Tuesday, September 29, 2020

The first debate


 Did you force yourselves to sit through tonight's cage match?  Whatever that was, it seems difficult to attach the word "presidential" to it.  One commentator described it as a World Wrestling Federation match.  Another compared the two candidates to kindergarteners.  A wag tallied the two candidates' talk time:


Sharpest comment I've seen so far:

Any reactions?

57 comments:

  1. I didn't watch. Is Fox correct in asserting that Trump "steamrolled" Biden (Hannity) and was the "clear winner" (Bossie)? Or should I look elsewhere?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Trump was a disgrace. And I think that even the winguts see it. Right after the debate, the only substantive thing I saw from them on various social media was that Biden kept looking down, which clearly meant that he had a secret teleprompter built into his podium. (I remember looking down a lot at a company I worked for when the CEO was making a total fool of himself at a meeting; I guess I must have had a teleprompter too). But I have seen no wingnut claiming that Trump thrashed Biden. The most I've seen was that it was a split decision. And from the people I read, this is like Thomas Aquinas saying that Satan had his good points too.

    The most interesting takeaway for me was Trump apparently making it official that the Proud Boys are his own personal Brown Shirts. The young fascists have already constructed a nice banner that quotes Trump "Stand Down Stand By". Nice.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I didn't watch either. But this is from someone who might have been expected to be more friendly in assessing Trump:
    "CNN political commentator and former Pennsylvania GOP Sen. Rick Santorum, who often defends Trump, said the president did poorly on Tuesday. “I think the president overplayed his hand tonight,” Santorum said after the debate. “I don’t think it worked for him tonight. I think he came out way too hot.”
    Which sounds like an understatement. The account I am reading sounds like Trump spent the whole time spewing like a fire hose with lies and raging. I do not want to hear how the president thinks Biden is on Adderal, when he himself acts like he took the street drug Flakka.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think the claim that Biden might be on drugs was meant to counteract the possibility that Biden would perform well given that the Trump people have been claiming that Biden is totally senile and "tired" for months. It's classic Trump.

      Delete
    2. Of all the Fox commentators, Chris Wallace seems the fairest. He totally lost control of last night.

      Here's the schedule of remaining debates and the moderators. I hardly know of any of them and don't know how they will be able to handle Trump, particularly the female moderators. Trump is notorious for his abuse of women and I can't see that he will respect their role any more than he did that of Wallace.

      As I said elsewhere, I agree 100% with Frunk Bruni when he says that Biden should simply refuse to participate in any further clown shows.

      I will be VERY interested to see how Pence holds up under the relentlessness of Tiger Harris next week.

      Delete
    3. Jimmy, me too about the Pence and Harris debate. I have the expectation that they will at least be able to behave like adults, and maybe, you know, actually discuss some ideas and policy.

      Delete
  4. The moderators do have one tool at their disposal which I hope they use next time (*next time*? Is anyone seriously going to watch next time?) They can turn off the mike if a speaker exceeds the time limit, or tries to shout down the person who has the floor.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I doubt either side would agree to that. And if they did, the first time The Don's mike burped, his capos would be all over the place hollering "censorship!"

      Delete
    2. Next time? I agree 100% with Frank Bruni:

      https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/30/opinion/biden-trump-2020-debate.html?campaign_id=93&emc=edit_fb_20200930&instance_id=22660&nl=frank-bruni&regi_id=34913414&segment_id=39436&te=1&user_id=82bf2057d2ebc4393657d719951fb2ca

      After That Fiasco, Biden Should Refuse to Debate Trump Again

      Delete
    3. Jim, essentially the question is will more debates help or hurt Biden? I am not competent to answer that question because I would have to be able to emulate the mind that doesn't see him for what he obviously is, the worst example of humanity that you can possibly imagine. I don't understand the sort of thinking or weltanschauung that makes that possible.

      Delete
  5. Trump is a troll. I mean that in the Internet-forum sense. He doesn't come in good faith. His malicious intent is to disrupt by pulling his opponent down into the mud so they can wrestle on his slimy level.

    Last night, Biden took the troll bait way too often. I can only think that he was coached to do so. Probably he pleased his partisans by fighting back against the evil Trump. But Biden was on Trump's level way too often, insulting him, interrupting him. It wasn't a good look for any voters who are hoping for a calm, steady adult at the helm. (For all I know, I'm the only one who wants that.)

    In addition, Biden doesn't do mud wrestling very well. He got flustered a lot by Trump's incessant badgering and interruptions.
    Biden frequently let Trump's interjections derail him from his talking points. Consequently, Biden had a number of episodes of what we saw during primary debates, where his neurons are firing in one direction and his tongue is wagging in another direction and he can't quite get them synched up.

    The thing is: Biden can do calm, steady adult at a debate. Trump probably can't (or in any case, won't). That's a significant distinction between the two candidates. I think it would help Biden's campaign to make that distinction. If they do this again, Biden should try being the adult in the room. My advice to him is: ignore the troll and make your case.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. But pretty hard to play the calm collected adult when you're engaging with someone who is out of control. If Biden hadn't responded to Trump's attempts to steamroller him, he would have been branded as "weak", and a patsy.
      Trump is a troll in more than just the online sense of the word.
      Biden did get in a very good one-liner: "This is not about my family or his family. It is about your family.”

      Delete
    2. Katherine - there is a way to show, with facial expression and body language, that you're above the mud fight, without coming across as weak. Biden actually managed it several times last night: he pursed his lips, closed his eyes, and his body language said, "I've got more discipline than this *sshole, and I'm not going to let him run me off the road." I think he should stick with that. America didn't get to hear much of his actual program last night, despite Chris Wallace's heroic efforts to keep them on-topic.

      Delete
    3. If it had been a high school debate match, they would have been kicked out of class.

      Delete
  6. I can only imagine trying to conduct a class in quantum mechanics with Trump in the room. He is a high volume source of noisy clutter. I don't think it is possible to talk intelligently while this buffoon is carrying on. Recordings of his voice could be used to complement waterboarding.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I only lasted thirty minutes. Where are those commercials when you need them? Trump disgusting as usual. Biden pathetic as usual.

    But why should we expect more? Americans elected tricky Dick. And they made the Teflon Reagan into a hero while he destroyed unions and set the course for diverting wealth from the working and middle classes to the very wealthy. And then there was King George Bush II who made Dick Cheney his Prime Minister. And Bill Clinton who made the Democratic Party safe for wealthy Republicans who were fleeing the racist Southern Strategy.

    Of course we can dream of Camelot since Kennedy died so young. But after the Bay of Pigs and the Cuban missile crises, I guess we are lucky the Russian commanders in Cuban did not have to use their authorization of tactical nuclear weapons. And the dream of a Black American President? His strategy of hiring his competitors as staff (Joe and Hilary) not only limited his ability to be progressive it has stuck the Democratic Party in reverse for eight more years.

    Will the resurgence of Covid-19 wake up the American people? If it happens early enough we might get rid of Trump. If not we will have four more years of both Trump and Covid. Will the Democrats do any better even if they get the Presidency and Senate and retain the House. I predict they lose them all again within another four years. They are as pathetic as the Republicans are disgusting.

    September was a wonderful month here weather wise. I have gotten caught up on a lot of my gardening and landscaping. Hope that October is also fine. “I get all the news that I need to know on the weather report.”

    I plan NOT to watch the election returns. No need to disturb my peace again. I have keep my three Bernie 2020 signs which I expect I will have to display sometime in the next four years (regardless of the election) to remind people that there was another choice.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jack, I agree sadly with your entire assessment. The problem is the American voter, uninformed and afraid of real change and voting against their own welfare. Bernie or Warren should have been behind the Democratic podium.

      Delete
  8. Yes. Watched it. All.

    Trump has no sense that a debate is an exchange of ideas and contrasting views. He sees it only as a forum where one must humiliate and destroy with personal attacks, interruptions, and lies.

    There's no way to "just ignore him" because he did everything but run over to Biden's lectern and stick his head in the picture while shouting "Joe Biden wets the bed!"

    The only way this is going to work is if the candidates are encased in soundproof Lucite booths and their mics turned off when it is not their turn to talk. Or to give them both a pair of Everlast gloves and let them clobber each other until one of them is dead.

    I am just sickened by what I saw last night. I don't think I can sit through another session.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. One thing about it, if anyone was in doubt about what he was "really" like, this ought to have settled it in their mind. Is the guy they want in charge of the nuclear codes?

      Delete
    2. I think the piggies have gotten used to their swill and internalized The Don's victory before he even opened his mouth.

      I just got off the phone with someone who had wanted Biden to open by saying: "My opponent owes somebody $400 million in the next four years, and maybe a total of a billion overall. Who? Until we know who owns the president, anything else we say here is irrelevant." And then answered all interruptions with, "Who do you owe $400 million?" I am sure someone suggested that to Biden's "camp." And I am sure some highly paid adviser rejected it as being "un-Joe." Nevertheless, until we know WHOM, everything else really is irrelevant.

      (I did think Biden should have referred to his opponent as "the $750 billionaire" and pointed out he paid Stormy Daniels almost twice as much as he paid the government.)

      Delete
    3. Trump's never going to say to whom he owes the $400 mil. He would probably claim that it's just another lie by people seeking to smear him. Are there no investigators capable of finding out? Would this fall under the CIA or the FBI's purview? Of course they're the "deep state". But you are right that "...until we know WHOM, everything else really is irrelevant."

      Delete
    4. I attended dozens of mandatory security briefings during my career in the government. Trump fits the classic profile of a security risk including having financial problems.

      Delete
    5. Bob Woodward said Dan Coats -- the first intelligence director under The Don -- thought it was Russia, and Coats hasn't denied it. I think it's Russia.

      This morning, during a rant about the Vatican bank, which has been corrupt and under "reform," for as long as I can remember (maybe all the way back to Judas, the first Church banker), I suggested the Vat bank could merge with Deutschebank and put all the big crooks under one roof where we can watch them. Someone said Deutschebank is the only place Trump can borrow, and I said, "Yeah, but that's all Russian oligarch money it's laundering for Putin." Although there were MAGAs in the room, nobody disagreed. It's a huge mystery everybody knows the answer to.

      Delete
    6. Tom, that's a very good line about the church's first banker!

      Delete
  9. A dose of sanity from Bernie: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=MO1o66Ti2bA

    ReplyDelete
  10. Biden did not think well on his feet, but I don't think anyone does under that kind of attack.

    Frankly, I would have lauded Joe had he refused to participate after the first 20 minutes by saying, "The American people have a civic duty to make an informed decision about whom to elect to lead the nation. President Trump is clearly unwilling or incapable of providing them with the information they need, and I see no point in continuing this kind of exchange. If you want to know where I stand, visit my Web page. Mr. President, let me know when you are ready to have a conversation in which you abide by the rules we agreed on." Then he should have apologized to his audience contingent for inviting them to a slug fest and ask them to join him in vacating the premises quietly.

    Raber strenuously disagreed. "It's a fight! He has to go the distance or he's weak!"

    Sometimes strength is knowing when to walk away. It would have left Trump with nothing to bluster at. And without bluster, he is nothing but a deflated gasbag.

    But our political scene is still so testosterone fueled that a sane response like walking away from a tantrum, which every mother knows how to do, is somehow not acceptable. And that's how we got Trump in the first place. Too many men who can't resist the crazy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Unfortunately I think Raber is right, he had to go the distance, or people would get on the "old and senile" theme again. Better than being old and batsh#t crazy. Not to mention evil.

      Delete
    2. Katherine, do you really think so? My guess is that in the demographics where Biden is doing well--women, college-educated people, some people of color--that leaving Trump to his ranting and railing would not have hurt him one bit.

      Would it have changed your mind?

      Men never like to see other men turn away from a fight, but I think it would have a perfectly honorable way to leave Trump gawping.

      Delete
    3. Heavens no, it wouldn't have changed my mind. And I don't think it wpuld have been dishonorable at all. But you said it, "Men never like to see other men turn away from a fight...' Not all men feel that way, of course. But I think it would have hurt him to do that.
      I liked your idea about the soundproof lucite booths.

      Delete
  11. Looks like early calculations of the TV ratings are down:

    https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/tv-ratings-tuesday-sept-29-2020-presidential-debate-1

    Of course I am sure that Trump will blame that on Biden.

    What happens if the ratings continue to drop? Most Americans have made up their minds, and many of them will soon have voted.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What is even the purpose of debates at this point? As you say, Most have made up their minds, some will have already voted. If anyone wants to find a candidate's position on a given issue, they can look it up on their website.

      Delete
  12. Trump probably scored some points by taunting Biden about his son Hunter - that led to some of Joe's least articulate, most confused babbling of the evening. Likewise, I thought Joe scored one of his best points of the evening when Wallace asked Trump about his taxes and Joe interjected, "Release them." (Or something similar).

    Both of these moments were examples of the interjectors not following the debate rules - they were interrupting, trolling, derailing. But they were revealing exchanges which also made for compelling television. Both moments made impressions, at least on me.

    In these moments, each of the candidates had seized the interlocutor's role from Wallace - and arguably were considerably more effective in their brief, pointed questions and comments than Wallace was. Wallace was sort of a disappointment: he came across as several degrees to obsequious. He was begging and pleading with both candidates to abide by the agreed-upon rules; he should have done more to seize control and keep the evening on-track.

    But undoubtedly, one of the factors at work here is Trump's enmity toward the media. Even though Wallace is a Fox guy, Trump clearly perceived Wallace as unfriendly; I think Trump may have said at one point that he was debating two people that evening, meaning Biden and Wallace. I would guess that Wallace understood that dynamic and was trying to keep Trump somewhat placated in the interest of keeping the evening from getting even more out of hand.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think you're right about the dynamic between Trump and Wallace. Wallace interviewed Trump not long ago and held his feet to the fire re covid infections and deaths, and Trump's claim that the reason our infection rates look so high is because he's done such a great job initiating testing.

      As a Republic who won't vote for Biden or Trump, Jim, did you feel that the debate gave you any confidence about Biden's ability to run the nation over Trump?

      I think there are Republicans in my area who are leery of Trump, judging from the signs for down-ballot candidates in their yards, but no Trump flags or signage, and no signs for his Michigan senatorial lapdog candidate, John James.

      In 2016, our veterinarian, a solidly moderate Republican who was also the lone voice of reason on a very nutty school board, did not have a Trump sign. I don't like to start political discussions with people who are going to be poking and prodding the family pets, but I presume that a man who used to kiss the cats on the head before he examined them and who felt as bad as I did every time one of them had come to the end of the road, is not really plugged into the Trump gestalt.

      Delete
    2. I am sorry to say, I probably feel less good about Biden than before. And even worse than before about Trump.

      Biden is probably a good opponent to run against Trump. Pretty clearly, Trump hasn't cracked the code on him yet.

      Delete
    3. I don't think Biden makes a good opponent. But he's the opponent the party thinks can win over and above his debate performance.

      Delete
  13. WaPo just announced that rules will be tightened for future debates:

    The Commission on Presidential Debates announced Wednesday that it would add “additional structure” to the remaining faceoffs between President Trump and Democratic nominee Joe Biden after Tuesday night’s chaotic clash in Cleveland, saying “more orderly discussion is needed."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tempting thought from Facebook: Trump needs a shock collar.

      Delete
    2. The "sides" have to agree to any change the commission wants. I can promise you The Don thinks he won last night, so why accept changes to make Sleepy Joe look better and give the failing leftist New York Times a chance to say it made the president shut up?

      Delete
  14. About down-ticket stuff, I now have an alternative to voting for Ben Sasse or leaving it blank. The Democratic party in Nebraska is totally incompetent. They couldn't field a viable candidate against Sasse, and they couldn't make the non-viable candidate with sexual harassment charges against him drop out. But now they have endorsed a write in candidate, Preston Love Jr. He is a young Black man who shows lots of promise. He should have been the Dem candidate from the beginning. Of course he won't win this time, but we haven't seen the last of him.

    ReplyDelete
  15. To illustrate some of the dynamics at play in the debate, here is a portion of last night's transcript.

    CHRIS WALLACE: Mr. Vice President, if Senate Republicans, we were talking originally about the Supreme Court here, if Senate Republicans go ahead and confirm Justice Barrett there has been talk about ending the filibuster or even packing the court, adding to the nine justices there. You call this a distraction by the President. But, in fact, it wasn’t brought up by the President. It was brought up by some of your Democratic colleagues in the Congress. So my question to you is, you have refused in the past to talk about it, are you willing to tell the American tonight whether or not you will support either ending the filibuster or packing the court?

    JOE BIDEN: Whatever position I take on that, that’ll become the issue. The issue is the American people should speak. You should go out and vote. You’re voting now. Vote and let your Senators know strongly how you feel.

    DONALD TRUMP: Are you going to pack the court?

    JOE BIDEN: Vote now.

    DONALD TRUMP: Are you going to pack the court?

    JOE BIDEN: Make sure you, in fact, let people know, your Senators.

    DONALD TRUMP: He doesn’t want to answer the question.

    JOE BIDEN: I’m not going to answer the question.

    DONALD TRUMP: Why wouldn’t you answer that question? You want to put a lot of new Supreme Court Justices. Radical left.

    JOE BIDEN: Will you shut up, man?

    DONALD TRUMP: Listen, who is on your list, Joe? Who’s on your list?

    CHRIS WALLACE: Gentlemen, I think we’ve ended this-

    JOE BIDEN: This is so un-Presidential.

    DONALD TRUMP: He’s going to pack the court. He is not going to give a list.

    CHRIS WALLACE: We have ended the segment. We’re going to move on to the second segment.

    JOE BIDEN: That was really a productive segment, wasn’t it? Keep yapping, man.

    Compare Wallace's respectful but assertive (but also paragraph-length question) to Trump's simple and direct rendering: "Are you going to pack the court?" That direct, easy-to-understand and in-your-face style appeals to some Americans.

    It's true that Biden didn't reveal his plans. Perhaps that's okay; traditionally, many candidates have used their talking time to talk about what they want to talk about rather than answer the question directly. It's not easy to discern about what Biden means by "Whatever position I take on that, that’ll become the issue. The issue is the American people should speak. You should go out and vote." Maybe, as Trump accused, he simply dodged the question. It's also possible that this is just an example of Biden incoherency - somehow his brain leaped to "people should vote" rather than staying on topic.

    Biden may also be giving his honest take here: he doesn't wish to answer the question because, if he answers it directly, that will become a headline-making announcement, and he wants to avoid that, perhaps because he's caught between his party's progressive wing (which apparently wants to pack the court) and his desire to appeal to independent voters, who probably don't want to pack the court.

    He may also saying, "The election results will tell us whether court packing is viable; if you, the American people, want us to pack the court, then give me a Senate that will work with me on it."

    One last thing: Trump's people are accusing Wallace of bailing out Biden several times when Trump seemed to have Biden on the ropes, by peremptorily shutting down the topic and moving on to the next one (a favor which never was extended to Trump). This is one of those instances. This impression feeds conservative paranoia that the media is in cahoots with Biden. This is one of the episodes which fueled Trump's remark that he felt he was debating two opponents last night. You may or may not agree with that view, but this is how it is seen by Trump supporters. Personally, I don't find it incredible that Wallace may find Biden more likable than Trump.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Interesting point about Trump demanding Biden's SCOTUS list, as recorded there. Trump was the first-ever presidential candidate to provide a Supreme Court list. He did it for the Cathvangeical vote. Traditionally, candidates have NOT gone in for naming judges because they pretend they will choose a superior candidate from the American Bar Association list. That keeps up the agreed-upon fiction that justices are bound by the law, not politics. And it keeps the spirit of the Hatch Act. Trump had no problem blowing up tradition and an agreed-upon fiction (which was the only thing giving SCOTUS its power, Chief Roberts not having an army at his disposal).

      That is how a non-Yale, non-Harvard (hooray) nominee got herself plopped right in the middle of an election campaign and how the Supremes lost their agreed-upon virginity.

      While breaking that tradition, The Don also broke the tradition of presidents letting the pubic know what financial strings may be attached to them and how they will cut the strings.

      He broke both traditions for his worthless self, not for national security or the good of the people.

      Delete
  16. Jim, I think you got it correctly here:
    "Biden may also be giving his honest take here: he doesn't wish to answer the question because, if he answers it directly, that will become a headline-making announcement, and he wants to avoid that, perhaps because he's caught between his party's progressive wing (which apparently wants to pack the court) and his desire to appeal to independent voters, who probably don't want to pack the court."
    And is it any mystery why Wallace may find Biden more likeable than Trump?
    All the talk of court packing by increasing the number of justices is just that, talk. Because where do you end? If they really want address the issue of fairness in appointments, it would be better to impose term limits, say 18 years. And have the terms expire so that each president would get one appointment per four year term. It's still possible that justices could die in office, but most of them wouldn't.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. FDR got nowhere with the idea of court-packing at a time when he was more popular than The Don or Biden ever will be. The people wanted a court that they could at least pretend to think was above politics. If packing the court is conceivable now, it's because The Don (and the right-to-life movement and Mitch McConnell) with his lists and his constant yapping and the deer he has currently put in the headights has ripped away the screen and turned the courts into an arm of the executive, as they are in any good dictatorship. One of Joe's jobs, if elected, will be to find a way to rehang the screen, if that is even possible.

      Delete
  17. Jim's excerpt above, imo, demonstrates that Trump walked into the debate having taken his extra-strength FU pill. He knows that acting like an arrogant SOB is what his fans like. He orchestrates that attitude right down to instructing his family and fans not to wear masks in the audience.

    Going full FU mode works for Trump because he doesn't have to explain or defend, just taunt and attack. This tactic also throws the moderator off balance, forcing him to waste time reminding everyone of the rules, restating questions that have gone off track, and breaking up candidates talking over each other. Running out the clock this way works to Trump's advantage because it's time he doesn't have to spend on anything substantive.

    Bob Woodward has talked at length about this tactic, and Trump doesn't seem to have made any bones about it. Enrage people and you have the upper hand over them. They'll walk away if they know you're impossible to deal with. And then you can do whatever you want.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jean - I agree completely.

      We know it works - at least, in 2016, it allowed him to aggregate more electoral college votes than Hillary. Whether it will allow the same to happen in 2020 against Biden is very much an open question - maybe even doubtful.

      Delete
    2. "...extra strength FU pill", good one, Jean!

      Delete
    3. Does he think it even matters if he loses the election? He has a lot of solid supporters and the most solid are among those of a paramilitary mindset. If the voter suppression doesn't work, maybe the army of whackos is his ace not in the hole but face up on the table. His FU is to democracy. His supporters don't care about democracy either.

      Delete
    4. Right, Stanley. Trump began by surrounding himself with generals -- Flinn followed by McMaster, "Mad Dog" Mattis and Kelly. McMaster still has trouble bucking the commander-in-chief who consigned him to the ashcan of history. Mattis knew how to handle The Don, making sure everybody with two stars or more got his resignation letter at the same time The Don got it so The Don couldn't claim to have fired him. (Which he did anyway.) But The Don committed unforced errors with Khizr Kahn, John Glenn, his 4th of July parade and and numerous disrespectful remarks about military officers and men. He tried to build a military wall around himself but, being The Don, he blew it.

      So he turned of the White Supremacists and "law and order." He has sheriffs all over the West defying their governors and legislatures on this law and that, and the FBI worries about ties between supremacists and cops in several cities. He is rebuilding the wall. How much violence will it take to get through his defenders to remove him if he loses the election? Loony Tunes isn't as good as the U.S. military, but it's more firepower than Sleepy Joe has.

      Or, maybe it's like what he told John Bolton. He desperately wanted a meeting with the ayatollah, and was turned down publicly. So he tweeted back that it was he who had refused to meet with the Iranians, and said to Bolton,"Sometimes I just want to *uck with their heads."

      Delete
    5. Right, Tom. That alliance between white supremacists and cops is really scary. Trump is like a laser guided missile exploding in the weakest spot of this country. The once only superpower is now disintegrating.

      Delete
    6. The alliances Trump is building are interesting: xenophobes of all stripes, para-militias obsessively concerned with the Second Amendment, single-issue abortion voters, isolationists, climate-change deniers, environmental and business regulation opponents, people who are sick and tired of the Political Correctness nitpickers, and apologists for the Old Confederacy.

      It's worth reading his Twitter feed occasionally to study how social media helps shape his message. It's a medium that allows for only short bits of info. That's conducive to the very black and white terms messages Trump likes: Democrats are with rioters, we are with cops. Democrats shut down businesses with environmental regulations, we open them up. Democrats are for open borders, we will build a wall. As our national challenges become more complicated, I think this is comforting for a lot of people. they can tell themselves he is cutting to the chase. And it absolves them from seeking info elsewhere because the president said it.

      Today, he's on Twitter bragging about his ratings for the debate, which establishes him as a winner: HIGHEST CABLE TELEVISION RATINGS OF ALL TIME. SECOND HIGHEST OVERALL TELEVISION RATINGS OF ALL TIME. Some day these Fake Media Companies are going to miss me, very badly!!!

      And he's using one of his favorite ploys, raise legitimate questions and then answer them with innuendo or spurious info. For instance, 100,000 defective ballots were sent out in Brooklyn that will have to be replaced. It's a big mess, someone should be hung out to dry for it, and people need to know how the election board is going to cull out the bad ballots and what their options are.

      https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/29/us/nearly-100000-new-york-city-voters-have-been-sent-invalid-absentee-ballots-with-wrong-names-or-addresses.html

      Trump could make all kinds of hay off this, since the cock-up involves a Democratic board of elections official. If I were advising him from a PR standpoint, I'd urge him to appoint a committee to investigate and oversee the whole mess, thereby showing that responsible Republicans have to save NYC from incompetent Democrats. It wouldn't be too hard to work in references to Boss Tweed and Tamany Hall.

      But why bother with that, when you can just tweet this in 30 seconds: 100,000 DEFECTIVE BALLOTS IN NEW YORK. THEY WANT TO REPLACE THEM, BUT WHERE, AND WHAT HAPPENS TO, THE BALLOTS THAT WERE FIRST SENT? THEY WILL BE USED BY SOMEBODY. USA, END THIS SCAM - GO OUT AND VOTE!

      The mainstream media, which he has discredited to his coalition, will try to explain what's going on, but that won't matter because understanding it takes too long. His sycophants at Fox, who do have some journalistic skills and could get on the horn and find out what's up won't because they are devoted to picking up his scare tactics to light everybody's hair on fire.

      It will be interesting to historians in another 20 years (if there are any such thing as historians left). But living through this crap is something else.

      Delete
  18. Here's a little more optimistic assessment of our situation. "Trump is a magical thinker, refusing to accept the reality of anything going on in the real world when he can wish it, heckle it, or gaslight it away. That’s what he was doing to us...So no, last night was not a debate. It was more of a competition over our perception of reality. Trump showed that the only way he can win a debate or an election is to convince us that there’s nothing we can do to stop him...But according to Trump’s own logic, all we need to do to defeat him is to believe otherwise and vote."

    ReplyDelete
  19. Hopefully my last comment on the "debate":

    We were sitting on the couch watching it. My heart started pounding about 30 minutes in. The cat parked on my lap (Edgar is one of the more sympatico felines around here) woke up and stared at me with his tail lashing. I tried to settle him down, but he sat there with his tail going and his ears in radar mode for a few minutes and finally jumped down and left the room.

    My guess is that he was clearly picking up on the agitation and trying to model sensible behavior. "You're gonna have a heart attack, you dumb lady, and you need to get away from the bad noise on the squawk box."

    But someone needed to sit next to Raber to monitor the steam coming out of his ears.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Cat is sitting on my lap as we speak. They're very good at modeling relaxed behavior.

      Delete
    2. I could borrow MaryAnn's cat if it liked me outside of dinner time.

      Delete
    3. Cats. Once in awhile you get a cat who really likes you, but with most of them, the relationship is largely transactional. You have to figure out what kind of a deal they want to make with you.

      My mother-in-law, who liked animals, was always frustrated because our cats would not come out yapping and dying to lick her face like the little dogs she had. One time, she put a gob of whipped cream on her saucer and gave it to Butch, who was hanging around the perimeter of the table at a dignified distance. After that, he always sat by her dining room chair when she visited. But she could never figure out why he didn't come and greet her at the door. She didn't realize she'd have to pay extra for that.

      Delete