I've been pretty critical of Trump's strategy lately but I think the debate was him at his recent best. Funny moments, high energy, successfully avoided a lot of landmines. Seems like people wanted him to be washed out and "reserved" or something but he actually went off script. I personally prefer this version of Trump. He wasn't overly nasty or anything but didn't make it boring either. You could tell his words were his own and not written by a focus group.
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (35)
sorted by:
Trump did not do well. Moderators did not help but she was better prepared. It pains me to say but it’s the truth.
How did he not do well? I think if we're only comparing Trump's performance without reference to his opponent, this one was much stronger than his last debate with Biden.
I agree with Agman, he didn't do well. He didn't answer questions (this isn't an interview where you can go off script, it annoys people in the center, looks evasive)
He didn't complete sentences and that made him sound like biden
He made fun of biden's obvious medical condition. Yes biden has a medical condition. We all know, it is a foregone conclusion. Why is he still president? Because bad guys are in control and everyone knows it
But that doesnt' give you a pass to shit on him for having alzehimers
The point of him mentioning it was that our country looks weak and that makes it very dangerous for us now. Trump DID make that point.
PUT YOURSELVES in the position of a Center/Undecided/Independent who knows a tiny miniscule fraction of what you guys all know about Trump and the narratives. Essentially assume a blank slate
What Kamala said is then "True" to them, because they don't know she's pushing long-debunked talking points like "the very fine people hoax" or "Project 2025"
They don't know it's a heritage foundation thing unrelated to Trump.
Harris has successfully exploited their ignorance. They might hear Trump say "that's a complete lie and she knows it" but will they believe that?
There is something called "anchor bias" which means the first thing you hear you believe it to be true. It's about "The FIRST" thing. Mommy believes the FIRST sibling that accuses the second of stealing cookies, because they were the first to report it. That doesn't make it true though
We all have anchor bias. The dems exploit this by saying something untrue. They know that even if it's proven to be false, the IMPRESSION, the psychologial emotional neurological IMPACT WILL LINGER
They know this because they're all a bunch of CIA brats trained in neuropsychology at the highest degrees in ivy schools specifically YALE...they know that this works.
We are up against a multi TRILLION DOLLAR neuropsychology think tank that has been refinining its ability to gaslight and neuroprogram thru NLP and other bastardly tricks, the entire population for DECADES
That is why they know these tricks, even if found out later to BE tricks will still have a lingering impact on we the people's psyches and they exploit it.
It's really nasty. The particular exmample I hate is when hillary had signs that said "Love Trumps Hate" and it was a kind of sinister command to polarize people and then frame Trumpers as hateful, in a predictivey-programmyish way so that it implied that Trump was full of hate and therefore ipsofacto Trump supporters must also be a hate group. It was a mass OTHERING RITUAL of the Trump supporter.
Very nasty stuff.
Good points.
She was very aggressive, forcing him to be on the defensive most of the time.
Kamala usually spoke first and got in, like, a dozen whoppers to which Trump had to choose what to respond. Most of them would take a long time to explain and give context to--"fine people", "disrespecting veterans", "project 25"--but he only had 1 minute in which to respond. Trying to debunk all of that in 60 seconds is going to be disjointed.