-2016, 06:23 AM
I'm wondering if each candidate will sit-down while the other is speaking, then stand to deliver their own comments. Or, will they stand the whole time? Sit the whole time?

I would think -- given Hillary's recent illness -- that they'd arrange for both to sit most of the time. I don't care a fig for her but to arrange to have them stand would border on cruel.

What think ye?

And -- do you have any other thoughts about the debate you'd like to share?

Crepitus
09-23-2016, 07:36 AM
If Clinton's health is better Trump is in trouble.

DGUtley
09-23-2016, 07:38 AM
If Trump stays focused and appears presidential, Hillary is in trouble.

Crepitus
09-23-2016, 07:42 AM
If Trump stays focused and appears presidential, Hillary is in trouble.
Yup, because we all know he has a long history of that...............

LMAO.

DGUtley
09-23-2016, 07:53 AM
Yup, because we all know he has a long history of that............... LMAO.

No, but he has a short history of that and it's closed the gap. We'll see. I found this article interesting along these lines:

http://buchanan.org/blog/trump-wins-debate-125730

zelmo1234
09-23-2016, 08:12 AM
I can't remember a debate where the candidates were sitting, I am sure that there have been some, but I do not remember them.

I would think if Hillary is Able she will want to stand the entire time. She will look week if she can't

Ethereal
09-23-2016, 08:17 AM
If Clinton's health is better Trump is in trouble.

Why would you think that? Trump basically eviscerated the entire Republican field one-by-one. Clearly he is a skilled debater. Perhaps not in the classical sense of the word, but he is quite effective at marketing himself and labeling his opponents, otherwise he wouldn't be in this position.

Mark III
09-23-2016, 08:41 AM
16208

Mark III
09-23-2016, 08:42 AM
I'm wondering if each candidate will sit-down while the other is speaking, then stand to deliver their own comments. Or, will they stand the whole time? Sit the whole time?

I would think -- given Hillary's recent illness -- that they'd arrange for both to sit most of the time. I don't care a fig for her but to arrange to have them stand would border on cruel.

What think ye?

And -- do you have any other thoughts about the debate you'd like to share?

They will both stand the entire time. At the end a yellow puddle will be revealed on the floor where Trump was standing.

MisterVeritis
09-23-2016, 08:43 AM
I'm wondering if each candidate will sit-down while the other is speaking, then stand to deliver their own comments. Or, will they stand the whole time? Sit the whole time?

I would think -- given Hillary's recent illness -- that they'd arrange for both to sit most of the time. I don't care a fig for her but to arrange to have them stand would border on cruel.

What think ye?

And -- do you have any other thoughts about the debate you'd like to share?
So Clinton is in such poor health she is unable to stand? Then we ought not to vote for her.

Mark III
09-23-2016, 08:43 AM
Clearly he is a skilled debater. Perhaps not in the classical sense of the word, but he is quite effective at marketing himself and labeling his opponents, otherwise he wouldn't be in this position.

If this is true, it indicates that the American people are morons. For the sake of posterity let's hope and assume you are wrong.

zelmo1234
09-23-2016, 08:53 AM
If this is true, it indicates that the American people are morons. For the sake of posterity let's hope and assume you are wrong.

Until the left finally figures out that the reason that Trump is popular with the people, is because he is different than any of the lying politicians.

Look at what has happened over the past 16 years. Lies and deception. On both sides.

Trump comes in and tells the people that he is fed up as well. So she can land and great sounding DC talking point that Stumps Trump and it will be a positive for Trump, because the people want him to be different.

If the Democrats Try attack his Character , Trump is not like any other GOP candidate and he will roll in the mud with them, and that will set Hillary off on one of her screeching's, that will be a positive for Trump.

Hillary is gong to have to try and stay on ideas and policy positions, and 70% of the people don't agree with the current direction of the country.

She is really between a rock and a hard place and Trump will come off as likeable and she will not!

Private Pickle
09-23-2016, 08:58 AM
I'm wondering if each candidate will sit-down while the other is speaking, then stand to deliver their own comments. Or, will they stand the whole time? Sit the whole time?

I would think -- given Hillary's recent illness -- that they'd arrange for both to sit most of the time. I don't care a fig for her but to arrange to have them stand would border on cruel.

What think ye?

And -- do you have any other thoughts about the debate you'd like to share?

I think one of the jobs as POTUS is to stand up and give long speeches. If she can't do 1.5 hours of standing what does that say about her eligibility?

Subdermal
09-23-2016, 08:59 AM
I'm wondering if each candidate will sit-down while the other is speaking, then stand to deliver their own comments. Or, will they stand the whole time? Sit the whole time?

I would think -- given Hillary's recent illness -- that they'd arrange for both to sit most of the time. I don't care a fig for her but to arrange to have them stand would border on cruel.

What think ye?

And -- do you have any other thoughts about the debate you'd like to share?

If she needs to sit - and she very well may - I'd request a podium and stand the entire time, were I Trump.

Adelaide
09-23-2016, 08:59 AM
If Trump stays true to his past performances, in debates and in general just speaking engagements, then I think he is in some trouble. Clinton is a better politician (not saying she's a better candidate but she has more political experience). Trump needs to come out actually speaking like a President should and be able to rebuff Clinton on issues like foreign policy without being an idiot. I am not sure that he can get as in-depth on issues as Clinton can.

Subdermal
09-23-2016, 09:00 AM
If this is true, it indicates that the American people are morons. For the sake of posterity let's hope and assume you are wrong.

You miss the point entirely. It isn't whether or not the people are morons. The fact is that Trump is a skilled debater because he defeated many other candidates who are not morons.

Mark III
09-23-2016, 09:01 AM
he is different than any of the lying politicians.



Trump is the biggest liar to EVER run for president. He lies repeatedly every hour of every day.

If the American people don't see that, they are morons. The evidence is overwhelming.

Mark III
09-23-2016, 09:02 AM
You miss the point entirely. It isn't whether or not the people are morons. The fact is that Trump is a skilled debater because he defeated many other candidates who are not morons.

Defeated in whose eyes? Trump got up there and babbled when it was his turn. If people ate it up then it is on them.

zelmo1234
09-23-2016, 09:03 AM
If Trump stays true to his past performances, in debates and in general just speaking engagements, then I think he is in some trouble. Clinton is a better politician (not saying she's a better candidate but she has more political experience). Trump needs to come out actually speaking like a President should and be able to rebuff Clinton on issues like foreign policy without being an idiot. I am not sure that he can get as in-depth on issues as Clinton can.

I don't think this is an issues election.

If she hits him on an issue and makes it a point, he can't point out that she was part of the administration and they failed on that issue, and he will be right.

He just has to keep his cool and point out how She and the Establishment have failed the American people time and time again.

Mark III
09-23-2016, 09:07 AM
If Trump stays true to his past performances, in debates and in general just speaking engagements, then I think he is in some trouble. Clinton is a better politician (not saying she's a better candidate but she has more political experience). Trump needs to come out actually speaking like a President should and be able to rebuff Clinton on issues like foreign policy without being an idiot. I am not sure that he can get as in-depth on issues as Clinton can.

I am not sure that he can get as in-depth on issues as Clinton can.

You're "not sure" ? Lol. Yikes! By now everyone should be more than sure that he cannot, and that he knows next to nothing about any issue. Why do you think Trump kills so much time ,at his rallies and in his interviews, repeating himself and repeating sentences? He has nothing to say because he knows so little.

If Lester Holt does his job Monday night Trump will be exposed as a policy ignoramus. Then what will the media do?

MisterVeritis
09-23-2016, 09:09 AM
If Trump stays true to his past performances, in debates and in general just speaking engagements, then I think he is in some trouble. Clinton is a better politician (not saying she's a better candidate but she has more political experience). Trump needs to come out actually speaking like a President should and be able to rebuff Clinton on issues like foreign policy without being an idiot. I am not sure that he can get as in-depth on issues as Clinton can.
No one knows ahead of time what will happen. I cannot speak to what a Trump "win" will look like to someone who doesn't want Hillary. As a general rule, the more people see of Hillary the less they like her. Trump is a TV star.

MisterVeritis
09-23-2016, 09:12 AM
I am not sure that he can get as in-depth on issues as Clinton can.

You're "not sure" ? Lol. Yikes! By now everyone should be more than sure that he cannot, and that he knows next to nothing about any issue. Why do you think Trump kills so much time ,at his rallies and in his interviews, repeating himself and repeating sentences? He has nothing to say because he knows so little.

If Lester Holt does his job Monday night Trump will be exposed as a policy ignoramus. Then what will the media do?
You believe this is important. I do not. We are not looking for continuity with the Obama-Clinton policy failures. We are looking for a leader who will not repeat the failures Clinton created.

Tahuyaman
09-23-2016, 09:17 AM
No matter what happens during the debate, @TrueBlue (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=1308) will post his usual thread about how Mrs.Clinton's performance was inspiring and that she is going restore order in the world. The peoples of the world will worship the ground she walks on.

@MisterVeritis (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=1287) will post comments telling us how Trump just won over all of the undecideds and is a lock for the presidency and everything will be perfect.

MisterVeritis
09-23-2016, 09:18 AM
No matter what happens during the debate, @TrueBlue (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=1308) will post his usual thread about how Mrs.Clinton's performance was inspiring and that she is going restore order in the world. The peoples of the world will worship the ground she walks on.

@MisterVeritis (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=1287) will post comments telling us how Trump just won over all of the undecideds and is a lock for the presidency and everything will be perfect.
You see, every day you add to the posts proving you lack depth.

Tahuyaman
09-23-2016, 09:18 AM
I'm wondering if each candidate will sit-down while the other is speaking, then stand to deliver their own comments. Or, will they stand the whole time? Sit the whole time?

I would think -- given Hillary's recent illness -- that they'd arrange for both to sit most of the time. I don't care a fig for her but to arrange to have them stand would border on cruel.

What think ye?

And -- do you have any other thoughts about the debate you'd like to share?

they will be provided bar stools so they can sit, but look like they are standing.

Tahuyaman
09-23-2016, 09:19 AM
You see, every day you add to the posts proving you lack depth.

My prediction on the debate response is spot-on.

Subdermal
09-23-2016, 09:21 AM
Yup, because we all know he has a long history of that...............

LMAO.

He has a recent history of that, which is why Hillary has been in trouble. That, and her fathoms deep flaws.

Tahuyaman
09-23-2016, 09:22 AM
I am not sure that he can get as in-depth on issues as Clinton can.

You're "not sure" ? Lol. Yikes! By now everyone should be more than sure that he cannot, and that he knows next to nothing about any issue. Why do you think Trump kills so much time ,at his rallies and in his interviews, repeating himself and repeating sentences? He has nothing to say because he knows so little.

If Lester Holt does his job Monday night Trump will be exposed as a policy ignoramus. Then what will the media do?

You're one of those people who already has the narrative prepared about Hillary Clinton's debate performance. You don't care one iota about the substance of any of their responses to the questions.

Subdermal
09-23-2016, 09:23 AM
If Trump stays true to his past performances, in debates and in general just speaking engagements, then I think he is in some trouble. Clinton is a better politician (not saying she's a better candidate but she has more political experience). Trump needs to come out actually speaking like a President should and be able to rebuff Clinton on issues like foreign policy without being an idiot. I am not sure that he can get as in-depth on issues as Clinton can.

Trump's tone and demeanor in Mexico tells me that his antics on stage are calculated, and in his control. He sounded exactly as he should have sounded in Mexico, and did exactly what he had to do in order to convey his gravitas.

I do not see the debate as being in any way different.

Tahuyaman
09-23-2016, 09:24 AM
Trump is the biggest liar to EVER run for president. He lies repeatedly every hour of every day.

If the American people don't see that, they are morons. The evidence is overwhelming.


As far as I know, the FBI director hasn't ever documented any of Trump's lies. He has however publicized many of Hillary's bald faced lies.

Tahuyaman
09-23-2016, 09:28 AM
I don't see these debates having much of an impact. The two candidates are so polarizing in their own way, minds have been made up. Nothing could change that now.

MisterVeritis
09-23-2016, 09:30 AM
My prediction on the debate response is spot-on.
Sure it is. For you. You admit that you have no clue about undecided voters. You clearly have no clue about Trump supporters. Naturally, you fall back on whatever approach worked best in the past.

MisterVeritis
09-23-2016, 09:33 AM
You're one of those people who already has the narrative prepared about Hillary Clinton's debate performance. You don't care one iota about the substance of any of their responses to the questions.
Why do you believe "substance" is what people are looking for? When people shop for a political leader they are looking for someone they can like and trust.

MisterVeritis
09-23-2016, 09:35 AM
I don't see these debates having much of an impact. The two candidates are so polarizing in their own way, minds have been made up. Nothing could change that now.
The cool part is that all of the TV talking heads who know what you know will agree with you. All of you will be wrong together.

You are half-right. Hillary cannot undo her decades of being a horrible person in a 90-minute show.

Tahuyaman
09-23-2016, 09:36 AM
Why do you believe "substance" is what people are looking for? When people shop for a political leader they are looking for someone they can like and trust.

I said that the substance of their answers doesn't matter.

nic34
09-23-2016, 09:39 AM
I don't see these debates having much of an impact. The two candidates are so polarizing in their own way, minds have been made up. Nothing could change that now.

"Well, there you go again"... giving up before it starts

Mark III
09-23-2016, 09:39 AM
Trump:
• Can be insulting and demeaning to his opponent, the debate moderator, and voters at large, which can be off-putting.
• Tendency to lie on some issues (like his challenge to President Obama’s citizenship) or use incorrect information or advance conspiracy theories — all of which opens him to counterattack from Mrs. Clinton or rebukes from the moderator. Advisers are urging him to focus on big-picture themes rather than risk mangling facts. If Mrs. Clinton says he is lying, his advisers want him to focus on her trustworthiness and issues like her State Department email and accusations of favors for donors.
• Lacks a range of perspectives from women as he prepares to face the first-ever female general election candidate. The only woman consistently in Trump debate preps is Kellyanne Conway, his campaign manager. While she is a savvy and strategic debate coach, Mr. Trump may be underestimating the task of taking on a woman on a big stage.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/24/us/politics/presidential-debate-hillary-clinton-donald-trump.html?_r=1

Tahuyaman
09-23-2016, 09:39 AM
Sure it is. For you. You admit that you have no clue about undecided voters. You clearly have no clue about Trump supporters. Naturally, you fall back on whatever approach worked best in the past.

I said that the number of undecided voters is insignificant. There are virtually no undecideds at this point. Even those who normally don't pay attention have made up their mind this time.

MisterVeritis
09-23-2016, 09:40 AM
I said that the substance of their answers doesn't matter.
You said someone else didn't care about substance (implying that you do). Now I can see that substances doesn't matter to you either. :-)

Tahuyaman
09-23-2016, 09:41 AM
"Well, there you go again"... giving up before it starts

I know for a fact that the candidate I'm voting for has no chance. I just refuse to reject my principles to vote for one of the two buffoons.

MisterVeritis
09-23-2016, 09:42 AM
I said that the number of undecided voters is insignificant. There are virtually no undecideds at this point. Even those who normally don't pay attention have made up their mind this time.
Doubling down on your error does not change the error. I see little reason to continue this thread.

Tahuyaman
09-23-2016, 09:43 AM
You said someone else didn't care about substance (implying that you do). Now I can see that substances doesn't matter to you either. :-)


Obviously you don't care about substance because you are all in for Trump and he has provided no substance at all.

Tahuyaman
09-23-2016, 09:44 AM
Doubling down on your error does not change the error. I see little reason to continue this thread.

I just corrected your misstatement of my previous comment.

MisterVeritis
09-23-2016, 09:45 AM
Obviously you don't care about substance because you are all in for Trump and he has provided no substance at all.
This takes us back to your earlier foolishness. Your blind spots are not my problem. Only you can decide to take the time to correct your errors. And you have no interest in doing so. That is fine with me.

Mark III
09-23-2016, 09:55 AM
I see little reason to continue this thread.

Uh, that is not up to you.

MisterVeritis
09-23-2016, 09:56 AM
Uh, that is not up to you.
Don't be stupid. Of course it is up to me.

donttread
09-23-2016, 10:14 AM
I'm wondering if each candidate will sit-down while the other is speaking, then stand to deliver their own comments. Or, will they stand the whole time? Sit the whole time?

I would think -- given Hillary's recent illness -- that they'd arrange for both to sit most of the time. I don't care a fig for her but to arrange to have them stand would border on cruel.

What think ye?

And -- do you have any other thoughts about the debate you'd like to share?

I'm boycotting it. How can you even call a lie filled discussion between the donephant's two biggest assess , while excluding 3rd party candidates free to tell it like it is, a debate? It's more of a dog and pony show

Subdermal
09-23-2016, 11:11 AM
I don't see these debates having much of an impact. The two candidates are so polarizing in their own way, minds have been made up. Nothing could change that now.

I think you're wrong - but I also do not understand how you seem so sure that Trump will lose, and so against voting for him that you're willing to throw away your vote to a non-entity 3rd party.

These debates are going to do several things, not the least of which is cement decisions which to this point have been masked by transient hesistation by polled voters to admit for whom they're voting.

Consider this: the MSM cannot possibly make Hillary look better. Conversely, the MSM could not have made Trump look worse. They have been to this point absolutely obsessed with assassinating his persona. Every stop has been pulled; every insipid mud-slinging technique utilized.

What happens when both candidates appear - live and unscripted - as they truly are? That Trump suddenly looks and sounds nothing like the carefully narrative caricature that the MSM has been pushing? That Hillary has a coughing fit, or a fainting spell? Or merely cackles like the shrew we know she is?

Or that Trump easily handles the issues, as far as voters are concerned?

These debates will mean more to the outcome of this election than just about anything else to date.

Subdermal
09-23-2016, 11:12 AM
I'm boycotting it. How can you even call a lie filled discussion between the donephant's two biggest assess , while excluding 3rd party candidates free to tell it like it is, a debate? It's more of a dog and pony show

You keep insisting that Trump is part of the donkephant movement, when his popularity centers around exactly the opposite.

Subdermal
09-23-2016, 11:15 AM
If Trump stays true to his past performances, in debates and in general just speaking engagements, then I think he is in some trouble. Clinton is a better politician (not saying she's a better candidate but she has more political experience). Trump needs to come out actually speaking like a President should and be able to rebuff Clinton on issues like foreign policy without being an idiot. I am not sure that he can get as in-depth on issues as Clinton can.

I utterly reject the notion that Clinton is a better politician - unless you're describing Bill.

Central to the definition of 'better politician' is likability. Hillary, by definition, utterly fails that test.

Chris
09-23-2016, 11:16 AM
They will both stand the entire time. At the end a yellow puddle will be revealed on the floor where Trump was standing.

And the brown...?

Mac-7
09-23-2016, 11:39 AM
No, but he has a short history of that and it's closed the gap. We'll see. I found this article interesting along these lines:

http://buchanan.org/blog/trump-wins-debate-125730

I think trump is a smart guy who is willing to learn

he may do quite well in the debates

nic34
09-23-2016, 11:45 AM
You miss the point entirely. It isn't whether or not the people are morons. The fact is that Trump is a skilled debater because he defeated many other candidates who are not morons.

Not only skilled, but a master-debater.....lol

nic34
09-23-2016, 11:49 AM
I know for a fact that the candidate I'm voting for has no chance. I just refuse to reject my principles to vote for one of the two buffoons.


https://youtu.be/acI12jO0HSQ

Chris
09-23-2016, 12:05 PM
Not only skilled, but a master-debater.....lol



https://youtu.be/acI12jO0HSQ


The moeckery is just downright devastating, fallacious appeal, but oh so devastating!!

Ethereal
09-23-2016, 02:14 PM
If this is true, it indicates that the American people are morons. For the sake of posterity let's hope and assume you are wrong.

Thanks for telling us what you really think of Americans.

Hillary Clinton 2016: The American people are morons.

Ethereal
09-23-2016, 02:15 PM
Trump is the biggest liar to EVER run for president. He lies repeatedly every hour of every day.

Sounds a lot like Hillary Clinton.

Crepitus
09-23-2016, 02:21 PM
Why would you think that? Trump basically eviscerated the entire Republican field one-by-one. Clearly he is a skilled debater. Perhaps not in the classical sense of the word, but he is quite effective at marketing himself and labeling his opponents, otherwise he wouldn't be in this position.
He will lose his cool and go off on a rant.

Crepitus
09-23-2016, 02:24 PM
He has a recent history of that, which is why Hillary has been in trouble. That, and her fathoms deep flaws.
Her flaws are considerable, there is no doubt.

But I have doubts that he can keep his cool through the entire debate.

Peter1469
09-23-2016, 04:51 PM
No coughing breaks. No commercials. If Hillary goes into a fit, it is on live TV for the duration. Like Dick Nixon's debate with JFK. Lost him the election.

Subdermal
09-23-2016, 05:25 PM
No coughing breaks. No commercials. If Hillary goes into a fit, it is on live TV for the duration. Like Dick Nixon's debate with JFK. Lost him the election.

There is no question in my mind that the Clinton Cabal is going to do everything in their power to suppress any chance of that - which tells me she'll be deeply drugged up, and sound and look like a space cadet as a result.

del
09-23-2016, 05:26 PM
:rolleyes:

Tahuyaman
09-23-2016, 05:54 PM
I think you're wrong - but I also do not understand how you seem so sure that Trump will lose, and so against voting for him that you're willing to throw away your vote to a non-entity 3rd party.

These debates are going to do several things, not the least of which is cement decisions which to this point have been masked by transient hesistation by polled voters to admit for whom they're voting.

Consider this: the MSM cannot possibly make Hillary look better. Conversely, the MSM could not have made Trump look worse. They have been to this point absolutely obsessed with assassinating his persona. Every stop has been pulled; every insipid mud-slinging technique utilized.

What happens when both candidates appear - live and unscripted - as they truly are? That Trump suddenly looks and sounds nothing like the carefully narrative caricature that the MSM has been pushing? That Hillary has a coughing fit, or a fainting spell? Or merely cackles like the shrew we know she is?

Or that Trump easily handles the issues, as far as voters are concerned?

These debates will mean more to the outcome of this election than just about anything else to date.


It's fine that that you think I'm wrong. You won't think I'm wrong once Hillary wins the election she was supposed to lose.

Im not a fan of Mrs.Clinton at all, but she is going to win and win with a comfortable margin. She's not going to win with a majority though. 42% of the vote max.

donttread
09-23-2016, 06:05 PM
I think you're wrong - but I also do not understand how you seem so sure that Trump will lose, and so against voting for him that you're willing to throw away your vote to a non-entity 3rd party.

These debates are going to do several things, not the least of which is cement decisions which to this point have been masked by transient hesistation by polled voters to admit for whom they're voting.

Consider this: the MSM cannot possibly make Hillary look better. Conversely, the MSM could not have made Trump look worse. They have been to this point absolutely obsessed with assassinating his persona. Every stop has been pulled; every insipid mud-slinging technique utilized.

What happens when both candidates appear - live and unscripted - as they truly are? That Trump suddenly looks and sounds nothing like the carefully narrative caricature that the MSM has been pushing? That Hillary has a coughing fit, or a fainting spell? Or merely cackles like the shrew we know she is?

Or that Trump easily handles the issues, as far as voters are concerned?

These debates will mean more to the outcome of this election than just about anything else to date.

He's probably willing to "throw away his vote on a non entity 3rd party" because we don't want either half of the donkephant they are the same. I thought you would be too smart to swallow the "wasted vote " donkephant propaganda.
Let me ask you something. How long have you been voting the "lesser of two evils?" And how long do you think you will have to continue to do so before you drive America off the cliff you and your ilk have parked her on.

Tahuyaman
09-23-2016, 11:24 PM
I would gladly vote for one of the major party candidates if one of them demonstrated to me that they believe in the concept of limited government. As it is now, both Trump and Clinton seem to believe that the purpose of government is to see how many things they can provide for us.

Of all the candidates running today, only Gary Johnson demonstrates an understanding of the constitutional restraints placed upon government.

People are voting for whoever promises to provide the most. I refuse to fall in line with that.

Tahuyaman
09-23-2016, 11:28 PM
No coughing breaks. No commercials. If Hillary goes into a fit, it is on live TV for the duration. Like Dick Nixon's debate with JFK. Lost him the election.

Hillary could vapor lock and her followers would say it was the most inspiring episode of the vapors in history.

Also, Nixon won the debate according to the people who listened to it on the radio. He lost it because more people watched it on TV and he appeared to need a shave. A lot of people are swayed by the visual because they are shallow.

AZ Jim
09-23-2016, 11:33 PM
I can't remember a debate where the candidates were sitting, I am sure that there have been some, but I do not remember them.

I would think if Hillary is Able she will want to stand the entire time. She will look week if she can'tNixon Kennedy they alternated between being seated and standing. Seems like there were others but I didn't take the time to look that up.

AZ Jim
09-23-2016, 11:35 PM
Hillary could vapor lock and her followers would say it was the most inspiring episode of the vapors in history.

Also, Nixon won the debate according to the people who listened to it on the radio. He lost it because more people watched it on TV and he appeared to need a shave. A lot of people are swayed by the visual because they are shallow.Nixon also sweated profusely and mopped his face with a handkerchief. Nixon also bit his lip and shifted his eyes around. I watch it and there are videos on the net somewhere.

Tahuyaman
09-23-2016, 11:43 PM
Like I said, shallow people put more emphasis on the visuals.

Hal Jordan
09-24-2016, 12:04 AM
You keep insisting that Trump is part of the donkephant movement, when his popularity centers around exactly the opposite.
Are you really that blind to believe the whole Trump is anti-establishment bullshit? How can you be against yourself?

Mac-7
09-24-2016, 01:34 AM
If Clinton's health is better Trump is in trouble.

Hillary is a better debater than some people are giving her credit for.

but the low expectations of liberals for trump are uninformed also

Peter1469
09-24-2016, 05:38 AM
I would gladly vote for one of the major party candidates if one of them demonstrated to me that they believe in the concept of limited government. As it is now, both Trump and Clinton seem to believe that the purpose of government is to see how many things they can provide for us.

Of all the candidates running today, only Gary Johnson demonstrates an understanding of the constitutional restraints placed upon government.

People are voting for whoever promises to provide the most. I refuse to fall in line with that.

The right left debate is gone.

Events have overtaken it.


Now the focus, rightly or wrongly, is nationalism v. the march towards globalism.

Peter1469
09-24-2016, 05:39 AM
Hillary could vapor lock and her followers would say it was the most inspiring episode of the vapors in history.

Also, Nixon won the debate according to the people who listened to it on the radio. He lost it because more people watched it on TV and he appeared to need a shave. A lot of people are swayed by the visual because they are shallow.

I agree with all of that.

donttread
09-24-2016, 07:27 AM
I would gladly vote for one of the major party candidates if one of them demonstrated to me that they believe in the concept of limited government. As it is now, both Trump and Clinton seem to believe that the purpose of government is to see how many things they can provide for us.

Of all the candidates running today, only Gary Johnson demonstrates an understanding of the constitutional restraints placed upon government.

People are voting for whoever promises to provide the most. I refuse to fall in line with that.

Tally you and I often disagree, but not about this. I would of voted for Ron Paul in a heartbeat. Of course he's a republician in name only and really a Libertarian but as you remember at one time the repubs did stand for limited government . And at one time , less than 20 years ago a democratic president actually cooperated with congressional republicians to balance a budget .
But we have fallen very far , very fast. Voters listen to rhetoric and somehow never compare what the candidates say to what they actually do.
It's like if I told people I was the world's best golfer and they bet on be in a torney against PGA pros and of course I didn't even make the cut, but I kept telling them I was the best and they kept betting on me and I kept never making the cut but they were incapable of comparing my results to my words to figure out that I was lying and stop betting on me. It boggles th mind.
The Bushbama years have been a non stop 16 year disaster. And virtually all of our major problems are largely because of government growth and unimagineable intrusiveness and or openly for sale politicians in both "camps".
Yet somehow most of over countrymen still manage to see big government and those same two "for sale to the highest bidder camps" as the soultion!
It's as if entering a voting booth cuts their IQ in half.

donttread
09-24-2016, 07:35 AM
Nixon also sweated profusely and mopped his face with a handkerchief. Nixon also bit his lip and shifted his eyes around. I watch it and there are videos on the net somewhere.


And 50 percent of the voters were female to whom JFK looked a hell of a lot better than Nixon to begin with. Yes, we are pretty much that shallow.

donttread
09-24-2016, 07:37 AM
The right left debate is gone.

Events have overtaken it.


Now the focus, rightly or wrongly, is nationalism v. the march towards globalism.

That and the seeming inability of the people to recognize lies. I vote for localism .

Tahuyaman
09-24-2016, 09:27 AM
Tally you and I often disagree, but not about this. I would of voted for Ron Paul in a heartbeat. Of course he's a republician in name only and really a Libertarian but as you remember at one time the repubs did stand for limited government . And at one time , less than 20 years ago a democratic president actually cooperated with congressional republicians to balance a budget .
But we have fallen very far , very fast. Voters listen to rhetoric and somehow never compare what the candidates say to what they actually do.
It's like if I told people I was the world's best golfer and they bet on be in a torney against PGA pros and of course I didn't even make the cut, but I kept telling them I was the best and they kept betting on me and I kept never making the cut but they were incapable of comparing my results to my words to figure out that I was lying and stop betting on me. It boggles th mind.
The Bushbama years have been a non stop 16 year disaster. And virtually all of our major problems are largely because of government growth and unimagineable intrusiveness and or openly for sale politicians in both "camps".
Yet somehow most of over countrymen still manage to see big government and those same two "for sale to the highest bidder camps" as the soultion!
It's as if entering a voting booth cuts their IQ in half.

I do not disagree.

Tahuyaman
09-24-2016, 09:31 AM
The right left debate is gone.

Events have overtaken it.


Now the focus, rightly or wrongly, is nationalism v. the march towards globalism.

globalism vs nationalism is part of the left/right debate.

Peter1469
09-24-2016, 10:29 AM
globalism vs nationalism is part of the left/right debate.

No it is not. It is completely separate.

Tahuyaman
09-24-2016, 06:35 PM
No it is not. It is completely separate.

I disagree. Globalism vs nationalism is indeed a left / right thing.

Mister D
09-24-2016, 06:40 PM
I disagree. Globalism vs nationalism is indeed a left / right thing.

The free market right champions a globalist ideology.

Peter1469
09-24-2016, 06:44 PM
I disagree. Globalism vs nationalism is indeed a left / right thing.

It is not. There is little if any discussion of fiscal responsibility in the new debate.

Tahuyaman
09-24-2016, 06:44 PM
Conservatives tend to be centered more on nationalism. The left is very much globalist. The left desires a borderless world governed by one single all powerful authority.

Mister D
09-24-2016, 06:46 PM
Conservatives tend to be centered more on nationalism. The left is very much globalist. The left desires a borderless world governed by one single all powerful authority.

So does the right: capital.

Tahuyaman
09-24-2016, 06:48 PM
It is not. There is little if any discussion of fiscal responsibility in the new debate.

I agree that this election isn't about left vs right. It's an issue of how far left we are heading. There is no viable right wing option here. Gary Johnson is close, but he has no chance at all.

Tahuyaman
09-24-2016, 06:49 PM
So does the right: capital.

One can be a capitalist without combining it with globalism.

Chris
09-24-2016, 06:54 PM
Capital has always been global.

Mister D
09-24-2016, 06:55 PM
One can be a capitalist without combining it with globalism.

That's the nature of free market ideology, sir. It militates for a borderless world. It always has. The liberal right embraces an economic system that gradually but ineluctably destroys everything they're trying to conserve.

MisterVeritis
09-24-2016, 07:21 PM
That's the nature of free market ideology, sir. It militates for a borderless world. It always has. The liberal right embraces an economic system that gradually but ineluctably destroys everything they're trying to conserve.
This is nonsense. It is gobbledygook.

Tahuyaman
09-24-2016, 07:44 PM
That's the nature of free market ideology, sir. It militates for a borderless world. It always has..

It hasn't always been that way. This "borderless" thing is a fairly recent development. As our government has drifted to the left, the borderless world thing has picked up.

Peter1469
09-24-2016, 08:44 PM
Conservatives tend to be centered more on nationalism. The left is very much globalist. The left desires a borderless world governed by one single all powerful authority.

Don't tell the neocons that. Those bastards are globalists even if they don't realize it.

Peter1469
09-24-2016, 08:46 PM
It hasn't always been that way. This "borderless" thing is a fairly recent development. As our government has drifted to the left, the borderless world thing has picked up.

Bush the Elder started it with his New World Order stuff.

Tahuyaman
09-24-2016, 08:49 PM
Don't tell the neocons that. Those $#@!s are globalists even if they don't realize it.

Neocons are supporting Hillary Clinton. They aren't conservatives.

Tahuyaman
09-24-2016, 08:50 PM
Bush the Elder started it with his New World Order stuff.

maybe.....

Peter1469
09-24-2016, 09:18 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=txukr5zgHnw

ripmeister
09-24-2016, 09:59 PM
This is nonsense. It is gobbledygook.

Why so?

Mister D
09-24-2016, 10:15 PM
This is nonsense. It is gobbledygook.

Tell me why.

Mister D
09-24-2016, 10:18 PM
It hasn't always been that way. This "borderless" thing is a fairly recent development. As our government has drifted to the left, the borderless world thing has picked up.

A world without borders has always been the logic of capitalism. Your government is wedded to international interests that have no loyalty to anything but their bottom line. I appeal to you as a Christian and a conservative, sir. Dump these viruses.

donttread
09-25-2016, 06:26 AM
No it is not. It is completely separate.


I don't think anything in Washington is separate from the "left and right " debate. It's all consuming and selling it is the only way for them to stay in power. It might be more accurate to say portions of both the right and left want globalism for different reasons.
One to feed the megacorps the other to allow government to live everyone's life for them. But, of course even that is a gross over simplification.

Peter1469
09-25-2016, 07:29 AM
I don't think anything in Washington is separate from the "left and right " debate. It's all consuming and selling it is the only way for them to stay in power. It might be more accurate to say portions of both the right and left want globalism for different reasons.
One to feed the megacorps the other to allow government to live everyone's life for them. But, of course even that is a gross over simplification.

Pay attention. In five years historians will be saying what I am saying now.

MisterVeritis
09-25-2016, 09:29 AM
Why so?
One can trade across borders. Free market capitalism has nothing whatever to do with borders.

MisterVeritis
09-25-2016, 09:32 AM
Tell me why.
Free market capitalism has nothing to do with borders. You get to decide what is best for you. I get to decide what is best for me. That, in essence, is free market capitalism. If you are on one side of a border and I am on the other side we can trade. The border is not relevant to the trade.

When I buy groceries at my nearby store I am not thinking I must tear down the walls of my house. The idea itself is absurd.

Mister D
09-25-2016, 09:53 AM
Free market capitalism has nothing to do with borders. You get to decide what is best for you. I get to decide what is best for me. That, in essence, is free market capitalism. If you are on one side of a border and I am on the other side we can trade. The border is not relevant to the trade.

When I buy groceries at my nearby store I am not thinking I must tear down the walls of my house. The idea itself is absurd.

Right. For example, it's best for some business interests to flood your country with cheap, alien labor. Oh, let me guess...you blame that on liberal Democrats, right? No, Mr. V, we're knee deep in Mexicans largely because of your political party, its donors and its policies. Free market capitalism places the economy, or rather business interests, before any and all other considerations. What hampers business is bad. What facilitates business is good. Sovereignty is among the former.

You're a conservative, right? Can you articulate in precise terms exactly what it is you're trying to conserve? Don't give me some vague platitudes about "liberty" or the constitution. Be specific. What is there to conserve?

Mister D
09-25-2016, 09:55 AM
One can trade across borders. Free market capitalism has nothing whatever to do with borders.

Who drives globalism, Mr. V? Liberal Democrats?

MisterVeritis
09-25-2016, 11:21 AM
Right. For example, it's best for some business interests to flood your country with cheap, alien labor. Oh, let me guess...you blame that on liberal Democrats, right? No, Mr. V, we're knee deep in Mexicans largely because of your political party, its donors and its policies. Free market capitalism places the economy, or rather business interests, before any and all other considerations. What hampers business is bad. What facilitates business is good. Sovereignty is among the former.

You're a conservative, right? Can you articulate in precise terms exactly what it is you're trying to conserve? Don't give me some vague platitudes about "liberty" or the constitution. Be specific. What is there to conserve?
It is clear you don't know what free market capitalism is. That is a shame. Are you aware that people have traded across borders for thousands of years? It did not require a one world government. Where do people like you come up with such goofy ideas?

If you want to start a thread on what Constitutional Conservatism is, by all means, do it.

MisterVeritis
09-25-2016, 11:22 AM
Who drives globalism, Mr. V? Liberal Democrats?
Ask a globalist.

Mister D
09-25-2016, 11:27 AM
Ask a globalist.

Non-sequitur. I'm asking you.

Mister D
09-25-2016, 11:36 AM
It is clear you don't know what free market capitalism is. That is a shame. Are you aware that people have traded across borders for thousands of years? It did not require a one world government. Where do people like you come up with such goofy ideas?

If you want to start a thread on what Constitutional Conservatism is, by all means, do it.

It's a shame you can't respond adequately.

Yes, I'm well aware that peoples have traded across borders for millennia. I'm not aware of what your point might possibly be. Nor are you. I asked you earlier what drives globalism. You dodged because you are aware, however dimly, of the right answer.

Who said anything about one world government? I mean besides you.

MisterVeritis
09-25-2016, 11:36 AM
Non-sequitur. I'm asking you.
To what end? I am not a globalist.

Mister D
09-25-2016, 11:38 AM
To what end? I am not a globalist.

One last time before I write you off. What drives globalism? Liberal Democrats? Obama? The commies? :shocked:

MisterVeritis
09-25-2016, 11:43 AM
It is clear you don't know what free market capitalism is. That is a shame. Are you aware that people have traded across borders for thousands of years? It did not require a one world government. Where do people like you come up with such goofy ideas?

It's a shame you can't respond adequately.
Was there something you objected to?


Yes, I'm well aware that peoples have traded across borders for millennia. I'm not aware of what your point might possibly be. Nor are you.
I was responding to your foolishness about sovereignty. We can have borders and we can have trade. Does that clear up your confusion?


I asked you earlier what drives globalism. You dodged because you are aware, however dimly, of the right answer.

Who said anything about one world government? I mean besides you.
Why don't you tell me what you believe drives globalism. While you are at it why don't you tell us what you believe globalism is.

If you don't think a one world government is the logical end of globalism that is fine with me. The pendulum is swinging in the other direction now.

MisterVeritis
09-25-2016, 11:43 AM
One last time before I write you off. What drives globalism? Liberal Democrats? Obama? The commies? :shocked:
You raised it. You answer. If you can...

Mister D
09-25-2016, 01:02 PM
It is clear you don't know what free market capitalism is. That is a shame. Are you aware that people have traded across borders for thousands of years? It did not require a one world government. Where do people like you come up with such goofy ideas?

Was there something you objected to?


I was responding to your foolishness about sovereignty. We can have borders and we can have trade. Does that clear up your confusion?


Why don't you tell me what you believe drives globalism. While you are at it why don't you tell us what you believe globalism is.

If you don't think a one world government is the logical end of globalism that is fine with me. The pendulum is swinging in the other direction now.

Your responses have all been non-sequiturs. You simply refuse to answer direct questions. No worries. It's likely because you know the answers are damaging to your position.

Mister D
09-25-2016, 01:04 PM
You raised it. You answer. If you can...

No, I asked you a direct question. Actually, I asked several direct questions. You continue to dodge. No worries. That speaks for you.

MisterVeritis
09-25-2016, 01:07 PM
Your responses have all been non-sequiturs. You simply refuse to answer direct questions. No worries. It's likely because you know the answers are damaging to your position.
What do you believe my position is?

We can have free market capitalism and, at the same time, have national sovereignty. I cannot solve whatever confusion you have. That is up to you.

MisterVeritis
09-25-2016, 01:09 PM
No, I asked you a direct question. Actually, I asked several direct questions. You continue to dodge. No worries. That speaks for you.
I answered your question about why your statement is goofy. Your questions about globalism are not for me. I did not make any claims that free market capitalism requires globalism. You did. And you are wrong. What else do you need to know?

Mister D
09-25-2016, 01:11 PM
What do you believe my position is?

We can have free market capitalism and, at the same time, have national sovereignty. I cannot solve whatever confusion you have. That is up to you.

Not with this type of response that's for sure. lol Forget it.

Mister D
09-25-2016, 01:12 PM
I answered your question about why your statement is goofy. Your questions about globalism are not for me. I did not make any claims that free market capitalism requires globalism. You did. And you are wrong. What else do you need to know?

They were for you and only for you but never mind, V. It's clear you won't answer them.

MisterVeritis
09-25-2016, 01:14 PM
They were for you and only for you but never mind, V. It's clear you won't answer them.
You can continue in error as long as you wish.

Tahuyaman
09-25-2016, 01:23 PM
Bush the Elder started it with his New World Order stuff.


Does it matter who started it? What matters is emininating it.

Tahuyaman
09-25-2016, 01:26 PM
A world without borders has always been the logic of capitalism....

That is not true.

donttread
09-26-2016, 01:22 PM
Pay attention. In five years historians will be saying what I am saying now.

You're a great board member Peter and I have a lot of respect for you , but that was some pompous stuff right there. You really don't think the nationalism vs. globalism is just another part of the "divide the people so they never think to collectively judge us" Game?
I'll set my radio on 9-26-2021 and take my chances that the that the entire donkephant is part of the debate on both sides and just like every other issue they'll keep debating it and going nothing as long as we keep electing their sorry assess.
In fact even if we could wake the country up to go 3rd party the other two have so much control now they could rig the vote. Hell the DNC already appears to have done so to Bernie. We may have waited too long to heed Jefferson and some some Viglance.

Peter1469
09-26-2016, 02:01 PM
You're a great board member Peter and I have a lot of respect for you , but that was some pompous stuff right there. You really don't think the nationalism vs. globalism is just another part of the "divide the people so they never think to collectively judge us" Game?
I'll set my radio on 9-26-2021 and take my chances that the that the entire donkephant is part of the debate on both sides and just like every other issue they'll keep debating it and going nothing as long as we keep electing their sorry assess.
In fact even if we could wake the country up to go 3rd party the other two have so much control now they could rig the vote. Hell the DNC already appears to have done so to Bernie. We may have waited too long to heed Jefferson and some some Viglance.

Europe is seeing the same shift that we are.
Right v left has actually been gone for a while. Look at the GOP- it is essentially Dem lite.

donttread
09-26-2016, 02:08 PM
Europe is seeing the same shift that we are.
Right v left has actually been gone for a while. Look at the GOP- it is essentially Dem lite.

Yes, in a way it's the illusion of one vs. the other that they use to stay in power. I think maybe the globalism vs. nationalist is just another illusion.
But given the fact that the larger the government the more corrupt I think globalism is a terrible mistake. For one thing we'd be bailing out the poor countries with money we ain't got

Peter1469
09-26-2016, 02:11 PM
Yes, in a way it's the illusion of one vs. the other that they use to stay in power. I think maybe the globalism vs. nationalist is just another illusion.
But given the fact that the larger the government the more corrupt I think globalism is a terrible mistake. For one thing we'd be bailing out the poor countries with money we ain't got

I agree. I actually think that globalism will happen naturally. But what we see today is forced and for the wrong reasons.

Cigar
09-26-2016, 02:53 PM
West Wing Presidential Debate
https://youtu.be/VyqzPu5pX6U

Great show, I wish it would come back.

Mac-7
09-26-2016, 03:10 PM
The momentum is on trumps side

since the conventions he has been gaining on hillary.

if the debate is a draw which I expect it to be Trump benefits more.