Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth
Sep 30, 2020 - 4:42am
It was awful. It was miserable. And one wished desperately that there were commercials during the grotesque spectacle if only to give someone a chance to throw cold water on the president. But there were no breaks. It was an endless display, and it was frustrating to hear Wallace calling the president âsirâ as he pleaded with him to adhere to the rules to which he had agreed. Sir.Trump did not deserve that nicety because he did not come to the debate bearing the mantle of the presidency. He came with the demeanor of a thug.
Would that have happened because of Wallace? Would that have happened because of Biden?
We shouldn't act like it was a group effort. It was - surprise - chaos. Just like this administration has cultivated since the beginning.
I guess I'll be voting for the guy that didn't tell the Proud Boys to stand by.
WTF else did you guys expect? This is Trump. The 2016 debates with HRC were the same ugly mess. Interviewers and moderators can no longer have a sensible, reality-based conversation with Trump. He lives in his own fantasy world. Don't blame Wallace or Biden. Biden wasn't a problem during all the Democratic primary debates. If anything he struggled to get himself heard above the crowd during them.
Trump loves chaos because it lets him get away with lying. He will openly and brazenly lie on TV and not flinch. Jonathan Swan was praised for putting follow-up questions to Trump's answers in an August 2020 interview. If you don't press Trump to back his claims up or expand on them, he will litter the interview with throwaway lines based on lies.
From the CNN piece I linked to above:
Trump: "You know, there are those that say you can test too much, you do know that."Swan: "Who says that?"Trump: "Oh, just read the manuals. Read the books."Swan: "Manuals? What manuals?"Trump: "Read the books. Read the books."Swan: "What books?"
Trump moved on without offering a direct answer. While Swan couldn't get the President to concede that he is making up these "manuals" and "books," he exposed him nonetheless.
Swan had similar success when Trump returned to his laughably inaccurate claim that the virus is "under control," which he has now been making for more than six months.
Trump: "Right now, I think it's under control. I'll tell you what —"Swan: "How? 1,000 Americans are dying a day."Trump: "They are dying. That's true. And you have — it is what it is. But that doesn't mean we aren't doing everything we can. It's under control as much as you can control it."
I watched a five minute summary of the Biden-Trump debate. Wallace could barely keep Trump on track and restrained from interrupting Biden. You need a panel of 3-4 moderators to force Trump to debate and behave like a mature adult.
In interviews with the same voters conducted before the debate, 56% said they expected Biden to do the better job while 43% expected that Trump would. The post-debate result is about the same as the outcome of a post-debate poll in 2016 after the first debate between Trump and Hillary Clinton. In that poll, 62% thought Clinton won the debate, 27% said Trump did.
Visit CNN's Election Center for full coverage of the 2020 race About two-thirds said Biden's answers were more truthful than Trump's (65% Biden to 29% Trump), and his attacks on the President were more frequently seen as fair. Overall, 69% called Biden's attacks on Trump fair while just 32% said Trump's attacks were fair. The survey is designed to be representative of those registered voters who watched Tuesday's debate, it does not represent the views of all Americans. The voters who watched the debate were more partisan than Americans as a whole — 35% identified as independents or non-partisans compared with around 40% in the general public, and the group of debate watchers was more Democratic than a typical survey of all adults, with 39% identifying as Democrats and 25% as Republicans.
The CNN post-debate poll was conducted by SSRS by telephone and includes interviews with 568 registered voters who watched the September 29 debate. Results among debate-watchers have a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 6.3 percentage points. Respondents were originally interviewed September 22-27 either by telephone or online, and indicated they planned to watch the debate and would be willing to be re-interviewed when it was over. Respondents initially reached online are members of the SSRS Opinion Panel, a nationally representative probability-based panel.