Jump to content
Baseops Forums
disgruntledemployee

The Next President is...

Recommended Posts

Speaking as neutral observer:

The fact that the general consensus is and all of the YouTube video highlights showed that both men were equally as bad is a win for Trump.  You kind of expected Trump to be who he is in this kind of environment, but the general public didn't expect Biden to be part of the "Shit Show".  So now you've plant the idea in everyone's mind that Biden is just/kind of like Trump, then the advantage goes to Trump.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think there's anything a rational person can take away from this debate other than trump being completely unhinged. His interruptions and constant riffing overshadowed any possible Biden missteps and was the absolute driver of chaos throughout the debate. No one is talking about joes policy stances, or his mental slips, or his refusal to denounce antifa because trump simply would not shut up. You know it's bad when you're the republican and the Fox News moderator is fed up with your antics. 
 

On top of that, Trump had a few good lines here and there and joe definitely tripped up a few times but it was all lost in the ever-present cacophony of his stream of consciousness jabs. Maybe this style would have worked to dominate a stage of 10 candidates early in a primary.  Maybe it would have worked with a large audience with applause breaks. But this was not that.  It was a one on one debate with clearly defined rules and no active audience to pander to.  He ended up looking like an unruly toddler and that is THE story of the debate. 
 

You can say that this is just trumps schtick, and you'd be half right. But this was a uniquely bad showing and perhaps the schtick is getting old. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the story of the debate is Joe got the same spray tan as Donnie. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think the story of the debate is Joe got the same spray tan as Donnie. 


Your tv must be ed. Joe was nearly as white as his hair and shirt.
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, ThreeHoler said:

 


Your tv must be ed. Joe was nearly as white as his hair and shirt.

 

Could be. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I took from the debate, beyond the antics, was that Trump was generally optimistic about the country and Biden was pessimistic.  Biden's tone to me was: America is jacked up and therefore needs more big government to intervene into everything."  At least that's my impression.  I'm sure Harris will echo the exact sentiment that Biden did: America is racist, America's economy is in the toilet, America's health care system is the worst on the planet, etc.  And she'll need to reign back in the green new deal people that Biden stepped on. 

I was on the fence about whether or not I would even vote this time around.  I'm definitely showing up to the polls after watching that.

And I will certainly admit that Trump behaved like a child.  For some reason that doesn't bother me anymore - a lot of politicians behave horribly and say horrible things and encourage horrible behavior.

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, filthy_liar said:

What I took from the debate, beyond the antics, was that Trump was generally optimistic about the country and Biden was pessimistic. 

I think some of that stems from a legitimate difference in philosophy and perspective, but mostly boils down to the fact that incumbents are always going to tell you that everything has been awesome on their watch, and challengers have to sell the notion that everything is terrible.

  • Like 4
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/30/2020 at 10:40 AM, jrizzell said:

The fact he wouldn’t just condemn white supremacy

Fake news much? 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/30/2020 at 6:09 AM, slackline said:

He didn’t tell the Proud Boys to “stand by”

Why should he? Proud Boys is a boogieman of the left. - they blame them for everything. 

Interview of fake news doesn't go that well 

 

 

Actual history behind that group. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tapatalk is being weird. Can't get it to post normal.

I laugh so hard when people wanting to be taken seriously say fake news.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, slackline said:

Tapatalk is being weird. Can't get it to post normal.

I laugh so hard when people wanting to be taken seriously say fake news.

To an extent I get what you’re saying. I don’t think all negative/refuting coverage is “fake news.”

But mainstream news has completely fucked away some pretty serious stories. So much so that I have to now spend an hour or so digging through sources to double check them before making a conclusion. The number of times I’ve found BS is very troubling.

Best I can determine, people are simply judging the number of outlets saying the same thing and thinking “if all of them are saying it, must be true.” If it’s on the NYT, Washington Post and CNN... then it’s basically fact.

We desperately need to get comfortable saying “I don’t know, I’ll get back to you on that.” Or “I heard this, but I can’t verify it.”

Instead I’m stuck trying to explain that Trump didn’t say “fine people on both sides” with regard to the white supremacists, while also simultaneously telling another person that Trump did in fact lie about the Portland sheriff endorsement.

Edited by Kiloalpha
  • Like 2
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Sim said:

All of those "established" facts are fake DNC talking points. All refuted by actual proper journalists. 

 

Example - DNC was not hacked by Russians. 

https://newspunch.com/report-dnc-not-hacked-russians/

 

And who are these actual proper journalists I should be following?  Who are these amazing journalists who have better investigative resources than the entire US government at the behest of the Senate that resulted in an intelligence report with said "fake news findings" written by republican senators?  Please I must know!

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, drewpey said:

And who are these actual proper journalists I should be following?  Who are these amazing journalists who have better investigative resources than the entire US government at the behest of the Senate that resulted in an intelligence report with said "fake news findings" written by republican senators?  Please I must know!

Alex Jones, clearly

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, filthy_liar said:

What I took from the debate, beyond the antics, was that Trump was generally optimistic about the country and Biden was pessimistic.  Biden's tone to me was: America is jacked up and therefore needs more big government to intervene into everything."  At least that's my impression.  I'm sure Harris will echo the exact sentiment that Biden did: America is racist, America's economy is in the toilet, America's health care system is the worst on the planet, etc.  And she'll need to reign back in the green new deal people that Biden stepped on. 

I was on the fence about whether or not I would even vote this time around.  I'm definitely showing up to the polls after watching that.

And I will certainly admit that Trump behaved like a child.  For some reason that doesn't bother me anymore - a lot of politicians behave horribly and say horrible things and encourage horrible behavior.

Jesus Christ, we're fucking doomed.  We really do deserve 2 candidates of the caliber we have in front of us if this is the kind of logic that's being used by the average voter to decide where their vote should go.

I mean, in any election this would be a absurd statement.  It's plainly obvious why the incumbent would take a rosy view and the challenger a pessimistic one.  But in this specific case, this logic deserves a facepalm of epic proportions.  The current incumbent was a challenger 4 years ago and his god damned mantra was "Make America Great Again", implying that America was no longer great.  Maybe the hat that he wore with the mantra emblazoned on it burned your retinas to the point where you couldn't see it?

Every 4 years there's two more manufactured candidates just putting on a theater show during the campaign.  The script is written by a team of sociologists and PR people and they all just hope that their horse can rattle of bullshit platitudes for the 9 month campaign without stepping on any run-ending landmines.  Landmines in this case being a metaphor for making some social faux pas that has no bearing whatsoever on somebody's ability to run a country.  And the worst part is that the voters know they're watching contrived theater, and yet, instead of demanding reality they just get wrapped up in the details of the storyline and cast votes as if the show they're watching was reality.

Can we just start voting based on who seems more human before this country goes the way of Rome?  I'd ask for decision making at a more sophisticated level than that, but...baby steps.

And before anybody tries to decide who's more human between Trump and Biden, I'm talking about through the whole process.  Neither of these idiots would have ever been on a primary stage if it required a Turing test to qualify.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it #fakenews that P/FLOTUS have tested positive? Sheesh!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Mark1 said:

Jesus Christ, we're ing doomed.  We really do deserve 2 candidates of the caliber we have in front of us if this is the kind of logic that's being used by the average voter to decide where their vote should go.

I mean, in any election this would be a absurd statement.  It's plainly obvious why the incumbent would take a rosy view and the challenger a pessimistic one.  But in this specific case, this logic deserves a facepalm of epic proportions.  The current incumbent was a challenger 4 years ago and his god damned mantra was "Make America Great Again", implying that America was no longer great.  Maybe the hat that he wore with the mantra emblazoned on it burned your retinas to the point where you couldn't see it?

Every 4 years there's two more manufactured candidates just putting on a theater show during the campaign.  The script is written by a team of sociologists and PR people and they all just hope that their horse can rattle of bullshit platitudes for the 9 month campaign without stepping on any run-ending landmines.  Landmines in this case being a metaphor for making some social faux pas that has no bearing whatsoever on somebody's ability to run a country.  And the worst part is that the voters know they're watching contrived theater, and yet, instead of demanding reality they just get wrapped up in the details of the storyline and cast votes as if the show they're watching was reality.

Can we just start voting based on who seems more human before this country goes the way of Rome?  I'd ask for decision making at a more sophisticated level than that, but...baby steps.

And before anybody tries to decide who's more human between Trump and Biden, I'm talking about through the whole process.  Neither of these idiots would have ever been on a primary stage if it required a Turing test to qualify.

Since when does “being more human” whatever that means make you a good candidate to run the most successful and empathetic country in modern history. Mother Theresa and Ghandi were ideal humans, don’t think I’d want them making the important decisions tho.  
I hear this so often I can barely handle it—Trump is evil the other side states. He wasn’t that evil 4 yrs ago when you were inviting him onto your TV shows and staying in his resorts and hotels.
As soon as he started playing the politics game and putting his foot down on things he became “evil”, and the mob media has gone to extreme lengths to portray him in that way. 
While yes I will consent Trump is a major asshole, needs to seriously learn how to play in the middle, be a little more decent and have some tact, but I don’t vote for someone based on if they’re nice people or if I like them, I vote based on the policies they’re wanting to implement and if I agree with them. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Dangerzone said:

Since when does “being more human” whatever that means make you a good candidate to run the most successful and empathetic country in modern history. Mother Theresa and Ghandi were ideal humans, don’t think I’d want them making the important decisions tho.  
I hear this so often I can barely handle it—Trump is evil the other side states. He wasn’t that evil 4 yrs ago when you were inviting him onto your TV shows and staying in his resorts and hotels.
As soon as he started playing the politics game and putting his foot down on things he became “evil”, and the mob media has gone to extreme lengths to portray him in that way. 
While yes I will consent Trump is a major asshole, needs to seriously learn how to play in the middle, be a little more decent and have some tact, but I don’t vote for someone based on if they’re nice people or if I like them, I vote based on the policies they’re wanting to implement and if I agree with them. 

I'd argue that Ghandi was a damned effective leader who faced some real significant challenges.  Clearly he had some kind of leadership ability.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Dangerzone said:

Since when does “being more human” whatever that means make you a good candidate to run the most successful and empathetic country in modern history. Mother Theresa and Ghandi were ideal humans, don’t think I’d want them making the important decisions tho.

It doesn't.  I thought I was clear that it's not an all-encompassing metric.  However, at the moment we're lofting 2 incompetant idiots that are also human cesspools to the top of the two-party system with nearly perfect accuracy.  Wouldn't it be a good start if we just went with 2 incompetant idiots that were mildly respectable human beings instead?

As a side note, you should substitute somebody else for Mother Theresa in future rhetorical questions.  She left a lot to be desired when it comes to morality.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Mark1 said:

It doesn't.  I thought I was clear that it's not an all-encompassing metric.  However, at the moment we're lofting 2 incompetant idiots that are also human cesspools to the top of the two-party system with nearly perfect accuracy.  Wouldn't it be a good start if we just went with 2 incompetant idiots that were mildly respectable human beings instead?

As a side note, you should substitute somebody else for Mother Theresa in future rhetorical questions.  She left a lot to be desired when it comes to morality.

So did Ghandi, like all those preteen girls he was probably raping people love to not talk about. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, pawnman said:

I'd argue that Ghandi was a damned effective leader who faced some real significant challenges.  Clearly he had some kind of leadership ability.

See my above comment. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, FLEA said:

See my above comment. 

You wanna go with source?  Only think I found on a "Gandhi rape" search was from a Vice article by someone claiming to be the grandson of a guy that was in jail with Gandhi.  It doesn't mention rape, that he just slept naked next to young girls (ew).

Same for "Mahatma Gandhi rape."

Admittedly, I didn't click on page 2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Mark1 said:

It doesn't.  I thought I was clear that it's not an all-encompassing metric.  However, at the moment we're lofting 2 incompetant idiots that are also human cesspools to the top of the two-party system with nearly perfect accuracy.  Wouldn't it be a good start if we just went with 2 incompetant idiots that were mildly respectable human beings instead?

Reagan was the last charismatic leader America has had and that was a long time ago. I am in agreeance with you, I think it's an absolute disgrace that with all the great minds/people in this country, these are the two nutjobs we decided should represent American. I believe we're going to have our equivalent of the French Revolution in a not so future time. Wealth gap keeps widening, socialistic ideas becoming increasingly popular, racial tension... There is so much anarchy and unrest and Americans have become completely us vs them in the two party system. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...