Did Donald Trump take a dive last night?

He didn't take dive or elevate himself, all he did was convince onliners majority that he defeated Hillary in the debate.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showth...t-26-2016-**&p=6321243&viewfull=1#post6321243





Apparently he had promised his advisors that he will be nice to Hillary because she is a woman etc.

Politics can make strange bed fellows at times.

ap_16268532077785-e1474807776164.jpg

Strange bed fellows? Only to the...ahemmm....uninitiated. Strange to the appearance of the masses but decidedly unstrange when you know they all work together toward the same goal.

Screenshot-2016-02-16-at-1.02.17-PM.png


That's George Wallace on the right, the most vociferous of opponents to desegregation.
"Wallace was elected governor the first time in 1962, with what was the largest popular vote in state history and with the declaration: "I draw the line in the dust and toss the gauntlet before the feet of tyranny, and I say, segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever."
 
Last edited:
[MENTION=849]jmdrake[/MENTION], it sounds like your expectations were a bit too high. Quite a bit.

 
Last edited:
Donald Trump was on fire last night. He called Hillary out on TPP, Bill's NAFTA, Hillary on her deleted emails, and even got in that Hillary called young black males 'super-predators'. As usual, Hillary often did nothing to respond but laugh and chuckle it off. I don't know if Hillary was unprepared,or over-prepared, but she looked off of her game. I though she would pose a little bit more of a challenge. I think she didn't know how to handle Donald or was too scared to. She couldn't get away from the script, that sounded like it was written by young staffers. She wasn't able to engage Donald dynamically. Trump had said in the past that he wanted to debate Hillary old-fashioned style, head -to-head. Hillary was not prepared for that or was to afraid to go down that route. I think Donald accurately painted Hillary as an establishment, status-quo politicians whose incapable of bringing real change. Hillary tried to paint Donald as a greedy, racist, sexist bigot; and it fell short. I don't see how Donald took a dive, and after watching this debate, I don't see how anyone thought, or still thinks that Donald is a plant only helping Hillary. If anything, Hillary is plant, helping Donald. He pummeled her at the debate.
 
Trump tried to tone it down. Hillary and her team did their homework. They knew how to bait Trump. Amateur politicians often have this problem. They take questions at face value and attempt to answer them, which makes them easy to manipulate and lead around.

Professional politicians dismiss quickly when set-up and change the subject. Really good politicians can turn it around. Being defensive and dwelling on it is a losing strategy, and they trapped Trump like that over and over.

This is the same garbage CNN tried to spew right after the debate last night. Essentially, you all are saying that Donald over-defended himself. That's ridiculous. I think Trump did a decent job defending himself from Hillary's attack. Hillary's refusal to take Donald's bait, made her look weak and corrupt. When he called her on TPP, she looked weak. When he called her on her emails, she looked corrupt.
 
Hillary looked like she was ready to fall asleep during the whole thing. The only time she got fired up was when she was reaching for her rehearsed attack lines, and even then she came off as a totally ineffectual. She basically just repeated the same empty attacks she's been pushing on media ads; and I think Donald did a good job at painting her as a dirty politician who wastes money on attack ads.
 
This is the same garbage CNN tried to spew right after the debate last night. Essentially, you all are saying that Donald over-defended himself. That's ridiculous. I think Trump did a decent job defending himself from Hillary's attack. Hillary's refusal to take Donald's bait, made her look weak and corrupt. When he called her on TPP, she looked weak. When he called her on her emails, she looked corrupt.

No, Trump looked pathetic and his rambling attempts to defend himself were terrible. During the first half of the debate, I thought he was handling himself well. As soon as he got derailed and went on the defense he sounded really stupid. That response about his temperament was one of the most embarrassing moments I've ever seen in a debate.
 
This is the same garbage CNN tried to spew right after the debate last night. Essentially, you all are saying that Donald over-defended himself. That's ridiculous. I think Trump did a decent job defending himself from Hillary's attack. Hillary's refusal to take Donald's bait, made her look weak and corrupt. When he called her on TPP, she looked weak. When he called her on her emails, she looked corrupt.

Most of the audience has no idea WTF is a TPP, and are tired of hearing about the emails. That's the type of stuff that happens when the candidates run campaigns that are devoid of substance.
 
This is the same garbage CNN tried to spew right after the debate last night. Essentially, you all are saying that Donald over-defended himself. That's ridiculous. I think Trump did a decent job defending himself from Hillary's attack. Hillary's refusal to take Donald's bait, made her look weak and corrupt. When he called her on TPP, she looked weak. When he called her on her emails, she looked corrupt.

Calling 'em like I see 'em.

As for Hillary, there is never a single second where she doesn't look corrupt, and every time her lips move a lie comes out.
 
yes. and he looked Presidential. Besides, I don't think Ripping Hillary apart will win him many undecideds, though It would be satisfying for Hillary Haters.

Lol...by Presidential you me pissy and whiney? He interrupted 55 times to her 11 times. It took about 5 minutes at most to get under his skin and she quickly opened it to a gaping wound as he bit on just about every taunt.

He is gonna stew on this till the next debate, and mentioning that he's not going to mention something is mentioning something (plenty of folks pointing that out today), but he is so disconnected from the group of people he needs to win over he'll go in swinging to get that dig in at her because that is what he sees as her flaw. He thinks that will throw her off. GL with that one. The type of women he needs have already been talking about that almost invite of Gennifer Flowers and this morning were trickling out the "mansplaining" going on re:last night's performance by your boy Trumpster.

So...bring it on. I'd love to watch this fool show himself in all his flaming glory. I don't think Trump will watch and learn from the mistakes he made last night. All those online polls will be used to shout down his campaign staff trying to explain to him he needs to get undecideds and that means soccer moms need not to see him as a misogynist with a nasty streak a mile wide. His rebuttal on FOX this morning about Miss Housekeeping...yeah, that was just brilliant. Sure is working the Hispanic vote, much less women, there with that one. He just.cant.help himself.

Oh, and Clinton is going to be burning the crap out of him here in the rust belt with that just business snippet about the crashing housing market and flipping properties. And how's that Trump U thingie doing? Did that even get brought up?
 
Donald Trump seemed to have more weight behind his attacks. Which one of Hillary attacks worked against Donald? As far as I can recall, none of them.
 
This is the same garbage CNN tried to spew right after the debate last night. Essentially, you all are saying that Donald over-defended himself. That's ridiculous. I think Trump did a decent job defending himself from Hillary's attack. Hillary's refusal to take Donald's bait, made her look weak and corrupt. When he called her on TPP, she looked weak. When he called her on her emails, she looked corrupt.

The emails thing has been overused. Trump supporters think it is owning her every time it gets mentioned but to many people it is getting old and he better come up with some new material if he wants to get people's attention. He seems inclined to try and burn her on Bill's failures as his second act. Y'all should encourage him to go there, loudly, and stop pussyfooting around with it....;)
 
If the goal of the debate is to get airtime and control the stage, then Donald accomplished that. I don't agree with Donald on every issue, but he won that debate. Inserting himself at every opportunity makes him look strong. That's what people were looking for in a candidate. They wanted someone who was going to be tough and not let their opponent or the moderators walk all over them. Donald controlled that debate, against both Hillary and Lester.
 
The emails thing has been overused.

The email thing is terrible. Disqualifying. She was SEC of State and she wants to be POTUS? She can't handle classified info. She used her private email to sell her pay to play cards.
 
Donald Trump seemed to have more weight behind his attacks. Which one of Hillary attacks worked against Donald? As far as I can recall, none of them.

Well, you could start with his crowing about those who lost their homes, or how he admitted he doesn't pay taxes yet is bemoaning the state of airports here in the states. Or, well that little issue about Miss Housekeeping which he didn't deny...
 
Are the emails overused as much as Trump's taxes are? Donald took control of his tax release issue, by putting Hillary and Dems on the defensive. They can't talk about his tax returns without having to address her 30+ thousand deleted emails. Talking about Hillarys emails come with alot of baggage, because then you have to go into why her staff not only deleted emails, but bleached servers and hammered cell phones to bits after the House Committee for Oversight and Reform had already asked Hillary's staff to produce them.
 
The email thing is terrible. Disqualifying. She was SEC of State and she wants to be POTUS? She can't handle classified info. She used her private email to sell her pay to play cards.

That may be working for you as an argument. Without being punished for it other than in the court of opinion, it comes across as being less critical as everyone waits and waits and waits on the latest round of investigation, and it has been talked about to death. Basically sh@t or get off the pot seems to be the temperature of the public who isn't in the Trump camp. It plays to his base. He needs to look outside of the base and his next idea seems to be a real winner.
 
Dilbert 4D Chess :)

Clinton won the debate last night. And while she was doing it, Trump won the election. He had one thing to accomplish – being less scary – and he did it.

http://blog.dilbert.com/post/151007796236/i-score-the-first-debate

Trump and Clinton debated each other for the first time last night. Here’s how I score the night.

Clinton won on points. She had more command of the details and the cleaner answers. Trump did a lot of interrupting and he was defensive. If this were a college debate competition, Clinton would be declared the winner. I call that victory on the 2D chess board. But voters don’t care about facts and debating style. They care about how they feel. So let’s talk about that.

For starters, Trump and Clinton both seemed “presidential” enough. That mattered more for Trump. We haven’t seen him off the teleprompter lately. So Trump passed that test by being sufficiently serious.

Clinton looked (to my eyes) as if she was drugged, tired, sick, or generally unhealthy, even though she was mentally alert and spoke well. But her eyes were telling a different story. She had the look of someone whose doctors had engineered 90 minutes of alertness for her just for the event. If she continues with a light campaign schedule, you should assume my observation is valid, and she wasn’t at 100%.

Some will say Clinton outperformed expectations because she didn’t cough, collapse, or die right on stage. That would be true if she also looked healthy in general, and her campaign schedule from here on out is full. We’ll know more this week, based on her schedule.

Clinton’s smile seemed forced, artificial, and frankly creepy. I’m already hearing on Twitter that mentioning a woman’s smile is sexist. I understand the point. But when someone goes full Joker-face and tests the uncanny valley hypothesis at the same time, that’s a bit different from telling a woman to “smile more.” My neighbor Kristina hypothesized that Botox was making her smile look unnatural. Science tells us that when a person’s mouth smiles, but their eyes don’t match the smile, they look disingenuous if not creepy. Botox on your crow’s feet lines around your eyes can give that effect. But whatever the reason, something looked off to me.

To be fair, Trump’s physical appearance won’t win him any votes either. But his makeup looked better than I have seen it (no orange), his haircut was as good as it gets for him, and he was otherwise his normal self that some voters hate and some like.

But the most interesting question has to do with what problem both of them were trying to solve with the debate. Clinton tried to look healthy, and as I mentioned, I don’t think she completely succeeded. But Trump needed to solve exactly one problem: Look less scary. Trump needed to counter Clinton’s successful branding of him as having a bad temperament to the point of being dangerous to the country. Trump accomplished exactly that…by…losing the debate.

Trump was defensive, and debated poorly at points, but he did not look crazy. And pundits noticed that he intentionally avoided using his strongest attacks regarding Bill Clinton’s scandals. In other words, he showed control. He stayed in the presidential zone under pressure. And in so doing, he solved for his only remaining problem. He looked safer.

By tomorrow, no one will remember what either of them said during the debate. But we will remember how they made us feel.

Clinton won the debate last night. And while she was doing it, Trump won the election. He had one thing to accomplish – being less scary – and he did it.
 
I thought Clinton lobbed him the perfect softball, but he totally whiffed on it. She was doing some tough talk on cyber-warfare and getting tough with Russia.

Would have been the easiest time to say, "Really, Hillary? With all of your email troubles, do you think anyone is really going to trust you with cyber-security?" Would have made the news and played over and over. He didn't even swing on it.

That killed me when his response was to waste time defending Russia. He should've turned it around on her by saying, "Hillary has already proven she can't be trusted with America's cyber security. She set up an unsecured email server that exposed classified information to anyone with an internet connection." Then he could've finished her off by saying why she did it: "She was more concerned about hiding her pay to play deals vis-a-vis the corrupt Clinton Foundation than with protecting our nation's secrets. It's the most blatant case of government for sale that this country has ever seen. Hillary Clinton belongs in prison, not in the White House."

Another one that killed me was when she was harping on his tax returns, and "who does he owe"? He should've shot back with, "what do you owe to the banks on Wall Street that paid you millions of dollars for closed-door speeches? What are they expecting in return? Or do you expect the American people to believe that your little speeches are worth 10 million dollars in and of themselves, and that they weren't buying favors? What do you owe to the corrupt, totalitarian, foreign governments that you took money from? What are they expecting in return if you become President?"
 
Dilbert 4D Chess :)

Clinton won the debate last night. And while she was doing it, Trump won the election. He had one thing to accomplish – being less scary – and he did it.

http://blog.dilbert.com/post/151007796236/i-score-the-first-debate

Less scary, as in unprepared fool who didn't bother to prepare for the job interview because he is entitled to have it given to him because she doesn't look Presidential.

Dilbert should have listened more closely to what others outside camp Trump were hearing. Sniff...sniff...sniff...how's that relentless schedule going for the restless, old man who brags about never sleeping and has a narcissistic retort for everything? Sniff...sniff...sniff...does Trump need another glass of water? Some people are sayin' ya know.:)

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slat...with_drug_trafficker_joseph_weichselbaum.html
 
Less scary, as in unprepared fool who didn't bother to prepare for the job interview because he is entitled to have it given to him because she doesn't look Presidential.

Dilbert should have listened more closely to what others outside camp Trump were hearing. Sniff...sniff...sniff...how's that relentless schedule going for the restless, old man who brags about never sleeping and has a narcissistic retort for everything? Sniff...sniff...sniff...does Trump need another glass of water? Some people are sayin' ya know.:)

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slat...with_drug_trafficker_joseph_weichselbaum.html

You claim Scott Adams is wrong because he's basing his analysis on the reactions of those biased towards Trump, and then you post a link to Slate to defend your own analysis. Is this a joke?
 
Back
Top