Page 1 of 1

who's joining me?

Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2016 9:34 am
by callmeslick

Re: who's joining me?

Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2016 9:44 am
by MD-1118
I won't be watching the debate. I will be self-medicating, though.

Re: who's joining me?

Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2016 11:28 am
by Ferno
I might be watching the debate for the sole reason and the possibility of watching trump having a massive meltdown.

The schadenfreude will be palpable ;)

Re: who's joining me?

Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2016 11:30 am
by callmeslick
MD-1118 wrote:I won't be watching the debate. I will be self-medicating, though.
you have a fine set of priorities. :D

Re: who's joining me?

Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2016 11:39 am
by callmeslick
you know, I sort of take the view when I read in here and some other fora or FB threads, that no one's about to change his/her mind at this point unless there is a truly massive gaffe or such.............then, I make the mistake of studying up. I was waiting for my long-suffering spouse to have a dental consult this morning and was reading in the waiting room. There was a poll in the paper around the debate. Nationwide, something like 28% or so of all voters who plan on watching the debates say they COULD be swayed. Now, to backtrack when I was working on campaigns(Biden, Specter, Obama, etc) the watchword for all hands at the end of the campaign is pulling in what were called persuadables. You made sure your hardcore support was id'd and marched to the polls, but then focused pitch calling to identified persuadables, who usually only ran 4-5 percent by October. This seems to indicate a massive pool, especially if the debate outcomes aren't clearcut(which they seldom are in this age of spin). Given the stark nature of the choices, color me shocked. I suppose it speaks to the overall weakness of all the candidates, but from a sheer political geek perspective, I'll betcha some folks in both major camps are pulling their hairs out. I wonder if the same vacillation is occurring, in downballot races. I suspect not.

Re: who's joining me?

Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2016 8:12 pm
by Ferno
So glad I put aside some time for this. This is great.

Now that it's over, I can sum it up in one word: predictable.

Re: who's joining me?

Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2016 9:01 pm
by Tunnelcat
Ferno wrote:I might be watching the debate for the sole reason and the possibility of watching trump having a massive meltdown.

The schadenfreude will be palpable ;)
I watched it and boy did he BOMB! All that sniffing, microphone leaning, face twisting, fidgeting and dry mouth water sipping made him look like a nervous first time plebe who didn't bother to even study the material. If there was any question about Hillary's stamina, it was put to rest tonight. As much as I hate to admit it, Hillary looked presidential. Anybody want to make a wager that Trump will skip the next 2 debates? :lol:

Re: who's joining me?

Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2016 9:46 pm
by Spidey
Yes, the robot with the plastic smile definitely defeated the fidgety fool.

Re: who's joining me?

Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2016 10:28 pm
by vision
callmeslick wrote:...no one's about to change his/her mind at this point ...
Hey, guess what? I changed my mind. I really warmed up to Mrs Clinton after watching the debate. I feel like I can vote for her comfortably. She was unflappable.

Re: who's joining me?

Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2016 12:27 am
by Ferno
you guys noticed how many times trump interrupted, or tried to interrupt everyone there?

Like watching a bad interpretation of Zoidberg.

Re: who's joining me?

Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2016 2:19 am
by Nightshade
Yes. Trump is the perfect fool.

Re: who's joining me?

Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2016 5:25 am
by callmeslick
you know his night didn't go well when Team Trump had to reassure all the media that yes, the Orange buffoon would show up for round 2. That whole evening was akin to watching a gleeful child whack a pinata. Three things in particular absolutely KILLED Trump last night:

1. The response to her attack about insulting women. He should have run away, talked about his kids or about kittens or anything, but no. He goes on a rant inferring that his words toward Rosie O Donnell were acceptable, and then whining about both her, and Hillarys political ads that 'weren't nice'. Hint, the actual job you are running for gets a LOT harder than that.

2. The split screen. For 90 minutes, she was unflappable(no surprise to any that watched her at hearings), he was a visible wreck. He was sweating, grabbing for water like a lifeline, coughing, snorting, gasping and altogether destroying any illusion he created of her being weak or ill.


3. 100 million people watched it. He should have prayed that they moved the debate to 3 am.

Re: who's joining me?

Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2016 6:16 am
by woodchip
callmeslick wrote:you know his night didn't go well when Team Trump had to reassure all the media that yes, the Orange buffoon would show up for round 2. That whole evening was akin to watching a gleeful child whack a pinata. Three things in particular absolutely KILLED Trump last night:

1. The response to her attack about insulting women. He should have run away, talked about his kids or about kittens or anything, but no. He goes on a rant inferring that his words toward Rosie O Donnell were acceptable, and then whining about both her, and Hillarys political ads that 'weren't nice'. Hint, the actual job you are running for gets a LOT harder than that.
Rosie deserved everything he said as it was in response to what she said about him
callmeslick wrote:2. The split screen. For 90 minutes, she was unflappable(no surprise to any that watched her at hearings), he was a visible wreck. He was sweating, grabbing for water like a lifeline, coughing, snorting, gasping and altogether destroying any illusion he created of her being weak or ill.
I thought the drinking of water was a subtle jab at Clinton as she doesn't drink water to the point she passes out. Her sickly smile when being attacked said it all. Good thing she has top of the line dentures.

callmeslick wrote:3. 100 million people watched it. He should have prayed that they moved the debate to 3 am.
Time poll, Trump won poll 53 to Clintons 47%, CNBC poll Trump 66% to her measly 34%. So tell me again why he should pray?

Re: who's joining me?

Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2016 7:04 am
by callmeslick
woodchip wrote:Rosie deserved everything he said as it was in response to what she said about him
said as a middle aged male. You see, the candidates have a job in these things. Part of his was to stop insulting women and thinking it is ok. It is NOT, especially in the eyes of women voters. So, no, Rosie did not deserve to be called a pig, nor did the beauty contestant(who'll I will bet makes a public appearance in 3,2,1......). Pure lose for Trump. As I said,he should have deflected, because a deflection would have served him far better than what degenerated into whining about how mean people are to him.
I thought the drinking of water was a subtle jab at Clinton as she doesn't drink water to the point she passes out. Her sickly smile when being attacked said it all. Good thing she has top of the line dentures.
he looked BAD. Get over it. More alarming, I'm sure, for his team, he looked both petualant and out of control. Moreover, he clearly wore down as the debate wore on. If his narrative was supposed to be that he was the one most vigorous(not that I find vigor to be a core value), he put the lie to it in front of 100,000,000 voters.

Time poll, Trump won poll 53 to Clintons 47%, CNBC poll Trump 66% to her measly 34%. So tell me again why he should pray?
I'll assume you've never worked on a campaign. Those polls are all call-in type polls, and the campaigns when needed call up their people to respond. The only poll I've read that contacted a normal range of polling volunteers(CNN, 900 voters), had Clinton winning 62-20. As I said, 100 million people watched that, so overnight polling means nothing. I will near guarantee, no, hell, I'll guarantee that last night won him nearly ZERO new votes. Likely didn't lose his supporters, as you are witness to, as they are fact resistant. But, I suspect she both shored up shaky support and won over independants to some extent, which was her target going in.

Re: who's joining me?

Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2016 7:19 am
by woodchip
Yeah, I guess you could say she won by simply not fainting..

Re: who's joining me?

Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2016 7:25 am
by callmeslick
when, by comparison, he grew feebler and more short-tempered as the night wore on, that is pretty much correct, Woody, in terms of killing the bogus narrative his surrogates spent a month trying to paint.

Re: who's joining me?

Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2016 7:27 am
by Spidey
To call Rosie O Donnell a pig, is an insult to pigs everywhere.

Re: who's joining me?

Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2016 7:32 am
by callmeslick
final insult to the clearly unprepared Trump campaign? You know how he kept bellowing about 'go to my website'?
Well, last night, folks could have feasted on this bounty of information:

Image

Re: who's joining me?

Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2016 8:00 am
by woodchip
callmeslick wrote:when, by comparison, he grew feebler and more short-tempered as the night wore on, that is pretty much correct, Woody, in terms of killing the bogus narrative his surrogates spent a month trying to paint.
What I noticed that at the end he refrained from bringing up all the the things that Hillary did to screw women over. Though he may regret that as Crazy Bernie regretted not bringing up Clintons emails.

Re: who's joining me?

Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2016 8:12 am
by callmeslick
Image


when this is making the rounds, your candidate didn't have a good night.

Re: who's joining me?

Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2016 8:13 am
by callmeslick
woodchip wrote:What I noticed that at the end he refrained from bringing up all the the things that Hillary did to screw women over. Though he may regret that as Crazy Bernie regretted not bringing up Clintons emails.
oh, hell, he missed about 10 clear chances to make his points, whether one agrees with them or not. That is called NOT PREPARING, and if he can't prepare for a freaking debate, how is he supposed to do the job he's running for?

Re: who's joining me?

Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2016 8:17 am
by callmeslick
“She mind screwed him from the beginning by mentioning the loan from his father,” said Rob Stutzman, a GOP operative in California. “That was brilliant psychological warfare on her part. He slowly unwound from there, culminating in borderline incoherency over the final 30 minutes.”

Re: who's joining me?

Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2016 9:27 am
by Vander
My favorite part was his rant about "temperament" being his best trait.

Re: who's joining me?

Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2016 9:47 am
by callmeslick
Vander wrote:My favorite part was his rant about "temperament" being his best trait.
I think that was around where Howard Dean posted his little snark about Trump's 'debate prep'(....consisting of 4 lines of coke). It was an otherworldly thing to see, honest to pete. Here he is, out of control, been that way for several minutes and sputtering about his own temperment. Unreal. :shock:

Re: who's joining me?

Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2016 1:36 pm
by Top Gun
There's a decent mix of politics and temperaments where I work, yet to a person everyone around the lunch table was talking about what a ★■◆●ing buffoon Trump was. Hell, he made Nixon's debate performances against Kennedy seem palatable.

Re: who's joining me?

Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2016 2:17 pm
by Tunnelcat
Spidey wrote:Yes, the robot with the plastic smile definitely defeated the fidgety fool.
Better than looking at a pissed off, not prepared, arrogant, sniveling slimebag. And Trump DID answer a question last night we've all had for months, by flapping his gums in a fit of boastful irritation. He doesn't pay any taxes, because he's "smart". I seriously doubt all the hard working tax paying people of America appreciate his rich businessman tax con game, legal or not.

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/2016-p ... es-n655261

Re: who's joining me?

Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2016 3:23 pm
by callmeslick
if we can presume that he manages to utter ANYTHING that isn't a lie, he's been audited by the IRS for 15 years of records. If his taxes are legal, they sure are dancing on the edge to get that amount of scrutiny, because the feds are paying a crapload for such a major audit.

Re: who's joining me?

Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2016 3:43 pm
by Top Gun
Is it true that he implied during the debate that audits are a normal, everyday thing? Because holy lulz.

Re: who's joining me?

Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2016 4:55 pm
by Tunnelcat
Some fact checks for both Clinton and Trump.

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/debate-fact-c ... ories.html

Re: who's joining me?

Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2016 6:07 pm
by Ferno

Re: who's joining me?

Posted: Wed Sep 28, 2016 5:09 pm
by sigma
callmeslick wrote:who's joining me?
Perhaps, I am ready to support you on any of your request or the reason, but not this one.

Re: who's joining me?

Posted: Wed Sep 28, 2016 8:06 pm
by callmeslick
since you chose to chime in, Sigma, let me ask you: in that paradise of openness and freedom, I presume any Russian had access to unedited, fully translated footage of the entire debate, as was available in most of the rest of the world. Is that correct?

Re: who's joining me?

Posted: Thu Sep 29, 2016 5:25 am
by sigma
callmeslick wrote:since you chose to chime in, Sigma, let me ask you: in that paradise of openness and freedom, I presume any Russian had access to unedited, fully translated footage of the entire debate, as was available in most of the rest of the world. Is that correct?
This is a direct link to the website of The New Yorker. What could be the editing? Here are a couple of links, what write about it in Russia, if that's what you mean.

http://ren.tv/novosti/2016-08-17/v-ssha ... ri-klinton
http://www.bbc.com/russian/features-37211378

Although frankly, this is more interested journalists and politicians, ordinary people do not worry about it. At least in conversations, as far as I know, in the best case, this topic is of interest to 0.01% of the population of Russia.

Re: who's joining me?

Posted: Thu Sep 29, 2016 6:23 am
by woodchip
tunnelcat wrote:
Better than looking at a pissed off, not prepared, arrogant, sniveling slimebag. And Trump DID answer a question last night we've all had for months, by flapping his gums in a fit of boastful irritation. He doesn't pay any taxes, because he's "smart". I seriously doubt all the hard working tax paying people of America appreciate his rich businessman tax con game, legal or not.
And did you call slick any names when he bragged how he paid no taxes on his inheritance?

Re: who's joining me?

Posted: Thu Sep 29, 2016 7:02 am
by callmeslick
woodchip wrote:
tunnelcat wrote:
Better than looking at a pissed off, not prepared, arrogant, sniveling slimebag. And Trump DID answer a question last night we've all had for months, by flapping his gums in a fit of boastful irritation. He doesn't pay any taxes, because he's "smart". I seriously doubt all the hard working tax paying people of America appreciate his rich businessman tax con game, legal or not.
And did you call slick any names when he bragged how he paid no taxes on his inheritance?
not that I remember, but then again, I was decrying the reality. Not, for instance, bragging that I was 'smart'. Kind of a big difference, but that sort of obvious fact doesn't really matter to you,now does it?

Re: who's joining me?

Posted: Thu Sep 29, 2016 7:03 am
by callmeslick
sigma wrote:
callmeslick wrote:since you chose to chime in, Sigma, let me ask you: in that paradise of openness and freedom, I presume any Russian had access to unedited, fully translated footage of the entire debate, as was available in most of the rest of the world. Is that correct?
This is a direct link to the website of The New Yorker. What could be the editing? Here are a couple of links, what write about it in Russia, if that's what you mean.

http://ren.tv/novosti/2016-08-17/v-ssha ... ri-klinton
http://www.bbc.com/russian/features-37211378

Although frankly, this is more interested journalists and politicians, ordinary people do not worry about it. At least in conversations, as far as I know, in the best case, this topic is of interest to 0.01% of the population of Russia.
ok, thanks. That sort of thing gets wondered about here, it's good that you get some unfiltered access.

Re: who's joining me?

Posted: Thu Sep 29, 2016 4:38 pm
by woodchip
callmeslick wrote:
woodchip wrote:
tunnelcat wrote:
Better than looking at a pissed off, not prepared, arrogant, sniveling slimebag. And Trump DID answer a question last night we've all had for months, by flapping his gums in a fit of boastful irritation. He doesn't pay any taxes, because he's "smart". I seriously doubt all the hard working tax paying people of America appreciate his rich businessman tax con game, legal or not.
And did you call slick any names when he bragged how he paid no taxes on his inheritance?
not that I remember, but then again, I was decrying the reality. Not, for instance, bragging that I was 'smart'. Kind of a big difference, but that sort of obvious fact doesn't really matter to you,now does it?
Oh get off it slick, you chortled the whole thread about how "rich" people don't pay taxes by doing things in a certain manner. You're no different than Trump...like being compared to him?

Re: who's joining me?

Posted: Thu Sep 29, 2016 4:43 pm
by callmeslick
bull★■◆●^^^

Re: who's joining me?

Posted: Thu Sep 29, 2016 5:35 pm
by sigma
callmeslick wrote:... it's good that you get some unfiltered access.
I wish the same for you =)

Re: who's joining me?

Posted: Thu Sep 29, 2016 7:39 pm
by callmeslick
alas, available but underutilized. :(