[ExI] The Debates

Dylan Distasio interzone at gmail.com
Thu Sep 15 16:31:35 UTC 2016


There are a confluence of factors at work here.  The first one is that I
think the majority of centrist democrats do not like their own candidate;
she is lucky she is up against Trump or she would be abandoned by many of
her own party's voters at this point.  She comes off as a completely aloof,
untrustworthy, cold candidate that is part of a dynasty that many are sick
of hearing about.  There are also now major questions about her health even
within her own party after she got caught in the typical HRC lying pattern
instead of just stepping up and letting the light shine in.  Personally, I
think Biden would have been better off running.  I am not a Dem but would
strongly consider voting for him in this election.  The only way I might
have swallowed the bitter pill of voting for HRC was if she was up against
someone like Cruz, and it looked like he was going to win.

There is also a large portion of the US population (that you gleefully are
lumping into the basket) that is sick of business as usual around here, and
would like to see the stranglehold of global elites broken.  They are tired
of Presidents like GWB, then Obama, and an endless series of bailouts, an
endless war machine, and elites like everyone's favorite Palindrome who
seek to use their wealth and power to drive their own agendas that also
correspond to a decline in liberty.

Trump has survived his gaffes despite an endless barrage from the
mainstream media.  A media which the DNC leaks revealed is clearly in the
pocket of the DNC which has also appointed itself a party kingmaker.  A
media that endlessly bangs Hillary's drum and attempts without success to
find something to throw at Trump that will stick.  It is not for lack of
trying that they have not succeeded.

HRC is so despised by many that they are willing to take a chance on Trump
for change.   You clearly don't agree, but many of us think she is a
perennial liar at the least, and something much more nefarious at the most.

So, yes, I would expect the debates are going to go as you predicted as
long as Trump can show the slightest restraint.

I am also in the basket that does not believe he is going to start a
nuclear conflagration as Cheeto-in-Chief.  I would be a Johnson supporter
if I thought he could actually win despite his disturbing Aleppo flub.  I
believe this republic will survive either candidate.  That said, I am not
going to willingly put HRC into office as I don't buy your odds on WW III.

I am surprised you are not buying Pascal's wager on believing in a higher
power when you are also proposing the same one to us with Trump.

I have no love for Trump, but my disdain for HRC (who arguable should be in
jail for what you consider a little email server issue amongst a host of
other potential issues like pay for play) far exceeds any concern I have
with him in office.    That's without even getting into a policy discussion
on the two of them.

If that puts me in the basket, so be it.

On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 11:55 AM, John Clark <johnkclark at gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm worried about the presidential debates that will happen in less than 2
> weeks. I'm worried because Hillary has to be absolutely perfect while as
> long as Donald doesn't defecate on the stage he will be perceived as having
> exceeded expectations. Over the last few months Trump has committed dozens
> of gaffs, any one of which would have torpedoed Clinton or just about
> anybody else, but Trump is held to a far more forgiving standard than
> anybody else and I'm not sure why. Perhaps it's because he's such a rapid
> fire gaff machine that it's hard to concentrate on any one blunder, before
> you can think about the ridiculous thing he just said he says something
> even more ridiculous. And I have hard numbers to back up what I say.
> A recent poll found that 15% more people believed Trump was "more honest
> and trustworthy" than Hillary Clinton. And yet we know that people are just
> dead wrong about that, PolitiFact found that 56% of Hillary's statements
> were flat out true and another 15% were mostly true; but with Trump only
> 10% of his statements were flat out true and another 18% mostly true. And
> 46% of Trump's statements were not just false but "pants on fire" false,
> while only 6% of Hillary's were.
> If Trump makes a flub in the debate, or even if he makes 10, people will
> chuckle and say that's just Trump being Trump and decide to vote for him
> anyway, but if Hillary makes just one mistake, or just makes an
> uncomfortable statement even if it's true (especially if it's true
> actually) then her campaign is dead. And so are we.
>  John K Clark
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20160915/8cc8dc19/attachment.html>

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list