The First Presidential Debate - Bart Simpson vs Lisa Simpson - THUNDERDOME - General

[QUOTE=TheFilmSlacker;51118689]Which is fucking pathetic. Clinton wasn't perfect, but Trump could literally not stop fucking up.[/QUOTE] That's the impression I got, too. Trump went off-topic, argued with the moderator, told actual lies and resorted to name-calling and yelling "you're wrong!" all the time. The (very) few actual points he managed to make were mostly standard conservative trickle-down bullshit that has been absolutely proven not to work in the real world. Also, the housing-market-crash comment he made going "that's business" would have been complete political suicide for literally anyone else.

[QUOTE=TheFilmSlacker;51118689]Which is fucking pathetic. Clinton wasn't perfect, but Trump could literally not stop fucking up.[/QUOTE] Trump's whole spiel is that he's "not more of the same," (ironic since he's pushing for higher military spending and repealing national healthcare, which is literally the same thing every Republican candidate has pushed for) so Trump supporters are going to see what we perceive as a flopped debate with petty jabs and no substance, and be legitimately happy with the outcome, because all they care about are those petty jabs and broad sweeping, generally racist, statements. He said China sucks, he said Muslims suck, he said BLM sucks, he said the only things his supporters care about, and he doesn't need to do anything else. The "status quo is all about planning and talking and no action," so when Hillary make sure at least semi-legitimate statements, Trump supporters see her as an all-talk "stop planning and just do it," and see Trump's lack of a plan as no big deal, or even as a benefit, since they think he "can just get it done." We see Trump supporters finding this a victory partially because theyre blindly attracted to his cult of personality, and secondly, because his shitty debate is what they want to see as a sign of not subscribing to "terrible government status quos like 'real debate". [editline]27th September 2016[/editline] I'm sure a majority of Trump supporters think debate is awful and see his shitting it up as a quality move.

The moderator pushed Trump harder because he was the only one repeatedly lying and refusing to answer questions.

That's mods in general. They need joe rogan for the debates, he won't hesitate to pull the plug on their mics.

Reanimate the rotting corpse of Macho Man Randy Savage to pile drive anyone who goes over their two minutes or interrupts.

The combo-breaking endorsements keep coming: The Arizona Republic, a conservative newspaper that has never endorsed a Democrat for President in its 126-year history, has endorsed Hillary Clinton [url]http://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/editorial/2016/09/27/hillary-clinton-endorsement/91198668/[/url] Clinton now has the backing of 11 newspapers, while Gary Johnson has 4 and Trump has zero

[QUOTE=smurfy;51119296]The combo-breaking endorsements keep coming: The Arizona Republic, a conservative newspaper that has never endorsed a Democrat for President in its 126-year history, has endorsed Hillary Clinton [url]http://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/editorial/2016/09/27/hillary-clinton-endorsement/91198668/[/url] Clinton now has the backing of 11 newspapers, while Gary Johnson has 4 and Trump has zero[/QUOTE] What a crazy ride this election is.

[QUOTE=Svinnik;51117053]What do you guys think about the argument that the moderator was biased against him? [/QUOTE] I was going to do a point by point takedown of this but I don't really feel it's necessary as the author laid his cards on the table at the end so I'll just address that Quantifying "exclusive questions" and correlating this to a bias is fucking retarded. If Holt had given Clinton 15 exclusive questions to Trump's 2 then the author would be complaining that he was biased by giving her too many chances to present her case over Trumps. In fact, using his standard, you could very well accuse Holt of being soft with Trump, giving him multiple opportunities to walk back some of the more egregious things he said on the campaign trail. The fact that he doubles down on it isn't the moderators fault, it's Trumps, but the author can't admit this. And then he just flat-out admits that he wants the moderator to go on the offensive against Clinton. He wants the moderator to bring up Benghazi, something that Clinton has been cleared of wrongdoing seven times by formal investigation. He wants the moderator to make the case, not Trump, that Clinton should bear responsibility for failures in Libya and Syria. He wants the moderator to make the charge that NAFTA and the TPP are bad by default and put Clinton on the defensive, when if you watch the fucking debate Trump attacked her on both. He wants the moderator to bring up immigration when that was never one of the themes of the debate, not that Trump gives a shit about the themes. He wants the moderator to make patently false claims that Saudi Arabia is laundering money through the Clinton Foundation to give to Clintons campaign. The most baffling claim is that these supposed attacks on Trump were to eat up time that would otherwise be spent discussing policy issues or legitimate issues for our country, as if Trump clearly wasn't given enough time to discuss these issues. Holt didn't have an agenda, but this dude [B]badly [/B]wanted him to have one last night, and his shill game is weak.

Who is Holt Lester

[QUOTE=smurfy;51119472]Who is Holt Lester[/QUOTE] Presumably Lester Holt's leftist doppelganger.

Lester is a criminal and must be holted immediately

Back in April I volunteered in a Bernie Sanders campaign. Made a few friends. A lot of them have been somewhat crazy but a few of them have officially jumped off the deep end with this debate. I got one guy claiming that after that debate it has become apparent that working within the system and voting doesn't work so it's time to start an armed revolution. I got another guy claiming that after the debate it's clear that if the general isn't rigged, then Hillary will lose (he backed this up with no attempt at reasoning.) Being in that campaign was fun and a good experience and all, and I still like Bernie, but what Bernie has unintentionally build up around him is a cult.

[QUOTE=SGTNAPALM;51119636]Back in April I volunteered in a Bernie Sanders campaign. Made a few friends. A lot of them have been somewhat crazy but a few of them have officially jumped off the deep end with this debate. I got one guy claiming that after that debate it has become apparent that working within the system and voting doesn't work so it's time to start an armed revolution. I got another guy claiming that after the debate it's clear that if the general isn't rigged, then Hillary will lose (he backed this up with no attempt at reasoning.) Being in that campaign was fun and a good experience and all, and I still like Bernie, but what Bernie has unintentionally build up around him is a cult.[/QUOTE] It's really disapointing how distant from Sanders message so many of his crowd went. I think he said a lot of good things, but it feels like a large portion of the people voting for him either didn't care about what he was saying in the first place, or they beleived in him to such a degree that everyone else is apparently going to ruin the country

I just feel like as more time goes on, more people gain access to the internet, thus more people enter social media. A lot of these people are just dumb, and are now finally being heard through social media and getting involved in politics. They've always been there, but now we really see them come out of the woodwork. I somehow feel like next election will be just as wild since news sites are using more and more social media tools than ever before.

[QUOTE=hoodoo456;51119946]It's really disapointing how distant from Sanders message so many of his crowd went. I think he said a lot of good things, but it feels like a large portion of the people voting for him either didn't care about what he was saying in the first place, or they beleived in him to such a degree that everyone else is apparently going to ruin the country[/QUOTE] pretty sure most of them just hopped on the "free school" train.

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;51118062]they'd be mostly swapping one set of voters for one of a similar size doing that, i don't think they'd gain any advantage doing it[/QUOTE] I disagree, anti-gun isn't going to suddenly switch to Republican, but gun owners would be able to vote Democrat with confidence. The gains would outweigh the losses.

[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;51120447]I disagree, anti-gun isn't going to suddenly switch to Republican, but gun owners would be able to vote Democrat with confidence. The gains would outweigh the losses.[/QUOTE] The worry isn't that anti-gun will switch to Republican, it's that they'll switch to Green.

[QUOTE=SGTNAPALM;51119636]Back in April I volunteered in a Bernie Sanders campaign. Made a few friends. A lot of them have been somewhat crazy but a few of them have officially jumped off the deep end with this debate. I got one guy claiming that after that debate it has become apparent that working within the system and voting doesn't work so it's time to start an armed revolution. I got another guy claiming that after the debate it's clear that if the general isn't rigged, then Hillary will lose (he backed this up with no attempt at reasoning.) Being in that campaign was fun and a good experience and all, and I still like Bernie, but what Bernie has unintentionally build up around him is a cult.[/QUOTE] That... that does explain quite a bit. I just came to realization, people today really desire some sort of messiah to rein in the changes and fix all the problems. So this is how cult of personality starts. Bernie never wanted such thing, so only small amount of people go that far. But Trump? He loves it, he ego loves it, hence the huge cult of personality behind him.

[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;51120447]I disagree, anti-gun isn't going to suddenly switch to Republican, but gun owners would be able to vote Democrat with confidence. The gains would outweigh the losses.[/QUOTE] not really, gun voting bloc tends to be more rightwing so democrats would get less votes than you think. leftwing generally supports gun control so it makes sense for the leftwing party to be generally in favour of it. plus the gun voting bloc isn't really growing or going leftwing in other policy areas so its not like they'd catch it either all they'd be doing is alienating some democrat voters to try going after those who probably would vote for libertarians or something anyways

First post-debate polls will start coming out today! Should probably wait a few days for more data before we get too excited about anything though

Politico/Morning Consult poll is out. Clinton gets a 4-point bump on their pre-debate poll, and is seen to have won the debate 49-26. More people thought Lester Holt was fair than thought he favoured either of the candidates [url]https://morningconsult.com/2016/09/28/clinton-bests-trump-debate-half-likely-voters-say/[/url]

[url]http://nypost.com/2016/09/27/trumps-debate-incompetence-a-slap-in-the-face-to-his-supporters/[/url] Some good analysis by a Republican (and son of the person in my avatar)

Watching the debate right now, Trump's "law and order" segment is a total mess. I'm gonna assume that it gets worse from here.

[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;51121966]Watching the debate right now, Trump's "law and order" segment is a total mess. I'm gonna assume that it gets worse from here.[/QUOTE] We do need to restore Law and Order. SVU just isn't as good, and I have a man crush on McCoy.

[QUOTE=Mingebox;51122030]We do need to restore Law and Order. SVU just isn't as good, and I have a man crush on McCoy.[/QUOTE] Just watched the rest and oh man he fucked up. First 20 minutes or so were going okay, but then it just started going downhill fast.

[media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ldfF6chin5s[/media] holy shit, i was almost in tears from this

[QUOTE=SGTNAPALM;51119636]Back in April I volunteered in a Bernie Sanders campaign. Made a few friends. A lot of them have been somewhat crazy but a few of them have officially jumped off the deep end with this debate. I got one guy claiming that after that debate it has become apparent that working within the system and voting doesn't work so it's time to start an armed revolution. I got another guy claiming that after the debate it's clear that if the general isn't rigged, then Hillary will lose (he backed this up with no attempt at reasoning.) Being in that campaign was fun and a good experience and all, and I still like Bernie, but what Bernie has unintentionally build up around him is a cult.[/QUOTE] Funny how that always happens with socialism I mean who hasn't had his socialism is amazing phase in middle school

[QUOTE=SirJon;51136297]Funny how that always happens with socialism I mean who hasn't had his socialism is amazing phase in middle school[/QUOTE] I remember having it in high school and got the whole soviet soldier shebang, listened to soviet anthem each day and drank vodka.

I'm still worried how Hillary's solution on economic problems of America (the subject on jobs) is to have higher minimum wage. That only causes inflation and would probably discourage employers hiring more employees. What exactly would this higher minimum wage solve?

[QUOTE=PsycheClops;51137521]I'm still worried how Hillary's solution on economic problems of America (the subject on jobs) is to have higher minimum wage. That only causes inflation and would probably discourage employers hiring more employees. What exactly would this higher minimum wage solve?[/QUOTE] The money would go to the middle class and flow back into the economy, is the general idea.