[ENTJ] The First 2020 Presidential Debate (Biden vs Trump)

Who won the debate?

  • Biden.

    Votes: 2 50.0%

  • Trump.

    Votes: 2 50.0%
  • Total voters
    4
  • Poll closed .
Deleted member 16771 said:
Lol, right, exactly. Honestly it does seem like a distraction.

People are picking up on an ambiguous statement he made, and it seems to be deflecting attention from all the outrageously hateful shit he actually said, which would prove him to be an unfit person to hold the office.
Click to expand...

The man was impeached. Let's reelect him!
 
Deleted member 16771 said:
I just can't believe that people have forgotten how he wanted to invade Venezuela and buy Greenland, ad infinitum.

He's a fucking psychopath. The most diagnosable man on the planet, and somehow he's still an option. Jesus America wtf.
Click to expand...
And left the freaking Iran Nuclear Deal.
 
People here are equating insensitivity to racial issues with racism, when it's just insensitivity.

Racism in government is when policies and discussions are knowingly designed to disadvantage some demographics.

I'm unwilling to accuse the US democrats of racism, but they have had an unerring knack for maintaining black poverty traps.
 
The clear loser in this debate was any and all of the people watching.
We already knew interrupting, talking over and attacks, whether made up or real, were Trump's way of debating as he gets results with it. The louder he is, the more unclear the opponent is.

The debate organization has said they are re-working their model to allow for smoother debates in the future. Short of putting each candidate in their own soundproof cube and shutting off the mic and camera on the opponent while a candidate has a chance to speak, I don't see anything changing.

Perhaps a debate via zoom would work better.

The only thing of all this that upset me was Joe dropped down to Trump's level after being brow beaten. Wrestle with pigs and you'll get dirty too.
 
I feel sorry for Americans. It's a great country, with a great people, and actually seeing their dignity hit like this is quite painful to witness.

There are the jokes and the America memes, but this is simply sad. In the midst of multivariate crises, I can't believe they have to put up with this shit to top it all off.
 
MoonFlier said:
The clear loser in this debate was any and all of the people watching.
We already knew interrupting, talking over and attacks, whether made up or real, were Trump's way of debating as he gets results with it. The louder he is, the more unclear the opponent is.

The debate organization has said they are re-working their model to allow for smoother debates in the future. Short of putting each candidate in their own soundproof cube and shutting off the mic and camera on the opponent while a candidate has a chance to speak, I don't see anything changing.

Perhaps a debate via zoom would work better.

The only thing of all this that upset me was Joe dropped down to Trump's level after being brow beaten. Wrestle with pigs and you'll get dirty too.
Click to expand...
The moderator was the worst. After it became apparent that he didn't have the balls to control the debate, he should have just shut up and let them argue. Wallace just became the interruption, whenever it was becoming interesting.
 
While I can’t speak for all people of color, speaking as a person of color I think it is both immediately relevant and disturbing for him to essentially address supremacists on national television, saying what is equivalent to “Stand down, but be ready.”

I know and acknowledge that there are definitely legitimate reasons that half of the country is voting for Trump, and that conservatives and/or Trump supporters can’t and shouldn’t be given blanket labels or insults. If for example you belonged to a family raised in a town that depended on a petroleum refinery, how would you feel about voting for an administration that wants to fast-track your livelihood out of existence in 10-15 years without any solid answers on how to help you transition from your career to something else that will continue to support you? Doesn’t make sense, but you can’t win if that gets you labeled a racist or a mouth breather for supporting Trump.

Anyway, my point is that putting aside my inherent dislike of the man’s character, and my suspicions about a gross lack of competency, I can’t vote for someone who is giving coded nods to any kind of supremacists on the grounds that it inherently upholds inequality in favor of those who seek to hold a disproportionate amount of power or freedom in comparison with other equally deserving fellow human beings. However, I think it’s worth putting out there that good people do have their reasons for voting for Trump, and negative blanket labels on his supporters only encourage further division and tribalism, which hurts everybody.
 
Wyote said:
Yea but let's argue about racism
Click to expand...
It's a real issue among many issues.
Sometimes Yeah said:
People here are equating insensitivity to racial issues with racism, when it's just insensitivity.
Click to expand...
No, it's not just insensitivity to racial issues. It's racism. I'm literally telling you that the President of the United States (Donald J. Trump) is a racist. While that's uncomfortable to hear, his words and actions over the years bear this out.

We shouldn't treat the President with kid gloves.
 
Pin said:
WHERE I AM FROM WE EAT COYOTES FOR BREAKFAST
Click to expand...

That's gonna be a little tougher in my case
dd4ljg6-b032dc89-ac84-446e-a2b9-4fbfffb2c076.gif
 
Sometimes Yeah said:
The moderator was the worst. After it became apparent that he didn't have the balls to control the debate, he should have just shut up and let them argue. Wallace just became the interruption, whenever it was becoming interesting.
Click to expand...
I agree that Chris Wallace is too weak to moderate anything other than a troop of girl scouts fighting over what to do with their cookie sales profits. (The girl scouts would have behaved better by the way.)

The rules of debate state that the opponents are given uninterrupted time to state their position and give responses. It is of course a throwback to more genial times where these rules were created so that nasty arguments and obtrusive shout overs were put aside and we could focus on issues.

Moderating a presidential debate is one of the most important roles given to a newscaster. For the moderator to step aside and let them "have at" would have been akin to quitting.
 
Last edited:
Sloe Djinn said:
I'd agree that he did denounce white supremacist groups several times, however wouldn't you concede that when asked to do this during a recent live presidential debate, the response (when asked in reference to any and all white supremacists) "Proud Boys, stand back and stand by" was hardly a denunciation during what is obviously a critical time for him to appeal to his base? In such polarized times I would agree with your observation about the goal posts moving, but he moved the goal post on his own there.
Click to expand...
This is a Kafka trap.

"He doesn't condemn white supremacists"
Does it 20 times
"Well I didn't believe him"
If he condemns them for a 21st time it won't make any difference, you have your conclusion and no statement from him is going to break it.

NounEdit
Kafkatrap (plural Kafkatraps)

  1. A sophistical rhetorical device in which any denial by the accused serves as evidence of guilt.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top