The worst thing about this whole election (apart from Trump himself) is that the democrats could have selected almost anyone other than Clinton and pretty much guaranteed winning at least the Presidency, if not the House.
Clinton needs to avoid getting dragged down to Trumps level and concentrate on what she will do for the country. Let him spout his inanities and trip himself up. No need to shoot when he can pull the trigger on his own foot. Not saying Clinton will win each debate but the less baiting she does the more she will come out on top.
Clinton needs to avoid getting dragged down to Trumps level and concentrate on what she will do for the country. Let him spout his inanities and trip himself up. No need to shoot when he can pull the trigger on his own foot. Not saying Clinton will win each debate but the less baiting she does the more she will come out on top.
An excellent point. The best thing she can do is look stateswoman-like, which she does pretty well. Were I in her corner the thing I would be coaching her on is not getting too deep into the weeds on policy. To her credit she has a lot of ideas on detailed policy, well as detailed as you get in politics these days, but that sort of stuff just doesn't play in debates (not saying that's a good thing). For her it's got to be hit your major points, and let Trump talk himself in circles.
That said, I expect a good performance from Trump tonight. I suspect his team will have been working with him on this for weeks, and for as disgusting as some of the people in his corner are, they'll know he needs a good, statesman-like performance tonight. He has it in his bag to act that way 60-70% of the time over the course of an evening.
It's also easier for the non-incumbent to have a strong first debate, as all they really need to do is challenge the status quo. This happened badly to Obama in the first debate in 2012. As we go down the stretch and voters start to weight what impact their vote will have, and what the candidate they vote for can actually do for the country, that is when detail and experience come into play.
Right now FiveThirtyEight has the race at just about evens in their adjust polls. A draw tonight and keeping it that way would be a very good result for Hillary. Her ground game is very strong and well-organized, and even if it's level going in to election day, she will back her campaign's ability to get voters to the polls.
I am very hopeful he will crash very badly tonight.
I hope the Clinton preparations has included the whole list of negative attacks that worked so well leading into the convention; the fact that unlike the majority of the 100 million watching Americans he has always used every loop hole to avoid paying his fair share of taxes; the fact that he betrayed American workers by using cheap labour in Mexico and China; the fact that he routinely stiffs American workers when he does employ them; the fact that he mocks the disabled; the fact that he insults American war heroes llike John McCain and the parents of dead American war heroes despite doing everything possible to avoid serving in Vietnam; the fact that he scammed American vets with his Trump University fraud; the fact that he followed blatant racist policies in his rental buildings in the 70s and 80s.
It is being reported that a lot of undecided voters will be taking their first look at the candidates tonight. For a lot of these voters, unbelievably, it will be their first exposure to these facts about Trump. They are already aware of the all the negatives about Clinton. If she repeats each of these facts several times during the 90 minutes I see him reacting very badly.
The worst thing about this whole election (apart from Trump himself) is that the democrats could have selected almost anyone other than Clinton and pretty much guaranteed winning at least the Presidency, if not the House.
So I am not without my criticisms of Hillary Clinton, but I think it's worth noting that she is the most qualified Democrat by leaps and bounds in terms of relevant experience (as much as you can have relevant experience). I do think that her gender as well as various issues on past stances/policies and the inability to tell the truth has made it so that the standard for her is much higher. You need only look at Trump saying "she doesn't look Presidential." Being an experienced politician, including all of the dirt that comes with, is exactly what most Presidents look like.
Back to my original point, I don't know that there is any other Democrat who could have gone the distance. Did the Democratic Party want her elected? Yes, there was something of a coronation about it all. But it's hard to identify any real challengers who you could unequivocally say would have lasted into the general election well.
Bernie Sanders obviously polled well nationally while he was in the race, but he is the quintessential primary candidate--far to one side of where at least the perceived base of the party is. A strong grassroots movement. Idealistic, but ultimately lacking badly in certain policy areas. I say this as someone who is ideologically closest to him, but when it came to think beyond his core issues, such as foreign policy, he was found wanting. Could that have changed in a national election? Possibly. But if you look at his stance on education--where he had a very popular desire for free university level education (an excellent idea), when pushed beyond that within the realm of education, details were sparse.
Some on here were calling for Biden, but the truth is Biden ran for President twice with little-to-no fan fare. Biden is one of the rarest of creatures, a very good and influential Vice President. His impact on foreign policy has been really important within this administration, as has been some of his more symbolic stances, such as coming out on marriage equality in the 2012 election (though I suspect that was well calculated), and his open letter to the Stanford rape victim. The last eight years has shown him to be a kind and genuine, albeit somewhat wonky man. But kind and genuine men don't make Presidents, see Carter, Jimmy.
Lastly, this probably came 2-4 years too early for the newer faces/rising stars in the party--namely Elizabeth Warren and Cory Booker. Those two in particular (along with Brown, Harris, Newsom, and various other California Dems) give me hope that I may once again have a place within the Democratic party, though of course it will never shift as far left as I am. Both are still in their 2nd/3rd year in the Senate, and though that's where Obama was when he ran for President, after his speech at the 2004 DNC he'd spent more time in the national spotlight, as well as cutting his teeth in the ruthless Illinois state legislature. That said, if Trump is elected, or even if Hillary is elected but is a very unpopular president, expect Booker and Warren to be there or thereabouts in 2020.
The worst thing about this whole election (apart from Trump himself) is that the democrats could have selected almost anyone other than Clinton and pretty much guaranteed winning at least the Presidency, if not the House.
Absolutely - such a shame, any normal democrat would have wiped the floor with Trump.
The worst thing about this whole election (apart from Trump himself) is that the democrats could have selected almost anyone other than Clinton and pretty much guaranteed winning at least the Presidency, if not the House.
It wouldn't have made any difference. The Trump campaign have spun this to paint Hillary as the person people now think she is. For many years she has had a pretty stellar political career. it's amazing how much people will believe if there is a continual spin put on something. That is what has happened here. Clever but pretty scary tactics. She is by no means perfect but certainly not the person she is now being painted as.
The worst thing about this whole election (apart from Trump himself) is that the democrats could have selected almost anyone other than Clinton and pretty much guaranteed winning at least the Presidency, if not the House.
So I am not without my criticisms of Hillary Clinton, but I think it's worth noting that she is the most qualified Democrat by leaps and bounds in terms of relevant experience (as much as you can have relevant experience)..
Apparently the most experienced presidential candidate ever but I am guessing that she has been in the game all her life where as Trump has been conning people his life and has got lucky to be where he is now because he has appealed to the masses that can't or won't check any of his policies or statements.
Clinton needs to avoid getting dragged down to Trumps level and concentrate on what she will do for the country. Let him spout his inanities and trip himself up. No need to shoot when he can pull the trigger on his own foot. Not saying Clinton will win each debate but the less baiting she does the more she will come out on top.
That said, I expect a good performance from Trump tonight. I suspect his team will have been working with him on this for weeks, and for as disgusting as some of the people in his corner are, they'll know he needs a good, statesman-like performance tonight. He has it in his bag to act that way 60-70% of the time over the course of an evening.
And there are, as Hillary would say, some deplorables backing him. I have been tracking some of the high brow backers behind Trump claremont.org/crb/basicpage/the-flight-93-election/ that have a few valid points along with low brow stuff i.e; Breitbart and Infowars ( would not doubt it if Trump were president he would create a department similar to that of the Gestapo and make Alex Jones head of it ) which I have found to be pretty disgusting. But as free speech is part of the first amendment you are going to get some odd and very wrong views.
And I would like to add more more comment. It seems like Trump gets some his policies from what Ann Coulter talks about 2 or 3 years ago. For someone so intelligent she has come out with some perverse shit.
One othe thing before I collapse into a heap is the media exposure the 2 candidates made befor the debates with Trump letting Fallon mess up his hair which is jovial at best compared to Between Two Ferns with Hillary Clinton.. Cracked me up but not sure if it was deadpan or not. Either way Trump is going to be in a bad place if he tries to take on Hillary intellectually.
Just switched it on and Trump is hammering Clinton on NAFTA, TPP, and the outsourcing of jobs. Of course he personally had benefited massively from cheaper labor thanks to things like NAFTA, but this is an area where he can attack Hillary arguably from the left. I can hear the rust belt just moving ever-so-slight red.
Clinton is trying to counter with plans on job creation and not adding to the debt but I just don't know if that plays as well as being anti-NAFTA.
I hate to say it but I think he will win - the polls will get it wrong like they did with the UK general election and Brexit
There is a massive, massive difference between polls in the UK and in the US, along with the fact that we have the Electoral college which allows for more uncertainty because it's state-by-state.
I think Trump is landing a LOT of punches tonight. As I said before, he doesn't need to produce policy, he just need to attack the status quo. Expect him to be favorite to win tomorrow, but I think tonight will be the pinnacle of his campaign.
I hate to say it but I think he will win - the polls will get it wrong like they did with the UK general election and Brexit
There is a massive, massive difference between polls in the UK and in the US, along with the fact that we have the Electoral college which allows for more uncertainty because it's state-by-state.
I think Trump is landing a LOT of punches tonight. As I said before, he doesn't need to produce policy, he just need to attack the status quo. Expect him to be favorite to win tomorrow, but I think tonight will be the pinnacle of his campaign.
Our constituency system is similar to the electoral college - sadly most states are irrelevant just as most constituencies are here.
Twitter poll suggests trump 68% to 32% Clinton. He was clear odds to win but not by such a clear margin.
Are you sure you didn't miss out a few words in that post? Like Twitter poll of white supremacists.....
He was utterly crushed in that debate. Made to look a complete fool. From start to finish. The way some pundits are suggesting he won the first 15 minutes is an example of the different standards he gets judged against.
So I had to go play footy very, very poorly and re-injure my knee about halfway through the debate. This seems to be a very, very good breakdown of the debate. My comments about him really hitting hard on free trade are echoed. But by the time I left for footy his ability to just keep talking himself in circles really started to get him in trouble and make him feel tiresome.
My criticisms of Hillary on the night were that at times she was static and awkward, particularly when discussing race if she is in fact the candidate of African Americans, even if it's de facto. And also, she didn't go for the jugular. I don't think (in spite of what is discussed on here) that she really hit home the fact that he doesn't pay his laborers, and he doesn't pay his taxes. But she was clever, most of the night she gave him little nudges and then let him talk himself into trouble.
My criticisms of Trump is that he is a passive aggressive, petulant, and delusional man who is both disingenuous and bigoted.
I said before the night that a draw was good enough for Clinton, and it seems like she may have just edged it on points. It's a result for her. When Trump has to come from behind, or even just attempt to stay on topic and relevant as he did in the latter stages of the debate tonight, he's more and more prone to self-destruction. I think tonight is the beginning of the end for his realistic chances of winning the Electoral College. I stand by the fact that Clinton will hold everything Obama won in 2012 and pick up North Carolina and Arizona.
Also, Nate Silver is a jew whose hair looks like he's wearing a yarmulke even though he isn't (I have uncles for whom this is the same).
Comments
That said, I expect a good performance from Trump tonight. I suspect his team will have been working with him on this for weeks, and for as disgusting as some of the people in his corner are, they'll know he needs a good, statesman-like performance tonight. He has it in his bag to act that way 60-70% of the time over the course of an evening.
It's also easier for the non-incumbent to have a strong first debate, as all they really need to do is challenge the status quo. This happened badly to Obama in the first debate in 2012. As we go down the stretch and voters start to weight what impact their vote will have, and what the candidate they vote for can actually do for the country, that is when detail and experience come into play.
Right now FiveThirtyEight has the race at just about evens in their adjust polls. A draw tonight and keeping it that way would be a very good result for Hillary. Her ground game is very strong and well-organized, and even if it's level going in to election day, she will back her campaign's ability to get voters to the polls.
How many times will he make that masturbating a tiny penis gesture with his right hand?
I hope the Clinton preparations has included the whole list of negative attacks that worked so well leading into the convention; the fact that unlike the majority of the 100 million watching Americans he has always used every loop hole to avoid paying his fair share of taxes; the fact that he betrayed American workers by using cheap labour in Mexico and China; the fact that he routinely stiffs American workers when he does employ them; the fact that he mocks the disabled; the fact that he insults American war heroes llike John McCain and the parents of dead American war heroes despite doing everything possible to avoid serving in Vietnam; the fact that he scammed American vets with his Trump University fraud; the fact that he followed blatant racist policies in his rental buildings in the 70s and 80s.
It is being reported that a lot of undecided voters will be taking their first look at the candidates tonight. For a lot of these voters, unbelievably, it will be their first exposure to these facts about Trump. They are already aware of the all the negatives about Clinton. If she repeats each of these facts several times during the 90 minutes I see him reacting very badly.
Back to my original point, I don't know that there is any other Democrat who could have gone the distance. Did the Democratic Party want her elected? Yes, there was something of a coronation about it all. But it's hard to identify any real challengers who you could unequivocally say would have lasted into the general election well.
Bernie Sanders obviously polled well nationally while he was in the race, but he is the quintessential primary candidate--far to one side of where at least the perceived base of the party is. A strong grassroots movement. Idealistic, but ultimately lacking badly in certain policy areas. I say this as someone who is ideologically closest to him, but when it came to think beyond his core issues, such as foreign policy, he was found wanting. Could that have changed in a national election? Possibly. But if you look at his stance on education--where he had a very popular desire for free university level education (an excellent idea), when pushed beyond that within the realm of education, details were sparse.
Some on here were calling for Biden, but the truth is Biden ran for President twice with little-to-no fan fare. Biden is one of the rarest of creatures, a very good and influential Vice President. His impact on foreign policy has been really important within this administration, as has been some of his more symbolic stances, such as coming out on marriage equality in the 2012 election (though I suspect that was well calculated), and his open letter to the Stanford rape victim. The last eight years has shown him to be a kind and genuine, albeit somewhat wonky man. But kind and genuine men don't make Presidents, see Carter, Jimmy.
Lastly, this probably came 2-4 years too early for the newer faces/rising stars in the party--namely Elizabeth Warren and Cory Booker. Those two in particular (along with Brown, Harris, Newsom, and various other California Dems) give me hope that I may once again have a place within the Democratic party, though of course it will never shift as far left as I am. Both are still in their 2nd/3rd year in the Senate, and though that's where Obama was when he ran for President, after his speech at the 2004 DNC he'd spent more time in the national spotlight, as well as cutting his teeth in the ruthless Illinois state legislature. That said, if Trump is elected, or even if Hillary is elected but is a very unpopular president, expect Booker and Warren to be there or thereabouts in 2020.
Clinton is trying to counter with plans on job creation and not adding to the debt but I just don't know if that plays as well as being anti-NAFTA.
I think Trump is landing a LOT of punches tonight. As I said before, he doesn't need to produce policy, he just need to attack the status quo. Expect him to be favorite to win tomorrow, but I think tonight will be the pinnacle of his campaign.
He was utterly crushed in that debate. Made to look a complete fool. From start to finish. The way some pundits are suggesting he won the first 15 minutes is an example of the different standards he gets judged against.
So I had to go play footy very, very poorly and re-injure my knee about halfway through the debate. This seems to be a very, very good breakdown of the debate. My comments about him really hitting hard on free trade are echoed. But by the time I left for footy his ability to just keep talking himself in circles really started to get him in trouble and make him feel tiresome.
My criticisms of Hillary on the night were that at times she was static and awkward, particularly when discussing race if she is in fact the candidate of African Americans, even if it's de facto. And also, she didn't go for the jugular. I don't think (in spite of what is discussed on here) that she really hit home the fact that he doesn't pay his laborers, and he doesn't pay his taxes. But she was clever, most of the night she gave him little nudges and then let him talk himself into trouble.
My criticisms of Trump is that he is a passive aggressive, petulant, and delusional man who is both disingenuous and bigoted.
I said before the night that a draw was good enough for Clinton, and it seems like she may have just edged it on points. It's a result for her. When Trump has to come from behind, or even just attempt to stay on topic and relevant as he did in the latter stages of the debate tonight, he's more and more prone to self-destruction. I think tonight is the beginning of the end for his realistic chances of winning the Electoral College. I stand by the fact that Clinton will hold everything Obama won in 2012 and pick up North Carolina and Arizona.
Also, Nate Silver is a jew whose hair looks like he's wearing a yarmulke even though he isn't (I have uncles for whom this is the same).