First presidential debate - September 26: Trump vs Hillary

[apples]

Electing Trump would send a clear message to the millions of illegals and potential future illegals that they are not welcome here. On the other side you have Hillary who wants to overrun the country with unskilled third worlders.

electin trump cuse dey terk er jerbs

NPR actually just had a piece on this this morning

kinda funny how the system works

[Vilendor]

Every single sentence from Hillary was written, practiced and designed before the debate. The whole time she sounded like a robot reading a script. Even her tones and gestures looked fake and planned. They practiced every single scenario for comebacks, ripostes, interruptions.

Meanwhile Trump improvised everything on the spot and made him look scattered, unprepared and nonpofessional. He needs to cut back on sniffing and slurping too.

This round goes to Hillary for looking more prepared, but with really disgusting taste in the mouth caused by her true reptilian identity under the human skin.

[Macaquerie]

It's not so much because Donald Trump doesn't know how to deal with North Korea, it's that America cannot deal with North Korea (short of military action). America does not have leverage over North Korea, but China does, and America has leverage over China.

What leverage do we have over China at this point that we don't have over North Korea? Ultimately when it comes to NK, everyone knows in the back of their mind that if push comes to shove, we can roll in there and take them out. After seeing what's happened in Iraq and Afghanistan maybe it's not something we'll be eager to do, but we can fall back on it if we have to. With China, we JUST might be able to avoid mutually assured destruction in an all out military conflict, but an extended occupation is absolutely out of the question, we simply do not have the capacity to keep the peace and maintain order over there if we take out the current government.

Sure, we can try some of Trump's idiotic trade policies, and those might have been effective 20 years ago, but nowadays China's economy has grown way beyond simply supplying America with cheap consumer goods and whatever tariffs we could impose would only hurt, but not cripple, them. Not to mention you can always count on the Donald to put his own business interests ahead of the country, and unless he wants to find a new place to make his Trump hats and Trump ties, he might just have to reconsider his tough stance.

[paralleluniverse]

Every single sentence from Hillary was written, practiced and designed before the debate. The whole time she sounded like a robot reading a script. Even her tones and gestures looked fake and planned. They practiced every single scenario for comebacks, ripostes, interruptions.

Meanwhile Trump improvised everything on the spot and made him look scattered, unprepared and nonpofessional. He needs to cut back on sniffing and slurping too.

This round goes to Hillary for looking more prepared, but with really disgusting taste in the mouth caused by her true reptilian identity under the human skin.

Reading briefs and preparing is a big part of being president.

She's prepared. That's a great thing. Trump is an unprepared, clueless buffoon. And got wrecked.

[Deleted]

How is NK a problem for China? They might not like Kim or his regime, but they love it whenever they go unhinged and start threatening American allies in the region, there's no reason for them to try and stop that.

NK is China's problem because they A, don't like NK going crazy, B, because NK must not collapse.

[paralleluniverse]

Not like he is wrong though.

I remember people getting upset when I explained this in other threads a while ago. That business smart people wouldn't buy their movies or games either, because it's smarter to get it for free.

Trump is a business man at least, he isn't fully retarded. Who would pay when the option is there to do it without paying?

Ultimately, and I'm just playing devil's advocate here, because Trump disgusts me, his remark could be interpreted as a criticism on the legislation that allows that option to be there, that opens up the possibility for the super-wealthy to skip paying taxes and shoves the weight of paying on the shoulders of the middle and lower classes instead.

Trump's economic plan is $5B to $10B (it keeps changing) in tax cuts for the rich. So helping rich people not pay taxes, like himself, rather than making them pay their fair share when there is skyrocketing inequality, isn't just some smart business thing, it's a policy choice for the country.

So no, he's not a fighter for the little guy, like some delusional people think. That's Clinton's plan to raise taxes on the rich to expand healthcare, raise the minimum wage, debt-free public college, provide paid parental leave, etc. Trump's plan is tax cuts for the rich at the expense of everyone else, but more extreme. Like Clinton said, trumped up trickle-down economics.

He even fell for the trap and explicitly spelt out the discredit Reagan-Bush trickle down theory:
"Well, I’m really calling for major jobs because the wealthy are going to create tremendous jobs. They’re going to expand their companies. They’re going to do a tremendous job."

Didn't work.

[ati87]

Electing Trump would send a clear message to the millions of illegals and potential future illegals that they are not welcome here. On the other side you have Hillary who wants to overrun the country with unskilled third worlders.

Still more then skilled enough to steal those ''millions of jobs from Americans''.

[Orlong]

How long does it take to say "I was wrong and I take full responsibility"? That's a 0% weasel out of ratio, by the way.

How's Trump's taxes and lawsuits going?

She said she made a mistake (it wasnt a mistake, it was deliberate), she didnt say she was wrong. Also how did she take responsibility? Taking responsibility usually means you accept some kind of punishment, or affect some sort of change to make sure it doesnt happen again. Why isnt she saying "yes I was wrong and to make sure nobody else will expose classified information available to hackers, I am going to work with Secretary Kerry to build a standard email policy for the State Department that every employee will be required to follow, and in addition, if elected president I will make it a priority to create a federal law dictating how classified material WILL be handled in emails."

[LilSaihah]

Still more then skilled enough to steal those ''millions of jobs from Americans''.

More that they can avoid paying tax and therefore undercut the average American.

[Deletedaccount1]

I fear it's because his policies, if elected, would be pretty "standard politician" like. He's not going to build a wall, kick the muslims and so on OBVIOUSLY.
Like, he's only capitalising on the votes from a general disappointment and frustration towards normal politics because he's an eccentric guy.
But you're right, clinton manages to be so unpopular and bland, that even someone like Trump becomes a potential candidate. Isn't it peculiar.

Evolutionary theory has been perplexed by the problem as to the initial assemblage of functional DNA molecules, since natural selection seems to require as a precondition the existence of complex biochemicals which in turn seem to require an evolutionary mechanism already at work. This is a 'vicious circle' typical of the quandaries posed by cyberpositive or self-conditioning processes. Cairns Smith calls it the 'life puzzle', and has suggested a solution involving the redescription of DNA as a 'usurper replicator'. His thesis is that the crystalline complexes of primitive clays might already have been shaped by processes of variation and selection, to the point of forming DNA subcomponents which eventually supplanted their builders. According to this account the biosphere emerges as an escape, an immense spasm of deterritorialization that revolutionizes the machinery of terrestrial replicator production, a planetary trauma.

[Vilendor]

Reading briefs and preparing is a big part of being president.

She's prepared. That's a great thing. Trump is an unprepared, clueless buffoon. And got wrecked.

Not really, because these are not her thoughts, these are not her opinions. These are carefully created scripts by the best script writers in Washington, approved by minority/corporation/wall street leaders and finally tested on focus groups for maximum efficiency among voters. Everything she said was a pre-created and designed ad campaign made by professionals. She isn't prepared in the sense as she knows the facts, data or has her own ideas. She is prepared in the sense as she learned the lines she has to say when Trump says X sentence.

But yeah, Trump was literally the opposite of this, which is just as bad.

[Deletedaccount1]

She said she made a mistake (it wasnt a mistake, it was deliberate), she didnt say she was wrong. Also how did she take responsibility? Taking responsibility usually means you accept some kind of punishment, or affect some sort of change to make sure it doesnt happen again. Why isnt she saying "yes I was wrong and to make sure nobody else will expose classified information available to hackers, I am going to work with Secretary Kerry to build a standard email policy for the State Department that every employee will be required to follow, and in addition, if elected president I will make it a priority to create a federal law dictating how classified material WILL be handled in emails."

Drives are the functions of nomadic cybernetic systems, not instincts, but simulated instincts, artificial instincts. They are plastic replacements for hard-wired instinctual responses, routing a sensory-motor pathway through the virtual machine of the unconscious. There are two basic diagrams for such processes: that of regulation by negative feedback which suppresses difference and seeks equilibrium, or that of guidance by positive feedback which reinforces difference and escapes equilibrium. Machinic processes are either cyberpositive-nomadic, with a deterritorializing outcome, or cybernegative-sedentary, with a reterritorializing outcome.

[Orlong]

Trump's economic plan is $5B to $10B (it keeps changing) in tax cuts for the rich. So helping rich people not pay taxes, like himself, rather than making them pay their fair share when there is skyrocketing inequality, isn't just some smart business thing, it's a policy choice for the country.

So no, he's not a fighter for the little guy, like some delusional people think. That's Clinton's plan to raise taxes on the rich to expand healthcare, raise the minimum wage, debt-free public college, provide paid parental leave, etc. Trump's plan is tax cuts for the rich at the expense of everyone else, but more extreme. Like Clinton said, trumped up trickle-down economics.

He even fell for the trap and explicitly spelt out the discredit Reagan-Bush trickle down theory:
"Well, I’m really calling for major jobs because the wealthy are going to create tremendous jobs. They’re going to expand their companies. They’re going to do a tremendous job."

Didn't work.

Clinton's plan only works if you assume that the rich people and big businesses will just shut up and pay more, and not pass on the added taxes on to their customers, or shirt business overseas. That will never happen. Trump is a business man and told her it wont work, he runs businesses and knows that businesses never eat increased taxes and he knows the ways they do it. That makes him much more knowledgeable on how to stop it.

[TZucchini]

Hillary mentioned daddy's business loan, and Trump imploded from there on out.

Meanwhile, Hillary actually looked strong, healthy, full of stamina, and laid out specific policies.

Just a complete disaster for the Trump campaign.

[ati87]

More that they can avoid paying tax and therefore undercut the average American.

Also their is no concrete proof that in the US illegal immigrants have a negative impact on the economy. They do pay allot of certain taxes that they can't avoid but get back little in return unlike most other people.

Still if you where ''superior'' you wouldn't be effected by illegal immigrants taking those ''low skilled jobs'' you claimed they are taking now would you.

TBH the argument doesn't hold up.

[Skroe]

She said she made a mistake (it wasnt a mistake, it was deliberate), she didnt say she was wrong. Also how did she take responsibility? Taking responsibility usually means you accept some kind of punishment, or affect some sort of change to make sure it doesnt happen again. Why isnt she saying "yes I was wrong and to make sure nobody else will expose classified information available to hackers, I am going to work with Secretary Kerry to build a standard email policy for the State Department that every employee will be required to follow, and in addition, if elected president I will make it a priority to create a federal law dictating how classified material WILL be handled in emails."

Because it would never pass.

Why?

Because private email servers are routine nowdays among elected officials at the State and Federal level (especially) in the House and Senate.

Why?

Because the Freedom of Information Act has been successfully weaponized by special interest groups. The noble cause of government transparency has been instead perverted into a tool for "No Compromise, EVER!" Political Action Groups to get intra-government correspondences in order to make sure that elected officials are as radical as they are. To intimidate them into submission. Conversely other groups use it to gain access to correspondences of all sorts in order to turn a Senator or Representative's words against them. To make them pay for every changing their mind or taking a stand opposite their agendas.

The FOIA is a wonderful idea, but some of the legitimately worst people this country is capable of shatting out have turned it instead into a horrible tool of intimidation that has prevented routine wheeling and dealing that is part of consensus forming governing and decision making.

Congress would never pass such a law because banning use of private email servers would close off one of the few avenues they have left to not have their own words turned against them at every turn by our society's extremists.


Fundamental FOIA reform needs to happen soon to unshackle our elected officials.

[LilSaihah]

Also their is no concrete proof that in the US illegal immigrants have a negative impact on the economy.

That's not the argument. Illegal immigrants taking jobs is bad for people, the citizens who might have otherwise gotten those jobs, not the economy.

[Allybeboba]

Hillary mentioned daddy's business loan, and Trump imploded from there on out.
T
Meanwhile, Hillary actually looked strong, healthy, full of stamina, and laid out specific policies.

Just a complete disaster for the Trump campaign.

She only had to stand for 90 minutes. That really is not that long.

She did not look so strong when she hobbled off to the crowd and had to be helped up the steps. I also did not see her in any post debate interviews. Trump answers quite a few questions. I suppose her handlers shuffled her off very quickly.

Her big mistake was making such personal attacks at him at the very end. That was not very becoming of her at all. It made her look very very bad. The debate was supposed to be about policy not about personal attacks.

[Ausr]

She did not look so strong when she hobbled off to the crowd and had to be helped up the steps. I also did not see her in any post debate interviews. Trump answers quite a few questions. I suppose her handlers shuffled her off very quickly.

You kidding me? He left the stage as soon as his kids and wife came up on the stage in shame, meanwhile she stayed behind and thanked/talked with the audience along with her husband.

Man, plain ol ignorance much be nice to live with.

[ati87]

That's not the argument. Illegal immigrants taking jobs is bad for people, the citizens who might have otherwise gotten those jobs, not the economy.

The ''people'' don't want to work on farms, a farmer tries that (google it) and a great number of people left before lunch break.

Also that was your argument, you argued that they didn't pay taxes and undercut american workers. To me this means that they do the following
1) cost the US money by virtue of being their, this argument doesn't hold up since their is no numbers to back up this claim
2) undercutting wages: This goes back to the economy argument because your assuming total overlap and that 1 illegal immigrant hired = 1 less american hired. It could be by virtue of spending illegals create jobs as well, again your argument doesn't hold up because its based on ''gut'' feeling like every other right wing argument.