I'm not surprised. Even told my son-in-law I thought Biden would get more viewers. My reason was exactly almost word for word what I just quoted.So maybe this is an indication that people are just tired of Trump, just done with it.
I'm sure he'll just say he got more viewers. And someone will call him out on it. And he'll just repeat it and that'll be that.Ouch...that will bother Trump a bit.
Election wise...he is probably better off if as few people as possible watch him.
In general yes. But when someone is stating flat out lies, her calling him out on it is 100% appropriate.I have mixed feelings about the performance of Savannah Guthrie in the town hall. The questions she asked were more combative (when did he last test negative, white supremacy and QAnon questions, etc.) than designed to allow Trump to share his priorities and vision for America. I generally think moderators should try to be in the background for these things as much as possible. Frankly, I don’t know why moderators need to ask questions at all during a town hall but that was NBC’s format.
On the other hand, Trump did this to himself. He constantly lies, does and says stupid stuff, and rarely answers questions from the media other than from his Fox friends. Should Guthrie just ignore all that? I think probably not.
Very unfair to pick topics on which Trump knows very little about.Debate Topics for Thursday
- fighting Covid-19
- American families
- race in America
- climate change
- national security
- leadership
Sean Connery:Very unfair to pick topics on which Trump knows very little about.
Do they have a mute button this time around? If not...this doesn't matter. If they do, I'd absolutely do exactly this, step back and watch the word salads of incoherence erupt from his mouth. I watched a couple questions from his townhall and good Lord it was bad...especially on ACA and healthcare.If I'm Biden, I say my piece on Covid, and climate change, and on every other subject, lean in real close to the mic, and go:
I yield my time to the president
After whichever of Trump's answers is the worst (I'll take Race Relations, if there's a pool), Joe should say,The topics mean nothing. This is going to go way off the rails.
Find out who wrote the first paragraph, have them reword the last five, resend.This letter from the Trump campaign to the debate commission is incredible: https://twitter.com/BillStepien/status/1318269143884435456
Agreed, the campaign has legitimate grounds for complaint. But this is just the ravings of a lunatic.Find out who wrote the first paragraph, have them reword the last five, resend.
Seriously, the first part was my exact reaction: I thought #3 was supposed to be the Foreign Policy debate?
Only the last five paragraphs. The opener was cogent.Agreed, the campaign has legitimate grounds for complaint. But this is just the ravings of a lunatic.
Dear POTUS,Find out who wrote the first paragraph, have them reword the last five, resend.
Seriously, the first part was my exact reaction: I thought #3 was supposed to be the Foreign Policy debate?
This letter from the Trump campaign to the debate commission is incredible: https://twitter.com/BillStepien/status/1318269143884435456
I have some ideas for how they could respond: https://lettersofnote.com/2011/02/14/regarding-your-stupid-complaint/
Agreed. The first paragraph is well written, but then it goes downhill from there. The point is valid, but it'll be hard to win an argument for any changes when they're already tipping their hand to the sort of exaggeration and distortion they intend to pursue. Biden, though, should be open to a foreign policy debate - prepare sharp, crisp responses to the criticisms already raised, and let Trump continue with his embarrassing antics.Find out who wrote the first paragraph, have them reword the last five, resend.
Seriously, the first part was my exact reaction: I thought #3 was supposed to be the Foreign Policy debate?
They should have signed it "John Barron"This letter from the Trump campaign to the debate commission is incredible: https://twitter.com/BillStepien/status/1318269143884435456
I have some ideas for how they could respond: https://lettersofnote.com/2011/02/14/regarding-your-stupid-complaint/
This will be in someone’s book one day. The President was fine with the first paragraph of the memo, which merely framed the purpose of the lettter. But he objected to every supporting argument, saying it “sounds weak, put some teeth in there.”Agreed. The first paragraph is well written, but then it goes downhill from there. The point is valid, but it'll be hard to win an argument for any changes when they're already tipping their hand to the sort of exaggeration and distortion they intend to pursue. Biden, though, should be open to a foreign policy debate - prepare sharp, crisp responses to the criticisms already raised, and let Trump continue with his embarrassing antics.
There’s the out Trump was looking for; their spokesperson told the NY Post they wouldn’t agree to it. Guess we’ll see if they meant it or just blustering.Mike Balsamo @MikeBalsamo1
WASHINGTON (AP) — Debate commission adopts new rules to mute microphones to allow Trump, Biden 2 minutes of uninterrupted time per segment.
6:43 PM · Oct 19, 2020
Submitted, thanks!FanDuel is doing a free fantasy debate challenge again for anyone who is interested.
I know folks (somewhat rightly) will cry foul and that this is just meant to thwart Trump. But for many of us, we've wanted this implemented long before 2016. It's annoying to listen to these people talk over each other and interrupt each other. I like it.Mike Balsamo @MikeBalsamo1
WASHINGTON (AP) — Debate commission adopts new rules to mute microphones to allow Trump, Biden 2 minutes of uninterrupted time per segment.
6:43 PM · Oct 19, 2020
As if the first time the mic cuts out on him, he doesn't just keep going while raising the volume of his voice to a dull roar.There’s the out Trump was looking for; their spokesperson told the NY Post they wouldn’t agree to it. Guess we’ll see if they meant it or just blustering.
RelevantI heard that as an alternative to a debate focused solely on foreign policy, the Trump team will accept a debate if the topics are as follows:
- Hunter Biden
- Antifa
- Black unemployment circa 2017-2019
- Media bias
- Bad hombres
- Russia hoax
- Mail-in voter fraud
Please cut as soon as time is up alsoI know folks (somewhat rightly) will cry foul and that this is just meant to thwart Trump. But for many of us, we've wanted this implemented long before 2016. It's annoying to listen to these people talk over each other and interrupt each other. I like it.
Absolutely the latter.I have a serious question that will sound trolly but it's not.
I've rarely watched any debates or follow politics. In fact I literally just registered to vote and I'm almost 50.
Have these debates/rallies/Town Halls always been so " jerry springery", or is this a Trump phenomenon?
Let’s hope this is the rule for all future presidential debates.I know folks (somewhat rightly) will cry foul and that this is just meant to thwart Trump. But for many of us, we've wanted this implemented long before 2016. It's annoying to listen to these people talk over each other and interrupt each other. I like it.
It cost him my voteAbsolutely the latter.
Go to YouTube and pull up the Obama/McCain debate to get an idea, for example.
You only need to watch the first 5 minutes. Just watch the civility from the handshake to start and the first question to see how it's supposed to be.
ETA -- I think McCain would have been a good President as well. It's a shame, for his sake, he chose Palin, because I think that truly cost him a good shot at winning.
Yep. 0% chance I watch even 1 min of that dumpster fire. Saw all I needed in the first oneThe topics mean nothing. This is going to go way off the rails.
In terms of having to cut mics and just blathering about, that's new. Debates have always had that feeling of "southern politeness" and "coyness" to them, so that's new. However, in the end, it's always been a bunch of non-answers or "I'm going to answer the question I want to, even if it's not the one I was asked". They've been fruitless endeavors for a long time.I have a serious question that will sound trolly but it's not.
I've rarely watched any debates or follow politics. In fact I literally just registered to vote and I'm almost 50.
Have these debates/rallies/Town Halls always been so " jerry springery", or is this a Trump phenomenon?
That’s a change I would be in favor of too - cutting their mic off if they don’t answer the question.In terms of having to cut mics and just blathering about, that's new. Debates have always had that feeling of "southern politeness" and "coyness" to them, so that's new. However, in the end, it's always been a bunch of non-answers or "I'm going to answer the question I want to, even if it's not the one I was asked". They've been fruitless endeavors for a long time.
Cutting the mic isn't the (long term) answer. It's necessary right now, but the solution isn't regulation. It's better candidates.That’s a change I would be in favor of too - cutting their mic off if they don’t answer the question.
I have no idea how that could work but if somebody could convince me of a fair approach sign me up.
We don't need to cut them off for non-answers. All it takes is a moderator with balls to say to each and every non-answer, "Ok, I'll put you down as not wanting to give an answer that has anything to do with my question....moving on...." and then going to the next question which will likely not be answered either.That’s a change I would be in favor of too - cutting their mic off if they don’t answer the question.
I have no idea how that could work but if somebody could convince me of a fair approach sign me up.
Trump on Fox & Friends about interruptions at the next debate: "There is a chain of thought, that there are a lot of people that say let him talk, because he loses his train, he loses his train, he loses his mind, frankly." Classic.
A mic cut debate would help Trump if he decided he wanted to go into the debate with the strategy of actually laying out his case. I think the idea of "letting Biden ramble" is a bit overblown; because Biden unchecked can bloviate and spin yarn as good as any older career politician can. You're not going to give Biden enough rope to hang himself with in an unchecked debate. But, if Trump is forced to back away from his full court "Trumpitude" and actually A) lay out his accomplishments and B) look Presidential and non confrontational......it would be a better look than what we got from him in the first debate.
You are right but the trend is very much in the wrong direction there. I’d be ok using it like a dog collar to shock the candidates back to “good behavior”.Cutting the mic isn't the (long term) answer. It's necessary right now, but the solution isn't regulation. It's better candidates.