The Great Debate

[Valcazar]

Harris said no active personal in combat zones when some have died IE 2 navy seals among others

As potential commander she has denigrated those who died and should have been called out

That is not denigrating those who have died.
What a silly thing to say.

And, since you are being so precise, here is what she said, according to the transcript.

"And as of today, there is not one member of the United States military who is in active duty in a combat zone in any war zone around the world, the first time this century."

She specifically said in war zones.
So she was right, even if you want to say limiting that way is misleading. (Which I think is a fair criticism.)

You make good points but to ask opponent to correct a lie is wasting their valuable speaking time when it is authoritative if the moderaters do it but, yes, it is hard to decern what partial, or even full lies, should be called but by calling out lies they stop them

The moderators are never going to get into nitpicky fights with the speakers.
In fact, as others on this thread have said, many people think the moderators shouldn't fact check at all.
(This was the Trump campaigns position since lying freely helps Trump.)

The moderators mostly stuck to things they could directly fact check and didn't involve parsing words - which is probably the best approach you can take in a format like this.

I believe they called out Trump 5 times and not Harris once

I'm sure they called out Trump more than that - he lies constantly and egregiously.
When there is asymmetrical lying, there will be asymmetrical fact-checking

I loved they called out the migrants eating cats (trump threw in dogs LOL) internet hoax and Trump panicked by calling the mayor of the town ( I think it was) who denied it a liar

And if Harris had something as outlandish as that, she would have been called on it.

The Nancy Pelosi lie is the hugest lie of the night and can be easily rebuked as she did not have the power to call in national guard, they missed it and it was a lie they should have been prepared for as he has said it before

Yeah, they probably should have jumped in on that one.

 

[Valcazar]

Yeah, narrcisistic mom putting her politics ahead of her young daughter's innocent fun. Even admits Taylor Swift is not likely to hear it but "it's worth a shot". That's real family values right there! I'm sure that her daughter will never forgive her for it.

Probably already resents her attention whore mom by "helping"her with her makeup! Who else would have drawn the mismatched Snidely Whiplash moustache eyebrows on her cheek implanted over-the-hill-but-not-accepting-it face tightened face...

The mom seems like a piece of work.

 

[shack]

It was sarcasm. Try following along for a change.

I was not attempting to make any point, political or otherwise. It simply reminded me of that line that I think is a cute play on words.

Extremists (like Geno as well) are always overly sensitive and lack a sense of humour. Lighten up, dude.

 

[Valcazar]

And Mitchel laughs when it is pointed out his sources are flat out lying to him.

I'm pretty sure mitchell admitted to being a troll the first month in when I pointed it out.

 

[shack]

Mitch, you are making the forum an obsession. Please post less. You don't have to post many redundant tweets with the same point.

I think that a day in the life of Mitch has 30 hours.

 

[shack]

Why?? Trump's getting ripped off by the mainstream media, just like he did in 2020. Those two ABC debate moderators were a total joke....LMAO

Whose fault is it if he is unlikeable?

 

[SchlongConery]

The mom seems like a piece of work.

And she''s a lightweight compared to most Trump mom's!

 

[shack]

I'm a total right-winger,

Ohhh. So now you tell us. We'd have never known.

 

[Valcazar]

Not really.

Most voters don't vote policies. They vote personality.

KH could repeat Biden's policies and yet attract a completely different type of voter.

Look at Trump. He has effectively no coherent policies, yet manages to attract those voters who love a senile clown who claims immigrants eat dogs.

Most importantly, most undecided voters don't vote policy.
(I'm sure there are some.)
The people who appreciate policy have often already made up their minds - the policies tend to be very different these days.

But as you say, most voters - the vast majority I would think - vote on vibes.

 

[SchlongConery]

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-says-he-will-not-participate-another-debate-with-kamala-harris-2024-09-12/

Trump chickens out of any more debates!

(I knw this is an old meme bit it exemplifies just how and why he is so attractive to his flock... fat, angry bigmouthed chicken!)

Seems he only wants to fight old men cuz he loses when women fight back!

 

[Big Rig]

That is not denigrating those who have died.
What a silly thing to say.

And, since you are being so precise, here is what she said, according to the transcript.

"And as of today, there is not one member of the United States military who is in active duty in a combat zone in any war zone around the world, the first time this century."

She specifically said in war zones.
So she was right, even if you want to say limiting that way is misleading. (Which I think is a fair criticism.)



The moderators are never going to get into nitpicky fights with the speakers.
In fact, as others on this thread have said, many people think the moderators shouldn't fact check at all.
(This was the Trump campaigns position since lying freely helps Trump.)

The moderators mostly stuck to things they could directly fact check and didn't involve parsing words - which is probably the best approach you can take in a format like this.



I'm sure they called out Trump more than that - he lies constantly and egregiously.
When there is asymmetrical lying, there will be asymmetrical fact-checking



And if Harris had something as outlandish as that, she would have been called on it.



Yeah, they probably should have jumped in on that one.

Actually, I agree with you esp about asymmetrical lying,
except her not acknowledging that soldiers are dying in the line of duty. That is not silly

I was trying to point out what Trump will say

He has wisely chickened out of another debate and will fire all those responsible,
except himself of course, as he comes up with more lies about Harris like saying she was told the questions before hand etc

You stand in awe of him blaming all those he has fired when he was the one who hired them and now promises to hire only ass kissers .

Without those who desperately talked Trump into reason gone and a senate and Supreme Court full of ass kissers a second Trump term will be far worse than the first

 

[WyattEarp]

And, since you are being so precise, here is what she said, according to the transcript.

"And as of today, there is not one member of the United States military who is in active duty in a combat zone in any war zone around the world, the first time this century."

She specifically said in war zones.
So she was right, even if you want to say limiting that way is misleading. (Which I think is a fair criticism.)

Technically, Harris was correct if you also apply a strict definition of war zone. We have military advisors in Israel and the Ukraine. They're far from the front lines, but it's also good policy to not disclose that if they were near the lines.

Honest question, were are troops in a war zone during 2001?

None of this is a big deal. I think politicians should be given a fairly long leash to make their case. The China tariff debate is an example.

 

[shack]

Wouldn't be surprising, if true. She did seem rehearsed.

I didn't realize that preparing is cheating.

"Failure to prepare is preparing for failure." That was validated last night.

 

[Valcazar]

Technically, Harris was correct if you apply a strict definition of war zone. We have military advisors in Israel and the Ukraine. They're far from the front lines, but it's also good policy to not disclose that if they were near the lines.

Now that I've listened to more of it, it is clear she was very good at not answering questions when she didn't want to and going with these sort of "technically correct but misleading" or just "really needs more context" kind of answers.
Those are the kind that are exceedingly hard to fact check by a moderator without it turning into an argument about interpretation or emphasis.
I don't mind those kinds of answers so much (I don't love them, but a format like this is always going to have those) but I do think the moderators should have been better with follow up questions when she skated away from ever actually answering.

 

[WyattEarp]

I didn't realize that preparing is cheating.

"Failure to prepare is preparing for failure." That was validated last night.

Again you're taking posts out of the context of the thread.

As far as the Twitterati claiming there is an ABC whistleblower coming forward to declare Kamala being fed the questions, I'll just wait for this whistleblower to surface. Unfortunately, fucking around about debate cheating is only believable because it happened in 2016.

Regardless, the questions aren't really all that surprising. The candidates probably have heard them all several times in their debate prep.

 

[Frankfooter]

here i agree with you. Like i wrote the problem is i do not believe on PP and conservator fixing anything. We need to let much fewer immigrants but mostly start building government based housing for the masses. Without a roof for all anything else will go to shit. Some will turn to violence, drug, fall into mental problems... The basic need of eating and having a roof must be available for all.

The libs did do a massive cutback on temporary foreign workers and international students. Universities say international students are down 45% this year.
Timmies and other corporations have been abusing the new rules for workers as well.

 

[Frankfooter]

I'm ok with gov't providing some housing but the private developers should be driving the construction of new dwellings. Unfortunately the environment for that in Canada is less than optimal.

The only housing built lately in Ontario has been micro condos that investors were favouring until interest rates went up.
Housing starts are way down under DoFo even with all the gifts he's been giving them.

DoFo favoured developers who favour luxury housing for profit over starter homes, rentals and family affordable condos and townhouses.

 

[Big Rig]

Now that I've listened to more of it, it is clear she was very good at not answering questions when she didn't want to and going with these sort of "technically correct but misleading" or just "really needs more context" kind of answers.
Those are the kind that are exceedingly hard to fact check by a moderator without it turning into an argument about interpretation or emphasis.
I don't mind those kinds of answers so much (I don't love them, but a format like this is always going to have those) but I do think the moderators should have been better with follow up questions when she skated away from ever actually answering.

That is why she has not done interviews as she was wisely preparing scripted answers

When Harris debated before 2020 she was not nearly as good

I hate that tatic but it is all part of politics, clearly Trump should of done the same but I suspect he surrounded himself with ass kissers and conspiracy theorists who told him cat eating immigrants was a good one.

Even better than windmills cause cancer .

Or climate change is a Chinese hoax

Or the bullet was deflected by divine intervention (not his exact words)

Or Harris is a Marist commie

Or the white house attackers were infiltrated by the left (he stopped saying that one)

Or all illegals are rapists and drug dealers

Or covid is no worse than the flu (of course he denies saying it)

Or the world respected his strenght when he was in office

 

[Valcazar]

As far as the Twitterati claiming there is an ABC whistleblower coming forward to declare Kamala being fed the questions, I'll just wait for this whistleblower to surface.

The only reasonable response.

Regardless, the questions aren't really all that surprising. The candidates probably have heard them all several times in their debate prep.

Not knowing the basic outlines of questions would be ridiculous.
A journalist might sometimes come at you in an unexpected direction, but one of the whole points of debate prep is to practice the questions you pretty much know you're going to get.

 

[Valcazar]

That is why she has not done interviews as she was wisely preparing scripted answers

I don't think we can assume that.
Taking over and launching a campaign on short notice is a lot of work and I don't think she's been wrong that communicating directly through social media and speeches was better for getting her message out than indulging the white house press.

Did that necessary launch work include getting her scripted answers ready for obvious legacy media questions?
It's possible.
But I don't think we can simply say it was just that.

When Harris debated before 2020 she was not nearly as good

She was solid against Pence in 2020.
The Democratic primary debates were different with the multi-person format.

That said, I do think she was better here - this was an impressive performance.
But it was also a performance tailored to fuck up Trump.
I don't know if the strategy of "dangle some bait and let the other guy implode because he can't resist taking it" is one that she ever had before so we don't know if she was capable of it in 2020.