ABC News Debate "Moderators": Fake & Non Existent "Fact Checks"

[BillsFanNC]

The King.

 

Diagnosis: Terminal TDS.

[L Ron Burgundy]

1 hour ago, Irv said:

 

Trump should have realized it was all a set up. Rigged.  ABC?  C'mon.  

Yeah!  They should debate on newsmax!  At the 4 seasons landscaping!

 

Rudy can referee I mean moderate.

[Irv]

Trump kicked ass!  Three against one and his opponent supplied the questions.  Dude rocks!

[ChiGoose]

21 minutes ago, Irv said:

So we agree.  

 

That you are deep in your feels? Yes, that's quite obvious.

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

1 hour ago, Irv said:

Just a f*cking bold face liar.  Plain and simple.  Yet the morons on here like @Tiberius, @ChiGoose, @L Ron Burgundy and the rest of the brain dead I don't remember will follow along like lemmings - right off the cliff.  What a mess.    

 

 

 

The sand called.  It wants your head to leave.  What a mess.  

 

 

Let it go, Irv.  Trump has debated the chosen candidate of the Democrat party 2x in 60 days.  He lost one. He won one.  The people who post here are going to trend partisan with the occasional center left or center right participant.  Biden virtually imploded in the first debate Trump participated in, had he stayed in the race, I would think every poster here on the left would have cast a vote for him regardless.   Trump had a bad day the other day, it's not changing any poster who supported Trump the day before.  I'd think most people realize that debates are largely an exercise in political gasbaggery. 

 

As Frankish routinely suggests on issues, no one really cares, and I'd be hard-pressed to think any independent considering Trump would refuse to vote for him because he skipped debating a dem for the third time.  Btw, in that regard, I would humbly suggest that Trump focus specifically on that  issue--that the dems created a sh*tshow on rolling with Biden when he clearly was well past the expiration date, that Harris was complicit in covering up the true nature of Biden's decline out of her own self-interest, and that it was a complete abdication of true leadership. 

 

@Doc Brown, a reasonable enough poster, mentioned the other day it gives the appearance of cowardice.  I understand that may be the perspective of some, but l don't see it that way.  He's done two debates.  He was nearly assassinated in a scenario so confoundingly improbable it almost seems it had to be an inside job (and I don't think it was, but any movie plot in the scenario given would be laughed at in the theater as completely implausible), stood up, defied the shooter and has simply kept moving right along.  

 

Consider, too, that Harris has avoided any significant press conference and sit down with media members, not unlike Biden in 2020.  Her one foray into the public eye had her sitting down for a friendly interview with a guy who really could have been her beloved grandad helping her make the case that she deserves a job she's applying for.  

 

So, Trump takes a tactical cue from the dems and makes his case based on the debates he's participated in.  If the dems wanted three debates, perhaps they and Harris  shouldn't have propped up Glass Joe the first time around.

 

This is about the independents, and the Harris-Biden record over the past several years.   It's going to be interesting. 

 

 

 

 

 

[Doc Brown]

24 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

 

@Doc Brown, a reasonable enough poster, mentioned the other day it gives the appearance of cowardice.  I understand that may be the perspective of some, but l don't see it that way.  He's done two debates.  He was nearly assassinated in a scenario so confoundingly improbable it almost seems it had to be an inside job (and I don't think it was, but any movie plot in the scenario given would be laughed at in the theater as completely implausible), stood up, defied the shooter and has simply kept moving right along.  

I thought he blew an opportunity to say I'll do another debate but only on Fox with fair moderators.  That's all.  I think any "neutral" observer (the few true independents in swing states who are left) would come away from that debate with the conclusion she beat him pretty soundly and would be more likely to vote for her.  Trump not wanting to debate her again comes across as being scared imo.  Seems like a missed opportunity to just say no more debates.

[BillsFanNC]

David Muir "fact checked" Trump with his own friggin opinion for crying out loud.

 

A moderator in no sane universe has any business weighing in with his or her opinion of whether Trumps sarcasm was discernable or not.

 

Useful idiots are lost forever.

 

 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

14 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:

I thought he blew an opportunity to say I'll do another debate but only on Fox with fair moderators.  That's all.  I think any "neutral" observer (the few true independents in swing states who are left) would come away from that debate with the conclusion she beat him pretty soundly and would be more likely to vote for her.  Trump not wanting to debate her again comes across as being scared imo.  Seems like a missed opportunity to just say no more debates.

I wasn’t knocking that thought process, Doc, I just disagree that it matters to any degree.   I think people vote on matters that impact them at home, not dog and pony shows and moderators that seem to have their thumb on the scale. 

 

Biden showed us, as does Harris, that running a non-traditional campaign where you hide from any real scrutiny can work fine.   As for missed opportunities, there certainly is that.  However, if upon consideration of strengths/weakness of the candidate, perhaps Trump feels it plays to her strengths and not his.  Why do that given he’s already done two debates? 
 

Btw, your thoughts on a debate with “fair” moderators spells out the reason that I think, generally, people don’t vote based on debate performance.  Besides, if an independent witnessed a debate that revealed the network and moderators were unfair, biased etc and voted in spite of that, I’d question how independent they are to begin with. 
 

You could be right, of course.  We’ll see. 
 

 

[Tiberius]

Trump just isn't very smart, that's why he lost the debate so badly. It's funny seeing MAGA crying how unfair literally everything under the sun is. That everything is biased against their dim witted hero. 

 

Like parents of a kid who isn't athletic screaming that their little Donnie  should be a starter on the baseball team 

Pathetic 

[L Ron Burgundy]

17 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Trump just isn't very smart, that's why he lost the debate so badly. It's funny seeing MAGA crying how unfair literally everything under the sun is. That everything is biased against their dim witted hero. 

 

Like parents of a kid who isn't athletic screaming that their little Donnie  should be a starter on the baseball team 

Pathetic 

Isn't very smart?  He's legitimately stupid.  Can you think of one time he's said something intelligent?

 

All I can think of is a couple random one liners during debates.  More timing than saying something smart.

 

The cats and dogs part 100% illustrates he uses TV and internet like our resident internet brain folks.  The moron Boomers that believe anything that supports their bias.

 

We could be making fake stories right now he'd report as news tomorrow. 

[AlBUNDY4TDS]

13 minutes ago, L Ron Burgundy said:

Isn't very smart?  He's legitimately stupid.  Can you think of one time he's said something intelligent?

 

All I can think of is a couple random one liners during debates.  More timing than saying something smart.

 

The cats and dogs part 100% illustrates he uses TV and internet like our resident internet brain folks.  The moron Boomers that believe anything that supports their bias.

 

We could be making fake stories right now he'd report as news tomorrow. 

Meanwhile, you we told Joe was sharp as a tack, until he wasn't. But please go on about your fake stories. Russia, Charlottesville, hunter Biden laptop. Go on.....

[Scraps]

2 minutes ago, AlBUNDY4TDS said:

Meanwhile, you we told Joe was sharp as a tack, until he wasn't. But please go on about your fake stories. Russia, Charlottesville, hunter Biden laptop. Go on.....

Meh.  Biden may not have been sharp as a tack but he isn't running anymore and the person who took his place is sharper than Biden or Trump.  Pity, the Republicans probably would have this election in the bag if they nominated someone other than Trump.

[AlBUNDY4TDS]

Just now, Scraps said:

Meh.  Biden may not have been sharp as a tack but he isn't running anymore and the person who took his place is sharper than Biden or Trump.  Pity, the Republicans probably would have this election in the bag if they nominated someone other than Trump.

I totally agree with your last sentence. He can't get out of his own way.

[Doc Brown]

1 hour ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

I wasn’t knocking that thought process, Doc, I just disagree that it matters to any degree.   I think people vote on matters that impact them at home, not dog and pony shows and moderators that seem to have their thumb on the scale. 

 

Biden showed us, as does Harris, that running a non-traditional campaign where you hide from any real scrutiny can work fine.   As for missed opportunities, there certainly is that.  However, if upon consideration of strengths/weakness of the candidate, perhaps Trump feels it plays to her strengths and not his.  Why do that given he’s already done two debates? 
 

Btw, your thoughts on a debate with “fair” moderators spells out the reason that I think, generally, people don’t vote based on debate performance.  Besides, if an independent witnessed a debate that revealed the network and moderators were unfair, biased etc and voted in spite of that, I’d question how independent they are to begin with. 
 

You could be right, of course.  We’ll see. 
 

 

That could be the case but I think he'd be wrong.  Usually, the more people see of Kamala the less they'll like her.  I don't think that happened at the last debate.  I think another debate with 60 million plus people watching wouldn't give her the chance to "hide" in the basement like Biden did in 2020.  I think she couldn't do any better than the last debate and Trump couldn't do any worse.  I get your point about people not voting for the dog and pony show theatrics around a debate.  However, I think it matters to a very small degree which could be the difference in what will be a razor tight contest in a few battleground states

[All_Pro_Bills]

2 hours ago, L Ron Burgundy said:

Isn't very smart?  He's legitimately stupid.  Can you think of one time he's said something intelligent?

 

All I can think of is a couple random one liners during debates.  More timing than saying something smart.

 

The cats and dogs part 100% illustrates he uses TV and internet like our resident internet brain folks.  The moron Boomers that believe anything that supports their bias.

 

We could be making fake stories right now he'd report as news tomorrow. 

But you and the Kamala fanboys here are all completely objective without any bias? Is that what you think?

[49er Fan]

2 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

I think she couldn't do any better than the last debate and Trump couldn't do any worse.  

Trunp can and has done a lot worse in debates.  And I doubt Harris would give herself “100” for her performance Tuesday. That was not her ceiling.  

[L Ron Burgundy]

41 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

But you and the Kamala fanboys here are all completely objective without any bias? Is that what you think?

 

No.  But several orders of magnitude less biased than you.  It's not debatable.  I would not support a criminal traitor.  I would not support someone who SOOOOO many have come out to say the person is inept, unintelligent.  

 

You've bent yourselves into pretzels for years defending a moron conman and continue to do so.  It's pathetic.  No other explanation.  

 

Do your stupid comparison to Joe, sure.  There's a little truth there.  But he ONLY got elected because he was a centrist that we knew could beat your guy.

 

Literally anyone is better than what you are running.  Voting for a traitor makes you a traitor.  Downplay j6 if you want i dont care.  That combined with the fake elector scheme I could better argue as treason than you could argue as just politics.

[L Ron Burgundy]

3 hours ago, AlBUNDY4TDS said:

Meanwhile, you we told Joe was sharp as a tack, until he wasn't. But please go on about your fake stories. Russia, Charlottesville, hunter Biden laptop. Go on.....

 

Oh please you're a child that can't even explain the moron talking points you vomit out.

 

Come talk to me when you start pointing out the same in Trump who every single day stutters and jumbles out sentences JUST as bad as Joe.

 

Joe deteriorated.  But then what?  We replaced him!  You can only talk when you do the same to your deteriorating lump of orange shite.  But you absolutely won't.  He's your hero.  You'll literally gargle his nads before you admit he's too old and should be put out to pasture.  See the difference?  We do what's right.  You vote for a traitor/criminal.

[AlBUNDY4TDS]

1 hour ago, L Ron Burgundy said:

 

Oh please you're a child that can't even explain the moron talking points you vomit out.

 

Come talk to me when you start pointing out the same in Trump who every single day stutters and jumbles out sentences JUST as bad as Joe.

 

Joe deteriorated.  But then what?  We replaced him!  You can only talk when you do the same to your deteriorating lump of orange shite.  But you absolutely won't.  He's your hero.  You'll literally gargle his nads before you admit he's too old and should be put out to pasture.  See the difference?  We do what's right.  You vote for a traitor/criminal.

I never voted for him you ***** moron.  

[L Ron Burgundy]

Just now, AlBUNDY4TDS said:

I never voted for him you ***** moron.  

Cool.  Why the F do you defend him like he's your orange spouse then?

 

Might be even weirder.