I watched it. 🤦♀️ What a chaotic hour and a half! Poor Chris Wallace.
I've heard people calling it a tie. I can see why they are saying that, because neither candidate got utterly clobbered. They each held their own, each sticking to their own sides' alternative sets of facts.
Trump interrupted more.
I think Biden won the debate, and I'll tell you why. Biden looked more calm--more Presidential.
His criticisms about Trump not having proposed a comprehensive alternative to Obamacare (the Affordable Care Act) landed. He said, "he doesn't know how to do that," when Trump claimed he would replace it with a better plan. Later, he said calmly: "He doesn't know what he's doing."
Those criticisms landed because the have the ring of truth--Trump does kind of always give off the feeling that he's winging it.
Trump came off as more rattled and desperate, and yet he still somehow matched Biden's soft voice and lack of energy, in a bad way. At some points I got the feeling that both of them were just full of it. Feigning outrage, but really just playing the game.
Trump's criticism of the Green New Deal landed. He ridiculed the idea of tearing a bunch of buildings down just to rebuild them again, and said it was not feasible to spend that kind of money.
Biden had a good comeback, though. He said to look how much we already spend on fires, floods, seawalls, and the like.
Trump brought up
a list of other countries who pollute and objected to how the Paris Climate Accord made American businesses less competitive by imposing different restrictions on than on those other countries.
Biden argued that renewable energy is the future, and that it is more competitive for America to be investing in that than growing by using fossil fuels.
Anyway, I think Trump looked a little desperate (and a little conspiracy theory-ish), but he held his own, and Biden won because he sounded calm and presidential.
I've heard people calling it a tie. I can see why they are saying that, because neither candidate got utterly clobbered. They each held their own, each sticking to their own sides' alternative sets of facts.
Trump interrupted more.
I think Biden won the debate, and I'll tell you why. Biden looked more calm--more Presidential.
His criticisms about Trump not having proposed a comprehensive alternative to Obamacare (the Affordable Care Act) landed. He said, "he doesn't know how to do that," when Trump claimed he would replace it with a better plan. Later, he said calmly: "He doesn't know what he's doing."
Those criticisms landed because the have the ring of truth--Trump does kind of always give off the feeling that he's winging it.
Trump came off as more rattled and desperate, and yet he still somehow matched Biden's soft voice and lack of energy, in a bad way. At some points I got the feeling that both of them were just full of it. Feigning outrage, but really just playing the game.
Trump's criticism of the Green New Deal landed. He ridiculed the idea of tearing a bunch of buildings down just to rebuild them again, and said it was not feasible to spend that kind of money.
Biden had a good comeback, though. He said to look how much we already spend on fires, floods, seawalls, and the like.
Trump brought up
a list of other countries who pollute and objected to how the Paris Climate Accord made American businesses less competitive by imposing different restrictions on than on those other countries.
Biden argued that renewable energy is the future, and that it is more competitive for America to be investing in that than growing by using fossil fuels.
Anyway, I think Trump looked a little desperate (and a little conspiracy theory-ish), but he held his own, and Biden won because he sounded calm and presidential.
I felt Trump's criticism of the Green New Deal was utterly foolish. He lied a great deal about what the GND plan actually involves, making his criticisms of a straw man. Furthermore, Biden does not endorse the Green New Deal and has his own aggressive climate change plan, make Trump going after fake stipulations in the GND doubly straw-manish -- he wasn't even talking about Biden's actual plan.
This seems like a great time to remind people to double check their voter registration: https://iwillvote.com/
This seems like a great time to remind people to double check their voter registration: https://iwillvote.com/
I am still extremely upset that Trump did not denounce white supremacists during the debate, but actually went so far to tell the Proud Boys to "stand back and stand by". This was met with great enthusiasm from the Proud Boys who have declared themselves ready to kill for Trump.
I am appalled, to say the least, that this seems to not be a big issue or talking point when discussing the debate. This is quite significant and Trump loses any smidgen of credibility he ever had in this debate just for this alone.
I am appalled, to say the least, that this seems to not be a big issue or talking point when discussing the debate. This is quite significant and Trump loses any smidgen of credibility he ever had in this debate just for this alone.
Ah! It's nice to see some other people watched the debate.
@Kim
That's true -- Trump uses the "firehose of lies" propaganda method, in which he produces so many untrue or only partially true statements that it's impossible for fact-checkers or commentators to even keep up without losing their audiences attention. This is one of those cases. I've heard someone put it this way: "even his lies tell lies."
You're right, according to CNN, Biden doesn't endorse the Green New Deal.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/30/politics/joe-biden-green-new-deal-fact-check/index.html
And you're right, the deal that Trump is arguing against isn't the real Green New Deal, it's a figment of his imagination and a straw man for him to knock down. Or, as he would call it, "truthful hyperbole." There's an example of lies within lies because his "truthful hyperbole" isn't, in fact, truthful!
One of the silliest straw man claims he has made is that the Green New Deal would ban cows.
Which, of course, is utter nonsense.
Fact check on that here:
https://www.statesman.com/news/20200929/fact-check-does-green-new-deal-ban-cows
@Sanne:
Ah yes! "Stand by."
I've been hearing a lot about that moment since the debate.
When I watched the debate itself I didn't even hear the words "stand by," I only heard him say "sure, sure..." and then, "Proud Boys, stand back..."
I was surprised then, when I started listening to post-debate coverage that this particular moment became such a crucial moment of the debate. Then when the pundits played the clip back again, then I did hear the "stand back and stand by."
Apparently I wasn't the only one who heard what he said differently (I didn't hear him refusing to condemn white supremacy). Literally, I heard him condemn it--at least that's what I believed he had done--admittedly with a voice full of sarcasm as if he thought the question was ridiculous. A lot of other people, though, heard his answer as just the opposite.
It wasn't just me, because Snopes rated the claim:
"Did Trump ‘Refuse to Condemn’ White Supremacists at Debate?"
...as a "Mixture" of true and false. I don't know if y'all consider Snopes a credible fact-checking source, but that's one example that at least shows that there's some disagreement.
They say the trouble centers around the word "refuse," because after agreeing to comdemn it, he then didn't condemn it in the specific words that they were asking for, but he didn't technically "refuse" to, like the talking point accuses.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-condemn-white-supremacists/
It helps to go to the transcript to see what was actually said to fully understand why two intelligent, fair-minded people could hear different messages:
Here it is:
Wallace: [Addressing Trump] …You have repeatedly criticized the vice president [Biden] for not calling out Antifa and other left-wing extremist groups —
Trump: That’s right
Wallace: — but are you willing, tonight, to condemn white supremacist and militia groups —
Trump: Sure
Wallace: — and to say that they need to stand down and not add to the violence in a number of these cities, as we saw in Kenosha, and as we’ve seen in Portland?
Trump: Sure, I’m willing to do that but —
Wallace: — Are you prepared to specifically —
Biden: Well do it
Wallace: Go ahead then.
Trump: — I would say, I would say almost everything I see is from the left wing, not from the right wing —
Wallace: So what do you, what are you saying?
Trump: I’m willing to do anything, I want to see peace —
Wallace: Then do it, Sir —
Biden: Say it. Do it. Say it.
Trump: Do you want to call them, what do you want to call them? Give me name, give me a name, go ahead —
Wallace: White supremacists and right-wing —
Trump: Who do you want me to condemn? Who?
Biden: The Proud Boys
Wallace: White supremacists and right-wing militias
Trump: The Proud Boys? Stand back and stand by, but I’ll tell you what, I’ll tell you what, somebody’s got to do something about Antifa and the Left, because this is not a right-wing problem.
Now bear in mind, this may be yet another propaganda technique, called, I believe, "equivocating?" And maybe I'm naive, but I...didn't hear a refusal to condemn white supremacy there, I heard just the opposite...
...until later when I read that The Proud Boys made a logo or seal or something featuring the words "stand back and stand by," as if they had taken the president's fumbled-sounding words as some kind of command....as if they were some kind of members of a "secret military" that Trump commands. 🙄
To me, the diabolical genuis thing that happened in that exchange was Chris Wallace and Biden convincing Trump to speak directly to "white supremacist militias," and in military language ("stand down"), thus cleverly manuvering him into literally sounding like he DOES command them. Even if he had told them to "stand down," as the moderator asked, he would look like he was giving white supremacist militias--military commands. What could sound more terrifying than that?
Come to think of it, Trump might have been trying to set Biden up in exactly the same way by repeatedly asking him to call off "antifa" violence. Biden is smart enough not to fall into a trap like that, however. He's been in politics so long that he sees things like that coming.
That's my take on it. However, I want to add a disclaimer here, because everyone I have talked to about this heard it the way that you heard it.
My mom's physical therapist was just here and we were talking about it. His take on it is that Trump didn't directly answer the question because "he doesn't want to lose those voters," because "he knows if he loses those people, he's done." He said Trump knew what he was doing when he said "stand by," because he's Commander-in-Chief, and it's military language.
So... 🤷♀️ It's possible that I live in imaginary happy fairy land where I just believe people when they say they're not racist. And I can acknowledge that maybe there's something there in his answer that I'm not seeing.
Fortunately, he tried to clarify it afterwards and finally used the words "stand down," like the moderator had asked him to (see article). However, with some of these militia groups actually believing he was talking to them through the TV and... legitimizing them 🙄...I guess the damage is already done, whatever his intention actually is.
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/518992-trump-says-proud-boys-should-stand-down-after-backlash-to-debate
I am appalled, to say the least, that this seems to not be a big issue or talking point when discussing the debate.
To this, I say, take heart--it IS a big issue and a HUGE talking point when discussing the debate. In fact, it's made headlines on all the news sites, from CNN to Fox (which leans right-wing). One of Trump's most influential supporters, a guy named Scott Adams, literally said that Trump had lost his vote over that, and in his podcast showed how easy it is to condemn white supremacists in one simple, direct sentence.
Also, #condemnwhitesupremachallenge (or something along those lines) is trending on Facebook, where Americans also put a statement up condemning white supremacy... basically modeling what we want to see a president of the United States do. It has become a central talking point.
As for why I didn't mention it in my analysis, well, I literally heard him say "sure, sure," and then tell some group I had never heard of to "stand back," and I didn't think much of that. I just wasn't following any live tweets of the show or anything, so I didn't dream that some crazy militia people would think that the president was personally asking them to mobilize (they still seem utterly delusional to me for reading that into "stand back and stand by" after Chris Wallace had asked Trump to say "stand down," and knowing that it was Biden, and not Trump, who threw their name out there).
Then later I go online and...wow. Scott Adams is no longer voting for him and people are afraid for their lives.
I guess one thing that could help is if the FBI investigated the group itself.
The best way to end the insanity is for Biden to win in a landslide, so that there is no doubt and no court challenges that could lead to a period of uncertainty. If it's a close vote, then you're going to have both sides screaming about a "stolen election." The right and left will both call for protests and that would be disaster waiting to happen.
So yeah, again with Vote.
Stimulating discussion. 🤯
@Kim
That's true -- Trump uses the "firehose of lies" propaganda method, in which he produces so many untrue or only partially true statements that it's impossible for fact-checkers or commentators to even keep up without losing their audiences attention. This is one of those cases. I've heard someone put it this way: "even his lies tell lies."
You're right, according to CNN, Biden doesn't endorse the Green New Deal.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/30/politics/joe-biden-green-new-deal-fact-check/index.html
And you're right, the deal that Trump is arguing against isn't the real Green New Deal, it's a figment of his imagination and a straw man for him to knock down. Or, as he would call it, "truthful hyperbole." There's an example of lies within lies because his "truthful hyperbole" isn't, in fact, truthful!
One of the silliest straw man claims he has made is that the Green New Deal would ban cows.
Which, of course, is utter nonsense.
Fact check on that here:
https://www.statesman.com/news/20200929/fact-check-does-green-new-deal-ban-cows
@Sanne:
Ah yes! "Stand by."
I've been hearing a lot about that moment since the debate.
When I watched the debate itself I didn't even hear the words "stand by," I only heard him say "sure, sure..." and then, "Proud Boys, stand back..."
I was surprised then, when I started listening to post-debate coverage that this particular moment became such a crucial moment of the debate. Then when the pundits played the clip back again, then I did hear the "stand back and stand by."
Apparently I wasn't the only one who heard what he said differently (I didn't hear him refusing to condemn white supremacy). Literally, I heard him condemn it--at least that's what I believed he had done--admittedly with a voice full of sarcasm as if he thought the question was ridiculous. A lot of other people, though, heard his answer as just the opposite.
It wasn't just me, because Snopes rated the claim:
"Did Trump ‘Refuse to Condemn’ White Supremacists at Debate?"
...as a "Mixture" of true and false. I don't know if y'all consider Snopes a credible fact-checking source, but that's one example that at least shows that there's some disagreement.
They say the trouble centers around the word "refuse," because after agreeing to comdemn it, he then didn't condemn it in the specific words that they were asking for, but he didn't technically "refuse" to, like the talking point accuses.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-condemn-white-supremacists/
It helps to go to the transcript to see what was actually said to fully understand why two intelligent, fair-minded people could hear different messages:
Here it is:
Wallace: [Addressing Trump] …You have repeatedly criticized the vice president [Biden] for not calling out Antifa and other left-wing extremist groups —
Trump: That’s right
Wallace: — but are you willing, tonight, to condemn white supremacist and militia groups —
Trump: Sure
Wallace: — and to say that they need to stand down and not add to the violence in a number of these cities, as we saw in Kenosha, and as we’ve seen in Portland?
Trump: Sure, I’m willing to do that but —
Wallace: — Are you prepared to specifically —
Biden: Well do it
Wallace: Go ahead then.
Trump: — I would say, I would say almost everything I see is from the left wing, not from the right wing —
Wallace: So what do you, what are you saying?
Trump: I’m willing to do anything, I want to see peace —
Wallace: Then do it, Sir —
Biden: Say it. Do it. Say it.
Trump: Do you want to call them, what do you want to call them? Give me name, give me a name, go ahead —
Wallace: White supremacists and right-wing —
Trump: Who do you want me to condemn? Who?
Biden: The Proud Boys
Wallace: White supremacists and right-wing militias
Trump: The Proud Boys? Stand back and stand by, but I’ll tell you what, I’ll tell you what, somebody’s got to do something about Antifa and the Left, because this is not a right-wing problem.
Now bear in mind, this may be yet another propaganda technique, called, I believe, "equivocating?" And maybe I'm naive, but I...didn't hear a refusal to condemn white supremacy there, I heard just the opposite...
...until later when I read that The Proud Boys made a logo or seal or something featuring the words "stand back and stand by," as if they had taken the president's fumbled-sounding words as some kind of command....as if they were some kind of members of a "secret military" that Trump commands. 🙄
To me, the diabolical genuis thing that happened in that exchange was Chris Wallace and Biden convincing Trump to speak directly to "white supremacist militias," and in military language ("stand down"), thus cleverly manuvering him into literally sounding like he DOES command them. Even if he had told them to "stand down," as the moderator asked, he would look like he was giving white supremacist militias--military commands. What could sound more terrifying than that?
Come to think of it, Trump might have been trying to set Biden up in exactly the same way by repeatedly asking him to call off "antifa" violence. Biden is smart enough not to fall into a trap like that, however. He's been in politics so long that he sees things like that coming.
That's my take on it. However, I want to add a disclaimer here, because everyone I have talked to about this heard it the way that you heard it.
My mom's physical therapist was just here and we were talking about it. His take on it is that Trump didn't directly answer the question because "he doesn't want to lose those voters," because "he knows if he loses those people, he's done." He said Trump knew what he was doing when he said "stand by," because he's Commander-in-Chief, and it's military language.
So... 🤷♀️ It's possible that I live in imaginary happy fairy land where I just believe people when they say they're not racist. And I can acknowledge that maybe there's something there in his answer that I'm not seeing.
Fortunately, he tried to clarify it afterwards and finally used the words "stand down," like the moderator had asked him to (see article). However, with some of these militia groups actually believing he was talking to them through the TV and... legitimizing them 🙄...I guess the damage is already done, whatever his intention actually is.
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/518992-trump-says-proud-boys-should-stand-down-after-backlash-to-debate
Quote:
I am appalled, to say the least, that this seems to not be a big issue or talking point when discussing the debate.
To this, I say, take heart--it IS a big issue and a HUGE talking point when discussing the debate. In fact, it's made headlines on all the news sites, from CNN to Fox (which leans right-wing). One of Trump's most influential supporters, a guy named Scott Adams, literally said that Trump had lost his vote over that, and in his podcast showed how easy it is to condemn white supremacists in one simple, direct sentence.
Also, #condemnwhitesupremachallenge (or something along those lines) is trending on Facebook, where Americans also put a statement up condemning white supremacy... basically modeling what we want to see a president of the United States do. It has become a central talking point.
As for why I didn't mention it in my analysis, well, I literally heard him say "sure, sure," and then tell some group I had never heard of to "stand back," and I didn't think much of that. I just wasn't following any live tweets of the show or anything, so I didn't dream that some crazy militia people would think that the president was personally asking them to mobilize (they still seem utterly delusional to me for reading that into "stand back and stand by" after Chris Wallace had asked Trump to say "stand down," and knowing that it was Biden, and not Trump, who threw their name out there).
Then later I go online and...wow. Scott Adams is no longer voting for him and people are afraid for their lives.
I guess one thing that could help is if the FBI investigated the group itself.
The best way to end the insanity is for Biden to win in a landslide, so that there is no doubt and no court challenges that could lead to a period of uncertainty. If it's a close vote, then you're going to have both sides screaming about a "stolen election." The right and left will both call for protests and that would be disaster waiting to happen.
So yeah, again with Vote.
Stimulating discussion. 🤯
Quote:
To me, the diabolical genuis thing that happened in that exchange was Chris Wallace and Biden convincing Trump to speak directly to "white supremacist militias," and in military language ("stand down"), thus cleverly manuvering him into literally sounding like he DOES command them. Even if he had told them to "stand down," as the moderator asked, he would look like he was giving white supremacist militias--military commands. What could sound more terrifying than that?
What's more terrifying than telling people to stand down, is to tell them to stand by, immediately followed by the sentence "somebody’s got to do something about Antifa and the Left".
By dictionary definition, the words 'stand back' and 'stand by' mean to wait and be ready for action. The fact Trump followed these words with a call for action is the most terrifying thing of all. Because, as you said, the Proud Boys took it as an order immediately.
Because it is. Trump is by all definitions racist and a white supremacist. He has a long, painful history of racism, bigotry, and sexual assault. I think it's extremely naive to believe him when he says something to free himself of a negative label, considering we have irrefutable evidence that Trump is a chronic liar and will deny even his own spoken words on a recording as being real and calling it 'fake news'.
Quote:
Fortunately, he tried to clarify it afterwards and finally used the words "stand down," like the moderator had asked him to (see article). However, with some of these militia groups actually believing he was talking to them through the TV and... legitimizing them 🙄...I guess the damage is already done, whatever his intention actually is.
Quote:
I just wasn't following any live tweets of the show or anything, so I didn't dream that some crazy militia people would think that the president was personally asking them to mobilize (they still seem utterly delusional to me for reading that into "stand back and stand by" after Chris Wallace had asked Trump to say "stand down," and knowing that it was Biden, and not Trump, who threw their name out there).
I don't understand this phrasing. 'The Proud Boys believing he was talking to them through the TV"? He literally addressed them, straight up. He was directly talking to them. I don't believe for a second that he made an innocent oopsie considering this is not the first time he has called white supremacists to commit violence for him. He has persistently defended white supremacists and proudly complimented them before, not even limited to the Proud Boys, so I legitimately don't understand where your confidence in believing he could mean well comes from.