• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Presidential Debate #1 |Hofstra University| PRESS X TO SEAN

Who won the debate?


Results are only viewable after voting.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Calidor

Member
You completely avoided what I asserted which was that you suggested her platform to be worse than his.

But that's the thing. One thing is what she has published on her platform, and another is what she is really into.

As anything, is not black or white, both have good proposals (Trump: US not being world police, Hillary. continuity on Obamacare) and bad proposals (Hillary: TPP, Trump: that freaking wall)
 

depths20XX

Member
As someone who voted for Bernie in the primaries and was never big on Hilary I have to say Trump looked really bad here. The last 30 minutes reminded me of a drunk friend rambling without actually saying anything. I just can't take him seriously.
 

Piecake

Member
Listening to him claim to have the better temperament was pretty hilarious, considering that he spent the whole debate trying to interrupt her or provide petty snipes while she was speaking.

Yup.

I really don't get why some people are saying that Trump won the first half of the debate. Just because someone constantly interrupts and flings accusations at someone doesn't make them stronger or a better debater. All it does it make them look like a petulant child.

People need to stop worrying about how they think 'other' people are going to perceive it because that imagined other person is usually imagined to be a gibbering idiot.

The only real question where i thought he might do some damage was on trade, but he is just so rambling, insulting, and hyperbolic that I think that is going to lose people who are still undecided, wary, or lukewarm about both candidates.
 
I don't understand why people are saying he did strong the first 30 minutes when it was basically

I'm going to be the most tremendous Ronald Reagan and bring jobs back by cutting corporate taxes. Also I don't pay taxes cause that's good business.

Hillary didn't roast him enough on investing in education and high skill job market and how his plan would reflect on the average worker's salary and quality of life to be able to compete with China at manufacturing. She was weaker there for no reason at all, and it was embarrasing to see trump not know shit about macro economic and trade deals and babble like a baby on stage.

Btw what was the word he made up? Can't believe I forgot it because it was absurd as hell
A friend asked me if braggadocious is real

It is, it's informal and not often used, but it's real.
 
To show that she's weak for staying with a cheater or that she can't please her man. Appeal to the conservative, family values-oriented women vote.

And then promptly nuke his chances with women. You can't win an election with white male high school graduates.
 

Ekai

Member
Absolutely, women are held to a different standard and it's 100% sexist bullshit. However I do not believe this lady was "fired for being too enthusiastic at E3."

I wasn't responding to E3 specifically. But the response women always get when it comes to presenting themselves.
 

CazTGG

Member
Somebody please call Sean hannity.

Can't, Jon Stewart murdered him.

On the debate (Canadian here): Donald Trump had a smorgasbord of "binder full of women" moments with how many ridiculous statements came out of his mouth, essentially shooting himself in the foot with a loaded revolver one bullet at a time. Hillary Clinton wasn't just more competent and prepared and able to actually answer the questions that were asked (and not telling the fact checker they're wrong when they clearly don't know what they're talking about), she was cohesive with illustrating her plans, policies and painting her opponent as un-presidential as he appears to be on the surface. It's not even a question as to who won this: Clinton demolished Trump on nearly every front.
 

JordanN

Banned
You're gonna have to explain these. Watching that debate and coming to that conclusion seems irrational.


I'm not for any illegal things advocated by Trump. It's the part where he said he doesn't want America to be interventionist/world police that I thought stood out.

Now risking an entire presidency on moving the US towards that? I clearly don't like him as a candidate so that's a no.
 

Fat4all

Banned
But that's the thing. One thing is what she has published on her platform, and another is what she is really into.

As anything, is not black or white, both have good proposals (Trump: US not being world police, Hillary. continuity on Obamacare) and bad proposals (Hillary: TPP, Trump: that freaking wall)

hillary is against tpp
 

FStubbs

Member
Its happened before. Remember this lady?

Rewinding-E3-Highlights-from-the-Electronic-Entertainment-Expo-Cammie-Dunaway.gif


She was fired right after E3 for being overly enthusiastic. Some people don't like that. It feels so forced.

The irony is the Wii fell off a cliff right about the time she was forced out.
 

DrSlek

Member
My thoughts.

Trump: Better debater, more charismatic, more suitable for foreign policy. His domestic policies would be disgusting.

Hillary: More sane, totally better at domestic policies. She never wanted to address Trump head on though which worries me.

Conclusion: I still don't like either candidates.

Better debater? From the admittedly little I saw, Trump seemed to very much be using Contradiction and Ad-Hominem, while Clinton seemed to be sticking to counterarguments, refutation and refuting the central point.

 
I feel like Hillary won but Donald didn't totally embarrass himself so it wasn't a KO punch for either side. In a week or so, polls will remain where they were. Nothing game-changing happened.

He absolutely did. He's come out of this looking terribly to everyone but his supporters, who are even having a hard time spinning this performance. He brags about not preparing and that much was obvious. The last 2/3 of this debate he was completely incoherent. The numbers with moderates, undecideds and "very against Trump" people are looking terrible for him.
 
But that's the thing. One thing is what she has published on her platform, and another is what she is really into.

As anything, is not black or white, both have good proposals (Trump: US not being world police, Hillary. continuity on Obamacare) and bad proposals (Hillary: TPP, Trump: that freaking wall)
This is so shockingly reductionist I'm sort of baffled to have read it.

Everyone has the same number of pros and cons, so who can know which is better? Right guys? :-/
 
To be fair I think the issue is that 90% of her smiling seemed forced and fake.

Overall, she did as well as she could considering who she was debating.
And as I mentioned in a previous post, she may have done it as a way to get to Trump. He is a bully after all. And smiling and laughing is dismissive - something that bugged me as someone who sees Trump as a serious candidate worthy of being eviscerated, but I'm coming around to think that her method was wiser because I think it really got under Trump's skin.

So yes, I do think it was calculated early on. And I think it was smart.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom