Jump to content

Best rundown of the 2nd Debate yet...


Recommended Posts

I came across this gem.....unfortunately posted anonymously so I wasn't able to find out who wrote it.....but it is still one of the most complete and thorough take downs of T'Rump's deranged, lying performance that I have yet seen.

 

Trump - The Second Debate

Last night was the second presidential debate, though only one candidate on stage was actually presidential. Trump did better than the first debate, in that he remained on the attack throughout and didn't get nearly as defensive as he did the first time around. But his attacks were unhinged, to say the least, he was unable to coherently answer most questions, he whined about time and questioning, displayed massive ignorance about important topics, and of course kept up a near-constant barrage of lies and misleading statements.

 

His most ardent supporters will say he won the debate, because he said everything that passes for accepted truth inside the right-wing bubble. But in the real world, those claims are seen for what they are -- extreme and often straight-up false. And Trump's often-garbled delivery meant his attacks only made sense to those ardent supporters, who already know every detail of Hillary's alleged crimes -- anyone else listening would have had a hard time following him, much less figuring out what he was referring to.

 

So this one, again, goes to Clinton.

 

Let's look at some details. Any quotes not attributed elsewhere are from this transcript:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/10/us...bate.html?_r=0

 

DEALING WITH TRUMP'S WOMAN PROBLEM

 

There was a lot of speculation about how Trump would address the explicit audio of him that was leaked on Friday, talking about grabbing women by their genitals (or in the immortal phrasing of Wonkette, "grab them by their what now?") and essentially bragging about sexual assault and cheating on his wife.

 

In the event, he decided to address it in true Trump fashion -- an insincere apology, both preceded and followed by antics that undercut the apology AND amounted to saying "sure it was bad, but somebody else did worse."

 

First, before the debate, Trump put on a press conference featuring three women who have accused Bill Clinton of assault, and one rape victim whose attacker was represented at trial by Hillary Clinton.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/1...ccusers-229441

 

Trump's antics might make sense if Bill were running for president, but he's not. And his attempts to tie Hillary to these women has always been strained -- amounting to claims that she aided and abetted Bill's actions.

 

The problem is, none of the women have any actual proof that they had sexual contact with Bill, much less that it wasn't consensual. I can easily BELIEVE that they did, and I can also believe that it wasn't fully consensual -- Bill was a philanderer living in a time when it was not uncommon for powerful men to coerce subordinate women into sex. But my personal belief is not proof.

 

So what Trump rolled out was three people who are the "she said" in what is a "he said, she said" argument, the truth of which we will never know. In cases from 20-40 years ago, involving a guy who isn't running for president.

 

All this to try to counter the irrefutable evidence of his own adultery and willingness to brag about sexual assault -- on top of all the other proven examples of his degradation of women.

 

Further, "a member of the opposite party did it, too" doesn't make a coherent argument for why Trump should get a pass. If it was unacceptable for Bill, surely it's unacceptable for Donald -- especially 30 years later, when mores have changed substantially.

 

Even more important, Trump at the time ATTACKED Bill's accusers. So it's not clear where he thinks he gets the standing to judge him now.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/flash...ry?id=42686582

 

Days after President Clinton admitted to having an inappropriate relationship with former White House intern Monica Lewinsky, Trump said Clinton was a "victim" and critiqued the physical appearances of various women with whom Clinton had been accused of having extramarital relations at different times.

 

"It's like it's from hell, it's a terrible group of people," Trump said in an interview with FOX News' Neil Cavuto on Aug. 19, 1998.

 

Asked by Cavuto if Clinton's image as a "quasi-sex symbol" stood to somehow benefit from the alleged extramarital relations, Trump took issue with the characterization.

 

"I don't necessarily agree with his victims, his victims are terrible, Trump said. He is really a victim himself. But he put himself in that position."

 

"The whole group, Paula Jones, Lewinsky, it's just a really unattractive group. I'm not just talking about physical," he said.

Trump then tried to seat the women in his family box at the debate -- a transparent effort to rattle Hillary during the debate -- but was rebuffed.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/p...-was-thwarted/

 

Early in the debate, Trump was asked about the video. His response was canned -- and insincere, as quickly became obvious when he was pressed on the point.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/09/politi...2016-election/

 

First, he immediately went defensive, trying to dispute that Anderson Cooper properly understood what the tape said. Which was nonsense.

 

He then caught himself, tried to shrug it off as "locker room talk" of which he wasn't proud, and then pivot to ISIS.

 

He used the phrase "locker room talk" repeatedly over the next few minutes, which quickly leached the term of any sincere meaning. And essentially arguing "Sure, I did that, but at least I don't drown people in steel cages" isn't a winning argument, especially when there is another candidate on stage who neither degrades women nor drowns people.

 

But the hopelessness of his situation came minutes later. He HAD to claim that the audio didn't truly represent who he was -- that it was from 11 years ago, and he had changed since then.

 

But both Clinton and the moderators knew that such a claim would be coming. Clinton had an obvious and devastating response waiting, and the moderators asked an obvious follow-up question that Trump fumbled.

 

Clinton pointed out that there's no evidence that Trump is a changed man. The audio is of a piece with all his other known incidents of sexism.

 

CLINTON: "What we all saw and heard on Friday was Donald talking about women, what he thinks about women, what he does to women. And he has said that the video doesn't represent who he is.

 

But I think it's clear to anyone who heard it that it represents exactly who he is. Because weve seen this throughout the campaign. We have seen him insult women. We've seen him rate women on their appearance, ranking them from one to ten. We've seen him embarrass women on TV and on Twitter. We saw him after the first debate spend nearly a week denigrating a former Miss Universe in the harshest, most personal terms.

 

So, yes, this is who Donald Trump is."

And the moderators asked the obvious followup: "You say you've changed. When did that change occur?" And Trump had no answer. He said "locker room talk" twice and then attacked Bill Clinton. He never answered the question.

 

Trump's performance likely hurt him with women in other ways.

 

Trump was unable to restrain himself from constantly interrupting Clinton, despite repeated warnings from the moderators, and despite getting sharply criticized for doing so in the first debate.

https://www.bustle.com/articles/1887...he-numbers-are

 

Trump also had trouble restraining himself when Clinton was talking. Rather than sit down, he wandered around the stage. At several points he walked up behind her while she was talking, looming over her in a way that was just weird, and won't play well with women.

http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politi...illary-clinton

 

TRUMP THE WHINER

 

Trump spent a large part of the night complaining about the moderators. He complained about them letting Hillary go over her allotted time -- even though by the end, he spoke for more minutes than she did. He complained about them asking him follow-up questions. He didn't seem to understand the format of the debate, blaming the moderators for not bringing up certain issues, when the questions mostly came from audience members.

 

And he also couldn't restrain himself from whining -- again and repeatedly -- about the mean things Clinton has said about him.

 

It made him look weak and defensive, which is never a good place for a candidate to be, and especially not Trump at this moment in his campaign.

 

TRUMP'S BIZARRE PERSONAL ATTACK

 

Besides Trump's repeated assertions that Hillary ought to be ashamed of herself for one thing or another, one moment stood out both because of the bizarreness of the claim and the nakedly personal nature of it.

 

Asked a question about whether he could be a president for all Americans, not just his base, he tossed in this attack:

 

"We have a divided nation, because people like her and believe me, she has tremendous hate in her heart. ... She's got tremendous -- she's got tremendous hatred."

This was just jaw-dropping. He claims to know what is in Hillary's heart? It was just another in the long series of head-scratching things Trump says that make people go "that guy is nuts."

 

TRUMP THE DICTATOR

 

Trump said that if he were president, he would appoint a special prosecutor to indict Clinton and put her in jail.

 

TRUMP: "If I win, I am going to instruct my attorney general to get a special prosecutor to look into your situation, because there has never been so many lies, so much deception. There has never been anything like it, and we're going to have a special prosecutor. ..."

 

CLINTON: "... It's just awfully good that someone with the temperament of Donald Trump is not in charge of the law in our country."

 

TRUMP: "Because you'd be in jail."

This is unprecedented in American politics -- one candidate threatening to jail his opponent if elected. It floored just about every commentator watching the debate. CNN's Dana Bash put it best:

http://www.rawstory.com/2016/10/cnns...lin-or-hitler/

 

"Okay, not to sound too corny, but what makes this country different from countries that have dictators in Africa or Stalin or Hitler or any of those countries with dictators and totalitarian leaders is that when they took over, they put their opponents in jail. To hear one presidential candidate say -- even if it was a flip comment, which it was -- 'Youre gonna be in jail' to another presidential candidate on the debate state in the United States of America? Stunning, just stunning.

Others pointed out that Trump's threat comes directly from Vladimir Putin's playbook:

http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/10/politi...ential-debate/

 

TRUMP THE RUSSIAN LAPDOG

 

Besides emulating Putin's zeal for jailing political opponents, Trump engaged in a fact-free denial of Russian meddling. Talking about the WikiLeaks dump of Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta's emails, Trump strenuously denied there was any evidence that Russia was behind the hack -- even going so far as to suggest there might not have been a hack.

 

"But I notice, anytime anything wrong happens, they like to say the Russians are -- she doesn't know if it's the Russians doing the hacking. Maybe there is no hacking. But they always blame Russia."

Uh, there was hacking. And the intelligence community's consensus is that Russia is behind it.

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/1fad9...-blamed-russia

 

"U.S. officials publicly accused the Russian government of directing cyberattacks on political organizations and American citizens in an attempt to interfere with U.S. elections. The joint statement from the office of the Director of National Intelligence and the Homeland Security Department cited disclosures of "alleged hacked emails" on sites like DCLeaks.com and WikiLeaks as being "consistent with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed efforts."

He later disagreed with his own VP on what our policy should be in Syria, particularly dealing with Russian provocations:

 

TRUMP: "OK. He and I haven't spoken, and I disagree. I disagree."

 

RADDATZ: "You disagree with your running mate?"

Not the jaw-dropping disclosure that he and his VP have not discussed such a basic policy position. They really are running two completely separate campaigns.

 

TRUMP NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR HIS OWN POLICY

 

When addressing whether he still supported a complete ban on Muslim immigration, Trump first tried to dodge the question, then acted as if the policy had somehow magically changed on its own.

 

TRUMP: The Muslim ban is something that in some form has morphed into an extreme vetting from certain areas of the world.

So did Trump just wake up one day and discover that his policy had morphed while he was sleeping?

 

TRUMP THE IGNORANT

 

Trump tried to blame Hillary for not single-handedly overhauling the tax code when she was a Senator -- including somehow overriding a presidential veto. Thus betraying a lack of understanding of how our political system works.

 

CLINTON: "I've been in favor of getting rid of carried interest for years, starting when I was a senator from New York. But that's not the point here.

 

TRUMP: "Why didn't you do it? Why didn't you do it?"

 

CLINTON: "Because I was a senator with a Republican President."

 

TRUMP: "You could have done it, if you were an effective -- if you were an effective senator, you could have done it. If you were an effective senator, you could have done it. But you were not an effective senator."

 

CLINTON: "You know, under our Constitution, presidents have something called veto power."

Trump seemed to have no idea about the state of affairs in Aleppo, finally dismissing it entirely by asserting "I think that it basically has fallen. OK?" and then pivoting to Mosul. He never got specific and never answered the question.

https://www.bustle.com/articles/1886...-a-clue-during

 

For the record, Aleppo hasn't fallen -- but it is an ongoing humanitarian crisis due to the actions of Russia and Assad.

 

TRUMP THE LIAR

 

From Fact Checker:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...ential-debate/

 

-- He falsely accused Clinton of laughing at a 12-year-old rape victim.

-- He exaggerated how much Obamacare premiums are rising

-- He repeated the false claim that Clinton started the birther movement, including citing completely made-up "evidence" to back up his claim

-- He accused her of "viciously" attacking Bill Clinton's accusers -- except that didn't happen

-- He repeated false characterizations of the Iran nuclear deal

-- He claimed "many people saw bombs all over the apartment" of the people who committed the mass killing in San Bernardino. This simply didn't happen.

-- He claimed Clinton deleted emails after receiving a subpoena -- except there's no evidence she had anything to do with it

-- He claimed that using "BleachBit" to wipe a server, as Clinton's contractor did, is "very expensive" -- which is nonsense. The program is free.

-- He repeated his strongly debunked claims that he opposed the war in Iraq

-- He claimed "our taxes are just about the highest in the world", which is laughably wrong. Our taxes are among the LOWEST in the developed world.

-- He claimed ISIS controls "a good chunk" of Libyan oil. This is completely false. There is no evidence they control ANY of it.

-- He claimed Libyan ambassador Chris Stevens made 600 requests for help before he died in the attack on the consulate in Benghazi. It's a highly misleading misunderstanding of a figure used by one of the zillion House committees on Benghazi. It's rubbish.

-- He continues highlighting that murders spiked in 2015, implying that we are suffering from a massive increase in crime. But the spikes are largely local, confined to the worst neighborhoods in a few major cities. And overall, murder and all other crimes are at or near all-time lows.

-- He denied tweeting "Check out sex tape", when he clearly did

-- He argued that "clean coal" is a thing, when it's not: it's industry propaganda

-- He claimed there are "hundreds of thousands of people coming in from Syria". We admitted 12,500 in 2015-6 -- a pathetic amount given our population and the size of the humanitarian crisis there. Clinton has said she wants to take in 65,000 -- still pathetic, and still a far cry from "hundreds of thousands".

-- Trump claimed that winning the contract to renovate the Old Post Office in D.C. was a sign of his "very great balance sheet" -- neglecting to mention that the financial backer on that project is a completely different company, Colony Capital. THEY have a great balance sheet; Trump's balance sheet was irrelevant. When Colony backed out after helping win the bid, Trump had to cough up $40 million and take out a $170 million loan. Then there's the fact that once work began, the lead architect on the project resigned, saying "I left because I couldn't support what they were doing to the building. They were covering up or tearing out everything that was historic." So Trump lied about how he won the renovation contract on a historic building -- a building where he is now systematically destroying everything that made it historic.

 

And that's just the topline.

 

TRUMP'S TAX RETURNS

 

Trump added another argument to why he needs to release his tax returns, admitting he claimed the $916 million loss shown on a leaked return, and that he used it to avoid taxes for years. Even more weird, he then tried to blame Hillary for it.

 

He also asserted he had no business interests in Russia -- something we have to take his word about, because he hasn't released his tax returns.

 

He repeated his bogus "after the audit" excuse for not releasing his returns, even though that excuse has been shattered repeatedly.

 

It highlighted, once again, that Trump is hiding his returns for a reason.

 

TRUMP'S WORD SALAD

 

Many of Trump's responses to questions were nearly incomprehensible. And not because he is a genius using big words to explain complicated thoughts.

 

For instance, on Obamacare:

 

"Obamacare is a disaster. You know it. We all know it. It's going up at numbers that nobody's seen worldwide. Nobody's ever seen numbers like this for health care. Only gets worse. Their method of fixing it is to go back and ask Congress for more and more money. We have almost $20 trillion in debt. Obamacare will never work. It's very bad. Very bad health insurance. Far too expensive. And not only expensive for the person that has it, unbelievably expensive for our country. One of the biggest line items very shortly."

.Trump's typical hyperbole is simply wrong here. Average premiums are not "going up at numbers that nobody's seen worldwide." Clinton has identified specific sources of revenue for her Obamacare-related fixes, so they wouldn't increase the deficit, thus the debt argument is irrelevant -- never mind that Obamacare is still scored to slightly reduce the deficit overall. The claim that Obamacare will shortly be "one of the biggest line items" is also complete nonsense.

 

Meanwhile, here is Trump describing his alternative:

 

"When we get rid of those lines, you have competition and we'll be able to keep pre-existing and help people that can't get, dont have money because we are going to have people protected. And Republicans feel this way. Believe it or not and strongly this way. We're going to block grant. Into the states. Block grant into medicaid. So we will be able to take care of people without the necessary funds to take care of themselves."

This is almost completely incoherent. It's babbling.

 

If you assume there's an actual plan in there and try to tease it out, he seems to be saying that all we need to do is open up interstate competition and do Medicaid block grants, and everything will work great -- we'll get to keep all the good things about Obamacare (no pre-existing conditions exclusions, for example) while suddenly having affordable policies that actually cover stuff. Which is complete and utter nonsense. Especially when you consider that the whole point of GOP proposals to do Medicaid block grants is to REDUCE FUNDING.

 

TRUMP THE RACIST

 

Trump had a couple of statements during the debate that reflected both his ignorance and some underlying racism.

 

In response to a question from a black audience member, Trump immediately began talking about the inner cities. Indeed, it often seems like he thinks all black people live in inner-city ghettos. His referring to blacks as "the African-Americans" -- conspicuously labeling them as some group of "others" -- doesnt help.

 

And in his response to a question from a Muslim audience member, he gave a thoroughly Islamaphobic answer, suggesting Muslims -- and only Muslims -- have a responsibility to watch for criminals in their midst.

 

TRUMP'S TINY VOCABULARY

As an educated person, this is a personal bother for me. Trump only has about three adjectives in his entire vocabulary -- "beautiful", "strong" and "disgraceful." It became hugely distracting as the debate went on. Everything was either "beautiful" or "disgraceful." His limited vocabulary mirrors the content of his sentences -- vague, usually meaningless, often factually incorrect. It's a shallow vocabulary for a shallow thinker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess that was a bit long....but it is a very good analysis of a great many points in the debate and worth checking out.

 

Here's an important excerpt....

 

TRUMP THE LIAR

 

From Fact Checker:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...ential-debate/

 

-- He falsely accused Clinton of laughing at a 12-year-old rape victim.

 

-- He exaggerated how much Obamacare premiums are rising

 

-- He repeated the false claim that Clinton started the birther movement, including citing completely made-up "evidence" to back up his claim

 

-- He accused her of "viciously" attacking Bill Clinton's accusers -- except that didn't happen

 

-- He repeated false characterizations of the Iran nuclear deal

 

-- He claimed "many people saw bombs all over the apartment" of the people who committed the mass killing in San Bernardino. This simply didn't happen.

 

-- He claimed Clinton deleted emails after receiving a subpoena -- except there's no evidence she had anything to do with it

 

-- He claimed that using "BleachBit" to wipe a server, as Clinton's contractor did, is "very expensive" -- which is nonsense. The program is free.

 

-- He repeated his strongly debunked claims that he opposed the war in Iraq

 

-- He claimed "our taxes are just about the highest in the world", which is laughably wrong. Our taxes are among the LOWEST in the developed world.

 

-- He claimed ISIS controls "a good chunk" of Libyan oil. This is completely false. There is no evidence they control ANY of it.

 

-- He claimed Libyan ambassador Chris Stevens made 600 requests for help before he died in the attack on the consulate in Benghazi. It's a highly misleading misunderstanding of a figure used by one of the zillion House committees on Benghazi. It's rubbish.

 

-- He continues highlighting that murders spiked in 2015, implying that we are suffering from a massive increase in crime. But the spikes are largely local, confined to the worst neighborhoods in a few major cities. And overall, murder and all other crimes are at or near all-time lows.

 

-- He denied tweeting "Check out sex tape", when he clearly did

 

-- He argued that "clean coal" is a thing, when it's not: it's industry propaganda

 

-- He claimed there are "hundreds of thousands of people coming in from Syria". We admitted 12,500 in 2015-6 -- a pathetic amount given our population and the size of the humanitarian crisis there. Clinton has said she wants to take in 65,000 -- still pathetic, and still a far cry from "hundreds of thousands".

 

-- Trump claimed that winning the contract to renovate the Old Post Office in D.C. was a sign of his "very great balance sheet" -- neglecting to mention that the financial backer on that project is a completely different company, Colony Capital. THEY have a great balance sheet; Trump's balance sheet was irrelevant. When Colony backed out after helping win the bid, Trump had to cough up $40 million and take out a $170 million loan. Then there's the fact that once work began, the lead architect on the project resigned, saying "I left because I couldn't support what they were doing to the building. They were covering up or tearing out everything that was historic." So Trump lied about how he won the renovation contract on a historic building -- a building where he is now systematically destroying everything that made it historic.

 

And that's just the topline.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That was thorough and near brilliant Pogo.

Many of the points of the author were similar to what was going thru my head.

It was a clusterfuck of bad..it just enveloped the evening,

His whining to the moderators and comments under his breath only hundreds of millions around the world could hear, confirmed what a petulant child he really is.

My suggestion for Hillary in the next debate is when it's her turn to speak, just say," I'm good."

I'll yield the floor to Mr.Trump."

And then let him talk and put the noose around his neck the rest of the evening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. 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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...