Presidential Debates Discussion Thread

[Undone]

Obama passed on completely repudiating the endless War on Terror and all the tools of the state that had been developed for it. That position is there, for someone to take.

 

Do you mind explaining in more detail what you're getting at with both sentences here, zoogs?

[zoogs]

Among the criticisms Obama takes from the left is that the 2008 victory was an opportunity to roll back the reviled security state apparatus that had sprouted up in the aftermath of 9/11. I do think he tried, to an extent -- but not very hard, and soon enough he rolled with it. Perhaps it was too entrenched to begin with, so I'm trying neither to particularly condemn nor absolve him, so much as just to sum up the situation as it stands.

 

Here's a Columbia law professor writing for International Socialist Review:

 

So you see how these so-called national security policies, which most Democrats and liberals condemned as unlawful and unnecessary, are now the bread and butter of the Obama administration. These unlawful practices are not just continued by a Democratic administration, but as with the use of drones, increased.

I think the drone program is one of the biggest pieces of the criticism, but it's not the only one. A few weeks ago President Obama quietly extended the "emergency" executive powers first put in place after 9/11. The Atlantic wrote in 2013 that "Bush and Obama have built infrastructure that any [aspiring tyrant] would lust after."

 

From Barron's:

 

In the matter of state secrecy, Obama allowed all of the National Security Agency’s surveillance to continue, including the use of warrantless wiretaps and metadata—even though the NSA was violating its own rules. After the revelations by whistle-blower Edward Snowden of NSA practices, Obama stated that while he championed civil liberties, there was a trade-off when it came to real threats. Under pressure from Congress, Obama signed legislation limiting the collection of bulk data, including a requirement that communications companies rather than the NSA possess such data. Overall, reform was very limited; the government retained enormous surveillance authority.

So there's an opportunity here for at least a protest party to take on the mantle of pushing back against this sort of overreach. And as we've seen with Bernie Sanders (for better or for worse), a surge from the flanks *can* have the power to influence a national coalition's agenda.

[BigRedBuster]

Zoogs....I would love a chance for another party to spring up that actually has a chance to compete. However, if there is anything this election has taught us is that the two main parties can nominate whomever they want. Those two can be the most disgusting and horrible candidates imaginable but the two parties have such a strangle hold on the system that no way can another party get traction.

[Undone]

That is exactly along the lines of what I assumed you meant, and thank you for the write-up.

 

I'm one of those crazy civil liberties champions. Big fan of the 4th Amendment, long-time hater of The Patriot Act.

As to the interventions in the Middle East, I feel like both candidates are very likely to ramp up the "boots on the ground" footprint there. That is sad to think about, in my opinion.

[knapplc]

 

[Red Five]

[Saunders]

If #TrumpWon trended there earlier, it isn't now. But there's no evidence it did start there.

 

Update: A spokesperson for TrendsMap confirms that the map isn't theirs -- and that the hashtag started in the U.S., according to their data.

 

"This is certainly not from any of our tools and do not know of any tools that look this way," Kathy Mellett said in an email. "Based upon our analysis, #TrumpWon primarily came from the US. There was an initial spike just after the debate followed by a much larger one a few hours later. In particular, around 97% of the initial spike of approximately 6,000 tweets came from the US." The next highest countries? Canada and the U.K.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/09/27/that-viral-image-showing-trumpwon-starting-in-russia-is-probably-fake/

 

[HuskerNation1]

If your scoring on traditional debate points alone, Hillary won that debate, just as Rubio, Cruz and others often did against Trump in the primaries. If you are scoring based upon how the two performed relative to their expectations, especially given this was Trump's first ever 1/1 debate, it was a draw. While he came across bombastic at times and missed many opportunities, Hillary also came across as smug and overly scripted (something Rubio got a lot of flack for).

 

Also, Trump spent way too much time playing defense, but this could be because Holt asked him 4 times more questions putting him on the defense than he did Hillary. A full listing of the specific questions asked, as well as the fact checking Holt did to Trump but not so much Hillary, can be seen at this link. Please note that this was written by somebody that does not support Trump and enjoyed seeing him struggle in the latter half of the debate.

 

http://www.mediaite.com/online/donald-trump-is-right-lester-holts-moderation-was-demonstrably-one-sided/

[zoogs]

I mean, Jeremy Lin is basically Michael Jordan with the necessary scaling factors applied.

[HuskerNation1]

I mean, Jeremy Lin is basically Michael Jordan with the necessary scaling factors applied.

 

That's how these things work in reality. It always has. Gore may have won those debates on technical points, but he had higher expectations, and Bush 43 had more charisma. With that said, Trump could have and should have done much better and was off the final 60 minutes of the debate.

Will the first debate matter...it's hard to say. In 2012 Romney wiped the floor with Obama, yet Obama still ended up winning the election. I really think the VP debate is going to matter more this year than ever before, for 2 reasons:

 

1. Trump and Hillary are old, and with Hillary's health woes, voters may weigh more heavily the VP choices.

 

2. Trump does not have government experience, so who he picked as his VP candidate is a display of his judgment and the types of people he would bring to the White House. If Pence does well, it bodes well for Trump. If Pence struggles, it could hurt Trump.

[knapplc]

 

If #TrumpWon trended there earlier, it isn't now. But there's no evidence it did start there.

 

Update: A spokesperson for TrendsMap confirms that the map isn't theirs -- and that the hashtag started in the U.S., according to their data.

 

"This is certainly not from any of our tools and do not know of any tools that look this way," Kathy Mellett said in an email. "Based upon our analysis, #TrumpWon primarily came from the US. There was an initial spike just after the debate followed by a much larger one a few hours later. In particular, around 97% of the initial spike of approximately 6,000 tweets came from the US." The next highest countries? Canada and the U.K.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/09/27/that-viral-image-showing-trumpwon-starting-in-russia-is-probably-fake/

 

 

 

 

Clearly I didn't do enough due diligence before posting that. Mea culpa.

 

The lesson, as always, is this: Nothing on the Internet is real.

 

 

Although - I am real. And available for beers.

[caveman99]

 

 

He has to know there's video of him advocating for the war in iraq, doesn't he? He doubles down anyway.

He also said that it was false that he said climate change was a hoax.

Meanwhile...

 

https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/265895292191248385?lang=en

Funny thing, his campaign went in and deleted that tweet during the debate to try and hide this lie.

[HuskerNation1]

 

 

 

He has to know there's video of him advocating for the war in iraq, doesn't he? He doubles down anyway.

He also said that it was false that he said climate change was a hoax.

Meanwhile...

 

https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/265895292191248385?lang=en

Funny thing, his campaign went in and deleted that tweet during the debate to try and hide this lie.

Both campaigns have deleted topics from their sites. Hillary Clinton gave a speech earlier this year claiming that all sexual assault victims have a right to be believed. When Juanita Broaddrick, one of the women Bill Clinton raped, tweeted Hillary asking if she had the right to be believed, that quote mysteriously disappeared from her site the next day.

[Saunders]

 

 

If #TrumpWon trended there earlier, it isn't now. But there's no evidence it did start there.

 

Update: A spokesperson for TrendsMap confirms that the map isn't theirs -- and that the hashtag started in the U.S., according to their data.

 

"This is certainly not from any of our tools and do not know of any tools that look this way," Kathy Mellett said in an email. "Based upon our analysis, #TrumpWon primarily came from the US. There was an initial spike just after the debate followed by a much larger one a few hours later. In particular, around 97% of the initial spike of approximately 6,000 tweets came from the US." The next highest countries? Canada and the U.K.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/09/27/that-viral-image-showing-trumpwon-starting-in-russia-is-probably-fake/

 

 

 

 

Clearly I didn't do enough due diligence before posting that. Mea culpa.

 

The lesson, as always, is this: Nothing on the Internet is real.

 

 

Although - I am real. And available for beers.

 

No worries dude! I saw a ton of people run with it, especially in the twittersphere.

 

[teachercd]

 

Come to think of it...why are we okay with the security at Memorial Stadium opening up our bags?

Do you want to go to a game in a 90,000 seat stadium with people who have not been screened? In today's world, really do you?

 

I guess I have never thought about it as in being worried of being hurt. But what I mean is, why are we okay with this but not okay with frisking people on the street?

 

They both seem kind of wrong.