(09-11-2024 02:05 PM)green Wrote:  

(09-11-2024 01:26 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(09-11-2024 01:14 PM)olliebaba Wrote:  Vance, who's quicker on the retort would have torn her a new S. She wouldn't have stood a chance against her and Vance would have quieted the Mods as well. Trump is not a good debater, it's that simple. But, (like all Leftists when they say something nice they always throw in a BUT) he did have to defend himself against 3 people, which was expected. I don't know why he never told them to go pound sand on having it on ABC. If ABC was intent on fairness they should included someone like Jesse or Laura to be mods but they aren't stupid, they're just evil like the party they support.

A debate format either greatly aids or horribly hinders people who dot give a **** about facts or being truthful.

If you don’t want moderators to fact check, don’t tell whoppers like there is no tomorrow.

this is flat out unprecedented, clarence ...
never seen before ...
they're moderators not participants ...
outside of their job description ...
one-sided interjection amounting to out and out election interference ...

THUMB ON THE SCALE

I take it you support a candidate telling whatever lie or falsehood in a debate as perfectly acceptable? Without danger of it being noted as false?

I don't have an issue with blatant falsehoods being pointed out at the moment they are uttered. Bummer on that.

You apparently feel different on that? If so, that is a position I find strange. My outlook is if you tell a glaring whopper, I don't have any sympathy on it being pointed out as a falsehood. No matter who points it out.

Unfortunately that works out as a net negative, nominal and relative, for invetrate or pathological liars. How sad.

Maybe consider interviews. No one doubts the propriety of interviewers acting to check facts. This is no difference in practice. How terrible.

(09-11-2024 01:41 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(09-11-2024 01:34 PM)ECUGrad07 Wrote:  -Kamala called it a "lie" that she supports mandatory confiscation of firearms. But in 2019, Kamala said she wanted a mandatory buyback of all "assault weapons." https://bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019...lt-weapons

-Kamala said that nowhere in America is abortion happening up until birth. But at this very moment, abortion is legal through all nine months of pregnancy in New Mexico, Minnesota, Oregon, Colorado, Vermont, New Jersey, Alaska, and Washington D.C. Tim Walz signed a bill removing any requirement to provide lifesaving care to children born in a botched abortion. https://axios.com/2024/04/11/abortion-la...-state-map

-Kamala said that Trump's policy is to ban IVF, when Trump has directly intervened to protect IVF and is campaigning to expand access to it. https://npr.org/2024/08/30/nx-s1-5094454...treatments

-Kamala said Trump referred to neo-Nazis as "very fine people." This is a thoroughly-debunked lie. Kamala just repeats it because hacks like ABC let her get away with it. https://snopes.com/fact-check/trump-very-fine-people/

-Kamala claimed that Trump threatened a literal "bloodbath" if he wasn't elected. This is a total lie — Trump said that there'd be a bloodbath in the AUTO INDUSTRY if Joe Biden won reelection. Apparently, CNN doesn't consider this a "false claim." https://factcheck.org/2024/03/trumps-bloodbath-comment/

-Kamala said Trump planned to levy a "20% tax" on everyday goods. This is a total fabrication.

-Kamala said she made it "very clear" all the way back during the 2020 election that she supports fracking and doesn't want to ban it. But in the 2020 primaries, on live TV, Harris said verbatim "There’s no question I’m in favor of banning fracking." https://nbcchicago.com/news/local/fracki...s/3545180/

-Kamala described Project 2025 as the "detailed and dangerous plan" that Trump will implement if elected. Setting aside that this contradicts Kamala's own claim just minutes before that Trump has "no plan," the reality is that Project 2025 was created by other people and Trump has no involvement with it. Trump's actual plan is called Agenda47, and you can learn more about it right on Trump's website: https://donaldjtrump.com/agenda47

-Kamala claims that police officers were murdered on January 6. Exactly zero Capitol police officers died on January 6 or from injuries they suffered that day. Accordig to a medical examiner, Officer Brian Sicknick died of natural causes and had suffered no injuries. https://npr.org/2021/04/19/988876722/cap...xaminer-ru

You do undestand that a tariff invariably ends up as an effective tax on consumers, right? No matter what Saint Donald protests.

There are a slew of errors in your litany above. You migh want to recheck some transcripts. Just saying…..

is that what they taught yaz at Rice U ... you and #s are on par...

I call it the greatest, most bestest of equilibrium fully realized via incentivization ... but fk it ... that's for another day that will now never materialize, eh?

it's a game bubby ... and you're on the winning side ... that's what so fk'd up...

(09-11-2024 02:29 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(09-11-2024 02:05 PM)green Wrote:  

(09-11-2024 01:26 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(09-11-2024 01:14 PM)olliebaba Wrote:  Vance, who's quicker on the retort would have torn her a new S. She wouldn't have stood a chance against her and Vance would have quieted the Mods as well. Trump is not a good debater, it's that simple. But, (like all Leftists when they say something nice they always throw in a BUT) he did have to defend himself against 3 people, which was expected. I don't know why he never told them to go pound sand on having it on ABC. If ABC was intent on fairness they should included someone like Jesse or Laura to be mods but they aren't stupid, they're just evil like the party they support.

A debate format either greatly aids or horribly hinders people who dot give a **** about facts or being truthful.

If you don’t want moderators to fact check, don’t tell whoppers like there is no tomorrow.

this is flat out unprecedented, clarence ...
never seen before ...
they're moderators not participants ...
outside of their job description ...
one-sided interjection amounting to out and out election interference ...

THUMB ON THE SCALE

I take it you support a candidate telling whatever lie or falsehood in a debate as perfectly acceptable? Without danger of it being noted as false?

I don't have an issue with blatant falsehoods being pointed out at the moment they are uttered. Bummer on that.

You apparently feel different on that? If so, that is a position I find strange. My outlook is if you tell a glaring whopper, I don't have any sympathy on it being pointed out as a falsehood. No matter who points it out.

Unfortunately that works out as a net negative, nominal and relative, for invetrate or pathological liars. How sad.

Maybe consider interviews. No one doubts the propriety of interviewers acting to check facts. This is no difference in practice. How terrible.

I prefer both be fact checked if they're lying. You know as well as I do that she was lying too.

(09-11-2024 02:29 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(09-11-2024 02:05 PM)green Wrote:  

(09-11-2024 01:26 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(09-11-2024 01:14 PM)olliebaba Wrote:  Vance, who's quicker on the retort would have torn her a new S. She wouldn't have stood a chance against her and Vance would have quieted the Mods as well. Trump is not a good debater, it's that simple. But, (like all Leftists when they say something nice they always throw in a BUT) he did have to defend himself against 3 people, which was expected. I don't know why he never told them to go pound sand on having it on ABC. If ABC was intent on fairness they should included someone like Jesse or Laura to be mods but they aren't stupid, they're just evil like the party they support.

A debate format either greatly aids or horribly hinders people who dot give a **** about facts or being truthful.

If you don’t want moderators to fact check, don’t tell whoppers like there is no tomorrow.

this is flat out unprecedented, clarence ...
never seen before ...
they're moderators not participants ...
outside of their job description ...
one-sided interjection amounting to out and out election interference ...

THUMB ON THE SCALE

I take it you support a candidate telling whatever lie or falsehood in a debate as perfectly acceptable? Without danger of it being noted as false?

I don't have an issue with blatant falsehoods being pointed out at the moment they are uttered. Bummer on that.

You apparently feel different on that? If so, that is a position I find strange. My outlook is if you tell a glaring whopper, I don't have any sympathy on it being pointed out as a falsehood. No matter who points it out.

Unfortunately that works out as a net negative, nominal and relative, for invetrate or pathological liars. How sad.

Maybe consider interviews. No one doubts the propriety of interviewers acting to check facts. This is no difference in practice. How terrible.

pose questions ...
keep time ...
get out of the way ...
it's up to others ...
determining ...
who tells truth ...

WHEAT FROM CHAFF

(09-11-2024 02:29 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(09-11-2024 02:05 PM)green Wrote:  

(09-11-2024 01:26 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(09-11-2024 01:14 PM)olliebaba Wrote:  Vance, who's quicker on the retort would have torn her a new S. She wouldn't have stood a chance against her and Vance would have quieted the Mods as well. Trump is not a good debater, it's that simple. But, (like all Leftists when they say something nice they always throw in a BUT) he did have to defend himself against 3 people, which was expected. I don't know why he never told them to go pound sand on having it on ABC. If ABC was intent on fairness they should included someone like Jesse or Laura to be mods but they aren't stupid, they're just evil like the party they support.

A debate format either greatly aids or horribly hinders people who dot give a **** about facts or being truthful.

If you don’t want moderators to fact check, don’t tell whoppers like there is no tomorrow.

this is flat out unprecedented, clarence ...
never seen before ...
they're moderators not participants ...
outside of their job description ...
one-sided interjection amounting to out and out election interference ...

THUMB ON THE SCALE

I take it you support a candidate telling whatever lie or falsehood in a debate as perfectly acceptable? Without danger of it being noted as false?

I don't have an issue with blatant falsehoods being pointed out at the moment they are uttered. Bummer on that.

You apparently feel different on that? If so, that is a position I find strange. My outlook is if you tell a glaring whopper, I don't have any sympathy on it being pointed out as a falsehood. No matter who points it out.

Unfortunately that works out as a net negative, nominal and relative, for invetrate or pathological liars. How sad.

Maybe consider interviews. No one doubts the propriety of interviewers acting to check facts. This is no difference in practice. How terrible.

There is a solution to this. You have 3 debates. Say you divide up by: Domestic economy, National security and Foreign policy. Each person participating in the debate has their initial time to answer, opponent's rebuttal and final comments from the original person who was given the question. Both candidates fact check each other throughout the debate because both are prepared to DISCUSS THEIR POLICIES and to BACK UP THEIR CLAIMS WITH DATA.

Moderators keep track of time, and keep muted mics so no interruptions allowed.

To say Trump lied more than Harris is a joke. To say that the mods didn't interject and have too much control to interact with the candidates was a joke. They are to be time keepers - nothing more than that. Questions should be screened and made neutral as much as possible.

(09-11-2024 01:10 PM)Claw Wrote:  

(09-11-2024 12:56 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(09-11-2024 12:25 PM)Billy_Bearcat Wrote:  

(09-11-2024 12:06 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  

(09-11-2024 12:04 PM)Eldonabe Wrote:  I forgot to ask.... any indication she was wearing an ear piece?

Wouldn’t surprise me, but no way to prove it so move on.

If it looks like a duck...

That's not the same earring.

The bottom part, which is likely the electronics, looks the same. The other part is just camouflage.

(09-11-2024 01:52 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(09-11-2024 01:40 PM)ECUGrad07 Wrote:  

(09-11-2024 01:36 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(09-11-2024 01:28 PM)WalkThePlank Wrote:  

(09-11-2024 01:26 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  A debate format either greatly aids or horribly hinders people who dot give a **** about facts or being truthful.

If you don’t want moderators to fact check, don’t tell whoppers like there is no tomorrow.

If you’re going to fact check, don’t let one candidate get away with their lies/exaggerations. You do understand that’s why people are upset with the moderators?

Yes, how dare they call out pretty excessive and bald falsehoods as “Haitians are eating peoples pets”. And “Dems support executing babies”..

Lolz.

Hatians ARE eating peoples pets and Dems DO support executing babies.

No hope for America when half of you are this dumb.

That's what we think, too, just a different half. That's why we need two countries.

(09-11-2024 08:51 AM)WKUYG Wrote:  As I said before the debate this isn't about Trump losing votes and I don't believe he did. This debate was about the VP holding on to her votes and even if no one changed....

Sorry for the late reply. Busy day and I'm tired from staying up too late followed by having trouble getting to sleep. (Yelling at the t.v. screen has a way of doing that.)

As always, your argument is sound. I am sure that Trump did not lose a single last night. And I doubt (even with Taylor Swift) Kamala gained much. Where I differ is in the flow of the election. Here's how I see it (and you and others are welcome to call me an f'ing idiot; I won't argue the point):

Elections to me are akin to a college basketball season. Wins and losses will happen over the course of the season. The important point is that the team be peaking come tournament time.

Looking at my pathetic Monarchs, and their last two coaches, we see a real contrast in how they managed the team:

--> Until he hit the bottle, Coach Blaine Taylor got more from less out of his players. He was an ordinary in-game coach, but he was smart enough to rely on his assistants and he was a terrific motivator. His players were tough, and would run through walls for him. Losses were treated as opportunities for correcting course along the way, leading to the team being in peak playing form come the CAA (and happily quite often, NCAA) tournament(s). I miss Coach Blaine Taylor.

--> Coach Jeff Jones was a superior in-game coach. But that is all that I can say for him. He got less from more out of his players. With the sole exception of the Trey Freeman miracle-working season, his teams would routinely fizzle come tournament time. Losses were not a correcting event, they became the focus of an ever-spiraling season by players who would often be mailing it in come tournament time. I do NOT miss Coach Jeff Jones. (And, b.t.w., I blame Western Kentucky for foisting that useless turd Wood Selig off on us.)

So where does Team Trump come out in this analogy? Until this year, I would have put them in the Jeff Jones camp. Every set back was made even worse by a blame-others egomaniac in charge. This year seemed to be different. I just hope that's so.

Yesterday was a loss. And not a pretty one. But it won't be a fatal one so long as Team Trump maintains its composure and keeps competing through the election. Specifically, I pray that Donald has the sense to rely on his assistants - - who are WAY better at this stuff than he is. And if there is another debate (which I doubt), I hope that he puts in just a little bit of effort in preparation time.

(09-11-2024 03:17 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(09-11-2024 01:52 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(09-11-2024 01:40 PM)ECUGrad07 Wrote:  

(09-11-2024 01:36 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(09-11-2024 01:28 PM)WalkThePlank Wrote:  If you’re going to fact check, don’t let one candidate get away with their lies/exaggerations. You do understand that’s why people are upset with the moderators?

Yes, how dare they call out pretty excessive and bald falsehoods as “Haitians are eating peoples pets”. And “Dems support executing babies”..

Lolz.

Hatians ARE eating peoples pets and Dems DO support executing babies.

No hope for America when half of you are this dumb.

That's what we think, too, just a different half. That's why we need two countries.

Our half will need a wall. Their half will be eating cats.

Note to all: Remember Bernie dropping a dine on Kamala about being pragmatic and doing what she needed to win, when asked about her flip-flopping?

Well, Rafael Warnock just did the same thing, only with specifics. He said Kamala, if elected, plans to do a mandatory gun buy-back, no matter what she is saying right now.

(09-11-2024 03:23 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(09-11-2024 03:17 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(09-11-2024 01:52 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(09-11-2024 01:40 PM)ECUGrad07 Wrote:  

(09-11-2024 01:36 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  Yes, how dare they call out pretty excessive and bald falsehoods as “Haitians are eating peoples pets”. And “Dems support executing babies”..

Lolz.

Hatians ARE eating peoples pets and Dems DO support executing babies.

No hope for America when half of you are this dumb.

That's what we think, too, just a different half. That's why we need two countries.

Our half will need a wall. Their half will be eating cats.

they won't have a chance penetrating 'that' wall ... cat < cow...

the next decade is going to be a hoot with plenty of 'bang bang'...

(09-11-2024 03:45 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(09-11-2024 03:23 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(09-11-2024 03:17 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(09-11-2024 01:52 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(09-11-2024 01:40 PM)ECUGrad07 Wrote:  Hatians ARE eating peoples pets and Dems DO support executing babies.

No hope for America when half of you are this dumb.

That's what we think, too, just a different half. That's why we need two countries.

Our half will need a wall. Their half will be eating cats.

they won't have a chance penetrating 'that' wall ... cat < cow...

the next decade is going to be a hoot with plenty of 'bang bang'...

I'm trying my best to live to see it, lol.

(09-11-2024 03:50 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(09-11-2024 03:45 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(09-11-2024 03:23 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(09-11-2024 03:17 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(09-11-2024 01:52 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  No hope for America when half of you are this dumb.

That's what we think, too, just a different half. That's why we need two countries.

Our half will need a wall. Their half will be eating cats.

they won't have a chance penetrating 'that' wall ... cat < cow...

the next decade is going to be a hoot with plenty of 'bang bang'...

I'm trying my best to live to see it, lol.

...in participation ... at our age, we're front-line worthy with a guaranteed poskill ratio ...

(09-11-2024 03:54 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(09-11-2024 03:50 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(09-11-2024 03:45 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(09-11-2024 03:23 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(09-11-2024 03:17 PM)TripleA Wrote:  That's what we think, too, just a different half. That's why we need two countries.

Our half will need a wall. Their half will be eating cats.

they won't have a chance penetrating 'that' wall ... cat < cow...

the next decade is going to be a hoot with plenty of 'bang bang'...

I'm trying my best to live to see it, lol.

...in participation ... at our age, we're front-line worthy with a guaranteed poskill ratio ...

Beware of old people who have nothing to lose and have handled firearms their entire lives.

Ya’ll just mad your “Trump is going to dog walk Harris at the debate” predictions did not come true. Instead Harris dog, cat, and duck walked Trump.

How was it unfair? Trump was allowed to speak constantly. And fact checking? lol. Other than the pet eating thing when did they “fact check” either candidate?

(09-11-2024 04:17 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  

the soon to be silenced in soylent ...

(09-11-2024 04:01 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(09-11-2024 03:54 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(09-11-2024 03:50 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(09-11-2024 03:45 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(09-11-2024 03:23 PM)shere khan Wrote:  Our half will need a wall. Their half will be eating cats.

they won't have a chance penetrating 'that' wall ... cat < cow...

the next decade is going to be a hoot with plenty of 'bang bang'...

I'm trying my best to live to see it, lol.

...in participation ... at our age, we're front-line worthy with a guaranteed poskill ratio ...

Beware of old people who have nothing to lose and have handled firearms their entire lives.

Offset by diminished reflexes, hand eye coordination and sense in general.

(09-11-2024 04:19 PM)Mr_XcentricK Wrote:  Ya’ll just mad your “Trump is going to dog walk Harris at the debate” predictions did not come true. Instead Harris dog, cat, and duck walked Trump.

How was it unfair? Trump was allowed to speak constantly. And fact checking? lol. Other than the pet eating thing when did they “fact check” either candidate?

Why lie? Unless you didn’t watch it.