Donald Trump’s supporters are blaming the moderators of last night’s debate for their man’s poor showing. It’s true that the moderators, especially David Muir, did their best to help Kamala Harris.
Thanks for the comment. You may be right that the debate won't have a meaningful impact on the outcome of the election and maybe even the polls. I hope you are.
Harris won on the "vibes" but not on the issues. I agree with you there.
But I can't see anyone switching from undecided to Trump based on his performance. I can see some voters (how many, I don't know) switching from undecided to Harris because she sounded good and had a pretty good demeanor.
Partially agree- Trump is often his own worst enemy for multiple reasons and for the majority of the debate this was the case. He underestimated both Harris’ ability to remain coherent for 90 minutes as also the extent of the open hostility of the moderators. ( As did I , AMD I was pretty cynical in this regard - but did not understand the stent of Muir’s lack of objectivity since I never watch ABC. However, while Harris clearly won on form and her ability to bait Trump, in spite of his problems to any semi objective observer Trump still clearly won on the issues - as both my unscientific anecdotal survey of my associates with political awareness and the panels of undecided voters conducted during and after the debate indicated. Her constant religion of her talking points and deflection on almost all issues grew increasingly obvious. I would be very surprised if this debate has any meaningful impact on either the polls or undecided voters’ decisions.
As difficult as I find it to vote for Trump, neither of them has the character that I would hope for in a President but at least Trump is a known quantity under whom the country prospered until Covid and she is a deceitful ultra progressive who could easily totally destroy our republic during a four year presidency . If she has not changed her values as she claims, then they are still inimical to me. And Walz is to the left of her and whose policies as a governor have been abominable.
No Republican should ever agree to ANY "debate" again. Frankly no Democrat should either but the format favors them. If accused of cowardice the Republican should simply offer to sit down with three pro Democratic journalists for a 60 minute interview so long as his opponent agrees to do so with three journalists from a conservative outlet such as National Review or Comomentary. Can't IMAGINE the Democrat agreeing but if they did this is the best possible way to take the measure of the candidate and their views.
Yes, the moderators were a disgrace, but I totally agree that it wasn’t the reason for Trump’s poor performance. I had to turn it off. He is a smart man, but intellectually lazy. He wasn’t prepared, and he was the one spouting word salads. It was painful to watch. She was cool and calculatingly dishonest. Her goal was to deceive. Unfortunately, she was largely successful. Disappointing to say the least.
I'm afraid of Trump losing, and then getting the nomination again in four years. I do like Trump, but he only won one election, the election when everyone assumed he would lose and stayed home.
This is his last go-round. He'll be too old; indeed, between his miserable acceptance speech and the mess we apparently were served last night (I declined to watch), I strongly suspect he's already too old, in addition to his other problems of ego, endless exaggeration and self-involvement.
Paul had the honesty to tell the truth about Trump before a lot of Republicans were ready to hear it, and took plenty of crap for it. The country needs restoration not re-imagining (as the Democrats and other race hucksters would have it), and the Republicans need restoration as well, of both the principles and the persona of Reagan.
Thanks for the comment. You may be right that the debate won't have a meaningful impact on the outcome of the election and maybe even the polls. I hope you are.
Harris won on the "vibes" but not on the issues. I agree with you there.
But I can't see anyone switching from undecided to Trump based on his performance. I can see some voters (how many, I don't know) switching from undecided to Harris because she sounded good and had a pretty good demeanor.
Partially agree- Trump is often his own worst enemy for multiple reasons and for the majority of the debate this was the case. He underestimated both Harris’ ability to remain coherent for 90 minutes as also the extent of the open hostility of the moderators. ( As did I , AMD I was pretty cynical in this regard - but did not understand the stent of Muir’s lack of objectivity since I never watch ABC. However, while Harris clearly won on form and her ability to bait Trump, in spite of his problems to any semi objective observer Trump still clearly won on the issues - as both my unscientific anecdotal survey of my associates with political awareness and the panels of undecided voters conducted during and after the debate indicated. Her constant religion of her talking points and deflection on almost all issues grew increasingly obvious. I would be very surprised if this debate has any meaningful impact on either the polls or undecided voters’ decisions.
As difficult as I find it to vote for Trump, neither of them has the character that I would hope for in a President but at least Trump is a known quantity under whom the country prospered until Covid and she is a deceitful ultra progressive who could easily totally destroy our republic during a four year presidency . If she has not changed her values as she claims, then they are still inimical to me. And Walz is to the left of her and whose policies as a governor have been abominable.
No Republican should ever agree to ANY "debate" again. Frankly no Democrat should either but the format favors them. If accused of cowardice the Republican should simply offer to sit down with three pro Democratic journalists for a 60 minute interview so long as his opponent agrees to do so with three journalists from a conservative outlet such as National Review or Comomentary. Can't IMAGINE the Democrat agreeing but if they did this is the best possible way to take the measure of the candidate and their views.
Yes, the moderators were a disgrace, but I totally agree that it wasn’t the reason for Trump’s poor performance. I had to turn it off. He is a smart man, but intellectually lazy. He wasn’t prepared, and he was the one spouting word salads. It was painful to watch. She was cool and calculatingly dishonest. Her goal was to deceive. Unfortunately, she was largely successful. Disappointing to say the least.
I'm afraid of Trump losing, and then getting the nomination again in four years. I do like Trump, but he only won one election, the election when everyone assumed he would lose and stayed home.
This is his last go-round. He'll be too old; indeed, between his miserable acceptance speech and the mess we apparently were served last night (I declined to watch), I strongly suspect he's already too old, in addition to his other problems of ego, endless exaggeration and self-involvement.
Paul had the honesty to tell the truth about Trump before a lot of Republicans were ready to hear it, and took plenty of crap for it. The country needs restoration not re-imagining (as the Democrats and other race hucksters would have it), and the Republicans need restoration as well, of both the principles and the persona of Reagan.
Tom Cotton, get ready.