• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

First Debate - Your thoughts?

Acim

Revelation all the time
Conservatives only. I put this in this sub forum because I imagine it to be partisan swipes galore if in the North American Politics sub forum. I'm mostly interested in hearing from fellow conservatives what you thought of this debate.

I'll go first:
- I don't see a clear winner, and thought they both had good points and not so good points. I knew that was likely going in.
- Positive spin: Trump had control of the discussion. There were times I found him addressing the issues more squarely than Hillary.
- Negative spin: Trump's insistance on interrupting I found distasteful. They both did it (interrupted the other), but he did it more. There were times where he was so defensive he was unable to address the question from the moderator (Lester).
- Given the build up, I thought it delivered. The candidates went after each other, and yet it wasn't overly harsh, which I thought it might be. IMO, Hillary made it more personal than Trump, but Trump was no choir boy in his attacks on her/her experience.
- I thought the moderator did a very good job. I'm glad he didn't engage in fact checking and I recall that only coming up once between him and Trump.
 

Perditus

へびつかい座
We are in big trouble. Trump still doesn't give specifics regarding his solutions on a variety of issues.

It would be nice to hear the actual meat and potatoes of how he's going to grow jobs or deal with domestic security.

I do like his emphasis on addressing the repair of our infrastructure. We should end foreign aid and divert it for this purpose.
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
- Positive spin: Trump had control of the discussion. There were times I found him addressing the issues more squarely than Hillary.
When was that?
One of the things I noticed was how often he didn't answer the question at all. The moderator kept trying to get him to answer the question "How will you get those jobs back?" It's one of his big campaign promises. He refused to address it. He kept dodging.

Frankly, I think Hillary cleaned his clock. She stayed on the subjects and delivered answers, while Trump fumed and bragged but never said anything important.
Tom
 

MD

qualiaphile
I think Trump had some valid points. The inner cities are horribly unsafe. The economy is declining. The Chinese are racing ahead. Companies are leaving. Michigan, Ohio and other former manufacturing powerhouses are becoming wastelands. Hilary's option about investing in infrastructure to create jobs was stupid. Investing in infrastructure is necessary, but investments can only occur through economic growth. The debt is insane.

Trump was very childish and to be honest I don't trust him. He was a bully. He's not an intellectual with an extensive background in intelligence, economics or the military. He's not highly educated, he was using words like 'bigly'. And in the end he is a rich man who will end up becoming richer if he wins or loses. I don't think he truly cares about the American people. He is pandering to white males, the demographic crisis they face and is using unnecessary fear to gain votes.

America needs a Right wing secular intellectual, the Europeans and Russians have leaders like these. The fact that the American Right cannot produce such a candidate leads me to believe the whole thing is a sham and that the true masters of the USA are corporate elites.
 

Acim

Revelation all the time
When was that?

The first segment or two. Not sure if it's on YouTube yet, but if we could link to it, I'd be glad to bring it in for reference. She took the first question (and had first dibs) and changed it to "the central question of this debate is...."
That had me sit up and take notice, and for a good 20 minutes I found him squarely addressing questions or doing better job than her. As the debate went on, it flipped but mostly because he was a bit rattled, playing defense.

One of the things I noticed was how often he didn't answer the question at all.

I find that assertion non-credible.

The moderator kept trying to get him to answer the question "How will you get those jobs back?" It's one of his big campaign promises. He refused to address it. He kept dodging.

On that one he did dodge, but that type of thing is in my observations of debates routinely dodged. He addressed it by saying that cutting corporate taxes would make it so it's hard for them to leave. He 'answered' the question by saying under his leadership they wouldn't leave. So, I agree he didn't answer that one squarely.

Frankly, I think Hillary cleaned his clock. She stayed on the subjects and delivered answers, while Trump fumed and bragged but never said anything important.
Tom

That's fine if you think that. I very much disagree. I honestly don't think she answered much at all and is point I said above. Politicians give same old responses all the time to virtually the same questions. It's some variation of, "we have to understand the problem, and then work together toward a solution. We have the capability, but under my leadership, we will get this done."
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
America needs a Right wing secular intellectual, the Europeans and Russians have leaders like these.
We used to have them.
But the TeaParty and Fox drove them out of the party. When a Republican tried to put the country ahead of the party s/he was branded a RINO.
Tom
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
The first segment or two. Not sure if it's on YouTube yet, but if we could link to it, I'd be glad to bring it in for reference.
I hate video. I want to find a transcript with words I can cut and paste.
I did not hear anything nearly as concrete as Clinton's answers to nearly everything. You may not like the answers. But they were there. About the closest Trump came was a huge tax cut. Trumped Up Trickle Down seems like a good way to describe that. It's what Bush did and what we got was the Republican Recession of 2008.
Tom
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
Two things I remember that could easily be fact checked.
One is that he claimed to be vehemently against the Iraqi invasion. There was video at the time and I am sure lots of it is available.
Two, he said "stop and frisk" dramatically lowered murder rates in NYC. Clinton pointed out that not only was it deemed unconstitutional, but that murder rates continued to decline after it stopped and the new mayor wouldn't defend it. Trump said that it didn't. Either the murder rates continued to decline or they didn't and that information can't be hard to find.
Tom
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
Correction....
Bush did not cause the recession.
It was the result of a combination of things.....
- Real estate bubble created by bi-partisan supported subsidies over many decades.
- The economic crash beginning on 9.11.01, which led to home mortgage defaults, which led to the 2008 debacle.
- Fed policy which prohibited the market from properly responding to the 2001 crash.
This includes....
Fed mortgage corporations (eg, Fannie Mae) refusing to renegotiate loans with under water borrowers.
IRS & lender regulatory policies which preferred borrower bankruptcy to renegotiation.
I know you believe that. I don't understand why, but I know that you do.
Banking deregulation caused the real estate crash and the tax cuts freed up capital to invest overseas which caused the economy to collapse.
Tom
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Note:
I have once again accidentally posted in a restricted forum which is not my own.
I apologize, & have deleted the offending posts.
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
Another plan Trump mentioned for regaining jobs was making taxes on foreign goods more "fair" or something. He mentioned Mexico having a VAT. What can he mean but a tariff?
Tom
 

Mindmaster

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
I think this debate helped no one, but if I was going to say who's the net winner then I'd say Trump.

1) She was not asked a single challenging question. This made her look stupid, not knowledgeable. She had no good answer regarding her expansive time in the office and why she didn't improve anything in that time. ISIS, George Soros connections, deleted emails, NAFTA/TTP, etc... Covering up Bill's sex scandals and tormenting the women? Clinton Foundation watering down AIDS medications, and keeping 95% of the donations themselves? Cripes, there is a lot of stuff. More than I can even remember.

2) The moderation (#1) was extremely biased and it was apparent. The specific disclosure of no one seeing any questions, and Hillary constantly looking down at a piece of paper put it all into question.

3) Trump did good for about the first half because they were talking about issues, but the second half stalled. It didn't hurt him though, it's just the questioning was irrelevant/

4) Trump was being too nice, and should have challenged the moderator on irrelevant questions. His tax returns, some case in '72 class action, and 5 of 500 companies that are bankrupts aren't relevant. He's right on his income disclosure, and you could have figured out what his net worth was to some degree via is campaign financials. Whether he had 5 million a year, or 600 most Americans would feel he's rich enough to say he is rich, lol.

The net is win because:

Trump is dominating the battleground states, and she needs to make up ground not him. She is seriously sucking out over there and those states are the election, plain and simple. But, informally... she's don't doing well in my home state of Illinois with non-minorities, and she's about 50/50 with them. If she loses Illinois she's done, this state tends to vote the winner.
 

Mindmaster

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Another plan Trump mentioned for regaining jobs was making taxes on foreign goods more "fair" or something. He mentioned Mexico having a VAT. What can he mean but a tariff?
Tom

Tariffs are for keeping fair trade not limiting it. It keeps someone who can make your widget for $0.01 from completely destroying your economy. It also prohibits them from doing currency manipulation. It also provides no incentive to migrate jobs out of your country.
 

MD

qualiaphile
We used to have them.
But the TeaParty and Fox drove them out of the party. When a Republican tried to put the country ahead of the party s/he was branded a RINO.
Tom

I think the U.S. needs them back, and fast. Extreme liberalism destroys civilizations, Europe is gone it's far too weak of a continent and culture to do anything but succumb to a foreign power.

With CRISPR, things are going to move fast. We will see genetically engineered babies in the next 10-20 years, and if you're having a culture where SJWs complain about safe space vs a culture which creates super soldiers...well you know what happens.
 
Last edited:

Acim

Revelation all the time
When was that?
One of the things I noticed was how often he didn't answer the question at all. The moderator kept trying to get him to answer the question "How will you get those jobs back?" It's one of his big campaign promises. He refused to address it. He kept dodging.

Do you still dispute that Trump was (seen by many as) controlling first part of the debate, providing more direct answers than Hillary.

Here is transcript from about the first 10 minutes to help make the case stronger:

Beginning with you, Secretary Clinton, why are you a better choice than your opponent to create the kinds of jobs that will put more money into the pockets of American works?

CLINTON: Well, thank you, Lester, and thanks to Hofstra for hosting us.

The central question in this election is really what kind of country we want to be and what kind of future we’ll build together. Today is my granddaughter’s second birthday, so I think about this a lot. First, we have to build an economy that works for everyone, not just those at the top. That means we need new jobs, good jobs, with rising incomes.

I want us to invest in you. I want us to invest in your future. That means jobs in infrastructure, in advanced manufacturing, innovation and technology, clean, renewable energy, and small business, because most of the new jobs will come from small business. We also have to make the economy fairer. That starts with raising the national minimum wage and also guarantee, finally, equal pay for women’s work.

CLINTON: I also want to see more companies do profit-sharing. If you help create the profits, you should be able to share in them, not just the executives at the top.

And I want us to do more to support people who are struggling to balance family and work. I’ve heard from so many of you about the difficult choices you face and the stresses that you’re under. So let’s have paid family leave, earned sick days. Let’s be sure we have affordable child care and debt-free college.

How are we going to do it? We’re going to do it by having the wealthy pay their fair share and close the corporate loopholes.

Finally, we tonight are on the stage together, Donald Trump and I. Donald, it’s good to be with you. We’re going to have a debate where we are talking about the important issues facing our country. You have to judge us, who can shoulder the immense, awesome responsibilities of the presidency, who can put into action the plans that will make your life better. I hope that I will be able to earn your vote on November 8th.

HOLT: Secretary Clinton, thank you.

Mr. Trump, the same question to you. It’s about putting money — more money into the pockets of American workers. You have up to two minutes.

TRUMP: Thank you, Lester. Our jobs are fleeing the country. They’re going to Mexico. They’re going to many other countries. You look at what China is doing to our country in terms of making our product. They’re devaluing their currency, and there’s nobody in our government to fight them. And we have a very good fight. And we have a winning fight. Because they’re using our country as a piggy bank to rebuild China, and many other countries are doing the same thing.

So we’re losing our good jobs, so many of them. When you look at what’s happening in Mexico, a friend of mine who builds plants said it’s the eighth wonder of the world. They’re building some of the biggest plants anywhere in the world, some of the most sophisticated, some of the best plants. With the United States, as he said, not so much.

So Ford is leaving. You see that, their small car division leaving. Thousands of jobs leaving Michigan, leaving Ohio. They’re all leaving. And we can’t allow it to happen anymore. As far as child care is concerned and so many other things, I think Hillary and I agree on that. We probably disagree a little bit as to numbers and amounts and what we’re going to do, but perhaps we’ll be talking about that later.

But we have to stop our jobs from being stolen from us. We have to stop our companies from leaving the United States and, with it, firing all of their people. All you have to do is take a look at Carrier air conditioning in Indianapolis. They left — fired 1,400 people. They’re going to Mexico. So many hundreds and hundreds of companies are doing this.

TRUMP: We cannot let it happen. Under my plan, I’ll be reducing taxes tremendously, from 35 percent to 15 percent for companies, small and big businesses. That’s going to be a job creator like we haven’t seen since Ronald Reagan. It’s going to be a beautiful thing to watch.

Companies will come. They will build. They will expand. New companies will start. And I look very, very much forward to doing it. We have to renegotiate our trade deals, and we have to stop these countries from stealing our companies and our jobs.

HOLT: Secretary Clinton, would you like to respond?

CLINTON: Well, I think that trade is an important issue. Of course, we are 5 percent of the world’s population; we have to trade with the other 95 percent. And we need to have smart, fair trade deals.

We also, though, need to have a tax system that rewards work and not just financial transactions. And the kind of plan that Donald has put forth would be trickle-down economics all over again. In fact, it would be the most extreme version, the biggest tax cuts for the top percent of the people in this country than we’ve ever had.

I call it trumped-up trickle-down, because that’s exactly what it would be. That is not how we grow the economy.

We just have a different view about what’s best for growing the economy, how we make investments that will actually produce jobs and rising incomes.

I think we come at it from somewhat different perspectives. I understand that. You know, Donald was very fortunate in his life, and that’s all to his benefit. He started his business with $14 million, borrowed from his father, and he really believes that the more you help wealthy people, the better off we’ll be and that everything will work out from there.

I don’t buy that. I have a different experience. My father was a small-businessman. He worked really hard. He printed drapery fabrics on long tables, where he pulled out those fabrics and he went down with a silkscreen and dumped the paint in and took the squeegee and kept going.

And so what I believe is the more we can do for the middle class, the more we can invest in you, your education, your skills, your future, the better we will be off and the better we’ll grow. That’s the kind of economy I want us to see again.

HOLT: Let me follow up with Mr. Trump, if you can. You’ve talked about creating 25 million jobs, and you’ve promised to bring back millions of jobs for Americans. How are you going to bring back the industries that have left this country for cheaper labor overseas? How, specifically, are you going to tell American manufacturers that you have to come back?

TRUMP: Well, for one thing — and before we start on that — my father gave me a very small loan in 1975, and I built it into a company that’s worth many, many billions of dollars, with some of the greatest assets in the world, and I say that only because that’s the kind of thinking that our country needs.

Our country’s in deep trouble. We don’t know what we’re doing when it comes to devaluations and all of these countries all over the world, especially China. They’re the best, the best ever at it. What they’re doing to us is a very, very sad thing.

So we have to do that. We have to renegotiate our trade deals. And, Lester, they’re taking our jobs, they’re giving incentives, they’re doing things that, frankly, we don’t do.

Let me give you the example of Mexico. They have a VAT tax. We’re on a different system. When we sell into Mexico, there’s a tax. When they sell in — automatic, 16 percent, approximately. When they sell into us, there’s no tax. It’s a defective agreement. It’s been defective for a long time, many years, but the politicians haven’t done anything about it.

Now, in all fairness to Secretary Clinton — yes, is that OK? Good. I want you to be very happy. It’s very important to me.

But in all fairness to Secretary Clinton, when she started talking about this, it was really very recently. She’s been doing this for 30 years. And why hasn’t she made the agreements better? The NAFTA agreement is defective. Just because of the tax and many other reasons, but just because of the fact...

HOLT: Let me interrupt just a moment, but...

TRUMP: Secretary Clinton and others, politicians, should have been doing this for years, not right now, because of the fact that we’ve created a movement. They should have been doing this for years. What’s happened to our jobs and our country and our economy generally is — look, we owe $20 trillion. We cannot do it any longer, Lester.

HOLT: Back to the question, though. How do you bring back — specifically bring back jobs, American manufacturers? How do you make them bring the jobs back?

TRUMP: Well, the first thing you do is don’t let the jobs leave. The companies are leaving. I could name, I mean, there are thousands of them. They’re leaving, and they’re leaving in bigger numbers than ever.

And what you do is you say, fine, you want to go to Mexico or some other country, good luck. We wish you a lot of luck. But if you think you’re going to make your air conditioners or your cars or your cookies or whatever you make and bring them into our country without a tax, you’re wrong.

And once you say you’re going to have to tax them coming in, and our politicians never do this, because they have special interests and the special interests want those companies to leave, because in many cases, they own the companies. So what I’m saying is, we can stop them from leaving. We have to stop them from leaving. And that’s a big, big factor.
 

1137

Here until I storm off again
Premium Member
Do you still dispute that Trump was (seen by many as) controlling first part of the debate, providing more direct answers than Hillary.

Here is transcript from about the first 10 minutes to help make the case stronger:

I'm sorry to butt in here, but I'm curious if you're posting this as evidence that trump was doing well early on? Just trying to follow your guys conversation, sorry!
 

Acim

Revelation all the time
I'm sorry to butt in here, but I'm curious if you're posting this as evidence that trump was doing well early on? Just trying to follow your guys conversation, sorry!

Evidence that, as stated in OP, Trump had control of the discussion (early on) and him addressing the issues more squarely than Hillary.

If you are conservative, no problem butting into the discussion.
 

1137

Here until I storm off again
Premium Member
Evidence that, as stated in OP, Trump had control of the discussion (early on) and him addressing the issues more squarely than Hillary.

If you are conservative, no problem butting into the discussion.

Not conservative, just interested in all sides. I'll go back to lurking!
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
If you are conservative, no problem butting into the discussion.
I'm still thinking through a response to your post that quoted me. Clearly we had different expectations and subjective opinions about the outcome.
But I gotta ask. Who is a conservative? What does that word even mean in the current political landscape? How in the hell did a queer atheist straight ticket Democrat become too conservative to post in the Liberal Only DIR, and opine freely in the Conservative Only DIR?

What is wrong with this picture?
Tom
 

jeager106

Learning more about Jehovah.
Premium Member
I'm still thinking through a response to your post that quoted me. Clearly we had different expectations and subjective opinions about the outcome.
But I gotta ask. Who is a conservative? What does that word even mean in the current political landscape? How in the hell did a queer atheist straight ticket Democrat become too conservative to post in the Liberal Only DIR, and opine freely in the Conservative Only DIR?

What is wrong with this picture?
Tom


Great questions in that post!
 
Top