2016 US Presidential Election Thread Part XI

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
so when is the first debate meant to be? I fully expect Trump to pull out. and I fully expect for his behaviour to be allowed to continue unabated because nothing matters anymore.
 
so when is the first debate meant to be? I fully expect Trump to pull out. and I fully expect for his behaviour to be allowed to continue unabated because nothing matters anymore.

Not until the fall. September 26. At least that's when it's scheduled now. All of the debates are more or less in the final month leading up to the election.
 
you guys are missing the story Trump wants to debate he just wants people to watch the debates

Two of the three debates will be televised at the same time as an NFL game. On Sept. 26, the night of the first debate, ESPN will carry the Monday night game featuring the Falcons vs. the Saints. On Oct. 9, the second debate will air opposite the Sunday night game featuring the Giants vs. the Packers on NBC.

A Trump aide said Saturday that the Republican candidate "was made aware of the conflicting dates by a source close to the league." The aide was not authorized to speak by name and requested anonymity.
 
you guys are missing the story Trump wants to debate he just wants people to watch the debates
Hi troll

The debates were against NFL games last time, too. They do play on 3 of the 7 days of the week, with two of the 4 remaining days being Friday and Saturday.

And they've been set for over a year.

Try again.
 
I understand Trump's point...he wants the most viewers imaginable and he doesn't want NFL-watchers to be tuning out of the debates since that's the sort of crowd that would actually consider voting for him. The DNC might as well oblige him although it seems like they have been going through every hoop imaginable to not have people watching these debates even though it is Clinton's strength.

If he tries to weasel out after a schedule change, then he's obviously just chicken shit.
 
hell no. then he'll just find something else to whine about and keep pushing until it ends up with just hillary in a cage and a million rotten tomatoes on the national mall.
 
We'll just have to wait and see, but nobody can argue that Clinton and her camp haven't done everything they can to hide her from the public and media. No press conferences this year, a small handful of Democratic debates held on low viewership nights, etc.
 
Those of us on the left should be careful about having such nonexistent expectations for Trump in the debates. They call it the soft bigotry of low expectations. I offer this exchange from The West Wing:

TOBY
These two men are going to be side by side on the stage, answering
questions. That's the ball game.

C.J.
If the whole thing is, he can't tie his shoelaces and it turns out he can,
then that is the ball game.

The bar is so low for Trump regarding the debates that if he comes out and gives even just an 'ok' performance as opposed to a 'holy-shit' level awful performance, then the next-day story every news outlet is running is 'hey, he actually wasn't completely terrible! Maybe he can be president!'.

This could also be compounded if Hillary were to have an off night. We're all expecting Hillary to dominate the debates, and she's certainly capable of it, but even great, brilliant debaters can have off nights(see that first Obama-Romney debate in 2012 where Obama didn't do great), and if Hillary has an off-night against Trump while he has an 'ok' night, watch out for the stories that get written.
 
I can't quite envisage a debate in which Hillary beats him. If she ever talks over him she'll get called hysterical. If she tries to just calmly present policy, she'll be called boring. If she counters with important facts, figures, anything of substance, I can just see Trump saying something outlandish, which he's done from the very start, and it will win people over, despite there being no substance whatsoever to what he's saying.
 
I don't think the debates are going to make people in the middle choose a side. I think all they'll do is push people more and more to the side they were already thinking. Or encourage people not to vote.

Or maybe they'll get Gary Johnson in there, that'd be a real mixup. I'm sure you've all heard it by now but... "Why choose between the left nut and the right nut when you can just have the Johnson?"
 
ImageUploadedByU2 Interference1470029086.276005.jpg

Let's not forget about other qualified third party candidates besides Jill Stein and Gary Johnson.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
I thought I was fucking sick of the Harambe meme until I saw that.
 
Who, or what, is the Harambe meme? I mean, I'm pretty good on some of my memes, I know the Vengeance Dad Meme, the Success Kid Meme, and well, one or two others. But not the Harambe Meme.
 
We'll just have to wait and see, but nobody can argue that Clinton and her camp haven't done everything they can to hide her from the public and media.

Why do you immediately tie this debate schedule to Hillary? The debates are organized by a non-partisan committee. And the dates were set sometime last year, way before the candidates were even known. You could therefore argue that the NFL is up to something, scheduling these two games on a debate night. :hmm:
 
I can't quite envisage a debate in which Hillary beats him. If she ever talks over him she'll get called hysterical. If she tries to just calmly present policy, she'll be called boring. If she counters with important facts, figures, anything of substance, I can just see Trump saying something outlandish, which he's done from the very start, and it will win people over, despite there being no substance whatsoever to what he's saying.

On the other hand, if she is talking and Trump is trying to brutely interrupt her (or shout back at one of her statements) it will come across as male aggression surpressing a woman. And that will not look good on him.
 
On the other hand, if she is talking and Trump is trying to brutely interrupt her (or shout back at one of her statements) it will come across as male aggression surpressing a woman. And that will not look good on him.


This happened to Bernie. He raised his voice at her and talked over her and I'm sure we all remember what happened. Not everyone agreed, but it still happened.
 
On the other hand, if she is talking and Trump is trying to brutely interrupt her (or shout back at one of her statements) it will come across as male aggression surpressing a woman. And that will not look good on him.

This is the thing though, the line about Mexicans didn't look good. His repsonse to the father of the Muslim army bloke didn't look good. His comments about his daughter, or the Obamas, or any one of a million things, didn't look good. But it hasn't mattered. It hasn't hurt him.

So why would talking over Hillary all of a sudden be the thing that hurts him? I don't buy it.
 
You can understand where Trump is coming from without necessarily supporting him.
 
You misinterpreted what I meant. By caring where they come from, I mean that it's not like there's an incredibly high demand for your services. It's not like if she chooses not to do one of those speeches, she has another lined up waiting for her the same day. You take as many as you're offered, because 200k is a significant portion of her income.

Again. Sexist as shit. She gets paid what is normal for someone of her background and stature. First lady of Arkansas, First lady of U.S., 2 term senator of one of the most influential states in the union, SOS, and past presidential nominee. No comes close to that background yet, let see other peoples fees.

Donald Trump - $1.5M

Topping the list by a longshot is billionaire birther and infamous reality-TV host Donald Trump. “The Donald earned a staggering $1.5 million per speech at The Learning Annex’s ‘real estate wealth expos’ in 2006 and 2007,” according to Forbes. “Trump appeared at 17 seminars and collected this fee for each one.”

Bill Clinton - $200K

Tim Geithner - $200K

Ben Bernanke - $200K to $400K

Condoleezza Rice - 150K

Larry Summers - $135K

Al Gore - $100K

Sarah Palin - $100K

David Plouffe - $100K

Dick Cheney - $75K

Mitt Romney - $68K


But yeah, she shouldn't be paid this amount. ridiculous
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom