Ze First Debate

[yottabit]

Considering he follows Goebbels 101: Accuse other side of what you're guilty of.. you might have a point.

Might have to investigate near where he lives..

RFK Jr. says he’d eat ‘virtually anything’ — but not a dog or a human​

RFK Jr. says he’d eat ‘virtually anything’ — but not a dog or a human

The independent presidential candidate issued the denial on Tuesday after Vanity Fair published a story — complete with an unsettling photo of him posing with a charred four-legged animal &#8…

nypost.com

So if we apply the GOP filter now that he’s defected, one could assume his diet consists primarily of dogs and humans

Why Is Trump So Obsessed With Hannibal Lecter?: A Complete Timeline​

Why Is Trump So Obsessed With Hannibal Lecter?: A Complete Timeline

As the press continues to cover Trump's bizarre comments about fictional serial killer Hannibal Lecter at campaign rallies, he's leaning into the bit

www.rollingstone.com

Oh no…

 

[hal2kilo]

Waiting for the highlights is so much better.

Who the hell is the Abdul guy. That's definitely not the name of the head of the Taliban.

 

[eelw]

Whoa the Hannibal has been since last year

 

[nakedfrog]

Whoa the Hannibal has been since last year

Well, this led me to look it up... I guess I wasn't aware that this had been an ongoing thing that he keeps doing. Bigliest mental health, the best, you know because he had an uncle at MIT with the nuclear. Fuck's sake, what the hell is wrong with people?

 

[NWRMidnight]

It's pretty simple. His stated policies are more in line with my beliefs than Harris.

I don't think you have anything to be concerned about as I don't see Trump winning the election.

His stated policies? he didn't have any polices? other than tarrifs that will be passed on to you and me.. so basically, you just admitted you have no beliefs..

Dude, get his junk out of your mouth.

 

[manly]

- Lindsey Davis also corrected just one of Trump's many false claims on abortion, simply making a very quick statement that there is no state in the country where killing a baby after birth is legal, cutting through Trump's second repeat of the same lie with that quick factual statement.

The moderators showed remarkable restraint in not interrupting the other 40 or 50 odd whoppers from Trump, and Kamala did a good job with facial expressions alone, effectively calling out most of the ridiculous Trump lies for those watching. The moderators only corrected a few, very severe, lies that Trump repeated that have dangerous repercussions from being believed by his base.

That's the wild (and obvious) thing. If you actually tried to live fact check him, there would be no "debate." You'd be interrupting him non stop for lying, and the optics would appear that the moderators are ganging up on him.

Here's a thought experiment. Instead of identifying the copious lies, how many truths did he speak during the debate? I don't mean simple stuff; but whether on policy or easily verified claims, how many times is he truthful? Do you even need all ten fingers to count his spoken truths?

 

[Moonbeam]

The only thing I'm angry at is the fact I live in the only country on earth where we have to evaluate if an ambulance ride is absolutely necessary because it's going to cost 5 grand on top of the thousands we already spend on "health insurance." Yup. I'm fucking mad at every single imbecile that has voted Republican for whatever reason for the last 5 decades because we're in that situation because of them.

And it's not just for me because I'm fortunate enough to be in a position where we can afford to make that choice. Millions of our fellow Americans are not so lucky. No other policy positions justify this outcome.

Wouldn't that moral concern fall under the heading of equality and care. If one person can afford to use an ambulance shouldn't society make sure that everybody can? So what about "ownership theft". Suppose you own the ambulance and I need to go the hospital but you need it too. Which of us should get the ride?

This comes to a political question regarding government responsibility. How do we pay for things? Should we put all our money in ambulances and maybe not do cancer research? How do we acquire and distribute government funds. Do we rob from Peter to pay Paul? How will Peter feel about that? Is it fair that because he has more money, perhaps from hard work, that you tap his wallet to give some drunk a ride?

I am asking these questions to get you to think. How do you justify your anger. How do you know your idea of medical care won't break the entire system. You don't know. You're just angry and are full of opinions. How a society should structure itself to live withing what it can spend and what it should best deliver is a tremendously complex question. You are angry but you are arrogant. And on top of it all you are also killing yourself, poisoning your health with toxic chemicals released by the adrenals etc and making everyone around you terrified you'll blow your cork. Righteous indignation is a form of self pity. Poor you, worried about having no shoes while others are feeding their children with feet lost to buried mines. Have some shame.

Misery is a mental state. You can make your points without shitting on everybody else. If you have an ego you can bet your ethics are situational
Watch the video in the thread you were the first to post in where I had forgotten to do the actual link. Tell me what you think.

 

[akugami]

Trump has no stated policies, other than "I'm gonna own the libs, and grift the fuck out of the country". So if that's what conservatives want to support, then whatever.

By now, they should already know that Trump is a shitty human with no morals and no soul. He's a grifter, serial liar, sexual predator, incompetent fucktard who only cares about himself will shit on the people who support him. So if conservatives want to open wide, while he shits in their mouths, then who am I to stop that from happening. Conservatives can enjoy their shit entree.

I'm just going to do my part in voting against traitors like trump.

 

[Stokely]

It would be bad enough if that's all it was.

The first time around, Trump was in it for the grift, and his toadies were brought in to loot and ransack the various departments like Rome just conquered some outlying territory. Ben Carson and the rest of the wackos.

This time around, Trump will still be in it for the grift, with an extra side of "stay out of jail" and "vengeance against all the people who have wronged me." And while he's paying zero attention to actually governing, the Project 2025 plan will at least be attempted....and those people appear to be both intelligent and driven (unlike their dupe figurehead that will draw all the attention). Reminds me of the damn Manchurian candidate. I fear them a lot more than I do Trump, who is likely to keel over before this term is up, which means all hail President JD fucking Vance. That should give any sane person nightmares.

 

[manly]

Trump has no stated policies, other than "I'm gonna own the libs, and grift the fuck out of the country". So if that's what conservatives want to support, then whatever.

By now, they should already know that Trump is a shitty human with no morals and no soul. He's a grifter, serial liar, sexual predator, incompetent fucktard who only cares about himself will shit on the people who support him. So if conservatives want to open wide, while he shits in their mouths, then who am I to stop that from happening. Conservatives can enjoy their shit entree.

I'm just going to do my part in voting against traitors like trump.

If only conservatives ate his shit, then fine and dandy. But if Trump somehow wins the election, the 51% of voters who don't want him would eat the same shit sandwich.

Not to mention the RoW (rest of world) that would be negatively impacted by Trump 2.0. It would be an existential crisis for Ukraine and for Palestinian civilians.

Quite obviously a national election is very different from a state or local election where you can say voters get what they deserve.

 

[Zorba]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1833707121403162957

ETA: my comment is this is great.

 

[dank69]

Wouldn't that moral concern fall under the heading of equality and care. If one person can afford to use an ambulance shouldn't society make sure that everybody can? So what about "ownership theft". Suppose you own the ambulance and I need to go the hospital but you need it too. Which of us should get the ride?

This comes to a political question regarding government responsibility. How do we pay for things? Should we put all our money in ambulances and maybe not do cancer research? How do we acquire and distribute government funds. Do we rob from Peter to pay Paul? How will Peter feel about that? Is it fair that because he has more money, perhaps from hard work, that you tap his wallet to give some drunk a ride?

I am asking these questions to get you to think. How do you justify your anger. How do you know your idea of medical care won't break the entire system. You don't know. You're just angry and are full of opinions. How a society should structure itself to live withing what it can spend and what it should best deliver is a tremendously complex question. You are angry but you are arrogant. And on top of it all you are also killing yourself, poisoning your health with toxic chemicals released by the adrenals etc and making everyone around you terrified you'll blow your cork. Righteous indignation is a form of self pity. Poor you, worried about having no shoes while others are feeding their children with feet lost to buried mines. Have some shame.

Misery is a mental state. You can make your points without shitting on everybody else. If you have an ego you can bet your ethics are situational
Watch the video in the thread you were the first to post in where I had forgotten to do the actual link. Tell me what you think.

You're doing it to make me think? Brother, all I do is think. The ownership angle and the ambulances over cancer research are false dilemmas. Do you know what that means? Make sure you understand it so you don't do it again.

They are false dilemmas because M4A is projected to cost something like $32T. Big number right? Except we currently spend $49T for much worse outcomes. In other words we get better ambulances (for every person who needs one) and better cancer research and it still costs less than we already pay.

So yeah I do know. It isn't just an opinion. Every other country figured it out a long time ago. We aren't talking about theoretical. We have data. We have evidence. Nobody is guessing. All the other countries are doing it right now and doing it better than us.

 

[MtnMan]

Here is a take on the debate from two middle school age kids who really know little about politics or the candidates. Trea calls himself a Liberal redneck (raised in a rural Tennessee town) but now a standup comedian.

 

[kage69]

I finally watched it.

She eviscerated that greasy orange bastard, plain and simple. Not exactly surprising, pretty much what I and dozens of others here have been saying would happen, since Biden called it. A crook with dementia and a room temp IQ vs a skilled prosecutor who can speak in complete sentences. Yeah. Having said that, I thought he was going to get serious like he's done a few times before, didn't expect him to perform so many faceplants, and with such gusto. He's as disciplined as a spoiled six year old. When she brought up people leaving his rallies out of boredom and exhaustion, it looked like he rageshat himself on the spot.

I had three separate people who watched it last night all text me some variant of "rope a dope," now I see why. Yeah, near zero percent chance there is another debate.

Kamala the Kold! Takes grit to go on TV and savagely beat down a confused diapered person. She's going to make a good CiC.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Doubt it, there has never been a more clear election between two candidates. There are no undecided voters but a handful of idiots and mentally challenged people in each State. Overwhelming majority of those who state they are undecided have decided they are simply embarrassed too admit so or like the cnn panel don’t seem to understand what undecided means or simply want airtime to help Trump.

For example, many of these people are not undecided. They have decided they won’t ever vote Democrat, several appear to plan on throwing their vote away on a write in candidate. That’s a weak position in my opinion. Just buck up and vote democrat it’s the only choice today. Many of these are never democrat voters. We shouldn’t be calling them undecided.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/09/11/politics/debate-reaction-persuadable-voters/index.html

 

[kage69]

I hope she had some Purell handy.

 

[Muse]

Waiting for the highlights is so much better.

Who the hell is the Abdul guy. That's definitely not the name of the head of the Taliban.

It's Trump's John Doe for the Taliban leader he entertained at Camp David. IOW, he couldn't remember they guy's name, maybe never caught it in the first place.

 

[Muse]

Well, this led me to look it up... I guess I wasn't aware that this had been an ongoing thing that he keeps doing. Bigliest mental health, the best, you know because he had an uncle at MIT with the nuclear. Fuck's sake, what the hell is wrong with people?

Longest tenure at MIT of anyone ever, said the Trumpster. That may include the janitors, I don't know.

 

[Moonbeam]

You're doing it to make me think? Brother, all I do is think. The ownership angle and the ambulances over cancer research are false dilemmas. Do you know what that means? Make sure you understand it so you don't do it again.

They are false dilemmas because M4A is projected to cost something like $32T. Big number right? Except we currently spend $49T for much worse outcomes. In other words we get better ambulances (for every person who needs one) and better cancer research and it still costs less than we already pay.

So yeah I do know. It isn't just an opinion. Every other country figured it out a long time ago. We aren't talking about theoretical. We have data. We have evidence. Nobody is guessing. All the other countries are doing it right now and doing it better than us.

Did you say somewhere before this you were not talking about ambulance costs but that M4A was the topic, that efforts to block a specific medical change in the law was your issue? There is a complete difference between arguing for a deeply thought out proposal to introduce greater efficiency into the system that a personal beef any one person may have against some aspect of the system about which they have a pet peeve. M4A has undergone the kind of team expert analysis I was accusing you of being personally incapable of making.

I would say that opposition to M4 A isn’t even conservative, it’s libertarian. It fucks with private insurances capacity to profit.

These issues go to the fact that we do not live in a democracy because the 1 percent or less control the vote. It is the Democratic process that is supposed to control where capitalist greed can be aimed. The current Democratic Party will not restore Democracy because it would require biting the hand that feeds them.

You are going to need a revolution, I think.

To be extra clear, I thought you were making a general case against injustices in the current medical system using ambulances as an example. My response was intended to take that example and indicate the extremely complex analysis it would take to fix owing to all the inherent problems with income vs expenditure. That requires an expert multidisciplinary approach that you or I would not be qualified to do as single individuals.

 

[Muse]

That's the wild (and obvious) thing. If you actually tried to live fact check him, there would be no "debate." You'd be interrupting him non stop for lying, and the optics would appear that the moderators are ganging up on him.

Here's a thought experiment. Instead of identifying the copious lies, how many truths did he speak during the debate? I don't mean simple stuff; but whether on policy or easily verified claims, how many times is he truthful? Do you even need all ten fingers to count his spoken truths?

I think you could be dead on as a quadruple amputee.

 

[Muse]

This time around, Trump will still be in it for the grift, with an extra side of "stay out of jail" and "vengeance against all the people who have wronged me." And while he's paying zero attention to actually governing, the Project 2025 plan will at least be attempted....and those people appear to be both intelligent and driven (unlike their dupe figurehead that will draw all the attention). Reminds me of the damn Manchurian candidate. I fear them a lot more than I do Trump, who is likely to keel over before this term is up, which means all hail President JD fucking Vance. That should give any sane person nightmares.

I'm thinking/hoping that Tim Walz will mop the floor with him wall to wall come the October debate. Making the prospect of Shady taking over the White House a very scary thing would win a lot of votes.

 

[Stokely]

Honestly I don't hear people talking enough about it. Trump, like Biden was, is past the average life expectancy for an American male. Biden was older, but Trump doesn't exactly ooze health.

If you elected Biden in 2020, you knew there was a better than usual chance that you'd have President Harris. And the same goes now for Trump and Vance. Not sure that bothers any GOP voters but it sure as hell bothers me. I think I'd take Trump over that stain if a gun was held to my head, but then that's kinda like askign if you'd rather be eaten by a shark or a crocodile.

 

[akugami]

Honestly I don't hear people talking enough about it. Trump, like Biden was, is past the average life expectancy for an American male. Biden was older, but Trump doesn't exactly ooze health.

If you elected Biden in 2020, you knew there was a better than usual chance that you'd have President Harris. And the same goes now for Trump and Vance. Not sure that bothers any GOP voters but it sure as hell bothers me. I think I'd take Trump over that stain if a gun was held to my head, but then that's kinda like askign if you'd rather be eaten by a shark or a crocodile.

I did know that there was a likely chance of a Biden not surviving his term. But I voted for Biden knowing that he was a million times better for this country than Trump.

It'd be a sad sad sad day if Trump makes it back into the White House. The crazy part is, my 12 year old understands economic concepts that eludes this UPenn Wharton student. That's how stupid Trump is. And yet, conservatives would rather have a moron in the White House, than someone who can actually help the country.

If you'd ask me, gun to the head, if I'd rather have Trump or Vance, I'd say Trump. But that's like picking between being electrocuted by an electric boat battery or getting eaten by a shark.

 

[Moonbeam]

In my opinion Trump did a very good job in the debate which in 2016 would have moved the bar much less than this one did, moving it in Kamala's favor. I think the reason is that you can fool some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time but not all of the people all of the time. The problem for Trump, in my opinion is that the pubic is not amazed any longer by his bullshit but have grown inured and indifferent to it. It's same old same old every time. He's been God's gift to the world for years and years now and everything is still shit. We now all know who he is and his magnificence doesn't amount to a pile of beans. The convictions are piling up.

 

[MrSquished]

Ze first debate and then ze shade