Netto Azure
Kiel
- 9,468
- Posts
- 15
- Years
- Alistel, Vainqueur
- Seen Dec 21, 2023
His advisers are definitely going to make him practice for the debates next time
2016 US Presidential Elections Thread [Trump Wins]
- Thread starter Kanzler
- Start date
Nakuzami
[img]https://i.imgur.com/iwlpePA.png[/img]
- 6,896
- Posts
- 13
- Years
- Age 25
- The Forgotten Crossroads
- Seen Nov 15, 2023
Lol that was a mess (expected and funny)
Maybe it's not too late to get a selfie with Trump and Clinton
Maybe it's not too late to get a selfie with Trump and Clinton
Somewhere_
i don't know where
- 4,494
- Posts
- 8
- Years
- somewhere (duh)
- Seen Jun 5, 2019
Trump interrupted her a lot, and she was respectful and did not. She kept her cool, but I think Trump preformed better overall because he was more commanding and hit her harder on her weak points than she hit him.
- 10,769
- Posts
- 14
- Years
- California
- Seen Jun 30, 2018
Trump: "I think my strongest asset may be by far is my temperament. I have a winning temperament."
Trump couldn't help bragging when he was accused of not paying any federal taxes. Like, I get that some people don't like taxes, but did he realize he was practically admitting that he was being sneaky with his tax returns? Despite everything though I don't think any Trump supporters were moved to join team Clinton. I bet the polls will show a small uptick for her though since she was pretty on point throughout.
Trump couldn't help bragging when he was accused of not paying any federal taxes. Like, I get that some people don't like taxes, but did he realize he was practically admitting that he was being sneaky with his tax returns? Despite everything though I don't think any Trump supporters were moved to join team Clinton. I bet the polls will show a small uptick for her though since she was pretty on point throughout.
George W. Bush practised for debating Al Gore for six months before their first debate. He ain't gonna make it.
Somewhere_
i don't know where
- 4,494
- Posts
- 8
- Years
- somewhere (duh)
- Seen Jun 5, 2019
I think my opinion changed a bit... Clinton was definitely better prepared. Trump will need to step it up.
Top percentage temperament. I found it really distracting when he talked about his accomplishments as a businessman. I don't know about what most Americans think, but the debate is an interview for the position of President, not running a business.
I must admit that's true - Clinton might have projected or explained the very stances they are against. But I think Clinton inspired a lot of confidence and projected a lot of strength today, especially for the voters who just aren't quite on board yet.
Ivysaur
Grass dinosaur extraordinaire
- 21,082
- Posts
- 17
- Years
- Age 33
- He/him
- Madrid, Europe
- Seen May 4, 2024
- 10,769
- Posts
- 14
- Years
- California
- Seen Jun 30, 2018
The radio news today was saying that a group of tepid Clinton supporters they followed during the debate felt more energized after and a group of formerly upbeat Trump supporters were feeling subdued.
Ivysaur
Grass dinosaur extraordinaire
- 21,082
- Posts
- 17
- Years
- Age 33
- He/him
- Madrid, Europe
- Seen May 4, 2024
I'll elaborate on it. I think this election will be decided by three groups:
- True undecideds, low information voters who look at TV after Labour Day and can be more easily swayed by slogans, mainstream media coverage and other "gut" instincts.
- D-leaning voters who would have gladly voted for Obama's third term or for Sanders but who feel very "meh" about Clinton.
- R-leaning who happily voted for Mitt Romney four years ago (like, say, Mitt Romney) but who feel like throwing up when they see Trump.
Essentially, the last two groups are pondering voting for "their" natural candidate or abstaining/protest voting Johnson/protest voting Stein. The tightening in the polls these previous weeks seems to have come from a mix of Never-Trump Republicans coming to terms with Teleprompter Trump while a similar amount of Hillary-I-Guess Democrats walked away after Pneumo-gate. And this is where the debate performance may really help Clinton:
- Clinton was generally expected to win (+8, according to pre-debate polls). She pretty much nailed it- she didn't do anything excellent, but she did come across as more experienced, more calm, more respectful and more prepared, which even Trump himself commented on. She even managed to get in a few zingers, whithout ever having to resort to the "tiny hands" lows that Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz were reduced to during the primaries. In short, she looked and acted the part- exactly what she was supposed to. Nothing outstanding, but you didn't have to think twice to realise who was the person on stage with experience on these things.
- Trump was given a low bar- he essentially had to prove that he could play Teleprompter Trump without needing a script on hand. He failed. He fell for all the baits Clinton threw at him, got entangled in fights with the moderator, regurgitated conspiracy theories and even blurted out unbelievable things, like "I don't pay taxes because I'm smart" or "Cheering up for the 2008 housing crash- that's called business", which make excellent advert material. Bonus points for the moment when he said "My best feature is my temperament" and the people at the studio broke in laughter.
As per the result, flash polls gave Clinton a clear win (up to +35 points, as per CNN), and panels of undecideds from swing states (PA in CBS, FL in CNN) gave her an overwhelming victory, even when a lot of participants declared themselves sort of leaning towards Trump before starting. And all of the MSM is talking about Clinton's win.
What is the point here? Well, I'm sure that most of Trump's supporters will feel hit by the debate, but -like Obama's in 2012- will stick on anyway. The key is the three non-rabidly-partisan groups I mentioned earlier. Clinton essentially made a pitch for the undecideds and the soft democrats. Trump talked to people who think that "ask Sean Hannity I swear I told him otherwise" is a good retort to "you lie when you say you didn't support the Iraq War"- and those people are probably already voting for him. Maybe Clinton barely moved the needle in her direction, but Trump certainly didn't make himself any favours. And he is the one who seems to have a lower ceiling of support, while Clinton has the most to gain from embarrassing him on public TV. She is still winning -barely- but winning. If she manages to get some of her softer supporters on board and get Trump's own words to get some soft republicans to give up and walk away, she'll get to Nov 8th much more relaxed than she is right now.
- True undecideds, low information voters who look at TV after Labour Day and can be more easily swayed by slogans, mainstream media coverage and other "gut" instincts.
- D-leaning voters who would have gladly voted for Obama's third term or for Sanders but who feel very "meh" about Clinton.
- R-leaning who happily voted for Mitt Romney four years ago (like, say, Mitt Romney) but who feel like throwing up when they see Trump.
Essentially, the last two groups are pondering voting for "their" natural candidate or abstaining/protest voting Johnson/protest voting Stein. The tightening in the polls these previous weeks seems to have come from a mix of Never-Trump Republicans coming to terms with Teleprompter Trump while a similar amount of Hillary-I-Guess Democrats walked away after Pneumo-gate. And this is where the debate performance may really help Clinton:
- Clinton was generally expected to win (+8, according to pre-debate polls). She pretty much nailed it- she didn't do anything excellent, but she did come across as more experienced, more calm, more respectful and more prepared, which even Trump himself commented on. She even managed to get in a few zingers, whithout ever having to resort to the "tiny hands" lows that Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz were reduced to during the primaries. In short, she looked and acted the part- exactly what she was supposed to. Nothing outstanding, but you didn't have to think twice to realise who was the person on stage with experience on these things.
- Trump was given a low bar- he essentially had to prove that he could play Teleprompter Trump without needing a script on hand. He failed. He fell for all the baits Clinton threw at him, got entangled in fights with the moderator, regurgitated conspiracy theories and even blurted out unbelievable things, like "I don't pay taxes because I'm smart" or "Cheering up for the 2008 housing crash- that's called business", which make excellent advert material. Bonus points for the moment when he said "My best feature is my temperament" and the people at the studio broke in laughter.
As per the result, flash polls gave Clinton a clear win (up to +35 points, as per CNN), and panels of undecideds from swing states (PA in CBS, FL in CNN) gave her an overwhelming victory, even when a lot of participants declared themselves sort of leaning towards Trump before starting. And all of the MSM is talking about Clinton's win.
What is the point here? Well, I'm sure that most of Trump's supporters will feel hit by the debate, but -like Obama's in 2012- will stick on anyway. The key is the three non-rabidly-partisan groups I mentioned earlier. Clinton essentially made a pitch for the undecideds and the soft democrats. Trump talked to people who think that "ask Sean Hannity I swear I told him otherwise" is a good retort to "you lie when you say you didn't support the Iraq War"- and those people are probably already voting for him. Maybe Clinton barely moved the needle in her direction, but Trump certainly didn't make himself any favours. And he is the one who seems to have a lower ceiling of support, while Clinton has the most to gain from embarrassing him on public TV. She is still winning -barely- but winning. If she manages to get some of her softer supporters on board and get Trump's own words to get some soft republicans to give up and walk away, she'll get to Nov 8th much more relaxed than she is right now.
Last edited:
- 304
- Posts
- 9
- Years
- Georgia
- Seen Mar 27, 2017
I think without a doubt, Clinton was the winner of last nights debate. She presented herself in a much more professional manner as compared to Donald Trump. Trump interrupted her from what I counted, at least 20 times, he interrupted the moderator to try to correct him, he tiptoed and did his typical "Trumpsplanation" of things, instead of actually highlighting points in his policies. His actions for the most part last night were very reminiscent of what he did through the entirety of the Republican Primaries, which is good for shock value, but isn't good for actual governing in my eyes. He again was very childish, which is very unbecoming for a presidential hopeful
She on the otherhand, did her best to highlight her points, she was very articulate in her wording, she didn't interrupt the moderator or Trump, she answered the questions asked of her in the allotted time without a moment of hesitation. Which is something that one should expect out of a presidential hopeful.
I've heard people say when I mentioned her state of professionalism and the way she portrayed herself as important factors in a leader, I almost immediately get shot down, which I don't really understand why? If Trump acted the way he did during the primaries and last night's debates during a meeting with a foreign leader (such as the leader of Iran, Russia, etc) do we really think anything of substance would come from it? I at least know with Hillary if she were to act like she did last night, things might move in motion.
She on the otherhand, did her best to highlight her points, she was very articulate in her wording, she didn't interrupt the moderator or Trump, she answered the questions asked of her in the allotted time without a moment of hesitation. Which is something that one should expect out of a presidential hopeful.
I've heard people say when I mentioned her state of professionalism and the way she portrayed herself as important factors in a leader, I almost immediately get shot down, which I don't really understand why? If Trump acted the way he did during the primaries and last night's debates during a meeting with a foreign leader (such as the leader of Iran, Russia, etc) do we really think anything of substance would come from it? I at least know with Hillary if she were to act like she did last night, things might move in motion.
Elysieum
Requiescat en pace.
- 258
- Posts
- 10
- Years
- By the lake.
- Seen Sep 8, 2019
Clinton nailed it.
I haven't been much invested in this race, but I sat down and watched this entire debate from start to finish. It became clear very quickly that Hillary's mind was laser-precise in a way that Trump's 'winning temperament' couldn't match. I didn't like the way she pushed her website as the bible of facts, though. She also laid the courtesy factor on thick, like the way she cloyingly said, "It's good to be with you, Donald".
But other than that, I think she was successful, truly presidential. In some moments, she handed Trump a paintbrush with which he coloured himself as an essentially greedy businessman. She reinforced that his policies would further advance him and the businessmen of his calibre only.
That Trump became abrasive with the moderator was his major downfall, I think. He also totally evaded ownership of the Obama 'birther' lie. And let slip those nuggets about his taxes. Most of his criticism of Hillary was really just rants against the establishment. He kind of treated her as the face of all bad politics ever. A scattershot versus a sniper.
It's also worth mentioning the footage taken after the debate was concluded. Trump and Clinton shook hands and thanked everybody, then their parties showed a disparate image. Trump remained on stage surrounded by his tanned, blonde and slender family while Hillary and Bill Clinton descended to the audience and bowed down to meet the crowd, shaking each hand and talking to them.
Quite revealing, that.
I haven't been much invested in this race, but I sat down and watched this entire debate from start to finish. It became clear very quickly that Hillary's mind was laser-precise in a way that Trump's 'winning temperament' couldn't match. I didn't like the way she pushed her website as the bible of facts, though. She also laid the courtesy factor on thick, like the way she cloyingly said, "It's good to be with you, Donald".
But other than that, I think she was successful, truly presidential. In some moments, she handed Trump a paintbrush with which he coloured himself as an essentially greedy businessman. She reinforced that his policies would further advance him and the businessmen of his calibre only.
That Trump became abrasive with the moderator was his major downfall, I think. He also totally evaded ownership of the Obama 'birther' lie. And let slip those nuggets about his taxes. Most of his criticism of Hillary was really just rants against the establishment. He kind of treated her as the face of all bad politics ever. A scattershot versus a sniper.
It's also worth mentioning the footage taken after the debate was concluded. Trump and Clinton shook hands and thanked everybody, then their parties showed a disparate image. Trump remained on stage surrounded by his tanned, blonde and slender family while Hillary and Bill Clinton descended to the audience and bowed down to meet the crowd, shaking each hand and talking to them.
Quite revealing, that.
Last edited:
Melody
Banned
- 6,460
- Posts
- 19
- Years
- Cuddling those close to me
- Seen Mar 4, 2018
I've always thought that since Hillary was confirmed as Democratic candidate, that it was basically no contest. All Hillary has to do is try just a little bit, and it's evident from this debate that she could really and seriously trounce all over Trump and make him look like a serious monkey's uncle. But she didn't. Sure she definitely fired off a few witty retorts when Trump tried attacking her, but that simply shows her mastery of things. She deflected when she needed to precisely and Trump simply made a bigger ass of himself because he didn't have his teleprompter to help him.
- 10,769
- Posts
- 14
- Years
- California
- Seen Jun 30, 2018
Yeah, to any person with a decent understanding of politics and the world and who has even a little bit of critical thinking ability Clinton is the clearly better choice among the two, but so many Trump supporters are people without those basic skills and they're actually going to vote for once. It's frightening. I can't think of a single that that could happen, a single thing that Trump or Clinton could do, that would make them stop supporting him. There's really no stronger belief than the unquestioning faith of the stupidly ignorant.
But to be fair, the whole Clinton team is being pretty dense, too. They seem to think that they've got things locked up because they think that all you have to do is show Clinton and Trump side by side and that's all the argument they need. That kind of overconfidence is going to get them in a lot of trouble if they don't get serious soon. There's like barely over a month left before the election.
But to be fair, the whole Clinton team is being pretty dense, too. They seem to think that they've got things locked up because they think that all you have to do is show Clinton and Trump side by side and that's all the argument they need. That kind of overconfidence is going to get them in a lot of trouble if they don't get serious soon. There's like barely over a month left before the election.
Ivysaur
Grass dinosaur extraordinaire
- 21,082
- Posts
- 17
- Years
- Age 33
- He/him
- Madrid, Europe
- Seen May 4, 2024
Of course, they also have decided that the best course is to keep Trump busy with unhinged fights, such as his 3 AM tweetstorm in which he told people (whoever was awake by then) to watch a "sex tape" from a former Miss Universe Clinton baited him with during the debate.
Essentially, the best way for her to win is to invite Trump to keep acting like a total ass. And they found the way with the Khans and are apparently milking it for maximum effect now.
Essentially, the best way for her to win is to invite Trump to keep acting like a total ass. And they found the way with the Khans and are apparently milking it for maximum effect now.
Melody
Banned
- 6,460
- Posts
- 19
- Years
- Cuddling those close to me
- Seen Mar 4, 2018
This is true. The Clinton Campaign shouldn't be getting complacent; they've got to swim upstream against the wave of uninformed voters who still adore Trump and won't be swayed.
Well yeah they can definitely milk this fact until the cows go home; but if that's all they're doing against Trump; he's gonna pull ahead more than he should be because uninformed voters are actually a threat in this election season; and if Hillary can't clinch off something to say that will properly discredit Trump and make them like her Platform any better then she'll be shocked when we all go to the polls and Trump blows by her like she's standing still. x3
- 10,769
- Posts
- 14
- Years
- California
- Seen Jun 30, 2018
It's true they can bait him pretty easily, but I think only fairly media savvy, informed voters and young people are going to know what happens with twitter and that a large proportion of his supporters won't even know about it.
Basically I think the Clinton team needs to make her look better to those people who still aren't on board but might be persuaded. That's the only way I think she can win. She's got to get those former Bernie supporters to give up Stein and Johnson and staying home. She can gamble on painting Trump as a force too awful to let win like she's doing, but I think a lot of people don't want her to win either out of some spiteful feeling. Which is understandable. I went through a period where I felt that way. But we can't insist on perfection in a democracy if it means letting the worse of two evils win.
Like, I get the argument that people are making which is that we deserve Trump, that electing him will be a wake up call for America, that it will break the process in some way that will force a change. But in learning more about how much of America thinks (such small) and believes (much conspiracy theory) I don't think America can wake up properly and that trying to break up the system just for the sake of breaking it up is inviting some worse things to take up root in their place.
- 10,769
- Posts
- 14
- Years
- California
- Seen Jun 30, 2018
Given Johnson's second major flub I think there's a chance to siphon off a little of his support.
But it does seem like the debates were good for her. Before the debates they were saying that Trump was leading in Nevada, Florida, and North Carolina and now they're either even or favoring her. I mean, that's just polls, but it does show a slight bump in good news for her. The only thing to worry about is how Trump will "not go easy on her" the next time. Will that work for him or backfire and make him look even worse?
CoffeeDrink
GET WHILE THE GETTIN'S GOOD
- 1,250
- Posts
- 10
- Years
- Lootin' Your Poké's
- Seen Dec 5, 2016
I don't know why voting for Trump would be considered ignorant. Sure, he's an ass. So? I have two choices of turkey. I have a Butterball turkey and a Land 'O Lake turkey. I know for a fact that Land 'O Lake makes terrible turkey, so I'll try the Butterball this time around, even though I haven't had it before. It's an analogy that winds up in me still buying the turkey, but a turkey that I have yet to try.
So, this will be Trump's first office holding. Tight. So, can someone explain to me why I should choose someone that has cheated, lied, stolen, covered up, been incompetent, and a whole slew of shady dealings within the last 30 years? We have a concrete record on how Clinton runs and operates. Right? So forgive me when I say that it's pretty obvious what she'll do when she's elected, if she's elected. I've lived through her and her husband's office. I've seen her back things that make absolute zero sense.
So, forgive me if I think I'm going to see what happens when I vote the opposite way. I was always on behalf of the left, until relatively recently (past 7 years). I never really enjoyed either side, both the left or the right, but saw that my opinions greatly differed from the right up until recently.
Seeing really is believing, and what I don't see is Trump supporters shooting at cops, Republicans throwing food at the opposite side, Rep. rioting because another punk ass bitch got shot. See, these are things where I just cant agree with.
She supports some radicals that uphold a Terrorist as their inspiration. So, if #BLM really mattered and really was about peaceful protests then why, in all of holy magics, do you hold a terrorist as a dear friend? Makes as much sense as a peaceful organization holding up Dr. Mengela as an idol.
Congress is still trying to figure out her e-mail mess. Regardless whether or not what she did was considered felonious. She did something she knew she wasn't supposed to do, and handled state secrets, unclassified or no. 33,000 e-mails. I don't know about you but I doubt I've ever read 33,000 emails in my lifetime. Not one of those would be classified?
Trump is racist? Well then she must be too, because her mentor and idol is a former leader of the KKK. Not much to go off of there.
She supports illegal acts, such as staying in a country you're not supposed to be. If I told you to get of my property, and you didn't you'd be trespassing and you know that's illegal, right?
I have heard nothing she has said that has made up for the fact that her incompetence for 30 odd years. Her good intentions haven't made right all the wrongs. The point is this, she has been in a position where she could have genuinely made a difference. Genuinely made better laws. You know what she did instead? Took the money from multiple 'donors' whom had asked her to lobby on their behalf. These 'donors' wanted to lie to all of the American people, because they're 'safe'.
Oh, and I didn't think to call you ignorant, did I? *wink* So forgive me if I choose to vote for a different brand of turkey this time around. It is, after all, just a turkey.
So, this will be Trump's first office holding. Tight. So, can someone explain to me why I should choose someone that has cheated, lied, stolen, covered up, been incompetent, and a whole slew of shady dealings within the last 30 years? We have a concrete record on how Clinton runs and operates. Right? So forgive me when I say that it's pretty obvious what she'll do when she's elected, if she's elected. I've lived through her and her husband's office. I've seen her back things that make absolute zero sense.
So, forgive me if I think I'm going to see what happens when I vote the opposite way. I was always on behalf of the left, until relatively recently (past 7 years). I never really enjoyed either side, both the left or the right, but saw that my opinions greatly differed from the right up until recently.
Seeing really is believing, and what I don't see is Trump supporters shooting at cops, Republicans throwing food at the opposite side, Rep. rioting because another punk ass bitch got shot. See, these are things where I just cant agree with.
She supports some radicals that uphold a Terrorist as their inspiration. So, if #BLM really mattered and really was about peaceful protests then why, in all of holy magics, do you hold a terrorist as a dear friend? Makes as much sense as a peaceful organization holding up Dr. Mengela as an idol.
Congress is still trying to figure out her e-mail mess. Regardless whether or not what she did was considered felonious. She did something she knew she wasn't supposed to do, and handled state secrets, unclassified or no. 33,000 e-mails. I don't know about you but I doubt I've ever read 33,000 emails in my lifetime. Not one of those would be classified?
Trump is racist? Well then she must be too, because her mentor and idol is a former leader of the KKK. Not much to go off of there.
She supports illegal acts, such as staying in a country you're not supposed to be. If I told you to get of my property, and you didn't you'd be trespassing and you know that's illegal, right?
I have heard nothing she has said that has made up for the fact that her incompetence for 30 odd years. Her good intentions haven't made right all the wrongs. The point is this, she has been in a position where she could have genuinely made a difference. Genuinely made better laws. You know what she did instead? Took the money from multiple 'donors' whom had asked her to lobby on their behalf. These 'donors' wanted to lie to all of the American people, because they're 'safe'.
Oh, and I didn't think to call you ignorant, did I? *wink* So forgive me if I choose to vote for a different brand of turkey this time around. It is, after all, just a turkey.
- 10,769
- Posts
- 14
- Years
- California
- Seen Jun 30, 2018
Please read more carefully. I said there were a whole bunch of Trump supporters who were ignorant, not that voting for Trump makes one ignorant. Nor did I call you or anyone in particular out by name. Yes, I did make a fairly broad statement, but there are a lot of people in the Trump camp who just plain ignore reality because they don't like it. (I mean, claiming that Michelle Obama is actually a man and their kids are adopted? That's just wacky conspiracy theorizing.) And then there are the climate-deniers and the birthers, of course. They make up a sizable portion.
Don't look at me, I'm not trying to convince you to vote Trump.
But seriously, he's not clean. He's got his own shady dealings. You can claim that they're both corrupt in their own ways. There's a lot to debate there about what kind of dealings are worse. But Clinton is not incompetent regardless of how you feel. She's a practiced politician and looking at her debate performance you can see that she's smart and has the temperament of a serious adult. I don't know why you'd choose the thin-skinned, snake oil salesman over her. Because you don't like her? She's not my favorite choice either, but the country would be worse off with Trump at the wheel.
Also, give up the idea that BLM is a terrorist group. There's no real evidence for that.