Scroll to see replies
The man completely embarrassed me and left me red in the face after the debate.
I've been campaigning for him for months now.
I believe that when comparing policies and ideals; Trump's platform comes out far on top.
I despise Clinton, for me she brings out the very worst from both left and right wing politics. Yet, she wiped the floor with the guy. She was calm and spoke well-rehearsed soundbites that sounded plausible. And the truth is, she is highly intelligent and knows what shes's doing. The problem is that she does not act in the interests of the American or worlds' population.
How hard was it for him to rehearse soundbites to questions that were bound to come up. Instead of ranting like an ignoramus. Is the man truly that incompetent!?
Pick anyone to take his place. Nigel, Boris, May; literally anyone and it would have been a blood bath.
If I were American I would be worried. The choice is between an evil manipulator who is guaranteed to wage war, open borders and sell your rights to moneyed interests or a well-intentioned moron.
My only hope for him in office is that he has talented back-room staff and he reads off a teleprompter. Whilst having the strength to implement his policies behind the scenes. Or is that risk too far?
I can't defend this for example:
I've been campaigning for him for months now.
I believe that when comparing policies and ideals; Trump's platform comes out far on top.
I despise Clinton, for me she brings out the very worst from both left and right wing politics. Yet, she wiped the floor with the guy. She was calm and spoke well-rehearsed soundbites that sounded plausible. And the truth is, she is highly intelligent and knows what shes's doing. The problem is that she does not act in the interests of the American or worlds' population.
How hard was it for him to rehearse soundbites to questions that were bound to come up. Instead of ranting like an ignoramus. Is the man truly that incompetent!?
Pick anyone to take his place. Nigel, Boris, May; literally anyone and it would have been a blood bath.
If I were American I would be worried. The choice is between an evil manipulator who is guaranteed to wage war, open borders and sell your rights to moneyed interests or a well-intentioned moron.
My only hope for him in office is that he has talented back-room staff and he reads off a teleprompter. Whilst having the strength to implement his policies behind the scenes. Or is that risk too far?
I can't defend this for example:
Original post by t3h_y0u553f
The man completely embarrassed me and left me red in the face after the debate.
I've been campaigning for him for months now.
I believe that when comparing policies and ideals; Trump's platform comes out far on top.
I despise Clinton, for me she brings out the very worst from both left and right wing politics. Yet, she wiped the floor with the guy. She was calm and spoke well-rehearsed soundbites that sounded plausible. And the truth is, she is highly intelligent and knows what shes's doing. The problem is that she does not act in the interests of the American or worlds' population.
How hard was it for him to rehearse soundbites to questions that were bound to come up. Instead of ranting like an ignoramus. Is the man truly that incompetent!?
Pick anyone to take his place. Nigel, Boris, May; literally anyone and it would have been a blood bath.
If I were American I would be worried. The choice is between an evil manipulator who is guaranteed to wage war, open borders and sell your rights to moneyed interests or a well-intentioned moron.
My only hope for him in office is that he has talented back-room staff and he reads off a teleprompter. Whilst having the strength to implement his policies behind the scenes. Or is that risk too far?
I can't defend this for example:
I've been campaigning for him for months now.
I believe that when comparing policies and ideals; Trump's platform comes out far on top.
I despise Clinton, for me she brings out the very worst from both left and right wing politics. Yet, she wiped the floor with the guy. She was calm and spoke well-rehearsed soundbites that sounded plausible. And the truth is, she is highly intelligent and knows what shes's doing. The problem is that she does not act in the interests of the American or worlds' population.
How hard was it for him to rehearse soundbites to questions that were bound to come up. Instead of ranting like an ignoramus. Is the man truly that incompetent!?
Pick anyone to take his place. Nigel, Boris, May; literally anyone and it would have been a blood bath.
If I were American I would be worried. The choice is between an evil manipulator who is guaranteed to wage war, open borders and sell your rights to moneyed interests or a well-intentioned moron.
My only hope for him in office is that he has talented back-room staff and he reads off a teleprompter. Whilst having the strength to implement his policies behind the scenes. Or is that risk too far?
I can't defend this for example:
Stop copying and pasting this crap. I'm getting sick of it.
Original post by cbreef
Stop copying and pasting this crap. I'm getting sick of it.
Apologies; I only posted it in one other thread that shortly went dead.
Thought it was interesting from a strategical point-of-view. So far the Trump campaign has been savvy and run on much less money than Clinton's and even Jeb's.
I'm still in disbelief that under the spot light they didn't prep him with digestible bit-pieces to serve as useful propaganda.
how did clinton win the debate? she obviously was trying to seem stirm and "presidential"...but she did it in a pool of her own blood and with a few missing teeth...donald dragged her through the ****ing mud - and even at that - he was actually pretty lenient - there was a lot more he could have flung at her. I don't think he touched on iraq/libya or lewinski.
also, shillary had absolutely no comebacks to some pretty brutal attacks - especially the email scandal - she had literally nothing to say to defend herself. I almost felt sympathetic.
and look at this:
that was game, set and match in my honest opinion
also, shillary had absolutely no comebacks to some pretty brutal attacks - especially the email scandal - she had literally nothing to say to defend herself. I almost felt sympathetic.
and look at this:
that was game, set and match in my honest opinion
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by sleepysnooze
how did clinton win the debate? she obviously was trying to seem stirm and "presidential"...but she did it in a pool of her own blood and with a few missing teeth...donald dragged her through the ****ing mud - and even at that - he was actually pretty lenient - there was a lot more he could have flung at her. I don't think he touched on iraq/libya or lewinski.
Dude admit it. She actually spoke in coherent sentences.
And that's part of my point; he let the hag get away with everything. She even managed to put across an argument that she was interested in fighting for ordinary people and he was for the rich. Despite her incessant servitude to corporations.
I still think its worth rigging online polls and many Americans won't have seen the ineptitude of that performance. But it needs to be so much better next time. I haven't lost faith but his debate was appalling.
He literally said what was posted in that picture.
Original post by t3h_y0u553f
Dude admit it. She actually spoke in coherent sentences.
what section are you referring to? and don't say "all of it", not that I'm giving you any brilliant ideas here. are you talking about "bigly"? who gives a ****?
And that's part of my point; he let the hag get away with everything. She even managed to put across an argument that she was interested in fighting for ordinary people and he was for the rich. Despite her incessant servitude to corporations.
but she *isn't* interested in fighting for ordinary people. recently she got a haircut for $600. and she charges something like $150,000 for giving speeches to corporations. that's not something somebody on the straight and narrow does.
I still think its worth rigging online polls and many Americans won't have seen the ineptitude of that performance. But it needs to be so much better next time. I haven't lost faith but his debate was appalling.
He literally said what was posted in that picture.
He literally said what was posted in that picture.
are you joking? what was appalling on his part?
Original post by sleepysnooze
what section are you referring to? and don't say "all of it", not that I'm giving you any brilliant ideas here. are you talking about "bigly"? who gives a ****? are you joking? what was appalling on his part?
In my first post ITT I have posted a picture which is verbatim what he said on the stage regarding cyber security. Read it and tell me that's acceptable
but she *isn't* interested in fighting for ordinary people. recently she got a haircut for $600. and she charges something like $150,000 for giving speeches to corporations. that's not something somebody on the straight and narrow does.
I know that's my point. She is a corrupt deceiver but he let her get away with it. To a low-information independent voter it seemed that Hillary was willing to take on corporate-interests through high taxes. All Trump had to point out was that she allowed her friends not to pay tax by taking it off-shore and the taxes stifle small/medium sized businesses. He tried to but couldn't put across properly in the time frame.
In my first post ITT I have posted a picture which is verbatim what he said on the stage regarding cyber security. Read it and tell me that's acceptable
but she *isn't* interested in fighting for ordinary people. recently she got a haircut for $600. and she charges something like $150,000 for giving speeches to corporations. that's not something somebody on the straight and narrow does.
I know that's my point. She is a corrupt deceiver but he let her get away with it. To a low-information independent voter it seemed that Hillary was willing to take on corporate-interests through high taxes. All Trump had to point out was that she allowed her friends not to pay tax by taking it off-shore and the taxes stifle small/medium sized businesses. He tried to but couldn't put across properly in the time frame.
word count..
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by t3h_y0u553f
word count..
"word count"?
Original post by sleepysnooze
"word count"?
My replies are in the quote box. Word count was to satisfy the minimum word requirement.
Original post by t3h_y0u553f
My replies are in the quote box. Word count was to satisfy the minimum word requirement.
your relies are within my own quotation box...? how am I meant to reply to that then? quotation boxes don't appear in the reply box?
Original post by sleepysnooze
how did clinton win the debate? she obviously was trying to seem stirm and "presidential"...but she did it in a pool of her own blood and with a few missing teeth...donald dragged her through the ****ing mud - and even at that - he was actually pretty lenient - there was a lot more he could have flung at her. I don't think he touched on iraq/libya or lewinski.
also, shillary had absolutely no comebacks to some pretty brutal attacks - especially the email scandal - she had literally nothing to say to defend herself. I almost felt sympathetic.
and look at this:
that was game, set and match in my honest opinion
also, shillary had absolutely no comebacks to some pretty brutal attacks - especially the email scandal - she had literally nothing to say to defend herself. I almost felt sympathetic.
and look at this:
that was game, set and match in my honest opinion
Wishful thinking.
I remember checking Breitbart the morning after, and it was covered in a headline like TRUMP SMASHES CLINTON AND WINS DEBATE.
I checked today, and the coverage of the debate has been shoved right at the bottom of the page. Why? In a representative poll commissioned by Breitbart, Clinton won.
The polls, debate polls, and betting markets, have all moved towards Clinton.
sorry.
In my first post ITT I have posted a picture which is verbatim what he said on the stage regarding cyber security. Read it and tell me that's acceptable
I know that's my point. She is a corrupt deceiver but he let her get away with it. To a low-information independent voter it seemed that Hillary was willing to take on corporate-interests through high taxes. All Trump had to point out was that she allowed her friends not to pay tax by taking it off-shore and the taxes stifle small/medium sized businesses. He tried to but couldn't put across properly in the time frame.
Original post by sleepysnooze
what section are you referring to? and don't say "all of it", not that I'm giving you any brilliant ideas here. are you talking about "bigly"? who gives a ****? are you joking? what was appalling on his part?
but she *isn't* interested in fighting for ordinary people. recently she got a haircut for $600. and she charges something like $150,000 for giving speeches to corporations. that's not something somebody on the straight and narrow does.
but she *isn't* interested in fighting for ordinary people. recently she got a haircut for $600. and she charges something like $150,000 for giving speeches to corporations. that's not something somebody on the straight and narrow does.
In my first post ITT I have posted a picture which is verbatim what he said on the stage regarding cyber security. Read it and tell me that's acceptable
I know that's my point. She is a corrupt deceiver but he let her get away with it. To a low-information independent voter it seemed that Hillary was willing to take on corporate-interests through high taxes. All Trump had to point out was that she allowed her friends not to pay tax by taking it off-shore and the taxes stifle small/medium sized businesses. He tried to but couldn't put across properly in the time frame.
Original post by sleepysnooze
how did clinton win the debate? she obviously was trying to seem stirm and "presidential"...but she did it in a pool of her own blood and with a few missing teeth...donald dragged her through the ****ing mud - and even at that - he was actually pretty lenient - there was a lot more he could have flung at her. I don't think he touched on iraq/libya or lewinski.
also, shillary had absolutely no comebacks to some pretty brutal attacks - especially the email scandal - she had literally nothing to say to defend herself. I almost felt sympathetic.
and look at this:
that was game, set and match in my honest opinion
also, shillary had absolutely no comebacks to some pretty brutal attacks - especially the email scandal - she had literally nothing to say to defend herself. I almost felt sympathetic.
and look at this:
that was game, set and match in my honest opinion
She made him seem ignorant and childish IMO. Don't like her at all, but she certainly destroyed him on this particular debate, but overall Trump has been stronger throughout his campaign.
Original post by AOG1
She made him seem ignorant and childish IMO. Don't like her at all, but she certainly destroyed him on this particular debate, but overall Trump has been stronger throughout his campaign.
it's one thing to seem childish, but it's another to not be able to actually respond to the serious allegations that the "childish" candidate is attacking you with - it looks *really* bad not to answer to them...as if there's something being hidden. or they're just not equipped with any comebacks or defences.
Original post by sleepysnooze
how did clinton win the debate? she obviously was trying to seem stirm and "presidential"...but she did it in a pool of her own blood and with a few missing teeth...donald dragged her through the ****ing mud - and even at that - he was actually pretty lenient - there was a lot more he could have flung at her. I don't think he touched on iraq/libya or lewinski.
also, shillary had absolutely no comebacks to some pretty brutal attacks - especially the email scandal - she had literally nothing to say to defend herself. I almost felt sympathetic.
and look at this:
that was game, set and match in my honest opinion
also, shillary had absolutely no comebacks to some pretty brutal attacks - especially the email scandal - she had literally nothing to say to defend herself. I almost felt sympathetic.
and look at this:
that was game, set and match in my honest opinion
Much agreed.
Those people who think Killary won have to realise that everything was biased in her favour - the host, the audience, etc were all ganging up on Trump and giving Killary an easy ride. Trump did a tremendous job, especially considering everyone and everything was against him.
Original post by sleepysnooze
I don't think he touched on iraq/libya
He did touch on Iraq, and it blew up in his face when Lester Holt pointed out that Trump did indeed support the Iraq invasion initially, contrary to his false claims.
or lewinski.
And a good job for him that he didn't, that would have been a disaster.
Even when it happened, the Lewinsky scandal wasn't seen that much as a political issue. While it tarnished Bill Clinton's personal image in most people's eyes, the impact on his presidential approval ratings was non-existent, and the efforts to impeach and remove him were pretty unpopular. Now it's two decades later, and it's just remembered as a sex scandal, and would be seen as far below the belt and unworthy of a serious presidential debate.
also, shillary had absolutely no comebacks to some pretty brutal attacks - especially the email scandal - she had literally nothing to say to defend herself. I almost felt sympathetic.
It might have had some effect if he'd brought it up separately. Instead he only brought it up to avoid talking about his taxes, which, at best for Trump, made that exchange look like a draw (at worst, it looked like he was changing the subject).
and look at this:
that was game, set and match in my honest opinion
that was game, set and match in my honest opinion
No, dumb. People remember Hillary ran for president in 2008 and while they may not know the details, know Trump's "30 years" claim sounds a bit off.
Original post by #ChaosKass
Much agreed.
Those people who think Killary won have to realise that everything was biased in her favour - the host, the audience, etc were all ganging up on Trump and giving Killary an easy ride. Trump did a tremendous job, especially considering everyone and everything was against him.
Those people who think Killary won have to realise that everything was biased in her favour - the host, the audience, etc were all ganging up on Trump and giving Killary an easy ride. Trump did a tremendous job, especially considering everyone and everything was against him.
It was only "biased in her favour" in the sense that it favoured a serious, prepared and well-informed candidate. Or do you think the form, style and rules of the debate should change to accomodate Trump?
Original post by #ChaosKass
Much agreed.
Those people who think Killary won have to realise that everything was biased in her favour - the host, the audience, etc were all ganging up on Trump and giving Killary an easy ride. Trump did a tremendous job, especially considering everyone and everything was against him.
Those people who think Killary won have to realise that everything was biased in her favour - the host, the audience, etc were all ganging up on Trump and giving Killary an easy ride. Trump did a tremendous job, especially considering everyone and everything was against him.
did you ignore the number of times the moderator ignored trumps constant interruptions?
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- who is donald trump
- Edexcel A Level Politics Paper 3A (9PL0 3A) 16th June 2023 [Exam Chat]
- Should i vote Labour?
- Do you wish Johnson to return?
- Which 2024 election will be most significant for the world?
- lse econ or ucl econ
- [WJEC English Language Unit 2] Did you pick the outdoor story or Hillary Clinton? Why
- [Official] 2024 US elections megathread
- Have the Tories stopped being Conservative?
- Trump ineligible to run for president in Colorado and Maine in 2024 Election
- Things that worry me a little
- Kamala Harris is the Democrat VP pick
- Could Britain get a US trade deal if Trump wins?
- Anyone else here watch snooker?
- BEng / MEng / PhD
- LSE vs Bristol Law LLB
- Trump needs a $464m bond in six days. What if he can't get it?
- Tory MP William Wragg admits to leaking phone numbers in ‘honeytrap’ scandal
- GCSE revision journey
- London universities
Latest
Trending
Last reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
