Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[Hannibal]

"My side lost the debate"

-- Nobody ever

[Wild Hoss]

I read this morning that Hillary went the entire 90 minutes without taking a single drink of water.

I can only imagine her prep-sessions; tied to chair in a sweltering basement, illuminated by kleig lights and surrounded by cold bottles of Evian, spelling "Aleppo" backwards out loud a hundred times...

[*JD*]

NPR Fact Checking:

http://www.npr.org/2016/09/26/495115346/fact-check-first-presidential-debate?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=npr&utm_term=nprnews&utm_content=20160926

[froot loops]

"My side lost the debate"

-- Nobody ever

Storm front violated that maxim last night.

[entropy]

SNL has its work cut out for them to spoof that debate.

From what people say.. I'd just replay it.

[froot loops]

I'm sure they'll have a Sean Hannity character sitting by the phone.

[*JD*]

.

Dan Rather

Ladies and gentlemen, whatever civility once existed in our politics is tonight officially dead. Never in the history of televised debates have we witnessed such a show. And that?s what the Donald wanted. A show. He got it, but will he be seen as the hero or the villain?

If you are a fan of Hillary Clinton, I suspect you are thrilled with her poised and confident performance. Perhaps her crowning line was ?I prepared for this debate and I'm prepared to be President?. If you are a fan of Donald Trump, his quarrelsome, no-holds-barred approach, often facts be damned, will likely in turn have thrilled you. The question is what does everybody else watching think and how many impressionable voters remain?

Taking a snapshot of the debate stage this evening, two candidates behind podiums, each representing one of the major political parties, it would seem to be the latest chapter in our quadrennial dance with democracy. But experiencing the event, in sound and motion, it was of course anything but.

From the very beginning, the body language tonight was striking. HIllary Clinton, the first woman ever to be on this stage was calm and substantive. Donald Trump interrupted often and slouched and sneered as he turned to address her. This is what Trump?s fans like about him, playing the alpha male at all costs. Clinton seemed completely unflustered, which is what her fans love about her. How this all plays to the majority of viewers and voters at home will be in the eyes of the beholder.

But I was surprised by how much this man who has made so much of the means of television spent not looking into the camera, but preoccupied with his adversary. Trump came across as amped, a pacing tiger ready to pounce on every answer. His Interruptions suggests little regard to the rules. He?s itching for a fight...Wants to swing wildly.

At one point early in the debate Clinton, after multiple factually questionable assertions by Trump said, "I have a feeling by the end of this debate I'll be blamed for everything that ever happened," Clinton said. Trump replied, ?Why not?? That about summed it up.

Clinton clearly wanted to get under Trump?s skin. She attacked him for getting a hefty amount of money from his dad, challenging the narrative that he was a self-made man. And then attacking his business practices. The headline she was aiming for is Donald the Deadbeat. And then on the issue of Trump?s unreleased tax returns, when Clinton says that was because he may not have paid any taxes, Trump responded, ?that makes me smart.? Expect to hear more about this.

Clinton was clearly the policy expert, nimbly jumping from topic to topic, policy to policy. But she was also much more able to paint a big picture than I have seen in times past. I thought she was particularly effective on the issue of race and especially the birther lie against President Obama. She had the facts on her side, but also it was an effective appeal to fire up her base.

In the end, more than all of the specifics, I was struck by how unprecedented was the overall tenor - matching that of the campaign. We once held certain truths to be "self-evident" - that "all men are created equal" and "they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." These were the lofty ideals that served as a rallying cry for the founders of these United States to choose liberty over tyranny. The man who wrote these words, Thomas Jefferson, and his compatriots were imperfect and in some cases deeply flawed men. Yet their idealism fixed a North Star in our democratic firmament that has guided our ship of state ever since, with some very noted moral detours. Now I fear that the tide of progress is rapidly receding with the fierce undertow of a looming tsunami.

Our Founders believed in reason and the power of intellect. Donald Trump made clear tonight by his wilful ignorance of important issues that he does not. Our founders feared the accumulation of power, they loathed vanity, and tried to build in protections against the demagogues who would appeal to mankind's basest instincts. Donald Trump relishes in all of these impulses. For him they are instinctual and a prescription for success.

To call Trump a con man, as many have, is a disservice to the art of the con. By its definition a con requires deceit. But Trump has not tried to hide his lies or the sheer unrealistic audacity of his cartoonish policy positions. He has asked the American people to bet on him. The fact checkers will certainly weigh in. The pundits will have their say. But the voters have all the information they need. The judgement is in their - or more accurately our - hands.

[entropy]

Dan Rather... the guy who spent decades telling us a black man committed a crime while his picture was on TV, yet rarely labeled a white criminal as a white man.

[Da Geezer]

Surprisingly, I agree with most of what has been said here this morning, particularly by Hack and Talent. Hillary clearly won the debate.

Lester Dolt performed down to his normal level. No questions to Hillary on emails, Benghazi, or the Clinton Foundation. Lots of discussion about birtherism. Fact checking for Trump by Dolt, nothing for Hillary. I'll never understand why there has to be a moderator in these "debates".

I am interested in Hack's statement:

One thing frustrating to me, and evidence of a problem, is the number of friends I do have in government who can make a very powerful argument for Clinton. People who are attuned to the process understand her ability to work it. To some extent government people mistake the completion of government processes for actual real tangible progress or benefits to the lives of real people, so they are going to overvalue some BS we shouldn't care about, but we'd all be fools to completely ignore the view of principled public-sector soldiers. To me, if its so obvious to those insiders how great she is, and it's so hard for outsiders to see that, then this speaks to how little we know about what goes on in DC, and our inability to find out even though there are thousands of reporters running around town. Many government agencies aren't above taking advantage of media tumult to be more secretive. The FDA story this week is a good example of that kind of leverage.

Or, as Thomas Sowell put it:

You will never understand bureaucracies until you understand that for bureaucrats procedure is everything and outcomes are nothing.
Read more at: http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/qu...owe390345.html

In 20 years, I think the story of this election will be that there was finally a "coming-out" of the leftist elites that rule in the US. This is the first time in my life that the media, the politicians, the "public-sector soldiers" and the financial elites have openly and vigorously supported one candidate. My point of view is different than hack's in that, while I agree that what I'd call the bureaucratic tyrants do worship process, the media on the East Coast is fully invested in the status quo, and having "reporters" in DC now works against the average citizen.

Don't underestimate the American voter. While most here rail about how "stupid" Trump is, I'd just like to point out that he is a surviving winner in an industry and a market that is Darwinian in its emphasis on outcomes. It is no fluke that politicians, the controlled media, public-sector unions, Congress, banks, bureaucrats, and big business are united in their fear of Trump. Like it or not, Trump has prevailed against most of them in an arena where outcomes can be measured.

I drink coffee most mornings with a bunch of fellows who tolerate me as the resident liberal. Let me assure you that these farmers and blue-collar workers thought Trump won the debate. Let me also assure you that they "feel" threatened when so many institutions that impact their lives unite behind any one person or party. These same fellows understand that monopolies need to be controlled by offsetting powers, and they believe that a monopoly has developed with the government/media/big business axis. Give credibility to their view, which I share, that Trump is an offsetting power.

[entropy]

Lawrence PoliceVerified account @LawrenceKS_PD [ame="https://twitter.com/LawrenceKS_PD/status/780520107973804033"]18h18 hours ago[/ame]
REMINDER We realize politics can make emotions run high, but being mad at a presidential candidate in a debate is NOT a reason to call 911.

[froot loops]

I think Geezer is onto something, the Leftist elite made Trump not prepare. It was a great strategy that the cabal came up with, he was flat footed when she brought up Alicia Machado.

[WingsFan]

More than flat footed, first time he was really hit with an over hand right and staggered.

[froot loops]

I loved his initial response. He said something like, "Where did you find this?" Like he is some TV heavy on a police procedural.

[entropy]

you mean people are shocked trump wasn't prepared? a team of college kids would have known many of the questions that came his way..

Trump has and is winging it.. and people who are tired of career politicians don't care.

[Wild Hoss]

Donald Trump....the born-rich billionaire businessman with an entire media conglomerate in his back pocket, who brags about bribing public officials, is the "offsetting power" against the government/media/big business nexus.