Debate Tonight 9/10/24 9:00 PM EDT
-
@LuFins-Dad said in Debate Tonight 9/10/24 9:00 PM EDT:
TLDR - Kamala won the debate, but Trump picked up more voters from it.
Nate ranks them 79th in terms of reliability. He hasn’t updated his forecast because no pollster he considers reliable has come out with new data.
@jon-nyc said in Debate Tonight 9/10/24 9:00 PM EDT:
@LuFins-Dad said in Debate Tonight 9/10/24 9:00 PM EDT:
TLDR - Kamala won the debate, but Trump picked up more voters from it.
Nate ranks them 79th in terms of reliability. He hasn’t updated his forecast because no pollster he considers reliable has come out with new data.
Great. So go back to the NYT/Sienna poll. Trump 48% - Harris 47%. How many of that 48% do you think changed their mind? Do you think that a single person that responded they were going to vote for Trump switched their vote?
That leaves “undecided” and non-responsive. Trump has always outperformed in these groups. Donald outperformed polls by over 3% in each of the last two elections do you expect any different this time?
A ridiculously small sample size, but Reuters interviewed 10 undecided voters before and after the debate. Almost all agreed that Kamala won, but 6 said they were closer to voting for Trump after the debate, 3 towards Kamala, and 1 unmoved by either.
-
@Mik said in Debate Tonight 9/10/24 9:00 PM EDT:
Define winning.
I'm pretty sure I won the debate. I watched Kaos on Netflix.
I was only joking
-
@Jolly said in Debate Tonight 9/10/24 9:00 PM EDT:
You don't know. You have no credible source or news story.
You’ve got a fourth-person account from a random Facebook post, a series of memes resulting from it, and a presidential candidate that has become a laughingstock by repeating it in such a meme-able way.
@jon-nyc said in Debate Tonight 9/10/24 9:00 PM EDT:
@Jolly said in Debate Tonight 9/10/24 9:00 PM EDT:
You don't know. You have no credible source or news story.
You’ve got a fourth-person account from a random Facebook post, a series of memes resulting from it, and a presidential candidate that has become a laughingstock by repeating it in such a meme-able way.
Good summary
-
@Jolly said in Debate Tonight 9/10/24 9:00 PM EDT:
Well, maybe some people changed their minds...
I saw the video, it was actually pretty nice. Biden (wow, he looks even older now) was having a fun convo with a guy in a Trump hat. He asked if he should sign a Presidential hat and the civilian says "hell no, you can't even remember your name" or something like that, which Biden jokes "yeah I'm pretty slow" but then they swap hats. Anyway... he's embracing the IDGAF mentality now.
-
@Mik said in Debate Tonight 9/10/24 9:00 PM EDT:
Define winning.
I'm pretty sure I won the debate. I watched Kaos on Netflix.
@Doctor-Phibes I'm down wit' that.
-
@jon-nyc said in Debate Tonight 9/10/24 9:00 PM EDT:
@Jolly said in Debate Tonight 9/10/24 9:00 PM EDT:
You don't know. You have no credible source or news story.
You’ve got a fourth-person account from a random Facebook post, a series of memes resulting from it, and a presidential candidate that has become a laughingstock by repeating it in such a meme-able way.
Good summary
@89th said in Debate Tonight 9/10/24 9:00 PM EDT:
@jon-nyc said in Debate Tonight 9/10/24 9:00 PM EDT:
@Jolly said in Debate Tonight 9/10/24 9:00 PM EDT:
You don't know. You have no credible source or news story.
You’ve got a fourth-person account from a random Facebook post, a series of memes resulting from it, and a presidential candidate that has become a laughingstock by repeating it in such a meme-able way.
Good summary
Perception is reality.
People in the city we're talking about believe that story. There's enough smoke, that a lot of people in similarly affected places believe that story.
It matters not one red rolling rat's ass if Jon's neighbors believe that story or not.
-
-
You don't become a viable national politician by answering questions directly or honestly. The talent is in seeming to have answered while not actually answering. Neither of those two made a good show of seeming to answer.
-
You don't become a viable national politician by answering questions directly or honestly. The talent is in seeming to have answered while not actually answering. Neither of those two made a good show of seeming to answer.
You don't become a viable national politician by answering questions directly or honestly. The talent is in seeming to have answered while not actually answering. Neither of those two made a good show of seeming to answer.
Nailed it.
I believe that is an indispensable, albeit despicable, talent or trait for successful politicians at all levels of government regardless of nationality, culture or race.
-
You don't become a viable national politician by answering questions directly or honestly. The talent is in seeming to have answered while not actually answering. Neither of those two made a good show of seeming to answer.
Nailed it.
I believe that is an indispensable, albeit despicable, talent or trait for successful politicians at all levels of government regardless of nationality, culture or race.
@Renauda said in Debate Tonight 9/10/24 9:00 PM EDT:
Nailed it.
+1
Read the transcript of the debate. It was a spaghetti of talk - almost never answering the question asked.
-
Yeah, I rolled my eyes at that one. I don’t see that as being any kind of conflict of interest. I bet there have been a lot more egregious examples in the past.
-
That being a conflict of interest is like me saying as a Manchester physics alumnus I was involved in splitting the atom.
Which of course I was.
-
Former Clinton advisor Mark Penn thinks the debate was rigged and calls for an investigation.
"I actually think they should do a full internal investigation, hire an outside law firm. I don't know how much of this was planned in advance," Penn told the "John Solomon Reports" podcast.
"I don't know what they told the Harris campaign. I think the day after, suspicion here is really quite high, and I think a review of all their internal texts and emails really should be done by an independent party to find out to what extent they were planning on, in effect, you know, fact-checking just one candidate and in effect, rigging the outcome of this debate. I think the situation demands nothing less than that," he added.
Penn, chairman of the Harvard CAPS Harris Poll, also said Harris has done a "good job" defining Trump as the incumbent and herself as the change candidate even though she's the sitting vice president. But he described the mainstream media's coverage of Harris' campaign as laughable.
"It's a 50-50, race. He's [Trump] got more obvious tools to get across the finish line than she does and part of the thing here is that if the referees have their finger on the scale, it's harder to, you know, break through and overcome. And certainly, general media coverage has been fairly laughable," he said.
-
