The DEBATES are Coming! 3 Pres.& 1 VP debate Scheduled

So Biden says in an interview that Trump will only be attacking, attack attack attack.

WHAT that is ALL he has ALL he has been doing campaigning and ALL he will do during the debate.

 

I think they in the past have said this debate will be on foreign affairs and this one the economy and stuff like that. It's the actual questions they don't get if you are not Hillary.

 

They always release the debate topics, but you can be sure the Democrat is always fed the specific questions.

The moderators are always Democrats, and of course are in the bag for the Dem.

 

If Biden does well, he will show up to the next debate. If Biden bombs or forgets what he is talking about too often, then he won't debate again and hide out til the election.

 

Well I follow your logic. But it would also be logical to say Biden (or any candidate) wouldn't want to end on a bad performance. That is, if the 1st was a poor showing, more of a need would be felt to redeem oneself in another contest. Consider 2016 when the Dem favorite initially was given a very light debate schedule, at time slots that were unconducive towards getting large viewership. But when Clinton seemed to be struggling more than she should, when Sanders was doing better than the DNC had expected, then Hillary & Wasserman-Schultz decided to add more debates, in better time-slots. And, on the other side, after Trump had done better at his early debates than anyone had anticipated, he stopped debating. Do you follow that logic-- quit while you're ahead?

 

I'm sure they will, I'm interested for myself. We will see how ridiculous each side's reactions are and take the piss accordingly.

 

Sniff, sniff

 

Why would anyone need to be fed specific questions? We all already know what the questions will be

 

Believing in a Divine hand of fate is all well & good, provided one doesn't let that become an excuse not to act, which I have a feeling is not a problem of yours. But the big question, in my mind, is how do you know what the owner of that hand has in his mind?

 

Yes, I was going to say, no one on the right considers Wallace to be anything other than a democrat. Every debate will be monitored by a democrat.

 

I think Biden only quits debates if it is true that he has mentally lost it and gets lost without his teleprompter or has a problem with his ear piece feeding him lines. If all that happens, his team will hide him out instead of embarrassing him a second time. Now, if he is mentally there, I can see him having a second go at Trump.

 

Well the betting world, or at least my reading of them, was clearly WAAAAYY Off. Trump has come ready to rumble (which is what I would have assumed). The President is clearly well-prepped, & has a definite game-plan. And I have to admit, thus far, he is executing it surprisingly well. Unfortunately for those who want to hear a clear discussion, a central part of that game-plan has been turning the debate into a food-fight. Ooops, I just heard one thing the odds-makers predicted coming to fruition, from their highest, "over/under,"-- CHINA is to blame for the Covid-19 virus.

 

Trump has been showing his DOMINANCE. The President is controlling the debate, dominating Biden, dominating Wallace.

 

School yard bullying is not dominance. Agreeing to the rules and breaking them numerous times is not dominance. It's chaos.

 

Your mistake is believing that all of us see things that way. Don't get me wrong: I agree with you. But Trump was a bully in 2016, AND WE ELECTED HIM! So how bad for Trump, & good for those who don't want him to be re-elected, that he's now even MORE EFFECTIVE at it!!

 

We'll see. I was not 100% against him in 2016, even though I voted for the libertarian candidate. I rarely vote main party. He has drastically changed my mind. His leadership style is anti-leadership. We need a leader, not a moronic buffoon who hate dissent.

 

@Curious Always
That is, if someone just said, "BLA-bla-bla-bla...total nonsense...I'm a big baby." It doesn't seem like ANYONE could find him to come across well-- but just look at the reactions on the LIVE DEBATE thread. And it doesn't seem that childishness alone would, or SHOULD, be enough to stymie not only the Democratic Presidential candidate, but the debate's moderator.

I hope I'm completely wrong on this, & that in the coming days we see that the undecided vote swung uniformly to Biden, based on Trump's, "unacceptable," behavior. But I've seen Trump ignore the reports that Russia was offering bounties on the lives of American soldiers, (should I list 5 more? 10? 47?), without suffering a scratch, & I just don't think those who share your-- & the Democratic Party's-- attitude is as universal as so many seem to be acting as if it is.

If Trump just threw away the election, removed any chance that he could be elected, why aren't all the Democratic commentators giddy, rather than seemingly irritated, annoyed, exasperated, & so forth?

 

I don't know. We are not democrat nor republican in my household.

We spend much of the debate time laughing, or saying yigh yigh yigh yigh yigh.

It was a hot mess. Worst debate I've ever seen. If HS debate students behaved that way, they'd be kicked out and forfeit the debate. I know this because my husband was a state debate champion back in the day.

 

Right. But not nearly everyone appreciates the finer points of, "debate." For many-- I think most-- this is not so much a debate as a fight. And it felt like Trump pretty much ran over Biden, & Chris Wallace. But, to represent this point more graphically, while many got the impression that Trump steamrolled the debate-- --for others, the takeaway was that Trump steamrolled the debates!




And one can't even blame someone for feeling that, if a person is unable to come up w/ an effective way, one-in-one, to deal w/ someone who's being disruptive, how's he going to handle China's Xi Jingping or Russia's Vladimir Putin? And even if Trump IS in Putin's pocket, that's only arguing on points of reason, which are not exclusively what decides elections, as I hope you've noticed. If we merely cast off the impressions of that, "basket of deplorables," with whom we disagree, we are tempting fate to see lightning strike us a 2nd time.

 

How can you even think that way for such a p**sy, born with a silver spoon up his a** and never worked a day in his fat pathetic life? He's a fake tough guy. A con man who would take an ass beating from freaking Harris. Dominance? Are you f***ing kidding?

 

Did you watch? I am NOT a Trump supporter (I'd been for Sanders this time around, & in the past for Nader, several times, & Perot, just to give you a sense of where my sympathies lie). My assessment was just that: my honest impression of the proceedings; not based on my preconceived views, but in an attempt to gauge how it might be seen by anyone for whom there was any chance whatsoever they might vote for Trump. Hillary Clinton also scoffed at Trump as an uncouth fraud, & pathetic joke. How'd that work out for her? Or for us?

(If you are not fully clear of my stance, please refer to my posts just prior to this, #119, #117, &#115.)

 

This makes no sense. Screaming louder doesn't make one a leader.

 

And my reply, although I was slightly tipsy, stands no matter where your sympathies lie. Trump didn't DOMINATE anything. Oh sure he interrupted, screamed, obfuscated, and cried like a b***h. But dominated? GTHOOH.

 

Didn't say it did. I'll re-translate that point (which was only one of several I made, if you've lost track of who's posts you're replying to: see #115 & #117).

In the post you quoted, I'm NOT SAYING that Trump's behavior makes him a good leader. I'm saying that a leader needs to deal w/ problems. Debating someone who is being uncooperative by breaking the rules seems a relatively mild difficulty, compared to dealing with foreign nations that ignore international rules. So, if Biden cannot develop some strategy to deal effectively with Trump, how could one feel confident he would effectively defend U.S. interests in the world?

I'll remind you, once more, that I am not for Trump. I am, however, for facing truth, no matter how unpleasant.

 

If you prefer to say he, "Controlled," the debate, I have no problem w/ the substitution. Semantics.

I gave you my political frame of reference so that you couldn't write off my assessment as merely a partisan fantasy. Perhaps your view, however, is tinged by personal bias (assuming you are not, still, a little tipsy).